Skinner peeps on my Marlins


PDA






76shuvlinoff
November 16, 2009, 09:09 PM
Christmas is a coming, for me that usually means old bike parts but I have a 79 39A and 77 1894c in .357 I think qualify for peep sites ... and it's been bugging me for over a year.
I have only used peep sights on an extremely cheap pos 22 a long time ago, I wasn't happy but I think the issue was youth and an ultra cheap rifle. .... So I am looking for feedback on the two rifles I mention above.

1) Do they work with the factory front site?
2) Brass or Blue? ;)

Thanks,
Mark

If you enjoyed reading about "Skinner peeps on my Marlins" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
52grain
November 16, 2009, 09:36 PM
I recently purchased the barrel mounted sight. Have not yet had time to mount it, but Dr. Skinner was very helpful via e-mail. I ordered it Tuesday evening, and even though Wednesday was a postal holiday it was in my mailbox Saturday.

Badlander
November 16, 2009, 09:55 PM
I emailed A question to Dr Skinner late one evening. Recieved an answer in about 15min.

ucbandit10
November 16, 2009, 10:22 PM
I put the lo-pro skinner sight on my newer 39AS. I like it alot but the only problem i had was that the sight wasnt tall enough to sight in with the factory front sight, it would have had maybe 1 thread left before completely out. I email him about it and he said he would make a taller sight as well as a taller lock nut for me. I sent the old one in and within a few days i had the new one and it works perfectly.

I got the blued one because it seems like it would be stronger than the brass one.

ArmedBear
November 16, 2009, 11:01 PM
I might go with brass on a 39A with a gold trigger.

One of my 39s and my 1894C have blue triggers, though, so I'd go with blue. There's no other gold on the thing, so the brass sight would look "off" somehow.

Enjoy your sights. I'm going to get some, also.:)

ants
November 16, 2009, 11:44 PM
I'm not so happy with the lo-pro on my 336. It's not windage adjustable at all, unless I want to drift the front sight. And it's not really adjustable for trajectory. The aperture has a front and back, so you can only adjust it one full turn up or one full turn down. Which is a huge, huge adjustment on the target. Well, I mean OFF the target.

ArmedBear
November 16, 2009, 11:50 PM
Yeah, the Lo-Pro doesn't look too appealing to me.

In Tim Skinner's defense, though, it does say that in the description (both about no windage adjustment and how the sight adjusts vertically).

_N4Z_
November 16, 2009, 11:58 PM
I have a Marlin 1894c with the Skinner receiver peep (windage adjustable) and the front blade.

My Marlin was bought new within the past year. The buckhorn on the barrel was not square and it shot off to the right. Not happy about this and was going to box it up for a trip to the factory, but then decided to buy the peeps and forget about the factory foul up. Been contemplating such a move for my 336 for quite some time, but the .357 ended up jumping ahead in line. Knocked out the buckhorn, installed a blank, mounted the peep, ahhhh what a good move it turned out to be! Bugger shoots dead nutz now. :D

I highly recommend these sights. As stated by an above member, do not hestitate to email the Doc and ask questions. I did, he was quite helpful and prompt. Two thumbs up!

ArmedBear
November 17, 2009, 12:00 AM
N4Z: you can just fold the buckhorn flat, right?

salvo
November 17, 2009, 02:31 AM
Great sights, I bought the brass rear sight and blue steel front for my 1894CB. Best sight value out there! Next set will be for my 39A.

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d71/SeaOx/Marlin%201894CB%20Limited/IMG_6094.jpg

Kernel
November 17, 2009, 03:39 AM
I'm not entirely up on the new slang. Is this thread what the kids these days would call,

"Giving a shout-out to my peeps."?

Just wondering. :neener:

Nematocyst
November 17, 2009, 03:51 AM
I'm pretty sure I'll keep the scope on my 39,
but intend to replace the XS GR with a set of peeps.

Skinners run high on my list.

wnycollector
November 17, 2009, 07:09 AM
I have a skinner barrel mounted peep on my rossi m92 .44 mag. I will give mine two thumbs up! Super fast service, very reasonable price, high quality construction and great email support from Dr. Skinner...whats not to like!

SwampWolf
November 17, 2009, 07:34 AM
I suppose somebody has to offer an alternative :). I've used Williams receiver sights on most of my lever-action rifles, including Winchester Models 1886 and 94 and Marlin 39 for decades with great success. The only lever-action I have that wears a scope (a Redfield "WideField 1X5) is my Savage 99 chambered in .358 Winchester. Imo, scopes detract from the handling qualities of most carbines.

I'm not familiar with the Skinner product but what I like about the Williams sight (as well as the Lyman equivalent) is the ease with which fine adjustments can be made to change windage and elevation settings.

_N4Z_
November 17, 2009, 09:14 AM
N4Z: you can just fold the buckhorn flat, right?

Yes, the buckhorn could be folded over. With it removed though I think you might experience a cleaner sight picture.

76shuvlinoff
November 17, 2009, 09:00 PM
Thanks for the replies folks. I think I'll start off with one for the 39A, and yes brass probably would look good with the gold trigger. If I'm as tickled as the the rest of you are then a blue one for the 1894c will be on the short list.

Mark

76shuvlinoff
November 21, 2009, 10:12 AM
ordered the brass for my 39A a couple days ago.
... I find I am not a patient person..
:o

ArmedBear
November 21, 2009, 10:18 AM
One thing I like about Skinner sights vs. Lyman/Williams is that the Skinners don't detract from the simple, sleek nature of the rifle.

The Lyman style sights have always struck me as eminently suitable for a range toy, but not so much for a field gun.

Brian Williams
November 21, 2009, 01:01 PM
I would rather have a tang sight on my Marlins. I have a Marble's on my 1894c and I am looking to replace the Lyman receiver with a Marble's tang on my 39M

tubeshooter
November 21, 2009, 03:37 PM
I went with a brass for my 39A from Dr. Skinner, and I could not be more pleased.


I'm going with him for my 1894C, no doubt about it.

ArmedBear
November 21, 2009, 06:19 PM
Brian Williams-

Doesn't the tang sight interfere with the web of your hand on the wrist of the stock?

If not, a tang sight has its merits.

Brian Williams
November 22, 2009, 07:43 PM
No, it is not in the way and the longer sight radius really helps.

76shuvlinoff
November 23, 2009, 08:48 PM
No, it is not in the way and the longer sight radius really helps.

Brian, can you post a pic of your 1894c with the tang site on it? I might be doing something with mine after the holidays.

I got the brass Skinner for my 39A today and it looks good. I am in the middle of a bathroom project I need to wrap up before the holiday so it'll be a few days before I get to try it out.... maybe.
:evil:

Badlander
November 23, 2009, 09:48 PM
Would like to see A range report. After the bathroom project is done. yea right.

paintballdude902
November 23, 2009, 09:52 PM
i love mine i have the receiver mounted peep

Hanzerik
November 23, 2009, 10:15 PM
I went with a Marble's Tang sight on my 20" Puma, and a Marble's Bullseye on my 16" Puma. Tang sight has been sighted in at 100yrds, I have not had the chance to sight in the 16" yet. If I had a Marlin, I might have gone with the Skinner sights, but since my receivers are not drilled&tapped, I went with the sights I did.

http://home.bresnan.net/~hanzerik/pics/Puma/Right%20Side%201.JPG
http://home.bresnan.net/~hanzerik/pics/Puma/Tang%20Sight.JPG
http://home.bresnan.net/~hanzerik/pics/Puma/Bullseye.JPG

76shuvlinoff
November 25, 2009, 04:36 PM
Ok, got the Skinner a couple days ago, finally got it mounted on the 39A today and it looks great.

However here must be a learning curve. This is not a true range report as I was not shooting off a bench, just standing propped against a solid pole at 40 yards. In the same situation with same ammo I am better with the buckhorns. A helluva lot better with crosshairs :o

My grouping now is about 4" in diameter and right by another 3" Not really a fair assessment but basically it was real life type shooting albeit not long range.

I need to set up a bench and try it out but would a smaller aperture tend to tighten the group?

salvo
November 25, 2009, 05:33 PM
Yep, the smaller the aperture the tighter the group. At least for me it works that way. The smaller aperture makes for a finer sight picture.

76shuvlinoff
November 25, 2009, 11:46 PM
Thanks, I just sent a note off to Skinner asking for recommendations or maybe sell me a few to play with. This is the first time I've used a quality peep site, in actual use the .096 aperture it's shipped with seems large to me but I have no past experience to reference.

salvo
November 26, 2009, 01:08 AM
If you go to small you wont be able to see through it in low light conditions. It's nice to have a few to choose from, larger for hunting, smaller for target shooting.

76shuvlinoff
November 26, 2009, 10:18 AM
I'll try a smaller one but maybe my far from perfect eyes and the peep are just not compatible. My front site seems out of focus. Dr. Skinner suggested a .050 so I'll give it a shot. If that's too small for me I can open it up easy enough.

I keep a scope on my Model 60 but I don't want to put a scope back on the 39 lever. However there's a lot to be said for hitting what you're aiming at... or at least aiming where you're hitting. :o

tubeshooter
November 26, 2009, 12:10 PM
I also need to get some different sizes. Standard is good all-around, but I'd like to have more field of vision for the longer shots.


I am thinking about another front sight, too. The factory bead is kind of chunky when you start getting past 40 yards or so (at least for me).

76shuvlinoff
November 26, 2009, 12:22 PM
I sure like that tang site on Hanzerik's puma above but it seems that's right where my hand wraps around my grip. I do have fairly small hands and due to that I'm not real fond of double stack autos.

Hanzerik
November 26, 2009, 12:30 PM
I have no issue holding it normally. My thumb wraps around behind the upright.

mgkdrgn
November 26, 2009, 08:53 PM
Christmas is a coming, for me that usually means old bike parts but I have a 79 39A and 77 1894c in .357 I think qualify for peep sites ... and it's been bugging me for over a year.
I have only used peep sights on an extremely cheap pos 22 a long time ago, I wasn't happy but I think the issue was youth and an ultra cheap rifle. .... So I am looking for feedback on the two rifles I mention above.

1) Do they work with the factory front site?
2) Brass or Blue? ;)

Thanks,
Mark

I bought a Skinner peep to use on my Rossi 454 Casull/45 Colt lever action.

It works -much- better than the rear stock notch sight that came with the rifle.

It -did- work with the stock front sight ... but I have had to file it down a bit. Your mileage may vary.

Bottom line, it was a -very- good accessory for my rifle. I got mine in blue as that matched.

76shuvlinoff
November 26, 2009, 10:53 PM
Yep two turns up and still shooting a touch low. The front sight on the Marlin has a little bead on top, not sure I want to file it off but I see Skinner offers post sights that can be filed. First I want to try a smaller aperture then go from there. Ordered it today.

CZguy
November 27, 2009, 06:58 AM
One thing I like about Skinner sights vs. Lyman/Williams is that the Skinners don't detract from the simple, sleek nature of the rifle.

The Lyman style sights have always struck me as eminently suitable for a range toy, but not so much for a field gun.

Wow, we're going to just have to agree to disagree on this one. I think receiver sights look good, and function great on a field gun. I use Lyman's on several of my rifles, and have them sighted in for 100 yards. There are adjustable scales on both windage and elevation so that I can rapidly change the range setting, and then back again. I find this feature really helpful with cartridges like .35 Remington, and .45-70. To my way of thinking these sights are compact, light weight and allow me to engage targets at multiple ranges, without the bulk and weight of a scope. The skinner sight looks good to me but appears to only be useful at one range, an then you would have to guess at holdover for longer range shots.

salvo
November 27, 2009, 07:52 PM
A post sight works great!
Remember you want to focus on the front sight, the peep will be very fuzzy but your brain will center the front sight automatically. The target will also be somewhat fuzzy, just remember, focus on the front sight!

If you enjoyed reading about "Skinner peeps on my Marlins" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!