Anybody have any ideas on this?

[geobru]

How can a rifle have the "correct" front and rear sights on it and shoot high with the rear sight at the lowest position? Seems that if you did change a sight and the gun doesn't hit where you want it that you would correct the problem.

I have had this experience with two Winchesters in the last couple years, and I am wondering if any of you have seen anything similar happen.

First was a Model 64. I wound up replacing the front site with a taller sight and then an 1894 that needed a sight that was .125 higher than the one on it to work with the rear sight, which was a vintage flat top that appeared to be correct for that rifle.

Both rifles were 32 Special, and both shot 8-10" high at 50 yards with the sights that came on the gun. Both group really well with the new sights.

How does this happen?

I wonder if the previous owners stopped shooting these guns because they weren't accurate?

Did they rob a sight and throw on any old sight to fill the dovetail?

Do barrels get warped, bent or???

What do you think, and have you seen this on any of the guns you have reeled in?

These guns were obviously used, but I cannot imagine that they were used if they weren't accurate. What do you think happened?

[Pete44ru]

.

AFAIK, "correct" front sights were available in slightly different heights: AND don't forget that older pre-64 Winchester's iron sights were calculated to accommodate the loads of the day, and not modern commercial or hand-loaded ammunition.

Also, it's entirely possible that different barrels were bored with slight differences, enough so that the issue sights could not accommodate the difference w/o changing the sight(s).


.

[Malamute]

What type rear sight? Most of the Winchester rear sights had some sort of adjustment in the sighting notch or the entire notch plate was adjustable. The older ones werent intended to be zeroed by simply finding a notch in the elevator that worked.

.

AFAIK, "correct" front sights were available in slightly different heights: AND don't forget that older pre-64 Winchester's iron sights were calculated to accommodate the loads of the day, and not modern commercial or hand-loaded ammunition.

Also, it's entirely possible that different barrels were bored with slight differences, enough so that the issue sights could not accommodate the difference w/o changing the sight(s).


.

Yes, they did have different front sights for different purposes, something to check into.

What difference in ammo? The older ballistics tables I have show the same info back into the 40s as today for the Winchester 94 loads.

[jdad]

Did either of these rifles, at one time in their lives, have a tang or receiver sight mounted on them?

[Sixgun]

All excellent answers above my post and just show the different variables than can happen to cause POI changes.....

Yes, I've dealt with these issues all of my shooting life. It's as common as a lying politician. It's why I alsway keep a large assortment of sights on hand.------6

[marlinman93]

Considering all the various "correct sights" most guns could have over the years, unless you bought a gun new anything could happen! The original German silver blade front sights came in 3 or 4 heights for various calibers and barrel diameters, so easy to swap one and end up with POI wrong.
But I did have this happen with a brand new gun also! Had one of those H&R Buffalo Classics brand new, and no matter what .45-70 ammo I put in it, it shot 6" high at 100 yds. I ended up adapting a tang sight to it to fix the issue, and get more accurate shooting. Then sold it to a friend later.

[williamranks]

Finally one I can answer. It still has the front sight for the black powder cartridges available at the time.
You need a higher front. Had to do that on my '92 built in 1894.
There are charts on the net to help with calculating the change in height.

[ollogger]

My Dads lever guns would shoot to poa for him, if I shot them they would always be 6-10 in.
high, my Dad was a lot smaller all away around than me, he could get down on the stock a lot lower
than me, that said most any gun with bbl. sights will shoot high for me




Brad

[Old Savage]

Have a Miroku 81 BLR in .243 Only that is zeroed at 400 yds shooting 100 gr .243 Win with the rear sight at its lowest setting.

[GunnyMack]

Slower loads will shoot higher, more time in the barrel under recoil.

Faster loads will be lower.

Most replacement sights can be purchased in .010" height differences. Brownells should have a selection.

[geobru]

Did either of these rifles, at one time in their lives, have a tang or receiver sight mounted on them?

No on the 64, and I don't know on the 1894! It doesn't appear that there was a tang sight on the 1894.

Finally one I can answer. It still has the front sight for the black powder cartridges available at the time.
You need a higher front. Had to do that on my '92 built in 1894.
There are charts on the net to help with calculating the change in height.

Neither gun was really a black powder gun. The 64 is early 50's and the 1894 is 1908.

What type rear sight? Most of the Winchester rear sights had some sort of adjustment in the sighting notch or the entire notch plate was adjustable. The older ones weren't intended to be zeroed by simply finding a notch in the elevator that worked.

The 64 has the adjustable slide, but it was already down as far as it would go. The 1894 has the flat top sight with no adjustment in the sight.

[FWiedner]

Whenever I get a rifle with a bead on the front sight, I usually end up changing it out for a taller sight because there's just not enough elevation at the rear sight.

I tend to sight over the top of a bead rather than through it, I use it like it's a post or a blade sooooo... my shots go low.

Probably not the same subject, but I'm throwing a horseshoe at the stake anyway.

[hondo1892]

I owned a Win 94 in 32-40 it had a flat top adjustable sight and it shot high at the lowest setting. I took the elevator out of the sight and then it shot where I aimed. It was a 1920's vintage rifle and my loads were on the slower side so that may have been the reason. I also had trouble seeing the front sight on it in low light, my eyes cant see the blued steel blades very well any more. Both front and rear sight were vintage and available from Winchester for the 1894 but I don't know if they were original or not. But I would look for another vintage front sight to put on the rifles myself.