Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
November 7, 2015
Offline
This receiver sight 69A is a frequent flier on my range trips. I braved our current heat wave for a trip to the club inspired by the launch of Jeff’s book on the 69. I’ve decided this particular 69A is probably not a 100 yard gun but that may change with some ammo it likes and a better shooter. I probably could have buckled down and shot a bit better but didn’t. I did shoot a 50 yd group to make sure things were working properly.
Mike
Nice looking 69A! And not a bad group for 50 yards. The post-war 69A is about a 2 moa rifle at 100 yards with good ammo and benchrest, some pre-war rifles have a tighter bore and 6-groove rifling which helps a bit.
Try some Wolf Match or Eley Red Box in it and it should do just a tad better. Also, check the barrel bedding and make sure it is not contacting the stock abnormally in the barrel channel. Sometimes the stock stud will get shifted slightly and cause barrel contact on the side of the stock inletting. See if a dollar bill will slip down the barrel channel around the barrel at least half-way.
Best Regards,
.
WACA Life Member #6284 - Specializing in Pre-64 Winchester .22 Rimfire
November 7, 2015
Offline
Thanks, Jeff. Easy to see why it’s one of my “shooters” as well as a nice collectable. I was just goofing around, didn’t break out the match ammo. I had some Norma Tac-22 in the bag and it got shot. Excellent plinking and informal target ammo out to 50 yards but even with a target rifle it opens up a bit on the 100 yard line. I don’t do very well with the bead front sight on this rifle @ 100 so it’s just for fun.
In case you’re wondering, this rifle really CAN shoot! Here’s a target I fired with it awhile back. Someday I’ll finish zeroing the sights, I suppose.
Mike
Nice group! If you happen to run across a Lyman 57EF it attaches in place of the more crude Winchester 80A sight you currently have with no modification to the rifle. The Lyman 57 is a more precise sight and has infinitely more options for apertures. And, a Lyman 17A fits the front sight dovetail and is a good pairing with the 57. Probably not worth the effort for a simple sporting rifle but it does help illustrate the inherent accuracy in the 69A.
Best Regards,
Jeff
WACA Life Member #6284 - Specializing in Pre-64 Winchester .22 Rimfire
November 7, 2015
Offline
Jeff-
I have a modern 17A or two rattling around in my parts box but I happen to like the “crude” 80A sight and the existing front sight. I prefer to think of the Winchester sight as a “sleeker” sight more in keeping with a sporting rifle. Front sight is hooded and as an old BE shooter I’m familiar with the “six o’clock” hold. I think you’ve mentioned the Lyman sight before but I haven’t spent much time looking for one, I like this rifle just like it is. I have target rifles for when I need to scratch that itch but you have a point; the 69A is no slouch in the accuracy department.
Mike
TXGunNut said
Jeff-I have a modern 17A or two rattling around in my parts box but I happen to like the “crude” 80A sight and the existing front sight. I prefer to think of the Winchester sight as a “sleeker” sight more in keeping with a sporting rifle. Front sight is hooded and as an old BE shooter I’m familiar with the “six o’clock” hold. I think you’ve mentioned the Lyman sight before but I haven’t spent much time looking for one, I like this rifle just like it is. I have target rifles for when I need to scratch that itch but you have a point; the 69A is no slouch in the accuracy department.
Mike
Yup, I agree with you 100%. I like to shoot them “as issued”. If I want a little better accuracy I break out the 75 Target and if I really want to show off to the kids at the range I bring the 52C heavy barrel.
Best Regards,
Jeff
WACA Life Member #6284 - Specializing in Pre-64 Winchester .22 Rimfire
TXGunNut said
Jeff-I have a modern 17A or two rattling around in my parts box but I happen to like the “crude” 80A sight and the existing front sight. I prefer to think of the Winchester sight as a “sleeker” sight more in keeping with a sporting rifle. Front sight is hooded and as an old BE shooter I’m familiar with the “six o’clock” hold. I think you’ve mentioned the Lyman sight before but I haven’t spent much time looking for one, I like this rifle just like it is.
ONLY justification for using 17A or any other globe is to facilitate aperture inserts for bullseye targets, which permits the greatest accuracy of aim possible without optics. The other 17A inserts serve no useful purpose. So if I’m testing for accuracy, I’ll use the aperture best sized for the bullseye I’m using.
But for offhand practice, I always use a simple blade, without the obstruction of view a globe or any kind of hood creates; I want to be able to see the target CLEARLY, not through a hood, the real purpose of which is to protect the sight. For that purpose, nothing surpasses the wide sharp blade of the 93A standard on early M. 52s, or the special wide blade the Marines fitted to their 1903s.
Best paper target for use with a blade isn’t a bullseye (though for convenience, that’s what I usually use), but that special target that resembles an inverted “T”, which you generally have to make yourself.
1 Guest(s)
