Looking good.

 

Thanks!

 

Does your 92 have the tang safety? If so, does the Marbles cover it?

 

It does have the safety on the tang. The marbles utilizes the tang screw aft of the safety and a small indexing screw right in front for alignment. It does not extend up to or make contact with the safety. Everything is still usable as long as you’re used to shooting with your thumb not grasping the wrist of the stock.

 

I've got a Winchester/Miroku 45Colt 20", a Rossi .44 20", and an older Rossi 45Colt 20". I gotta say the Rossi rifles are my favs. Smooher actions, but I admit both had their ejector springs replaced with ones from McMaster-Carr. The Miroku is a bit jumpy in the lever's action, in comparison. But... but... it shoots really well, better than the Rossi guns by a small but measurable amount.

 

And I wouldn't keep my rifle next to boots like that.... The fumes alone from them boots is liable to knock the bluing right off the steel!

 

😂🤣

Those boots??? Man ALIVE do they wear well! And surprising?? Still smell like leather!

Leather relaxed with wear and softened by years…could use with a slight sole repair, but they can’t be beat!

 

I own a Win-ku ‘92 & ‘73 in .45 Colt - both have a Marbles tang, gives a classic look and helps my old eyes - very well made levers and fun to shoot. I load the 250 slug over 8.5 Unique and I am at 2 to 3” at 50 yards - someday maybe a short range deer with one of them.

 

Any helpful tips of making sure the Marbles is totally locked in to its setting?

 

M-92 can be on the rough side to start with. They can be worked over and smoothed out (cowboy action shooters are all over this), or they smooth out with time and use. I have two Rossis that have been worked on and they are sweet. Hope yours works good and is fun to run...

 

I have to say, I can’t find much to complain about on my particular rifle. Action runs well with a distinct and intentional force. If I were to sit there and slowly open, sure I could maybe notice parts that will become more smooth. Running the lever as I would in need produces the results I demand. The trigger is nice to me. Very little if any discernible movement before break. Heavier trigger, but breaks well to my finger. Not inclined to fiddle with it or really anything. This carbine is a tool. Sure…she’s a looker, too..but it’s just a means to an end. Like the weapon I carry, it’ll stay mechanically stock unless something happens.
Can it shoot targets? Surely! Will I shoot groups with it? I’m an addict! But the intent of this carbine is a woodsmate down here in Low Country South Carolina. Where a 100 yard shot is highly uncommon. In the swamp forests, your shots come closer and quicker. Should be able to stomach anything on the menu around here.

 

There may be something to the late resistance by the rebounding hammer, but I have found the Miroku repro lever actions to have much harder (better) metallurgy, taking much longer to smooth up. My current Miroku 1886 Extra Light is finally smoothing up a bit, after untold 1000s of cycles while watching the tube. In my experience, though, the Mirokus will likely never feel just like the old Winchesters, I believe because of softer mating surfaces and the flat springs of the latter. I have also operated quite a few Rossi and Uberti 92 repros that were closer in feel to the old Winchesters. Still, I absolutely love the Miroku repros, and, in some cases, I think the consistency in tolerances and the overall build quality rival, and even surpass, some of the original Winchesters. I know I'm in the minority on this, but I rather like the tang-mounted sliding safety on a lever action hunting rifle. Once one is accustomed to it, it's just as instinctive as any other safety. The bolt-mounted safeties, on the other hand, I can definitely do without.

 

Securing a Marbles tang sight: I have never been successful securing the sight to what would be called a “rock solid” status. I do not think that rock solid can be accomplished with the vertical adjustment design. I have accomplished “finger tight” or “snug” and I can work/ shoot with that but, the vertical lock nut does tend to work loose over use time - the horizontal holds well and is not a worry to me. I refuse to use a tool (pliers and such) on the vertical lock nut to maybe snug it tighter - I do not want to deface such a well machined sight. So I finger tight the vertical lock nut and check it and/ or snug it as needed. It is a small threaded stem and a small diameter nut - difficult to gorilla it with my big fingers. I simply do not have the magic answer.

 

This thread was a great read for my coffee time this morning. Enjoyed it, and the pics were absolutely fantastic.

 

Thanks so much for the kind words!

Here is another look at this little gem..

 

plan to be carrying this carbine on a hog hunt in March. I will take advantage of some hotter ammo from Underwod, Buffalo Bore, or even Corbon.

A load that shoots with authority and fantastic accuracy from my blackhawk may be worth a try. I would think the 92 action is strong enough to handle them, but you'd need to verify this for yourself. Also i'm not sure the 300gr jacketed hornady bullets will produce the best accuracy out of your rifle, but it cant hurt to try. Several years ago, when i got into leveraction metallic silhouette i planned on using the 45lc, since i had everything necessary to load for it. Only a few guys were using this round and told me i'd have to cast and they reccomended a particular die that ran out at .454". They said the standard .452 dia bullets wouldnt provide the necessary accuracy at 100m. There were a few more loading tricks suggested as well, but i dont recall. I went with the advice to use 357m instead, so i cant offer any tips that directly relate to the rifle. However this pistol load is great medicine for the hunt...
300gr hornady xtp
Win 296 min 17.9gr - max 21.7gr
Over standard large pistol primers
Seated to center cannular with a heavy crimp.
The max load is supposed to yeild 1300fps out of the 7 1/2" blackhawk barrel.
Again verify that it is safe to use in the 92 action before doing so.
Good luck and happy hunting.

 

Thanks so much for the recommendation! I wonder how those 300’s would cycle in the 92? Something to try!

 

I found my Miruko Browning 1892 with a similar steel butt plate is a hand full with full power (factory 240gr rifle) 44mag loads. The 92 is a 5 pound rifle. The OP can try those 300gr, but for me 250gr Hornady loaded above 45LC but below max would be a good place to be. I am not recoil sensitive but for deer or pigs no need to push beyond 44mag loads and close is good enough. I switched to a Marlin for my 44mag hunting. The Marlin is 6lbs and rubber butt plate it is a joy to shoot. Night and day difference.

One of the Winchester 1892 I was eye balling was in 32-20. Already having the 44mag I though one of these would be fun. Although 44 spec in the 92 is very mild, so fun in a 92 is already covered. That tang situation was a deal breaker.

 

Yes, those loads i mentioned are listed as Ruger only loads, though i always assumed that was in reference to other revolvers.
At anyrate the softer loadings should suit your needs just fine. Especially with the extra mv you'll gain from the longer barrel.
I used to use a 200gr jhp over 9.6gr of unique, but never shot a hog with one so i cant speak to its performance, but suspect they wouldve worked well enough... after all you cant make something extra dead.

 

The M-92 action is extremely strong. They have been chambered in 454 Casull with no problems.

 

The .454 92s required special metallurgy and heat treating. I would never assume a standard 92, even a Miroku 92 with modern metallurgy, would be suitable for the .454 loads.

 

I can only speak to my own Browning '92 in 44 Mag, full bore 300 gr and 240 gr loads are painful with the steel butt plate, a good .44 special load is a delight to shoot, unfortunately my eyes no longer work with the iron sights...

Wow, lousy photo I need to do some new ones as it's actually a beautiful rifle.

 

I can only speak to my own Browning '92 in 44 Mag, full bore 300 gr and 240 gr loads are painful with the steel butt plate, a good .44 special load is a delight to shoot, unfortunately my eyes no longer work with the iron sights...

Wow, lousy photo I need to do some new ones as it's actually a beautiful rifle.

Gerald I had a couple of these once, I could not get them to feed 44 spl or 38 spl they were fine in 44 Mag/.357
but they would not feed the lesser rounds, do yours feed ?

 

A good solution is a tang mounted peep sight - almost as easy to use and accurate as a scope.

 

yes, but. The options are limited due to the tang safety. The Marbles positioned too far to the rear and prevents normal grip of the rifle around the wrist. And it does not look quite right. Which is too bad becasue its a good sight for $150.

Given the cost and quality of the Miruko this MVC looks like a good option but it will require one hole drilled and removal of the tang safety. The safety slides over an "S" and a red dot. Both are countersunk into the tang. A hole would need to be drilled and tapped threw the "S" for this. Cost $327 for the one I would choose. I want windage and elevation screws but not so fancy as shown below. Still, twice the money for twice the sight. A nice bonus is the staff can be removed when the peep not needed.

Not my gun, picture is from MVC website or some other forum?

I did handle an older Winchester Miruko 1892. A used rifle with safety that did not have the 2nd hole D&T for the Marbles. That got me to looking at MVC. I also sighted down the barrel and it has a very nice sights with fine brass bead and small U notch buck horn. If they are all sighted like that it might be best to just live without a tang sight and leave the safety as-is.

 

Never thought about D&Ting inside the oval slot. How much meat is in there? Is there sufficient thickness in the bottom of the slot to allow multiple full threads? Just curious.

 

I dont know how thick. We can imagine not a lot. It would take a good looking over. Obviously if Miruko tapped a hole there would be no issue. For us the job could get tricky if we needed to back that up somehow. I think it would be ok one way or another.

 

I was curious how the safety worked and what it takes to delete it. Only requirement is an 8mm wrench.

Some photos, for the others with a curious mind.

Right where you see "chester" "1892" on this tang the OP's gun has an additional hole drilled and tapped for the tang site he mounted. This gun was made a few years prior without that feature.

 

I want to close the loop on fitting a more tradition tang sight on the Miruko 1892. To be practical the OP gun makes good sense. For the less practical, I found the Marbles 9817 for the 71 Winchester will work. That is with a twist. Notice I remove the horizontal screw and reversed the upright and reversed how the sight set on the gun.
I found out after that fact the 1873 Miruko sight 9884 will mount without any dissassemble and parts reversal. (EDIT I found out today, The 1873 sight has the wrong staff angle) AFAIK - Only the 71 Win sight, reversed will work.

Safety removed and sight lay in place and Marbles metric long tang screw:

The other tricky part is tapping for the screw down in the safety recess. The No10 Marbles screw are just a hair too large diameter. I plan to turn down one of the Marbles screws to 6-48 that will also allow use of standard filler if the future caretaker wants to remove the sight and put the safety back. That will be right on the 'S'.

Inverted and mirror image assembled. Note windage is on the left. I could have avoided this using the 1873 sight. That is unproven, below is for sure.

Here is the hole drill and tapped with plug. Safety will slide right over.

And with safety removed and sight installed:

EDIT:
I test fired today and at 50 yards I was a foot high with the elevation bottomed out. I had looked at this way back before I reversed the base and reversed the upright. This is a pretty major screw up. I ended up shortening the drum and the thread staff. It is not easy and pretty much kills the idea for a simple mix&match installation. I am not using the IMPROVED tang sight where the upright comes in 3 heights. Marbles will sell the different heights for the Improved. They wont sell that assembly for the Standard.

 

I need to bump this up and warn the readers, I ran into a problem with the Marbles sight project on my gun. If anyone has been following: "Huston we have a problem".

I test fired today and at 50 yards I was a foot high with the elevation bottomed out. I had looked at this back before I reversed the base and reversed the upright. I was close but looked ok at that time. When flipped around the drum is higher. This is a pretty major oversight. I ended up shortening the drum and the thread staff. It is not easy and pretty much kills the idea for a simple mix&match installation. I am not using the IMPROVED tang sight where the upright comes in 3 heights. Marbles will sell those different heights for the Improved. They wont sell the other upright assembly or the base for the Standard. And even if they did, which one?

 

test fired today and at 50 yards I was a foot high...

Why not just change the front sight out for a taller one?

 

Lee Shaver also makes nice period globe front sights, with internal levels if one is so inclined. They use the same size inserts as the lyman 17a, though Shaver also sells a nice variety of inserts.
Plus heres one more option, Shaver also makes dovetail inserts to raise the dovetail above the bore, if whatever height front isnt readily available you can use these to tune your sights to a specific zero. I used one to get my Marlin 39 zeroed for 40m using a redfield 75 reciever sight.

 

I have used MVA sights which are very nice, both well made and period looking. All I recall about Lee Shaver is I have quite few set of his inserts. I know someone makes a globe that can roll over to make a blade. That is supposed to be an exact copy. I had to Google the Redfiled 75 and it looks a lot like the sight on my Winchester 75. Coincidence?

 

Adding a taller front sight blade is easier said than done, at least if one is trying to maintain a period look, and most of us are trying to do that with the old Winchester lever gun replicas. I added what I considered a fairly low profile vintage receiver sight to a Miroku/Winchester 1886 recently, and the front sight required to make the rear sight work looks downright cartoonish; nothing like an original 1886 front sight. This is also a problem with shooting hard cast or jacketed bullets at higher velocities than the original BP loads of the day. One can usually exceed velocities by quite a margin, but the original iron sights become useless with the new trajectories.

 

I removed .15 from the rear sight. I dont know how much was needed but today I verified I am sighted in and some adjustment left to work with. I appreciate your comments and you are right, the gun looks reasonably period correct. The only change is the windage knob on the sight. Other wise I see a lot of old lever guns setup just like mine. And I am glad to have the windage. I am shooting a lot better too.

 

I want to bump this up because I got an idea. It is possible to mount a Marbles or other tang sight on a Miruko lever with a tang safety kept in place! I already posted how a 6x48 hole can be drilled and tapped down in the safety recess at the 2.2" spacing for the Marbles sight. My new idea is a little time with a drill or mill and one could cut a small recess into the underside of the Marbles sight base. Just enough to allow keeping the tang safety. There is plenty of metal in the marbles to do this. No parts go missing and the safety would be captured OFF and hidden under the Marbles. Perfect. Plan C.

 

I want to bump this up because I got an idea. It is possible to mount a Marbles or other tang sight on a Miruko lever with a tang safety kept in place! I already posted how a 6x48 hole can be drilled and tapped down in the safety recess at the 2.2" spacing for the Marbles sight. My new idea is a little time with a Dremel or mill and one could cut a small recess into the underside of the Marbles sight base. Just enough to allow keeping the tang safety. There is plenty of metal in the marbles to do this. No parts go missing and the safety would be captured and hidden under the Marbles. Perfect. Plan C.

Great idea no lost parts, no mod to the rifle other than one threaded hole.the rifle can be brought back sans Marble sight if desired.

 

92's are extremely strong rifles. Winchester loaded special "high velocity" rounds specially for the 92 back in the day. Moroku rifles are made from the best steel and very high quality. I would have no concerns with using "Ruger Only" loads in it...

 

Just read this thread with interest; fourbore, nice job with the modifications & photo documentation. The D&T hole through the "S" is an excellent solution that would hold value IMO. A ~dozen years ago I purchased a Rossi M92 which included a Marbles tang sight, partly because of the tang sight itself.

 

~dozen years ago I purchased a Rossi M92 which included a Marbles tang sight, partly because of the tang sight itself.

The R92's are good shooters, and the factory d&t"ed tang is a plus. The one i own in 357 is extremely accurate and the action is buttery smooth. For a competition rifle it is hard to beat and is my favorite lever gun to shoot.
That being said they do lack the fit and finish of the winchester or miroku 92's and the rossi ejector has been a source of problems. I have found i actually prefere using it without the ejector, since i dont have to remember to capture the brass when cycling the bolt, or hunt it down when i forget to...