Marbles & Lyman Sights for R92 38/357

[Krogen]

In the last couple weeks I picked up an R92 in 38/357 with the 24" octagon barrel. I've put about 50 rounds through it and now my face hurts. I'm still grinning despite the facial discomfort. I think I'm hooked.

I plan to put a Marbles tang sight on it. I don't a the need for their improved version as I don't expect I'll need the elevation offered by the various interchangeable uprights. I'm sure open to suggestions if I'm wrong on this.

I'm also planning to use a Lyman 17 front sight. The rifle's original bead is about 0.2" high. I'm mulling over which Lyman 17 to use. I'd like a little more front sight height because it's a bit of a "scrunch" to get my cheek down on the stock with the present front sight. Lyman makes three 17's I'd consider. They're 0.404", 0.494" and 0.584" high. I'm inclined to go with the 0.584" high sight provided the Marbles tang sight has enough elevation. If I'm missing something, please advise. . . .

I will appreciate any and all comments from the group.

Thanks,

Krogen

[Ranch Dog]

I'm mulling over which Lyman 17 to use. I'd like a little more front sight height because it's a bit of a "scrunch" to get my cheek down on the stock with the present front sight. Lyman makes three 17's I'd consider. They're 0.404", 0.494" and 0.584" high. I'm inclined to go with the 0.584" high sight provided the Marbles tang sight has enough elevation. If I'm missing something, please advise. . . .

Anybody

[joec]

I went with what is offered on Steve Gunz site using the from large ivory bead front sight and the Winchester rear buckhorn on my 20" octagon barrel 45 Colt 92. So far very pleased with them. I would assume Marble and Lyman are perhaps some of the makers of the sights he offers also but don't know for sure.

[Model 52]

I used the standard Marbles tang sight on my Model 92 as well, but with a regular front sight. I found that the overly tall stock front sight limited the range of adjustment with the standard peep sight, and went with a .276" high front sight, although a .312 worked fine as well. If you are going to go with a 17A globe front then go as low as possible - the .404" 17AHB model. But if you plan on longer range shooting, I'd go the "improved" peep sight route with a taller upright.

They list the 009807 sight for the "new Rossi 92" but the 009808 sight for the Winchester Model 92/94 works fine. Either way you'll need the metric 995002 screw set rather than the 995003 set used on the Winchester 92.

If you go with the 17A front sight, I'd recommend you get the "improved" sight 991001 with the 995002 screw set, but you'll also want the "standard" upright (990110) as the sight otherwise comes with the "short" upright.

I've used the .404" 17AHB on on of Model 94's with a Lyman No 2 sight and it has adequate elevation, so that's another option, but one that reduces the windage adjustment options.

[Krogen]

Excellent advice, Model52. That was exactly what I needed to learn. Thank you!

Krogen

[Krogen]

Folks:

To close the loop, here's a range report: I did exactly as Model 52 suggested. I installed a Lyman 17AHB front sight along with a Marbles tang sight. Although I've used peeps for years, today was my first use of a tang sight. I sure like it! It brings out the best of the rifle, much more so than the semi-buckhorn factory sight. Today, I shot a series of loads with 2400 and Hornady's 158 gr flat point. I'd say the load/gun is good for 2 1/2" groups at 100 yds. I got some tighter clusters and (yep) some bigger ones, so I'm not sure how much is the gun and load vs. the nut holding the stock. A few more sessions will help with that assessment. I'm betting the gun is more capable than the shooter. There's plenty of elevation range with this setup at 100 yds. I'm glad I didn't go with a taller front sight or I may have run of of elevation range. Model 52, your advice was spot on! Thanks, my friend. My next goal will be to shoot an NRA cowboy silhouette match in August. Looking forward to it. I think I swallowed the hook; the Rossi hook, that is.



Krogen