Marlin 336c

[red rick]

It’s funny the older I get I find myself pulling off scopes . I am looking at aperture sights now . I am leaning Skinner . Before and after . That see through mount looks terrible . What was I thinking . I did that over 45 years ago .

 

[Risky buisness]

I've always appreciated a good aperture sight on rifles. If I may suggest Providence tool company. They make a really nice adjustable rear in the old Lyman tradition. I think #27 was the original one.
Quite adjustable and as it's an aperture, one can fit a diopter modification lens into it so that " can't see the front sight or target " thing is corrected.
Used for years. Great results.

 

[Buzznrose]

I’m the opposite. For accurate bullet placement, my older eyes benefit greatly from optics.

That said, don’t knock that scope because it’s mounted on lousy rings. See-through rings, as far as I am concerned, were a compromise for shooters who didn’t learn to use their scopes.

But if you like peep sights, or whatever other sights, I hope you find a set that you like. I’ve used Skinners and they seem fine to me, but I’m a novice using them…

Take care,

 

[3Crows]

I cannot see without a scope, period. But, I would most definitely pull that scope. Too much scope and those rings need to go. Get a one inch VX of 1.5-4 and the lowest rings that can be fitted. Preferably with Warne QD type rings for reversion to irons in good light or those days I might can see a little better.


Or a classic blued steel Weaver like this 3X on Weaver rings:

 

[earlthegoat2]

I personally prefer vintage Redfield and Lyman sights even though they are tough to find now.

The Skinners have never worked for me very well. I guess I just don’t like the way they look or the adjustment method. Williams aren’t much better but they are available still at least.

Still, I prefer a low power scope for the majority of my hunting.

 

[Jonah77]

Looks good to me…

 

[EIB0879]

Yeah most folks I knew in the seventies and early eighties had those sight through mounts including me. I finally figuredout that I never used iron sights so I went to regular base and rings. My BIL still has a tip off mount on an old Rem 740 of his.

 

[dh1633pm]

I use the XS Ghost Rings on mine. Works for me. The key is "works". Gotta have something that works for you.

 

[jmr40]

A big scope with see-thru mounts is about the worst possible combo on a lever rifle. It just makes it a lot harder to use the scope and it is near impossible to use the irons either. The factory irons are OK at best and some sort of peep is a good idea if you don't want use a scope.

But even for those with perfect vision a small, low powered scope in the 1-4X20 range mounted as low as possible isn't too aesthetically unappealing and is much better functionally. At woods ranges you don't need much if any magnification, but a scope lets you see what you're shooting at in light so low it would be impossible to see either the sights or the target without optics. The time of day when you're most likely to see game.

Iron sights are much more accurate than a lot of folks think. As long as they are shooting out in the open in good light. Two things that rarely happen where I hunt.

 

[red rick]

That scope might look huge because of those see through mounts , but it is only a 4x 32 .

 

[shootstraight57]

Thats funny because I have the same see thru mounts on my 336 and have had them on since day 1. LOL

 

[red rick]

Thats funny because I have the same see thru mounts on my 336 and have had them on since day 1. LOL

I did the same thing when I first got mine . It has been setup like that since 1977 or 78 . It was a Christmas present from my mom . I think I decided on setting it up like that from reading hunting magazines in the school library . That was about the only thing I read in school .

 

[gralewaj]

I use the XS Ghost Rings on mine. Works for me. The key is "works". Gotta have something that works for you.

I too have this XS setup on my 336C .35 Rem and I like it, but I'm leaning toward putting the factory front sight and the Williams peep it came with back on! I put the ghost ring on along with the XS scout mount when I was a lot younger and wanted a scout rifle, but only had one rifle. I now have a Ruger Frontier .358 Win scout rifle and a Rem 600 .350RM scout and I think the lever is about to return to looking more natural again.

Great thread!

where is that OEM front sight...?

 

[dh1633pm]

Not sure where the stock sight is. I will take a look in my spare parts bin.

 

[W.E.G.]

Do people use see-through rings because the scopes they buy are so awful that the scopes don't work in the woods.

Its usually the other way around. Can't see anything with irons in the woods, but scope works fine.

 

[red rick]

I think that they are probably better for running animals and at close distance than a scope .

 

[W.E.G.]

The scope wouldn't be a problem with "close distance."

As for "running animals," I've learned my lesson on that.
Unless its a shotgun, my miss-ratio is 100% on running animals with rifles - scope or no-scope

 

[3Crows]

That scope might look huge because of those see through mounts , but it is only a 4x 32 .

Yes, but without going into the physics, a 4X power scope really is not going to need an objective lens greater than about 20mm, the exit cone of light is larger diameter than a human eye can generally accept. So I was suggesting to go to a smaller, more compact 4X or less power scope.

I once also thought high rise see thru rings were desirable but I have since come to the conclusion they are not much good for anything.

 

[red rick]

Back when I put that scope on I had never seen or heard of a scope with a 20mm object . But if I decide later to put a scope back on it I will go that route .

 

[SwampWolf]

"See-through" rings are an answer to a question never asked by people who know what they're doing. A "tip-off" mount (as made by Weaver and Pachmayr) are the best answer for people who don't trust their scopes. Snow on the lens is best addressed by flip-up covers. See-throughs are an abomination, imo. Each to their own, of course.

 

[Skeptic13]

I prefer shooting my 336 with iron sights. I can still shoot well enough to kill a deer at 100 yards. With my reading glasses on and the gun properly rested of course.

 

[Rex in OTZ]

The scope wouldn't be a problem with "close distance."

As for "running animals," I've learned my lesson on that.
Unless its a shotgun, my miss-ratio is 100% on running animals with rifles - scope or no-scope

a cheap way to start is get a airsoft gun and practice on stiching a old soccer ball or vollyball rolled over rough ground.
then when you get hits progress to a Daisy Red Ryder.
then progress to a .22 semiauto like a 10/22 (helps to go hunting game like raccoon) then move onto bigger game like badgers and coyotes, then onto deer.

 

[Varminterror]

I think that they are probably better for running animals and at close distance than a scope .

I think you’re wanting that to be true, but it really isn’t.

see-thru mounts [are] about the worst possible combo on a lever rifle.

^this.

 

[red rick]

I think you’re wanting that to be true, but it really isn’t.



^this.

IMO FOV on a running animal especially in or around cover helps with getting a quicker shot or even a shot . We hunt with hounds here so close to half of your shots will probably be at a running deer . I have also had deer come out right under my treestand , I prefer not having a scope in those situations .

 

[herrwalther]

LPVO scope on a lever gun solves all the issues. Can go low for closest shots out to however far your round can go. 1.5-4X is my personal favorite. My eyes aren't all that old but I already prefer scopes over peep sights.