Lever gun scope

semi_problomatic said:
If I were gonna cripple a lever gun with some kinda sight other than irons it'd be a red dot or scout scope. I'd rather just put a peep sight on it. I've been wanting one of them skinner peeps for a while now...
Click to expand...

I get it, I really do. However, my 60-year-old eyes can no longer see a front sight properly. Irons are pretty much out of the question at rifle distances. So, it's either a low powered scope, or quit using the lever guns. I think I'll stick with my scopes.
 
I don't see how putting glass on a levergun "cripples" it any more than putting glass on a boltgun.
Unless, of course, you are one of the .0003% (I made that statistic up:D) of hunters that will actually use a horse to get you back in the wilderness, and you actually use a saddle scabbard to carry your "thutty-thutty" with you.
Yes, it changes the balance point a bit, but it does the same thing with a boltgun. You simply adjust to it.

Crippled? My idea of "crippled" is refusing to face the fact that if you DON'T put a glass on it, you are either limiting yourself to a 30 or 40 yard shot, or you are taking a shot with a high probability of wounding/crippling your game animal. :mad:
If you're still under 40yrs of age, and can shoot accurately with open sights... bravo! Enjoy it while you can. It doesn't last. :(
 
I get it, I really do. However, my 60-year-old eyes can no longer see a front sight properly. Irons are pretty much out of the question at rifle distances. So, it's either a low powered scope, or quit using the lever guns. I think I'll stick with my scopes.
Click to expand...

+1000, PawPaw. Very well said.
 
Crippled? My idea of "crippled"
Click to expand...
....

.... is taking a gun that is best known for being quick handling and mild recoiling, and putting a sighting system on it that makes it neither.

It can still shoot, and a deer with a broken leg can still walk, after a fashion.

I'm not saying that it should not be scoped, but there's a couple of right ways to do it and many wrong ways ..... the wrong seem to be most prevalant to me, judging by what I usually see.

Madcratebuilder's 336 in the thread I linked above looks pretty close to right.
 
is taking a gun that is best known for being quick handling and mild recoiling, and putting a sighting system on it that makes it neither.
Click to expand...

Not trying to be argumentative, but I firmly disagree with you here...

A levergun IS/WAS meant to be quick handling... I understand that. But, in that sense, we are talking about deep forest "jump" shooting, in my opinion. And this type of shot is usually taken at the 30-40yd limitation I mentioned in my previous post. Any other type of shot taken will require no "quick handling"... any more than will any bolt gun used for hunting.
So, unless the only shooting at game you will be doing is that deep forest jump shooting, the quick handling requirement is pretty much moot.
I will wager that 98% of all shots taken with a levergun are in situations exactly like those with a boltgun.... 50 to 150yd, take your time, aim deliberately, and squeeze the trigger. In that case, the hunter should take advantage of a scope to give him the best possible sight picture.

I agree with you, aesthetically... I think the scope should be as small as possible, and as low-profile as possible. But I think boltgun scopes should be, as well. Unless we're talking long range target or varmint shooting.

edit: oh, yeah... actually, when you add the scope, it adds weight to the gun, which helps lessen recoil.... just a thought.
 
I will wager that 98% of all shots taken with a levergun are in situations exactly like those with a boltgun.... 50 to 150yd, take your time, aim deliberately, and squeeze the trigger.
Click to expand...

Hasn't worked out that way for my Eldest daughter ..... both deer she took last year were 150 yards away and running.

You'll have a hard time hitting a moving target with stock that does not fit your sighting system.

Likewise, percieved recoil is greater if you don't have a good cheekweld.

You CAN mount a scope pretty high on these guns (and others)- you justhave to raise the comb to match the sight line. Doing so messes with the balance, esp. if the scope is heavy.
 
I agree with all you said there... in those circumstances, the combination would be less than ideal.
I always assume the person scoping the rifle would take the time to mount it properly so that it "fits" the rifle, and the rifle fits the shooter, but I know it doesn't always work out that way. :rolleyes:
 
http://swfa.com/Leupold-15-5x33-VX-R-Scout-Scope-P51466.aspx

That would be my choice...mounted on a 45/70 Guide Gun or even the Deerfield Carbine .44 Magnum...if it moves and it's inside 150 yards that will do the trick, 33mm lens gives good light gathering for those early mornings sitting at a field edge or orchard line, illuminated reticule makes it standout that much more, sure its overkill, then again so is a Barrett, but how many people would turn one of those down.
 
To each, their own. Getting old sucks and the eyes tend to go first. What I find hideous is a scope on a handgun yet they are very popular. I bet those that call adding a scope to a lever gun sacreligious have a scoped pistol or two. It's for function, not aestetics, when you're over 50.


Mossbergright1.jpg


 
Last edited:
I guess it goes down to using the right tool for the job then.

If you're taking slow well aimed shots at 150 yards with a lever...well there might be some problems with your tool selection.

My lever is for thick brush and shots within 100 yards taking quick, off hand shots. I want a smooth transition and a fast sight picture. I want to be able to pull the gun to my shoulder and aim. Not pull the gun to my shoulder and bob my head like a bird trying to see through a scope.

If I were to be sitting in a stand taking slow scoped shots, I'll use a rifle built to take a scope with a raised comb so my cheek weld stays the same and I'm not trying to get a "jaw weld" since the guys who scope levers insist upon putting see through mounts on them so they can still "use" the irons they can no longer see.

And since I was old I'd probably also like a gun that was a bit more forgiving of things that old age supposedly brings. Levers have curved fore stocks for your hand, not flat to be stable on a rest. The ones in the pic above are chambered for rounds that don't travel as fast or have as straight a trajectory as modern bullets. This means increased flight time and higher arching trajectories. Less forgiving when your reflexes are slower and your eyes are going.

But that leads me back to the scout style scope. It's set far foward and low, so your cheek weld isn't destoyed. It's a low powered scope so you can use both eyes to shoot and track making it easier to shoot on the fly. It does put weight forward, but thats not a bad thing when swinging a gun, keeps the gun from being "whippy". Might slow it down, but I can turn faster than a critter can run.

It's really not about looks or scabbards or blasphmemy (I did suggest a red dot after all...) It's just about keeping the rifle's strengths and not putting something on it that completely negates them. Like taking a quarterback and making him a center. Sure, he's a football player and sure, he could snap the ball...but he's probably not the best one to do it.
 
Last edited:
My lever is for thick brush and shots within 100 yards taking quick, off hand shots.
Click to expand...

Not all of us have have the luxury of multiple rifles - Eldest just has the one .... but she does pretty well with it. ... "Beware the teenager with just one rifle- she probably knows how to use it.

I want a smooth transition and a fast sight picture. I want to be able to pull the gun to my shoulder and aim. Not pull the gun to my shoulder and bob my head like a bird trying to see through a scope.
Click to expand...

This should be true of all rifles (probably shotguns, too, but the mass market stocks fit me well enough .....) ..... because I have a scope on my 721, and it has a stock made for irons sights, I needed to raise the comb ..... now I bring the gun up and the reticle is on the target (as opposed to bringing the gun up and looking at the scope bases).

But that leads me back to the scout style scope. It's set far foward and low, so your cheek weld isn't destoyed. It's a low powered scope so you can use both eyes to shoot and track making it easier to shoot on the fly. It does put weight forward, but thats not a bad thing when swinging a gun, keeps the gun from being "whippy". Might slow it down, but I can turn faster than a critter can run.
Click to expand...

Agreed, and Eldest has a 2X Burris pistol scope forward mounted on her Marlin 30A ...... works great, though we did have to raise the comb a 1/2" to get it to line up ...... and as for being front heavy ...... It's a 30A- like a no frills 336- it weighs what? 7 1/2 lbs loaded anyhow ... another 12 ounces of scope isn't going to hurt anything .....

I have a scout scope on my "kid loaner" gun, a Ruger Frontier in 7-08.... we added 3/4" of padding to the comb of that one so little faces line up behind the glass right, too .....
 
Lol, I was just explaining why I used "cripple". I wasn't trying to insult anyone. Just seemed I offended a couple folks and wanted to explain what I meant.
 
I don't think anyone's offended by your choice of words. At least I'm not. Just cause we don't exactly agree doesn't mean I don't love ya, man... :D

The internet and the typed word sometimes come across wrong... it's difficult to put nuances in what you say. They don't make a smilie for everything.. :)
 
I don't think anyone is going to argue that a 4-16x50mm scope is not appropriate for a lever gun, particularly one chambered in a moderate velocity cartridge like 30-30, 35 Rem, 45-70...

The original post simply asked the question about the possibility of scoping a Henry Big Boy, and what magnification was used.

And the answer is... Yes, it is quite possible to mount a scope on a lever gun and enhance (rather than diminish) the effectiveness of the gun. Like any scope - rifle combination, it must be an appropriate match, and it must be fitted properly.

Match: Low magnification scopes are best for 30-30, 35 Rem, 45-70 and similar. A magnification of 2X to 3X significantly enhances my ability to see through brush, and I can use the rifle with both eyes open until I finally line up the shot. Anything more than 4X is too much for me to use at close range or in deep woods. The other advantage of low magnification scopes is the small objective lense, which allows the scope to be mounted low. I have a Nikon 1-4X20mm on my AR-15, and this would be a good lever gun scope. A lot of companies are now making 1-4X20 at a variety of price points. A fixed power scope is also a good choice because they can be lighter and shorter than a variable. As I said before, I use a 2.5x20mm on my Marlin 336.

Fit: A rifle fits if it comes to the shoulder and cheek naturally and the eye is nearly aligned with the sights (iron, scope, red-dot, peep, whatever). The final aligning of the sights should be possible with subtle movements of the head, without needing to re-cheek-weld. Given the rise built into most lever gun stocks, it is important that the scope be positioned as low as possible. Low profile mounts and low rings are generally required.
 
I am 54 with a really bad shoulder and astigmatism and nearsightedness. On my one lever gun, a Marlin 336W, is a Vortex Viper 2x7 and a really nice recoil pad. My shots have the potential to be 200 yards.

I'm happy with my setup and if you go without a scope I'm happy for you. Just don't put other people down for their choices, except of course if someone uses a 50mm objective scope on their lever. Then only do it face to face in private and make comment about the inverse relationship between stinger size and objective size.
 
Has anyone mounted a scope on their Henry Big Boy or any other CF lever gun. What power did you get.
Click to expand...

Center fire lever gun, yes. A Marlin 336C in 35 Remington.

You will have to decide for yourself as to what power and type works best for YOU. All I can do is tell you what I chose.

A 3-9X40MM sighted in at 75 yards and kept and used at 3x 90% of the time. Also you will note that it is mounted on see through rings. I am not a fan of see through rings, but they do serve a function when a buck jumps up in-front of you at 10 to 15 yards. (really too close for a scope)

If you hunt from a tree stand, maybe the 9 power will help maybe not. It would help me at 150 yards. If I am stalking, I stop a lot and use the scope at 9 power to scan the tree line ahead. If in a ground stand, the 3 power is used the most.

You will need to chose depending on the way YOU hunt.
Jim

 
Don't do this to me.

I stop a lot and use the scope at 9 power to scan the tree line ahead. If in a ground stand, the 3 power is used the most.
Click to expand...

I take a VERY dim view of ...... "people" using a scope as a pair of binoculars ...... having been "scanned" by an idiot who was "Jus' tryin' to see what ya' wuz....." :mad:
 
I agree with jimbob 150% scopes should not be used to "scan". Never. If you do, you're basically breaking rule #1 of gun handling. Never point a gun at something you don't intend to shoot. Pack a lunch or skip starbucks a couple days and buy you some binos.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top