Does anyone here have any ideas on how I could scope a Browning B92. It is a top eject like the Winchester 94 but I cannot find a side mount for it anywhere. I've talked to a couple of gunsmiths who said they don't think a side mount for a Winchester 94 or 1892 could be adapted. I've called Browning. I tried Weaver, BSquare, Leupold, no help. My eyes just won't let me shoot out to 100 yards without a scope any more. Any help appreciated.

That Browning 92 is too nice a gun to cobble up like that. You might consider just getting a different gun that you can scope and use it instead. Save the Browning for closer shots you can see.

One thing we seem to forget as we acquire guns, they will be around long after we are gone and they need more consideration about what they are and what they were made to do.

If you like the 92 and want go ahead and scope one, get a Rossi and scope the heck out of it, but please leave the Browning alone. I would even be interested in trading you a Rossi for the Browning if you want to proceed with your quest.

I have a Marlin which is scoped. But the B92 is the most accurate 44Mag I've ever seen. At 50 yards I can still group an inch. Which isn't bad for 44 Mag.

Others had talked me out of scoping it but then one fellow said to me "What use is the gun if you can't enjoy it?" Are you saving it for someone else to enjoy? If you are keeping it only for the resale value then you are not enjoying it and you might as well get rid of it." So I'm exploring the possiblity again.

Some people drill and tap for peep sights and most see nothing wrong with that.

Some people might even put a mustache on the Mona Lisa if they owned it, but that doesn't make it right. You can do what ever you like, but the Browning shoots so well at 50 yards, use it for what you can and get something else that is suited for optics.

There is a reason there aren't provisions for a scope on that rifle. You have already mentioned the top eject isn't compatable with a scope. You are trying to make a sow's ear from a silk purse, don't do that.

"Some people drill and tap for peep sights and most see nothing wrong with that."

Exactly.

A rear reciever sight like a Williams or Lyman will not affect the looks or handling like adding a side mounted scope would. Which is why most folks don't have any problem with that.. The scope will ruin the resale value as well.

What is the point of taking a beautiful little 5.5LB lever carbine and making it feel and handle like a bulky bolt gun with a scope?

One other thing, the stocks on the B-92 are not exactly desgined for a scope use either..

IMHO, if you can shoot groups that tight with the B-92 and the factory iron sights you are answering your own question.

Unless you are going to use the B92 for 200 yard Prairie dog shots or enter the gun in a benchrest match ,I would put a good receiver sight on it. You might put a finer bead or blade sight on the front as well.

Best advice yet!!!

There are two problem with a receiver sight
1) it requires the front sight to be altered. Or at least that is what I was told when I called Williams. And what my gunsmith says. The front sight on the Browning is neither pinned in nor does it use a groove. It is soldered in place. It seems to me as great a travesty to break that solder or to modify the front sight as to drill and tap the receiver.
2) after I've done the receiver and the front sight what happens if I still can't shoot it well?

I regularly shoot my scoped rifles at 200-300 yards. Of course they are not 44 Mag and I know 44 Mag is not an accurate 200 yard round. But I would like to be able to maximize the capablities of the gun. Otherwise I may as well just sell it. I'm half convinced to do that now.

How much would you want for the Browning?

W,

You need to go back and read the reponses here again.. You are missing several facts here.

First of all, as far as the "adequacy" of any peep sight. If you can TRULY shoot 1" groups with that rifle at 50 yards with the factory iron sight, -YOU HAVE ALREADY ANSWERED YOUR OWN QUESTION..

I have never heard of anyone who cannot shoot rear aperture sight better than open sights as long as the aperture size is large enough. The peep will be BOTH faster and moe accurate for most shooters. If you can shoot the factory irons that well, the peep will be even better.

Now, about the "travesty" of drilling the reciver for a peep sight..

HOW do you think you will get a side mounted scope on that rifle? With Duct tape? No- you are going to drill 2-4 holes in locations that serve NO other purpose than to put on a side mount. And, they will be bigger holes than for a peep sight. And, if you ever take that ugly looking side mounted scope off someday, the rifle will look like a block of swiss cheeze.

Most lever gun buyers would not mind two holes drilled in the side of a lever gun for a proper peep sight. That is becuase most lever gun buyers usually get around to putting a rear peep on any top ejecting lever gun to begin with. It certainly does not drop the value on a replica like the B92 if done properly. But most of folks WOULD holler like mashed cats if they saw the left side of that reciever with holes for a side mount.

The last point is,unless your gun shoots high right now with the lowest eleveator setting on the rear sight,I simply do not agree with your take on the receiver sights. They CAN be mounted low enough to hug the top of the action pretty closely. The center of the aperture should be able to be place right wehre you need it.

With most loads, I sincerely doubt yuou will need to do anything with the front sight if the reciver sight is mounted by anyone who really knows what they are doing. If you do need a higher front sight blade, here is how to do it. The orional m92 rifles had the same basic base design as the Brownings do, only the front sight blade was fitted into a slot in the base and pinned in.

Any decently talented gunsmtih could replicate the orgional Winchester setup without removing the orgional sight on the barrel. They could the actual blade and then mill a slot in the front base on a mill or simply cut a slot with a Screw slotting file by hand. Either way, you could put a higher front sight on it to the correct size.

And not "put a mustache on the Mona Lisa"...

What I had been trying to figure out is a way to either adapt a side mount for a Winchester 1892 or 1894 to the B92. I was thinking I could get an aluminum side mount. TIG weld over the holes and redrill holes to match the existing holes in the receiver. Use enlongated screws and avoid any drilling and tapping. If I can't use a Winchester side mount then get a machinist to build a suitable copy adapted to the B92. Using either my 2x7 Leupold or an even lighter Leupold compact (wieght 8-11 ounces) shouldn't affect the handling that much.

Now I have to admit I've never shot a tang sight or peep sight. (other than on my AR which I don't like) If I can find someone here near Houston perhaps I can give it a try. I belong to the Texas Hunting Forum so I can post there to see if anyone has one.

But still if I can adapt or make a side mount without drilling and tapping the thought intrigues me.

I hadn't really thought about selling the B92. I have no idea what it is worth. It shoots and handles beautifully but its been used. So the wood has some scratches.

I put a Williams peep sight on my Browning B92 and have been very happy with it. My eyes are nearly 59 years old and don't work like they did even a few years ago. I'm putting peep sights on more of my woods rifles, like a Remington 14 in 35 Remington, and still shooting them out to 100 to 125 yards with no problem.

Did you have to modify the front sight? Williams told me I would have to do so.

Yep. But it wasn't a problem. The gunsmith just slotted the base and pinned in a taller sight. It looks like it belongs on the rifle. I did a Browning 86 SRC the same way. I put a receiver sight on it and needed the taller front sight, so I slotted the base and pinned a piece of a silver coin in place. When I saw how the 92 was done I did the 86 my self. It works great and looks like a period sight.

Do you happen to have the Williams model number? Or a picture perhaps if no number? Thanks

Some ideas:


http://www.levergunscommunity.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=22807




http://possibleshop.com/rifle-malcolm-scopes.html


http://www.opticsplanet.net/leatherwood-hi-lux-wm-malcom-winchester-1894-mount-set.html

BCP..

That bottom pic should be renamed "something stupid"

I will try to get a model number tomorrow. The rifle is at my shop. I'll try to take a picture of it too.

Either a Williams FP-94 or a 5D-94 receiver peep sight will fit a B92 properly.

OR

You could mount a tang peep sight, like I did on this B92, and use the issue front sight.



.

BCP thanks for the websites. I called the the possibleshop and the scope manufacturer. Really nice people. They didn't have anything to help me but I was amazed at the number of those scopes they sell.

Rangr44
Could you send that picture to [email protected]
I'd like to resize it for a closer look. Thanks

This is a picture of the Williams Fp sight on my 92. I thought about a tang sight at first, but have one on a 94 Winchester and it gets in the way of my right hand when I'm carrying it. I went with the receiver sight instead even though it doesn't look traditional.


The higher front sight blade on the 92. It is made of nickel silver but I keep it black.

Mathsr

Those are good pictures. Thanks. Did you have to drill and tap the receiver? What was done to the front sight?

I can't swear to it but I believe that the receiver did have to be drilled and tapped. The front sight blade was filed off the post so the post is flat. The post was then slotted and a blade fitted to the slot. The post with the blade inserted was then drilled for a pin and the blade then pinned in place. The blade is then filled down to the correct height, shaped and the face of it is grooved and blackened. I polished the head of the pin so that it would show up better in the picture. There is not much room for the blade to extend forward of the sight post because of the cheep aluminum magazine band but extending it some toward the rear keeps it from looking too tall. It takes about as long to do as it does to type it up.

None of the B92 rifles were factory tapped for peep sights.

Should be easy enough to do. Dennis Olson in MT drilled and tapped one for my about 15 years ago, and he told me the metal on the Brownings "cut like cheeze".

As to the "traditonal" look of aperture sights. They have been around since about 1900. They are plenty "traditional"- just not "old west" tradtional.

One thing about those Williams Fool proof sights with the click adjustments. DO NOT let the almuninum bodies of those sights fool you. The internal screws and ball detents are HARDENED STEEL. They have COIL springs in their detents and everything is covered from dust and moisture. They are a damn fine and practial peep sight for the money -overall more rugged than the current Lymans.

I like the Williams FP sight. I have had one on a Marlin 336 in 44mg since 1968 or 69 and it has held up to everything I have thrown at it. It is a solid, well built sight.

Yep, Hwe I was younger, I leaned toward the Lyman m66 sights due to the Lyman name and the fact they were around a bit longer than the Williams..

When in got a little odler and wiser, I took a Williams apart and actually compared it's guts to a Lyman. No comparision.

The Lyman m57/56 sights, with their cheap exposed leaf springs are built like a carnival prize compared to a Williams FP.

Actually ,there is nothing wrong with the Willaims 5D sights with their sliding, scre lock adjustments. Especally for a hunter who is going to sight it in and lock it down anyway.

How did this turn out ?

Turnbull Restoration could likely help you out.