lyman side mount vs skinner barrel mount

Williams makes nice side mount receiver sights also.

Oh ok all the Williams ones I found used the scope mounts

Get the Lyman if buying new. Best would be to check gun shows and other enablers for an older 50s or 60s vintage Lyman or even a nice old Redfield.

As for the Williams, it comes both ways-side or scope holes. If you can find an older Lyman (I think they were all steel until several years ago) or Redfield, that would be my choice. If you have to go with the new alunimum Lyman, I recommend the Williams over it. They just seem tighter and more precice to me. Good luck, Jack

If you're going to buy new get the Williams FP 9436 model....it mounts to the side of your reciever. They're better than the newer Lymans IMO. You can order them direct from Williams Gun Sights if they are out of stock else where.
If you want an older one look for a Lyman or Redfield

Theres more than just sight radius making the reciever sight a better option. The closer to your eye the aperture is the easier it is to use. On the barrel you look at it & thru it. On the reciever you just look thru it, you cant see it really. I prefer the Williams as well.

yea im leaning towards the reciever sight as it will probably be more accurate but since my barrel has dovetails already cut i was thinking it would look cleaner it i used the skinner.Any one use the skinner barrel mount that want to throw in an opinion on how it works.

yea i think that i will probably get the filler and try to blend it in so its very hard to see. Luckily im going to be reblueing the whole rifle so i don't have to worry about matching finishes.

The Lyman and Williams also use the most commonly encountered apertures too. I'm not sure about the older Redfields, they may be a different thread than the other two. If you're looking for accuracy you'll end up going to the smallest aperture you can use, it sharpens the front sight up nicely. This is why most folks shooting over the course use apertures of .036 to .040", not the larger .055" or so. Another reason to consider the receiver mounted versions for accuracy work. With a peep out at longer distance you'll not be able to take advantage of the sharpening ability of the small aperture. The barrel mounted peep works well though with a large aperture for hunting big game, but thats hardly precision work.

Doubletap said:

The Lyman and Williams also use the most commonly encountered apertures too. I'm not sure about the older Redfields, they may be a different thread than the other two.

Click to expand...

You can put a Williams aperture in a Redfield, prefer the twilight ones myself

There we go, learned something new again! Thanks for the info, I'll put that to use.

The other apertures fit a Skinner peep too. I do have a Skinner barrel mounted peep on my 1894 25/20, but only because its an antique & not set up for a side mounted Williams or Lyman. I like it ok but its not the same.
As far as the filler goes I make them from old sights. I shape the rear to match the front, blue & install it. I need to get some pics of them. IMO it looks better than the ones you can buy and you cant beat the price. Since your getting things blued anyway I'd strongly suggest you go that route. Filling the dovetail & dressing it to make it unnoticeable is a good option too but I like my way better. ;D

Is this the .219 project rifle I read about on the firing line .com?

yea i am on the firing line too and have been documenting the build over there, i need to update the thread i started on here.

You might take a quick read of this review of the barrel-mounted peep sight :
http://www.marlinowners.com/forums/index.php/topic,78733.0.html

I bought one, tried it, and like it.
If you're used to the factory sights, then the barrel-mount peep feels natural.
Like the reviewer, I removed the threaded insert.

wow thanks for that review. I know that the reciever sight would be more accurate, but the skinner sight looks very clean.

That Skinner does look good. But, I think my recommendation would be for the receiver mounted aperture. The increased sight radius alone is enough reason to do it.

If you work out one handload and use it at varying distances a Lyman 66 works well and you can scribe lines on the Lyman scale to match varying yardages.

If you work out a couple of hand loads say a top end jacketed and a plinker with jacketed or cast again the Lyman 66 shines. Zero the top end load set the little set screw that bottoms out on the action, set the side scale at zero. Next raise the sight to zero the plinker load, scribe a line on the side scale to show where the zero is. Now to switch back and forth all you have to do is push the quick adjust button on the side of the sight and lower to the set screw for you top end zero, raise it to the scribed line for the plinker. Just a push of the button.

What you are building I figure begs for a good quality tang sight, and globe front.