Vintage lever rifles with receiver top mounted sights|Winchester Sights|Forum|Winchester Collector

Bert H. said
This is just my opinion… that is an ugly sight, and mounted on an ugly gun
I much prefer the tang sight option that Winchester stuck with through July 1942.  The shift to receiver mounted sights in the post-WW II production years was a mistake (again in my opinion), as I do not care for a lump of steel hanging on the left-hand side of the receiver frame.  The No. 98 series bolt peep sights were innovative and should have been continued beyond the year 1948.
Bert
  

Bert –

I appreciate your opinion.  Given I look at most everything these days through collector’s eyes, I can forgive a lot of ugliness in favor of rarity.

I certainly agree about the desirability of the No. 98 series bolt peep.  It was a fine innovation.  Not surprisingly, for a couple decades, there’s been a market for the reproduction of that sight.  This includes gunsmiths who specialize in slotting bolts.  And this includes slotting bolts on reproduction Model 1895’s.

Zebulon said
I agree the Hepburn sights illustrated fell out of the ugly tree and got mashed by several branches on the way to the ground. (The rifles are no things of grace mostly because of the downward projecting lump from which the lever is suspended. Are these the earlier Hepburn branded rifles or the later Marlin/Hepburns? )
I also wish the 98a bolt peep had continued as an option for the top-ejecting Winchester lever actions. They have a minimalist appeal and don’t clutter up the stock wrist as tang sights do. They look good on a Model 71 or 64 but I think they really shine on a 94 carbine. The closest thing to it I know of still available is a Skinner in black finish. 
Although many collectors dote on a side-mounted Lyman 21 or 38, those look like a Rube Goldberg [over-complicated] invention to me and do not seem to be much, if any, more precisely adjustable than the 98a. 
However, given a choice and from a shooter’s perspective, I prefer micrometer adjustable receiver sights with hunter knobs, my favorite being the old Redfield 70 or the steel 80. Compared to a Lyman 21 they are almost invisible and the aperture is comfortably further away from my eye than a tang peep allows, which can be a hazard on hurried, uphill shots with a light, heavily recoiling rifle. 
Truth be told, the most inconspicuous receiver sight is a black aluminum Williams FP with screwdriver adustments. Anathema to originalists and even I wouldn’t put it on a Winchester. It does look right on a Mountie because of the cover illustration on the old Outdoor Life anthology. 
  

Bill –

All four of these, “Marlin Combination Receiver Sights” are marked Marlin, with the June 30, 1903 patent dates.  I’ve vaguely heard of variations that are unmarked – so perhaps those are the other versions you are referring to?  I realize this is a Winchester forum and I don’t want to out you … but I’ve collected and studied Marlins for 50 years… and there is some evidence to suggest that you know more about Marlins than I do

Zebulon said
Good morning, Steve.  No, I know very little about Marlins, particularly compared to you. I was questioning the brand of the rifles, not the sights. My very limited understanding of the Hepburn Marlin relationship is that Marlin bought the Hepburn patents and Marlin rifles are based on those.  
I was born into a family of loyal Winchester customers. My paternal grandfather’s duck gun was a Winchester 1911 self loader. An uncle was a Winchester sales rep and knew Ad Topperwein and his wife quite well. Another uncle who owned the farm on which I learned to shoot was a locally renowned sportsman, a Master of Hounds, and the Game Warden of Warren County, MS.  His shotgun was a Model 1897 and he bought his grandson a Model 42. My Dad had a Model 90 in 22 WRF.  
But where we lived on the Texas Gulf Coast, there was no free hunting land and Dad saw no reason for me to have an expensive 22. I got a Sears single shot. The only local store with a gun counter was a Western Auto and it was not a Winchester dealer. The only lever action rifle I could even look at was a Marlin 336. Even at age 10 I thought of it as a weird, misshapen and disappointing pseudo-Winchester. Like Bert does. 
Years later, the first time I did get to go deer hunting, some bozo almost gut shot me with — you guessed it, a 336. 
But I always wanted a Mountie.
  

Bill –

If I had the reading comprehension of a second-grader, I might have been able to grasp your question.  I’m not aware of any actual Hepburn branded rifles (other than prototypes), but Hepburn did create the patents for the Marlin Models, 1888, 1889, 1891, 1892, 1893, 1894, 1895 and 1897.  The rifles I pictured are all Marlin Model 1893’s.  

I believe, I too, could be described as having come from a family of loyal Winchester customers.  My Dad’s first deer rifle was an ’86 in .33, my Grandfather used an ’86 in .45-90 (and later a Model 54 in .30-06), my Great uncle used a M1876 in .40-60, many uncles and cousins used M94 carbines in .32 special (with a couple .30WCF carbines thrown in).  My Dad’s shotgun was a M1897 12 gauge.  My Dad also later purchased a M100 in .308.  I do recall one alternate brand deer rifle of note that received strong family admiration was a Savage .250-3000 that my cousin shot an enormous deer with.  

I probably used a greater variety of rifles over the years at the family deer hunt than anyone else.  Winchesters were included and my M94 .32 Special carbine accounted for many deer. 

Now, true confession time.  For many years I also used a Marlin M1894 .44 magnum carbine. And it did account for many deer.  As I think of it, I can’t recall any other family member using a Marlin   I recall one year I used a Winchester M70 custom rifle – but it was in .450 Marlin