Sighting Problems on a late Inland

[USGI]

I mentioned this 6.94M Inland in another thread several days ago.

https://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=67560 (From Post #3 on)

I decided I needed to start my own thread and post some pictures of the sights. I bought this one a year or two ago at a local gun shop. It looked fairly original other than being in an SA stock, addition of a flip safety, and a 30rd mag catch. I shot it for the first time in January and had to set the rear sight for 250 yds. to make it hit POA.

In the other thread I said it was set at 200, but when I got it out today for the pictures, it's actually at 250. This made me think one of the sights had been changed for some reason, and I got comments from others suggesting that possibility. So, here are a bunch of pictures of the sights. The staking of the rear is different than on a 5.4 Inland I had in the past, but not a whole lot. The "R" front sight looks normal to me, but I want to hear what you guys think. I do see some kind of a "tool mark" or impression on top of the receiver rail just to the left of the bolt. Could that be evidence of GI tools being used to change out the rear sight or maybe from a barrel change? I haven't seen a mark like that on a carbine receiver before. I expected the sights to be "right on" with this one, and it puzzles me that they aren't. Let me know if you see something in the pics that I'm not. I took several and can post more if needed. Thanks! - Bob

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[Bruce McAskill]

There were times through out Inlands later production that they would run short of adjustable rear sights and would use the old flip sight just to keep the line moving. This was OK with the military as they knew down the road the rear sight would be changed for an adjustable. But the front sight was filed down for the flip sight so now with the adjustable you have to place the rear sight up higher to be able to hit on around the 100 yard mark as the front sight sits too low. If you can find a new in the wrap R marked front sight then you can replace yours and slowly file it down to the proper height. The other choice is to build the sight up with some JB weld and then file it down or leave it as is and just keep the rear at 250.

[jimb16]

I thought I could see a chisel staking on the top of the dovetail. If my eyes are correct, that indicates an original flip sight was installed. That would account for the sight problem.

[USGI]

Which side Jim? I've got more pictures, and will take a look. I guess I'm confused on the front sight. It must be me, since there's been 65 or more views and no one else has said anything. I think the front blade is too high as it is! - Bob

[M94/14]

What the pics are showing is a brand new front sight. It will have to be trimmed to hit POA at 100m with the 100m setting.

[INLAND44]

What the pics are showing is a brand new front sight. It will have to be trimmed to hit POA at 100m with the 100m setting.

There it is. I can't believe the discussion continues as if the question were not answered. Look in your carbine ordnance manuals to see exactly how to trim the sight blade at a slight angle. You need to do this so the carbine will be correct and shoot 'according to the book' at 100 yds with the rear sight on '1 - 1.5'. It can be as much as 12" high at 100 and still be approved. Look up the 100 yd target - the impact zone is 16" wide and 12" high with the aiming point on the lower center line. So, to target the carbine like it was intended to be, 'ideal' would be on the center line and 6" high. Once you actually know what you're doing, things get so much easier....

[GotSnlB28]

Your front sight looks original and almost full height. The dovetail staking looks like type 2/3 to me. Very slight skew on the divots. Type 1 flip sights required the blade to be filed down lower and when replaced with an adjustable sight the rifle will shoot high. If you are shooting low it could be the ammo some is low velocity compared to ammo used to originally sight it in. If not the ammo the front sight blade needs to be filed to zero, carefully. By the way, nice late Inland you have there. I'd hesitate to change anything on it.

[jimb16]

Looks like a possible light chisel mark on the left rear dovetail. Just behind the punch mark....

[USGI]

Jim, I thought the chisel marks (if needed) on Inlands with flip sights were always on the RH side . I've got two of them and they're both "staked" on the right side. One has them both front and rear, and the other one just at the rear. I'm attaching a picture of the one with both. Also, will attach more pictures of the left side area on the late inland. Thanks! - Bob

Attachment 100483Attachment 100484Attachment 100485

[jimb16]

Jim, I thought the chisel marks (if needed) on Inlands with flip sights were always on the RH side . I've got two of them and they're both "staked" on the right side. One has them both front and rear, and the other one just at the rear. I'm attaching a picture of the one with both. Also, will attach more pictures of the left side area on the late inland. Thanks! - Bob

Attachment 100483Attachment 100484Attachment 100485

Chisel staking could be on either side. It depended on which side was loose. A few of them were staked on both sides! My Inland X-suffix is staked on the left.