Win M94 Williams v Lyman sight

[Rock185]

I have a Lyman tang sight on an old, 1942, Winchester 94. I think I must have been around 12 when my favorite uncle gave me the Winchester. That was a very long time ago. So I had the 94 for most of my life, before I discovered the aperture flips down, making for a larger aperture

 

[BB57]

I assume you're talking about a receiver sight, instead of a tang sight.

Williams are aluminum, Lyman are steel. The Lyman is much better quality.

Post war 94's that were drilled for a receive sight won't have their value decreased either way. The Williams brothers made their living drilling and tapping guns to add their sights and scope mounts. They're less than an hour away from me in Davison Michigan, but I can never forgive them for destroying the value of so many guns that would now be collectable.

The Lyman 66 is also aluminum. The older Lyman 56 was steel.

 

[Yendor357]

I agree that putting a scope on a nice old Win 92, 94 is just awful. If you need a scope on a levergun, just buy a Marlin; they're cool too.

In 100 years from now, if my Miroku Win 92 is worth a little less because I put a reciever sight on it….. oh well. I shoot a Peep sooo much better.

My friend and I put a Williams peep sight on his 24 inch Rossi 357. I had no idea that Rossi rifles were that accurate; at least his is. He bought that rifle from an estate. The old boy that originally had it did an action job on it. It's a very nice rifle now.

 

[Drm50]

The Lyman 66 was a steel sight, I know cause I got 3 of them as we speak.
Like the rest of Lyman receiver sights they are now aluminum. I had Lyman tang type on Remington 8-81-14-141 also Savage 99s. On these model rifles the sight is mounted on back of receiver putting in in same position as a receiver sight mounted on a lever action. Much more natural and instantly acquired when shooting running game. Also doesn't interfere with grip of the stock.
The behind the hammer tang sights are ok for target but not much practical use in the woods.

 

[ISCS Yoda]

As an additional note, I have a Navy Arms/Rossi M92 in .45 Colt that was my cowboy action rifle. I had a Smith Enterprises peep sight affixed to it (I need a picture for y'all). Shot several clean matches with that rifle and my brace of .45/c Vaqueros.

Uncle Sam's Army taught me to like peepsights.........

 

[Skeet 028]

Like the rest of Lyman receiver sights they are now aluminum. I had Lyman tang type on Remington 8-81-14-141 also Savage 99s. On these model rifles the sight is mounted on back of receiver putting in in same position as a receiver sight mounted on a lever action. .

Those old Remington reeiver sights are hard to find and bring pretty high prices. They work great

 

[ISCS Yoda]

Everyone likes pictures:


Navy Arms/Rossi M92 in .45 Colt

Close-up of the Smith Enterprises peep sight - it was supposed to drop down but it doesn't. No big deal. The angle looks funny but, trust me, it's perfectly aligned with the front sight.

 

[StrawHat]

Not a 94 but…

That should tell you what sight I prefer.

On top of the receiver, close to my eye and does not interfere with my grip.

Kevin

 

[BB57]

I agree that putting a scope on a nice old Win 92, 94 is just awful. If you need a scope on a levergun, just buy a Marlin; they're cool too.

In 100 years from now, if my Miroku Win 92 is worth a little less because I put a reciever sight on it….. oh well. I shoot a Peep sooo much better.

My friend and I put a Williams peep sight on his 24 inch Rossi 357. I had no idea that Rossi rifles were that accurate; at least his is. He bought that rifle from an estate. The old boy that originally had it did an action job on it. It's a very nice rifle now.

I have a Rossi 92 20" short rifle and Rossi 92 24" rifle both in .357 Mag with tang sights any Lyman 17AHB front sights. Both are solid 5 shot group 2 MOA rifles at 100 yards. I get 1800 and 1840 fps respectively from them with federal 158 gr JSPs and 2200 and 2220 fps respectively with hand loaded 125 gr XTPs.

Both received the full Steve Gunz tune up and replacement ejector spring and magazine follower and are almost as smooth as my Armi Sport 1892, but much more accurate.

Very nice rifles for deer sized game at 100 or so yards.

 

[Skeet 028]

I have a 1894 Winchester 24 inch but an XTR. So I will have to find a peep made for the XTR. Never chrono'd the darn thing but plugged one deer at about 50 yds for eating meat. DRT one shot...125 Rem HP I had loaded for coyotes

 

[diyj98]

I have a 1894 Winchester 24 inch but an XTR. So I will have to find a peep made for the XTR. Never chrono'd the darn thing but plugged one deer at about 50 yds for eating meat. DRT one shot...125 Rem HP I had loaded for coyotes

I believe the XTR receiver is the same as other post 64 94 receivers, or am I missing something?

 

[cmansguns]

Peeps for the win!

1962 Sears & Roebuck 303 British SMLE that had been professionally sporterized (by whom I have no idea). $45 well spent...great eastern whitetail deer rifle, short, compact, handles very well in heavy brush, Williams peep gets right down to business as quick as you shoulder the arm.

Then came 1966 and Uncle Sam kept my education of peeps alive with the M-14, and even years later as I finally obtained a M1 Garand in National Match configuration...that NM aperture really gets you on the mark quickly....really true: Best Sight Picture Ever.

 

[hivel37]

If elevation changes are required, scratch around
and find an all-steel sight. Save yourself a lot of
aggravation.

 

[Yendor357]

Here is the Williams that use the scope mount holes. It's a pretty clever solution for those guns that don't have the side of the reciever drilled and tapped.

 

[Skeet 028]

I'll have to check but don't think the XTR isn't drilled and tapped for a regular receiver sight. Think they make one for where the rear scope base is

 

[BB57]

I'll have to check but don't think the XTR isn't drilled and tapped for a regular receiver sight. Think they make one for where the rear scope base is

I put a tang sight on mine, but my impression was the holes for the receiver sight are just farther forward.

However it might be worth noting that my BB94 is a low 10xx range serial number example made in 1978 and is consequently a top eject carbine rather than the 1982 and later top eject examples.