357 1894 Scope Height

MGTom · Post by **MGTom** » Wed Jun 11, 2008 10:17 pm

Hi,

I have a 1894 in 357 and decided to scope it since I have a nice little Weaver 2.5 available.

I am using the usual Weaver 63 base and some unknown rings. The setup looks great (for a handle) but it seems I
just can't see thru it without lifting my face off the stock a little. I would also like to move the scope foreward but
there is no room for movement. My cheeks are plump enough so don't suggest I fatten up!

Any ideas?

Tom

El Chivo · Post by **El Chivo** » Thu Jun 12, 2008 3:38 am

Get one of those leather buttstock cartridge cases, lay your cheek on that.

I almost scoped my 1894, but thought the scope looked too big for the gun. It now has a tang sight which actually works very well, despite the short barrel.

Post by **Old Savage** » Thu Jun 12, 2008 10:30 am

This works perfectly for me as do the others. I think they are all on Weavers except the one is a Warne on their bases.

CowboyTutt · Post by **CowboyTutt** » Thu Jun 12, 2008 10:39 am

Arrrggh! That many leverguns ruined with a scope on them in one pic simply hurts my eyes! One at at time, please!

-Tutt

Rusty · Post by **Rusty** » Thu Jun 12, 2008 11:53 am

Would a shorter set of rings work?

cshold · Post by **cshold** » Thu Jun 12, 2008 3:32 pm

I love my little Weaver K3 wide field.

And yes EEE-Gads on a lever, and a Win. at that.

Post by **Old Savage** » Thu Jun 12, 2008 8:44 pm

Here is a better look at mine. If you want to meet me at A Place to Shoot you can try it. Fits me pretty well - we are similar in size as I recall from the get together.

MGTom · Post by **MGTom** » Thu Jun 12, 2008 9:46 pm

Old Savage,
Your Marlin looks great. Mine looks very similar but my problems are that with the Weaver base and rings I can't move
the scope far enough forward to take advantage of the long eye relief of the Weaver 2x scope.

Also I wonder if another mount would bring the scope closer to the receiver. The scope has a straight tube at the objective end which gives loads of clearance if I could just get it a little lower.

You have a nice collection.

Tom (the MG relates to little British sports cars)

Post by **Old Savage** » Thu Jun 12, 2008 10:14 pm

My neck makes it uncomfortable to have a mount too low. The way I have it is about perfect for me - let's my neck be a little straighter up when I shoot. I never use less than medium rings. A standard Win 94 with iron sights is too low to be comfortable.

357 1894 Scope Height

357 1894 Scope Height

Re: 357 1894 Scope Height

Re: 357 1894 Scope Height

Re: 357 1894 Scope Height

Re: 357 1894 Scope Height

Re: 357 1894 Scope Height

Re: 357 1894 Scope Height

Re: 357 1894 Scope Height

Re: 357 1894 Scope Height