kmca Posted March 13, 2008 Share Posted March 13, 2008 Just read in this month's Front Sight, that the Advantage Tactical sight is not an authorized modification. The old book says "notch and post" type sights only. The 2008 book makes no mention of any sights, other than they may be "trimmed, adjusted, replaced, colored, or fiber-optic". Is the Tactical sight okay or not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MI_Packer Posted March 13, 2008 Share Posted March 13, 2008 Just read in this month's Front Sight, that the Advantage Tactical sight is not an authorized modification. The old book says "notch and post" type sights only. The 2008 book makes no mention of any sights, other than they may be "trimmed, adjusted, replaced, colored, or fiber-optic". Is the Tactical sight okay or not? Item 13 in Appendix D4 states post and notch type sights in the current rulebook. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Keen Posted March 13, 2008 Share Posted March 13, 2008 John Amidon specifically stated that they were NOT ALLOWED in Production division. This comes from "the man" himself, so I would look for something else if I were you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kmca Posted March 13, 2008 Author Share Posted March 13, 2008 Just read in this month's Front Sight, that the Advantage Tactical sight is not an authorized modification. The old book says "notch and post" type sights only. The 2008 book makes no mention of any sights, other than they may be "trimmed, adjusted, replaced, colored, or fiber-optic". Is the Tactical sight okay or not? Item 13 in Appendix D4 states post and notch type sights in the current rulebook. I was looking at D4, item 21. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nik Habicht Posted March 13, 2008 Share Posted March 13, 2008 Your best bet would be to raise the matter with John Amidon, citing both his article in front sight and the applicable section of the PD rules. Just make sure you've read them in their entirety --- nothing's quite as frustrating as having missed something that answers the question, when getting the reply from John.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enoon Posted March 13, 2008 Share Posted March 13, 2008 My understanding is that the topic of post and notch sights is being discussed -- probably as a reaction to John Amidon's response in Front Sight. "Post and notch" has been a term that we understood without honing everything to a fine point. I liked that. Now the genie is out of the bottle. I have suggested (to my Area Director, hence my opening line) that now that the topic has been breeched, it should be functionally defined so some poor Match Director(s) doesn't get stuck with protests about beach ball front sights not being posts or any number of other whines I could develop if I had too much time, a desire to finish ahead of someone at any price, or can't tell the difference between a shooting match and a debating society meeting. Anyway, I wouldn't jump one way or the other if I could avoid it. Things may change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MI_Packer Posted March 13, 2008 Share Posted March 13, 2008 I would imagine that XS Express sights would fall into the same category as the Advantage sights. I haven't seen much of either as an RO. I think, but it's not my decision, that any of these sights should be allowed in production. I can see a loosely defined post and notch in each of these designs. A simple notch could be cut into the advantage rear sight without detracting from the triangular aiming method if someone wanted to meet the notch description. If it's OK to race cut a sight it must be OK to make a smaller notch as well. The bigger problem is that I would not have called a competitor on it, until I read the same article in Front Sight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted March 14, 2008 Share Posted March 14, 2008 I think that both the XO style and the triangle style are notch and post. They both have a notch in the rear and a post up front. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enoon Posted April 17, 2008 Share Posted April 17, 2008 The Board voted and the ATS sight is legal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JThompson Posted April 17, 2008 Share Posted April 17, 2008 The Board voted and the ATS sight is legal. Interesting.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eerw Posted April 17, 2008 Share Posted April 17, 2008 its very similar in concept to the Steyr triangle front/rear sights Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisStock Posted April 18, 2008 Share Posted April 18, 2008 its very similar in concept to the Steyr triangle front/rear sights That was the first thing that crossed my mind when I looked at them as well. My thinking was that if they are legal on the Steyr, no reason for them not to be legal on other Prod Div pistols. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kmca Posted April 18, 2008 Author Share Posted April 18, 2008 Glad I didn't do anything rash, like replacing them I got them in a Steel Challenge package and waited almost a year for them to be made for the XDs. I guess they'd be legal in Single Stack Division also? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SA Friday Posted April 18, 2008 Share Posted April 18, 2008 Not to rub baby oil on a sunburn while outside on a sunny desert day, but I really don't see an advantage gained from any of the iron sights discussed in this thread. Hell, if anything, I see disadvantages to all the iron sights discussed in this thread vs what's being used now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eerw Posted April 18, 2008 Share Posted April 18, 2008 think the thread is more whether they are legal or not.. vs what will work better..that probably will get proven out on the range Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nik Habicht Posted April 18, 2008 Share Posted April 18, 2008 The Board voted and the ATS sight is legal. I took a quick cruise through the Board minutes --- and found nothing...... Got a link or a source? 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