Three Foot Johnson Posted August 28, 2011 Share Posted August 28, 2011 I just picked one of these up on gunbroker and with the rear sight all the way to the top of the ramp, it still hits 8" low at 100 yards with 405 grainers. Black powder & subs are just slightly low, but smokeless loads are way low. The good news is all but one of my dozen or so three shot groups this morning have been under 2"/100 yards. I'm thinking a MARBLES TANG SIGHT and a LOWER FRONT SIGHT might be in order. At least the tang sight anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Fill 'Em 67797 Posted August 28, 2011 Share Posted August 28, 2011 I'm having the same problem with mine. I think the front sight will be OK with a tang sight. The thing is, the Marbles' tang sight did not get very good reviews and I hate how it looks on the gun. The Lyman sight looks better and mounts better, you just don't get windage adjustment. I ordered the Varner tang sight for mine, but after getting it, it won't even work. Might work on a '94, but not a '95. So, I think I will end up getting the Lyman, I know it will work. Have you tried any other bullets with your gun? Mine shoots 300gr. real well. I've got some 405's loaded up but haven't tried them yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Three Foot Johnson Posted August 28, 2011 Author Share Posted August 28, 2011 Three of the seven reviews on Midway are thumbs down for the Lyman. Unfortunately, there is only one review there for the Marbles, but it's favorable. What are the complaints with the Marbles? I've got some 340 grainers around here somewhere I could try later today or tomorrow and see what happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Boy Posted August 28, 2011 Share Posted August 28, 2011 Why don't you just go to Brownells Tech site - find the calculation to determine the height of a new front sight! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Three Foot Johnson Posted August 28, 2011 Author Share Posted August 28, 2011 The height of the front sight becomes somewhat less important with the installation of a tang sight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Original Lumpy Gritz Posted August 28, 2011 Share Posted August 28, 2011 The height of the front sight becomes somewhat less important with the installation of a tang sight. No it don't, if you what to take full use of that tang sight Cheers, LG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Three Foot Johnson Posted August 28, 2011 Author Share Posted August 28, 2011 "somewhat less important", not a moot point. In this case, the lower the front sight, the better, as I'll get a bit more range out of the tang sight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Original Lumpy Gritz Posted August 28, 2011 Share Posted August 28, 2011 JBB, are you shooting a factory equal load(smokeless)or "lite" ones with the 405? Respectfully, LG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Three Foot Johnson Posted August 28, 2011 Author Share Posted August 28, 2011 This morning I used 5744 and 3f. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Original Lumpy Gritz Posted August 28, 2011 Share Posted August 28, 2011 Have you tried any factory 405's. Never liked 5744....Left to much un-burned grud in the bore. Confirm caliber is .45-70? Cheers, LG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Three Foot Johnson Posted August 28, 2011 Author Share Posted August 28, 2011 Yep, .45-70. Everything I've ever used 5744 in, it's left a lot of half-burned powder in the barrel, but surprisingly it's usually very accurate, go figure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Original Lumpy Gritz Posted August 28, 2011 Share Posted August 28, 2011 Try a bx of factory loaded .45-70/405's and see what happens. X2 on 5744, and the colder it gets. The more unburned crud you see. PM-inbound. Cheers, LG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
backshootin beauford mcgee Posted August 28, 2011 Share Posted August 28, 2011 If you handload those 405's up to 1800 or 2000 fps that front sight will work fine. I think they set it up as a hunting rifle for modern loads not a CAS rifle with black or like velocity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrangler Jones, SASS # 64178 Posted August 28, 2011 Share Posted August 28, 2011 Three of the seven reviews on Midway are thumbs down for the Lyman. Unfortunately, there is only one review there for the Marbles, but it's favorable. What are the complaints with the Marbles? Complaints with Marbles tang sight? Never heard of such a thing! Unless quality control has fallen off, Marbles is superior to Lyman; but Marbles does cost more [which is why I bought the Lyman #2 ]. If windage is off with the Lyman, you can adjust it by shimming it with aluminum foil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WOODFOX , sass#34179 Posted August 28, 2011 Share Posted August 28, 2011 If you buy a Marbles get the long stem I had a 95 and replaced the fromt sight with a .375" I believe the factory one is .500" . I never could handle the recoil on my marlin . Bought a 86 carbine . And my marbles sight didn't work out for me I sent it back . Check Lee Shaver or MVA sights . Woodfox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dutch Al #22045 Posted August 29, 2011 Share Posted August 29, 2011 I've used 5744 in my 45-70s. And like everyone else, I've had unburned powder kernels left in the cartridge case and barrel. Enough, in fact, so that in a lever gun, the unburned kernels would get down in the action of my Marlin 1985 CB,and made it stiffer to operate. For me, 5744 works best using the bottle as a door stop. For lighter cast bullet loads, I have found 4759 to be a great powder. It was originally designed to work best in reduced power cast bullet loads. Great Stuff! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.