I did a bad, bad thing...

[LRDGCO]

It’s called hypocrisy. Pure and simple.

For years I have waged a vicious, relentless war against scoping lever guns. I have scolded those who have, pshawed those who claimed that aging eyes required it, vilified those who claimed that doing so improved their enjoyment and expanded their use of said rifles.

I love my Marlin 336 Texan. I find it the ideal rifle for hog stalking. But, on my last hog hunt last month, I found my eyes were not responding as well to the Williams peep sight. Even when I removed the disc and used the rear sight as a ghost ring, my target acquisition was sub-optimal.

I was filled with anguish, indeed, near despair. But, I sucked it up, recognized that I would have to do the needful. I can only live with myself because the use of a period Weaver K3 is contemporaneous with the 1968 manufactured Texan. And the post reticle is pretty much perfect.

But oh, the ignominy...

 

[horsemen61]

Looks fine to me man

 

[ECVMatt]

Looks good and so does your Rokon!

 

[hillman23]

Don't beat yourself up too bad. If it's any solace, I enjoy microbrews and reruns of Friends. AHHHH, that was painful to write! Plus, that remains a handsome weapon you have.

 

[SwampWolf]

You have to do what you have to do. If you really have to... and it seems like you really did have to do a "bad, bad thing".

 

[Birdhunter1]

Don’t feel too bad, in fact you must be damn near genius level... my grandpa did the same thing. A Weaver K3-1 El Paso, TX on his 336 30-30 and it was on there as far back as I can remember.
I took it off a few years ago and went to a Williams peep sight, I think my grandpa would be proud of his rifle today as I have it.
By the way he clanked when he walked, long story to that one but you must be alright if you’re on the same track as my grandpa.

 

[kwg020]

You have evolved.

kwg

 

[Newtosavage]

Damn that's ugly. Congratulations on ruining that rifle.

LOL Just kidding!

 

[LRDGCO]

You have evolved.

kwg

I'm going to show your post to my wife. She says it's not possible.

 

[ontarget]

Terrible just terrible. Almost unbelievable.
Actually I kinda like that scope on that rifle.
Looks right at home to me.
At least you didn't put a quad rail handguard on it. Lol.

 

[GRIZ22]

I have the same rifle. A friend has a vision problem using irons and to show her how a scope solves those I mounted a K1 on the rifle. It works so well I find myself using it more often.

 

[21041mag]

Kill a hog with it, see how bad you feel then

 

[NIGHTLORD40K]

I think we should form a support group......

 

[bersaguy]

I think you did just fine. There are far worse things to put on a levergun

 

[bannockburn]

LRDGCO

As others have pointed out you have adapted to a situation and evolved. Now put that gun and scope to use and let us know hoe you do with it.

 

[edwardware]

There are far worse things to put on a levergun. . .

That is eye-gougingly wrong.

 

[Lafitte]

A 336 with a 2 1/2 Weaver is classic. I gave one to my dad sometime around the early 1960's, My oldes grandson has it now.
Lafitte

 

[WestKentucky]

That all weather 336 is hideous, but the AFG and optics makes it look like it would be even faster on taget than a traditional gun... big questions is who would be caught in the woods with that thing? Bad thing is that a 336 is no lightweight to begin, and adding tactical stuff is not making it any lighter.

 

[Picher]

Red-dot sights work nicely on lever guns, but don't look "traditional". However, how many people do you see in the woods? It's not like you were carrying it in a parade! I don't own a lever-gun and never hunted deer with one. My mantra is "one shot, one kill", so a bolt-action is fine for me, and I appreciate the extended quick-kill range afforded by a 3-9X scope, as well as the ability to spot antlers in the woods, when necessary.

It's nice to have an old steel Weaver on a lever gun, but they're heavy and not as bright as some newer scopes. That's why I like Weaver Detachable mounts. You can have one new scope to hunt with and another to put on the rifle for showing people your "authentic" lever gun. The mounts are 100% returnable to zero after detaching and re-attaching. So, you can have your "cake" and eat it too.

 

[Scooter22]

That looks fine and it's period correct. If any one gives you any BS about it just say, " What scope?? Oh thats my new carry handle".

 

[Newtosavage]

That is eye-gougingly wrong.

Agreed. Unfortunately, they can't be un-seen.

 

[Newtosavage]

I have a pre-64 Win 94 that I've owned since 1984. In that time, it's worn:

1) Original irons,
2) A Weaver side mount with Simmons 4x scope
3) A Weaver K4 (which accounted for probably 200 pig kills in the 90's)
4) A vintage Leupold scout mount with a Swift pistol scope
5) A Burris 2.75x scout scope
6) A Weaver 4x scout scope (my favorite)
7) A Lyman rear receiver peep
8) A Pearson's scout rail with a red-dot (very effective on hogs)
9) And finally, a Williams rear dovetail aperture ring and front fiber optic bead.

As you can see, I've been around the world and back with that gun when it comes to sighting solutions. Since I have other hunting rifles that wear various scopes for different applications, I felt it was best to just return the 'ol Winchester back to irons and use it for close-range deer and pig hunts. That rear aperture ring mounted on the dovetail gives me a much better sight picture than any other irons I've ever used, especially when paired with a front fiber optic bead. I have no trouble holding 3" groups at 100 yards, which is fine and dandy for what I will use that rifle for. Most shots won't be further than 50-75 yards anyway.

I finally decided to ditch the scopes when I realized that that gun has been shot so much, it just isn't as accurate as it once was. There was a good long time that I could shoot 1-1.5" groups with that rifle and a low power scope. These days, it's a 3" gun no matter what, so the need for a scope just isn't what it used to be. If I expect shots beyond 100 yards, I'm grabbing a different rifle when I head out.

Whenever I choose a scope (or sights) these days, I always consider how accurate the rifle is that it's going on. I don't see the need for a 3-9x scope when I'm holding a 2" gun because I'm not going to take 400 yard shots with a 2" gun. I'll put a 1.5-4x or 2-7x on a rifle like that. My 3-9x with the ballistic reticles are reserved for my rifles that are sub-MOA out to 400 yards, where I can use the extra magnification, particularly on smaller targets like some of our S. Texas whitetail does, coyotes and smaller feral pigs. On something as large as an elk, I have no problem using a 2-7x or fixed 6x out to 400 yards because of the size of the critter.

 

[doubleh]

Age has a way of making us adapt to to keep doing what we like to do as long as we can. If it's adding a scope sight to a lever action just do it. I can see that coming in my future. I won't like giving up my peep sights but I will rather than prop the guns in the safe or sell them.

 

[NIGHTLORD40K]

That is eye-gougingly wrong.

I kinda like the bayonet-

 

[<*(((><]

Thread by @LRDGCO to be seen soon in Buy, Sell and Trade: Rifles section "WTT: Marlin 336 Texan for Mossberg 464 SPX" Only kidding...



I've yet to put a scope on my levers, but most of mine are top eject 94's to avoid such rash decisions such as @LRDGCO has succumbed to.

Those Marlin's are the "gateway drug" to lever scoping.