is anybody using these?

T

tdoyka

New member
i have an win m94(1973) in 30-30 that definitely needs some cerakote. when thats done then its going to JES and he'll make a 35-30/30 win. when thats done, i want to use a "red dot" sight. since the rifle is top eject and i abhor a side scope mount, i would like to go with the pearsons no drill mount and a see all sight. does anybody use this? what do you think?

http://www.mod94scoperail.com/

https://seeallopensight.com/
 
It's your money, and with enough of it most anything can be done. But if the Winchester had any sentimental value I'd keep it as is. I'd just buy a Marlin in 35Rem that can take a top mount scope. Then I'd mount a small light 1-4X20 scope on it and be done. If you really want it they are available with a lighted reticle. You'll have a better rig and have less money in it. Plus a 2nd rifle.

If the Winchester had no sentimental value I'd sell it to finance the Marlin.
 
tdoyka said:
...a see all sight. does anybody use this? what do you think?
Click to expand...

I had one, and didn't care for it.

The advantage is that it is small, durable and not too expensive.

However, it isn't a substitute for a red dot or scope, or even an iron sight. It's an occluded eye sight, meaning you look at the sight with one eye and at your target with the other. Given the inherent inaccuracy of that mechanism, they do make a bit too much of their "no parallax" claim. My thumb is also parallax free in the sense that it is so imprecise that parallax isn't measurable. Yet, none of the claims made in their literature is false.

The major basis for my dissatisfaction has nothing to do with any of their claims. My rifle experience all involved aperture sights or scopes, both of which help a near-sighted fellow see his target. I failed to account for the fact that a SeeAll wasn't going to help me that way. I tried using it as a conventional sight and made some four inch groups at 50 yards. The MrGunsnGear fellow made groups like that at 100yards.
 
Last edited:
I have the Pearson's scope mounting rail for a model 94. I also have a Vortex scout scope to mount on the rail. I do not like it at all and took it off the rifle. I need some sort of optics to use a rifle, can't use the iron sights. Installed the Pearson's sight rail and found that the whole set up is too top heavy and too forward heavy. Looks kind of ridiculous, too, but that was not the problem. A model 94 carbine is a really handy rifle, lifts easily into firing stance, etc. With the rail on there and the optic, it just changes the balance so far forward and so top heavy that it is definitely not a handy rifle anymore. And I found that the rail points too far upwards relative to the line of the bore of the barrel. In actuality, the rail points straight forward, horizontal, but the barrel slopes down slightly as you go from the receiver to the muzzle, and so there was an upward declination of the rail relative to the barrel and that totally messes up the ability to use the optic because it messes with the ability to zero it. One of those parallax free red dot sites would become affected by parallax under those circumstances. It is well made and it installs pretty easily, but make sure you like it and that you can zero your scope before you go Lock-tite-ing everything down. Overall, I thought it would be great, but it's not.
 
:Dbut i wanna wildcat!!!!!!:D


yes, that gun has sentimental value to me, it was my first rifle. i have killed more deer and groundhogs than i can count. i put her in a safe about 20 years ago and i just plain forgot about her. nowadays my mood has changed and i find myself wanting a wildcat. a 35-30/30 in win m94 is a good place to start.
 
Well then go for it. No body here is going to tell you NOT to get a rifle built the way you like. The more the merrier as far as were're concerned.:D
 
I have a Rossi 92 with a short rail that replaces the rear sight in order to mount a red dot or a long eye relief compact scope, but it requires a cheek pad in order to properly line up the sight or scope.
 
I would have all the work done before I had any finish applied to rifle. I would have to have a good reason to go to the expense of doing all this. It would make more sense to get a 35 rifle and less money.
 
My buddy put a See All on his muzzle loader and really likes it, CO says you can't use any optics so even red dots are out.
 
see all sight

I've not hunted with a M94 in .30-30 in years, but I bought a first generation See-All sight maybe 5 years ago. Ran a post on it on these forums as well I think?

I first put the See-All (delta reticle) on an AK clone and shot a wee bit of outlaw 3-gun with it locally. I also kept on the AK an hauled it around in the truck and ATV a bit. The sight held zero and held up, no problems. I did manage to chip the lens when I got clumsy with the rifle pulling it from the rack on my ATV, but it did not effect function or zero. In 3-gun, the sight was fast and accurate enough for the big cardboard plate targets (12"+?) up close, inside 50 yds. Out at 100, it was still possible to shoot acceptable groups on pie plate size targets. But I would say without reservation that a precision/distance sight the See-All is not. I could shoot a real peep/aperture sight much better, especially past 100 yds.

The first gen sight is a bit clunky, the shape far too blocky and edges too severe, and the "slide on" attachment design was not convenient. There was a lot of frame material there that did not need to be. I actually wrote See-All a letter (pen and ink!) commenting on slimming down the gen 1's and making the attachment system more practical. Whether my letter carried any weight is debatable, but the second gen sights are much more trim and rounded. The attachment system is more refined as well.

The gen 1 See-All next went on my turkey gun last season, and I believe the unit has found a home. Clamped onto the top of my vintage 870 via a saddle type mount, it sets way too high and required a redneck Monte Carlo stock mod (foam rubber and camo duct tape) to raise my cheek weld high enough to aim consistently. So modified, I proceeded to shoot 4 gobblers with it, at distances from 24 to 40 yds. I found the See-All visible under all possible lighting conditions in which one could legally shoot with no problem. I could see the See-All MUCH better than the factory iron sights on the slug barrel (onto which I screw a turkey choke!) And, as advertised, no batteries needed, ever, and no way moisture is going to fog or short circuit the unit, ever.

I like the sight, and may buy another for on my HiPoint 10mm carbine, which also has about the same limited range as a shotgun.
 
bamaranger said:
I've not hunted with a M94 in .30-30 in years, but I bought a first generation See-All sight maybe 5 years ago. Ran a post on it on these forums as well I think?

I first put the See-All (delta reticle) on an AK clone and shot a wee bit of outlaw 3-gun with it locally. I also kept on the AK an hauled it around in the truck and ATV a bit. The sight held zero and held up, no problems. I did manage to chip the lens when I got clumsy with the rifle pulling it from the rack on my ATV, but it did not effect function or zero. In 3-gun, the sight was fast and accurate enough for the big cardboard plate targets (12"+?) up close, inside 50 yds. Out at 100, it was still possible to shoot acceptable groups on pie plate size targets. But I would say without reservation that a precision/distance sight the See-All is not. I could shoot a real peep/aperture sight much better, especially past 100 yds.

The first gen sight is a bit clunky, the shape far too blocky and edges too severe, and the "slide on" attachment design was not convenient. There was a lot of frame material there that did not need to be. I actually wrote See-All a letter (pen and ink!) commenting on slimming down the gen 1's and making the attachment system more practical. Whether my letter carried any weight is debatable, but the second gen sights are much more trim and rounded. The attachment system is more refined as well.

The gen 1 See-All next went on my turkey gun last season, and I believe the unit has found a home. Clamped onto the top of my vintage 870 via a saddle type mount, it sets way too high and required a redneck Monte Carlo stock mod (foam rubber and camo duct tape) to raise my cheek weld high enough to aim consistently. So modified, I proceeded to shoot 4 gobblers with it, at distances from 24 to 40 yds. I found the See-All visible under all possible lighting conditions in which one could legally shoot with no problem. I could see the See-All MUCH better than the factory iron sights on the slug barrel (onto which I screw a turkey choke!) And, as advertised, no batteries needed, ever, and no way moisture is going to fog or short circuit the unit, ever.

I like the sight, and may buy another for on my HiPoint 10mm carbine, which also has about the same limited range as a shotgun.
Click to expand...


most of the area i hunt is well under 100 yards. the furthest deer i have killed, was a whopping 53+/- yards(i got it from my laser range finder and a tree that was next to my deer, it was afterwards). i guesstimate 30 - 40 yards is all i need. i have a burris fastfire 2 that i use on my ruger sbh in 44 mag, i was just wondering that i would do something different.
 
You 94 isnt worth trying to Wildcat. These were the years when Win tried to save money and really cheapened them up. If it was a pre 64 or post 77 then you'd have a good sturdy platform to work from. I'd put it back in the safe and yank it out when I needed a little cheering up. I have a 1963 short barrel 94 30-30 that I shot my first buck with. I cant touch that rifle without that memory flooding my mind. Think it over and if you still want to do it then go for it.
 
I made my first 30-30 deer kill this year with a Winchester made in 1981. No stamp parts but they must be cast. Not forged for sure. Its been a great little rifle. Its pretty beat up and has the rusty receiver from the strange metal its made from but I like it. I put a Williams 5D peep on it and its a blast to shoot. I'm not going to change it anyway.

I have three 30-30 rifles and they are some of my favorite guns. I could have used a 30-30 to have killed all of the deer and elk I have killed so far. Two elk and 30 or so deer. And I have lots of bullets, brass and powder for them. Notice my Sig line.
 
ratshooter said:
I made my first 30-30 deer kill this year with a Winchester made in 1981. No stamp parts but they must be cast. Not forged for sure. Its been a great little rifle. Its pretty beat up and has the rusty receiver from the strange metal its made from but I like it. I put a Williams 5D peep on it and its a blast to shoot. I'm not going to change it anyway.
Click to expand...

the receiver is probably made from sintered steel(1964-1982). i have a 1973 model and its rusty too.

http://tincanbandit.blogspot.com/2014/02/winchester-model-94-rifles.html
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top