Vintage Lyman sight experts?

[AR22]

Trap if you could indulge me with another possible answer. What would be you best guess as to which way to mount this sight? Hope you understand what I am saying. I would think it would mount with the Lettering and stamping on top readable from the rear of the Rifle looking down the barrel? Thanks

[TRAP55]

Your third pic from the top, is what you want facing you when installed.

[Mike Armstrong]

Isn't that "flip" feature part of the Beech sight patent? So this would be a "Beech's Combination Front Sight."

They were made by several manufacturers over time, back when patents ran only 10 years (an excellent idea in some ways, both the sight and the patent time limit).

[ARFrog]

I have read a reference someplace that Lyman obtained the manufacturing rights to to the Beech front sight by filing a patent in 1891. This became Lyman's #5 sight combination sight.

Maybe AR22 can verify the imprint on his #17 sight which I believe is stamped "Lyman's PAT FEB 1894".

Additionally, if someone has a copy of Nick Strobel's book "Old Gunsights: A Collector's Guide, 1850-1965", maybe they can verify the history of these early Lyman sights for us. (Personally, I have heard of this book but never seen it.)

[TRAP55]

July 14th, 1891 is when Lyman procured the manufacturing rights, and produced them until 1955.
The 1894 patent on AR22's No.17 was for the change in the No.7 sight, eliminating the windage adjustment, even though the two sights were introduced about the same time.

[AR22]

ARFrog

It is actually marked like this. Not a big difference, but the 18 is the day of the month. 94 the year of course.

Lyman's Pat Feb 18' 94

[AR22]

Trap I will send a PM back to you also. But here is a public update.

Received the sight today and it is really a cool sight. Here is a couple pics of it mounted for everybody.

Trap, have another question for you. Do you think this sight is adjustable for windage? I as because it has two tiny screws on each side on the base. Or are those likely just to retain the posts and that is all. But if not adjustable for windage. Why two screws and not just one set screw?

Thanks

[ARFrog]

Sweet, looks great, congrats OP!

[AR22]

Thanks very much.

The project is finally finished, I think. The bore is not great to look at. Looks pretty bad but there is Rifling. And the bullets fly straight, and it is actually still pretty accurate for the sewer looking bore. But that does not surprise me a whole lot. I have had some real sewer looking bores in old Rifles before, that shot very nice.

I thought about a reline. But it actual shoots satisfactory to my needs where I think doing so would do more damage than shooting it as is. I think it out shoots my old eyesight right now. So a reline would do me no good anyway,LOL


EDIT:
I was looking closer inside the globe with magnifier, and it sure appears those two little screws on each side move the apertures right and left. I may get brave and give then a nudge this evening and see what happens. But not even sure my Gunsmith set will have a small enough driver though. I do not want to screw anything up. Thanks

[TRAP55]

Damn! That does look good!
Don't mess with those screws, or you'll have a bad day. They're for the post pivot, and as long as they have been there, probably froze up pretty good. If I remember right, there is a tiny little curve spring under that pivot to keep tension on the posts. A little drop of gun oil at the base of the post will do more good than harm too.
Here's some pics of a No.7 with windage adjustment.

https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/lyman-remington-sharps-others-front-21164752

[AR22]

Thanks, that is why I asked. I will leave them alone. I did put a little oil down in the posts with a Q tip..Thanks very much for the comments and the help. I really appreciate it from everybody..

I really like this sight much better than a Lyman #5 flip sight. I always thought those little ring hoods were a weak point and can snag and break to easy. I am going to keep an eye out for another one of these for my 1893.

My next thing will be when I shoot it. How the lowest setting on my Hepburn wants to coexist with the front globe sight. Looking with my Bore sight laser in the barrel. I think I will be alright. Of course the Hepburn is adjustable for elevation.

[ARFrog]

OP, you have asked about the Frontsight but what is it you have on the rear?


Edit: never mind. You answered my question while I was writing it

[AR22]

These 97s and alot of other Marlins in the period were drilled and tapped .900 on centers for the LL Hepburn sight. Mine was in 1906 so it was drilled for the Hepburn. Earlier than 1903 or so. If you bought the sight you had to have a Smith drill/tap for it. This one is a repro, as originals are even more expensive and very hard to find too. But the guy that made these, did a above superior job on the them. They are even marked as the originals were. With one exception.

When he showed his sight to Marlin to get permission to use the old original Marlin Markings. They told him the sight was too good. And I understand they made him drop one apostrophe off of one small place on the stampings. Then he was given permission to make them. I will try to take a pic of the top of the sight so you can see just well they were done..

Te sight is actually way to nice for my Rifle. But I cannot bring myself to "age" it to match. It is just so pretty.

[ARFrog]

Curse you OP. Now I want a Marlin 1897 with a globe front sight and Hepburn rear sight too

Seriously, your takedown rifle looks pretty cool with that beautiful wood and long octagon barrel.

Marlin 39A rifles have never spoken to me in that their weight distribution/balance seems slightly off. What is its balance like on the 1897?

[AR22]

I know what you are saying. I have newer 39As. I definitely like the looks and handling much better on the old Rifles. Marlin stuck with the internal design of the Lever .22 since 1891 more less all the way to the 39As. But they screwed up with the exterior changes in my opinion. Only thing they really changed internally were extractor and ejector designs. Most of those internal small changes were for the most part, inferior design changes in my opinion.

I do have a 1970 Century CL. That was made retro looking however. Straight stock, slim Forearm and Octagon Barrel. I like that one.