Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Offline
Photo of my late 1955 Sporter. Grooved receiver and #32-D rear sight. No cut in stock for Lyman rear sight. Big Larry
Good test, but what happened to your old coffee table, Larry? Odd that Lyman was making 48s for M.52s that mounted without cutting, but not for the 75. Even odder is that Lyman’s description of the two rcvr. sights made for 75s, the 57E & 58E say nothing about having to butcher the stock; I’d be pretty put out if I bought one, then found out I was going to have to chop my stock to mount it.
clarence said
Good test, but what happened to your old coffee table, Larry? Odd that Lyman was making 48s for M.52s that mounted without cutting, but not for the 75. Even odder is that Lyman’s description of the two rcvr. sights made for 75s, the 57E & 58E say nothing about having to butcher the stock; I’d be pretty put out if I bought one, then found out I was going to have to chop my stock to mount it.
The mounting holes on this Sporter are nearly covered by the stock. They are the blued Winchester plug screws. To add a sight, one would certainly have to cut the stock. I have a very late M75 target rifle that is not cut for a sight and has two Winchester Combination scope blocs. It also has no front sight, but has two Winchester plug screws as does the receiver. Normally, you would find a dovetail for the front sight. Big Larry
Bill Hanzel said
Is it a new way to take pictures-Bi pod, tri pod?
When shooting down with a tripod, it’s hard to find a position where the legs aren’t showing in the frame, if the subject is as far away as it has to be to show the full length.
Is this better? I took the photos for Larry…..his original post included one of my test shots. This is the cropped and processed version.
tsbccut said
Is this better? I took the photos for Larry…..his original post included one of my test shots. This is the cropped and processed version.
Outstanding! Almost looks like a different photo. I’ve tried again & again, even using special high-powered photo bulbs, but with results that are always disappointing. I don’t know how to crop or do anything more complicated than pressing the shutter.
To all, this is right up my alley and why I detest trying to get good photos for the magazine or the calendar! I kind of solved the issue of getting the tripod legs out of the picture. I use bags of bird shot on the rear leg, and tip the tripod forward to near vertical so the front two legs are out of frame, when doing a vertical shot and trying to get full length of the rifle. Often have to add a piece of 4 by 4 under the rear leg, if shooting a long rifle, such as a model 1876. I also have NO skills in cropping, or adjusting exposure in the computer, etc. Ask Rob–there are times it takes me all day and a bit of frayed temper to get a couple of pictures that Rob accepts. He has had to lower his standards to get anything out of me! Think he has also gotten afraid to ask for photos or “just one more try”! Give me film, my old Yashica, and my 300mm lens and I can do passable with wildlife!
Tim
tsbccut said
Is this better? I took the photos for Larry…..his original post included one of my test shots. This is the cropped and processed version.
You are “D” man, and a very good friend. Thanks for all you do. Big Larry
TEST, PASSED!
Maverick
WACA #8783 - Checkout my Reloading Tool Survey!
https://winchestercollector.org/forum/winchester-research-surveys/winchester-reloading-tool-survey/
1 Guest(s)
