Need Peeps

[Michael J. Spangler]

hey guys,

lets hear some opinions on peeps. i have an 1895 in 45-70 and an 1894 in 357 that are both in need of peeps.
I like the looks of the skinners but i worry the adjustments are going to be too coarse. Seems that guys like to set there for a load and leave them there. i do a lot of monkeying around and shooting between 50 and 200 yards at the range. I like to get systems down and don't know if the skinners would be good for adjustments.
I'm not really a fan of the receiver sights other than that. I think a lever gun is a thing of beauty and they really take away from the nice lines.
I do like the marbles tang sights though. They're pretty classy looking. Does anyone run one of these? i would imagine you could run into some issues with recoil in the 45-70 if you're hand was wrapped behind that tang sight. How do you avoid that? different grip? is there enough clearance?
or am i over thinking this whole deal as always? get what looks good and spend some time with it putting round down range and i'll be all set?

thanks for the info guys.

[Tatume]

If you're going to make frequent adjustments the Lyman or Williams receiver sights will work well. I've always considered them to impart classic styling too, but that depends on what era you consider classic. Personally, I like the older Lyman sights.

[BCRider]

I've got a Marbles rear sitting here for my Win 94 project. I haven't shot it yet but I did stick it onto the 94 with only the back screw to see how it worked out. Adjustments are firm and snappy and the overall precision of the staff's threading fit is superb. There's no doubt that Marbles makes a quality product. But then for the cost I would hope so.

I'm teaming up the Marbles rear with a Lyman globe style front sight to use for long distance shooting.... .well, long distance for a .30-30 that is. Like out to around 300 yards.

[shaggybull]

I have a Skinner site on my marlin.

[MT Chambers]

Skinners are great, but you have to match the front sight with the peep and with Marlins it usually means a higher front sight, that's okay with me as I replace all front sights with Firesights.

[DeanWinchester]

Ohh sights! I though you were jonesing for some easter marshmallow.

[cbrick]

I've got the Marbles on my 94 30-30, went with Marbles over the Lyman because the Marbles is also windage adjustable and Lyman isn't. Can't answer your question about the sight & recoil with the 45-70 but in 30-30 it's a non-issue.

Rick

[pietro]

i do a lot of monkeying around and shooting between 50 and 200 yards at the range. I like to get systems down and don't know if the skinners would be good for adjustments.

I do like the marbles tang sights though. They're pretty classy looking.

Why not consider setting up both your rifles with dual zeroes ?

If you switch out the rear bbl open/iron sight for a folder (Lyman #16, Marbles #95, etc) and mount a Marble's tang peep sight, the rifles can be zeroed @ 50yds and the tang sights @ 200yds [ making it a simple matter the fold whatever sight (bbl ot tang) before raising the other sight, for the different distances.


.

[Michael J. Spangler]

Good idea. Not sure if I want to get that deep financially though.
I'm thinking of going simple on the 1894 with a skinner . I won't be shooting at anything crucial unless it's under 100 and I should be able to judge the drop.
I'm more worried about just having better groups and sight picture.
I guess the same could be said about the 1895 though that has way more drop so the tang sight could really come in hand.

[dlbarr]

Michael, this may not be an answer for you as your range extends to 200yds...

I recently installed a Marble's replacement for the rear sight on the barrel of my 1895. It is an aperture sight and combined with a new brass front blade from Skinner, is a very accurate system out to 100 yds. Can't verify beyond that. I was thinking along the same lines as you, but a guy on the phone at Buffalo Arms convinced me to give this a try as it is <$20. Figured I couldn't loose much if I didn't like it. I do like it - for my purposes. Just my 2 cents...

Unfortunately, this rear sight doesn't fold down. If they'd build it to do so, it would be part of a perfect short/long range sighting system combined with tang and beech-type front sights.

[dragon813gt]

I hate threads w/ out pictures

Marlin 336 in 35 Remington


W/ a Merit aperture installed. They are awesome and I'm ordering another one.


1894C




Pretty easy to tell what my preference is. Once set for a particular load all you have to do is figure out the hold overs. It's really not a big deal. If you want MOA out of a lever then put a scope on it. Mine are really close to MOA w/ the Skinners and small apertures.

[Michael J. Spangler]

I guess I really need to match it to the use.
I would to be able to small game hunt with the 1894 and do mostly target.
The 1895 would be for leer game at some point.

[W.R.Buchanan]

I like the Skinner Sights alot, as pictured above, as they are the good looking version of XS sights which are great on guns that shoot one load and are sighted in once and left alone after.

They are not easy to adjust frequently.

For a sight that you are going to want to move around like to play with load development with Cast Boolits then there are two real options.

Williams or Lyman. and by Lyman, I mean the older steel Lymans.

Of the two the superior sight is the older Lyman 66LA which will fit either of your guns. They may or may not be predrilled and tapped for these sights and will have two small holes drilled and tapped and plugged with set screws near the rear of the Receiver on the upper left side. If these holes are not there then they must be put there by someone who knows what he is doing.

Hint: up and downwise they must be on the same centerline as the center of the groove for the Extractor. Fore and Aft they must be positioned so that you can thumb the hammer without running into the sight.

Unfortunately they don't make these anymore and the current line of aluminum replacements are not nearly as good a product, so that relegates you to finding them on Ebay or other gun parts places.

Expect to pay $75-150 depending on quality of the sight.

The reason why you want this particular sight instead of all the rest is because you can move it, and then move it back and it will be exactly where you started. It is completely predictable and repeatable.

If you are going to just set and forget then any of them will work. If you are going to move it then the Lyman will pay for itself quickly in ammo saved during sighting in the gun.

I have several of them and would like more. I also have several Williams sights which will be replaced as soon as Lyman's are obtained for the guns they are on.

They are arguably the best Aperture Receiver sights ever produced on this planet. Redfield's are right there with them however they didn't make sights for as many applications as Lyman did and as a result they are more scarce.

Randy

[cbrick]

For a sight that you are going to want to move around like to play with load development with Cast Boolits then there are two real options. Williams or Lyman. and by Lyman, I mean the older steel Lymans. Randy

Only two options? Really? Marbels isn't an option? That's what I use for the 94 30-30 at 50-100-150-200 meters, it's repeatable when going up & down on the targets at the various ranges & would be useless if it wasn't. It's also windage adjustable, a huge advantage at 200 with a wind blowing.

Rick

[DeanWinchester]

1894C

What a friggin' genius idea for storing an extra aperture!!!!! Was that your idea?

[dragon813gt]

What a friggin' genius idea for storing an extra aperture!!!!! Was that your idea?

No, Skinner sells them. And their release couldn't have been more timely. I have a habit of losing them on the field somehow. Now I have an extra on hand that's easy to access. I'm really afraid I'm going to lose the Merit that I put on the 336. That one will get some locktite put on it.

[Michael J. Spangler]

ok so i got to use a williams at the range tonight. it worked well for sure. the aperture was a little big, i'm guessing about .125" or so.

what size aperture do you guys use? for target and good light conditions?

i think i'm going to go with a skinner. i really like the bead front, i'm going to have to see what he offer for options of bead or maybe a fiber optic front sight.

[TXGunNut]

Depends on where the holes are; I like Williams and Lyman receiver sights, Marble and Lyman tang sights, One Ragged Hole sight inserts and Marble Bulls-Eye rear sights. I don't like drilling holes so the location of the D&T'd holes narrows down my choices but so far I like them all. Haven't tried Skinner sights yet but it probably won't be long.

[dlbarr]

Those Merit sights really seem to be a great thing....have seen them for a long time but never understood them until now. Think I will get one.

For what ever reason, I find sighting systems the most interesting part of firearms & shooting/hunting.

[W.R.Buchanan]

Rick: they just seem flimsy to me. I also don't like their location on the tang. it gets in the way of my thumb. The only guns that I would consider putting a tang sight on would be a big Sharps or Hi Wall and then it would be a Soule type Ladder Sight that has two uprights for the car to travel on insuring it stays in alignment to the bore of the gun.

This is my opinion. or in other words,,, .02.

I realize a lot of people use them, I'm just not one. I don't see how they are nearly as accurate as a Lyman Receiver sight simply because the Lyman is shorter and fatter and that adds up to rigidity which is the basis for repeatability.

They're also prone to damage much easier than a receiver sight.

Like I said 2 main choices and one is even much better than the other.

Once again my .02.

Randy