I guess it's the sights that are on their rifles at present. We have a new 1886, new 1873, 10yr old 1892, 9yr old 1885, and 12yr old 9422. They all have the same semi buckhorn rear sight and front bead post. Here is the 1886: Here is the 1885 (after it was removed for a tang sight): Winchester also uses a smaller diameter bead on the front that perfectly fills the little vertical slot in the buckhorn - results in a more "refined" sight picture that is easier to keep lined up on the target (in my humble opinion)...Mistered wrote:What specific year range and models of Winchester rifles' sights do you think they should copy? Winchester made a lot of different sights over the years!All Henry has to do to improve the sights is copy what is on a Winchester - they have excellent buckhorn sights.
Spring has sprung. Get out and shoot your Henry
stock semi buckhorn
-
- Cattle Driver
- Posts: 725
- Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2016 6:53 pm
- Location: Shenandoah Valley, VA
Re: stock semi buckhorn
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
0 x
US Submarine Service 1976-2006
Henry H001TLP,H001TLB,H003T,H004,H006R,H006M,H012R,H012AW,H012MRCC,H010CC,H015-357,H015-44,H015-4570
Winchester 9422,1873,1885,1886,1892
Marlin 39A,AS,CL,D,M,Mountie,TDS,1897CB,Texan,1894CB,1895CBA,1895SBL
Ruger #1 44Mag
Henry H001TLP,H001TLB,H003T,H004,H006R,H006M,H012R,H012AW,H012MRCC,H010CC,H015-357,H015-44,H015-4570
Winchester 9422,1873,1885,1886,1892
Marlin 39A,AS,CL,D,M,Mountie,TDS,1897CB,Texan,1894CB,1895CBA,1895SBL
Ruger #1 44Mag
Re: stock semi buckhorn
While I agree the Miroku sights are of a higher quality of design than the stock Henry ones they unfortunately do not have a vertical moving rear blade that functions as a fine, sub adjustment for elevation.I guess it's the sights that are on their rifles at present.
Hey maybe this has not been a problem and you have been able to get a satisfactory elevation adjustment with just the sliding 'ladder' but I foresee a potential problem if one of the ladder notches results in either a bit too high or low elevation for the particular setting.
Regardless I agree with the front and rear being matched well in size to provide a very clear, refined sight picture as you suggested but a sliding 'sub' blade in the rear would have made it dang near perfect!
0 x
- North Country Gal
- Firearms Advisor
- Posts: 6095
- Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 12:46 pm
- Location: northern Wisconsin
Re: stock semi buckhorn
Good point on the refined sight picture. One of my pet peeves is manufacturers who just slap on the same width front sight and the same width notch on rear sights, regardless of barrel length. I see this all the time on handguns, especially. The fit of the front sight in the rear sight is very important on open sights for accurate shooting.
0 x
Re: stock semi buckhorn
Maybe the pictures don't do justice to the Winchester sights. Visually, the Henry sight on my .30-30 does not look inferior to that of the 118 yr old and especially not to those of the new Winchester.
0 x
UPDATES: OR passes 114, "one of strictest gun control measures in U.S." https://henryrifleforums.com/viewtopic. ... 34#p213234
Re: stock semi buckhorn
Well I don't know your experience with sights but the one on my BBB was the first thing that that really bummed me out when I was looking at it.Visually, the Henry sight on my .30-30 does not look inferior to that of the 118 yr old and especially not to those of the new Winchester.
There is no denying that the elevation blade is not only too small and narrow but does not fit the groove very well and is difficult to adjust. (Heck I already lost mine) Regardless it was probably something that was considered to be a 'compromise' when cost factoring the rifle.
I will say however I like the base design of the sight. I like the solid, undersized dovetail with the set screw for ease of adjustment. I can live
With the stamped 'channel' riser but the elevation blade is the detractor on it.
0 x
- markiver54
- Deputy Marshal
- Posts: 10308
- Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 11:49 am
- Location: Biue Ridge Mountains, NC
Re: stock semi buckhorn
I agree with MisterEd! As I mentioned a lot earlier, I too was really bummed about the white diamond inlay among other shortcomings of the SBH. Especially when the second one came the same way. No big deal, I guess, just a QC problem in that particular area. As was suggested, I could just turn the blade around, but this has become kind of a non-issue since I'm going optic anyway. How hard would it be to register that white diamond dead center on the notch? Oh well, still a big Henry fan!
0 x
I'm your Huckleberry