I was trying to help a friend get his Marlin 1894 scope-sighted at the range this weekend, but it ended in failure. He had a Williams 63B scope base on it. The base is very short. He tried mounting a Weaver K-2 with regular Weaver top rings, but the base is so short that we couldn't get those rings to move forward or back, or position the scope, so that there was proper eye relief.
I had a set of Weaver top mount extensions rings we tried, that let the forward ring extend about an inch forward of the receiver, over the rear of the barrel, but those danged rings are so high, that they looked ridiculous on the rifle and he couldnt get any cheek weld.
I would imagine that this is a very common problem and that lots of folks may have solved it. Assuming that a weaver K scope is being used, or any other relatively compact scope with no front bell, what is a workable solution to the mounting system, for an over the receiver (not scout type) mount?
The Brownells catalog at the gun club shows that Redfield makes a one piece base mount, that is slightly longer than the Weaver base mount, and that you can get a Redfield (or Leupold) front extension ring, that is fairly high (but not as high as the Weaver extension rings.)
Is this what folks are using?
GunList shows a new Picatinney type receiver mount, almost five inches long, that is being sold for the 1894s, but due to the fact that a slot is cut in them every quarter inch or so, they are really really ugly (they look like a saw!), and would probably ruin the sleek lines of the rifle.
Thanks for all suggestions. (He may have to buy a new scope, with more eye relief? Hopefully not.)
Regards,
Big Paulie
