al503 Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 And the front sight appears to recoil higher. That is exactly backwards. The rib adds more weight to the front end of the gun and keeps the front sight FROM recoiling as high as a non sight tracker. 'Appear' is the key word, IMHO. Get a ~7" stick. Put a front sight on the front of it and put another a few inches behind it. The only time a sight tracker's front sight would appear to recoil less is if there was no flip at all. If you're seeing the front sight as the pistol cycles, even one degree of flip will make the front sight of the sight tracker appear to be higher simply because it stays further away. With that said, the extra weight of the rib will help with the flip (all other things being equal). Whether that extra weight actually compensates for the difference? My guess would be no but I have nothing to back that up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diehli Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 And the front sight appears to recoil higher. That is exactly backwards. The rib adds more weight to the front end of the gun and keeps the front sight FROM recoiling as high as a non sight tracker. False as to your first statement. As to your second, it's a nonsequitur. Get a gun with the same weight out front but with the front sight on the slide, that sight will not appear to recoil as high. Little thing called physics; look into it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diehli Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 Anecdotally, I shot one of the first STs (Taran's) 8 or so years ago. I was shooting a Fat Free .40 at the time. Despite the "extra weight" (my gun had a standard frame & fluted bull barrel, Taran's a slightly shortened FDC frame), I found my front sight was easier to track. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diehli Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 And I should mention that a FF40 is a 6" gun (& Taran's was a 5") for those that don't know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjb45 Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 Guys, Stop bugging Brandon. I am expecting a new frame, slide, and barrel. I need this here in NM so I can have Kodiak build me a new 9mm 3Gun prior to Rocky Mt 3 Gun match in August. I just sold my Production gear, so I may also go for another new steel grip. Or for $200 from me to you, get my stuff out the door. Roy, go back to work! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
latech15 Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 And the front sight appears to recoil higher. Ok, you got me. It would not APPEAR to recoil as much due to the sight being further back during recoil. The bottom line is that a sight tracker's muzzle DOESN'T recoil as high. False as to your first statement. As to your second, it's a nonsequitur. Get a gun with the same weight out front but with the front sight on the slide, that sight will not appear to recoil as high. Little thing called physics; look into it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diehli Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 The bottom line is that a sight tracker's muzzle DOESN'T recoil as high. Again, a false statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Badger Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 I just purchased a new 6 inch STI Eagle double stack with bull barrel full length frame and slide. It looks like a 6 inch Edge. A fairly meaty beast but I really like it. If however I wanted to convert it to a sight tracker would I not be best to have a minimal length rib and cut the minimum from the slide? Possibly flute the barrel a little? Cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerTrace Posted May 2, 2012 Author Share Posted May 2, 2012 The bottom line is that a sight tracker's muzzle DOESN'T recoil as high. Again, a false statement. Maybe if he had said in his opinion the front sight doesn't appear to recoil as high I think it's whatever you practice with the most. I can tell you without question, that I can track the front sight on my 9mm ST much faster and easier than my 6" bushing gun. Of course I'm comparing 9mm to 40 S&W. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digby7 Posted May 2, 2012 Share Posted May 2, 2012 i'm really curious to compare the differnces between the two: - fldc - lightend slide, bull barrel, tungsten guide rod - sight tracker in terms of front sight height lift/tracking for the same caliber. pondering another top end but dont know if my eye is even fast enough to track the difference between the two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
latech15 Posted May 2, 2012 Share Posted May 2, 2012 The bottom line is that a sight tracker's muzzle DOESN'T recoil as high. Again, a false statement. Please provide the physics that you are so fond of to back up your statement that more weight out on the end of the gun is somehow going to make the muzzle rise more than without it. Or am I just wrong and you are right because you say so? Easier to track????? Maybe for you, not necessarily for everyone, but the amount of muzzle rise isn't a matter of opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benjamin Posted May 2, 2012 Share Posted May 2, 2012 this debate is getting out of hand... so the question is if you are building a gun and can do a sight tracker, should you do it?? is there a chance i would hate it?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent C Posted May 2, 2012 Share Posted May 2, 2012 I would highly doubt you would hate it. I have not met some one who has. Not saying they don't exist, but I have never hear that someone hated their sight tracker with all thing equal to another gun. Bottom line is you have less mass in the slide moving back when the gun cycles then compared to an identical gun with a bull barrel, and a little more weight on the muzzle of the gun due to the extra mass of the rib. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigGabe Posted May 2, 2012 Share Posted May 2, 2012 (edited) I agree with Vincent. I have an Apeiro and while not a Sight Tracker I would think it would have essentially the same recoil characteristics as a Sight Tracker. Out of the guns I've gone through I like it the best. Maybe one of these days I can have a Sight Tracker or a custom built. Edited May 2, 2012 by BigGabe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leozinho Posted May 2, 2012 Share Posted May 2, 2012 (edited) Bottom line is you have less mass in the slide moving back when the gun cycles then compared to an identical gun with a bull barrel, and a little more weight on the muzzle of the gun due to the extra mass of the rib. Honest question (I have no experience with a Sight Tracker) I thought the big advantage was that the front sight doesn't reciprocate and the shooter can more easily maintain focus on the front sight since the focal distance doesn't change? Or is it about the weight? (edited to fix grammar) Edited May 2, 2012 by Leozinho Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julien Boit Posted May 2, 2012 Share Posted May 2, 2012 Well, technically, a Sight Tracker front sights recoils higher than a slide mounted sight. If you guys think about how a slide cycles, you'll notice that the slide is moving to the rear. The sight being mounted on it, it also moves to the rear and then it reduces the angle of flip as it moves toward your hand. The front sight being stationary on the Sight tracker, it moves up with the muzzle of your gun. I've rarely seen shooters being able to have a perfectly flat recoiling pistol in limited/standard. Almost all of them have some kind of muzzle rise. What I have experienced and can certify is that IF you pay attention to your FS during recoil, you will see it better in a Sight Tracker configuration because it moves in only one direction, up. On a regular configuration, it moves up and rearward. But you need to be really aware of your shooting if you want to notice that. I had to shoot more than 10 000 rounds before I actually realized that i was tracking my front sight better with the ST. But the concept of the ST works, and it works great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
latech15 Posted May 2, 2012 Share Posted May 2, 2012 Well, technically, a Sight Tracker front sights recoils higher than a slide mounted sight. If you guys think about how a slide cycles, you'll notice that the slide is moving to the rear. The sight being mounted on it, it also moves to the rear and then it reduces the angle of flip as it moves toward your hand. The front sight being stationary on the Sight tracker, it moves up with the muzzle of your gun. I've rarely seen shooters being able to have a perfectly flat recoiling pistol in limited/standard. Almost all of them have some kind of muzzle rise. What I have experienced and can certify is that IF you pay attention to your FS during recoil, you will see it better in a Sight Tracker configuration because it moves in only one direction, up. On a regular configuration, it moves up and rearward. But you need to be really aware of your shooting if you want to notice that. I had to shoot more than 10 000 rounds before I actually realized that i was tracking my front sight better with the ST. But the concept of the ST works, and it works great. Well said. I agree on all points. My statement was that the muzzle rise is less on a sight tracker than a non sight tracker (due to the weight) and I think you just backed that up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julien Boit Posted May 2, 2012 Share Posted May 2, 2012 Not necesarily. Grip, stance, load, springs can change your perception of recoil and muzzle rise. We would need to evaluate two similar set up to have the answer with one specific load. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diehli Posted May 2, 2012 Share Posted May 2, 2012 Julien gets it. latech, you seem to want me to prove a negative. That's not how it works. You made the positive statement that ST-barreled guns have less muzzle rise, period, no restrictions. Back it up. Here's a counter example (if STs are all about the weight): Limcat's tungsten-sleeved barreled guns. Question for Julien: is your experience with tracking the front sight based on acclimation to the recoil characteristics or have you gone through & done timing drills with ST'd guns and standard ones? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
latech15 Posted May 2, 2012 Share Posted May 2, 2012 I don't really see how it is a positive or a negative but I will back up my statement with physics. The more weight that you have out on the end of the gun ( muzzle ie the rib) the less it will be affected buy an equal amount of upward force as compared to the same force being exerted with less weight out there. The force of the recoil has to lift more weight in order for the muzzle to rise an equal amount. Given the assumption that the two rounds are the same and that we start out with guns that are set up identically, there is no law of physics that would support your theory that simply adding a rib to the barrel and removing the reciprocating mass from the slide would cause the muzzle to rise more that not. If you are simply arguing semantics please just say so. My point is sound. A sight tracker has less muzzle rise than a gun without a ribbed barrel. All other variables held equal. I have no idea what you are referring to with the limcat barrels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisMcCracken Posted May 2, 2012 Share Posted May 2, 2012 I think he is making a distinction between actual muzzle rise and apparent rise in the sights. Because the sight remains at the end of the barrel it will go up more than the sight attached to the slide. As the barrel rises on the non-ST, the sight is moving back with the slide. With an equally weighted slide and equal weight distribution, the non-ST and the ST should have the same muzzle rise. It's just a question of where the sight is throughout the the follow through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Badger Posted May 2, 2012 Share Posted May 2, 2012 Very interesting thread. I had not heard of sight trackers until I read this thread. I have seen a few 5 inch pistols ( 5 inch slide) with 6 inch barrels and the front sight moved and fixed to the top of a weight attached to the end of the barrel. These guns are used for Action Pistol (Bianchi Cup). The idea I guess is a fast slide cycle and a stable long sight picture, the same as sight tracker? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julien Boit Posted May 3, 2012 Share Posted May 3, 2012 Dielhi : These are MY observations based on shooting side by side two different set up. One was a Sight Tracker with a 12.5lbs recoil spring, and the other was a slide mounted SV with also a 12.5lbs recoil springs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerTrace Posted May 3, 2012 Author Share Posted May 3, 2012 (edited) Dielhi : These are MY observations based on shooting side by side two different set up. One was a Sight Tracker with a 12.5lbs recoil spring, and the other was a slide mounted SV with also a 12.5lbs recoil springs. Also keep in mind that Julien is one of the Top Standard Shooters in the World, so he's shot a gazillion rounds and knows how to watch his sights Edited May 3, 2012 by SV-COP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julien Boit Posted May 6, 2012 Share Posted May 6, 2012 Thanks for the kind words Trace. I can't wait to watch my sights on my 5.4s to compare Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now