scoping 336 30-30

[Sigmar]

Well I had a chance to look through some peep sights and due to eye sight they're not going to work, too blurry at the rear sight. So scope it will be. Bought a pic rail for it to mount a scope, haven't decided which scope yet. My ignorant question for the day is this. The screws in the top of the receiver, do I use those to mount the rail or will I need new longer ones ?

[3leggedturtle]

The base will have the screws you need in the package with it.

[J Miller]

With peep sights the rear is supposed to blurry. If it's in focus you're not focusing on the front sight.
You look through the rear aperture centering the front sight in it. You don't look at the rear aperture.

Perhaps you should learn how to properly use the peep sight before you condemn it.

Joe

[AJMD429]

With peep sights the rear is supposed to blurry. If it's in focus you're not focusing on the front sight.
You look through the rear aperture centering the front sight in it. You don't look at the rear aperture.

Joe is right - try shooting the gun with just putting the front-sight on the target, and 'happening to look through the rear aperture to do so. Your eye will automatically center things, and you will shoot more accurately than you anticipated.

[Old Savage]

You will be better off with the scope - a 1.5-5x Leupold is going on the new Pre Rem 336 I am putting together. The ultimate package to my mind.

[Blaine]

A fixed low power with a ton of relief, and field of view will be your best bet...the hardware should have come with the rail. Prepare the holes with alcohol, and use loctite...

[Griff]

With peep sights the rear is supposed to blurry. If it's in focus you're not focusing on the front sight.
You look through the rear aperture centering the front sight in it. You don't look at the rear aperture.

Joe is right - try shooting the gun with just putting the front-sight on the target, and 'happening to look through the rear aperture to do so. Your eye will automatically center things, and you will shoot more accurately than you anticipated.

+1.

You will be better off with the scope...

Sometimes, that's not the point!

[Old Savage]

It is for me.

Well now let me think about that - may be some contradictions here. Though it is not my favorite caliber I have more of those than any other caliber and only one is scoped. Yet, I have never taken one hunting. Maybe should remedy that.

[El Chivo]

I vote for the scope, I have the Weaver 1-3x on my 336; it's the lightest scope out there. I think it's also the only one with 1x as opposed to 1.5x, if you want to go natural.

I would also consider a Swift scope. I just bought a Swift for my indoor range shooting and the optics are excellent, and made in USA. Nicely made. They make several low power ones as well.

With a pic rail I don't know what kind of rings you can get, but on my 336, Weaver low rings are perfect. With my setup, scope, rail, and rings all weigh about a pound.

[OldWin]

As Doc said, try shooting the rifle with the peep first. The arpeture itself will not be sharply defined and many people remove the threaded in center once the rifle is zeroed.
As for a scope, you will first have to ask yourself what you intend to use the rifle for to determine if it is an advantage. A scope is going to add weight and bulk to an otherwise light and trim rifle. While it can be an advantage, it's not always.
If you have a picatinny rail for a base you can get quick release rings for your scope and get a peep sight that attaches to the rail and have the best of both worlds.

Decisions, decisions.

[Canuck Bob]

My usual scope recommendation for a lever is the Leupold 2.5X Ultralite. 1/4 MOA adjustment and almost 5" of relief and a sight picture like an optical peep. The earlier M8 version worked like a charm on my 444 setup for snap shooting offhand. Great optics, warranty, in a reasonable price and unlikely to ever get kissed by the scope.

[Borregos]

With peep sights the rear is supposed to blurry. If it's in focus you're not focusing on the front sight.
You look through the rear aperture centering the front sight in it. You don't look at the rear aperture.

Joe is right - try shooting the gun with just putting the front-sight on the target, and 'happening to look through the rear aperture to do so. Your eye will automatically center things, and you will shoot more accurately than you anticipated.

+1.

You will be better off with the scope...

Sometimes, that's not the point!

+1

[AJMD429]

Though it is not my favorite caliber I have more of those than any other caliber and only one is scoped. Yet, I have never taken one hunting. Maybe should remedy that.

That sounds like the kind of stuff I pull; I guess it comes from being a hoplophile more than a hunter, and having enough OCD that I never can keep the same scope/sights on a gun long enough to really get used to them...

Here is a 'sight picture' through an aperture sight that is 'ghost-ringed' (by removing the threaded aperture once sighted-in off the bench):



As you can see, the FRONT sight is clearly visible, and though the background is just a towel, even my old eyes can see the front sight AND a target/game 100 yards away. As for the rear 'sight' - it is off-center in the photo, and just begs for you to somehow 'fix' it by getting the front sight centered in the round window (if you look closely through an actual aperture sight the central part of the window is actually a bit brighter, too). You just put that front sight ON your target, and let your eye/shoulder 'center' it in the window, and bang you will hit the target. You NEVER need to try and 'focus' the rear sight at all - it only serves as a tool to assure your gun is lined up properly because you have to look through it to see the front sight and your target. It is automatic, which is why it is so intuitive and fast, but for those used to traditional 'open' sights, where you have to focus on the rear sight enough to align a bead-in-a-V-notch, or center a blade-in-a-U-notch, it takes a step back and some relaxation.

I've shot better groups at 50-100 yards with aperture sights than scopes in some instances.

The advantages of a scope will be:

• 1. In dim light conditions, if you have a large-bell/low-magnification one, it truly does 'gather light' and will enable you to discern game you'd see far less clearly with ANY other sight system (other than infrared night-vision).
  
  2. If the target is small or far away (subtending say 4 minutes-of-angle or less), you likely won't be able to even see it without a scope. Perhaps a black-on-white bullseye at a well-lit range, but if it is a squirrel's head at 75 yards, or a prarie dog at 250 yards, you NEED a scope.

So. . . a true levergunner and hoplophile will eventually have to have BOTH an iron-sighted AND a scoped 30-30, like Old Savage...!

A low-magnification scope can be very 'fast', but so can SOME 'aperture' sights. In my lofty opinion [ ], the fastest is the Marble's "Bullseye", followed by the Williams WRGS, then the Williams FP (obscures more of the target-field), followed by the New England Custom Gunsight aperture sight (blocks out lots of your view), and worst of all is the 'tang' sight with the 'target' aperture (very wide 'shield' that blocks out lots of view). Of course you may not be wanting 'fast', but that is a factor to consider.

More information on 'peep' sights here > "Peeps" thread

[Treeman72]

I put a Leupold vx-2 2-7x on my 30-30 a month ago. Nothing but praise for it from me. Works from 30 feet to 100 yards adeptly. Soon, gonna try it on 200 yards. The scope is fairly compact and weighs 10 ounces. Think it had 4.9" of eye relief. Good fit for a leveraction

[Old Savage]

AJ - still not a scope picture but WHOA look out now - if you are too big a sissy to carry a scoped rifle you should stick with those irons and the goofiest looking thing is the FP hanging on the side of a Winnie - not as bad on a Marlin.

Was that enough smilies to escape????

[North Country Gal]

AJ - still not a scope picture but WHOA look out now - if you are too big a sissy to carry a scoped rifle you should stick with those irons and the goofiest looking thing is the FP hanging on the side of a Winnie - not as bad on a Marlin.

Was that enough smilies to escape????

Works for me. , especially the crack about the FP.

[AJMD429]

AJ - still not a scope picture but WHOA look out now - if you are too big a sissy to carry a scoped rifle you should stick with those irons and the goofiest looking thing is the FP hanging on the side of a Winnie - not as bad on a Marlin.

Was that enough smilies to escape????

Works for me. , especially the crack about the FP.

Hey, I'm the first to admit, I sometimes LIKE a "carry handle" on a levergun. . .

I have a scope on one of my two 45-70's...

...and one of my three 44 Mags

(that huge and hideous-looking thing on the stainless 1894 is a Williams-FP)

But I DO like the Williams FP's on Marlins...


...and Rossi's version of the Winnie 92...


Of course I can't make fun of anyone, given my strange 'Night Scout' sights...