Winchester 94 - Tang Sight or Receiver Sight?

[Dimner]

As I'm progressing with my winchester 94 Teddy Roosevelt Commemorative.... I'm planning my final setup for the rifle.

I know I'll be going aperture sights. That's a given. What I'm not sure about is if I should go receiver sight or tang sight.

If I go tang sight, it will be the Marbles Tang for adjustable windage.

If I go receiver, I'll probably go with a Williams foolproof.

There are pro's and cons of each.... Does anyone have experience with one or either or both on the winchester 94? What are your thoughts.

[Mk42gunner]

I prefer receiver sights over tang sights.

The reason is I put my thumb across the wrist of the stock and a tang sight isn't as comfortable, for me.

I also like steel sights better than aluminum, but if you don't knock your rifle around it is probably a moot point.

Robert

[Wind]

Hey there Dimner -- They will both work just fine. A tang sight will get you out there a little farther. Most receiver sights only have about 1/2" of elevation...

174673

I've never found tang sights on a Winchester to be a "thumb" problem...

174674

Whilst both of the above work just fine, if you're doing an initial set up why limit yourself? Get a tall sight (I'm a Montana Vintage Arms fan) and have plenty of reach when you want it...

174675

Marlin or Winchester, a 30-30 will reach out quite a ways...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8bPEPc3fnA

Hope this helps. Best regards. Wind

[Tatume]

Personally, although I own several, I don't like tang sights. They get in the way, and are uncomfortable to shoot. Also, my opinion is the Lyman is better looking than the Williams receiver sight. I especially like the antique all-steel Lyman sights. They can be hard to find though. The Williams is definitely a good sight.

A great deal depends on what you plan to do with the rifle. Are you going to hunt or shoot targets? Are you going to shoot short or long range targets?

Take care, Tom

[Hick]

I have a Williams receiver sight on my 30-30 Model 94. I'm very happy with it. I noticed someone commented that a receiver sight won't get you out to as great a distance compared to a tang sight, but I haven't had that problem. My Williams lets me get high enough for low velocity lead boolits, and low enough for shots out to 400 yards with 2000 fps loads. That's as far as I can comfortably see to shoot accurately anyway, so I'm happy with the Williams.

[Nrut]

For hunting a Williams receiver sight with target knobs.
http://www.brownells.com/shotgun-parts/sights/rear-sights/foolproof-tk-receiver-sights-prod27350.aspx

For long range plinking a Marble tang sight..
The Montana Vintage Arms tang sight like "Wind" shows above would be even nicer..

[JSnover]

There's nothing inherently wrong with a receiver sight but the tang sight will give you more of everything. Longer sight radius, more elevation and the aperture is closer to your eye. Plus the aesthetics are a lot better (IMO), if the overall appearance matters.

[OverMax]

Just saying:
Have used both. Like my Williams Fool Proof site better. Rock solid always. No surprises. And glass wearers friendly.
My experience: A tang site is better suited for bench rest targeting purposes.

[HawkCreek]

http://www.buffaloarms.com/Lyman_38_Receiver_Sights_it-162035.aspx?CAT=4096

Here's another option. Expensive yes but a little more unique and they are a quality sight.

[Wind]

Well boys -- The Providence Tool Co. copy of the Lyman Pattern 21 sight is a nifty sight. Be aware there are two different lengths of these sights. The shorter length is for the 1894 Winchester. You will need to drill and tap two holes in your receiver to mount this sight. While they do allow for longer range shooting, they are not as precise as a screw or "click" adjustable tang sight.

174714

I drilled and tapped the fixed hole factory aperture mount to accept a threaded Lyman aperture.

174715

And as much as I hate to say it, there were 697 shooters registered at the Mathew Quigley Buffalo Match this year and not a shooting bench in sight!! http://www.quigleymatch.com/index.html

Hope this helps. Best regards. Wind

[GunnyJohn]

have any idea what load he was shooting at 900 yards?

[rondog]

Just placed an order with Midway for a Marbles tang sight for my 24" Rossi 92.

[rintinglen]

I hold with those that hold with receiver sights. I have several lever guns set up with Tang sights, but I have more that have receiver sights. If you are going to shoot really long distances, the tang is a better choice,but only then. A receiver sight will take you out to 500 yards. I would go with the bolt Williams FP rather than drill holes in my nickled top strap.

[rondog]

My Rossi came D&T'd on the tang for the Marbles sight, and my old eyes need all the help they can get.

[Wind]

Hey there Gunny John -- I'm not sure just what Mountainhunters load was. 10 grains of Unique and a 170 grain Laser-Cast True Shot will get there accurately as well. That target is actually 990 yards from the shop door. I suppose we should quit calling it the "900" - but it isn't quite a thousand!! Best regards. Wind

[Dimner]

Thanks for all the replies everyone. Lots to think about. This sight will be for hunting only. I doubt I would be in the position to take a shot past 200 yards. Northern Michigan woods. Even if I had a 200 yard shot, not sure I would pull the trigger. I probably would try and stalk closer at least to 100. 150 yards would be the max I'm comfortable with pulling the trigger....for now. The only paper I shoot would just be for sighting in my cast loads.

As for the receiver sight, if I go with one, it will be one that I don't have to do any drilling or tapping to install. I really like that old Redfield that Wind showed on his.

I'm leaning towards a tang sight. For a few reasons.

1) I have always loved the look

2) Receiver sights seem a little less durable since they just float above the bolt

3) With a tang sight I can fold it down out of the way, then flip up the rear barrel sight. That way I can have the rifle zeroed for two loads. The tang zeroed for my 311041 173gr deer load. The rear barrel zeroed for my 25-50 yard 3118 120gr small game load at 1100fps.

But the receiver sight has some going for it too

1) no drilling and tapping

2) I live close to williams and they will sell me a foolproof model with just one target knob for elevation. I can use that to switch between small game and deer loads. Just not as fast as folding down the tang sight

3) at least half if not 75% the cost of the tang sight if you include gunsmithing

I'm glad to see the tang sight doesn't get in the way on a straight stock 94. The Teddy Roosevelt 94 is a like a straight stock/pistol grip mix. Not as pistol gripped as a marlin 336, but not straight either.

http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160819/df8da4fb7ed2c207df8fa269aa17f112.jpg

Think there would be any grip issues with this pattern of stock?



I hold with those that hold with receiver sights. I have several lever guns set up with Tang sights, but I have more that have receiver sights. If you are going to shoot really long distances, the tang is a better choice,but only then. A receiver sight will take you out to 500 yards. I would go with the bolt Williams FP rather than drill holes in my nickled top strap.

Exactly one of the reasons I'm hesitating for a tang sight. The nickel top strap on mine is the will need a hole drilled and tapped through TR'S signature. Well probably a fake signature that winchester made up. I don't care about collector value. This rifle has none. No box and I broke it of its virginity 2 weeks ago. So it's just a nickel plated 94.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[BAGTIC]

Tang sight will also get hung up on branches, etc. easier and get bent easier, and get knocked out of adjustment easier. A receiver sight is satisfactory for as far as I have a right or need to be shooting anyway.

[Maine1]

love receiver sights. modern man does not fully appreciate what you can do with a good peep sight. I have them on all my levers, as well as most of my semis.

[TXGunNut]

I won't D&T my old Winchesters so my choice is determined by the existing holes. I have and like both receiver and tang sights, just ordered a couple Marbles tang sights from Brownells a few minutes ago.

[pietro]

.

The Winchester 94 can be set up with dual zeroes, using both a tang peep sight and a folding rear barrel open/iron sight - and the issue height front sight blade.


:bigsmyl2:

If the barrel sights are zeroed for a relatively short range (say, 75yds), and the tanger zeroed for a somewhat longer range (say, 150yds), it's a simple matter to hunt off the barrel sights (with the tanger folded) in case of a suddenly-presented game shot, then, if/when a game target presents itself farther away, there's usually sufficient time to simultaneously fold the rear barrel sight & raise the tang sight, to make the shot.


.

[TXGunNut]

Think there would be any grip issues with this pattern of stock?-Dimner

I'm a little concerned with the angle of the upper tang. Not sure a tang sight will work as they have detents to ensure a consistent vertical position when deployed. Angle appears to be a bit different from a straight-stocked 94 but I could be wrong.

[Wind]

Hey again Dimner -- As I'm in the camp that will put my thumb where the sight isn't, I don't foresee grip issues with that stock configuration. Generally Winchester put an 18 degree angle on their tangs. It would seem illogical (channeling Spock here) to me they would change that for a limited production run of rifles. The bases of tang sights are "dished" to facilitate lightly modifying to fit a tang correctly (if needed).

175002

The key is having the staff perpendicular to the top of the receiver.

175003

If by some chance your rifles tang isn't 18 degrees, it would prolly only take a file stroke or two fore and aft to set it up correctly.

Hope this helps. Best regards. Wind

[Dimner]

Hey again Dimner -- As I'm in the camp that will put my thumb where the sight isn't, I don't foresee grip issues with that stock configuration. Generally Winchester put an 18 degree angle on their tangs. It would seem illogical (channeling Spock here) to me they would change that for a limited production run of rifles. The bases of tang sights are "dished" to facilitate lightly modifying to fit a tang correctly (if needed).

175002

The key is having the staff perpendicular to the top of the receiver.

175003

If by some chance your rifles tang isn't 18 degrees, it would prolly only take a file stroke or two fore and aft to set it up correctly.

Hope this helps. Best regards. Wind

This does help indeed. I'll take a look and see what the angle is at. Regardless, as I documented in another thread, I'm still having problems with scope mounts on this rifle. It's driving me crazy. Only using the scope for my load development process, I may be going to a aperture sight faster than I wished.

[Wind]

Hey again Dimner -- You might consider forgetting about the scope thang entirely. I'm not sure what the top tang on your commemorative rifle looks like, but most '94 tangs call for a 2" to 2.26" hole spacing and incorporate the tang screw as one of the mounts. On this Uberti tang that layout would just nick the forward most tip of the engraving.

Click to embiggenate

175016

You might check yours to see how it would play.

Getting a good tang sight will be far more rewarding than any raggedy ol" scope anyway!!

175017

The owner and this rifle returned a few weeks ago and it played pretty well.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LW76B4Nzlsk

There is no reason why yours can't do the same.

Hope this helps. Best regards. Wind

[Dimner]

Hey again Dimner -- You might consider forgetting about the scope thang entirely. I'm not sure what the top tang on your commemorative rifle looks like, but most '94 tangs call for a 2" to 2.26" hole spacing and incorporate the tang screw as one of the mounts. On this Uberti tang that layout would just nick the forward most tip if the engraving.

Click to embiggenate

175016

You might check yours to see how it would play.

Getting a good tang sight will be far more rewarding than any raggedy ol" scope anyway!!

175017

The owner and this rifle returned a few weeks ago and it played pretty well.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LW76B4Nzlsk

There is no reason why yours can't do the same.

Hope this helps. Best regards. Wind

For sure will be ditching the scope. It was my OCD messing with me anyway. I wanted to be able to test my load development as precise as possible and in a perfect world, a 12x scope would do that very well. After that, off to the tang or receiver sight. Sounds like Teddy's ghost doesn't agree. I can hear him clicking his teeth at me.

Here is a pic of the tang on mine. (this is a pic from the internet, not my exact rifle) I have absolutely no problem drilling a hole through the engraved signature. I'm pretty sure it's not even his signature anyway based on what I see online.

175019

Now I have to make the leap. Do I go tang? How long is it going to take for a gunsmith to fit me into his workload? Do I go receiver for now and miss out on having a zero for two loads?

[Kestrel4k]

Hello Dimmer,
I used to have a receiver sight on my M94, but went to an XS ghost ring which is far far better for field use IMO. It requires D&T'ing the top of the receiver if you don't have an AE model, but once installed is the best sight package for the M94's that I've ever seen - very unobtrusive.

https://www.xssights.com/Detail.aspx?PROD=993863&CAT=8508

You can click on the top right pic in the above listing to get a very good closeup view.

[targetfreak]

It comes down to this, and nothing else: The closer the aperture to your eye, the better. Therefore the tang-mounted peep sight is the best. Period.

[FergusonTO35]

For hunting and any shooting that doesn't involve a benchrest I say receiver sight all the way. All my rifles but two wear either Williams or Lyman receiver sights. I spent some quality time with my little 1894C today, it wears a new style Lyman 66 and .510 front sight with fine brass bead. On the menu was 7 grains IMR SR4756 and Lee 358-125-RF shooting bullseyes at 50 yards from a makeshift rest. Last few groups the holes were touching.

[Texas by God]

I vote for the receiver sight. Out of the way until you need it. When you need it - it's waiting on you. Steel Lyman's are nice but I've used Williams with nary a problem. I am not of the " Thumb alongside the grip" camp. Just my 0 $ worth of opinion. Best, Thomas.

[mustanggt]

I have two 94s. One a legendary frontiersman and a pre 64. I have 2 lyman 66A sights on them. Two appetures come with it one for target work and one for hunting. Both rifles have factory holes drilled for those sights. I would need to drill an extra hole for b the tang. So not an option for me. I like tang sights as I have two sharps rifles. I'm way more accurate than with barrel sights with the receiver sights.