Preparing for the Upcoming Season

[ChristopherO]

If I were more of a fisherman then this would be put off until later in the year, but shooting and hunting has always overridden my need to wet a line. The 45/70 1895 Cowboy's front sight was/is in need of attention, along with trials to test the CCI 250 Magnum primers I had picked up because LRP just aren't on the shelves and my supply of CCI 200 LRP is exceedingly low. Would the magnum primers throw off the grouping too much? Sunday afternoon was freed up to begin the research.


The Skinner Alaskan aperture peep is a quality piece, but I am not enamored with the wide Partridge post they sell for the front sight. In the past I've filed the top of the wide post to an A point and proceeded to do the same for this one before firing commenced. That helped. Not perfected yet, but better for the 100 yard target in front of the berm.

My normal load with the standard LRP was fired 3X's to give a baseline on Target One. Those are shots #1, 2 & 3 just inside the Bullseye and nearly touching at the 7 o'clock position. These are cast from an Accurate mold out of range scrap. That 7 or 8 year old mold, marked 460-405C (lubed, sized and GC'd at 420 grains) what Accurate has numbered on their online catalogue for this boolit now is 46-405A. This is a big, wide FN GC design but cycles through the action without a flaw and impacts deer with an audible smack. The grease grooves are full of WWL 2500.


The remainder of the holes in Target One were made with Powder Coated boolit over the CCI 250 Magnum LRP. Yes, I know, adding an other element into the testing was not a wise thing to do. This rifle just doesn't like PC baked on these boolits and this time was no different. But, the Chrony showed higher velocity readings with the PC and CCI 250's. That was interesting, as the gunpowder charge was exactly the same. The grouping wasn't promising, though. As the target shows, the shots were hitting much higher with PC / CCI 250 than the standard Greased CCI 200 holes. (My eyes at 100 yards was being stressed with the 3" bullseye) As I've run out of Hornady GC's a controlled group was marked S for Sage GC while the others H for Hornady GC. I keep them apart and marked on the target for comparison.

With ten greased boolits in the cartridge holder waiting their turn Target 2 was stapled onto the backstop. Again, the only thing different in this load was the use of the CCI 250 Magnum LRP. These greased projectiles were sized and gas checked with Hornady GC.


By this time in the evening my eyes were getting tired, but I did my best to touch off when the sight picture looked good with the front post toward the bottom of the black 4" bullseye. Shots 2, 4, 7 & 9 are in the top of the bull, while the others went high. Even though this isn't an impressively tight group once again the Marlin proved its preference for WLL 2500 over PC. If visual fatigue had not been a factor, and taking more time between shots was implemented this may have been a better display for my effort. The sun was falling fast, which kept the rate of shooting at a quicker pace.
The Chrony showed a 52 fps ES for these ten shots with an average of 1,601 fps. (1,573 to 1,625, with the highest and lowest velocities removed the mean average was still 1,601.88 fps) I had foolishly convinced myself this was a 1,700 fps loading, but the Chrony corrected that faulty thinking. Still, I've seen what this load will do to multiple whitetails over the years and don't feel under gunned for what they've been crafted for.

My biggest Take Away is that the stash of magnum primers will not be a detriment for this loading of H4227 with a tuff of Dacron cushioned between the charge and base of the boolit. I'm getting strongly temped to attach a quality slender little 1X4X20 scope to the receiver to really wring out the accuracy potential this lever action can provide. I see that Skinner now offers a pretty base for a scope that also hosts a peep sight. If any of you have used such a set up will it come up to the eye naturally for fast shots on game like the Skinner does?

This was a late Sunday afternoon well spent. Maybe I'll go fishing with my brother before the summer is over......

[dverna]

I was not going to post until I got to the end of your post.

If at all possible, I always mount a scope on a rifle to wring out loads. i even do that on my .38/.357 1894 Marlins I used for CAS. It is cheap and easy to do. If I cannot mount a scope (like on the 1873 clones) I add a tang sight.

For me, accuracy is more important than 100 fps and my eyes are not good enough to shoot factory sights well enough.

You are on the right track to add a scope. In fact, after adding one you will likely not remove it even for hunting. I have two 1.5-4.5x scopes that works perfectly for short range shots and the 4.5x gives plenty of magnification for testing loads. They are less than $100 and there is an inexpensive mount for the Marlins.

[centershot]

Don is right on track with his advice, I've found that a 1-4x is hard to beat for an all-around scope with the possible exception of +200 yd. shots. For big game hunting it's all I need, for varmints it's nice to have a little more magnification so I use a 3-9x or a straight 6x but if your vision is up to it, the 1-4x will do the job.

[BLAHUT]

[ Would the magnum primers throw off the grouping too much? ]

I tested every flavor of large rifle primer I could get my hands on, the only thing I changed in the load was the primer, ran all over a coronagraph, all flavor's of primer were within a few feet per second of each other, except federal and CCI, they were 100 FPS faster, each, in my 445/70. So that was the only thing that might change the group ?

[ChristopherO]

I bought this rifle new when Ohio legalized Straight Wall cartridges with the intention to use open sights (Skinner) until impractical. Last September I printed another little cluster group with it very well. I'll agree these 59 year young eyes aren't what they used to be, but glasses keep me in the game. Shooting water jugs at 200 yards in the past has been a fun practice with this set up. Sunday I had been bush hogging the farm before shooting, with the dust causing more matter in the eyes than normal. Still, the thought of a sleek little scope has been nagging at me. It's my Cowboy, so if it disgusts the purists if I screw on an optic, so be it. The desire to be quick and accurate trumps aesthetics.

I have other long guns scoped, so know the benefits well. Used to bust gallon jugs at 300 yards with a lowly 4X in the 06. A little magnification goes along way. But this unscoped rifle has been the berries to carry afield these past years.

Picked up a Weatherby/Howa 350 Legend at the LGS the other day. A good bolt rifle is my first love in firearms, and this was extremely nice one to shoulder. Made me wonder if the Marlin with a scope would come up to be on target as satisfactorily.

Don, what scope, base and rings are you referring to? I'm happy to accept suggestions.

[dverna]

Christopher O,

I have the Bushnell scopes. Currently $75. BTW not sure how they will hold up to the recoil of a .45/70 but no issues with .38/357 or .44 Mag. I would not mount a cheap scope on a hunting rifle but for my needs these have done a good job.

https://www.amazon.com/Bushnell-Bann...s%2C223&sr=8-2

I have a set of generic rings and this mount for the 1894's and it will fit your 1895.

https://www.midwayusa.com/product/1477189486/

Using a "cheap" scope to test loads is good enough but when I hunt, I want something of better quality. Might want to look at the Vortex Diamondback or similar. I have a Diamondback on a .308 that has served well. But it is four times the cost.

Good luck!

[huntinlever]

Excellent thread and breakdown, thanks for doing it. Lots lined up here, for me. 62 with eyes that are not at all what they used to be, a good Rx but I've found low-power readers do a decent job for the purposes of load development on my son's 336. My 45-70 is scoped with a Leu FX II 2.5 x 20, but my son's 336 has a Skinner. I found at 50 yards even with my eyes, 37.2 gr LeverRev and 150 gr Speer Hot Cor SNFP's, patterning was good and acceptable for hunting purposes. Jury is still out for him whether he wants to keep the peep or mount the other FX II we have, like mine.

I was glad to read a parallel thought by Don. When I was really trying hard to make the Skinner work on my 45-70, I still wanted to do load development with the scope, to "shoot as good as the rifle wants," before introducing the errors intrinsic to my using the peep. As it is, I'm finally accepting it's scopes for me here on out, in the field. If I ever move off the 2.5 x 20, that 1-4X seems a perfect choice.

Blahut I know you've moved to LRM primers for all your rifles. I was lucky to pick up some CCI 200's from Midsouth the other day, as I was running low, and because I shoot my .338 WM so little relative to my main hunting rifle (45-70), I have a lot of LRM on hand. I did try some comparative load development with the LR (CCI) v. LRM (Remington) and actually found the LRM resulted in poorer groupings. But I am certain I didn't do enough shooting with the LRM's to have good data.

Following with great interest.

[Mk42gunner]

Christopher O,

Your 1600 fps load should be fine, as you know from personal experience. Affordable chronographs have brought a large touch of reality to handloaders' expected muzzle velocities. Unknown thousands of buffalo were killed with a lot less velocity.

As for scoping a Marlin 1895CB, I say go for it. If you want to go back to the aperture sight after load development, fine. If not, the scope will give you a bit more hunting time at dawn and dusk. I'm 58 and if I were to go deer hunting again, I will definitely have a scope on my rifle, fuzzy front sights don't make for clean kills.

I also agree with using a quality scope for hunting. I broke the crosshairs on a 4X Simmons shotgun scope on a Ruger No 1 in .45-70 once, put a Leupold M8 2.5X on it and never looked back.

I like the smaller straight tubed scopes on lever actions, if they must be scoped. Actually hitting the game animal where you think you are aiming trumps how the rifle looks.

My 336 in .35 Remington wears a Leupold Vari-X I 1-4, and my 336CB in .38-55 wears a Redfield 2 3/4X. I believe these scopes will do anything the rifles are capable of in the field.

I believe it was Jack O'Connor that said you need one X of magnification for every hundred yards of range for big game.

Clarity of view (glass) tops magnification in the usefulness while hunting area.

Robert

[ChristopherO]

Now you all have went and done it; I'm strongly leaning toward the Leupold FX-II Ultralight 2.5x20mm Rifle Scope. It has more eye relief, nearly a 40' FOV, is lightweight, bells and whistles free and should look splendid resting on top of the Marlin.

Just pulled out a lessor quality 3x10x32 in the waning light of the evening and it gave a good crisp view at 100 yds. Leupolds have an excellent reputation for clarity, so the 20mm objective lens might just do the trick. I plan to go to the big city tomorrow afternoon. If time permits I'll swing by the Bass Pro to see if they have one to look through.

[huntinlever]

Now you all have went and done it; I'm strongly leaning toward the Leupold FX-II Ultralight 2.5x20mm Rifle Scope. It has more eye relief, nearly a 40' FOV, is lightweight, bells and whistles free and should look splendid resting on top of the Marlin.

Just pulled out a lessor quality 3x10x32 in the waning light of the evening and it gave a good crisp view at 100 yds. Leupolds have an excellent reputation for clarity, so the 20mm objective lens might just do the trick. I plan to go to the big city tomorrow afternoon. If time permits I'll swing by the Bass Pro to see if they have one to look through.

Not to be a total downer Christopher but as much as I love ours, I don't think they're producing them anymore and they can be tough to find. When I actually talked to Leupold about that, he said that while they're still in their lineup, they "aren't really producing them much." He said the 1.5-5 x 20X is close to the same form factor. I'd do one in a heartbeat if I didn't already have our FXII's. The ability to go in to 5X is, I think, not a bad thing either. Just my $0.02.

https://www.leupold.com/vx-3hd-1-5-5x20-cds-zl-duplex

[Mk42gunner]

Any fixed power scope can be hard to find these days.

My newest Leupold is a Vari X III, the 1.5-5X by 20 mm. It is a great scope that currently resides on my .35 Whelen. I wouldn't hesitate to use it on a .45-70. It is light and trim, maybe not as trim as the little 2.5X, but smaller than most scopes made today.

The only downside to the newer versions that I see are cost.


Robert

[GregLaROCHE]

I was once caught up with the zoom scopes. Once had a 6x20. After a number of years living and hunting in Alaska, I determined to a good Léopold 4 power was the best option for me when hunting.

[ChristopherO]

I agree Greg, a fixed 4X scope would be perfect, if my criteria allows the use of a larger objective bell, but I want a trim package of scope sitting a top this long slender rifle and unfortunately the 4X scopes I've been researching have a small FOV. Always trade offs but thankfully there are more options to consider.

Help me out Gentlemen, I had the opportunity to check out the Leupold 1.5-4X20mm yesterday at Bass Pro. It has the 30mm tube instead of the 1" tube that the 2.5x20 has and is a bit longer and weighs a tad more, as well. Still a nice scope, but $200 more expensive than the 2.5X, which they didn't have in stock to look at in person. The 4X would be excellent to sight in with but the FOV shrinks measurably. Lowering the adjustment to 2.5X and looking out the glass door into the vastness the vacant mall (as in empty, shuttered and nonfunctioning) that the Cincinnati Bass Pro is attached to shows that a 2.5X can work very well for a hunting scenario out to 150 yards, and probably 200 yards, if I were to purchase the fixed 2.5X20.

Online the 2.5X20 is discontinued in the rimfire version but still shows availability in the large centerfire rifle variety, though estimated delivery time is 12 to 21 days (not in stock). The 1.5-4X20 is In Stock. Again, $300 or $500 is the price of the two respectively. I love good glass, but spending $200 more for the one over the other has to have measurable advantage. In the 45/70, which I won't be sniping at a buffalo's brain at 400 yards with but shooting Odocoileus Virginianus at maybe 200 yards at best, but more in line with 100 to 125 yards, will the difference between to two be worth it?
The high velocity CF rounds I enjoy, yes, the difference will be worth the extra money. For the 45/70, which I've been quite successful for a number of years with peep sights, I have to be convinced.

Fire away. I am interested in hearing your responses.

[dverna]

The one concern with the 20mm tube is how it performs at dawn/dusk when light levels are low.

It is too bad they do not have one in stock that you can look through late in the evening to evaluate. I do not own any 20mm tube scopes so I cannot advise you but others might help out.

One option is to check if the store accepts returns for unmounted scopes. Buy both and return the 20mm if the 30mm tube exhibits a noticeable improvement. If the 20mm tube scope is good enough, you can save some money. If you are upfront with the salesman he should be ok with that plan...he knows you will be purchasing one or the other.

BTW, I missed a 275 yard shot with a cheap ($150) scope that had shifted POA by 5 MOA after I dropped the gun a few feet. That experience convinced me to invest in higher end optics. Over the next 15 years I hope to be shooting, the added cost ($300) does not seem too much of a premium. That cheap scope worked well for over 15 years and I was patting myself on the back for "saving a bunch of money" until I had to face the guys at deer camp. We searched for hours and never saw any sign of a hit. They know the gun and I are MOA and I was shooting from a blind with a good rest with little wind. It was not a tough shot. The guys could not believe I had missed until I benched the gun after the hunt.

[huntinlever]

The one concern with the 20mm tube is how it performs at dawn/dusk when light levels are low.

It is too bad they do not have one in stock that you can look through late in the evening to evaluate. I do not own any 20mm tube scopes so I cannot advise you but others might help out.

One option is to check if the store accepts returns for unmounted scopes. Buy both and return the 20mm if the 30mm tube exhibits a noticeable improvement. If the 20mm tube scope is good enough, you can save some money. If you are upfront with the salesman he should be ok with that plan...he knows you will be purchasing one or the other.

BTW, I missed a 275 yard shot with a cheap ($150) scope that had shifted POA by 5 MOA after I dropped the gun a few feet. That experience convinced me to invest in higher end optics. Over the next 15 years I hope to be shooting, the added cost ($300) does not seem too much of a premium. That cheap scope worked well for over 15 years and I was patting myself on the back for "saving a bunch of money" until I had to face the guys at deer camp. We searched for hours and never saw any sign of a hit. They know the gun and I are MOA and I was shooting from a blind with a good rest with little wind. It was not a tough shot. The guys could not believe I had missed until I benched the gun after the hunt.

Don, the light issue with the 20mm is interesting, though I've personally never felt trouble seeing early or later (well, except once - I call him "Ghost Buck." Magnificent from what I could make out but it was about 20 minutes before legal shooting. In the minutes just before legal light, I watched him disappear into the mist a mere 75 yards away or so, and I never found him). But you've got me curious. I've never seen a form factor scope like the VXIII 1.5-5 x 20 or the FXII 2.5 x 20, such low mag scopes, in anything larger than 20 mm. Do you have a lower power 30 mm and if so, what's the make/model?

[Mk42gunner]

Christopher O, I've never had a 30mm tube scope, so no help there.

I will say that I have never had a problem seeing things with the small straight tubed Leupolds. I've had three that I can think of for sure, the M8 2.5X, a Vari X II 1-4X, and a Vari X III 1.5-5. As the models get newer, the glass gets better; but for your use I think any of them will be fine.

Also the Vari X II models did not have click adjustments, but I think all currently manufactured Leupolds do have that feature. It really doesn't matter on a set it and forget it hunting scope on a one load rifle, unlike a range toy.

Don, the tube isn't 20mm, it is the objective lens. The scope tube itself is 1", just no enlarged objective bell like most larger scopes.

Robert

[ChristopherO]

Solid imput, Gentlemen. A) Don't cheap out, it will cost me in the long run, B) Light gathering abilities are fine within legal hunting time frames, C) Take into consideration the years of estimated enjoyment this purchase can contribute to my hunting career with this rifle.

I'm taking it all in with appreciation.

[huntinlever]

Solid imput, Gentlemen. A) Don't cheap out, it will cost me in the long run, B) Light gathering abilities are fine within legal hunting time frames, C) Take into consideration the years of estimated enjoyment this purchase can contribute to my hunting career with this rifle.

I'm taking it all in with appreciation.

Good luck Christopher. Appreciated your thread and the input of the experienced guys.

[ChristopherO]

As the summer continues I've made progress in the plans to be well prepared for the upcoming season. A Leupold 1.5-4X 30mm scope has been added to the Marlin 1895 CB. For those who howl and besmirch the addition of a scope onto a lever action rifle, never fear, the Skinner Alaskan is packaged and safely stored in the safe. When I sell the arm, or bequeath it to a family member, they can remove the blemish and unite the peep to the receiver at their convenience. So far the set up currently looks like such:

with this boolit being used, as a GG (WLL 2500) or PC (Red or Silver) from Smokes:


My son and I had a sight in afternoon last week to put the crosshairs on the bullseye. That went well, with much better results that I could extract from the naked eye. I was using the same load of H4227 with grease groove boolits, powder coated boolits, CCI 200 LRP and CCI 250 MLRP. There were definitely variations, but at 100 yards any deer shot at would have been dead in short order. We commenced to popping water jugs from the bench and off hand to wrap up that session. I didn't save those targets as I knew a more metered target session would be in order to really find out what this scope can do and what the various components would give. But knowing that I can still blow a jug to bits off hand at a football field length was satisfying.
Cleaning the bore is done with gun oil and tight patches using a Dewey Coated Rod. This rifle has only had my cast boolits, mostly range scrap, shot out of it, never a jacketed bullet in all these thousands of shots down range. It will leave lead shards in the first 3" or 4" from the chamber, but I've never witnessed a marked decrease in accuracy. Once two oiled patches doubled up are pushed down the bore then I take one of the compressed patches, add it to two unused patches to make the stroke extremely tight to push through the barrel. Here is the progression I notice when 20, 30 or in this case 40+ boolits are shot before cleaning:


A good friend and myself at the Ohio Gun Collector's Assoc Show recently where a vender had a full box of CCI 200 LRP from an estate dating back to 07/1995. They were as fresh and clean as what I have, so I scooped them up to replenish what I am nearly out of. More of the Accurate WFN 460" boolits were loaded up for the next time I could get to the range.
Sunday afternoon was hot enough to keep everyone in doors, except a diehard shooter such as myself. With the portable, slip together bench set up I was ready for another session of testing. Three shots of an Unique loading to foul the barrel first. Then settling down with the Marlin snug on the Champion tripod with sandbag buttstock rest more careful aim was employed via the 4X scope. Only this time, I had taped a temporary buttstock cheek pad/riser to give a better cheek weld and better sight picture through the Leupold than the initial sight in gave me.


With only 3 of my standard load of H4227, a tuff of dacron, under the GG (WLL 2500) over a CCI 200 LRP in Starline brass I shot Target #1:


Then, the next 5 rounds were covered in Red PC, same loading except with CCI 250 MLRP: (Not sure why picture is sideways)


I did not clean out the barrel between any of these various loadings and I believe that shooting the 5 PC boolits and then switching over to the GG Boolits caused the first shot on Target 3 to fly high. That's my story, as the others all settled down lower on the paper:

This is the exact same loading as Target 1 except FC brass was utilized instead of Starline. I was having fun trying to get the cluster tighter with the remaining 7 shots. I think there is major promise with this GG load. Actually, all the deer killed in the past 6 years has been with this loading, sans the FC brass.

Target 4 was first shot at with two of the 45/70 Short cases. I've made these up just incase I go over to Indiana to hunt public land. Everything is the same but the cases are trimmed to 1.79" to comply with that state's regulations on case length. The Red PC boolits are seated to the exact same OAL as the full length cases are. Number one of the shorties hit high. Maybe the grease in the barrel caused this? Short #2 was in the Bullseye.
Then I used up the last of the SILVER PC boolits with the FULL LENGTH FC brass ignited by the 07/1995 CCI 200 LRP's to finish out the 100 yard trial:


My note: I've not been impressed with the Red PC in all the times I've tried it out. This is basically my first go at the Silver PC, and I must say that target has me pleasantly surprised. There may be promise using PC after in this rifle. But greasing the grooves isn't a problem, either.

Then, for the fun of it I used two 1/2" dowel rods held in my hand as shooting sticks, leaned my back against the golf cart's bumper and let a few fly at 200 yards. Once my brother called out the hits with the spotting scope I adjusted the hash marks up to compensate for the boolit drop:

The triangle of 3 on the right side of the paper are my last three shots of the day with the second largest hash mark from the bottom holding on the black. This was at 4X. The other two holes are my brother's, who I encouraged to have a go at it.

Much fun, many boolits down range, and a far better knowledge of what this rifle and I can do together as we go into the game fields this coming Autumn.

[Mk42gunner]

Well the 30mm tubed scope doesn't look as bad (oversized) as I thought it would on your rifle, although the one inch tube scopes of that general design seem a better fit aesthetically. Maybe it is just that we have been using one inch tubes for decades and that is what I'm used to.

Cannot argue with the results, proving once again that you can't hit what you can't see.

It has been way too hot around here for me to think about going to the range, that or it rains just enough to get the humidity climbing.

Robert