Just picked up a Zastava LM85, want to install a peep sight
- Thread starter deanyang
- Start date
- Location
- Western Manitoba
XS Sights or whatever they are called these days made a rear aperture "ghost ring" sight that would mount in place of the rear scope base - probably using the factory drilled and tapped scope base holes. NOTE: I have XS Sight #22-2015A-058-1 which uses two mounting holes 0.605" centre to centre - I have not yet found a factory rifle with that hole spacing for a rear scope base. There is at least one maker who makes a rear aperture sight that clamps onto a Weaver style rear scope base - I do not readily remember the maker's name. Alternatively, Lyman makes a #57 SME Aperture sight - you drill and tap two holes on right sight - ahead of the bolt - fasten the base to the rifle, then the cross arm comes over top of rear bridge and is adjustable for windage and elevation on that base unit.
A most rudimentary one can be made and installed - look up how Finn Aargaard had a "L" shaped metal strap installed on his first Win 70 in 375 H&H - worked fine, as per him. No clue how they established the precise height to drill the aperture hole, but from pictures, there is only one hole there. Picture of Aargaard's rifle stolen from Internet:
If you really wanted to get super funky crazy and also replace the front sight, this is a Parker Hale PH5B 2 as they used on their 1200 TX 7.62 NATO rifles - it includes a bracket that attaches to the two scope base mount holes on the rear bridge. This Parker Hale rifle is using a very similar commercial Mauser 98 pattern action as is on your Zastava - might even have been made at the same factory, some years apart. I understand that the identical rear sight and bracket was supplied by Parker Hale on the Canadian C3 sniper rifles - the guys carried the front and rear aperture sights, with them, in their Kahles scope carry box.
A most rudimentary one can be made and installed - look up how Finn Aargaard had a "L" shaped metal strap installed on his first Win 70 in 375 H&H - worked fine, as per him. No clue how they established the precise height to drill the aperture hole, but from pictures, there is only one hole there. Picture of Aargaard's rifle stolen from Internet:
If you really wanted to get super funky crazy and also replace the front sight, this is a Parker Hale PH5B 2 as they used on their 1200 TX 7.62 NATO rifles - it includes a bracket that attaches to the two scope base mount holes on the rear bridge. This Parker Hale rifle is using a very similar commercial Mauser 98 pattern action as is on your Zastava - might even have been made at the same factory, some years apart. I understand that the identical rear sight and bracket was supplied by Parker Hale on the Canadian C3 sniper rifles - the guys carried the front and rear aperture sights, with them, in their Kahles scope carry box.
Attachments
Last edited:
- Location
- Western Manitoba
Go here: https://www.weaveroptics.com/on/dem...PdfFiles/weaverPdf/2016_WeaverMountsChart.pdf
You won't find "Zastava" listed - look at "Mauser" - typically Weaver #45 used as rear base on a large ring Mauser 98 of the commercial style - like made by FN and others - that is what your Zastava appears to be. I do not have a #23 to compare to a #45 - it might work - I do not know. Pretty standard to use #46 as front base and #45 as rear base, unless someone got a little happy with a file when removing the charger guide ridge on a military receiver.
EDIT: I have a couple charts about Weaver bases - radius of underside, height, hole spacing - none of the charts list a Weaver #23 base, at all, so no help to compare that way with a Weaver #45 base.
Last edited:
- Location
- Western Manitoba
I have used enough Weaver #45 - they are 0.505" centre to centre - so maybe you are on to something with the Weaver #23 - I have not found their dimensions, yet. As per Post #9, Hitzy says they were used with 71A on the Remington 799. I never had one to do that with.
- Location
- Western Manitoba
Hmm. Hole spacing obviously not correct. There are Weaver bases - rear one for Remington 788 - #76 - that use just one hole, but it is pretty much dead centre in that base. Also need to verify that the curve/contour underneath that base matches to the curve on the rear bridge. That the top flats on that rear base make a plane with the top flats of it's partner front base. That the bolt will open when that base is installed. The Weaver chart that I mentioned above gives those dimensions - hole spacing, radius of curve underneath, height of the base at it's narrowest point. For Mausers, the rear base often gets the back right corner cut off or filed off at an angle to the line of the attaching screws, to allow the bolt handle to travel up /down.
Each of these is more commonly dealt with when trying to attach a base to a former military rifle - often the grind job or polish job on the top of receiver makes some interesting challenges to get the scope bases solidly attached, and with their tops in a plane, and their sides in a straight line. That might involve metal shims or epoxy to build up or tilt a base. One piece bases often subject to same issues - they bend or twist as the screws get tightened down - so do not end up with true mounting for the rings - shows up when you use a lapping bar in the lower ring saddles and see that the rings are not the same height, or or not in a straight line to each other. There are several used rifles that I bought that have three holes drilled and tapped in rear bridge - obvious to me someone changed their mind about which base they were going to install, and made a third hole to "make it fit".
Last edited:
Or you could just buy the correct bases instead of pulling random ones based on numbers thrown out by guys on the internet
This rifle is not a Mauser it’s a SAKO vixen clone
Again, why on earth would you buy bases to install a peep, NECG or some kind of ace on the hole type deal are the only options I can think of for that and I have been there done that. Expensive, or require gunsmithing
Save your money, buy a lo-pro from skinner sights, make another thread asking how to adjust your front sight probably, be happy
This rifle is not a Mauser it’s a SAKO vixen clone
Again, why on earth would you buy bases to install a peep, NECG or some kind of ace on the hole type deal are the only options I can think of for that and I have been there done that. Expensive, or require gunsmithing
Save your money, buy a lo-pro from skinner sights, make another thread asking how to adjust your front sight probably, be happy
I really like the quick option of going from a low power scope with quick detach rings to the low removable XS sight for Weaver bases, my preference for a permanent peep would also be something like the XS with wings so it does not snag on scabbards cases etc. but limited model coverage, I have the Williams WGRS FN on a Husky 1900 30-06, the Skinner [I think] on a Henry 45 70, and whatever came on my Gunsite Scout [I removed the scout scope base], I am tempted to try the Lo Pro on a shortened Husky 9.3x62 M46 but I am not sure if I can find a higher front blade to go with it and at present it has the folding leaf for 100, 200 and 300 yards. I know there are some good Gunsmiths out there but I have also spent too much money and time on poor workmanship, a lot of the satisfaction I get from this hobby/obsession is fumbling around myself with and without advice on the things I think I can handle, plus when I screw up a Gunsmith will probably make more money correcting my mistakes. I wish the use of a peep sight had been better explained when I was young, my experience was always with some angry old man who was wishing He was somewhere else, turned me off peep sights for a couple of decades.
I could see wanting to switch from QD scope to peep. I have a rifle set up like this. I think in practice it is much more likely I will always use the scope for hunting purposes. YMMV
It sounds like op is relatively new to firearms. A simple working solution is probably best. All I’m saying, do whatever you want with your guns
I used to really like the idea of wings, somehow in all the bush bashing I do I have never damaged a wingless sight. I have lost sight inserts but I started using thread locker if I wanted to keep them on. Honestly I don’t find they make much difference unless they are very, very fine and then quick target acquisition suffers. I don’t draw my rifle from a scabbard, if I used a quad or something I might have a different opinion but I doubt it. They do look cool though
As above “ seriously go with the lo-pro”.
It sounds like op is relatively new to firearms. A simple working solution is probably best. All I’m saying, do whatever you want with your guns
I used to really like the idea of wings, somehow in all the bush bashing I do I have never damaged a wingless sight. I have lost sight inserts but I started using thread locker if I wanted to keep them on. Honestly I don’t find they make much difference unless they are very, very fine and then quick target acquisition suffers. I don’t draw my rifle from a scabbard, if I used a quad or something I might have a different opinion but I doubt it. They do look cool though
As above “ seriously go with the lo-pro”.
