Are these original?

S

sookie_69

CGN Regular
Rating - 98.8%
81   1   0
Location
Okanagan
Had a great walk through the penticton gun show this weekend and this pretty little thing followed me home. Nice condition except for some minor blue issues and an ill fitting buttplate, which i assume was too make the stock cover sit better. Im wondering if the peep sight is original as well as the forearm? And it's in 35 rem. Thanks.

20190413_134818.jpg

20190413_134837.jpg
 

Attachments

  • 20190413_134818.jpg
    20190413_134818.jpg
    44.6 KB · Views: 1,205
  • 20190413_134837.jpg
    20190413_134837.jpg
    49.3 KB · Views: 1,213
I watched you buy that rifle.

The fore end is original. The rifle could have been ordered with that Lyman rear sight from the factory. Hard to say. More than likely, it's an add on.
 
Buckhorns would be original and a tang peep would be the proper factory upgrade or dealer add on. I am sure it is usable but a Lyman on a lever gun just looks wrong imo. Probably looks wrong to you also which is why you are asking.
 
sookie_69 said:
That is correct sir.... looks a little goofy on there. Even the forend seems weird. But i wanted to try the 35.
Click to expand...
Lose the scope and leather butt thingy and you will find that Lyman receiver sight to be a very useful addition to the rifle. They work great.
 
35 rem is my favourite.
If you hunt deer or black bear in the Bush under 150 yards, you will love it.
If you can’t seem to fall in love with it, hit me up, maybe I will buy it from you minus the jewels.
 
That big bellied fore wood reflects the era before the scope base holes were drilled
on the top of the receiver...…………...or there abouts.
 
Garaldtao said:
Buckhorns would be original and a tang peep would be the proper factory upgrade or dealer add on. I am sure it is usable but a Lyman on a lever gun just looks wrong imo. Probably looks wrong to you also which is why you are asking.
Click to expand...


I put receiver sights on a 1957 Winchester '94 and improved its accuracy enormously. I was also give a Sears 45 (Marlin 336-see photo) in seized incomplete condition with no sights and I restored it and put a receiver sight on that too when scoping didn't work well. Works and looks cool. Was the peep sight original on the OP's marlin? No.
 
Thanks for the help everyone. Im gonna dump a box through it and see how i like it. It would be one of the smallest calibers in the pack.... besides the 22.
 
SHELL SHUCKER said:
That's the way I set up my past .35 Rem Marlins & they shot just beauty fer me. Best of the 35's for my use over the years.
Click to expand...

I have a Leupold 1-4 on my 336 right now for load development. It's actually a very good set up on a 336 but as soon a I get a decent load I will be replacing the scope with a receiver sight.
 
My eyes are good still. The only reason I'm not too fond of irons is because of the difficulty in goofy lighting. Ive held back on a few shots where i could see the deer on the tree line but because of the shadows and sunlight, once i lifted the rifle to sight the deer were hidden in the shadows.
 
MD said:
I put receiver sights on a 1957 Winchester '94 and improved its accuracy enormously. I was also give a Sears 45 (Marlin 336-see photo) in seized incomplete condition with no sights and I restored it and put a receiver sight on that too when scoping didn't work well. Works and looks cool. Was the peep sight original on the OP's marlin? No.
Click to expand...

Even a top mounted Skinner peep would look better than a Lyman side mount. What was the person who put that sight on, thinking!?!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom