Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
I’ve never seen a tang sight like this before. Obviously set back from the receiver to accommodate the long bolt. Does anyone know about these and who manufactured them?
That’s a Marbles tang sight. Very similar to the W12S but don’t quote me on that, I don’t have the book in front of me.
Bob
WACA Life Member--- NRA Life Member---- Cody Firearms member since 1991 Researching the Winchester 1873's
Email: [email protected]
Online
Just like 1873man says; The Marbles Special Base. I think part of the plan was to have a tang sight to accommodate a longer action like the 1895, as you eluded to deerhunter. The sight was advertised as having the advantage of putting the aperture closer to the eye and increasing the sight radius even more. I believe Marbles offered it for quite a few years for various rifles. Stories of unfortunate eye injuries caused by tang sights too close to the eye made it into books by Jack O’Connor and Elmer Keith for starters. I think those had something to do with aiming uphill also.
Marbles also used illustrations of their standard base flexible rear sight on the 1895 to advertise its ability to pop back upright after being hit by a long action. I personally can’t see how either a standard flexible base or Special Base would be much of a benefit over a receiver sight on an 1895 and maybe that’s why there aren’t so many of them around.
Brad
I see there is a similar sight on EBAY right now.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/231464690202?_trksid=p2060778.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT
January 26, 2011
Offline
hedley lamarr said
Just like 1873man says; The Marbles Special Base. I think part of the plan was to have a tang sight to accommodate a longer action like the 1895, as you eluded to deerhunter. The sight was advertised as having the advantage of putting the aperture closer to the eye and increasing the sight radius even more. I believe Marbles offered it for quite a few years for various rifles. Stories of unfortunate eye injuries caused by tang sights too close to the eye made it into books by Jack O’Connor and Elmer Keith for starters. I think those had something to do with aiming uphill also.
Marbles also used illustrations of their standard base flexible rear sight on the 1895 to advertise its ability to pop back upright after being hit by a long action. I personally can’t see how either a standard flexible base or Special Base would be much of a benefit over a receiver sight on an 1895 and maybe that’s why there aren’t so many of them around.
Brad
I had not heard of the injuries from this kind of sight. It does look like it would be too close for comfort, but it is kind of a cool sight.
~Gary~
Gary
I thought I’d better double check my books to locate where I had read what I mentioned. The Rifle Book by Jack O’Connor and Big Game Rifles and Cartridges by Elmer Keith make mention of injury to the eye, perhaps the same incident. I do not know if it was a special base sight or just a standard tang sight. I can’t remember hearing about that type of injury outside of those books but I can see how it could happen. It does look a little close as you mentioned.
Brad
To me, it looks like the e-bay sight is a bit shorter on the tang than the one one on the Gunauction gun. Perhaps, Marbles shortened it up a bit due to complaints of eye injury???
deerhunter said
To me, it looks like the e-bay sight is a bit shorter on the tang than the one one on the Gunauction gun. Perhaps, Marbles shortened it up a bit due to complaints of eye injury???
Deerhunter, I thought the same thing. It certainly looks shorter.
As often happens, the listing on eBay is not correct.
1) The box is marked “W 12”, which is for the standard base. The Special Base sight would be marked “W 12 S”. There appears to be room in the box for the extra length of the correct sight, so the box or the base are not original to the sight.
2) The length of the sight base on the GunAuction rifle matches the length of the same sight illustrated in Nick Strobel’s book, p. 63.
3) I have a Marble’s Flexible Joint Rear Sight, marked “W 2″, with the original screws, sitting on my reloading bench right now. The tang screw head mikes out to 17/64’s inch. Using that dimension I measured the eBay sight base and the hole centers are 1 11/32″ center to center. That’s well short or Winchester’s standard 2 3/16” tang sight hole spacing.
The Model 1895 is outside my area of expertise but I’m assuming the tang sight hole spacing would be the same as for other Winchester lever action rifles, especially after looking at the GunAuction listing. If that is correct, I can’t explain why the eBay listing is stamped “W 12 S” when the hole spacing is almost an inch shorter than it should be.
"This is the West, sir. When the legend becomes fact, print the legend."
The Model 1895 is outside my area of expertise but I’m assuming the tang sight hole spacing would be the same as for other Winchester lever action rifles, especially after looking at the GunAuction listing. If that is correct, I can’t explain why the eBay listing is stamped “W 12 S” when the hole spacing is almost an inch shorter than it should be.
Am I correct in believing nearly all Model 1895s have only one factory drilled hole in the upper tang (back on the rear of the upper tang)?
I also notice the ebay sight still has a base marked MSA Co. A discussion came up somewhere else awhile back about these sights. One thing of note is that many seem to have the MSA Co. marked bases, even those with applications for later guns. I guess they made up a lot of bases early on and it took awhile to use them up.
Brad
Checked Pirkle and he states that the tang sight screw mount hole was drilled through the upper tang on special order for a tang sight but does not specify the spacing between the two upper tang screw holes. He further states that this hole must be threaded 3/16-36 and not puncture the model marking on the tang or they would likely be non-factory mounted tangs and hole.
"This is the West, sir. When the legend becomes fact, print the legend."
January 26, 2011
Offline
My 1902 vintage ’95 only has the one hole. I thought I had seen a few others with a tang sight but didn’t realize they had to be drilled special order. I just glanced thru the Madis book and I don’t see a single example with a tang sight.
~Gary~
My 95 Flatside only has the Stock bolt hole . To add the top screw at the standard spacing would just touch the ‘dash’ — at the end of the Winchester logo. I am surprised that a standard tang sight was seldom used, A sight with the upright moved back like on an 1886 should be clear. Of course the upright would have to be flexible both ways. Lee Shaver currently offers tang sights that fit on an 86. I think it is his standard base , just reversed so the upright is offset close to the stock bolt hole.
Looking at it again the 95 bolt throw might be just a little farther back than an 86
Phil
Lyman had a receiver sight (patent 1895) available for the Model 1895 before Marbles had a tang sight with a flex spring available (pat. 1903: locking adj. sleeve, 1905: spring, I believe). I think the best option was already available in the case of the 1895.
This reminded me of something similar I saw an a Lyman catalog from 1889. Anybody have an 1886 with this modification?
Brad
I have seen one modified for the Lyman 15. I wouldn’t say it improves it looks like the ad says. I always thought they look too big and clunky for a tang sight.
Bob
WACA Life Member--- NRA Life Member---- Cody Firearms member since 1991 Researching the Winchester 1873's
Email: [email protected]
1 Guest(s)
