Daryl:

You make some great points {as usual} and I do respect your opinion and Marrakai's and the opinions of several others I may yet disagree with on this post. Some, naturally, I don't.

Yes, it IS easier to teach the use of the peep/post, because it is an easier sighting system for most people to use which is of course my whole point. That is why it exists in speed and precision rifle competitions the world over, and why V/Beads don't.

One thing I might add, however, is that at least one army did indeed extensively test the wide V/Bead. The British did, I suppose because their commercial makers were the originators of the V/Bead sighting system and due to its popularity at the time it was tested. From 1900-1902 it was run through a program of troop trials and found lacking for long range, rapid fire and snap-shooting. It was damned for lack of performance, not for lack of sturdiness. The source for this is Major EGB Reynolds in the arms classic, "The Lee-Enfield Rifle". He may have been a cork-popper, I don't know, but I do know he was a world record holder in the Dewar Match {against USA, Canada, South Africa and Australia}, was a Technical Officer Inspectorate of Armaments, British Army and won many other shooting medals as well. All of those things are may be strikes against him though, at least according to the fellow who followed your post.

I do believe good work can be done with a wide V/Bead, but it takes a lot of practice, practice I believe produces quicker and better results if applied to a different sighting system. That is my opinion and as I've stated, it is the opinion of a lot of other people as well.