[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
▼ Settings Mobile Home
/k/ - Weapons

Name
Options
Comment
Verification
4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
File
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.

08/21/20New boards added: /vrpg/, /vmg/, /vst/ and /vm/
05/04/17New trial board added: /bant/ - International/Random
10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
[Hide] [Show All]


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: 1778793556583502.jpg (1.15 MB, 5000x2815)
1.15 MB JPG
The marlin 1894, 1893 and 36 look so much better than the 336 and "1895"*
*The current 1895s are just large frame 336s that they named 1895 after the old 1895 which were large frame 1893/1894s
It's a shame the 336 became the meta. The Winchester 1873 also looks way better than the JMB designed Winchesters, but I recognize the massive advantages the JMB guns have in terms if weight and strength and how smoothness and fire rate was never actually a practical concern outside of cowboy action shooting
>>
>>65613155
I hate the look of the fat forend they went to for the model 1936 onwards
If I ever buy one it's getting filed down to look like pic rel
>>
>>65613168
fat forend is comfy
>>
>>65613174
I know it probably is, i just cant get over the looks
I like slim and svelte guns
>>
>>65613155
All those guns you listed, look exactly the same to me. Seems to me you’re just splitting hairs.
>>
>>65613213
the receiver looks completely different, blindoid. how do you even type without eyes?
>>
>>65613168
I want to put one of those sights on my winchester
>>
>>65613234
nice
>>
File: 3662214_sight_66a.jpg (41 KB, 700x700)
41 KB JPG
>>65613234
A side-mounted sight that screws into the receiver would be a far more practical choice for most applications.

Tang mounted sights kinda suck, they're very fragile and the slightest impact will ass rape your zero.
They're only useful on black powder rifles where the sights need to be elevated to ridiculous heights to compensate for the rainbow-like trajectories of big bore black powder cartridges.
>>
>>65613234
>>65615336
the tang mounted peeps are better if you're exclusively target shooting because they put the peep closer to your eye. the receiver mounted ones are better for hunting, because as you say, they're not in the way and not as finicky.
If you look at target rifles with iron sights or like shootzen rifles they usually have the rear sight as far back and close to the shooter's eye as possible
>>
The 336 is a blight on lever actions. Wish it never came to be.
>>
>>65615616
same
>>
File: classmarl2.jpg (19 KB, 987x551)
19 KB JPG
>>65615616
I dont think theres anything wrong with it in its original form. Sometimes a scoped 30-30 thats strong enough for bubbas pissin hot handloads is nice. But the ugly stainless and grey laminate guns with huge picatinny rails so you can larp as le heckin cool dinosaur man is what made em gay
>>
>>65618106
the one piece receiver looks gayer than the 2 piece
>>
>>65618111
I agree it doesnt look nearly as refined
And is it actually a two piece receiver or is it just the geometry of the ejection "slot"



[Advertise on 4chan]

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.