Dark Alley Dan
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Darkest Edmonton
TA-DAAAA!
My new M92 Baby Carbine is almost ready for the range test.
Well done, sir. Very well done indeed!
UPDATE: Rossi Ranch Hand Mares Leg
- Thread starter driller212
- Start date
Well done, sir. Very well done indeed!
- Location
- Southern Vancouver Island
Well done, sir. Very well done indeed!
Thankyou Sir!
It was your pic of that purdy little "Rare Winchester" that got
me goin' in the right direction on this build.
I just need the ladder rear sight to finish 'er up proper.
Shell-Shucker,
Have you (or has anybody) been able to physically confirm that the notch in that Chiappa ladder sight is low enough to do the trick? Is there any way of knowing how its lowest setting compares to the lowest settings in the Steve's Gunz "low buckhorn" and Steve's Gunz "low flat-top" replacement sights?
I wonder if those two sights from Steve's Gunz are identical in that regard.
Boomer
Have you (or has anybody) been able to physically confirm that the notch in that Chiappa ladder sight is low enough to do the trick? Is there any way of knowing how its lowest setting compares to the lowest settings in the Steve's Gunz "low buckhorn" and Steve's Gunz "low flat-top" replacement sights?
I wonder if those two sights from Steve's Gunz are identical in that regard.
Boomer
- Location
- Southern Vancouver Island
Boomer,
I've been scouring the web on this for some time now and folks on the Paco Kelly's
and leverguns community sites have been saying that the dovetail size on Chiappas
are .390". I figure that it's a safe bet that all of the Italian levergun replicas
would be this size because they, like Brazil operate on metric measurement.
US gunmakers work in inches. That's the Buggaboo.
As for sight height the Chiappa ladder sight is plenty low enough to get you in the ballpark
as it's a very close match to the sight on the Winchester "Baby Carbine".
Steve's low flat-top looks to be a good bet too. Give him a shout to be sure.
This sight is a Marbles unit I reckon, but confirm it with Steve.
SS
I've been scouring the web on this for some time now and folks on the Paco Kelly's
and leverguns community sites have been saying that the dovetail size on Chiappas
are .390". I figure that it's a safe bet that all of the Italian levergun replicas
would be this size because they, like Brazil operate on metric measurement.
US gunmakers work in inches. That's the Buggaboo.
As for sight height the Chiappa ladder sight is plenty low enough to get you in the ballpark
as it's a very close match to the sight on the Winchester "Baby Carbine".
Steve's low flat-top looks to be a good bet too. Give him a shout to be sure.
This sight is a Marbles unit I reckon, but confirm it with Steve.
SS
Last edited:
Shell-Shucker,
I wasn't curious to know if the dovetail would be a good fit. I'm sure that the .390 Chiappa sight will be fine.
I was just wondering how the minimum height in the "sighting-notch" of the ladder sight compared to the minimum height of the "sighting notch" in the Steve's Gunz/Marble's low flat-top.
In the FAQ section of the Steve's Gunz website, he claims that the low flat-top (or low buckhorn) ... in combination with his "higher" front sight ... will get you "in the ballpark" (whatever that means) with the Ranch Hand.
One thing about that comment makes me a bit uneasy. Although the RH comment was made one day before a similar Rossi 92 carbine comment, I'm pretty sure that he first made that conclusion in reference to the carbine-length Rossi 92's (which he'd been tweaking for years), and then just re-applied it word-for-word to the shorter/newer Ranch Hand. How could something which gets you "in the ballpark" with a regular carbine sight-radius also work similarly with the RH's 10" sight-radius. That's a pretty big assumption, right?
I wasn't curious to know if the dovetail would be a good fit. I'm sure that the .390 Chiappa sight will be fine.
I was just wondering how the minimum height in the "sighting-notch" of the ladder sight compared to the minimum height of the "sighting notch" in the Steve's Gunz/Marble's low flat-top.
In the FAQ section of the Steve's Gunz website, he claims that the low flat-top (or low buckhorn) ... in combination with his "higher" front sight ... will get you "in the ballpark" (whatever that means) with the Ranch Hand.
One thing about that comment makes me a bit uneasy. Although the RH comment was made one day before a similar Rossi 92 carbine comment, I'm pretty sure that he first made that conclusion in reference to the carbine-length Rossi 92's (which he'd been tweaking for years), and then just re-applied it word-for-word to the shorter/newer Ranch Hand. How could something which gets you "in the ballpark" with a regular carbine sight-radius also work similarly with the RH's 10" sight-radius. That's a pretty big assumption, right?
Last edited:
It's pretty easy to adjust most rear sights up and file the steps in the ladder to work with your favorite load........a higher based front sight is the answer!
Getting the sight line higher up will make for a more natural cheek weld as well for guys that want to use a full stock, and it will also improve the hold for people shooting with the short stock.
The sight line with the factory front sight of the ranchhand feels like a shotgun where you are basically looking just above the receiver and bolt.
I have a Rossi trapper that has a factory .5 front sight(which would still be to low on a ranchhand).....why Rossi chose to use an even shorter front sight for the ranch hand is beyond comprehension!
Getting the sight line higher up will make for a more natural cheek weld as well for guys that want to use a full stock, and it will also improve the hold for people shooting with the short stock.
The sight line with the factory front sight of the ranchhand feels like a shotgun where you are basically looking just above the receiver and bolt.
I have a Rossi trapper that has a factory .5 front sight(which would still be to low on a ranchhand).....why Rossi chose to use an even shorter front sight for the ranch hand is beyond comprehension!
- Location
- Southern Vancouver Island
All we can do is assume until we get the parts in our hands and
start experimenting with front and rear sight combos. I'm working on
that as we speak, but it won't be cheap for me at least cause I'll
be buying and range testing sights 'till I get it bang on.
Then of course, I'll blab it to the CGN world.
"I have a Rossi Trapper that has a factory .5 front sight (which would still be too low on a Ranch Hand) ... why Rossi chose to use an even shorter front sight for the Ranch Hand is beyond comprehension!"
Can-down, it may sound unbelievable, but the only possible rationale (that I can imagine) would be appearance/aesthetics. But it's soooo hard to believe that the manufacturer would consciously sacrifice function for aesthetics. On a hat, maybe ... but not on a parachute or firearm!
I'm eagerly waiting for a follow-up "range report" from Tall Guy, now that he's got his Steve's Gunz low flat-top rear sight all sorted-out and symmetrical. He's using it with the bit-taller Steve's Gunz front fiber-optic sight ... exactly the combo that Gary's gunsmith in B.C. is now (I hope
) finally mounting/testing on my Ranch Hand.
Can-down, it may sound unbelievable, but the only possible rationale (that I can imagine) would be appearance/aesthetics. But it's soooo hard to believe that the manufacturer would consciously sacrifice function for aesthetics. On a hat, maybe ... but not on a parachute or firearm!
I'm eagerly waiting for a follow-up "range report" from Tall Guy, now that he's got his Steve's Gunz low flat-top rear sight all sorted-out and symmetrical. He's using it with the bit-taller Steve's Gunz front fiber-optic sight ... exactly the combo that Gary's gunsmith in B.C. is now (I hope
) finally mounting/testing on my Ranch Hand.
Last edited:
guess_kto
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Brantfort, ON
Cut down stock issue #2
I appreciate your gracious back pedalling boomer49. There was something else really bothering me about the ranch hand and after handling it a bit more it became obvious...cycling a follow up round! Without the the rifle planted into my shoulder cycling the action for a follow up round was awkward, the rifle has to come away from the firing position, cycle the round and re-aim. Bad ju-ju if you need a lightning fast 2nd, 3rd shot...But it's still a hell of a rifle!
[/url] Ranch Hand_1 by sunstruck1, on Flickr[/IMG]
I appreciate your gracious back pedalling boomer49. There was something else really bothering me about the ranch hand and after handling it a bit more it became obvious...cycling a follow up round! Without the the rifle planted into my shoulder cycling the action for a follow up round was awkward, the rifle has to come away from the firing position, cycle the round and re-aim. Bad ju-ju if you need a lightning fast 2nd, 3rd shot...But it's still a hell of a rifle!
A" bungie" style single point sling attached to the saddle ring helps keep the butt end up when cycling the action.
I also find that pushing down and forward on the big loop helps but you need to hold firm with the front hand to keep the rifle from getting torqued up. Pushing the lever hand forward in the direction of the bottom right corner of the ammo box in your picture is how I like to cycle it...you can't do that with a regular shaped lever.
I was planning on replacing or at least resizing the big loop but I've found it to help with the offhand cycling more then I anticipated.
I also find that pushing down and forward on the big loop helps but you need to hold firm with the front hand to keep the rifle from getting torqued up. Pushing the lever hand forward in the direction of the bottom right corner of the ammo box in your picture is how I like to cycle it...you can't do that with a regular shaped lever.
I was planning on replacing or at least resizing the big loop but I've found it to help with the offhand cycling more then I anticipated.
Buddy writes ...
"I appreciate your gracious back pedalling boomer49. There was something else really bothering me about the ranch hand and after handling it a bit more it became obvious...cycling a follow up round! Without the the rifle planted into my shoulder cycling the action for a follow up round was awkward, the rifle has to come away from the firing position, cycle the round and re-aim."
I wasn't back-pedaling (note the correct spelling ... yes I'm a prick) ... just noting that I'd been sarcastic and snarky when I'd read your wild-west comment ...
"The stock stock is useless, I instinctively shoulder any longarm I'm shooting. The cutdown stock is a gimmick and for me hinders fast, instinctive shooting. If you hipshoot it's fine but I see no downside to installing a regular length stock."
WTF? Hipshooting?
And that is what made me give you a (sarcastic/snarky) smack. Deal with it. It was kinda harsh/cruel ... but life goes on.
I learned how to ####/reload (off the shoulder) a lever gun in about 1962. A too-big-for-me Daisy ...
And who needs a second shot anyways?
I have always shot chargin bears in the left eye-socket ... or the right (dependin upon the angle of attack) ... and the excitement has nevah bin matched.
The precedin blue text has been written in a Mark Twain Missoura accent
"I appreciate your gracious back pedalling boomer49. There was something else really bothering me about the ranch hand and after handling it a bit more it became obvious...cycling a follow up round! Without the the rifle planted into my shoulder cycling the action for a follow up round was awkward, the rifle has to come away from the firing position, cycle the round and re-aim."
I wasn't back-pedaling (note the correct spelling ... yes I'm a prick) ... just noting that I'd been sarcastic and snarky when I'd read your wild-west comment ...
"The stock stock is useless, I instinctively shoulder any longarm I'm shooting. The cutdown stock is a gimmick and for me hinders fast, instinctive shooting. If you hipshoot it's fine but I see no downside to installing a regular length stock."
WTF? Hipshooting?
And that is what made me give you a (sarcastic/snarky) smack. Deal with it. It was kinda harsh/cruel ... but life goes on.
I learned how to ####/reload (off the shoulder) a lever gun in about 1962. A too-big-for-me Daisy ...
And who needs a second shot anyways?
I have always shot chargin bears in the left eye-socket ... or the right (dependin upon the angle of attack) ... and the excitement has nevah bin matched.
The precedin blue text has been written in a Mark Twain Missoura accent
- Location
- Edmonchuk
you two need to cool it, because if this escalates and you get my precious thread locked, I am coming for you
Just exactly how many bears have you shot defensively boomer? And why did you shoot them when they charged you? Almost all charges are bluff charges. That's what bear spray is for. I avoid bear charges by making a lot of noise in the bush, and it seems to be working damn well, only problem is noise seems to attract the curious hungry ones haha, hence why I have the ranch hand. I only intend to use it if I am being stalked and the bear won't react to bear spray or warning shots.
Just my opinion of course based on what I have learned in the bush first hand, what people have told me from their experiences, and in bear education programs.
This is my process with bears:
Banger
Spray
Warning shot
Kill shot
I have never had to use anything past the banger yet.
You must have some damn good skills to shoot a charging bear in the eye let alone hit its head.
Just exactly how many bears have you shot defensively boomer? And why did you shoot them when they charged you? Almost all charges are bluff charges. That's what bear spray is for. I avoid bear charges by making a lot of noise in the bush, and it seems to be working damn well, only problem is noise seems to attract the curious hungry ones haha, hence why I have the ranch hand. I only intend to use it if I am being stalked and the bear won't react to bear spray or warning shots.
Just my opinion of course based on what I have learned in the bush first hand, what people have told me from their experiences, and in bear education programs.
This is my process with bears:
Banger
Spray
Warning shot
Kill shot
I have never had to use anything past the banger yet.
You must have some damn good skills to shoot a charging bear in the eye let alone hit its head.
- Location
- Edmonchuk
well that would make a hell of a lot more sense lol. I always take posts seriously on here. I seem to lack a sarcasm detector.
I gotta have at least one smart a$$ post a day, I mean come on
I gotta have at least one smart a$$ post a day, I mean come on
Totally joking ...
Yes ... absolutely
I think that I was semi-quoting Goldfinger from one of Ian Fleming's novels.
I added the "bear" references ... replacing "men" and ... obviously ... the Missourra-inflected spellin and inflections are totally un-genuine
Yes ... absolutely
I think that I was semi-quoting Goldfinger from one of Ian Fleming's novels.
I added the "bear" references ... replacing "men" and ... obviously ... the Missourra-inflected spellin and inflections are totally un-genuine
Last edited:
- Location
- Vancouver BC
Wait a minute - are you telling us you're NOT from missorura?
(boys - get a rope... )
- Location
- Edmonchuk
We don't take kindly to your type round here
Foxer's banned????
Damn,
Foxer always appears to be calm and smart ... and drinking coffee/tea.
So, today he "calls-out" some newbie idiot about flouting the law ... who's proudly chirping about selling firearms without regard to the licensing laws.
And Foxer uses harsh words like "moron" and "dips**t"
And (ahem) he's totally correct. I would have used worse.
Foxer knows how most CGN'ers feel, but he (quietly) senses how the huge majority of smart Canadians who are uninvolved but open-minded about all these firearms issues.
And now he's been tossed/banned by CGN for scolding a drooly knuckle-dragging Ryerson-trained NDP sister-poking idiot who's merrily breaking (and apparently bragging-about ... on CGN!) the remaining and reasonable (in my minority opinion) PAL regs?
OK OK ... I was harsh about them Ryerson comments.
Damn,
Foxer always appears to be calm and smart ... and drinking coffee/tea.
So, today he "calls-out" some newbie idiot about flouting the law ... who's proudly chirping about selling firearms without regard to the licensing laws.
And Foxer uses harsh words like "moron" and "dips**t"
And (ahem) he's totally correct. I would have used worse.
Foxer knows how most CGN'ers feel, but he (quietly) senses how the huge majority of smart Canadians who are uninvolved but open-minded about all these firearms issues.
And now he's been tossed/banned by CGN for scolding a drooly knuckle-dragging Ryerson-trained NDP sister-poking idiot who's merrily breaking (and apparently bragging-about ... on CGN!) the remaining and reasonable (in my minority opinion) PAL regs?
OK OK ... I was harsh about them Ryerson comments.
Last edited:
