ladder sight help

[Redman2006]

I need a little help with a ladder sight. I am new to these and seem to be having a hard time getting a good, steady, consistent sight picture. What is the best way to position my head/face to shoot this sight well when raised? How do you get a solid cheek weld?

So far I have given myself a bloody nose and a huge bruise on my cheekbone. It is a Browning SRC 1886 if that matters.

Also, the ladder slides far too easily and drops with recoil. Is there a fix for this?

Thanks

[Terry Murbach]

IF YOU ARE SPEAKING OF A TANG MOUNTED LADDER SIGHT THAT WOULD BE WHY I NEVER BUT NEVER WILL PUT UP WITH A TANG SIGHT ON A RIFLE/CARBINE WITH ANY NOTICEABLE RECOIL SPEED,[ NOT---NOT!!!---PUSH ]. IT IS OTHERWISE A FINE RECIPE FOR TROUBLE AND/OR TRAGEDY.
THIS IS WHY LYMAN INVENTED THE RECEIVER SIGHT 110+ YEARS AGO AND WHY NO ONE AFTER THAT PAID ANY ATTENTION TO NOR BOUGHT ANOTHER TANG SIGHT AGAIN. THEN ALL THE SASS YAHOOS CAME ALONG AND WITHOUT READING ANY OF SHOOTING HISTORY DECIDED THE TANG SIGHT WAS THE NEE-PLUS ULTRA OF LEVERGUN SIGHTS...AGAIN. YEAH RIGHT !!!

" THOSE WHO DO NOT READ HISTORY ARE CONDEMNED TO REPEAT IT."

AND SO IT GOES...

[KirkD]

Two things:

First, although I've never heard any recent accidents with a tang mounted sight, an old fellow I know told me he knew of one or two fellows way back that punctured their eyeball with one.

Second, I think you are asking about the barrel mounted rear ladder sight. Several of my old Winchesters have these and I just sight through them exactly the same as I do with regular open iron rear sights. It is a bit more challenging to get a consistent sight picture, however, due to the wider notch. Nothing but practice will solve this, but you should be able to get pretty good at it. A couple weeks ago I was shooting my original Winchester 1886 45-70 at 200 yards with the rear ladder sight flipped up and set at its lowest setting. My shots were within 2" side to side but 6" vertical. This illustrates the difficulty I find with the flipped up ladder sight ..... it is hard to tell exactly where the shoulder of the V-notch is because it comes right out to the vertical sides of the sight. This makes it a bit more challenging to have the front sight consistently at the same vertical, but I think more practice will solve this. I am thinking that a little strip of white tape or some white-out spots on the two sides of the slider will help as well.

With every shot, it is common to have the slider change position. I don't know the solution to this other than to pinch the slider a little tighter. This happens for both the originals and the modern repros. If you are doing a lot of shooting at a given range, perhaps a piece of tape will hold the slider in place.

[Redman2006]

I was talking about the barrel mounted sights. My issue seems to be getting my head high enough to sight consistently with a solid position when the ladder is up aways.

The bloody nose was from my thumb one time and the cheek is from the comb of the stock because I just can't weld tightly with my head so high so the recoil really smacks me...

Thanks for the tips. I will keep working on it... I guess I just have not found the right position yet.

[Malamute]

The Browning 86's have better sight notches than most of the originals I've seen. They are more like common U notches in open barrel sights.

I think you're seeing why so many of those sights were taken off, and more common sights installed, or receiver sights installed, and why Winchester quit using that style sight so long ago and went to regular "rifle" style sights on the later carbines. I have to confess I've removed the leaf (ladder) sight on my 86 carbne and installed a receiver sight. Many like them, and they do look cool, but aren't really that great of a sight. They don't work as well as most true military issue type long range sights. I think you'll find that the markings aren't range markings, just a vernier scale for reference, shooting them is simply trial and error. If they were true range markings, the numbers would be progressively farther aprt for longer ranges, not evenly spaced along the leaf. Most later Winchester carbine sights had simple vernier scales on them, not true range markings. If any particular range matches a number, its coincidence.


For cheek weld, there isn't really a good answer, and one reason high mounted see thru scope mounts aren't very comfortable and practical if you want a quick handling gun. It becomes more of an issue with heavier recoiling guns.

[AJMD429]

For cheek weld, there isn't really a good answer, and one reason high mounted see thru scope mounts aren't very comfortable and practical if you want a quick handling gun. It becomes more of an issue with heavier recoiling guns.

One thing you might try is using 'chin weld' instead of 'cheek weld'; I know it sounds blasphemous, but I had bad enough vision even as a kid that I found I liked scopes for groundhog hunting, and 'back then' a deluxe scope-mount was one where there weren't too many tractor parts, or the duct-tape wasn't visible, so many of mine were odds-and-ends, and pretty high above the bore. My favorite gun was a 1894 and the only scope mounts our small-town gunshop had were Weaver See-Thru ones, so I just bought them, and used them, and got used to them. I didn't have anyone to tell me I couldn't shoot well with a high scope like that, so I just did it! The next scoped gun to come along was an AR-15, and it was even higher above-bore, though the straight 'comb' maybe compensated some.

At that point I did consider a 'flat-top' upper, and a friend commented that I should check the trajectory and 'point-blank' range of a high-mounted, vs. low-profile, scope, and I realized that by having the scope a couple inches higher, it actually made more of the bullet's travel-arc able to be within the 'zone'. I still didn't exactly like the look of a carry-handle-scoped AR-15 (and still don't), but again, I did learn to live with it, and shoot it that way.

I gave it zero thought until I kept hearing people say they couldn't shoot well with scopes that weren't low-profile, so I watched them shoot, and then stood in front of a mirror and mounted my 1894 as if ready to shoot. I then realized I don't use 'cheek-weld', but rather put my chin/jaw against the stock, so my head is more upright. It works really well, and is second-nature.

The funny thing is, if I have to shoot a gun with a low-profile scope, it feels really awkward, and I find I have to 'hunker down' and get in what to me is a very un-natural position.

I'd say I'm right and everyone else is wrong (like usual ), but obviously since almost everyone else is using 'cheek weld' and feels IT is second-nature, and chin-weld is the 'awkward' one, it must just be what you get used to.

Anyway, now that I am aware I'm a 'chin-welder', I watch others shoot, and see I'm not alone (what a relief ), so others must have found the same solution. Try it and see if it helps.

[COSteve]

Got to disagree with Terry on his post to some extent when he says that after the invention of the receiver peep sight the tang sight was dead. In fact, the tang sight has two significant advantages over a receiver mounted peep sight that many older shooters find absolutely essential.

1st - the tang sight extends the sight radius farther than a receiver sight because the tang sits 4"-6" farther back on the rifle. That aids in longer range shooting and helps us older folks who aren't as steady as we were 40+ years ago.

2nd - (and this is the big one) the tang's position very close to the shooter's eye allows for the use of a much smaller aperture but yields the same FOV as a larger peep set farther from the shooter's eye. This is critical to those of us with aging eyesight because many of us have difficulty seeing the front sight and the target clearly enough to aim effectively.

The small aperture, close to the shooter's eye, gives the advantage of a longer Depth of Field wherein everything is in focus. My hunting aperture on my Rossi's tang sight enables me to see crystal clearly both the front sight and the target 100yds+ away. The receiver sight on my Henry helps some but the front sight and target are nowhere near as sharply in focus with my older eyes.

[COSteve]

Deleted

[handirifle]

I say throw it away and get a tang sight. I, too, disagree with Terry. Tang sights will never go away, and they are used on rifles with HEAVY recoil. Ever shoot a Sharps 45-120?.

I had one on a H&R Buffalo Classic



It worked perfectly, and I did develop more of a "chin weld". With ANY raised sight system you have to develop some sort of system. It can and DOES work well.

Here's one of my typical groups with that rifle/sight combo. Please not that is a .65" group with the 45-70 and Speer 400gr loads at about 1700fps. That's not 223 recoil.

[MrMurphy]

I've shot a aperature/ladder rear sighted No4 Mk1 at 900 yards and a chin weld was required.

Just takes practice.

[Redman2006]

For cheek weld, there isn't really a good answer, and one reason high mounted see thru scope mounts aren't very comfortable and practical if you want a quick handling gun. It becomes more of an issue with heavier recoiling guns.

One thing you might try is using 'chin weld' instead of 'cheek weld'; I know it sounds blasphemous, but I had bad enough vision even as a kid that I found I liked scopes for groundhog hunting, and 'back then' a deluxe scope-mount was one where there weren't too many tractor parts, or the duct-tape wasn't visible, so many of mine were odds-and-ends, and pretty high above the bore. My favorite gun was a 1894 and the only scope mounts our small-town gunshop had were Weaver See-Thru ones, so I just bought them, and used them, and got used to them. I didn't have anyone to tell me I couldn't shoot well with a high scope like that, so I just did it! The next scoped gun to come along was an AR-15, and it was even higher above-bore, though the straight 'comb' maybe compensated some.

At that point I did consider a 'flat-top' upper, and a friend commented that I should check the trajectory and 'point-blank' range of a high-mounted, vs. low-profile, scope, and I realized that by having the scope a couple inches higher, it actually made more of the bullet's travel-arc able to be within the 'zone'. I still didn't exactly like the look of a carry-handle-scoped AR-15 (and still don't), but again, I did learn to live with it, and shoot it that way.

I gave it zero thought until I kept hearing people say they couldn't shoot well with scopes that weren't low-profile, so I watched them shoot, and then stood in front of a mirror and mounted my 1894 as if ready to shoot. I then realized I don't use 'cheek-weld', but rather put my chin/jaw against the stock, so my head is more upright. It works really well, and is second-nature.

The funny thing is, if I have to shoot a gun with a low-profile scope, it feels really awkward, and I find I have to 'hunker down' and get in what to me is a very un-natural position.

I'd say I'm right and everyone else is wrong (like usual ), but obviously since almost everyone else is using 'cheek weld' and feels IT is second-nature, and chin-weld is the 'awkward' one, it must just be what you get used to.

Anyway, now that I am aware I'm a 'chin-welder', I watch others shoot, and see I'm not alone (what a relief ), so others must have found the same solution. Try it and see if it helps.

Thanks, That makes a lot of sense.

[Redman2006]

I say throw it away and get a tang sight. I, too, disagree with Terry. Tang sights will never go away, and they are used on rifles with HEAVY recoil. Ever shoot a Sharps 45-120?.

I had one on a H&R Buffalo Classic



It worked perfectly, and I did develop more of a "chin weld". With ANY raised sight system you have to develop some sort of system. It can and DOES work well.

Here's one of my typical groups with that rifle/sight combo. Please not that is a .65" group with the 45-70 and Speer 400gr loads at about 1700fps. That's not 223 recoil.

You have a case of the dreaded red X for the pictures.

I plan to use this rifle to hunt as well as to target shoot, so I need a reliable and fast system. The hunting ranges won't be so distant, but the target ranges might be out to 600 yards.

[Redman2006]

Got to disagree with Terry on his post to some extent when he says that after the invention of the receiver peep sight the tang sight was dead. In fact, the tang sight has two significant advantages over a receiver mounted peep sight that many older shooters find absolutely essential.

1st - the tang sight extends the sight radius farther than a receiver sight because the tang sits 4"-6" farther back on the rifle. That aids in longer range shooting and helps us older folks who aren't as steady as we were 40+ years ago.

2nd - (and this is the big one) the tang's position very close to the shooter's eye allows for the use of a much smaller aperture but yields the same FOV as a larger peep set farther from the shooter's eye. This is critical to those of us with aging eyesight because many of us have difficulty seeing the front sight and the target clearly enough to aim effectively.

The small aperture, close to the shooter's eye, gives the advantage of a longer Depth of Field wherein everything is in focus. My hunting aperture on my Rossi's tang sight enables me to see crystal clearly both the front sight and the target 100yds+ away. The receiver sight on my Henry helps some but the front sight and target are nowhere near as sharply in focus with my older eyes.

I would like to try a tang and a receiver sight before deciding. I could see an advantage to both.