Tang Sights - 24hourcampfire

If you were going to get a tang sight to go on your 1899 savage, which one would it be, a lyman or marbles and which type/style aperature, screw-in or flip-up/down would you go with? The windage lyman seems to be out of my price range, so I have pretty much eliminated it from consideration.
 
 A friend pointed out he likes the marbles because it is spring loaded and if you hit a lyman on something with it locked upright it can sheer the rear screw off or pull the threads in the tang, any truth to this?
 
 Thanks,
 
 RJS

I have both model sights mounted on different 1899's. I think the Lyman is better finished with a smoother polish and blue. The Marble has more of a mat finish and is not as well finished but seems a little more robust in its operation with the spring loaded tang. Generally the lymans go for 30% premium over the Marbles. Both function well and produce very fine sight pictures for shooting nice groups at 100 yards with my 303 (Lyman) and 22 Hi Power (Marbles).

This is an area of personal opinion. I have a variety of 99s with tang sights of all common variations. My favorite hunting combination is the Williams tang mounted sight on a 99G in the 30-30 cartridge. This rifle was one of a pair my Dad had set up for deer hunting. The other was a 99F in 300 Savage with a Lyman 57 sight. Both have the front bead painted flourescent red and the aperature is left open (without an insert). Either of these rifles come up dead on for me and attain any hunting accuracy required. I think my preference for these sights is based on the rear sight being about 2 inches further from my eye than the Lyman/Marbles tang sights. I can't quickly focus through these sights.

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr>My favorite hunting combination is the Williams tang mounted sight<hr></blockquote>
 I was not aware that Williams had or has ever manufactured any tang sights. They're known for making receiver sights, open sights, scope mounts, and having an excellent gunsmithing operation. Not tang sights, however. Is this something new?

it's a reciever sight and quite refreshing to hear from someone who's used them and found them easier/better than those damn tang sights that everybody's always chasin that ain't worth a crap for hunting.
 And the whiner's say "but they don't look good enough, waaah" fbocb

The man wrote "tang mounted" not tang sight. Williams, Lyman, Redfield and quite a few others manufactured sights that mounted on the tang but are not tang sights as the term is commonly used. My only problem with Williams sights is the material they're made of, not their usefulness. I prefer older Lyman and Redfield sights to Williams sights because they're made of blued steel rather than aluminum. I have no problem using a Williams if that's what I have to work with. My experience with tang sights is limited to using the Lyman that is mounted on my 1894 Winchester rifle (manufactured in 1895)and based on that limited experience my opinion leans toward receiver sights.

This Williams sight mounts using the two original holes on the tang as per the Lyman and Marbles. I have had Winchesters which had I similar looking sight mounted with two holes in the side of the receiver (which required drilling). There is no number showing on the Williams sight on my 99G. Perhaps it is on the inside base. I assume this sight is 25 - 30 years old and don't know if they are still manufactured. I will ask a friend who is more knowledgeable in this area when I see him at a show in two weeks.

You are mistaken. A TANG sight has an extended shaft for elevation that pivots up or down depending on the user's needs; i.e., transport, use of open sights, etc. A RECEIVER sight mounts, regardless of mounting holes location, so that its body is adjacent to the receiver and features micrometer adjustments. There IS a difference.

To the original question....I have both Lyman and Marbles and do actually like the Marbles because of it being spring-loaded and always returning to the same place when raised. They (the Marbles), however, aren't adjustable for windage. I also like having the ability to change the size of the disk because I can get a better sight picture with a large disk. I think the tang sights make a neater package than receiver sights but that's a matter of choice and as far as I know, all the receiver sights are adjustable for windage. Get some of each and have fun making up your own mind as to which one is best.

Can someone tell me what's the difference between the model or number 70 and 80 redfield receiver sights?
 
 Also, some I see have domed/slotted smooth adjustment knobs and others have knurled/flattop knobs. Any idea what the different knobs are called?
 
 Thanks,
 
 RJS

A Redfield 80 has a quick release button for removal of the slide as on the Lyman 57 (to remove the Redfield 70 slide, the adjustment screw has to be backed all of the way out).
 The slotted screw knobs are called "hunter knobs" whereas the knurled knobs are "target knobs."

I was at a show yesterday in Sundridge, Ontario and I picked up another Williams "Foolproof" receiver sight. It is different from my other one in that it is designed to mount in the holes intended for the rear scope base. It was obviously designed for the factory tapped models with the sliding safety on the tang. This sight would not be useable on any model with the cocking indicator post as it would be covered by the sight base.
 I have a Williams box for this sight. Williams Gun Sight Co. Davison Michigan

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr>This sight would not be useable on any model with the cocking indicator post as it would be covered by the sight base.<hr></blockquote>
 Negative. ALL 99s made from what, 1908 onward, have the cocking indicator in the forward part of the tang. The scope mount holes are forward of this. Any 99 factory D&T'd for scope mounts, as well as any 99 D&T'd to accept standard mounts, will accept this sight. None of the receiver sights made for a 99 will interfere with the cocking indicator.

The Williams Fool Proof you describe is designed for the rear factory receiver holes and will fit on the tang safety models as well as the lever safety models. As Robert stated, all 99�s have the cocking (hammer) indicator. If you look at the bottom of the sight, you�ll see that there are 2 holes besides the mounting holes. Those extra holes are designed to fit over the cocking indicator pin, one hole for each type. With that sight installed the cocking indicator is not visible and of no use.
 
 A lot of people don�t seem to like the Williams because it is aluminum but it is quality made and highly functional for its intended use, not collecting. The sight is mounted low and streamline on the 99 and does not have protruding knobs. The micrometer adjustments are exact and repeatable and the tang safety operation is not hindered in any way as well. I�m confident that the 85,000-pound tensile strength aluminum is more than adequate for any of my hunting situations.
 
 This sight is not manufactured anymore but is still available from Midway for about 58 bucks. The Williams model number for this sight is FP 99S.
 
 These sights show up fairly regular on E-bay and the auction sites. I bought one for a tang safety model a few months ago �new in the box� for $40. I own Redfeild and Lyman receiver sights but really like the Williams as well, especially on the tang safety 99A and 99F models.