Marbles tang sight question.

[scottz]

I'm tired of waiting on Taurus to get in the tang sight I ordered. I found a good deal on the Marbles sight on eBay that should work, hole spacing is right, but it comes in 2 different heights, low and high. Any idea which to order? Not sure of measurements, I've messaged seller to find out.

[Arktikos]

I'm tired of waiting on Taurus to get in the tang sight I ordered. I found a good deal on the Marbles sight on eBay that should work, hole spacing is right, but it comes in 2 different heights, low and high. Any idea which to order? Not sure of measurements, I've messaged seller to find out.

I'm thinking you are getting the new "improved" design like these which are ordered as two pieces, the base and the riser.
http://www.marblearms.com/improvedPeepTang.html
I sorta prefer their original, seems a little more robust..
http://www.marblearms.com/standardPeepTang.html

[scottz]

Yes, it appears to be both the base and a riser of the improved version. I went ahead and ordered it and cancelled the Taurus order. It had been on backorder for the last 6 weeks and I was told today at least another 6 to 8 weeks. I compared to your link and I did order the correct height. Now if Steve will ever return my emails about fixing the folding rear sight he sold me I will be set.

[Arktikos]

Yes, it appears to be both the base and a riser of the improved version. I went ahead and ordered it and cancelled the Taurus order. It had been on backorder for the last 6 weeks and I was told today at least another 6 to 8 weeks. I compared to your link and I did order the correct height. Now if Steve will ever return my emails about fixing the folding rear sight he sold me I will be set.

Well your post prompted me to get off the pot as I too have been waiting to find the Taurus, first for my Henry 22 and now for my Rossi. I got to checking around and found the right base for the improved Marbles on sale for $49.99, at Brownells which retailed for $86. Then I found the other half, short range upright on sale at Midway for $32, regular price around 40 i think and got the mounting screws for 7 so for around $90 I should wind up with a tang peep sight finally!

[Model 52]

I sorta prefer their original, seems a little more robust..

Same here.

----

It's a bit hit or miss getting the right sight combination but here's what worked for me.

The Marbles "standard tang sight" works fine on the 92 for most purposes. I normally drill and tap my 94s and 92 using the Winchester 1892/1894 Lyman No 2 tang sight spacing of 2.195" hole centers so that both the Marbles and Lyman sights will work. However on my 20" Rossi 92 I went with 2.250" to get the sight as high as possible on the tang as the Marbles base has a little more range than the Lyman No 2 and there is still adequate bolt clearance.

I used the 991001 sight set with the 995002 screw set on my Rossi and my Cimmaron/Armi Sport 1892 and it works fine. The rear screw is nominally a M5 x .8 x 1.815 metric screw but both times I've used it I've had to chase the thread with an M5 x .8 die as they are otherwise way to snug and you risk dinging the head trying to get it snug unless you chase the threads first. It's a little annoying, but the fault seems to be with the screw, not the rifles.

Height is where it get complicated.

My Rossi 92 had a high front sight (.472" from the bottom of the dove tail) that also gave a fairly poor sight picture as it was not real sharp or distinct. I ended up replacing it with a Marbles 103431 front sight for a 3/8" dove tail (.343" high from the bottom of the dove tail to the top of the bead, .531" wide at the base with a 1/16" gold bead). That's about as low as you can go before the sight picture starts to get compromised by the barrel band, but going to that point gave me a lot more elevation adjustment on the tang sight as much of it's range was being used up just catching up with the higher front sight originally installed. Given the profile of the barrel band on the Carbine, you'll need to grind or file a small bit off the bottom front of the sight blade to clear the band. A little cold blue and you'll never notice the change.

The Marbles "standard peep sight" has .335" of elevation adjustment range and, like mine, the odds are you'll end up very close to the top of that range with the standard front sight, leaving comparatively little elevation adjustment. On my 20" Rossi with a 25.25" sight radius, reducing the front sight by .129" gave me another 17 MOA of vertical adjustment, which along without mounting the tang sight as high as possible on the tang (2.25" hole centers), allowed enough elevation adjustment from a 100 yard zero out to about 225 yards with 150-200 yards with my particular .45 Colt 250 gr bullet at 1300 fps MV. That's plenty for my purposes.

The sight and/or riser you choose will depend on how you want to use your 92. With a lower front sight, the standard Marbles sight will give you a rifle that will easily accommodate a 150 yard zero and even with the Marbles recommended hole spacing of 2.185" you'll still have a 200 yard rifle.

With the "standard peep sight" on my 20" carbine, a 100 yard zero, the longer hole spacing and the .343 front sight, my aperture is roughly 1.83" over the tang and it maxes out about 2.23" over the tang. In comparison the the "improved tang sight" with the "standard" riser as will go up to about 2.352 above the tang so all things being equal with the 2.185" hole spacing used on both, they are probably very, very close in terms of height.

If you want longer range shooting beyond 200-225 yards, then get the "improved tang sight" with the "standard" riser, then add a "mid range" riser as it starts at 2.347" and goes up to 3.364". The problem with the "mid range" riser of course is that you probably won't be able to zero at a reasonable range like 100 yards, which is why Marbles mades them interchangeable and lets you buy the sight with either the "short" or "standard" riser.

While you are at it, it's worth ordering a standard 3/8" slot blank to fill the slot when you remove the barrel mounted rear sight, as well as 4 plug screws to fill the holes that live under the rear sight as Rossi does not include them on the gun.

[scottz]

I have the older 24", so the tang mounts are already drilled. Also, it doesn't have a dovetail front sight, it has the pinned brass blade. I already have some brass stock for replacement. Unfortunately the rear dovetail is .400"

[ironhead7544]

I think you made the right choice. I bought the Taurus tang but it is not made for the M92. It is just not strong enough. Falls over when firing the 44 Magnum. Dont see a way to improve it. A change in the design could work IF you could get Rossi to do it. The notch that holds the sight up is WAY too small and also looks like it will wear out quickly. Making one part thicker and the notch all the way across the part would improve it greatly. Probably could sell a lot of them for other rifles too at their price. JMHO.

I am going to try the Varner sight next, when I can get around to it.

[Arktikos]

I sorta prefer their original, seems a little more robust..

Same here.

----

It's a bit hit or miss getting the right sight combination but here's what worked for me.

The Marbles "standard tang sight" works fine on the 92 for most purposes. I normally drill and tap my 94s and 92 using the Winchester 1892/1894 Lyman No 2 tang sight spacing of 2.195" hole centers so that both the Marbles and Lyman sights will work. However on my 20" Rossi 92 I went with 2.250" to get the sight as high as possible on the tang as the Marbles base has a little more range than the Lyman No 2 and there is still adequate bolt clearance.

I used the 991001 sight set with the 995002 screw set on my Rossi and my Cimmaron/Armi Sport 1892 and it works fine. The rear screw is nominally a M5 x .8 x 1.815 metric screw but both times I've used it I've had to chase the thread with an M5 x .8 die as they are otherwise way to snug and you risk dinging the head trying to get it snug unless you chase the threads first. It's a little annoying, but the fault seems to be with the screw, not the rifles.

Height is where it get complicated.

My Rossi 92 had a high front sight (.472" from the bottom of the dove tail) that also gave a fairly poor sight picture as it was not real sharp or distinct. I ended up replacing it with a Marbles 103431 front sight for a 3/8" dove tail (.343" high from the bottom of the dove tail to the top of the bead, .531" wide at the base with a 1/16" gold bead). That's about as low as you can go before the sight picture starts to get compromised by the barrel band, but going to that point gave me a lot more elevation adjustment on the tang sight as much of it's range was being used up just catching up with the higher front sight originally installed. Given the profile of the barrel band on the Carbine, you'll need to grind or file a small bit off the bottom front of the sight blade to clear the band. A little cold blue and you'll never notice the change.

The Marbles "standard peep sight" has .335" of elevation adjustment range and, like mine, the odds are you'll end up very close to the top of that range with the standard front sight, leaving comparatively little elevation adjustment. On my 20" Rossi with a 25.25" sight radius, reducing the front sight by .129" gave me another 17 MOA of vertical adjustment, which along without mounting the tang sight as high as possible on the tang (2.25" hole centers), allowed enough elevation adjustment from a 100 yard zero out to about 225 yards with 150-200 yards with my particular .45 Colt 250 gr bullet at 1300 fps MV. That's plenty for my purposes.

The sight and/or riser you choose will depend on how you want to use your 92. With a lower front sight, the standard Marbles sight will give you a rifle that will easily accommodate a 150 yard zero and even with the Marbles recommended hole spacing of 2.185" you'll still have a 200 yard rifle.

With the "standard peep sight" on my 20" carbine, a 100 yard zero, the longer hole spacing and the .343 front sight, my aperture is roughly 1.83" over the tang and it maxes out about 2.23" over the tang. In comparison the the "improved tang sight" with the "standard" riser as will go up to about 2.352 above the tang so all things being equal with the 2.185" hole spacing used on both, they are probably very, very close in terms of height.

If you want longer range shooting beyond 200-225 yards, then get the "improved tang sight" with the "standard" riser, then add a "mid range" riser as it starts at 2.347" and goes up to 3.364". The problem with the "mid range" riser of course is that you probably won't be able to zero at a reasonable range like 100 yards, which is why Marbles mades them interchangeable and lets you buy the sight with either the "short" or "standard" riser.

While you are at it, it's worth ordering a standard 3/8" slot blank to fill the slot when you remove the barrel mounted rear sight, as well as 4 plug screws to fill the holes that live under the rear sight as Rossi does not include them on the gun.

So I ended up ordering the improved marbles tang and going by their chart I got the short range riser which I hope wasn't a mistake after reading your informative post. I am mostly a 100yd guy but might like to try my hand at longer ranges someday. I was thinking I might order a blade front sight as that combination works well with the receiver mounted peep on my 1895 Marlin. With a blade sight and a file, so long as it was long enough to begin with it can be filed down to the right elevation. As for the rear sight I am thinking of putting on one of my left over Marlin folding buckhorn sights for quick close range shots.

Sent from my Milestone X2 using Tapatalk 2

[Model 52]

So I ended up ordering the improved marbles tang and going by their chart I got the short range riser which I hope wasn't a mistake after reading your informative post. I am mostly a 100yd guy but might like to try my hand at longer ranges someday. I was thinking I might order a blade front sight as that combination works well with the receiver mounted peep on my 1895 Marlin. With a blade sight and a file, so long as it was long enough to begin with it can be filed down to the right elevation. As for the rear sight I am thinking of putting on one of my left over Marlin folding buckhorn sights for quick close range shots.

I considered that from an aesthetics point of view and as a back up sight. But from a practical standpoint the Marbles .055 aperture is small enough to give adequate precision and yet large enough to give enough field of view to be very effective at short range, so shooting over a folding leaf rear sight would be a choice of last resort.

Something to consider is that with a largish aperture in the rear sight, you can shoot with both eyes open at short range and that greatly enhances your ability to find track and shoot moving targets at shorter ranges.

[Arktikos]

considered that from an aesthetics point of view and as a back up sight. But from a practical standpoint the Marbles .055 aperture is small enough to give adequate precision and yet large enough to give enough field of view to be very effective at short range, so shooting over a folding leaf rear sight would be a choice of last resort.

Something to consider is that with a largish aperture in the rear sight, you can shoot with both eyes open at short range and that greatly enhances your ability to find track and shoot moving targets at shorter ranges.

That is a good point, what I was thinking about was a little different tho. One of the uses for this little cannon will be to carry for bear protection which is a very close range proposition and my thoughts were i would leave the tang sight folded down (less vulnerable) and the rear sight up in case I get caught off guard someday I won't have time for anything except to fire and keep firing until it groans and stops moving. Just a way to be prepared and otherwise I would rather not have a buckhorn sight on the gun. The peep is much more accurate IMO.
Sent from my Milestone X2 using Tapatalk 2