Anyone have a tang rear sight on their lever gun?

[1sailor]

I have an old (1901) Winchester M94 that was my deer rifle for years. I don't really hunt anymore but would still like to shoot the rifle. I loaded up a bunch of low power plinking rounds that are pretty accurate. My problem is that my rear sight doesn't give me enough elevation. I'm thinking about a tang sight (Marble's or Lyman) but not sure if it will give me the elevation I need. Anyone here have any experience with one? What's your opinion?

 

[Rock185]

I have a Lyman tang sight on my old 30-30. I've always liked it. Seems to have plenty of elevation adjustment for whatever factory or reloaded ammo I used. I haven't loaded 30-30 for many years though, because I rarely get around to shooting the old gun. I sighted mine in at a hundred yards with factory ammo back in the day, and haven't changed it since.

 

[Rodan]

I've shot a number of lever guns over the years with tang sights, and they work well, but can be vulnerable to getting banged around. I prefer a receiver sight, like a Williams, for a field gun. I've had them on a couple of 94s and they work great.

 

[Lonegle57]

Have a tang sight on my Grandfathers 25-35, 1906 rifle, found the leaf sight shot high. Put a Marbles tang and a globe front. Took a deer a few years ago and am planning to get it back out and shoot it soon and take it to the woods again this year. Usually carry a handgun so may take a Contender from my herd in 25-35, 10 inch octagon along.

 

[colt_saa]

I have several of them. The one I use most often is my takedown Marlin 1894

It has plenty of elevation adjustment

 

[1sailor]

If it were a newer rifle I wouldn't care about drilling holes for a Williams sight but I hate doing it to this old rifle. Since I don't hunt with it anymore I'm not too concerned regarding it being knocked around since it is now only going to be a plinker and not a field gun. Also, I think the tang sight might look appropriate with the long barrel on my rifle.

 

[Krogen]

I have several Marbles tang sights. They work OK, but honestly the quality lacks compared to Marbles sights of days past. They do make a version with interchangeable posts, so if elevation is a concern you can use a different post. I have some old Redfield and Lyman receiver sights and I like them better than Marbles tang sights.

In general, I like tang or receiver sights in preference to open sights. It's been a while since my eyeballs worked with a buckhorn open sight. Apertures are great!

As Rodan said, a receiver sight is more robust than a tang sight. That could be a key issue for some folks.

Some older guns came drilled and tapped for receiver or tang sights. You may want to consider that in making your choice. The other thing about a tang sight is, yes . . ., it's mounted to the tang. They can get in the way of your hand gripping the stock. Personally, I've never had troubles. It depends on the person, the rifle and where on the tang the sight sits. Just another thing to think about.

 

[JDBoardman]

I have a Lyman tang sight on my Marlin 45-70. Works well, and it's location forces me into a more correct positing of my right hand. Also, position it foe enough eye relief, because a tang sight in the eye is not fun (don't ask me how I know). It also looks mighty cool.

 

[zeke]

If possible, might consider getting a shorter front site or taller rear site. No real alteration to the rifle.

 

[SS336]

Sure, Lyman tang sight on my Savage 99. Works fine, has a fold down leaf sight on the barrel if it doesn’t.
Old lever guns look good with them and my 99 is not drilled and tapped so that’s the best option.

 

[Baltimoreed11754]

Look for an 1886 Lyman tang sight. Try Dixie Gun Works.

 

[Rpg]

I have a tang sight on my Marlin 39.

The rifle is an early one. I believe the tang sighting is by King.

This sighting system works much better than the old 4X scope that also came with the gun when I acquired it. My granddaughter likes it much more than the scope (as do I).

 

[dwh]

Every lever gun or single shot I own has a tang sight or receiver sight on it. It all depends on when the factory drilled the holes.

 

[1sailor]

I agree that receiver sights work well but, my rifle is not pre-drilled for one. My tang on the other hand is. So, there should be no need to alter anything. I do appreciate all the responses. Honestly, I was not expecting to hear much. I didn't realize they still had a following.

 

[armadillo]

I have an old tang sight mounted on a equally old M-94. Mine came with a long tang screw and attaches in the existing holes. The old collectible guns lose a lot of value when you drill holes in them.

 

[BB57]

There are pros and cons to the various options:

1) Vintage sights:

I have vintage Marbles or Lyman tang sights on two of my three pre-64 Model 94 carbines as well as on my 1926 Model 94 rifle.

They come in various configurations but my favorite is a Marbles with both a lock and a flip adjustable large and small aperture.

They also come in the slightly less snazzy model with screw in apertures and you can either get them in a few different aperture sizes:

Alternatively, get a Merit Adjustable aperture for them in either the 1/2” outside diameter Hunter or 3/4” diameter target models.

The pros of the vintage sight approach is that they are very well made and are very practical in use. They also look right on a vintage rifle or carbine where the new ones just don’t.

The cons are they are expensive and hard to find in excellent condition, and they lack windage adjustment. The tang needs to be properly drilled so that the sight is perpendicular to the tang and windage is adjusted via then front sight for zeroing purposes.


2) The new Lyman Number 2 sight:

These were the first of the modern reproductions to show up and they did so in the mid 1990s. The major advantage is they are readily available and are not al that expensive, and still allow you to get near maximum benefit offered by a tang sight (maximized sight radius, not having to focus on a barrel mounted rear sight, and being able to adjust the aperture size to get maximum depth of field in various light conditions).

They are not quite at the same level as the old Lyman sights quality wise and they use an o-ring for friction on the elevation barrel, and it also doesn’t have windage adjustment, but it’s still a very good sight. My pre-64 Model 94 carbine in .30-30 with a my Model 94 LF in .38-55 will all shoot between 1.5 MOA and 2 MOA with the Lyman No. 2 at 100 yards. The new Lyman No. 2 sight:

3) The new Marbles tang sight:

This reproduction came a bit later, and it comes in a standard version as well as a version with interchangeable risers. (I’ve never found a need for the higher risers with .30-30 and .38-55 classes of cartridges and the standard model has worked fine).

It’s a bit more expensive than the Lyman, but a lot less expensive than a vintage sight. It also offers a click adjustable windage knob. That’s a mixed blessing as that knob is a bit large and rubs a bit on the hand during recoil. Still, I have one on my BB 94 in .375 Win as well as on a Model 92 in .45 Colt and it’s not objectionable.

The riser also doesn’t stand up quite vertically on the tang on the Model 94, but it’s not enough to notice looking through the sight.

It’s my most common tang sight as over all it offers the greatest degree and ease of sight adjustment. I have them on two Rossi 92 rifles in .357 Mag, a Rossi 92 carbine in .45 Colt, a Model 1992 in .45 Colt, as well as my BB94, and a couple of 9422s.

It’s a good sight. It’s important to understand however that even though it has windage adjustment the tang still must be drilled so the sight is vertical over the bore centerline, so that windage doesn’t change as the elevation is adjusted. If it’s not plumb with the bore, you’ll need to shim it so that it is.

You can see the difference in the picture below with the Marbles on the top and the Lyman on the bottom.

 

[Krogen]

I agree that receiver sights work well but, my rifle is not pre-drilled for one. My tang on the other hand is. So, there should be no need to alter anything. I do appreciate all the responses. Honestly, I was not expecting to hear much. I didn't realize they still had a following.

Many of us have a wide spectrum of interests. I love high end optics and precision rifles, just like I love old levers and single-shots. I shoot a monthly lever-action silhouette match. My 9422 has a receiver sight and my (gasp) Rossi has a tang sight. I also play with accurate rifles and optics at 500 yds. I relish where firearms technology is headed. At the same time I delight historical firearms. Full spectrum.

Your comment about the drilled and tapped tang may tilt the preference. Using the existing holes is appealing. You might want to find an old tang sight that's period correct and has an equivalent amount of wear. A brand-new sight might look out of place. For example, I have a pre-war Model 70 and I hunted high and low to find a "correct" receiver sight. It fits the rifle and it's wear. This old '06 Model 70 is well used and cared for, it's no collectors item. The sight looks like it was original to the rifle. I'm sure the rifle has stories to tell, if only it could. Each mark has a tale behind it. The sight is right at home.

 

[2152hq]

I have tang sites on everything from Winchester 92,94's, 73's to Marlin Mod97 levers, Remington Model 8's, Savage 1899, a Wurfflein Mid-Range .22., a factory fitted Savage Mod 29S pump 22 and others.
Bolt -peep sights on several bolt action sporters,,equivelent sight for a bolt action rifle.

Yes I like them..
If it's the corect sight with the correct 'stem' in place, it should be able to be adjusted to a higher elevation than the standard factory rear bbl sight.

Some of the Tang Sights used the same base and lower adjustment knurled barrel assembly for several different guns. Or the same gun in several different calibers sometimes.
What changed was the 'stem',,the piece up top that actually goes up and down with the elevation adjustementand also has the aperture in it.

There are specific stems for the different rifles and sometimes different ones again for specific calibers of same models of rifles.
All to get the elevation you need to be correct for the caliber.

There is also a pin that is set into the bottom of the stem. It is simply a finger pressure press fit. It is there to place the stem, and the elevation, at absolute bottom zero for that specific sight/cal/rifle.

The small pin is often missing from the stem as the stem can be taken out of the sight by just running the elevation to it's limit and the stem comes free of the adjustment barrel.
The pin being only a light fit in the bottom, can fall free, get lost, or some just toss it if their mongrel sight is bottoming out on them with it in place and they need more 'down' elevation to zero their rifle.

The tangs are generally factory D&T'd on pre-ww2 guns for these sights. SOme after the War, but scopes started to take the lead and by the mid to late 50's the practice stopped.

Tang screw sizes are all over the place in spec. Most mfg'rs decided to make them a proprietary size meaning they are not a Home Depot available screw size as a general rule.
Many of the originals have been re-tapped to a standard machine screw size that is close so a standard #8 may fit for you. It can be a bit loose but will often do.
Most of the orig size tang site screws are avail as repro screws from parts suppliers.

Don't be surprised if when mounting an orig site on an orig rifle that the sight appears to stand crooked once you look at it.
The sight base is usually machined quite straight.
The rifle's tang can be anything but,,that may come as a surprise to many. But they were polished and being a curved surface, even the slightest deviation from perfection will allow the matching curved base to sit aside.

Very common to remove these on old rifles and find shims under one side to bring them to plumb.
Card from a shell box, very thin brass is common. It usually doesn't take much thickness and the narrow strip or two laid along one side and just up under the edge is un-noticeable once the site is screwed back down in place.

The site makers did offer a deluxe version of the tang site for most applications that included a windage adjustment as well.
Very pricey now if found like all vintage iron sights.

I replace the rear bbl sight when I install a tang sight. Otherwise you are just looking thru the tang sight and then through the notch in the rear bbl sight to see the front sight,,if everything is sighted the same.

Factory guns usually came with a rear bbl sight with one or 2 completely fold down leaf(s) to get them out of the way.
I like those. Or just remove the rear bbl site and replace w/a sight blank filler block.

Some find the placement of the tang sight objectionable to where they also grip the rifle.

Marbles made a series of tang sights that mounted the same as the others. But the base was extended to the rear, back off of the tang itself and followed the nose of the stock curve.

There the adjustment and aperture stem were located usually over where the tang screw bolt head or just back of it would be.
Marbles called these "Special Flexible Base" rear sights.

So the Aperture is very close to your face/eye. But the tang is clear of any obstruction of the sight itself save for the thickness of the mounting base.

I have a couple of them around, I've never felt real comfortable using one though.
There was some one back in the early 20thC, a famous hunter or maybe outdoorsman/writer type who's wife was using a Savage 1899 fitted with one of these extended to the rear type of tang sights.
She lost her eye using it.

Simply quickly bringing the rifle to shoulder, the tang site being so close to the face and eyes as it is mounted,, or from recoil,,you can imagine how the rest went.

 

[BB57]

Good stuff in the previous post.

Winchester wise, the pre-war lever action rifles, short rifles, and carbines were generally drilled and tapped for tang sights, while post war through 1963 it was generally only the rifles and short rifles that had drilled and tapped tangs.

When looking for a vintage sight, you are primarily looking for good mechanical condition and lack of serious abuse. Don’t worry about the finish.

The tang sight on this Winchester 1890 had almost no bluing left on it but it was mechanically sound and not abused. I disassembled it, cleaned it thoroughly, removed what little blue was left, degreased it thoroughly and then reblued with paste cold blue. 6-7 passes and you’ll get a decently dark but not too black finish, one that will also wear on the edges fairly soon and not look too new for a vintage rifle.

This tang sight on a pre-64 Model 94 carbine was similarly refinished. Purists will wail and gasp in horror, but it fits the rifle where the original badly worn finish on the sight would look badly out of place.

As noted in the post above, most tang sights parts from a given company are fairly common and or interchangeable in terms of risers, and barrels. The differences lie in the base and the angle at which it holds the riser.

Aperture wise there are two major thread sizes used, with a couple of proprietary threads on a couple brands just to make mit interesting) and that holds true from tang sights through most receiver sights up through WWII.


——


The sight base screws can be a challenge. You can find new screws but the head is usually too large, and or the profile is wrong. I usually end up chucking the new screw in a lathe and then turn the head to the required diameter and profile.

 

[2152hq]

Some of the tang sites can be adjusted for the post angle. That to allow for the post to be at the 90* to the bore. Sometimes when bolted into place and the staff flipped into position, it either lacks a few degrees from 90 or goes a few degrees over 90 in position.

They are finiky to work on and you need some good tools to do the work. A 2 prong spanner on most and very close fitting open end wrench for a starter.
There is a very strong torsion spring inside most of the designs that power the snap down and up positions. Small 'legs' on each end of that spring must be fit into holes in discs on either side of the round portion of the pivot point.
Moving the legs of the spring into different holes in the discs, changes the strength of the spring when in the up and down positions.
The stop for the 90* position is also changable.

Then some have an added thumb lock lever on one side.
They can get really challenging to reassemble.
It gets to the point where you think you need 3 hands and a special assembly jig for the operation.
The latter was likely a reality in the factorys at least for some of the assembly operation.

Vernier Tang sights generally just use a flat spring under the base with a point on it at one end. That point engages a V slot in the round pivoting base of the vernier to lock it in the upright position.
To adjust the exact position, the flat spring anchoring point is slotted so the spring can be moved slightly back and forth. That moves the position of the point at the other end of course. The staff can then lock at a slightly different angle so the 90* w/the bore can be obtained.
Not all have this. Some you are stuck with what the mfg'r gives you.

You find a lot of disassembled tang site parts because of it I believe and buggered up screw and spanner fasteners on them.