whizz Posted July 4, 2008 Share Posted July 4, 2008 Anyone have experience from the mentioned rear sights? Please share your thoughts as I am in the process of deciding which it will be. Anyone think a original S&W rear with a widened or standard notch would do as well? Conny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwx40x40 Posted July 4, 2008 Share Posted July 4, 2008 I like the plain black Milletts, but I also have a S&W that I widened with a file have become quite fond of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubber Posted July 4, 2008 Share Posted July 4, 2008 Anyone have experience from the mentioned rear sights?Please share your thoughts as I am in the process of deciding which it will be. Anyone think a original S&W rear with a widened or standard notch would do as well? Conny Whizz, I'll let you know after a couple of matches. I just put the Millet on my 686. It will turn into a preference type thing as I like the look of the larger blade on it right now. But I have not shot it in competitions yet. The LPA and the Millet set up seem to be about the same. Later rdd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom E Posted July 4, 2008 Share Posted July 4, 2008 I think the stock sight is fine but it has to be a .160 or .196 blade so you can cut the notch deep enough along with widening it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe4d Posted July 4, 2008 Share Posted July 4, 2008 I like the standard S&W with the V blade Smith uses on some of there revolvers. The V blade on a 4" 646 with FO front works pretty good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carmoney Posted July 4, 2008 Share Posted July 4, 2008 I'm a big fan of the Millett target (plain black) model, and have used them on most of my match revolvers for nearly 20 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cas Posted July 4, 2008 Share Posted July 4, 2008 I really like the Millets, and have a few sets of them (mostly on single actions). For my 625 I bought a set of both Millet and LPA. As expected I was leaning towards the Millet's till the LPA's showed up. Wow! There was no doubt for me which way I was going. Been thinking about buying a few more LPA's to stash away for the future. Also trying to figure out if my 629 Mountain Gun would look too silly wearing a set. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Round_Gun_Shooter Posted July 4, 2008 Share Posted July 4, 2008 (edited) I like the LPA but they need to be widened just a little. I have not used Milett except on my friend Mooney's 625. He has changed to LPA so maybe he can help out with the differences between them. From what I experienced, the LPA is a little sturdier and adjustments are finer. I used one set in bulls eye so the precision helped. Best price I have found is $60 US at Top Gun Real fast shipping also. Since they are Italian made, I imagine they are easily available in your area. Edited July 4, 2008 by Round_Gun_Shooter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whizz Posted July 4, 2008 Author Share Posted July 4, 2008 Yes LPA's are easy to get around here. Think I will go for the Millett plain black as I am not really sure I will like the overall look of my gun with the LPA. If I change my mind I can always get them later. Thanks for the input guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwx40x40 Posted July 5, 2008 Share Posted July 5, 2008 I like the LPA but they need to be widened just a little. I have not used Milett except on my friend Mooney's 625. He has changed to LPA so maybe he can help out with the differences between them.From what I experienced, the LPA is a little sturdier and adjustments are finer. I used one set in bulls eye so the precision helped. Best price I have found is $60 US at Top Gun Real fast shipping also. Since they are Italian made, I imagine they are easily available in your area. I remember an old post last year that mentioned Randy Lee was trying to get LPA to offer a wider notch sight. Of course it was that same time frame there was rumor of 8 shot 9mm Taurus too. Looks like a wider notch would be something easy for a manufacuture to offer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Round_Gun_Shooter Posted July 5, 2008 Share Posted July 5, 2008 Yes LPA's are easy to get around here. Think I will go for the Millett plain black as I am not really sure I will like the overall look of my gun with the LPA. If I change my mind I can always get them later. Thanks for the input guys. LPAs on revolvers 625 1955 Target Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mooney Posted July 5, 2008 Share Posted July 5, 2008 ..so now I jump in with my $.02 what the hey, they time me with a sundial these days anyway- may as well be late than never I like the LPA sights- but I also like the Millet ones. The LPA sits higher, the Millet rides right around stock height a bit more, not very noticable. I have the Millet rear on my 617 w. SDM front, and the LPA on my 625 w. SDM front. 6 or a half dozen. I know that it's useless without photos, but I like the aesthetics of the LPA sight better- the top strap blends nicely above and below (where you can see the area below the rear sight the best is in RGS's photo of the blue gun- with a stock 625 the area between the hammer channel and the rear sight blade just looks like the end of the top strap- along with the elimination of the black metal bar along the top strap. The notches are both nearly (if not completely) identical in both types, neither of which is wide enough for my taste with the FO, especially at distance. I have several extra sets of the Millet ones, so I plan to do a little notching to see what I can come up with. As Gary said, the LPA sights are more finely tunable, but for action shooting either is quite good. I'll try to remember to grab my camera and snap a couple photos, but life has been so hectic lately, it may be a while (or forever...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carmoney Posted July 5, 2008 Share Posted July 5, 2008 I guess aesthetics are always in the eye of the beholder. To me, the LPAs look dorky, with that big-ass aluminum adaptor thing that is obviously being employed to put on a sight that was not designed to fit on a S&W revolver. To my eye, it's a cobbled-up mess. But that's the thing about aesthetics--everybody looks at stuff a little differently. Now, all that said, if the LPA worked better than the Millett, I'd use it in a heartbeat. But it doesn't. So I don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carmoney Posted July 5, 2008 Share Posted July 5, 2008 From what I experienced, the LPA is a little sturdier... Here, I must disagree. I have no opinion of the sturdiness of the LPA product, and certainly no criticism of the LPA other than its looks and its cost, but the Millett revolver sights I've personally used on multiple guns for nearly 20 years have always held up 100% despite very hard use. Many others here (Hopalong, for example) have found the same thing to be true. In other words, I don't how a relatively new product (at least here in states) could be called "sturdier" than the Millett product that has proven itself to be completely sturdy over a long period of time. Has anybody here personally experienced a problem with a Millett replacement rear sight for S&W revolver? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cas Posted July 6, 2008 Share Posted July 6, 2008 The LPA... this is what I see. This is the "looks" part that matters to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S&WIowegan Posted July 6, 2008 Share Posted July 6, 2008 I guess aesthetics are always in the eye of the beholder. To me, the LPAs look dorky, with that big-ass aluminum adaptor thing that is obviously being employed to put on a sight that was not designed to fit on a S&W revolver. To my eye, it's a cobbled-up mess. But that's the thing about aesthetics--everybody looks at stuff a little differently. Now, all that said, if the LPA worked better than the Millett, I'd use it in a heartbeat. But it doesn't. So I don't. Whoa Ho!!! hold on there. Them's fighting words. Calling my favorite Italian sights DORKY is going way too far. First Carmoney gets in trouble for accusing somebody of stealing and now he's dumping on LPAs. What next......motherhood, apple pie, WHAT??? I may have to terminate my sponsorship of the Rotary Gunsmith Institute. Bob A16841 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LPatterson Posted July 7, 2008 Share Posted July 7, 2008 I switched from the Millett to the LPA because the visual presentation more closely approximates that of my Wilson, Springfield and Dawson blades. Sights are just a tool on the gun, which is also a tool, that allows me to play a game that I enjoy. Now golf, which I used to enjoy, has developed some wierd (dorky) looking drivers and putters (belly & chest) but players are using them to make millions of dollars a year so I guess it must be a case of what a person perceives as providing an improvement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carmoney Posted July 7, 2008 Share Posted July 7, 2008 Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, I suppose. I like the visual presentation of the Millett. Frankly, from behind the gun it doesn't look all that different than the LPA, although I believe the notch on the Millett is more appropriately sized for speed competition. The notch on the LPA is too small. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carmoney Posted July 7, 2008 Share Posted July 7, 2008 In any event, it's a hell of a lot more important to keep one's visual focus on the front sight than which rear sight is chosen! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhgtyre Posted July 7, 2008 Share Posted July 7, 2008 I just had a Millet rear and SDM FO front added to my 629 and I like the combo very much. I get the same, or very similar, sight picture that I have on my 1911/2011 based guns which makes the transition to revo a little easier. One of my shooting buddies has the LPA rear and he has stated that the notch is a bit too small and the rear blade a bit too large for his tastes. He stomps me as it is so I am not looking forward to him getting sights he likes! -ld Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hopalong Posted July 7, 2008 Share Posted July 7, 2008 I Have NOT used or seen an LPA other than pictures (Disclaimer) I DO have on ALL of my S&W revolvers MILLETT sights. ON my original 625 I started with, I have the Std S&W front sight and a slightly wider notch on my Millet. I did this to see through the rear and see the front better. IN the mean time, I thinned my Front sight of my 25-2 to .100 and use the .320 (I think, have to look) rear sight to get the same spacing but better results (thinner front sight gets more precise hits).I really like this set up and am going to have all them done this way. I have tried the white outline rear sight, and gave it away. I PREFER ALL BLACK (even the front sight). Now on durability !!!!! At the range a few years ago, I hung my gun on a prop going by and knocked it out (no discussing who's holster ect) and it landed smack dab on the rear sight. Red clay/dirt was all in it but after a little cleaning I went back to shooting. The sight was still right where I had set it, no readjusting or anything needed. Just add ammo and away we go. I have NEVER had to readjust or doubt my Millett sights. FWIW. HOP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whizz Posted July 7, 2008 Author Share Posted July 7, 2008 (edited) Regarding a to narrow notch I think it's nothing a steady hand and a good file can't cure. Think nothing will be worse than the sights on my 1917 anyway Really looking forward to get my 625 in a couple of weeks. A bit narrow rear... Edit: Ooops just realized that line could be misinterpreted Hope you understand I meant the rear sight... Writing in other than my native language sometimes keyboard tapping gets faster than my internal interpreter. Edited July 7, 2008 by whizz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cas Posted July 7, 2008 Share Posted July 7, 2008 (edited) The LPA notch looks small because the rear face is so big. Plenty large for the SDM and 5" barrel. I could understand if someone felt it was "snug" on a 4" perhaps. Edited July 7, 2008 by cas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pinger Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 (edited) I have a .410 Millet (plain black) if anyone is interested PM me. I tried it, and i like the small factory rear best. It seems to help me when there's no big rear sight to get in the way of the front sight. Who looks at sights anyway?...lol Edited July 8, 2008 by pinger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snertley Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 I have a .410 Millet (plain black) if anyone is interested PM me. I tried it, and i like the small factory rear best. It seems to help me when there's no big rear sight to get in the way of the front sight. Who looks at sights anyway?...lol Your telling me I have a sighting device on the back of my gun too! I better look for that in the morning........ 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