Avatar
Search
Forum Scope




Match



Forum Options



Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters
Lost password?
Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1125
Member Since:
December 21, 2006
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
1
June 28, 2023 - 7:11 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

 This is the 1894 I bought that collection to get, I didn’t have one just like it , so a good find for Me20230628_150637.jpgImage Enlarger20230628_150646.jpgImage Enlarger20230628_150715.jpgImage Enlarger20230628_150723.jpgImage Enlarger20230628_150741.jpgImage Enlarger20230628_150753.jpgImage Enlarger

W.A.C.A. life member, Marlin Collectors Assn. charter and life member, C,S.S.A. member and general gun nut.

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 82
Member Since:
February 1, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
2
June 28, 2023 - 8:31 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Very nice!

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1805
Member Since:
September 22, 2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
3
June 28, 2023 - 9:41 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Can you post photographs of the rear sight blank area?

Is there evidence of an elevator from a rear sight?  Or, as per this thread, a Special Smokeless Rear sight would leave no wear, usually, unless all the way down.

https://winchestercollector.org/forum/winchester-sights/question-on-32-ws-sights/

I would expect to see a Special Smokeless rear sight on a .32 Special rifle from this era. Or, if the tang sight is original and in its place, would that perhaps letter.

Just bringing this up, as I don’t know for sure and, in the meantime, photographs of the rear sight area would prove helpful.

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 4411
Member Since:
November 19, 2006
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
4
June 28, 2023 - 10:27 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

And it’s a .32 Special Cool

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1125
Member Since:
December 21, 2006
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
5
June 28, 2023 - 11:36 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Ian I don’t see any evidence of a sight mounted on the barrel and the tang sight looks as though it’s been there forever20230628_192818.jpgImage Enlarger20230628_192844.jpgImage Enlarger I do have a new in the box 32 sight I could put on the gun, but I don’t think I will

sp_PlupAttachments Attachments

W.A.C.A. life member, Marlin Collectors Assn. charter and life member, C,S.S.A. member and general gun nut.

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1805
Member Since:
September 22, 2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
6
June 28, 2023 - 11:55 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory sp_QuotePost

Henry Mero said
Ian I don’t see any evidence of a sight mounted on the barrel and the tang sight looks as though it’s been there forever20230628_192818.jpgImage Enlarger20230628_192844.jpgImage Enlarger I do have a new in the box 32 sight I could put on the gun, but I don’t think I will

  

The barrel looks much better than the sight blank which suggests to me that is not from the time of original manufacture.  There’s no evidence of a sight elevator, which tells me IF there once was a rear sight, it was the .32 Special Smokeless Rear Sight.

The tang sight, if not original to your rifle, has been on the rifle a very long time.

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 319
Member Since:
November 9, 2008
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
7
June 29, 2023 - 1:31 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Very Nice! I like those oct. barrels with short mags

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1805
Member Since:
September 22, 2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
8
June 29, 2023 - 12:35 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Henry Mero said
Ian I don’t see any evidence of a sight mounted on the barrel and the tang sight looks as though it’s been there forever20230628_192818.jpgImage Enlarger20230628_192844.jpgImage Enlarger I do have a new in the box 32 sight I could put on the gun, but I don’t think I will  

Can you mount that Special Smokeless Rear Sight and not occlude the sight plane of the tang sight?  If not occluded, I’d be inclined to inclined to put it on this nice rifle—IF it looks like it is of the same condition as your rifle and doesn’t appear to be a later addition.

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 4411
Member Since:
November 19, 2006
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
9
June 29, 2023 - 5:19 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Here’s a pair of .32 Specials I have.  The M1894 has the .32 Special sight and the Marlin M1893 has the Hepburn receiver sight that is mounted in the original Marlin tap holes that were placed for that purposed.  Most Marlin rifles made after 1903 have these holes.

https://i.imgur.com/ZP7LzcE.jpgImage Enlarger

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1125
Member Since:
December 21, 2006
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
10
June 30, 2023 - 12:31 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory sp_QuotePost

20230629_202951.jpgImage EnlargerI did put it on and yup it looks better than sitting on the shelf by itself and the rifle looks like a real .32 spl.

sp_PlupAttachments Attachments

W.A.C.A. life member, Marlin Collectors Assn. charter and life member, C,S.S.A. member and general gun nut.

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1805
Member Since:
September 22, 2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
11
June 30, 2023 - 1:06 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Henry Mero said
20230629_202951.jpgImage EnlargerI did put it on and yup it looks better than sitting on the shelf by itself and the rifle looks like a real .32 spl.  

Henry,

Now that looks FANTASTIC!!!

?

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 4411
Member Since:
November 19, 2006
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
12
July 2, 2023 - 5:16 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

I’ve always found it interesting that they were making the M1894 in five different chamberings, and for just one of those, they came up with a special sight.  I’d love to have heard the discussions that led to that decision.  I have seen one .30 WCF with this sight – that lettered.

Avatar
NY
Member
WACA Guest
Forum Posts: 6662
Member Since:
November 1, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
13
July 2, 2023 - 7:58 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory sp_QuotePost

Henry Mero said
20230629_202951.jpgImage EnlargerI did put it on and yup it looks better than sitting on the shelf by itself and the rifle looks like a real .32 spl.

  

Your opinion, but not mine, nor that of the original owner who was gun-savvy enough to set up his rifle for the best shooting it was capable of; that is, replacing the open sight with a tang sight.  And you can’t pretend there never was a tang sight, due to the discoloration of the upper tang, so it will have to go back, even though it can’t be used with the blockage created by the rear sight.  You’ve made a wall-hanger out of it.

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1805
Member Since:
September 22, 2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
14
July 2, 2023 - 8:55 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

clarence said

Henry Mero said

20230629_202951.jpgImage EnlargerI did put it on and yup it looks better than sitting on the shelf by itself and the rifle looks like a real .32 spl.

  

Your opinion, but not mine, nor that of the original owner who was gun-savvy enough to set up his rifle for the best shooting it was capable of; that is, replacing the open sight with a tang sight.  And you can’t pretend there never was a tang sight, due to the discoloration of the upper tang, so it will have to go back, even though it can’t be used with the blockage created by the rear sight.  You’ve made a wall-hanger out of it.  

Well, that was my question.  Is a Soecial Smokeless sight acceptable with a tang sight or does it obscure the sight plane when utilizing the tang sight?

Avatar
Kingston, WA
Admin
Forum Posts: 11117
Member Since:
April 15, 2005
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
15
July 2, 2023 - 9:07 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

mrcvs said

clarence said

Henry Mero said

20230629_202951.jpgImage EnlargerI did put it on and yup it looks better than sitting on the shelf by itself and the rifle looks like a real .32 spl.

  

Your opinion, but not mine, nor that of the original owner who was gun-savvy enough to set up his rifle for the best shooting it was capable of; that is, replacing the open sight with a tang sight.  And you can’t pretend there never was a tang sight, due to the discoloration of the upper tang, so it will have to go back, even though it can’t be used with the blockage created by the rear sight.  You’ve made a wall-hanger out of it.  

Well, that was my question.  Is a Soecial Smokeless sight acceptable with a tang sight or does it obscure the sight plane when utilizing the tang sight?

  

Unless you are trying to shoot 600+ yards with the tang sight, then Yes, the Smokeless sight interferes with the tang sight.  Because that rifle wore a tang sight for a long time, that is what I would put back on it (without the Special Smokeless sight).

Bert

WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
High-walls-1-002-C-reduced2.jpg

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1805
Member Since:
September 22, 2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
16
July 3, 2023 - 1:16 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Bert H. said

mrcvs said

clarence said

Henry Mero said

20230629_202951.jpgImage EnlargerI did put it on and yup it looks better than sitting on the shelf by itself and the rifle looks like a real .32 spl.

  

Your opinion, but not mine, nor that of the original owner who was gun-savvy enough to set up his rifle for the best shooting it was capable of; that is, replacing the open sight with a tang sight.  And you can’t pretend there never was a tang sight, due to the discoloration of the upper tang, so it will have to go back, even though it can’t be used with the blockage created by the rear sight.  You’ve made a wall-hanger out of it.  

Well, that was my question.  Is a Soecial Smokeless sight acceptable with a tang sight or does it obscure the sight plane when utilizing the tang sight?

  

Unless you are trying to shoot 600+ yards with the tang sight, then Yes, the Smokeless sight interferes with the tang sight.  Because that rifle wore a tang sight for a long time, that is what I would put back on it (without the Special Smokeless sight).

Bert

Okay, now I’ve done it!

That’s why I asked if it was appropriate (non occluded view) with the tang sight and this one.

It does look nice, however, if not appropriate.

If you replace the blank, I would replace it with a blank with less wear.  The blank has too much ch wear relative to the condition of this rifle.

I see no evidence of an elevator sight having been previously installed, either.

Avatar
NY
Member
WACA Guest
Forum Posts: 6662
Member Since:
November 1, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
17
July 3, 2023 - 2:36 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

mrcvs said

It does look nice, however, if not appropriate.

Well, I guess “nice” is in the eye of the beholder, but many believe this is one of the most awkward-looking rear sights ever designed.  (Excepting the abominations seen on some European Schuetzen rifles.)  I wouldn’t argue that it doesn’t work well, but “looks nice” is a statement about appearance, not function.

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1125
Member Since:
December 21, 2006
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
18
July 5, 2023 - 6:49 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

OK , well maybe I’ll take it off again and put the blank back in, then reinstall it depending on who I’m speaking with, whether they like the 32 sight or not.  I guess what I’m sayin’ is “I” like it with the 32 sight on it and if You think it’s an abomination, well sucks to be You, “cause I have the gun. Smile

W.A.C.A. life member, Marlin Collectors Assn. charter and life member, C,S.S.A. member and general gun nut.

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 4411
Member Since:
November 19, 2006
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
19
July 5, 2023 - 9:24 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory sp_QuotePost

Henry Mero said
OK , well maybe I’ll take it off again and put the blank back in, then reinstall it depending on who I’m speaking with, whether they like the 32 sight or not.  I guess what I’m sayin’ is “I” like it with the 32 sight on it and if You think it’s an abomination, well sucks to be You, “cause I have the gun. Smile

  

For the most part, we are talking collector’s with collector rifles here.  I realize many here shoot some (or all their rifles) but many of us have rifles that we do not shoot.  Again, I realize that does not include everyone.  

I shoot many of my rifles.  My eyes focus poorly on rear barrel sights so whenever possible, I use a tang or receiver sight.  I really dislike shooting a rifle with a tang sight and a rear barrel sight occluding the view.  Sometimes I just make do as I’m only shooting paper anyway.  I am reluctant to pull a rear barrel sight off a high condition rifle if it is clear, that sight hasn’t been touched since the rifle was originally shipped.  But yes, if it’s a rifle I would be hunting with, I would not leave a rear barrel sight on it (unless it is the two-leaf style that folds flat).  So if for me, if a rifle is primarily a collector rifle seeing little (if any use) the fact that the rear barrel sight partially occludes the tang sight, is a ridiculous concern.

Avatar
Wyoming - Gods Country
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1277
Member Since:
January 26, 2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
20
July 8, 2023 - 7:59 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory sp_QuotePost

I’ve always had mixed feelings on the 32 WS sight, mostly leaning towards the fact that it’s got a clunky, ugly look to it. That said, I did end up with a nice 22″ short rifle with an octagon barrel and a 2/3 magazine that really looks great with the 32 special sight. They are certainly a strange sight as they seem to float above the barrel.

Mod 1894, 22″ OB, 2/3 Mag 32 WS 309884 1906

DSCN0007-2.JPGImage Enlarger

 

IMG_3478.jpgImage Enlarger

sp_PlupAttachments Attachments

                                                                               ~Gary~

                                                                                                                                                                              94-SRR.jpg

Forum Timezone: UTC 0
Most Users Ever Online: 778
Currently Online: 426crown, freebird1968, markone1966
Guest(s) 88
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)
Top Posters:
clarence: 6662
TXGunNut: 5279
Chuck: 4739
steve004: 4411
1873man: 4370
Big Larry: 2385
twobit: 2327
mrcvs: 1805
TR: 1742
Forum Stats:
Groups: 1
Forums: 17
Topics: 13045
Posts: 114211

 

Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 1820
Members: 9009
Moderators: 4
Admins: 3
Navigation