Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Offline
I like having a rear sight with the tang sight, it helps to make quick elevation adjustments. I sight the gun in at 50 yards with the rear barrel sight, then set the tang sight to the rear sight. If I have to go to 200 yards I elevate the rear barrel sight 3 notches on the elevator, set the tang sight, then drop the rear sight back down 3 notches out of the way. depending on your load and caliber it will vary but a notch is usually 50 yards. The rear sight acts as a range finder without having to get out your cheaters and find some painted line you put on the tang sight. With my old eyes the tang sight allows me to focus on the front sight and the rear sight allows me to set the range by feel. The notches on a rear sight are handy for setting range. T/R
Online
TR said
I like having a rear sight with the tang sight, it helps to make quick elevation adjustments. I sight the gun in at 50 yards with the rear barrel sight, then set the tang sight to the rear sight. If I have to go to 200 yards I elevate the rear barrel sight 3 notches on the elevator, set the tang sight, then drop the rear sight back down 3 notches out of the way. depending on your load and caliber it will vary but a notch is usually 50 yards. The rear sight acts as a range finder without having to get out your cheaters and find some painted line you put on the tang sight. With my old eyes the tang sight allows me to focus on the front sight and the rear sight allows me to set the range by feel. The notches on a rear sight are handy for setting range. T/R
T/R – interesting. Thanks for sharing.
TR, hadnt thought about adjusting sights in that way but sounds like it could work in a pinch.
Dont see anything wrong with having a rear and tang sight combo on a gun. The bullet, load type (smokeless / BP), velocity, and distance all have a bearing on bullet trajectory and sight configurations that can be used, or not.
1892takedown @sbcglobal.net ......NRA Endowment Life Member.....WACA Member
"God is great.....beer is good.....and people are crazy"... Billy Currington
I am going to add this for some of you to chew on… Winchester installed tang sights on a significant number of the Winchester Single Shot rifles, and unless specifically requested not to, they also installed a standard barrel mounted rear sight. The higher grade Special Single Shot Rifles and the Schuetzen Rifles were the only variations where Winchester specifically omitted a rear sight dovetail & sight.
Like others have mentioned, the barrel mounted sight was used for close range shots, and the tang sight adjusted for longer range shots. I own several high-wall rifles that have both an original barrel mounted rear sight, and a factory installed (lettered) tang sight.
Accordingly, I see no reason to remove an original factory rear sight when installing a tang sight.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Bert H. said
I am going to add this for some of you to chew on… Winchester installed tang sights on a significant number of the Winchester Single Shot rifles, and unless specifically requested not to, they also installed a standard barrel mounted rear sight. The higher grade Special Single Shot Rifles and the Schuetzen Rifles were the only variations where Winchester specifically omitted a rear sight dovetail & sight.
Like others have mentioned, the barrel mounted sight was used for close range shots, and the tang sight adjusted for longer range shots. I own several high-wall rifles that have both an original barrel mounted rear sight, and a factory installed (lettered) tang sight.
Accordingly, I see no reason to remove an original factory rear sight when installing a tang sight.
Bert
Thanks Bert –
I am chewing on it. What you suggest makes a lot of sense. There is a fly in the ointment for me. That is my eyesight and the eye glasses issue. When it comes to iron sights, I do very well with tang and receiver sights. Rear sight are blurry for me.
Steve.
I hear you and also understand the eyesight issue (even though I an a mere 60-years old). I have installed Lyman tang sights on many of my Winchester Single Shot rifles after the fact (my favorite is the No. 103), followed by a No. 2. When possible, I leave the barrel sight installed (such as the 3-leaf express sight on my 405 WCF), and use the No. 103 with no interference issues. Only when it was absolutely necessary have I removed the barrel mounted sight. I have in clear zip-lock backs clearly marked as to which rifle (with the serial number) they belong to.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Bert H. said
Steve.I hear you and also understand the eyesight issue (even though I an a mere 60-years old). I have installed Lyman tang sights on many of my Winchester Single Shot rifles after the fact (my favorite is the No. 103), followed by a No. 2. When possible, I leave the barrel sight installed (such as the 3-leaf express sight on my 405 WCF), and use the No. 103 with no interference issues.
But that’s because the express sight doesn’t stand up high enough to intrude into the line of sight–I’ve used them merely as slot-fillers after installing a tang sight. A Lyman #6 serves the same purpose.
Bert H. said Winchester installed tang sights on a significant number of the Winchester Single Shot rifles, and unless specifically requested not to, they also installed a standard barrel mounted rear sight. The higher grade Special Single Shot Rifles and the Schuetzen Rifles were the only variations where Winchester specifically omitted a rear sight dovetail & sight.
If you are interpreting that as a recommendation for using both sights, I think you’re wrong. It was done, I think, merely because to deviate from the standard routine of cutting a slot & installing a rear sight complicated, not simplified, the manufacturing process. Which was why Winchester charged extra for NOT cutting the slot. NOT cutting the slot was a deviation from the standard routine, so more expensive for the company.
The theory that an open sight is preferable or easier to use for close range shots is contradicted by everything written by opticians about the optical principles conducive to accurate aiming. (Starting by the way with the many articles written by Wm. Lyman in the early days of his company.) Which was why I made the comment about John Garand. Would sights that handicap close range shots be installed on battle rifles?
This is turned into a very interesting thread for me. The main theme of this thread for me is, “no man is an island.” I never considered that others had also pondered this tang sight/rear sight issue. Even Bert mentioning that when he removes a rear sight, he is careful to bag it and label it. That is relevant to the concerns I have had. Aside from concerns about some damage to the rifle/sight once it was removed, I had been concerned about what happens once I safely have it off. Keeping it from being separated too far from the rifle concerned me. For example, what if I am not around anymore and my wife is stuck sorting that detail out. We all know that stuff can get separated – forever. I think about Bob’s M1873 .22 rifle that was ordered with the extra barrels (and forends) – they were never reunited. And recently there was the thread about the M1894 had the two (or three 😉 ) extra barrels – they were never reunited. A missing rear sight doesn’t loom nearly as large as missing extra barrels but it has loomed in my mind when I take a sight off. By the way, these kind of concerns occurred to me much less when I was younger.
Back to the main topic, it is my strong preference to use a tang or receiver sight and have nothing in the way to obstruct my view. Also, I can’t stand to have an open dovetail as is the situation with the original post on this thread. I also can’t stand to use a new blank in the dovetail that has bright shiny blue (if the barrel doesn’t have a similar amount of blue). I have often scoured ebay looking for vintage barrel blanks. I do have the folding two leaf rear sight on some of my rifles and I am happy with that arrangement.
A very knowledgeable (and older than me) friend (who is not a member of this sight) provided me, this morning, with his thoughts on the topic:
All of this is moot, when the advice of the system’s “originator” and best promoter is ignored. His counsel goes back to the basic optical principle interfered with by the middle sight being in the way. Back in the 1880s, when people weren’t getting the results they were promised from a peep sight, Wm. Lyman himself repeated the first instruction to using the peep sight effectively – “remover the barrel sight”. Period. I can understand why collectors don’t want to be drifting their factory installed Winchester sights off willy nilly. But if you want best results and care about doing things right – remove the barrel sight.
Steve, I like the looks of both sights on my guns. Sometimes these old ladies (guns) look better dressed up. T/R
steve004 said
Aside from concerns about some damage to the rifle/sight once it was removed, I had been concerned about what happens once I safely have it off. Keeping it from being separated too far from the rifle concerned me.
Right you are to be concerned. Any detachable part removed from any gun is almost certain to be lost somewhere down the line–usually after whoever did the removing croaks, or stops remembering his own name. It even happens, amazingly, to the bolts of bolt-actions; just a few weeks ago, someone posted a notice that he had inherited a Model 52 with a missing bolt, & I’ve seen or heard of the same thing many times before! (As for the idiots who’d DO that, store the bolt separately…!)
But removing an original sight in order to facilitate use of a tang sight was not the question that began this thread. If it had been, I’d have said “don’t be silly, you’re going to pop off a few rounds at the range, leave it where it is.”
steve004 said
A very knowledgeable (and older than me) friend (who is not a member of this sight) provided me, this morning, with his thoughts on the topic:All of this is moot, when the advice of the system’s “originator” and best promoter is ignored. His counsel goes back to the basic optical principle interfered with by the middle sight being in the way. Back in the 1880s, when people weren’t getting the results they were promised from a peep sight, Wm. Lyman himself repeated the first instruction to using the peep sight effectively – “remover the barrel sight”. Period. I can understand why collectors don’t want to be drifting their factory installed Winchester sights off willy nilly. But if you want best results and care about doing things right – remove the barrel sight.
All early Lyman catalogs carried these instructions. Of course, he never imagined that the main interest of some owners 100+ yrs later would be “looking at,” rather than “shooting with,” their rifles, & certainly never heard of safe-queens.
clarence said
All early Lyman catalogs carried these instructions. Of course, he never imagined that the main interest of some owners 100+ yrs later would be “looking at,” rather than “shooting with,” their rifles, & certainly never heard of safe-queens.
Well said! T/R
…..I always use a playing card to avoid scratching when removing sights. Just thought I’d mention.
TR said
Steve, I like the looks of both sights on my guns. Sometimes these old ladies (guns) look better dressed up. T/R
I tried telling my wife that once when she accused me of spending too much time down in my Gun/Man Cave… the look I got could have peeled a dozen layers of lead paint off of an old Battleship!!
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
foxfire said
…..I always use a playing card to avoid scratching when removing sights. Just thought I’d mention.
Thanks for passing that along. I’ll remember that … or at least for the period of time that I can remember my own name.
TR said
Steve, I like the looks of both sights on my guns. Sometimes these old ladies (guns) look better dressed up. T/R
I agree completely. The only problem is I don’t like the looks of the barrel sight when I am looking at it through the disk of a peep sight.
Bert H. said
I tried telling my wife that once when she accused me of spending too much time down in my Gun/Man Cave… the look I got could have peeled a dozen layers of lead paint off of an old Battleship!!
Bert – reminds me of the look I get from my wife when I point to my loading bench with all the supplies, etc. etc. and say, “someday, this will all be yours!”
steve004 said
I agree completely. The only problem is I don’t like the looks of the barrel sight when I am looking at it through the disk of a peep sight.
steve004 said
Thanks for passing that along. I’ll remember that … or at least for the period of time that I can remember my own name.
Ha!! A number of 51 card decks laying around the camp!!
1 Guest(s)
