Plug for SRC browning 1886 ring

[Redman2006]

I would like to find a nice plug/screw to fit the hole that would be left if I remove the ring. I just don't like it klinking around. I will hold onto the ring if I do it, but I would prefer it this way for hunting.

If I can not find one, I might just wrap it with leather lacing.

Any suggestions on where to find one? I tried Midwest Gunworks without any luck.

Thanks.

[Mike D.]

7mm plug screw works like a dream.

[Sixgun]

Remove the ring and fill the hole with Brownells bedding compound. Use the black die that bit comes with it. If for some strange reason you want the ring back in, heat it up briefly with a propane torch--pop out the junk and reinstall the ring.---------------Sixgun

[Malamute]

I made a filler screw from a metric bolt or set screw, 7mm I believe, as Mike said. I filed it flat and cut a slotted head so it looked like regular gun filler screws.

There may be some marring where the shank was torqued against the receiver. I just ignore it.

[gak]

Leather's always worked for me.

[Redman2006]

Thanks to all. Any idea what the thread pitch would be? Do metric bolts have different pitches?

I think I will pass on bedding stuff though. I could see myself messing that up big time.

[Malamute]

I just took my rifle into the bolt store after telling the girl what I wanted it for. She didnt mind.

[getitdone1]

Different strokes for different folks.

I've never noticed my saddle ring on my Browning 1886 SRC making much noise when in the field. To me it's a part of what a true '86 SRC is. I've considered leather but decided ring wear on side of receiver is just natural for the gun. I can understand the "take it off" viewpoint too.

I would go for thinning the wood down a bit, even with the metal and maybe a fiber optic front sight while keeping original. If I shot it a lot with hot 400 gr bullets I might even consider a limbsaver recoil pad--and that would be heresy and certainly detract from it's looks.

As I've said many times: What a wonderful gun. None better.

Don

[Redman2006]

I agree about thinning the wood. If I ever find a set of damaged funiture for one at a reasonable price, I will try to do that myself and add a limbsaver too.

I love the rifle, but am still unsure about the ladder sight. It keeps sliding down in recoil. The front blade is a nice fine sight, but hard to pick up in even moderately low light. I have been trying to find a way to have an aperature made that would use the existing ladder and work like the "Rough and Ready" sight by Montana. If I was a machinist.....I think I have a plan that would work.

I just hate the thought of tapping for a Williams or Lyman on this rifle.

[Mike D.]

Years ago, when I got my original 1896 made 1886 carbine, the prior owner had removed the original ladder sight and the ring and stud. A King folder was in the rear slot, but luckily he had the original sight and ring in his garage and I reinstalled them. That old shooter has accounted for several deer over the ensuing decades.

[gak]

Different strokes for different folks.

I've never noticed my saddle ring on my Browning 1886 SRC making much noise when in the field. To me it's a part of what a true '86 SRC is. I've considered leather but decided ring wear on side of receiver is just natural for the gun. I can understand the "take it off" viewpoint too.

I would go for thinning the wood down a bit, even with the metal and maybe a fiber optic front sight while keeping original. If I shot it a lot with hot 400 gr bullets I might even consider a limbsaver recoil pad--and that would be heresy and certainly detract from it's looks.

As I've said many times: What a wonderful gun. None better.

Don

+1 Not to turn this into a ring lovers vs haters thread, and the one (7mm) "solution" seems an elegant one--if you just gotta,... but I sometimes (?) seem to be in the minority on this. To me the SRC part is integral to the history and panache or cache or whatever you might call it--of an "SRC." My 86 and all my 92 (carbines/trappers) have had rings as God herself intended (but she messed up in a rare goof on the regular Browning 92)--or I put one on it. Some 95% (rough guess) original 92 carbines were so equipped, and a good majority of Pre War 94s too--maybe 90% well up into the 20s?) and my 1917 SRC retains hers, as does my 1979 Trapper. I don't care if the original-original reason for them being on there is largely gone (and that the 92-meister hisself, Lucas McCain, removed one or two of his...*he* may have actually had a justification!) and they've just become emblematic of a bygone era. If/when they bother for functional/hunting reasons, a little leather latigo strip goes on, wa la.

I suppose all you function-is-everything, the gun-I-paid-an-inordinate-amount-of-money-for (any gun really ) is just a tool-badge-of-pragmatic-honor- wearing-and-chest-pounding (careful hurting that badge!) folk should just go Pachmayr and Robar, Duty-kote or Hard Hat your Rugers and Colts then and be done with it. Those nice original factory or custom grips are mostly for gawk'n feel show--face it (yeah I know, they let the gun roll on recoil)--and original finishes are nothing but a pain in the butt requiring wipedowns and care against scratches 'n such and do nothing functionally for the weapon--compared to today's hard kote treatments. End of rant

Redman, about that ladder site; be glad to take it off your hands! I'm looking for one. My 86 had its changed out beforeI got it. Since different sights were originally available on most of these guns of yore, I won't go off on the originality of those! But I agree with your sentiment--don't go tapping a receiver sight into that. If a regular stepped-leaf rear do (and some "paint" on the back of that front sight) doesn't do it for you, I'm sure Nate (Steve Young) or other fine folk will have a more elegant solution!

[Hobie]

I just leave 'em on my guns. Never a problem. I move pretty slow in the woods...