Time to share some Iron Sight discoveries

[Aircooled6racer]

Hello: Great info here I am going backwords on my front sight choice. I was using a green fiber insert and now have gone to a red insert. The red for me is not as bright but I am shooting better with it. I am going to try a plan serrated Dawson front sight that is 0.100" wide and 0.180" tall on my 6" STI 2011 I built. The rear notch is 0.115". I did play with different front sight widths with green fiber inserts from 0.070"-0.110" wide. I settled on the 0.100" wide for now. Interesting results on the Lasik also. You may want to try some differnt Rudy Project lenses also to see what works. The darker lens seems to work better for me in the bright sun and high altutude. The Polar FX works well as does the Lazer red for me. I hope Front Sight publish this Thanks, Eric

[jdphotoguy]

Thanks for the great insight on sight configuration. It sure is timely for me as I'm looking to change the stock sights on my M&P 9L and your observations answered some questions and should help me dial in a winning sight configuration much faster.

[Kali]

Nicely written. Something that I do to adjust the variability of how much the FO grabs your attention is to black out a portion of the fiber with paint to adjust the amount of "glow". I started doing this slowly to ween myself off the FO. I kept making it dimmer and dimmer and the more and more I liked it. I would probably be fine with just a serrated front now, but a blacked out FO does the same thing.

What do you think about sight radius of the FO vs iron? Most FO that I have seen like the Dawson or a microdot are longer than a standard iron sight. I would guess that it is shortening your sight radius by about a quarter inch? Do you think that could have effect on long range accuracy? I remember some shooters using a front sight that extended forward of the slide making the sight radius longer. Could the reverse also be true?

[redleg1013]

Amazing article! I have been kicking around the notion of changing my sights on my P226 as the stock night sights don't "feel comfy". It seems that I have a deal of difficulty picking up my front sight past 15 yards at the indoor range here; maybe it's something as simple as my eyes have ADD and need something to keep their attention. You have provided a great deal of insight and actually made me look in a different direction than I was thinking. I hope that Front Sight picks up your article, I just discovered them last week and am just gutted that all the First Family membership plans they talked about in the DVD are gone and some new plan is in the works, well I guess I can blow the tax return on ammo and a 1911 for my wife. Thanks again!

[Ian_]

Thanks for you contribution...

Did you find/look into the effect of rear sight shape? I'm deciding between Warren Tactical "original" with FO front or Sevigny with FO front for my G34, any insight?

Very best,

ian

[ralphs]

Thanks for you contribution...

Did you find/look into the effect of rear sight shape? I'm deciding between Warren Tactical "original" with FO front or Sevigny with FO front for my G34, any insight?

Very best,

ian

Are you asking about the shape of the rear blade? Or the shape of the rear notch?

With regards to the blade shape I have a couple guns with notched corner rear blades similar to the Warren Tactical and then I have other guns with traditional Bomar or Bomar style rear blades that are similar in outline to the Sevigny rear sights. I can change from each style of rear blade without noticing any difference. At the time of shooting, the rear sight is just a slight blur that I am looking through and I only see the notch; the blade shape is not seen. When I am not shooting the rear sight blade shapes are quite different and distinctive, but once I am shooting the only part of the rear sight that I notice is the notch.

I do not have any rear sights with a slightly rounded U-notch which the Warren Tactical seem to have in the pictures that I have seen. As a traditionalist, I would probably prefer a squared U-notch. But since you should only be looking at the top of the notch it probably does not matter.

[CHA-LEE]

Thanks for you contribution...

Did you find/look into the effect of rear sight shape? I'm deciding between Warren Tactical "original" with FO front or Sevigny with FO front for my G34, any insight?

Very best,

ian

Ian> I have not played with the shape of the notch its self. I have always used a "Square" rear notch as that seems like the normal thing to visually process and not get distracted by it because of strange angles. As far as the outer edged of the sight blade I don't think that it makes much of a difference. At least not to me. I have tried straight top rear blades then dog eared rear blades and never even notice the difference when shooting. The thing that I have not tired is having a downward sloping angle on the top of the blade starting right at the top of the notch. I have always had a decent amount of straight flat on the top of the blade where the notch is located. I think having a straight top on both sides of the notch is important because it can be easily referenced as the "Top" when compared to the top of the front sight.

More than anything, I think the primary importance to any sight setup is to have a simple setup that is easily seen visually so it can be processed quickly while shooting. Everyone is able to process visual inputs differently so what you can or can't get away with using is going to be unique to each shooter. For me, my brain prefers straight lines at 90 degree angles to one another so that is how I setup my sights. For example, if my front sight is installed incorrectly and it puts the front post at a left or right leaning angle when compared to the rear notch it totally throws me off because the odd angle of the light bars is distracting and I can't call my shots effectively.

[Torogi]

Thanks for the article Cha-lee. IT IS really a front sight worthy article. I did researched too on the proper light bar or say baseline of what it is. You covered it perfectly. I might even try non-f/o fronts now. I have used F/O from day 1, but now after 2 years or so, I find it a little distracting. I have focused on it so much it is the only thing im seeing. I think i have to re-learn to aim on top of the sights now

[Ian_]

Thanks Cha-Lee and Ralphs for the replys...

My question was originally about the shape as viewed from behind, that is square, rounded corners, "wavy' (warren tactical) etc, I had not considered notch shape, so I guess there are 2 components there to consider.

I'm pretty new to pistol shooting and still figuring stuff out, the blur is something I forgot, or forget about.

Very best,

Ian

[Remington4Life]

if there is a list of must read posts this needs to be added to it

[want2race]

I went through a similar process. With glasses I was 20/40L, 20/25R. This allowed my eyes to "automatically" see with my dominant eye ® since it was clearer. With glasses, like you, my focal length was just passed my hands. I could see the sights very well even when looking at the target.

I had Lasik about 1.5 years ago. I found that my focal length was much longer and I had to pull my focus back to the front sight exactly as you discussed. If I wore +1 reading glasses, it was MUCH easier to see the front sight, but the target was blurry. I wore them a little while my eyes healed. Now I don't need them, and I've retrained my eyes to focus on the sight better.

I have two set ups. 6" slide with .110/.180 front FO, .115 Bomar rear with cropped corners. I find the pyramid shape easy to see around. My 1911 is a 5" with .110/.10 front FO, .125" fixed rear, also with cropped corners. With the shorter sight radius the larger rear notch still looks very similar to the 6" limited gun with smaller notch. I tried a thinner front, but too much light around the front sight takes too much time to align in the notch. The front sight swims around inside the notch and my accuracy (at speed in matches) suffered. Just a sliver of light on both sides tells me that if I can see the front sight through the notch, by sights are aligned.

The reason your vision is worse with darker glasses: your vision is crisper with smaller pupils. Wear the lightest tint you are comfortable with. I am light sensitive so I can't wear clear on sunny days. I'll wear a light red tint and it works well for bright sunny days. Cuts down just enough so that I'm not straining my eyes. Too much light and I get tired sooner in the day.

[SirLoin]

This posting from Ghost Dog Brian Enos seems relevant to this discussion: http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=118&view=findpost&p=1038201

[CHA-LEE]

I have not heard anything back from the Front Sight people so I am not sure if they even got the article I submitted. Maybe this info is already well known and not needed?

[MarkCO]

I have not heard anything back from the Front Sight people so I am not sure if they even got the article I submitted. Maybe this info is already well known and not needed?

Don't fret. I have an article to them I know is going in and it has not been published yet.

[BritinUSA]

With the Nationals coverage they may have already have a magazine-full.

Drop an email to Robin to confirm that he got it though just to be safe, maybe they will save it for the next edition which will go out around the same time as the Single Stack Nationals so they may have some room then as the Single Stack Nats will have to wait for the July edition.

My article is in the March edition and that was submitted last year.

Edited March 1, 2012 by BritinUSA

[cheers623]

Awesome thread! Have been struggling with vision issues this year and this explains and helps ALOT!

Thanks guys,

Cheers623

DVC

[CHA-LEE]

I still have not heard anything from the Front Sight people so who knows if it will make it into the magazine.

[Kali]

Good read. A while back I was seriously thinking about getting Lasik to correct my myopia. After doing some research I found that as we age, the shape of our eyes and the stiffness of our lenses change and that in most people, nearsightedness corrects itself (why many older people who never needed corrective vision before now require reading glasses). So if I were to get Lasik now, there is a good chance I would need corrective lenses for reading, or seeing the front sight as I got older. Right now I can see the front sight fine without correction. There was a good chance that I would immediately loose my crisp, clear, closeup vision and I determined that I would rather continue wearing corrective lenses for distance. Just throwing that out there in case anyone else was thinking about Lasik, it isn't for everyone.

[Skydiver]

+1 on the notes about Lasik.

When I made a decision to go for Lasik it was largely influenced by the sports and activities I do:

skydiving -- hated having a contact lens pop out during a skydive;

scuba -- hated the extra cost of custom face mask lenses and wearing glasses out to dive site along with the extra cost of clipon sunglasses or photochromic lenses

NRA/ISU style bullseye shooting -- hated contact lenses drying and weird distortion from everyday glasses; extra cost to have custom shooting glasses made

Add on that I'm practically blind without corrective lenses, it made sense for me to go for the surgery.

I knew going in that I would be facing becoming farsighted sooner with the adjustments to be made to my eyes, but talking with my doctors gave me an informed decision. Additionally, my age (mid-30s) was in the perfect window where I would appreciate the benefits of Lasik for the longest time before I would start seeing the deterioration.

One of the funnier conversations I had was with the surgeon performing the surgery on my eyes. I asked why he hasn't had the procedure done since he is an outdoorsman as well as loves to fly. The convenience of not needing glasses would have been very nice. He chose not to have the procedure done on himself because he didn't trust anybody else to do it, and he was also weighing the odds that he would have an excellent outcome. :-)

[CHA-LEE]

Anyone make some new Iron Sight discoveries on their own? Hopefully this information is useful.

[dlouie87]

good read. and good look with the front sight article!

[Allfat]

Wow, this is just what I needed to read. I have stock 3-dot white sights on my pistol that I have been using in USPSA, and I was having trouble tracking the sights during the last competition. I have been trying to figure out what kind of a sight to move to, but I had no idea where to start. This really has me thinking about it and gives me a good knowledge base to work off of. Thank you very much for your insight Cha-Lee!

I have also been looking at different shooting glasses. I just ordered a cheap set with a bunch of interchangeable lenses. My goal with it is to find out if different colors will work better for my sight picture or not. Hopefully I will learn something from all of this.

Cheers Cha-Lee!

Edited August 14, 2012 by Allfat

[Jim Norman]

CHA-LEE, just came across this post. Excellent info. My story. My Bomar Rear broke about a year ago, I replaced it and frankly screwed up. Got too small a notch. I have a .1 front with a FO and a WAY TOO tight rear. Will be modifying it manually to get it better and then ordering a fixed rear. I where glasses to see at distance. I can read just fine, my shooting glasses, Rudys by the way, are set u to focus about 6 inches in front of my front sight when I am extended. I can see the targets just fine, blurry, but I can see them, No chance of seeing a bullet hole so calling shots is a requirement.

So, last week I shot a knock down steel match. lots of little plates and it is all about speed. I found I couldn't hit squat. Went over to an empty pit after the match and verified it was me, not the gun, at 15-20 yards I could hit a 2" or smaller piece of clay bird shot for shot, just had to go slow. Next day I blacked out the FO completely and shot a USPSA match, only problem was the Star, Need to be accurate AND fast. I used to do that in 5-6 shots, took 10. Made some measurements tonight and decided to perform a little surgery on the rear. I think that I will open up to 0.010 on each side as a start. Currently only 0.005.

I want to go slow and open up the rear only enough, not too much.

Now here is the interesting part. I measured nearly all the iron sighted guns I own and the front and rear sights are all nearly identical in width! Yes there is a light bar on each side, this is due to the distance between the front and rear sights, same reason you can block the sun with one hand yet it is 865,000 miles across and your hand is only 4 inches or so. Now the light bars available when the sights are the same size are pitifully small and the slightest movement closes them up. Very accurate if you shoot slow, not so good at the speeds we shoot.

[CHA-LEE]

I still have not heard anything back from the Front Sight people. I am thinking that my e-mail went into the "Spam" folder or they simply didn't find it worthy of the Magazine. I will try sending it again and see what happens. I find it hard to believe that it would take more than a year to get an article into the magazine.

Edited January 15, 2013 by CHA-LEE

[Norone]

CHA,

Fantastic article. Just read it all and got affirmations and education.

Bought a G34 with Dawsons but the front was too thin for me- the rear to narrow. I was accurate but slow as I was "competing" with my sights so to say. Shot Bob Vogels Sevigny set up his 34 on a plate rack with him and saw an immediate improvement that minute. Purchased a Sevigny FO front with a Warren tactical rear (buy mistake) but made magic happen with the "maybe" mis match. It worked great for all I want to do.

As a tactician and competitor I have an appreciation for the wider window too. I can see more target and can practice discrimination much better. And of course- calling those shots.