Model 94 30-30 Williams sight question

[jr_roosa]

I get about 4MOA out of my Winchester 94 with the stock open sights. I'm tempted to pick up a Williams peep sight and give it a try, but I though I'd ask those who have switched how much accuracy improvement they have found.

I shoot highpower, so aperture sights are very familiar to me. My only hesitation is that the rifle is just so slick with nothing on it. I got it with a ridiculous side-mount scope that was way too bulky for the rifle, and that came off right away, especially since it was impossible to get a good cheek weld with it.

One day I might get a nice compact 4x scope and try the scope mount again with an M1C/D leather cheek pad, but that is way down my firearms wish list.

Thanks!

-J.

 

[rondog]

I have a Winchester 94AE Trapper in .44 mag, and bought a Williams rear peep for it, the economy model. I haven't got a chance to test shoot it, but I'm not real impressed with the Williams sight. The adjustments are pretty crappy and hit/miss. And it's aluminum.

Something with fine micrometer adjustments would be much better than "loosen a screw and hope it doesn't move too much". I HATE the term "you get what you pay for", but in this case I believe it applies. I regret my purchase.

Caveat Emptor.

FWIW - I've read of a lot of guys being very happy with tang-mounted aperture sights, and there's other choices as well. Do your research and choose wisely. Like this, but it's pricey. http://www.midwestgunworks.com/page/mgwi/prod/winchester-rifle-sights/U345311010

 

[Peter M. Eick]

I have these on most of my 9422's. They are the model D if I remember right. Very accurate, easy to shoot and no problems with mounting.



You can see the comparison on the second picture of the ones with and without. Yes they stick out a bit, but small sacrifice for the accuracy improvement.

 

[Sav .250]

The williams Fire sight will be a great addition. Low profile.
Is as accurate as you cam make it.

 

[highlander 5]

I had a William's peep sight on a 1885 Browning SS and other than having to replace the front sight for a slightly higher one I found it to be very accurate. I don't remember if it's the same as the pics above though.

 

[The Bushmaster]

You might just try to work up a good load for that lever gun. I load 32 grains of W-748 into Winchester or Remington cases under a 170 grain Speer Hotcore FN. With the Iron sights the rifle (Win. Mod 94 .30WCF) came with in 1949 I'm getting a three shot group of 1 5/8" at 100 yards.

Keep in mind that the rifle has to be capable of good accuracy before the peep sight will make a difference. If it [or you] can't hit the broad side of a barn then the peep sight is a waste of money and time.

 

[Peter M. Eick]

Agreed. I made sure my 30/30 would shoot before I put the williams on it. This is 50 shots off the bench from 100 yrds.

 

[The Bushmaster]

Very nice...

 

[Malamute]

The cheaper Williams sight is called the 5-D, the better one is called the Foolproof, and has the micrometer click adjustments. Both are aluminum, as are the current Lyman receiver sights. Older steel Lymans are around, but cost more. I think the change happened in the early 60's, but I'm not sure.

I haven't had to change front sights on mine, but I never cared for the round bead. I either filed the bead into a blade, or switched to a Sourdough type, which is a square blade with angled rear face with brass insert. They aren't as easy to find today as in the past.

I put receiver sights on all my levers, they dont hurt carryabilty in the least, and are better sights all around.

 

[Cocked & Locked]

I can usually shrink my group sizes in half switching from barrel mounted rear sights to a receiver sight.

Did the same on this 16" barreled 94AE .44 mag. I replace the front sight with a Lyman gold bead.

 

[jr_roosa]

You might just try to work up a good load for that lever gun. I load 32 grains of W-748 into Winchester or Remington cases under a 170 grain Speer Hotcore FN. With the Iron sights the rifle (Win. Mod 94 .30WCF) came with in 1949 I'm getting a three shot group of 1 5/8" at 100 yards.

Keep in mind that the rifle has to be capable of good accuracy before the peep sight will make a difference. If it [or you] can't hit the broad side of a barn then the peep sight is a waste of money and time.

Yep. I'm not sure if it's me or the rifle at this point. All my other rifles have aperture sights and I shoot those well. That load is similar to my best, but basically I found a 4MOA load out of a pile of 5 and 6 MOA loads, or worse. I was developing loads the other day and the first 2 shots touched. I almost packed up and went home. The next 3 filled out the usual 4 inch group.

I can usually shrink my group sizes in half switching from barrel mounted rear sights to a receiver sight.

Turning this thing into a 2MOA rifle would be awesome.

Agreed. I made sure my 30/30 would shoot before I put the williams on it. This is 50 shots off the bench from 100 yrds.

If I was better at shooting with the model 94 style sights, I would try that out. I am just so used to aperture sights that it's tough for me to get a consistent sight picture.

I think that I may just pick up a sight and give it a try. God knows I've blown $80 on dumber stuff.

-J.

 

[The Bushmaster]

L O L...Haven't we all...

 

[X-Rap]

I'd go along with post 10, +- that's about what my experience has been.

 

[Danny Creasy]

I really like the Williams and Lyman aperture sights

Here is my Model 94 in .30-30 with a Williams 5D receiver sight:







Can't leave the beloved Marlins out. The Model 39A and its big but shorter brother, my 1894C in .357 Magnum:





1894's Lyman receiver sight:


39A's Williams Fool Proof:

 

[Hanshi]

My two M94s. Top an older 30/30 Trapper with a steel Lyman receiver sight. Bottom an AE Trapper .45 Colt.


Early Marlin 1895 45/70 with another steel Lyman receiver sight.


Early 1960s 39A with an old williams receiver sight.


I have a couple more receiver sights (a Lyman and a good Williams) in my shop with nothing to install them on. The AE Trapper 94 is not drilled & tapped for a receiver sight!! Makes no sense.

 

[Malamute]

There may be some other work thats worth doing if the gun doesn't group. Making sure the barrel bands or fore end cap isn't too tight and causing pressure on the barrel, fore end wood being too tight etc, can hurt, as does a poor trigger pull. All of which can be fixed relatively simply.

 

[bandk]

I have a Williams on my 30-30 Win 94 Trapper.
Very happy with accuracy at 50 & 100 yards

 

[Vern Humphrey]

I can usually shrink my group sizes in half switching from barrel mounted rear sights to a receiver sight.

That's about right.

I have a Williams 5D receiver sight on my 94 Winchester. I put it on when the 5D cost $5.00, so you figure it's been there almost 50 years.

 

[shrewd]

are you set on a Williams?

If the top of your receiver is D&T'd you can go with skinner sights

They really look slick and have great QC.

 

[Danny Creasy]

The top of a Model 94's receiver is the bolt.

 

[jr_roosa]

are you set on a Williams?

If the top of your receiver is D&T'd you can go with skinner sights

They really look slick and have great QC.

I have 2 mounting holes on the side of the receiver towards the back. I think the angle eject is the one tapped on the top too.

The top of a Model 94's receiver is the bolt.

There are small rails on each side with the bolt in between. There is enough room to drill and tap if the screw is small enough.

-J.

 

[Danny Creasy]

My point is that:

The Skinner rear sights are all designed to be mounted along the center axis of the firearm. A Model 94 receiver sight has to be side mounted like a Williams or Lyman or possibly use a tang mounted peep sight.

Skinner does make a aperture sight that mounts on the barrel of the open toped Rossi repros. It replaces the factory open rear sight.

I stand corrected:

I checked Skinner's web site and it does look like they make a sight that rides on the two thin sides of the receiver. However, any model other than the AE (angle eject) requires gunsmithing.

http://www.skinnersights.com/winchester_26.html

Is your 94 a pre-64? I would think long and hard before cutting on a pre-64. Although, somebody may have already taken that step with the aforementioned scope side mount.

 

[rondog]

The AE Trapper 94 is not drilled & tapped for a receiver sight!! Makes no sense.

Odd. The .45 Colt Trapper? My .44 Mag. AE Trapper is D&T'd, it's a 1994 model.

 

[35 Whelen]

If you Shoot High Power, then you know the answer to the question; there simply is no comparison with regards to aperture vs. open sights.

If you're not sure, buy the el cheapo William's 5D and try it. That particular sight is designed to be set and left alone, so you could mount it, set it and work up loads. It doesn't matter if you don't hit the bull with every load because you'd be shooting for groups.

Also, lose the glitzy gold bead and replace it with a good Patridge type sight...just like in High Power.

35W

 

[jr_roosa]

If you Shoot High Power, then you know the answer to the question; there simply is no comparison with regards to aperture vs. open sights.

I guess you're right. On the other hand, I don't think I have a good grasp on the magnitude of the difference. Maybe I need to put an open sight way out on the barrel of one of my Garands and see how much accuracy goes down?

Is your 94 a pre-64?

Nope, 1979ish vintage. The holes are already there from the factory. In fact I needed to buy plug screws to fill the holes once I took off the old scope. I already had to re-finish the stock from where some dope did a little carving with a screwdriver or something. Thanks Bubba!

Also, lose the glitzy gold bead and replace it with a good Patridge type sight

Tempting...I'll have to track down one of those, maybe with some sort of a line on the front since deer don't have nice buff-colored paper around them to help get a clean sight picture like a match target. The dark sight on a dark background disappears a little for me.

-J.