Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

.156 rear notch with .115 FO front?


eboggs
 Share

Recommended Posts

I usually use a .105 FO front with .135 rear....I'm having a pistol worked on and am having a heinie ledge rear put on .156 rear notch, with a .115 fo front....

This will be a speed/steel gun....I've never had any experience with this sight setup and am now having second thoughts...do you think it will be much different than what I'm used to? Too much?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I once had a Warren/Sevigney sit combo with those dimensions on a Glock 35. Up close it was great, but for distance shooting there was too much daylight in the rear notch for my liking so I changed them out for .105" front and .125" rear.

I too have a BHP and several years ago I had a .100" Dawson front and a .125" Heinie Slant Pro rear installed. I like that sight picture for a carry gun. My comp guns all have a .100" front and .115" rear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My best results, for any type of shooting - when looking at the sights from your freestyle shooting position - the two light bars, added together, equaled the width of the front sight.

Interesting Brian. Two questions:

1. Any thoughts on why that is?

2. Is there a formula to figure that relationship out without buying and trying different widths that takes the distance between the sights into account, etc?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a little rusty on my geometry, but I would guess, that using this rule, it would be something like:

(width of front sight) = (width of rear sight opening)*(distance of front sight to eye)/(2*(distance rear sight to eye))

Someone should confirm that before using it though.

I guess I should explain this formula a little. To do this, you need to mathematically get the rear sight and the front sight in the same plane. I tried to project the rear sight opening size to the front sight distance by a simple proportion. The circumference of the circle, starting at the eye (actually the optic nerve, but why quibble with a half inch or so) is linear with radius, so that should work. I divided it by two because, with the above rule, the front sight takes up half the larger apparent size of the rear sight opening.

If the rear sight is say .150 wide and is 23 inches away from the eye, it will look like it's about .196 at 30 inches (for this example, the sight radius is 7 inches.) Half of that is .098, which would be the optimal size by this rule.

I wish I had this rule of thumb last week, because my new sights, that should be in today, are nowhere near that. I should have bought a much smaller front sight....oh well, I may get it right next time.

Edited by robport
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My best results, for any type of shooting - when looking at the sights from your freestyle shooting position - the two light bars, added together, equaled the width of the front sight.

Interesting Brian. Two questions:

1. Any thoughts on why that is?

I tried it initially, due Walter Ropers incredibly detailed testing he published in his "Experiments of a Hangunner." (More than likely long out of print.)

At first I didn't like it, viusally, but after testing it across the board on every target size and distance you could imagine, found I shot the best with it.

2. Is there a formula to figure that relationship out without buying and trying different widths that takes the distance between the sights into account, etc?

I'd doubt that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A little experimentation with my new sights suggests that my formula is very close. I need a smaller front or a wider back. This might be very good for bullseye though.

It was the best for me, when I trained for The Masters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the response. The mental picture I get with those proportions look natural to me.

Your experience is really appreciated.

Since Dawson guarantees their sights shoot to POA and it's shooting 4 inches high at 20 yards (not a bad grouping though), I'm going to see if they can replace the front with a taller and thinner one.

I'm not good enough to hold different sight pictures according to distance. I really don't want to have to stop and think when the buzzer goes off.

Heck, I have enough trouble with mental errors, especially when I get asked questions on the way to the line...lol

Last time, I designed the course of fire and it was a disaster...everyone keep asking what my intentions were on this stage or that...while I was loading and trying to get ready to shoot.

At least that's my excuse.

At least they seemed to like the course.

Thanks again for your insight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I usually use a .105 FO front with .135 rear....I'm having a pistol worked on and am having a heinie ledge rear put on .156 rear notch, with a .115 fo front....

This will be a speed/steel gun....I've never had any experience with this sight setup and am now having second thoughts...do you think it will be much different than what I'm used to? Too much?

What gun are you putting it on ? Glock 17, 19, 34, 24, 17L ??

Edited by bigtimelarry
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I learned from the PowerFactor youtube show that a ratio of 1.35 was a place to start with for action type shooting... example 0.100 front with 0.135 rear. Or, 0.110 front and a 0.150 rear; or, something like that

At least that was my take-away... I have not tried it yet, getting there thou.

Edited by usa259
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I learned from the PowerFactor youtube show that a ratio of 1.35 was a place to start with for action type shooting... example 0.100 front with 0.135 rear. Or, 0.110 front and a 0.150 rear; or, something like that

At least that was my take-away... I have tried it yet, getting there thou.

The only "problem" with using standard ratios is that they don't take into account the distance from each person's eye, to the rear sight. Or in other words, the light bars for a 1.35 ratio will be quite different for a person with short arms vs. a person with long arms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

huh, just went and measured my sights on my G35, i just got some off the rack trueglo F/O front/rear on there... .145 front and rear, same width... that is weird, with the slide length there is daylight on both sides... i guess i could go thinner up front

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...
On 5/5/2015 at 2:37 AM, eboggs said:

I usually use a .105 FO front with .135 rear....I'm having a pistol worked on and am having a heinie ledge rear put on .156 rear notch, with a .115 fo front....

This will be a speed/steel gun....I've never had any experience with this sight setup and am now having second thoughts...do you think it will be much different than what I'm used to? Too much?

A few years on but any feedback on this combination?

Im definitely noticing the deterioration in my vision and its time to try a different sight combination. 

I take brian's point about arm length and not thata ratio of 1.38 has been my sweet spot, so this combination could work for me. The question is, how does shooting such a big front sight work on small targets, partials etc?

And any other observations much appreciated, 

Thanks

P.D.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do to Jack, but aging is not kind. 

When i first started shooting i had a 1911 with millet front sight, blackedout, and an enlarged bomar rear, im guessing .140 plus width notch. 

I remember it being fairly easy and natural to just find the centre of tge front sight for accurate shooting. As we developed smaller front sights took over, until it became too hard to pick them up in a hurry. 

And fibre optic is not an option, i really dont like them after numerous attempts 

Edited by Phil Dunlop
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Phil Dunlop said:

  

And fibre optic is not an option, i really dont like them after numerous attempts 

 

I hated them too, the first time.

 

The 2nd time, I used the fiber as a replacement for "the dot" on my open gun

and LOVED it.     😍

 

Don't continue to use the top of the post for sighting - sight your gun in so that

the bullets hit the center (centre) of your fiber dot.   Really great and fast.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm 48 and I'm starting to see changes in my vision. I'm shooting more and more shots while focused on the target and aiming with blurry sights. I don't like the wider rear notches any more.

I'm shooting a .100 front and a .115 rear. The tighter rear sight makes it easier to call my shots with blurry sights. I still zero the gun at the top of the front sight, but at closer distances I just aim with the fiber.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have shot fiber optics using both techniques and over the years i must have tried 20 times but i still prefer.plain black sights, for the reason that i shoot them better, when i can see them.

Rather than compromising the simplicity of a single point of reference, the top of the front sight leveled and centered in the rear, i want to try bigger and bolder, hoping that is quicker for me.

Thanks for the responses.

P.D.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...