Log In
February 17, 2022
Offline
I have a chance to by a Winchester 36A vernier sight. So now my questions.
1,Whats it worth in “good” condition
2, Did these ever get installed on 1886’s
3, I have an 86 in 45-90 letters with a 30″ extra heavy barrel, would YOU put it on it?
November 1, 2013
Offline
oldcrankyyankee said \
3, I have an 86 in 45-90 letters with a 30″ extra heavy barrel, would YOU put it on it?
Not any sort of vernier sight; it might have been done by a green shooter with no practical hunting experience, but that doesn’t make it typical, much less sensible. A plain-Jane Lyman #1 would be appropriate, suggesting a skilled rifleman wanting something better than standard sights.
That number #36 (actually, #38) is an anachronism if applied to any but late production Mid-Range Verniers, as that is the term used in catalogs until after WWI, when some (probably) newly-hired whiz-kid decided the old-fashioned names weren’t good enough for “modern times.”
I believe Mid-Ranges are now selling for $500 up.
June 4, 2017
Offline
The Lyman N marked tang sight is best because it does not have to be folded back to work the action. Also cheaper and commonly installed on the 86. T/R
November 1, 2013
Offline
TR said
The Lyman N marked tang sight is best because it does not have to be folded back to work the action. Also cheaper and commonly installed on the 86. T/R
Correct for an ’86, but may not be much cheaper, as the “N” usually sells for twice the price of the common #1s. Marble’s “Flexible” tang sight was built to bend back if struck by the bolt, but the Lyman is the one I’d prefer.
February 17, 2022
Offline
Well thanks for the advice. just seems that a rifle with a 30″ xh barrel should have a tang sight.
November 1, 2013
Offline
oldcrankyyankee said
Well thanks for the advice. just seems that a rifle with a 30″ xh barrel should have a tang sight.
That or a rcvr. sight like a Lyman 21, but not because of its brl. length, because it’s a far superior sight regardless of brl. length.
