I would like to add target sights to my Uberti 1858. Are there some target sights I could purchase and install on my 1858, or have a gun smith install? If its more trouble than its worth, I may just by a new Uberti that comes with target sights. What are your thoughts? Thanks
Adding target sights to an 1858?
- Thread starter brentp
- Start date
Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:
grizzy adams
36 Cal.
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2009
- Messages
- 81
- Reaction score
- 0
I use to have 1858 44 cal wiff target sights , it was a tack driver , but I sold it :cursing: , as for installing target sights , u have to drill and tap or dovetail by a gunsmith , which mite cost to much , plus the cost of the sights . I would just get one wiff the target sights all ready installed .
Depends on how far you want to go. I know of one which wears a Smith & Wesson fully adjustable rear sight and ramped front sight. That required milling the top strap as well as drilling and tapping and I suspect the gunsimith bill would run 150-200 bucks plus the cost of the S&W rear sight. For that sort of modification you'd be way ahead to just sell yours and buy a new target model. But great improvement can be had by just filing the rear notch to a straight sided "U" notch and dovetailing the barrel for a straight blade up front which will give a very nice sight picture with windage adjusted by knocking the front side side to side in its dovetail and filing it for elevation just like most ML rifles.
Dave Rosenthal
70 Cal.
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2006
- Messages
- 4,470
- Reaction score
- 24
Be prepared to take a lot of "meat" off of the area where the rear sight would get installed. Simply attaching one would raise the rear sight, and since most of these revolvers shoot a little high to begin with, you will be adding to the problem. Installing a huge front sight would help this problem go away, but then it might not fit right in the holster after the modification necessary, so be aware of this too.
Best decision is to just buy another one, for around the same money, so you'll have two!
Dave
Best decision is to just buy another one, for around the same money, so you'll have two!
Dave
great advice, thanks guys. Never anything wrong with buying another gun! I will be looking for a uberti 1858 with target sights. What are the advantages to the stainless steel model verses steel? Im guessing that it is more resistant to corrosion?
I like this one! The two reveiws for it werent that good though.
http://www.midwayusa.com/viewproduct/?productnumber=571139
http://www.midwayusa.com/viewproduct/?productnumber=571139
Last edited by a moderator:
Dave Rosenthal
70 Cal.
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2006
- Messages
- 4,470
- Reaction score
- 24
What load and what sight picture produce that outcome?
excess650
50 Cal.
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2009
- Messages
- 1,671
- Reaction score
- 639
My Uberti 1858 with factory sights unaltered shot slightly low with a 6 o'clock hold, level sights, 25 yards. I was loading as much Swiss fffg as would fit in the cylinder and allow the ball or hollowbase conical to be seated. IIRC, I was in excess of 35gr and sealing the chambers with lube.
Too heavy of charge for good groups? I don't think so as it shot ragged holes with RBs or HB conicals. I didn't see any advantage in shooting the conicals over .454" RBs, so buying a mold to cast them is unnecessary unless you want to shoot conicals.
I shot at least 40 shots without cleaning or having the cylinder tie up with fouling. I shot 100 yards and other than being low, it wouldn't have been any problem to stay on a pie plate at that distance.
Too heavy of charge for good groups? I don't think so as it shot ragged holes with RBs or HB conicals. I didn't see any advantage in shooting the conicals over .454" RBs, so buying a mold to cast them is unnecessary unless you want to shoot conicals.
I shot at least 40 shots without cleaning or having the cylinder tie up with fouling. I shot 100 yards and other than being low, it wouldn't have been any problem to stay on a pie plate at that distance.
t.l.a.r. eng
40 Cal.
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2009
- Messages
- 131
- Reaction score
- 1
If I might ask, what does the 1858 use for sighting without the rear sight?
I am looking at buying the target model and have read all the reviews on the target and the original model. All give great reviews and say both models have good accuracy. How does the one without sights have good accuracy?
I am looking at buying the target model and have read all the reviews on the target and the original model. All give great reviews and say both models have good accuracy. How does the one without sights have good accuracy?
madcratebuilder
40 Cal.
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2008
- Messages
- 208
- Reaction score
- 2
t.l.a.r. eng said:
There is a groove about .150 wide the length of the top strap. At the very rear it narrows to about .050. This narrow groove is what you align with the front blade. Elevation is controlled by the amount of the front blade you have showing above this groove.
To install the factory style adjustable rear sight you would have to machine the top strap, plus drill and tap for one screw. It could be done easily by an experienced machinist with a mill and a few hours labor. It would be cheaper to sell your fixed sight gun and buy new.
token tory
45 Cal.
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2010
- Messages
- 570
- Reaction score
- 1
I agree with 'crate. Its not so much they "don't have a sight" as "they don't have an easily adjustable sight.":hmm:
The double cut groove in the topstrap is surprisingly good & repeatable, mostly the front sight is my issue as I find it easier to find a much thicker type of blade. The Remington's top strap at least allows for the groove, unlike the Colt open top style, but, never having used a Colt type sight I don't know if the difference is that noticeable in reality.
I did file down my front sight blade once I'd come up with a load I liked, but that was a Remmy feature too, Colts shot High & Remmies shot low till you figured out the sight, or so I'm told. My attempt at just aiming off didn't work out too well for me so I "regulated" the front sight for height, next I'm going to drift it in the dovetail a smidgin to fix the 2" left offset at 15 yds, although I find that easier to live with for some reason.
The double cut groove in the topstrap is surprisingly good & repeatable, mostly the front sight is my issue as I find it easier to find a much thicker type of blade. The Remington's top strap at least allows for the groove, unlike the Colt open top style, but, never having used a Colt type sight I don't know if the difference is that noticeable in reality.
I did file down my front sight blade once I'd come up with a load I liked, but that was a Remmy feature too, Colts shot High & Remmies shot low till you figured out the sight, or so I'm told. My attempt at just aiming off didn't work out too well for me so I "regulated" the front sight for height, next I'm going to drift it in the dovetail a smidgin to fix the 2" left offset at 15 yds, although I find that easier to live with for some reason.
t.l.a.r. eng
40 Cal.
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2009
- Messages
- 131
- Reaction score
- 1
Great photo's! I didn't mean to change direction of the thread, but you guys more than answered my questions. Thanks.
After seeing pictures of both, I think for $20. more, I will jump through the hoops here in Illinois to purchase the target model.
As a self taught machinist, I can see where the frame could certainly be modified to accept a rear sight.
Gary
After seeing pictures of both, I think for $20. more, I will jump through the hoops here in Illinois to purchase the target model.
As a self taught machinist, I can see where the frame could certainly be modified to accept a rear sight.
Gary
Similar threads
