Forum rules
Welcome to the Leverguns.Com General Discussions Forum. This is a high-class place so act respectable. We discuss most anything here other than politics... politely.
Please post political post in the new Politics forum.
Here's the front sight currently on my Model 94AE .25-35 carbine.
I can't get an exact measurement on it, but from the bottom of the dovetail to the top of the sight it looks like it's over 1/2". With a Marbles tang sight cranked all the way down, this rifle still shoots a little too high at 50 yards, especially when I start to push the 117 gr Hornady over 2200 fps. So, I'm looking for a taller front sight (preferably with a fiber optic bead), but it looks like .570" is the tallest I've found and I have a feeling that's what this sight already measures. Any ideas? I found this clunky thing at Brownell's: http://www.brownells.com/aspx/ns/store/ ... R%20BLOCKS
Not trying to be a wiseacre, but... just how much is a "little too high"? What hold point do you aim at? If it's the difference between a few inches, will a 6 o'clock hold make up the difference? Is it consistent at its current POI?
Griff,
SASS/CMSA #93
NRA Patron
GUSA #93
There is a fine line between hobby & obsession! AND... I'm over it!!
No I ain't ready, but let's do it anyway!
Griff wrote:Not trying to be a wiseacre, but... just how much is a "little too high"? What hold point do you aim at? If it's the difference between a few inches, will a 6 o'clock hold make up the difference? Is it consistent at its current POI?
With a six o' clock hold, at 50 yards, the gun shoots directly above the POA (within 1") with loads doing at or just under 2100 fps. When pushed above 2200+ fps, I'd expect the POI to be be at least 4" or 5" above the POA (and even higher out at 100 yards). Forget using anything lighter than 117 gr with iron sights. Start loads with an 87 gr bullet were close to a 1' high at 50 yards. I may put a scope on the gun, but I would like to start with a taller front sight so I can at least get 117 gr bullets shooting flatter out to 100 yards.
Tycer, would a hole need to be drilled into the barrel to screw on the ramp or do they dovetail in?
Slick,
Possibly not. The faster and lighter bullets may be more likely to be low. Far less "time in barrel" and recoil may have a lesser effect on point of impact. For certain, testing a few rounds before any sight changes will be less expensive.
Griff,
SASS/CMSA #93
NRA Patron
GUSA #93
There is a fine line between hobby & obsession! AND... I'm over it!!
No I ain't ready, but let's do it anyway!
No. A dovetail blank must be bought at the same time. I'm not sure of it's proper name, but it has a threaded hole in it and locks the shorty ramp down. Make sure you get your dovetail to fit the shorty ramp without too much pressure as beating the front sight into the shorty's dovetail with a setting maul will snap the head off the little screw.
The Marble's stem might be too tall for your rifle.
If it was my rifle, I would shoot it at the distance sight discrepancies are measured - 100yds - and measure exactly how much higher/lower a POI is at that distance.
THEN, I would use that measurement with Brownell's sight height calculator to accertain exactly how much correction will be needed.
With the correction figure in hand, and a measurement of the stem on that Marble's tanger, I would speak with the Marble's tech support, see if they have a proper height stem, and if they'll swap it out.
Tycer wrote:No. A dovetail blank must be bought at the same time. I'm not sure of it's proper name, but it has a threaded hole in it and locks the shorty ramp down. Make sure you get your dovetail to fit the shorty ramp without too much pressure as beating the front sight into the shorty's dovetail with a setting maul will snap the head off the little screw.
I did a search and found the blank that dovetails in, and then the ramp screws onto. Will place an order at Brownells later today. Thanks!
Griff wrote:Slick,
Possibly not. The faster and lighter bullets may be more likely to be low.
That's what I expected, but the 87 gr Remington bullet with a start load of H4895 of under it was waaaay high. Can't remember the exact figure, but close to a foot. After shooting three rounds I said "Well, that's a complete waste of time and money" (I'd bought two boxes of bullets). Tang peep was cranked down all the way (same as with the 117 gr bullet). If it had a shorter stem, I'd be looking at the back of the receiver rather than the front site.
Dug up an old target, and with 25 gr of RL 15 under the 117 gr Hornady, I was geting velocities between 2077 and 2110 (on an 80 degree day) and the POI was the same as the POA. I start moving up the velocity, the POI starts climbing fast and there's no adjustment left in the peep.
IIRC, in a recent (within the last two years) issue of American Rifleman they reviewed a take down 1895, and had the same problem (not enough front sight). Sounds like it might be a common problem with late model Winchester levers.
Rifles may be different but, when I mounted the Williams FP94/36 on my Buffalo Bill Commerative Winchester 94 in 30-30, it shot "way high" and I replaced the front sight with an XS white strip front sight 0.6" tall and it zeroed nicely then.
YMMV
OJ KING
SEMPER FI
DUTY, HONOR, COUNTRY
NRA LIFE MEMBER
This is just a thought but back in the days when these dash cartridges were common you never saw super tall front sights. They were usually fairly short and that was even on rifles with tang sights.
I'm wondering why the guns they make now have such ridiculously tall front sights.
It makes no sense to me.
Even my Marlin 1894 Cowboy had a .500" tall Marbles front sight on it and regardless of what hold I'd use that was WAY too tall. Not only that the bead was so big it obliterated the entire target as far as I could see.
Was just wondering what's changed between then and now ... other than most folks can't shoot worth a hoot without a scope.
Joe
***Be sneaky, get closer, bust the cap on him when you can put the ball where it counts .***
J Miller wrote:This is just a thought but back in the days when these dash cartridges were common you never saw super tall front sights. They were usually fairly short and that was even on rifles with tang sights.
I'm wondering why the guns they make now have such ridiculously tall front sights.
It makes no sense to me.
I've noticed and wondered the same thing. I guess something has changed (geometetry wise) in how the rifles were made and sighted back then compared to today, OR cartridges were slower than what was advertised back then (and what we're shooting today) and the sights worked with the velocities of the cartridges of the day.
How the heck did you get accurate velocity numbers in 1900?
.***