scoping a 1895 guide 45-70

[schlockinz]

Allright, so the buckhorn sight on my marlin broke the other day, and I was considering scoping it since I have a scope laying around, and mounting it would cost about the same as a rear peep would.

With that in mind, would a 3x9x40 be too big of a scope on this gun? I've never hunted with a scoped lever action. I'd been toying with the idea of using this older leopold scope and using high mounts with a peep or buckhorn still equipped on the rifle.

I don't hunt from horseback, so fitting in a scabbard is not an issue. I intend to keep hunting pigs with this gun, and will sometimes be in the thick brush with it, but I also do go to some fields from time to time (so longer shots may occur).

I've been thinking that the low light advantages of a scope might sway me in that direction, but didn't originally think about using the 3x9 due to its lowest power being a 3, and the fact that its not a compact scope, but now since my sight is broken, and the season is here, I was thinking that this might be the fastest fix.

Any and all thoughts appreciated.

 

[MCgunner]

The gun would be better IMHO with a low power scope. Personally, I'd put a receiver aperture on it, but that's just me. a 1.5x4 or 2x7 would be appropriate power. Since you have the 3x9, it'd work, but lower power is better at shorter ranges. I really like 1.5 to 2x for quick shots in brush.

 

[bswiv]

Sounds like to much scope.............. Unless you want to invest in a more practicle one, a Red Dot being very practicle, just do as suggested and fix the irons.

 

[rcmodel]

I have a Leupold M8 EER 2x pistol scope mounted on the XS Systems Lever-Scout mount on my 1894P Guide-Gun and like it a lot.

http://www.xssights.com/store/scope.html





IMO: A 3-9 x 40 is way too much scope for a Guide-Gun!
And high see-through rings are always a mistake! Always!

If you ever need the open sights (broken scope) take the dang scope off. It only takes a minute.

rc

 

[ArmedBear]

I have an M8 2X on a pistol, and I really like it. Works a lot like iron sights, since magnification isn't too high. But it also makes point-and-shoot easier, and helps in low light. Lightweight, too.

If I did what rcmodel did, I'd use Warne QD rings. I have some on a Weatherby bolt action, and the scope pops on and off in a couple seconds, while staying zeroed. That might just be my ideal setup: a light 2X scope, XS mount, Warne QD rings, and some Skinners.

 

[schlockinz]

What about the bushnell banner 1.5x4 scopes, anyone got experience with them.

With the 3x9 that I mentioned earlier, the main kicker was that I already owned it, I figured it might help me decide on the scope vs no scope options.

As for irons, is anyone using the standard blade with a peep, if so, what are you doing for lower light (I could never really focus on the blade with the buckhorns unless it was bright out.

Lastly, I have the old buckhorns from my rem 700 somewhere, is there a chance that they would work (they'd only fit one screw w/o tapping the reciever again...)

 

[ArmedBear]

TruGlo makes fiber sights for the Marlin.

I have 39s and an 1894C, none of which I use for anything "serious" like pissed-off pigs in brush in low light. But I also have a hard time seeing the front sight in the dark with the semi-buckhorns.

A fiber sight, much as I tend not to like the things, would probably help a lot.

 

[chas08]

I once owned a .444 Marlin in the Guide Gun configuration. I had it topped with a 2X7 Leupold. It was the smaller scope and fit the gun well. I killed a few hogs with it. I had bought it used and very right, one day a co-worker made me an offer I couldn't refuse. So I sold it. As for your dilema, that 3x9 will work fine. It may look a little large on the gun, but its a Leupold so I'm sure it's more than up to the task. And as you said it's the cheapest way to go with the season upon us. You may find you dont like a scope on that type of gun at all and decide to persue another avenue. I once had see-through mounts on a Savage 99. I didn't care for them. I had to raise up off the stock to far to see through the scope and it just didn't feel right. If you do decide to buy another scope a 1.5X5 or 2X7 would fit it great.

 

[achildofthesky]

I have used both a Leupold FXII 2.5 ultralight and a Leupold VXIII 1.5x5 on my 1895s and found the variable a bit more useful but a bit heavier thant hte 2.5. I have a couple higher power scopes but try to keep the rifle compact. Do you like higher power scopes on other rifles? if so give it a whirl just be SURE that you have adequate eye relief.

Be safe
Patty

 

[Asherdan]

As for your dilema, that 3x9 will work fine. It may look a little large on the gun, but its a Leupold so I'm sure it's more than up to the task. And as you said it's the cheapest way to go with the season upon us.

Agree. Drop $15 at Walmart on two piece Weaver bases and their Quad lock rings and load 'er up. Also, give Marlin a call and have them ship you the parts you need for the buckhorn.

I went with the Weaver 1x3x20mm for my 1895G. Williams peep & sight sets are a great option too, when you have the time.

 

[schlockinz]

I have a higher power scope on my 30.06 (3x9 used to be on it) and I've liked it so far, will get to really hunt with it later on and see if its going to live up to its hype.

Gotta say, I looked at some bushnell banner scopes last night, I was amazed at the poor clearity around the edges of the scope, very apparent, but only 69.95...maybe its something I could live with.

Looked through some scout scopes as well, I'm not sure that I could really adapt to using one, the long eye relief and small field of view (in relation to my total field of view) kinda messes with me.

 

[MCgunner]

In my experience, the Banners are wanting for optics, but are strong scopes that won't break and the dials are quite repeatable. Step up to the Trophy or Elite for better optics. I have a 3x9 Trophy that impresses me for a piddlin' hundred bucks. It's on a .22 magnum. I traded for the rig. I have a 1.5x4.5 I wouldn't hesitate to use on a Marlin .45-70, but the 22 mm objective ain't great for light gathering. I have it on a .22 at the moment. I've had that thing for a long time and had it on several rifles, good scope.

A Leupold 3x9x40 would work in low light, would be superior in optics to any of the above mentioned, and yeah, you own it now. I just think the lower power stuff works better with the caliber if, in the future, you go scope hunting. I'd STILL put an aperture receiver sight on it, though, and live happy. I like the Williams or such sights on lever guns, work great. I guess I'm a little traditional.

 

[jmorris]

I have a 3-9 on my 1895 but I don't know if it's been of 3 except when sighting it in. If I still used it much I would put one of the Bushnell 1-4 scopes on it.

 

[Flyboy]

rcmodel, what rear aperture sight is that? Is that the XS aperture? I've been thinking about putting their rail and aperture on my 1895, and I'd like to know what you think of it.

 

[Asherdan]

Looks like a Williams FP with target knobs. The rail is from XS.

 

[rcmodel]

Yep!
Thats what it is alright.

The target knobs were not of my choice, and are totally unnecessary & in the way.

But I got the Williams Fool-Proof off of EvilBay for $12.00, so couldn't pass it up.

BTW: I consider the Williams receiver sight far superior to an XS Ghost Ring.
With the target aperture screwed in, it's a click adjustable target sight.
With the aperture in your pocket, it's a ghost-ring sight same as the XS.

rc

 

[schlockinz]

Welp, for $5 dollars, I couldn't pass up using the scope.

I gotta say the things looks quite nice and it doesn't feel like it really changed the balance too much. Will be taking it out to the range today to sight in at 100yd and see how I like it while shooting.