Tang sight on a lever action

[Scrumbag]

Hi there folks,

I quite fancy putting a tang sight on my lever action 1892 clone (Chiappa in this case.

Anyone done this? Hints and tips much appreciated. Which model did you use?

Best wishes,

Scrummy

[michaelcj]

Been happy for years with the tang sights on my 1894 Winchester and 39A Marlin. I went with the Marbles because of the available windage adjustment.
The Lyman on my 1890 Winchester is also a great sight w/o the windage option.

[Erno86]

I would suggest that you be careful about the recoil impulse on a rifle fitted with a tang sight --- Because there has been a few instances...where a shooter has lost one of his eyes, due to the tang sight hitting it during heavy recoil.

[Pathfinder45]

I like them.

[44 AMP]

tang sight on my lever action 1892 clone

There is nothing you can put in an 1892 action that has the recoil to drive a tang sight into your eye if your face is in the right place to begin with.

The advantages of a tang sight are its accuracy and adjustability. The disadvantages are speed of use and fragility. They are easily bent. damaged, or just knocked out of adjustment if left on the rifle when not in use.

Even Quigley usually carried his tang sight in his pocket, not on the gun until needed for long range shooting.

The kind of shooting you aren't likely to be doing with anything in an 1892 action, including .44 Mag.

IF you want one for the looks, cool, its your gun, go ahead. Marble and Ideal are the classic names in the field, and I'm sure one of those could be mounted, provided you get the rifle drilled and tapped for it.

Do make sure you get one that is tall enough you can actually use it. You'll find it more precise than the semi buckhorn open rear sight, once you get used to using it. Whether or not the rest of the rifle is that precise, or if that precision is a useful thing is another matter.

Good Luck!

[Scorch]

Your choices nowadays are basically limited to Marbles and Lyman tang sights for you 1892. Drill and tap the tang of your rifle and install. Basically trouble-free and simple to use once sighted in, but they are not fast and they are not convenient on a lever rifle. They are a very basic flip-up peep sight that gives you a longer sight radius and greater precision potential in exchange for a little bit of inconvenience. You will find that they get in the way of your hand and take some definite intent to use. I would not install one on a carbine, but a long-barreled rifle is suitable for a tang peep. They are not like the tang vernier sights seen on 19th Century long-range rifles like Quigley's, those are much more delicate and precise instruments.

there has been a few instances...where a shooter has lost one of his eyes, due to the tang sight hitting it during heavy recoil

Really? Reference? Link to news story? I have several rifles with tang sights, including a Savage 1899, a Deluxe 1894 and a High Wall. I can't see that would ever happen, even with the long-range vernier on my High Wall. Sounds like "be careful, you'll put your eye out".

[mehavey]

To date I have never heard reference to eye injuries using a tang sight.
I admit to only going up to 45-90/45-3¼"/heavy 535-grain Sharps levels using
tang sights, but again never have I encountered/been told of eye problems.

Sharps:


32-20/357/44Mag/45Colt/ etc


Now if you want to chat about eyebrow-busting scopes . . . .


.

[Scrumbag]

Thanks folks, the rifle is drilled and tapped.

Just trying to work out which base would work. To be fair I want the peep because my eyesight is too bad to use buckhorns and I've tried a peep mounted infront of the ejection port on the back of a scout rail but struggle with it. - However I have a cocking piece sight mounted on a bolt action rifle and I really like it and shoot well with it.

Anyone put a Williams type receiver sight on a Chiappa? Might have the holes for it.

Scrummy

[Erno86]

Scorch...

"The tang sight is closer to the eye on uphill shots...therefore making it more dangerous to the possibility of eye injury ('however uncommon') on light rifles with heavy recoil."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tang_sight

Google: Are tang sights dangerous to the eyes - Then click-on "The American Deer Hunter - page 21

[Number10GI]

I've been shooting metallic silhouette for a number of years now and have never heard of an eye injury from a tang sight. Silhouette shooters use either tang or Vernier sights for the competition, there may be some who use a buckhorn sight but I've never seen it and I doubt that they score very well.
I don't hunt anymore and never used a lever gun in hunting so I can't comment on the difficulty using one in that sport. Walking through the brush with the sight upright could cause damage to it. In a blind or a tree stand I don't see a problem.
Check out Marbles sights, they make bases for a lot of different rifles so you shouldn't have any problem getting one for your rifle.
I have Marbles sights on my Winchester 94, Marlin 39A, Rossi Model 92, and on my Winchester 1885 Low Wall but I use the rifles in silhouette competition exclusively.

[COSteve]

Both my 24" Rossi .357 Mag and 24" Uberti .45 Colt have tang sights with target apertures for longer range shooting and both are a ton of fun to use. The .357 Mag does surprisingly well at 300yds!!

I used the Marble's Tang Peep Sight Rossi 65, 1892 Steel Blue, #009807 you can get from MidwayUSA HERE. It should work on your Chippa as both are clones of the Winchester '92. I use the target aperture because with it so close to your eye (no, it's never come close to hitting me either), you get a significant Depth of Field advantage so that even with old, bad eyes I can see both the front sight and target clearly.



I used Lyman's #2 tang sight and target aperture on my Uberti with the same excellent results. You can get one HERE.

[Drm50]

I have several original tang sights for rifles I have. Win, Marlin and Savage. They are fine for shooting target, lousy in the field. Most rifles they are behind the hammer and you have to change your natural grip to shoot. They aren’t worth snot for moving targets. On the other had a receiver type sight is just as precise, more if you get target clicks. And is in natural location for most. I got poked with a tang ladder, like Quigleys, on a RB 45/70. Shooting at jumped deer. I probably didn’t have gun in correct position, that’s why they are no good in the field. Unless you are staking out a herd of Buffalo.

[dahermit]

Originally Posted by Drm50

I have several original tang sights for rifles I have. Win, Marlin and Savage. They are fine for shooting target, lousy in the field. Most rifles they are behind the hammer and you have to change your natural grip to shoot. They aren’t worth snot for moving targets. On the other had a receiver type sight is just as precise, more if you get target clicks. And is in natural location for most. I got poked with a tang ladder, like Quigleys, on a RB 45/70. Shooting at jumped deer. I probably didn’t have gun in correct position, that’s why they are no good in the field. Unless you are staking out a herd of Buffalo.

I agree that they are problematic in the field. When it comes to aperture sights on the receiver, they also have their problems relative to hunting deer. Nevertheless, inasmuch as I was in love with the MI Garand and I did well with its aperture sight, I experimented with a receiver (aperture) sight on a custom 7x57 that I was dying to try out on deer. I purchase one with a "gold' ring inset around the aperture. Its purpose was to enhance its utility in dim light. I found it to not be useful in dim light, and was not happy in that instead of making things brighter in dim light, made things dimmer than when not looking through the sights. In short, I came the conclusion that aperture sights are very good for target in adaquate light, but not so much in fading light down in the swamp trying to aim at a buck...however, I made a good shot on the buck anyway, but it removed any illusion I had about hunting deer with an aperture instead of a scope.

[mehavey]

No question that scope is better than aperture.
But aperture's waaaay better`n open sights.

FWIW: The miiitary's stayed w/ aperture for battle sights from M1 - M-14 - M16 . . . . with the Marines only now phasing them out for optics on the line.
Pretty near 85 years.

[Drm50]

I have Lyman 66s on my several of my woods deer rifles. My deer shooting is mostly under 100yds, dead run and in stuff so thick they die standing up. I use no aperture in my receiver sights. I carry a Williams Twi Lite in my watch pocket , that’s the Gold Ring one to screw in if I get a chance at long shot. That gold ring doesn’t do jack, it just happens to be the one with the biggest hole. I wouldn’t say scope is better than receiver sight. It depends what the conditions are. They do some precision shooting with receiver sights. Stand up the average shooter give him 3x9 scope on his favorite rifle and give him five offhand shots at 100yds.
What do you reckon the average group to be? About 9” is the answer. Easily done with a receiver sight too. My dad belonged to a gun club that had a deer hunter turkey Shoot every year open to the public. Only rule was no support, 100yds, clay pigeons were the bullseyes.
They had 14 firing positions. Many times there would be no winners out of 14 shooters.

[stagpanther]

Maybe if you shoot straight up into the air the tang sight could poke you in the eye?

[Bart B.]

How does a rear sight aperture closer to the aiming eye enable better accuracy or shot placement precision?

The aiming eye doesn't subconsciously center the front sight in the rear aperture's field of view.

[mehavey]

1. I would offer the automatic centering of the front post is a (very) quickly-developed/ automatic reaction -- to the point of evolved instinct.

2. Even then -- as noted in other references -- the aperture itself becomes the entrance pupil for the entire optical system of target, front sight post, rear aperture, and eye. The resultant parallax suppression of a small aperture further reduces even the effect of slight misalignment.

3. As corollary, the light passing through the aperture is parallelized similar to how a collimated lens works -- producing a significant increase in depth-of-field and dramatically sharpens the front sight (and every in the field of view).


Drawback ? Reduced light gathering as conditions degrade.

[44 AMP]

The aiming eye doesn't subconsciously center the front sight in the rear aperture's field of view.

No, you have to do that. What we've been told (right or wrong), for generations is that the human eye can "naturally" find the center of a circle,

Which (we've been told) is how peep sights work. Your eye automatically finds the center of the circle (the aperture in the sight) and then its up to your conscious will to put the top of the front sight post there (in the center of the circle).

How does a rear sight aperture closer to the aiming eye enable better accuracy or shot placement precision?

The closer it is to the eye, the easier it is to look through the rear sight, not at it. We're told the "center the sight in the circle" is more precise than trying to line up equal amounts of "daylight" on each side, and front sight level with the top of the rear sight blade.

I'd say degree of precision varies, just as the skills of the shooters vary. Size of the aperture matters, tiny ones for target use are more precise (with a skilled shooter trained to use them) than open sights, but take longer to use accurately. Larger apertures (up to large "ghost ring") are faster to use than smaller ones, but are less precise. Something you probably won't notice unless they are shot side by side on a target range.

I don't know that tang sights are any more accurate (in the field) than receiver mounted peep sights, I don't have much experience with tang sights. Theory says the longer sight radius increases the potential for accuracy. Up to the shooter to see if they can use it, I guess.

[Road_Clam]

I quickly ditched to cheapish buckhorn tang setup on my Henry 30-30 in favor of a Skinner peep. I have a very accurate and mild "cowboy" load shooting a 170 gr RN cast bullet at about 1600 fps . I really struggled to hit anything with the OEM sights and could not figure out POI adjustments with my mild load. I ended up with the Skinner rear peep, and modifying an extra tall front blade sight so I could zero at 100 yds , and raise the rear peep and also hit at 200 yds.

http://skinnersights.com/

[Grant 14]

If eye sight is an issue with the tang sight, but you still want a peep, then try a receiver mounted peep sight like a Williams or Lyman. As my eyes got older I switched from a tang mounted peep to a Williams, and it works better for me on a model 94 30-30. Just being mounted 3 or 4 inched farther from my eye made a difference. It is also much more convenient. Good Luck. Grant.

[mehavey]

I've got Williams on my Marlins, and (with the exception of the `86), tangs on my Winchesters.
Ejection drives the choice.
(and old fashioned cool factor)

[Driftwood Johnson]

Howdy

When I first got involved in CAS I was regularly attending a match where we would occasionally have to take some shots at a big steel silhouette of a bear.

Most targets in CAS are very close, and there is no need for anything but open sights. But the bear was usually placed out 75 or 100 yards away from the firing line. I was shooting an original Winchester Model 1892 chambered for 44-40, and the 44-40 has pretty much of a rainbow trajectory.

So I mounted this Lyman tang sight on my '92 and sighted it in for 100 yards.








But I discovered right away that with the tang sight up the standard Semi-buckhorn rear sight on the rifle was in my line of vision when I used the tang sight. So I replaced the original Winchester Semi-Buckhorn sight with this flip up rear sight. When using the tang sight I would flip the rear sight down out of the way, and flip it up for all other shooting. You should take this into consideration if you intend to use both sights. To tell you the truth I don't use that rifle much anymore, and we don't shoot at the bear any more, so I should probably remove the tang sight and reinstall the original Sem-buckhorn sight. If I can find it.







Regarding danger to the eye with a Winchester Model 1892 or any replica of it, with the possible exception of those chambered for 44 Magnum or 454 Casull and maybe 357 Magnum, the typical chamberings for the '92 and its clones are 45 Colt and 44-40, and they do not develop enough recoil in a '92 for a tang sight to be a danger to the eye.



I picked up this antique Model 1894 chambered for 30-30 last year. It came with a tang sight, I'm pretty sure it is an old Lyman sight.









30-30 develops quite a lot more kick than 44-40 or 45 Colt. I tried the tang sight a couple of times, but didn't really like it so I flipped it down and used the original Semi-buckhorn rear sight when I took it to the range a few times. Even though this old '94 has a heavy 26" octagon barrel, it gives me a pretty good shove with standard factory 30-30 ammo. I would be a bit more leery of getting whacked by it in recoil than with the tang sight on my '92.

Regarding your use of a tang sight, it depends on what you use the rifle for. Tang peep sights obscure most of the target. This is of course dependent on how big the aperture is, but still they obscure most of the target. Very well suited for precision long range shooting from a bench, not so much for a quick shot at a bounding deer.

And frankly, as I found with my old '92, with rainbow trajectory cartridges such a 45 Colt or 44-40, not much use very far beyond 100 yards anyway.

Yes, your only options today are the Lyman sight which is only adjustable for elevation, or the Marbles one which is adjustable for both elevation and windage.


http://www.marblearms.com/peep-tang-sights.html

[Driftwood Johnson]

How does a rear sight aperture closer to the aiming eye enable better accuracy or shot placement precision?

The aiming eye doesn't subconsciously center the front sight in the rear aperture's field of view.

It is called the pin hole camera effect. Particularly useful for people with poor vision, particularly useful for near sighted (can only focus on objects close to them) individuals.

A very small aperture actually bends the light rays near the edge of the hole, bringing distant objects into sharper focus than normal. This effect was discovered with very early cameras that had no lens at all, just a pinhole (very small) hole. The pinhole would act like a lens and focus the image at the rear of the camera, but it would be inverted. I was terribly near sighted for most of my life until I recently had my cataracts removed. I have known since I was a kid that if I was swimming without my glasses I could hold my hand up close to my eye and form a very small hole between my thumb and first two fingers that would bring objects into focus almost as well as the very strong lenses in my glasses.

The same holds true for a small aperture in a peep sight. In addition to the eye tending to center the front sight in the aperture, a very small aperture will focus the target better. I have a tang peep sight on my Sharps and I can choose different aperture sizes depending on the lighting conditions.

Here is a link to the type of adjustable aperture I have on my Sharps. Rotating the knurled disk rotates in different apertures of different diameters. Not applicable to a Model 1892, but a small aperture in a tang sight on a '92 will help extend the focal length of the eye. But the pinhole camera affect only works if the hole is close to the eye.

https://www.buffaloarms.com/target-i...adley-eye-cups

[COSteve]

Originally Posted by Bart B.

How does a rear sight aperture closer to the aiming eye enable better accuracy or shot placement precision?

The aiming eye doesn't subconsciously center the front sight in the rear aperture's field of view.

2 Ways.

1st. The fact that the sight radius, the distance between the front and rear sight, is longer than with a barrel mounted rear sight producing a shorter sight radius giving a more precise aiming system as even a 1/16" vertical or lateral displacement with a longer sight radius results in a lower angular diversion from centerline. For example, my 24" Rossi levergun has a 20" sight radius with the barrel mounted rear sight but a 30" sight radius with a tang sight.

2nd. The target aperture, held close to one's eye, enhances the Depth of Field (DoF) meaning that objects much farther from your eye appear to be in focus. It's an optical principle used by photographers to adjust the area in focus. With a small enough aperture held close to one's eye, you will be able to see the front sight and the target clearly.

As used in photography, DoF is defined as:

"A basic definition of depth of field is: the zone of acceptable sharpness within a photo that will appear in focus. In every picture there is a certain area of your image in front of, and behind the subject that will appear in focus."

The smaller the aperture, the longer the DoF. That's why you should have shooting glasses that are tinted yellow and never wear sunglasses to shoot as you want your iris to be as small as possible to give you more precise DoF.

DoF enhancement can be experienced easily and for free if you have some electrical tape and a hole punch. Punch out some 1/4" black tape blanks and then put a tiny hole in the center. Then tape them to your shooting glasses where you sight through to shoot.

(Usually about here for right handed shooters)



I have blended lens with astigmatism correction and am close to being legally blind without my glasses but with a target aperture or these glasses, I can see my front sight and the target clearly.

The black tape is too close to your eye to focus on it so it sort of disappears and you just notice that the area inside the tiny hole is clear. So clear that you can see your front sight (no matter if it's on a 2" revolver or 30" rifle) and the target (no matter if it's 10' or 300 yds from you) clearly.

It's free to do, give it a try.