Avatar

Please consider registering
guest

Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search

— Forum Scope —






— Match —





— Forum Options —





Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters




sp_Feed Topic RSS sp_Print sp_TopicIcon
Question concerning a Lyman Combination tang sight
September 13, 2020
6:17 pm
Avatar
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 972
Member Since:
July 8, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I bought this Lyman tang sight at a gun show.  It is marked DA on the bottom of the base, it has pat. jan 29.79  may 6. 84 at the base of the stem, and Lyman middlefield, conn usa on top of the base.  see pictures.  I want it for my 1900 vintage SN 147842, model 1892 semi deluxe in 32-20, which letters with a Lyman front and rear sight. Is this the correct sight?? Thanks, Al.

 IMG_3260.jpgImage EnlargerIMG_3261.jpgImage EnlargerIMG_3262.jpgImage EnlargerIMG_3264.jpgImage EnlargerIMG_3266.jpgImage EnlargerIMG_3265.jpgImage Enlarger

sp_PlupAttachments Attachments
September 13, 2020
6:38 pm
Avatar
Kingston, WA
Forum Posts: 10344
Member Since:
April 15, 2005
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Al,

That sight is not original.  It is a pieced together sight.  The bases were not stamped with the "Middlefield" marking on the No. 1 sights.  Additionally, the elevation stem was installed backwards when somebody pieced it together.  Finally, the "DA" marking was for the Mode 1894 smokeless powder cartridges (e.g. 25-35 WCF, 30 WCF, and 32 WS).  The correct application code for the Model 1892 is "D".  Hopefully you did not pay much for that sight.

Bert

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

September 13, 2020
7:13 pm
Avatar
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 972
Member Since:
July 8, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Bert,

Thanks for the response. I paid $275 for it.  When I took it home and compared it to some information I found on-line, I suspected something was not right. Expensive lesson.

Al

September 13, 2020
7:18 pm
Avatar
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1933
Member Since:
November 1, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Bert H. said
 Additionally, the elevation stem was installed backwards when somebody pieced it together.

You would think the "re-assembler" would have had the sense to get THAT right!

But if he paid too much, I'll bet he can recover his money by selling it on ebay...& playing dumb.

September 13, 2020
8:32 pm
Avatar
Wisconsin
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 4441
Member Since:
May 2, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

The guy didn't even aline the doughnut spring correctly either.

Bob

WACA Life Member---
NRA Life Member----
Cody Firearms member since 1991

73_86cutaway.jpg

Email: bob.1873man@gmail.com

September 13, 2020
10:37 pm
Avatar
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 972
Member Since:
July 8, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Does anybody want to buy a parts sight?? I'll sell it cheap. make an offer. Al

IMG_3267.jpgImage EnlargerIMG_3268.jpgImage EnlargerIMG_3269.jpgImage EnlargerIMG_3270.jpgImage EnlargerIMG_3271.jpgImage EnlargerIMG_3270-1.jpgImage EnlargerIMG_3272.jpgImage EnlargerIMG_3273.jpgImage Enlarger

sp_PlupAttachments Attachments
September 14, 2020
5:20 pm
Avatar
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1834
Member Since:
March 31, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I'm not so sure this is a put together sight?  I just could be a much later sight that someone put it back together wrong.  Un-thread it and reposition the staff.  It is as Bert said not for your gun.  Someone with a 1894 of newer vintage might be able to use this.

Then again I could be mostly wrong.

 

Lyman sights were made in Middlefield, Conn.

September 14, 2020
10:52 pm
Avatar
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1933
Member Since:
November 1, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Chuck said
It is as Bert said not for your gun.  

Not "correct" according to Lyman's app chart, but it could still be used, just as I've always used "incorrect" sights on the SS models I've had; the rifle didn't know the difference.  Assume there's a difference in the staff height, but can't believe it would interfere with shooting at reasonable ranges.

September 15, 2020
1:00 am
Avatar
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1834
Member Since:
March 31, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

clarence said

Chuck said
It is as Bert said not for your gun.  

Not "correct" according to Lyman's app chart, but it could still be used, just as I've always used "incorrect" sights on the SS models I've had; the rifle didn't know the difference.  Assume there's a difference in the staff height, but can't believe it would interfere with shooting at reasonable ranges.  

What does Lyman's app chart say?

September 15, 2020
1:34 am
Avatar
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1933
Member Since:
November 1, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

What Bert said it did.  Fortunately for my peace of mind, I was buying & using Lyman sights long before I ever saw an app chart; I was so simple minded that it the sight could be screwed down properly on the tang, & I could use it to hit what I was aiming at, I was satisfied.

September 16, 2020
11:34 am
Avatar
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 972
Member Since:
July 8, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I took the sight apart, realigned the elevation stem, and aligned the donut spring in the correct orientation.  Trouble now is that the donut spring does not hold tension on the sight, as in when you raise or lower the sight. It is loose, and the donut moves with it, instead of staying in place.

September 16, 2020
2:04 pm
Avatar
Kingston, WA
Forum Posts: 10344
Member Since:
April 15, 2005
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Al,

Most definitely an intentionally pieced together sight.

Bert

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

September 16, 2020
6:22 pm
Avatar
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1933
Member Since:
November 1, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Bert H. said
Al,
Most definitely an intentionally pieced together sight.
Bert  

Might wonder where the different pieces come from...except that I see separate bases & stems listed frequently on ebay.  But I still wonder what purpose anyone would have in taking one of these sights apart.

September 16, 2020
7:18 pm
Avatar
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1933
Member Since:
November 1, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

tionesta1 said
I took the sight apart, realigned the elevation stem, and aligned the donut spring in the correct orientation.  Trouble now is that the donut spring does not hold tension on the sight, as in when you raise or lower the sight. It is loose, and the donut moves with it, instead of staying in place.  

Here's one that can be bought for $80, missing only the stem:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/402437284230?ul_noapp=true

September 16, 2020
10:02 pm
Avatar
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 664
Member Since:
June 4, 2017
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

 Al, I have a 90%  blue 1D Lyman for $200. It would match a 1892 with nice 90% blue. No scratches, light blue wear on the outside of the doughnut and top of stem. The D is correct for a 1892.

 I think you have 3 parts of a four part puzzle. It might be wise to just buy a good one.T/R

September 19, 2020
10:11 am
Avatar
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 972
Member Since:
July 8, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

TR said
 Al, I have a 90%  blue 1D Lyman for $200. It would match a 1892 with nice 90% blue. No scratches, light blue wear on the outside of the doughnut and top of stem. The D is correct for a 1892.

 I think you have 3 parts of a four part puzzle. It might be wise to just buy a good one.T/R  

TR,

I just read your response again and missed the part about your 1D sight.

Would your 1D sight be correct for a model 1892 made in 1900?

Thanks,

Al

September 19, 2020
12:46 pm
Avatar
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 664
Member Since:
June 4, 2017
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

 Al, Yes it would. T/R

Forum Timezone: UTC 0

Most Users Ever Online: 628

Currently Online: wolfbait
49 Guest(s)

Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)


Forum Stats:

Groups: 1

Forums: 16

Topics: 7630

Posts: 63638


Member Stats:

Guest Posters: 1040

Members: 9544

Moderators: 5

Admins: 3


Top Posters:

1873man: 4441

twobit: 2578

TXGunNut: 2499

clarence: 1933

Chuck: 1834

Maverick: 1620

Big Larry: 1445

JWA: 1356

steve004: 1217

Wincacher: 1185