Nick S Posted April 29, 2013 Share Posted April 29, 2013 (edited) Several weeks ago I ordered a Dawson Adjustable Rear and .305 FO front for my M&PL. I ordered the .305 front per the recommendation of SSS. After having the sights installed by a gunsmith I had to raise the rear to a ridiculous level to zero the gun. I could see light below the rear sight. I called Dawson who advised the .285 front was needed and they very graciously sent me a new front sight. I took the gun back to the gunsmith and had the new front installed. I went and rezeroed the gun and the rear sight still seems to be elevated high however I no longer saw light leaking in under the sight picture. After some further evaluation it appears the front sight is sitting high in the dovetail. Is this normal or an improperly fitted front sight? Also, could the sight sitting high in the dovetail be contributing to what I consider the rear sight being elevated in a high position. This whole episode is getting rather frustrating and expensive as the gunsmith has charged me 40 dollars for each install and I feel it's still not correct. If you guys have any guidance I would appreciate it. Ammo is Freedom Arms 115 grain FMJ @ 20 yds. Thanks Nick Edited April 29, 2013 by Nick S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
partyboy424 Posted April 29, 2013 Share Posted April 29, 2013 It looks like your all set now. The gap under the site is normal. I have a .285 on one gun and a .265 on another. The .265 is perfect, but the rear sight is bottomed out. If you mess with loads a lot, a .275 would give a little wiggle room. Just shoot it more, you'll get used to it. Also, stop taking it to a gunsmith. Dawson should've included the drift punch. Go spend 5 bucks on a fine file and some loctite. They're incredibly easy to do and you'll save a ton of money in the long run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParaGunner Posted April 29, 2013 Share Posted April 29, 2013 Have you tried different ammo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZombieHunter Posted April 29, 2013 Share Posted April 29, 2013 Looks exactly like mine. The reason they recommended the higher front sight to begin with, is so you actually have room to adjust it down if needed/desired. With a .285 front site, you really only have one direction to adjust, which is up. I also run the .285 front sight and yours looks identical to mine. Works great. With the rear sight all the way down, there will be a considerable gap; it is not like a traditional fixed rear sight. It also does "give" or "spring" if you push on it, but that is normal and will cause no issues. If you're ammo is shooting high for some reason and you can't adjust down, then I would first have someone else shoot it, and see if it's you or the gun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick S Posted April 29, 2013 Author Share Posted April 29, 2013 Thanks for all the answers. Ive shot had more or less the same results with AE 115s gr, AE 124 gr, WWB 115 gr and the Freedom Munitions 115 gr. The main reason I went with the Dawson's was to give me flexibility in regards to ammo considering how hard it is to source a consistent load. The gun has always shot low hence the lower front sight and having to elevate the rear. Do you guys think the front is fit correctly considering how high it sits in the dovetail, the gap between the bottom of the sight and the bottom of the dovetail as well as the blade not sitting flush on the slide? Thanks again. I really appreciate all your guidance. Nick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cohland Posted April 29, 2013 Share Posted April 29, 2013 (edited) ...Do you guys think the front is fit correctly considering how high it sits in the dovetail, the gap between the bottom of the sight and the bottom of the dovetail as well as the blade not sitting flush on the slide?.. The gap at the bottom of the front sight blade looks very odd to me. I've fitted perhaps a dozen Dawson front sights to Glocks, and that gap is not present on those sights. I would send a photo to Dawson and ask them if they think that is acceptable fit. It's too late now, but your gunsmith could have made this less noticeable by taking material off the bottom of the sight before working on the dovetail angles of the sight as it was being fitted. A little measuring before installation would have shown the difference in the depth of the slide dovetail and the height of the sight dovetail. Chris Edited April 29, 2013 by cohland Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mahamoti Posted April 29, 2013 Share Posted April 29, 2013 The gap below the front sight is normal. Any less spacing and you'd run the risk of scratching the frame while installing. It doesn't look that way on Glocks because that front sight screws in, so it doesn't need the clearance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyberiad Posted April 29, 2013 Share Posted April 29, 2013 I just installed a Dawson front on an XDM last week and I agree with Cohland. To me, a properly installed sight has no "gap" and the slide is not marked (though the punch I use did mark the sight but I forgot to take the precautions Dave Dawson mentions in his sight install video on YouTube). I personally wouldn't like the result you have but if the gun zeroes as it is you may as well just leave it. With some skill and good calipers I suppose you could determine how much father down the rear could go if the front were touching the slide but I doubt I could manage it. I had sights similar to yours on the same XDM a couple of years ago but switched to a Warren rear and (now) the new Dawson FO front. The adjustable rear was ok but I just didn't like them and the skyscraper tall front sight became annoying for some reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyberiad Posted April 29, 2013 Share Posted April 29, 2013 I just installed a Dawson front on an XDM last week and I agree with Cohland. To me, a properly installed sight has no "gap" and the slide is not marked (though the punch I use did mark the sight but I forgot to take the precautions Dave Dawson mentions in his sight install video on YouTube). I personally wouldn't like the result you have but if the gun zeroes as it is you may as well just leave it. With some skill and good calipers I suppose you could determine how much father down the rear could go if the front were touching the slide but I doubt I could manage it. I had sights similar to yours on the same XDM a couple of years ago but switched to a Warren rear and (now) the new Dawson FO front. The adjustable rear was ok but I just didn't like it in the end and the skyscraper tall front sight became annoying for some reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
partyboy424 Posted April 29, 2013 Share Posted April 29, 2013 If you had done the sight install yourself, you could've tightened up that gap. Your gunsmith is going to most likely install it based off of the instructions given by the manufacturer (in case the sight breaks and needs to be returned) Dawson clearly states to install the sight by filing the front edge only. When I put my sights on, I file the bottom, rear and front until that gap is almost gone and then toss some loctite in for good measure. The gap is normal and is exactly how Dawson designed it. Most likely to make it basically drop in even if S&W decided to change measurements a little bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Therealkoop Posted April 30, 2013 Share Posted April 30, 2013 I have a pro and a 9l, on my 9l the rear sights pretty high. Seems to be fine. On my pro i have the same .305 front sight, and my rear is BOTTOMED OUT and it still shoots a little high . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trident Posted April 30, 2013 Share Posted April 30, 2013 (edited) Theralkoop, that seems really odd and the opposite of what I had. I tried the .305 and found in to be really high as well as I had a ton of downward travel. Could have gone probably as far as .265. But before I made that change, I found that used for tactical use, racking the slide, racking the sight against the ground, walls, tables, holsters, belts, ect... I found with the downward movement of the sight it's would loosen itself so I replaced the adjustable with a fixed Warren U notch .140 . I don't really see any reason to really have an adjustable rear unless you are only bullseye shooting past 50 yards. For personal defense, USPSA, or IDPA the distances are too short to really worry about it. I can hit BC steel all day out to 200 yards. I also found the 10-8 to be better with the larger .060 F/O rod for the same width of front sight (.040 for Dawson) and the F/O set into the rear of the front sight giving a clear round outline of the dot as opposed to a round melted rod. 10-8 the way to go. If you want the corners of the rear site rounded for better visibility go with the Warren rears. Edited May 1, 2013 by Trident Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cohland Posted April 30, 2013 Share Posted April 30, 2013 The gap below the front sight is normal. Any less spacing and you'd run the risk of scratching the frame while installing. It doesn't look that way on Glocks because that front sight screws in, so it doesn't need the clearance. Good Point. Chris 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