I am interested in opinions regarding the pros/cons of the vintage steel Lyman vs. Redfield receiver sights on the Model 94/64 Winchester. I have come in possession of a nice old Model 64 Winchester and would like to mount a receiver sight.

The receiver sights look pretty similar in appearance. Is there any meaningful difference in their function? This is a rifle I do intend to hunt with.

Thanks for any help,
Wayne E.

An all-steel receiver sight by either maker will be attractive and functional. The alloy base of the current Lyman or the all-alloy Williams will look out of place on a pre-64 gun, though it will be just as functional. For best work with an aperture sight I like a flat topped post front sight. Back in the day a fella could buy a patridge replacement blade with a brass insert set at a 45 degree angle to catch the light; a good setup.

quote:

Originally posted by nordrseta:
An all-steel receiver sight by either maker will be attractive and functional. The alloy base of the current Lyman or the all-alloy Williams will look out of place on a pre-64 gun, though it will be just as functional. For best work with an aperture sight I like a flat topped post front sight. Back in the day a fella could buy a patridge replacement blade with a brass insert set at a 45 degree angle to catch the light; a good setup.

I have in my hand a current production Lyman sight and I'd love to know what this "aluminum base" comment is about because aside from the screws and apature thesight is entirely alminum.

However unlike the Williams aluminum sight the Lyman is not designed to be made of aluminum
so it winds up being kinda delicate compared to the Williams....

Looking at Vintage Lyman or Redfield sights
(I have both on other rifles) the differences are subtle and generally insignificant.

My 1973 win 94 wears a williams, because I haven't found a Lyman for a price I'm willing
to pay... But the williams is "period correct"
for my winchester....

Then again so was the Weaver K4-2 I took off of it and mounted on my 1972 Marlin 1895.

AD

Thank you for the responses, gentlemen.

Wayne E.

Since your going to hunt with it, use the Williams, I like the idea that the adjustments cannot be monkied with by curious hands that like to twist things that twist!!

If you can find an all steel Lyman or Redfield and they are around you might like it better, but of the newer makes I'd opt for the Williams.

You can get the old Redfield Sourdough front sights from Brownell now, and the NECG partridge sights with a gold face come in different heights and both are excellent when paired with a receiver sight...

The only Lyman I've seen was on a modern Henry .22RF. It wouldn't stop wobbling. My M94 Williams has a dovetail fit to the base, this Lyman didn't have, but needed it.

But I wish the Williams I have did have micro adjustments. The markings are quite fine and a small adjustment makes a fair difference, so it takes a while with a screw driver to get it right. Ray lends his to his kid/grandkid so that's his problem. They should have their own.

CORRECTION; Make that a Lyman on a Marlin .22RF
I don't think the Henry reciever would hold anything.

quote:

Originally posted by Allan DeGroot:

quote:

Originally posted by nordrseta:
An all-steel receiver sight by either maker will be attractive and functional. The alloy base of the current Lyman

I have in my hand a current production Lyman sight and I'd love to know what this "aluminum base" comment is about because aside from the screws and apature thesight is entirely alminum.

Hmmn, maybe "current" wasn't the right word. The Lyman I put on my Guide Gun in 1998 has an alloy base but the inverted L-shaped whatchamacallit the aperture and adjustments ride on is made of steel.

I got my "late" Lyman 66LA sight in 2005 it was ALL aluminum as described above.

I don't have a problem with the aluminum base so much, but the "L" shaped piece being made of aluminum turn the lyman from a "Good" sight into a complete Piece-of-Shit.

I am fervently hoping that someone from Lyman is reading this.

I cannot believe that the sight is materially cheaper to make from aluminum than steel, if anything it's false economy.

I'm sure their loss of sales swallows any savings in material costs

AD