Marlin 1895 SBL with see thru scope rings?

[DoveEater]

Managed to score a new Ruger made Marlin 1895 SBL in 45-70 at Bass Pro recently.

It came with an XS ghost ring sight which would be ok if only using the gun for defense against large dangerous game up close, but not really for hunting at 100+ yards like I hope to have the chance to do with it.

Thinking of getting some Leupold see thru scope rings to attach a low power scope to it, that way I could use the ghost ring sight if the need to quickly shoot close arose, but still be able to use the scope for longer shots.

Thoughts? Any of you done something like that with this or a similar gun and have experience to share?

 

[MThuntr]

I had a set on a smaller rifle to use the open sights too. Honestly they put the scope up fairly high which made for awkward shooting position. You'll find you don't use the sights so why bother at that point

A low mag scope like a 1-6 would work well. If you felt the want or need of the factory peep then som QD rings would work

I have a Rem made Marlin sbl and it's getting a Brownells MPO 1-6 to try out...currently on sale with a 15% coupon that expires tonight.

 

[shannerdrake]

Mthuntr is spot on.

I’ve played around with similar setups over the years and landed on a few things.

1) see through scope mounts are not good for using your scope or your sights.
2) a true 1x scope is for me still a lot better and faster than a set of iron sights. I shot an AR with a true 1-6x on it and used it from everything to shooting close shots mimicking room clearing (1x) all the way to shooting prairie dogs at 2-300yds (6x). If I did it again, I’d probably spend the money on a 1-8x. But a 1-4 or 1-6x would be more than enough for a 45-70
3) a good set of QR rings will return to zero or extremely close. They would allow you to ditch the scope in an “emergency”

 

[Jbotto]

These guys above beat me to it. If a rifle fits me properly and the scope is mounted low, the lowest magnification on most common scopes is enough for snap shooting. This was taught to me early on shooting rabbits with a 2-7x scope on a .22lr. Had no problems tracking them and shooting them on the run.

I would probably do like what mentioned above and get a 1-6x or similar and mount it on the lowest and sturdiest QD rings after I had the irons properly dialed in to my load of choice. My guess is that combo will treat you well you’ll not need to pop the scope off for irons.

 

[Sheltowee]

Probably considered heresy by some but you might consider putting an LPVO like a Vortex Strike Eagle or Eotech Vudu on top. Best of both worlds.

 

[noharleyyet]

There's some moving parts to consider when it comes to optics and mounts for the big loop. I got as low as I could with the hammer and ocular combo of a Trijicon 1x6 Accupoint & still needed a cheek riser appliance. Ended up removing the irons altogether for a @p_ham brake.

https://flic.kr/p/2nXY9Fy

 

[MThuntr]

There's some moving parts to consider when it comes to optics and mounts for the big loop. I got as low as I could with the hammer and ocular combo of a Trijicon 1x6 Accupoint & still needed a cheek riser appliance. Ended up removing the irons altogether for a @p_ham brake.

https://flic.kr/p/2nXY9Fy

I need to get p ham to work his magic on mine though no brake for me. I keep spending my fun $ on things

 

[TN2shot07]

I likes Ken’s approach above if you don’t want to shoot irons, it’ll let you mount that scope down a little more. If you want both the option of both Skinner makes an express sight where you have a peep and you can use a set of QD rings on the scope.

 

[howl]

In addition to all the other reasons why see-thrus are a bad idea, I've never seen any that held zero real well.

2x or 50' @ 100 yards field of view is wide enough for running shots at close range. Put a cartridge sleeve on and stick a section of pipe insulation under for an adequate cheek weld.

 

[p_ham]

See thru rings are garbage.
I would mount a 1.5-4x as low as possible.
Leupold makes a 1.4-4x IER scope that should let you keep your rear sight.

 

[Fishmaster196]

See thru rings are garbage.
I would mount a 1.5-4x as low as possible.
Leupold makes a 1.4-4x IER scope that should let you keep your rear sight.
View attachment 301358

Wow! That photo definitely makes me want one…

 

[44hunter45]

See thru rings are garbage.
I would mount a 1.5-4x as low as possible.
Leupold makes a 1.4-4x IER scope that should let you keep your rear sight.
View attachment 301358

I'll take one of those with a big loop, please.
I handled an blued shorty 1895 today. I was surprised how heavy they are. Do they really need the brake?

 

[p_ham]

I'll take one of those with a big loop, please.
I handled an blued shorty 1895 today. I was surprised how heavy they are. Do they really need the brake?

Ya the 1895's are pretty heavy. It seems like the new production models have a heavier barrel on them too. I've got one in the shop I could measure.

You don't really need a brake on 45-70, but you can load them fairly spicy. Mine's a hotrod wildcat I built, I don't care to shoot it without either a brake or suppressor.

 

[elkduds]

Given all this see-through hate, I'd have to be a glutton for punishment to opine how handy my Marlin 444 with see through and a Redfield widefield 1.5 x 4 long eye relief scope was for still hunting in the tightest of cover, and sitting over openings out to 200 yards. When Dad shot his last deer of his long hunting life with it, he opted for the glass at 125 yd. Since I'm no glutton, forget I mentioned it. Don't try it for yourself, just take everyone else's word for what will work best in your individual situation.