Henry Rifle Forums

Thanks for posting. What scope mount did you use?

It looks like the Henry scope mount from here

Wow, finally got to shoot with this weaver scope. I was hitting a 6inch metal plate, standing without rest, at 100 yards without problem using American Eagle 158 grain 357. At 3x it was working great, and I even tried a few at 1x and was still hitting the plate surprisingly. The gun and scope combo is great.


And to reply above, yea it's the henry scope mount.

SteelCarbine357 wrote:Wow, finally got to shoot with this weaver scope. I was hitting a 6inch metal plate, standing without rest, at 100 yards without problem using American Eagle 158 grain 357. At 3x it was working great, and I even tried a few at 1x and was still hitting the plate surprisingly. The gun and scope combo is great.

outstanding .... really happy to hear it

Shooting a Henry rifle off hand is most fun! And your range report says you had both the fun, and very good POI success with your Weaver. Great choice for your optic, and it looks really cool on your rifle. Thanks for posting.

SteelCarbine357 wrote:Wow, finally got to shoot with this weaver scope. I was hitting a 6inch metal plate, standing without rest, at 100 yards without problem using American Eagle 158 grain 357. At 3x it was working great, and I even tried a few at 1x and was still hitting the plate surprisingly. The gun and scope combo is great.

I decided to go back to lightweight and durable.
I got a skinner peep sight now.

I really like it.

If anyone's thinking about getting a skinner, I can say that the peep almost fits my standard front sight on this Steel Carbine 357 model. It comes close but I could use about another turn or half a turn down for most ammo. It was lined up alright enough with Hornady Leverrevolution 140 grain ammo but 125 grain Remington UMC and 158 grain 38 special was shooting about 3 or 4 inches high and I was having trouble just aiming lower, didn't feel natural in any way and my accuracy was suffering of course. I've got a front sight ordered to go larger and I'm thinking I'll require the tallest as I think .650 is about the height of the standard front sight on this model, but could be wrong. I would switch anyway as I'm finding the bead to be annoying on the front sight with the peep and I believe a plain front sight would feel more accurate.

I got the plug for the dovetail for when I removed the semi buckhorn sight. This required a quick few scrapes with a triangular file to get to a point I could push in halfway by hand and then tap it in. This is also the one that lets you store an aperture in it, and it's cool. I could have left the buckhorns on as they weren't interfering with sight picture too badly and sat low enough but it is nicer without them now. The medium aperture seems the lowest I would bother going with these as the "fine" one I tried was really hard to see through and kind of useless in most lighting for me. I'll probably still use the standard aperture and just store it in there when using the peep without aperture as Ghost ring.

I was surprised how similar my accuracy is with the peep compared to the 1-3x scope. My accuracy is still good enough and it wasn't as big an issue as I imagined. These peeps are great. Once I get a taller sight in I feel like I'll be confident in this set up and should be the end of this project lol


**I wonder if the LowPro version peep sight would go on a Steel Carbine 357 since it's tapped for a scope mount... hm. Maybe I could've just gone with that lol

I for one like your decision to change back to an iron rear sight....for all the reasons you noted, Carbine. Agreed. It is somewhat of a project to finally establish a sight configuration that works.

I equipped my BBS Carbine with a rear peep (Skinner Express), but I've kept the front bead. My elder eyes do okay with that setup so far, and was able to sight it in okay without needing a different front sight.

Bottom line, it sure is most interesting how an iron peep sight improves the sight picture vs. a buckhorn. About like night and day for me. I think the buckhorn sight looks fine; it just doesn't work well, especially mounted so far down the barrel.

Hope you continue to like shooting your Henry this way. Would look forward to a Range Report and some target photos, if you're a mind to. Enjoy!
PT7

SteelCarbine357 wrote:I decided to go back to lightweight and durable.
I got a skinner peep sight now.

I really like it.

If anyone's thinking about getting a skinner, I can say that the peep almost fits my standard front sight on this Steel Carbine 357 model.

I got the plug for the dovetail for when I removed the semi buckhorn sight. This is also the one that lets you store an aperture in it, and it's cool.

I was surprised how similar my accuracy is with the peep compared to the 1-3x scope. My accuracy is still good enough and it wasn't as big an issue as I imagined. These peeps are great. Once I get a taller sight in I feel like I'll be confident in this set up and should be the end of this project lol

SteelCarbine357 wrote:I decided to go back to lightweight and durable.
I got a skinner peep sight now.

I really like it.

**I wonder if the LowPro version peep sight would go on a Steel Carbine 357 since it's tapped for a scope mount... hm. Maybe I could've just gone with that lol

FWIW, I went with the LoPro on my BBS 357 and it's worked out great. I sort of went in the opposite direction, starting out with the LoPro and then moving onto a simple 1.5-4X20 scope, as I wanted more reach (70-100 yds) for deer. The peep is great for <75 yds, IMO.

With this scope, I did find the cheek-weld to be an issue, so I found this riser. Haven't used it yet, but I have confidence I'll find a combination of "pad heights" that works. I just got the plain ol' brown leather.

https://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B07 ... =UTF8&th=1

Great to see how another owner has tried different things. Thanks for sharing.

Agreed. It is somewhat of a project to finally establish a sight configuration that works.

Very true, especially when it comes to 'open' sights and one of the reasons Henry does not install a 'better' rear sight on their rifles at the factory.
If one is going to shoot to any degree other than informally a sight combination that gives the shooter the best sight picture will need to be utilized and typically a rear peep sight is the best but the choice in a front will vary.
After my cataract surgery a couple years ago I had to really work on different sight combinations with my rifles to achieve the best sight picture and optimal accuracy and it is narrowing down to a peep rear (which I have always used) but it seems a slightly wider,squared off blade front is coming down to be the best for me. The original white bead front off my Henry is now on a 26" Winchester with a Williams receiver and this works pretty well. The original blade front off the Winchester is now on my Henry (and with a Williams rear) and this is giving me some pretty tight groups.
In conclusion it will be rare for anyone to achieve optimal accuracy with stock sights - on ANY rifle.
And if you don't mind a helpful hint:

I got the plug for the dovetail for when I removed the semi buckhorn sight. This required a quick few scrapes with a triangular file

In the future if you do anything like this again (this or fitting any dovetail parts) a flat stone is typically used in these applications.
A file can 'cut' the metal and leave tiny, but sharp edges that are not conducive to a close metal to metal fit such as the base of the plug or a sight. It can also make installation difficult and scratch the metal it mates with.
A stone removes metal but leaves it smooth and is a better option for close fitting applications such as dovetailed parts.

Mistered wrote:

In the future if you do anything like this again (this or fitting any dovetail parts) a flat stone is typically used in these applications.
A file can 'cut' the metal and leave tiny, but sharp edges that are not conducive to a close metal to metal fit such as the base of the plug or a sight. It can also make installation difficult and scratch the metal it mates with.
A stone removes metal but leaves it smooth and is a better option for close fitting applications such as dovetailed parts.

Thank you I'm going to try that with the front sight I put on.