Anyone having accuracy problems? - RimfireCentral.com Forums

Go Back   RimfireCentral.com Forums > >

Join Team RFC to remove these ads.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-15-2017, 08:43 PM
snapbean
NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Aug 2014
Location: 
The banana republic of New Orleans
Posts: 
22
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Anyone having accuracy problems?



Log in to see fewer ads
Not long ago, after working my butt off for over a year with little time off, I guess I was fantasizing about spending a little time in the woods or at the range and treated my self to my first Henry .22. The down time has yet to happen, but I was able to shoot it a couple of times It's a sweet gun, smooth as butter, nice feeling in the hand and in general I love it, but.....shooting at a target at approx. 45 yards, I'm all over the place. I am generally low and left which is correctable, but my grouping is 3" - 4".

At the same time I shot my Marlin 60, Ruger American .22 mag and Remington 597 with very good results (extremely good with the .22 mag using iron sights).

I did install a Skinner rear sight, barrel mounted on it as I have a Marlin 795 with Tech Sights and it is deadly accurate. I was hoping for the same, but am thinking I may need to go with the receiver mounted peep to give me a longer sight plane, similar to the receiver mounted Tech Sights on my Marlin. Anybody have any thoughts on that or other things I could check? Thanks in advance for any input!
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-15-2017, 09:08 PM
alro41

Join Date: 
Nov 2010
Posts: 
537
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
To start with, these aren't target rifles but you probably know that. Seems like you should be able to get at least 2 inch groups at 45 yards but...
Have you tried different ammo, i.e. brands, speeds, bullet weights. Rimfires are notoriously finicky about ammunition. The one thing I don't like about Henry's is that the receiver cover is "sheet metal". But that in itself doesn't seem to be a major problem with huge numbers of guns out there. The long eye relief set up that you are using is also a negative factor which it sounds like you'll be correcting. And that might do it.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-15-2017, 09:52 PM
snapbean
NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Aug 2014
Location: 
The banana republic of New Orleans
Posts: 
22
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
I did not get a chance to do much experimenting with different ammo and you're right to check that. I am really hoping to not have to put a scope on this little rifle, as the weight and balance is great as it is. One contributing factor is my 65 year old eyes, but I will keep trying - I'm pretty confident I can get it sorted out with a little time at the range.

I was curious as to the Skinner peep that is drilled and tapped into the receiver cover and if anyone has had experience with going that route.
Reply With Quote
 
  #4  
Old 02-15-2017, 11:16 PM
CamP

Join Date: 
Apr 2015
Location: 
Fort Worth
Posts: 
505
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
I always do ammo/accuracy testing with a cheap, yet proven, scope and sand bags. Too many variables with open sights.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 02-16-2017, 12:30 AM
noremf's Avatar
noremf
US Army Veteran NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Jan 2011
Location: 
Alabama
Posts: 
8,132
TPC Rating: 
100% (2)
Changing sights and

Quote:
Originally Posted by snapbean View Post
I did not get a chance to do much experimenting with different ammo and you're right to check that. I am really hoping to not have to put a scope on this little rifle, as the weight and balance is great as it is. One contributing factor is my 65 year old eyes, but I will keep trying - I'm pretty confident I can get it sorted out with a little time at the range.

I was curious as to the Skinner peep that is drilled and tapped into the receiver cover and if anyone has had experience with going that route.
.22 lr rimfire rifles are notorious for being very picky and you simply have to find out the hard way which ammo your weapon "likes".

I did testing on the three main after market iron sights for my Henry Golden Boy, which were Marbles, Skinner and a number of tang mounted vernier peep sights.

I forwarded my results, based on a request by one of the Henry folks, to them. Even got an email or two from Imperato with some pertinent questions. Got 3 hats and 3 mugs back.

I am 73 by the by.

It has long been known that the closer to your eye, to a point, and the larger the eyepiece, not the eye-hole, is, again to a point, the better the results.

The skinner sight was too far away from the eye to be the most effective. Some improvement but not much over the stock iron sights. In addition if it is mounted on the cover and you need to take the cover off, when you put back on odds are that the sight will have to be re-adjusted. On the Henry you only need movement to the tune of .0069" to change the POI 1" at 100 yards.

The Marbles eyepiece is too small and for "well seasoned" eyes and that is a major issue.

The vernier tang sights came out on top by a large margin as was expected but depending on which bells and whistles you want can cost more then the rifle. IMO those sights also add a "period" flavor to the rifle.

Mine looks like this:



This is a Pedersoli USA 433 mid range creedmore sight. The elevation adjustments are superb and the sight is robust. The windage adjustment is not thread adjustable but at ranges out to 100 yards that is not a deal breaker unless you are going to be shooting in paper competition and in a variety of wind conditions.



These pictures show some other advantages.



Unless the sight is "in battery" as shown in the above pic, you cannot see through the peep.



The sight folds backwards for either storage or skulking around the woods stalking Bigfoot so it does not catch on foliage etc.



Better yet it also folds forwards which not only covers the above but acts as a mechanical safety as you cannot cock the hammer back.

Last but not least is that the price is well under $100 and you can get from Track of the Wolf.

To set it up properly you need to determine the best distance from the rear of the peep to your eye(s) with your "hold". Rarely will that be using the tang screws.

Consequently you need some method to determine that before you get the tang drilled and tapped so that you will not permanently alter the weapon before you finger that out for sure.

I have a write up on how to do that and you can even shoot the weapon to make sure it is set up right for you and since you did not alter the sight you can return it to TOW for a full refund if you don't like it. Good folks there.

If you are interested in how to do that then PM me and I can email the PDF to you.

With the tang sight installed and the ammo this rifle "likes" .75" 5 round groups are fairly common at 75 yards and 1.5"-2" for 5 round groups at 100 also. That is from a prone position. I have my own ranges.

noremf(George)

Last edited by noremf; 02-17-2017 at 02:28 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-17-2017, 01:54 AM
snapbean
NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Aug 2014
Location: 
The banana republic of New Orleans
Posts: 
22
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
That's a beautiful set up you have there! I am going to keep tinkering with it, but I can definitely see the advantages of the Vernier sight and the look is really nice. The fact that the accuracy is much improved makes it all that much more attractive. Thanks for your input!
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02-17-2017, 09:15 AM
ditto1958
NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Sep 2012
Location: 
Wisconsin
Posts: 
1,329
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
I have the basic H001 Classic model, and I have struggled mightily with the question of "how accurate is my rifle?"

I can tell you a few things from four years of shooting my rifle a lot:

1. I have been able to shoot small animals in the head with it at "practical" distances. So, it's definitely more than good enough for rabbit and squirrel hunting and plinking.

2. It's definitely not a good benchrest shooter. Try to shoot groups with it at any distance and you are likely to quickly become frustrated.

3. It has a "deceptively bad" trigger. Huh? Say what? Well, try the trigger on a Henry, and you're likely to say, "hmmm, that's not bad at all." And it's probably not. But couple it with a slim and slender lightweight carbine, and you soon find out it's hard to hold the Henry still enough to shoot it really precisely.

Conclusion: you are best off using a Henry .22 lever gun for the things guns like that were originally designed to do- small game hunting, and plinking.

If you want to try to wring benchrest accuracy out of it, you'd best be approaching it as a hobby, or a challenge. It's kinda like the numerous threads at a Ruger forums where people complain that their Mini-14 Ranch Rifle is not shooting sub-MOA at the bench. A Mini-14 is really good at it's intended purpose, which is not to be a target rifle. There's nothing wrong with shooting a Mini-14 at the bench and trying to wring more accuracy out of it. But at the end of the day, it's still a "ranch rifle."
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 02-17-2017, 10:14 AM
jstanfield103's Avatar
jstanfield103
NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Oct 2010
Location: 
KY
Posts: 
1,700
TPC Rating: 
100% (1)
That is a beautiful sight. It looks great on the rifle and seems to work well.

I have had tang mounted sights on a rifle myself. The only reason I bring this up is I did not care for the tang sight. Most people really like them but I did not. So I just wanted to give someone thinking about this sight something else to consider.

Not knocking the sight, it looks awesome and looks like it would work well. But I found that where I place my hand on the stock the sight just always made my grip uncomfortable. I actually had to change my natural grip. I do not know if it is because I am a shorter individual or just me But something to consider.


Congratulations on the new sight.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02-17-2017, 11:00 AM
ArmyScout's Avatar
ArmyScout
US Army Veteran NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Jun 2012
Location: 
IL
Posts: 
703
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
I have seen a lot of complaints on Henry 22 rifle sights. Much of the time it is the sights which are the problem. I replaced both sights on a my 22mag several years ago and have excellent results ever since.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 02-17-2017, 01:07 PM
blkwollf
NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Aug 2006
Posts: 
5,141
TPC Rating: 
95% (46)
Quote:
Originally Posted by noremf View Post
.22 lr rimfire rifles are notorious for being very picky and you simply have to find out the hard way which ammo your weapon "likes".

I did testing on the three main after market iron sights for my Henry Golden Boy, which were Marbles, Skinner and a number of tang mounted vernier peep sights.

I forwarded my results, based on a request by one of the Henry folks, to them. Even got an email or two from Imperato with some pertinent questions. Got 3 hats and 3 mugs back.

I am 73 by the by.

It has long been known that the closer to your eye, to a point, and the larger the eyepiece, not the eye-hole, is, again to a point, the better the results.

The skinner sight was too far away from the eye to be the most effective. Some improvement but not much over the stock iron sights. In addition if it is mounted on the cover and you need to take the cover off, when you put back on odds are that the sight will have to be re-adjusted. On the Henry you only need movement to the tune of .0069" to change the POI 1" at 100 yards.

The Marbles eyepiece is too small and for "well seasoned" eyes and that is a major issue.

The vernier tang sights came out on top by a large margin as was expected but depending on which bells and whistles you want can cost more then the rifle. IMO those sights also add a "period" flavor to the rifle.

Mine looks like this:



This is a Pedersoli USA 433 mid range creedmore sight. The elevation adjustments are superb and the sight is robust. The windage adjustment is not thread adjustable but at ranges out to 100 yards that is not a deal breaker unless you are going to be shooting in paper competition and in a variety of wind conditions.



These pictures show some other advantages.



Unless the sight is "in battery" as shown in the above pic, you cannot see through the peep.



The sight folds backwards for either storage or skulking around the woods stalking Bigfoot so it does not catch on foliage etc.



Better yet it also folds forwards which not only covers the above but acts as a mechanical safety as you cannot cock the hammer back.

Last but not least is that the price is well under $100 and you can get from Track of the Wolf.

To set it up properly you need to determine the best distance from the rear of the peep to your eye(s) with your "hold". Rarely will that be using the tang screws.

Consequently you need some method to determine that before you get the tang drilled and tapped so that you will not permanently alter the weapon before you finger that out for sure.

I have a write up on how to do that and you can even shoot the weapon to make sure it is set up right for you and since you did not alter the sight you can return it to TOW for a full refund if you don't like it. Good folks there.

If you are interested in how to do that then PM me and I can email the PDF to you.

With the tang sight installed and the ammo this rifle "likes" .75" 5 round groups are fairly common at 75 yards and 1.5"-2" for 5 round groups at 100 also. That is from a prone position. I have my own ranges.

noremf(George)
Keyboard's Messed up now,...Tnks alot!!!- Beautiful lookin' Shooter George!!
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 02-17-2017, 01:32 PM
Off-target's Avatar
Off-target

Join Date: 
Jan 2015
Location: 
Runcorn, UK
Posts: 
148
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by noremf View Post
I did testing on the three main after market iron sights for my Henry Golden Boy, which were Marbles, Skinner and a number of tang mounted vernier peep sights.
noremf(George)
George, I bought a Creedmore tang sight similar to yours, but I haven't fitted it yet. The thing that bothers me is the thought that it will interfere with the right hand grip on the wrist of the rifle.

Have you found any problems with using a tang sight, or am I worrying about nothing?
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 02-17-2017, 05:07 PM
snapbean
NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Aug 2014
Location: 
The banana republic of New Orleans
Posts: 
22
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Conclusion: you are best off using a Henry .22 lever gun for the things guns like that were originally designed to do- small game hunting, and plinking.

That's exactly my intended purpose. I'm going to get it a little more on target and take it into the woods, and the attractive thing to me is the overall weight and feel of the rifle, which if I added a scope would definitely negatively affect what I'm looking for.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 02-17-2017, 06:53 PM
TrblShtr
US Air Force Veteran NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Aug 2011
Location: 
Nebraska
Posts: 
1,252
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Off-target View Post
George, I bought a Creedmore tang sight similar to yours, but I haven't fitted it yet. The thing that bothers me is the thought that it will interfere with the right hand grip on the wrist of the rifle.

Have you found any problems with using a tang sight, or am I worrying about nothing?
I've used a Marbles tang sight on my old H001T and now on my new H001TLB. I have switched my grip so my right thumb lays along the side of the stock instead of wrapping over it. To be honest I think I am more consistent this way
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 02-18-2017, 01:26 AM
noremf's Avatar
noremf
US Army Veteran NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Jan 2011
Location: 
Alabama
Posts: 
8,132
TPC Rating: 
100% (2)
Trivia

Quote:
Originally Posted by TrblShtr View Post
I've used a Marbles tang sight on my old H001T and now on my new H001TLB. I have switched my grip so my right thumb lays along the side of the stock instead of wrapping over it. To be honest I think I am more consistent this way
On exposed hammer rifles the recommended hold is to have the thumb on top of the tang inline with the hammer.

Some of my younger grandkids with small hands though have a problem with the thumb on top so they have been trained to keep the thumb along the side of the hand grip but still pointing down the barrel like "TrblShtr" does.

"Off-Target"...answers your question also.

Personally and the way I trained my children and grandchildren is to keep the thumb behind the bolt or hammer with the exception obviously being semiautomagical rifles.

With revolvers they are trained to keep the thumb up along side the hammer.

That is the way I was trained from day one back in 1961-1963.

noremf(George)

Last edited by noremf; 02-18-2017 at 11:30 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 02-18-2017, 12:46 PM
snagglepuss

Join Date: 
Mar 2012
Posts: 
771
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Snap, I may have missed it but I haven't seen how you're shooting...offhand or benched off of bags.
I'm getting 3-4" groups at 50m offhand with the stock sights (H001).
Of of a bag it's more like 1.5 to 2".
I too have a Marbles Tang sight on order and am hoping that improves things a bit.
So I'd say that if you groups are offhand it's okay...if it's shooting 4" off the bench I think I'd be checking your crown and such.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:51 AM.

Privacy Policy

DMCA Notice

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 2000-2015 RimfireCentral.com
x