Well, I finally got to take out the .45 Colt M92 after securing the front sight. Results were pleasing. Because it was raining and going downrange would have resulted in my own field of lost shoes I just shot at pre-placed (make that left behind) stuff including several metal plates. These have been there a while and are about 6" in diameter and at 50, 100 and 150 yards. Although I only got to shoot about 15 rounds, every round was a hit at every range, from the standing position! Very pleased I am. The load was 23 gr. H110 under the Sierra 300 gr. .451 JSP lit by a CCI large pistol magnum primer in Winchester cases. Seated as these were, they fed very smoothly through the gun. This load is in the 30K CUP range.

Hopefully, I be able to try the 265 gr. Cast Performance bullet loaded over 9 gr. of Unique the next time I get to the range. Unfortunately that will be about the middle of July! Argggggh!!!!

As I continue load development for the .45 Colt I can see that a trend is developing. Readers who wish to have some good background on what the .45 Colt can do when used in the M92 platform should read Paco Kelly's article on the .45 Colt in such rifles, 45 (long) Colt in Leveraction Rifles.

I'm not certain where Paco got his pressure data on his loads but my experiences seem to bear out those figures. Of course, I don't have a strain gage or lab to do testing for me, this is just many years of experience (and some mistakes!) talking.

So, I've already found that the load using the Sierra 300 gr. JFP and 23 gr. of H110 is fully acceptable in the M92 Rossi and I expect that I could do the same with the Hornady XTP bullets. The two Hornady bullets I'm referring to are the 300 gr. XTP-HP and the XTP-Mag. If I've updated the photo in an early post, you'll be able to see the differences in these two bullets. The main reason for doing so isn't really to gain more velocity and energy, although there might be minor benefits from doing so. The biggest reason is to bring the POI up on the target so that I can use these loads with my rear sight at it's lowest setting. I think I'll also be moving the 300 gr. Beartooth WFNGC a bit faster and will work up until that bullet also is "on" at 100 yards.

Now that bullet, and the Cast Performance 265 gr. WFNGC, are a hoot to shoot at targets. You can hear them slap the target backing at 100 yards. The sound is VERY noticeable and I'm sure that they would "slap" game pretty hard, too!

I am going to try to slow down the 265 gr. WFNGC, though. Even at moderate velocities with the 10 gr. Unique load, it shoots way too high at 100 yards. Perhaps IMR's (now owned by Hogdon) new Trail Boss powder will be just the ticket. Haven't seen any of that locally but I'm sure it will be here soon. We have several CAS organizations in the area. Even with a max advertised rifle velocity of about 725 fps, from a rifle it should do about 800-850 fps, that 265 gr. bullet would have a lot of uses around the farm for general use. Perhaps at that velocity it will shoot to the sights on MY rifle at some of the closer distances. It would also be a very mild shooter.

That brings up another subject, recoil. This rifle can either be a very mild gun to shoot with free recoil energy of less than 5 fpe or pretty rough with energies approaching 20 fpe. I'm sure many folks wouldn't like those upper level loads with the steel buttplate but I don't find them objectionable. It seems to me that the stock design is very good for my very average body dimensions. I might sometimes get a bit of bruising when wearing just a T-shirt but no pain.

I finally got to the range today to try out some new bullets and older bullets loaded differently. All bullets are 300 gr.

Hornady XTP-Mag, 22 gr. H110, 1423 fps, 1366 fpe, 5 fps AD, 7 SD This load was a bit stickier to feed than I expected but was pretty accurate. Also, it was on at 100 yards.

Beartooth WFNGC, 22 gr. H110 1480 fps, 1459 fpe, 6 fps AD, 8 SD Fed smooth as silk, just a little low at 100 yards, sub 2 inch group at 100 yards, just 4 inches low at 150 yards! I'm going to try to work this up to 23 gr. That big flat point really slaps the target backing. You can hear it through muffs all the way back to the firing line.

Sierra JFP, 23 gr. H110 1504 fps, 1506 fpe, 9 fps AD, 11 SD Another smooth feeding load despite the fact that it is the longest COL of any of these loads. 1" or so low at 100 yards. This bullet has the best BC of any of these 300 gr. bullets.

Hornady XTP-HP, 22 gr. H110, 1446 fps, 1393 fpe, 11 fps AD, 17 SD This time I seated to the topmost cannelure and it fed better but it also struck lowest on the target at 100 yards. I'm going to work these up to 22.8 gr. (the Hogdon manual max) and see how they do. However, it is the XTP-Mag that is most suitable for these velocities (of all the XTP bullets).

I need to restake the front sight and zero. Today, by paying attention to the front sight, lateral variation of all loads did not exceed 3". It was the vertical disbursement that varied.

Free recoil energy of these loads varied from 18 to 19 fpe.

Hornady XTPs

I picked up 2 boxes of the Hornady 300 gr. XTP-MAG (45235). These are HPs like the 300 gr. XTP-HP ( 45230) but have a round nose as opposed to the the truncated cone shape and only one cannelure for use at the shorter length. In other words the cannelure is in the same location as the topmost cannelure on the XTP-HP. It should feed a bit better. As to construction and use in the rifle, I expect that performance will be very similar at the 1700 fps starting velocity I seem to be getting in my rifle although the BC is better being .200 vs .180. SD for both bullets is .210. Hornady's bullets can be see on their web site. The velocity range for the HP (45230) is 800-1700 and for the MAG (45235) is 1100-2100. These are both .452" bullets.

Just back from the range with results:

265 gr. Cast Performance WFNGC, 24 gr. H110, CCI350 primer for 1579 fps 1467 fpe 11 fps AD 14 SD

300 gr. Sierra JFP, 22 gr. H110, CCI350 primer for 1407 fps 1319 fpe 10 fps AD 15 SD (Note that this load came closest to shooting point of aim at 100 yards.)

300 gr. Hornady XTP-HP, 22 gr. H110, CCI350 primer for 1431 fps 1364 fpe 22 fps AD 30 SD Note: The bullet has been seated out to the second cannelure. I'm going to try it seated to the first cannelure. It does not feed well seated to the same length overall as the Sierra bullet!

Free recoil energy of these loads is about 17.5-18 fpe.

I had another interesting experience. 4 times I looked through the aperture to see no front sight. I just picked it up off the ground and stuck it back in. You see, the factory heavily greases these AND stakes them. As the base is a tapered wedge, you can reinsert them fairly accurately and if I choose to retain it, only need to stake the one end of the dovetail. It is my OWN fault that I removed the sight earlier and pending the results of my experiments, haven't correctly reinstalled it.

Of course there was a wind from 3 o'clock this afternoon so, combined with the front sight laterally shifting to the right, my groups were somewhat larger than expected.

I got to the range this afternoon AFTER this morning's rain. Got to shoot the following...

300 gr. Hornady XTP, 21 gr. H110, CCI 350 for 1449 fps, 1358 fpe, 4 fps AD, 5 SD
300 gr. Sierra JFP, 21 gr. H110, CCI350 Unchronographed
260 gr. Cast Performance WFNGC, 10 gr. Unique, CCI300 1215 fps, 868 fpe 4 fps AD 7 SD
145 gr. RB, 2.5 gr. Bullseye, CCI300 for 287 fps, 27 fpe 47 fps AD 48 SD

I've not got a photo yet, but some of these were below aiming point at 100 yards, the 265 gr. CP WFNGC was about right on and even the aforementioned 250 gr. Hornady XTP load was a good 6+ inches lower! Who knows what's up with that. Perhaps Ben Rumson is correct about how I handle the recoil. This is with the original factory front sight.

By the way, that front sight didn't move through all that shooting! It is practically a finger press fit and it stuck right through it all. Very interesting.

In any case, I think that I can find a load that will creat significant FPE and penetration and it right on at 100 yards. The current load with the 265 gr. CP WFNGC seems to be a good general purpose load. I think that if I speed up the 300 gr. bullets they will also come up on the target.

I can't say enough about how much I like the gun despite the situation with the sights. If I can find a couple of useful loads I'll be well satisfied.

However, if YOU plan to put a Williams Foolproof, Lyman 66 or other receiver sight on a .45 Colt or .44 Mag M92, mount it as low as it will go on the receiver. You WILL need the adjustment range.

I loaded 4 new loads (and the ramp ups) to test for velocity, accuracy and compatibility with the existing sight system on the EMF 92.

The bullets used in my .45 Colt handloads to date.

300 gr. Hornady XTP, 21 gr. H110, CCI 350
300 gr. Sierra JFP, 21 gr. H110, CCI350
260 gr. Cast Performance WFNGC, 10 gr. Unique, CCI300
145 gr. RB, 2.5 gr. Bullseye, CCI300

These are photos of the cartridges. The longest is 1.684" but still functions through the M92 action.

The longest of these cartridges is the load with the Sierra at 1.684" but the XTP has a second cannelure and can be loaded out to that length. Both will probably take the max load of 22 gr. H110 which should be very similar to that load as I use it with the 300 gr. bullet in the .44 Mag.

I've yet to use H4227 and Lil'Gun, both of which should provide slightly higher velocities if the manual is correct.

Yes, I have received the new .600" (measured from bottom of dovetail) Marbles sourdough front sight but haven't installed it yet. Perhaps my reloading will negate that necessity. That would be good as the sight will require modification, a lot of grinding, to use. I'd just as soon save the sight for another project if I can.

A comparison shot of the the factory front and the Marbles replacement. The Marbles must be extensively modified as most of the sight forward of the dovetail would have to be removed to avoid the barrel band!

This brings up another subject, removing and installing front sights. In this case the base of the original front sight was tapered in thickness to wedge into place in the center. It was heavily greased in the dovetail and can almost be removed and installed by hand but didn't come out after firing many rounds of heavy reloads. This is why one removes left-to-right and installs right-to-left. Not everyone does this sort of thing but enough do that it pays to adhere to this procedure.

As the saga of my new EMF Hartford 92 .45 Colt continues I've more to report.

Yesterday I went to the range thinking that I might have solved the problem with zeroing the rompin' stompin' .45 Colt loads using H110 and the Hornady 250 gr. XTP. At 1778 fps, these are so fast that the .065" sight change made didn't do the trick. Well, now here's a puzzle, it did do the trick with the much slower 225 gr. Winchester Silvertip factory loads! It may have lowered the POI of the heavy hitters by 2" but brought the Silvertips down the entire, calculated, 11". So, what is up with that? As it is, the gun shoots high with the XTP load even at 150 yards!

In the photos below, you can see what happened on March 31st and what happened yesterday. I know that yesterday's group gave a better impression of the accuracy of the system with the various loads but it did rather raise another problem. One should note that we had a 25-30 mph quartering to cross wind! Had one gust I thought would take the roof off the shooting bench shed!

The question is, what to do? Well, one thing is to go to slower but heavier bullets OR bullets of about the same weight but slower OR lighter and faster bullets. I think that the last option is the least suitable given my intended use. It certainly isn't much good if I can't zero the system with usable ammunition at a reasonable range.

Brownell's does sell a sourdough front with the necessary height (.600") of over ½". That should also work to allow the adjustment necessary. Another thing is that the sourdough allows ½ the bead diameter in additional "height" because of how it is used to bisect the target as opposed to being placed over the target. If that doesn't work...

However, I did want to try heavier bullets and have order the Sierra and Hornady 300 gr. jacketed to try as well as the Cast Performance 260 gr. WFN. I also have the Lee Alox to lube some roundball to load over 2.5 gr. of Bullseye for a close range squirrel/rabbit load.

These are the targets from the two days.

.45 Colt Ammo

I wanted to record some of my shooting impressions concerning my new EMF Hartford 92 noted below.

Yesterday, I took it to the range along with my chronograph. The following loads were tested with the noted results.

Make	Bullet	Vel	FPE	AD	SD
CCI Blazer	200 gr. JHP	1152	590	20	29
Win Cowboy	250 gr. LFP	835	387	30	35
Win ST	225 gr. ST	946	448	18	27
Reload	250 gr. XTP	1778	1756	12	28

The reload consists of 250 gr. Hornady XTP-HP over 26 gr. H110 ignited by a CCI Magnum Large Pistol primer in new Winchester cases.


These are the cartridges I've tested so far.

After chronographing, I immediately went to the targets at 50 yards. A 3" bull was placed at 50 yards and used as the aiming point. Remember, my rear sight is all the way down as low as it will go. Somewhat surprisingly, all rounds grouped into about 4". Not so surprisingly, the center of this group was 3-4" above the POA. I then moved the target to 100 yards and mounted a 12" bull just above the 3". I fired 3 rounds using the center of the large bull as an aiming point. Neither round hit the target. I then used the lower 3" bull as an aiming point. Interestingly, a neighboring shooter said something about me not being able to hit the target. Frankly, I took offense and said, "look, it shoots high, I'll try a couple at the lower bull," and cranked off 2 more at the lower bull. The impact of both rounds can be seen in the photo, 2" apart. The load used was my reload. That did it for my reloads and I fired a mixture of the other ammo using the lower bull as the POA. ALL rounds struck 11" above that and to the right of the target. Easy enough to adjust the Williams Foolproof laterally, but there was nowhere to go for elevation. Quick reference to the Brownell's technical page on sight adjustment gave the amount of adjustment needed at .065".

I wrote Steve Young about the problem and that I proposed to modify the sight to correct the problem. I immediately got a phone call from him! He mentioned that another customer had the same problem. He thinks that the same sights are used on all guns and that they are set up for the .38/357 Magnum guns. After a good discussion the following options seemed to be on the table.

1. Modify the Williams Foolproof to allow it to go deeper the .065" necessary.
2. Get a front sight .065" higher.
3. Split the difference between the front and rear sight.
4. Send it back and drill 2 MORE holes for the sight.
5. Send it back and bend the barrel.

I rejected options 5 and 4. I do not want to bend the barrel, drill and tap 2 additional holes OR send it back.

The front sight is already an unsupported ½" tall. I don't think I want a taller front sight and don't want the hassle of changing out the front sight. A post or sourdough would give me about .020" to .025" height because the bead is used by placing it over the target and the post bisects the target. How it is used counts for something. I rejected options 2 and 3.

So, I've set myself up to modify the rear sight and after a close examination and taking the sight all the way apart and putting it back together a couple of times, started to work. First I scribed the outline of the elevator and then chucked the mount in the vise (after removing from the rifle, of course). I then went to work on it with a file. It took a couple of different files and the Dremel tool to nick out a particularly troublesome corner but I notched out the top back of the mount to give me another .065" clearance. Seems to work, now I'll be back to the range (after I load some more ammo).

Back to the ammo. All except my handloads were very mild generating only about 3-5 FPE in recoil energy despite the light weight of the rifle. Velocities are probably little different from those of the same cartridges fired in a revolver. The light loads smoked the brass cases and sometimes made it appear that I'd had a case failure by virtue of all the smoke coming from the action!

The CCI Blazer was first up and while accurate and mild to shoot (all are very mild) it didn't extract well because the rim isn't correct for use with the extractor. I can see how it would work fine in a revolver, but it was mildly irritating in the rifle.

Next was the Winchester Cowboy load. Put up in an old west appearing box, it is very mild in performance giving the lowest velocities of any factory ammunition tried.

Then, I tried the Winchester Silvertip. I thought this would be a relatively "hot" ammo as it is clear that it was made for the self-defense use of the cartridge. Just look at that huge hollowpoint!. Not so. Did give cloverleafs at 50 yards.

Then, the rip snorters, my handloads. Not only is the AD and SD of this ammo lower than any factory ammo but it cut cloverleafs at 50 yards AND can go into less than 2" at 100 yards (see target). Once I get it zeroed and fine-tuned, I think this will be pretty good ammo for my uses. 1756 FPE is nothing to sneeze at and extraction and ejection were slick and positive.

Through it all, the rifle performed as expected. SLICK! All ammo fed without problems except that I short stroked it twice for some unknown reason. The bore must be slick as well, clean up was a breeze. Brass came out with little deformation indicating a seemingly well cut chamber. Recoil should have been stout with my handloads but it wasn't at all punishing. It seemed less so than my old Winchester and Marlin 1894s in .44 Magnum. Both guns weighed more so it must be a happy coincidence of the rifle's geometry and my body shape!

With the sight now right I expect that the next range session will produce a good zero.

I have to compliment Steve Young of Steve's Gunz who called me last night to discuss my concerns. Now I know that he's in Texas but this was still at the end of a long work day for him. He's a pleasant fellow to talk to and it is clear he enjoys his work. I think it is good customer service and Steve will get my business again.

What we discussed is the mounting of the Williams Foolproof on my carbine. Steve pointed out that the CAS shooters don't use the guns at targets beyond 50 yards and the wide range of adjustment isn't necessary. He also pointed out that these are 100 yard guns. I kinda disagree on that, I think that properly loaded they should be good to 150 yards. After that trajectory DOES get to be too iffy with MY ability to judge distance. He also mounts the sights at that height so that if one wants to switch to a Lyman sight (the model # escapes me) you won't have to drill and tap two more holes, only one.

One can also alter the Williams, install a different front sight (a sourdough might be good) and play with your loads a bit.

I'm hoping to be able to use bullets in the range of 250 to 325 gr. at about 1600-1800 fps. As I told him, we'll see. I haven't had the gun long enough to really wring it out!

Rossi/EMF .45 Colt Carbine Arrives

I've finally (after ONLY 8 weeks) received my EMF Hartford M92 Winchester clone from Steve Young (aka Nate Kiowa Jones) of Steve's Gunz.



My new EMF 92 in .45 Colt

I haven't been able to get to the range, yet, but did get to shoot a few rounds and make a few observations.



The receiver, lever and hammer are all in color case.

Steve has a great program where he will sell you an EMF gun at 10% over wholesale, he does his race ready work and ships it to you for one price. In addition, I had him mount a Williams Foolproof Receiver Sight, replace the plastic follower with one of steel, and install a barrel sight dovetail blank to replace the removed rear sight. My total was $638.90 and I think worth every penny.

When I got to the local FFL to pick up the gun, the folks there commented on how slick this gun was compared to the Legacy, Navy Arms and Rossi guns that they had sold. It is slick! You can operate the lever, under load, with only your little finger. Further, it works at speed or as slowly as you can work the lever. I've yet to see just how long a cartridge it will handle but it did handle all the ammo I had on hand.

Now the ammo is an experience. I suppose that the major markets around here are for CAS shooters and those who wish to spend little money as everyone seems to have only the "cowboy" loads by various makers and CCI Blazers in the aluminum cases. There is one exception, most dealers seem to have large quantities of Winchester Silvertips which use a 200 gr. bullet. It is a good thing that I bought some 250 gr. Hornady XTPs and a couple of hundred new cases. I'm certainly not going to be able to explore the full performance range of this rifle with locally available ammunition.

The gun itself is pretty nice. While the color case is nothing as brilliant and bright as a Doug Turnbull it does have the appearance of well-worn well-cared for color case hardened metal. I don't know if that is the intent but it does give the appearance of a very well cared for rifle with faded colors. I should note that this is on this particular gun. I've seen several of the Navy Arms guns with a more intense color. Those of you who do this know that there can be variations in production guns and I don't know what process is used for the color-case on the Rossi made guns.

The metal finish of the blued steel parts seems pretty even with no dips or waves or color variation. However, even I (I've got color deficient vision) could see that the magazine tube and the barrel have a different finish. I'm not certain if the barrel simply has a higher polish but the colors and appearance is different. I did need a good natural sunlight on it to see it though. It is the magazine tube that is the odd duck as the rest of the blued steel parts seem to match.

The wood to metal fit is generally very good with only 2 exceptions. Both are where the butt meets the receiver and both are on the left side of the gun. One is where the wood stands a bit proud of the receiver boss and the other is where a bit of a chip (possibly) was taken from the wood along the tang. All the rest is very good even the buttplate which seemed to be a bugaboo on other guns I've seen from this maker (Rossi).

The wood itself is some sort of hardwood that mimics walnut but clearly isn't. Fairly unimpressive stuff, only the left side of the butt has any figure at all. I'm sure that many of Winchester's guns with the gumwood stocks looked no better than this.

I had Steve install a Williams Foolproof Receiver Sight as I thought that best for my purpose. I did consider a good fully adjustable tang peep sight but passed on that even though I'm a fan of them and just installed one on my 1906 Winchester (see below). Why? Because I thought it would get in the way and MIGHT be a hazard in high recoil situations with maximum loads. The second reason was unfounded despite the light 5 to 5¼ lb weight of this rifle. However, it would have been in the way.

This rifle is petite, so much so that when you wrap your hand around the wrist of the rifle your hand covers the whole wrist. I think that this would make a tang sight a big problem on what is a hunting rifle. Sometimes I have to control the rifle by holding by the wrist and this would be difficult indeed with the tang sight in the way.

The Williams Foolproof is a great sight and I have one on many of my rifles. It is light, strong, easily & accurately adjusted, without unnecessary protrusions to catch brush. Steve did a great job on the installation but I, in my ignorance, failed to make a specific request. That is, the sight should be mounted so that with the vertical adjustment in the lowest position the horizontal just clears the top of the receiver. It appears that this translates to having the top of the mount even with the bottom of the bevel on the receiver OR 1/8" lower than was done. Now I see why Steve mounted the sight mount even with the top of the receiver, but it doesn't give the full range of adjustment that users might find necessary. For my next rifle (I'm thinking .32-20), this is what I will have done.

For those who may not know, this is how the rifle (carbine) started.




I think that Steve did a wonderful job and I really like the gun. I hope that I'll get to wring it out including running all the ammo over the chronograph before too long.

Well, the grinding of the new tang screw went off without a hitch. I really like these little guns. Lots of fun. Helps excite you when you had great times with grandpa and one of these fine rifles.



Winchester M62A (top) and Winchester 06

The photo makes clear the differences in size between the 06 and 62A. The 06 is very petite compared to the 62A which feels pretty solid even for a grown man. The shorter length of pull is clear. The shorter barrel makes a noticeable difference in weight. My kids used to think it was heavy and preferred the 06. Right now the 06 is zeroed for the Aguila Colibri .22 ammo. No, it doesn't stick in the barrel.

Winchester M1906 Marbles Sight Installation

As I noted last time I'm searching for projects, mostly catch-up jobs, to do while awaiting my EMF M92 from Steve Young (aka Nate Kiowa Jones) of Steve's Gunz. The first of those projects is the Winchester M06 (aka 1906) that was my maternal grandfather's. When I got it it had just come out of 20-30 years of storage in my grandparents' attic and had a coat of fine rust over most of the exterior. However, the internals and wood were in pretty good condition and it WAS my grandfather's gun so...

Sight Installation Closeup

Well I had it bead blasted and reblued. I messed with some modern open sights for a while and then a few days ago I re-installed the #21 front sight and ordered a Marble's tang peep from MidwayUSA. AT $125 (less a nickel) it isn't inexpensive but not all that bad either. I received it today and quicker than Teddy Kennedy after bourbon and ice I had the sight on the gun.


Although I wrote the people at Marble's prior to ordering the sight so that I could be sure it would fit AND that the screws would be properly threaded I wasn't all that certain. Their response to my inquiry Will this tang sight for the Winchester 1906 work with the factory drilled and tapped mounting hole? Is a new tang screw included properly threaded for the Winchester? was Q1 - Yes Q2 - Yes, you may have to change threads. Not at all reassuring. However, all threads and hole spacing matched perfectly. The only problem was that the replacement tang screw was a bit long. No problem that, a few minutes with a grinder and it will be just fine.

This is a wonderful sight in another way. It is easy to adjust (I hope not TOO easy!). Looking through the aperture, I was quickly able to roughly zero the new sight by aligning it with the sight picture of the old open sight. The adjustments were easy to make and there was no roughness in the threads. I then removed the new/old rear sight. I hadn't done that before I took this photo (too excited).

Well, I'm bound for the basement to do some grinding on a tang screw!

New Rifle Coming

I'm going to write a bit about my .45 Colt, EMF/Rossi M92 carbine finished in blue and color-casehardened receiver. I ordered this gun from Steve Young of Steve's Gunz. Steve is going to do his "race ready" work, install a Williams Foolproof, steel follower, and barrel sight slot blank. I considered having this made into a 16" trapper or trapper with button mag but decided that it would be infinitely wiser to shoot it as manufacturered (with Steve's refinements) and then decide if I wanted to shorten the barrel, magazine or both.

The EMF rifle as shown on their website.

I've already purchased the RCBS carbide die set for this cartridge. I also bought 100 cases and 1 box of 100 Hornady 250 gr. XTP HP bullets. I plan on loading this particular lot over a hefty charge of H110 but will also do some round ball loads over Bullseye and some cast GCs over Unique and Lil'Gun.

The thing that is getting to me is the wait. It has only been about 30 days now but I feel as if it has been a year! Pretty lame for an old, well, older man! In any case it is a bear to be waiting so I've tried to distract myself.

My first thought was to find a good single-action revolver in .45 Colt that could become my big bore revolver (so that I could rid myself of the 629). That search was a bust. I'm wanting a Bisley grip on the Vaquero and would have accepted the standard grip on a New Vaquero (aka Vaquerito). I then broadened my search to include the USFA or Colt revolvers. No joy. Now, after much searching and looking at the various revolvers I've come to the conclusion that I "need" a Freedom Arms M97 and am leaning towards the fixed sight version. Still, at $1694, this is no spur of the moment purchase. I'd want the .45 Colt. Anyway, at $1694, I'd better think about this some more so I need to find some other diversion!

I have this old Winchester 06, a pump-action rifle for the .22 Short, Long and Long Rifle, made in 1924 that belonged to my maternal grandfather. Many years ago my grandmother, a virulent anti-gun person as are her 3 sisters, made Grandfather put all his guns in the attic. Well, as will happen, the roof leaked and moisture got on and near the guns and there was some rust. When I got this one, it was in bad shape and I had it bead blasted (which removed the worst of it) and re-blued. I had replaced the sights. This included the front sight (which I thought was too short for the replacement rear sight) but I discovered that it was the same height as the replacement and switched back to the original No. 21 front sight. Now, something had to be done about the rear sight.

Well, I like aperture sights (you might have noticed) and so I checked with Marble's as to the fit and threading of the mounting screws and decided to order one of their windage adjustable tang sights for the 06. Not cheap but cheaper in real dollars than they would have been when the rifle was made. Now I'm waiting for delivery of the sight but when I get it this gun will be set up just like my other grandfather's Winchester M62A (made in 1947 IIRC).

I think I might have as much as 4 more weeks to wait so... I guess I need to find another project to keep me occupied.

I was recently was asked about mounting telescopic sights, aka scopes or scope sights. I read a lot of different articles, some more than once, and some maybe 2 or 3 years after first reading them. See a lot of posts on the internet.

I have always been a cheap so-and-so and would not even buy a scope for many years. Didn't like them, didn't need them, and didn't want to spend the money. Then my attitude began to undergo a change as I got older (who's sight doesn't get worse as they get older?) and when I began to feel a need for more precision. I had a couple of .22 rifles on which I mounted a scope sight for the purpose of squirrel hunting and made some really good shots. Then I go into Contenders and they are a natural for mounting scopes easily and maintaining their easy-to-carry characteristics. While I would never want to mount a scope sight on a levergun, most of my contender barrels have one.

Because I'm a cheap so-and-so, it seemed natural that I would mount the scopes myself. Of course, I'm too cheap to get a bore collimator or bore sighter (such as this Leupold Boresighter or this Simmons Boresighter. So, I've had to use a multitude of field expedients.

It is necessary and sometimes difficult is to ensure that the reticule is not canted in relation to the gun bore. I've used levels, plumb lines, the Reticule Leveler and all sorts of other devices and field expedients to correct problems. Sometimes you have to get really creative. However, you must start with the mount which must be of the correct relationship to the bore. Sometimes even the factory will get the D&T wrong (but not that often in my experience). When that happens, some people will quickly resort to shims.

I never use shims if I can help it. Mechanically, they are another very weak link in the physical chain connecting the scope to the mount and mount to rifle. IOW, the shim can actually render the scope to rifle relationship more tenuous than is necessary. MOST (not always) of the time shims are not needed to zero the firearm. MOST scopes have the range of adjustment needed, much more than needed IN MOST CASES. There are cases where the BASE or MOUNT must be shimmed to ensure it is square to the rifle but because of the way bases attach, there isn't nearly the chance for slipping that shimming in the rings might present. If gross off-sets are needed there are rings made with inserts such as the Burris Posi-lin that obviate even a perceived need to shim and also those that provide lateral (windage) adjustment such as the Millet Angle-Locs.

For shim material I particularly don't like the use of cartridge brass because it is tapered. You can't ensure that it isn't tapered because from the head of the case to the case mouth the brass will taper in thickness. Tapered shim material does 2 bad things. One, it makes it extremely difficult to judge the degree of change you'll get when you tighten the work down onto the shim. Two, not all of the shim material will be in contact with both work surfaces which reduces the friction which holds everything in place against recoil.One shim material that is usually consistent in thickness across the shim AND cheap is the side of a soda or beer can (I'm afraid to admit how many BEER can shims I've made! ).

For my scoped guns (which are now all Contenders) I use Weaver mounts and low Weaver rings. I square the reticule using the Reticule Leveler. Weaver rings can easily torque a scope out of square and so I tighten every other ring screw ¼ turn at a time until they are all fully tightened. I might bore sight but often find it a waste of time. I go to the range. I fire one shot on the target. I secure the gun with the crosshair directly on the one bullet hole. I then adjust the sights so that the crosshair is directly over the desired POI. I then fire a single confirmation shot. I've already tested the ammo used and have the supposed ballistic performance to hand. I then shoot to confirm at 25, 50, 100 and 150 yards. I then zero for maximum point blank range. I'm not one to be changing sights of any kind and for the light loads I make up for some rifles, I adjust the load to shoot to the sights albeit at shorter ranges, say 25 yards. This system works for me. If I pay attention to detail, the "chore" goes off without a hitch.

This is not to say that other methods don't result in zeroed guns but this seems so much easier to me. I know because I've tried the method of locking the gun into a vise making sure all is square and level and then using a plumb line on which one lines up the vertical crosshair of the reticule. Too, many steps many interconnecting parts. At each connection a bit more slop or error creeps in. It can be enough to drive anyone crazy.