SIGHTS

[williamlayton]

I have read, with interest, conversations about accuracy and sights--fixed or adjustable--here over the years.
I am of the opinion that---on handguns--for the work that most of us do, a fixed sight is a better choice. I am not going to get into the particular type or manufacturer, personal preferences.
If a sight is properly affixed and correctly aligned it will work.
I know, and I saw this just the other day, that each sight has a different rest for proper point of aim. In other words each sight will take some amount of borrow in the aliment to give a good grouping.
I think this is also true depending on the bullet and loading of each shell.
It is not difficult, for me, too know which is which with each gun or loading and to make the adjustment necessary to give a good grouping.
I do have some adjustable sights, and they are good, but I also find myownself just adjusting the point of aim with each different loading rather that adjusting the sights.
Now I am not talking bulls eye here.
Blessings

[blhof]

I agree, although most of my current guns are adjustabe sight.   Years ago I owned a Dan Wesson 357 and shot it enough that I developed muscle memory and could draw and shoot well enough to hit cans and bottles without even aiming.  Can't do it now; still trying to get good groups from a sandbag.  I found what worked with the DW and stuck with it til it was second nature.

[Savage]

My pistol sights, fixed or adjustable, must shoot to the top of the front sight with the loading I use in that pistol.  My carry guns are sighted for my carry ammo. My game guns are sighted to my power factor loads. Those loads haven't changed in years. I like to know that all my handguns are sighted the same way, so whenever I pick one up I don't have to remember any sighting variations. They all aim the same. I don't mind changing sights till I get what I want either. I've got a few sets of sights bagged and tagged, just waiting for use! For clarification, I stick to one load per caliber, with very few exceptions.
Savage

[coyotejoe]

Whether fixed or adjustable does not matter so much as the sight picture they present. Adjustable sights generally present a very good sight picture with a black faced rear notch, a flat topped rear blade, a tall straight sided, flat topped, black front black blade and the distinctive picture makes for very good, consistent alignment. Very few fixed sights present such a good picture. Most fixed rear sights are just a shallow, rounded groove in a semi-rounded top strap which makes it very hard to get a sharp, clear sight picture with consistent point of impact, especially with nickle or stainless guns. And I'm not even speaking of older fixed sight revolvers which often had fixed sights barely even visible to those of us with less than perfect vision. I once had an old 1917 S&W revolver in .45 ACP with fixed sights I had "re-worked" with a large brass bead front and a rear notch filed to a large half-round groove and after much tinkering to get them both just right, I could set the whole bead into the half notch to zero with 180 grain bullets or pull the bead down so that its top was level with the frame top for 230 grain loads and I shot that gun pretty well. But that was ten years ago and now I don't shoot any open sights very well. I now prefer the small, light weight, "tubeless red dot" sometimes called reflex sights and shoot better with those than I have shot any handgun in many rears. All in all, I like fixed sights on a carry gun because they are light, low, and rugged and one seldom really aims a defensive weapon. For "sporting" use, I find I just shoot better with the sharper sight picture presented by adjustable sights, the "adjustability" being of less importance than the sharpness of the sight picture. But for that use I now much prefer the aforementioned compact red dots because they present the sharpest of all sight pictures short of a scope.

[Davemuzz]

I've always been a big fan of open sights. But, that may or may not have had something to do with the fact that I never wore a pair of glasses until I was 45, and then they were reading glasses only. But today, I own several scopes on rifles and handguns. I enjoy shooting 'em and find they are more precise than open....for the most part....and that doesn't mean "always".

Pennsylvania this year allowed peep sights for the flintlock deer season for the first time. I mounted a Lyman #57 on my Hawken and I just love it. That front bead just seems to self-center. I have a Williams on my Marlin 1895XLR and it does the same. If I miss with either one of these guns....it's not the gun. (And yes, I have missed with the Hawken....but never with the Marlin!!!)

I have a 44 magnum Smith that I shoot pins with in the summer.  So, this winter after some searching on the internet, I found that millet makes a peep sight for the Smith and Ruger. So, the actual Peep insert is on backorder....but I can't shoot pins yet anyway. But I'll give it a try....hey....my score could go up.....and if it goes down, it's back to open sights.

Dave

[williamlayton]

I like Heinie--low mounts--fixed--not adjustable.
I think the thought comes to the point that fixed don't move and are where they are and what they are--all the time.
Blessings

[Lloyd Smale]

a few good points were hit on here allready. I do like fixed sights. Not really because there more rugged as it would take alot to knock a good adj sight out of alignment. I like them because i just like the looks of a fixed sighted gun. I also enjoy the challange of finding loads that work with them.  Problem is like was said they all dont give a good sight picture. Some of this can be improved. I detest a stainless front sight blade on any gun or a to narrow rear notch. If i had to pick a set of sights that gave the best sight picture it would hands down be a bowen target rear and a clements front post with the blade narrowed to .10. A great sight for the stainless vaqueros is the one dustin linebaugh does. My buddys new 500 by dustin has a nice front black post and a little insert in the rear of the notch that wide and BLACK! Its the best fix sighted sight picture ive seen and my stainless vaqueros are all getting boxed up and sent out there soon for this setup. to be totaly honest though for 99 percent of the shooters a good ajs. sight is hard to beat. there made rugged now a days and its a simple matter to turn a few screws and change loads. For the most part they give a better sight picture too.

[Ken ONeill]

Give me a good sturdy set of adjustable sights. I read of people knocking adjustable sights out of alignment. In 50 years of owning and shooting and hunting with handguns, I've NEVER knocked adjustable sights out of alignment. Had Smith blades loosen ? Yes. Had to adjust sights because of distance or changing light conditions ? OF COURSE ! Anyone who's ever enjoyed the handgun metallic silhouette game has had to make light adjustments.
On the other hand, I've never had to use a handgun as a hammer or crowbar, so I'll have to concede that those who do so may very well knock adjustable sights off.

[coyotejoe]

Well Ken, you don't really have to abuse an adjustable sight to loose zero. Most adjustable rear handgun sights depend on a spring to push the blade up against the elevation adjustment screw. They can easily become depressed in a holster or gun case and then the adjustment can turn freely and you won't know anything is wrong until you shoot two feet over a rabbit at 20 yards. Adjustable sights also stand high above the gun and that not only makes the gun bulkier and more likely to snag on things but also makes the sights themselves more subject to damage from a drop or knock. Sights that work great on the range are often not the best on a gun that is carried day in and day out.
  I though it a bit odd when Ruger came out with the fixed sight Vaquero, for years we were charged extra for adjustable sights on any handgun and now Ruger is charging us extra to leave them off!

[Savage]

I like adjustable sights, and have them on several handguns. I'll have to concede that they are not as rugged as my fixed sights. I once sheared the rear adjustable (Bomar Style) off a Kimber Custom Target doing malfunction drills. Of course I had a 4" laceration in the palm of my hand that I had to superglue closed to finish the training. The broken sight hurt worse than the injury! It cost me $65 to replace it!! In 40+ years of carrying adjustable sight pistols and revolvers, that's the only one I ever broke.
Savage

[Lloyd Smale]

ive had the silver solderd front sights on fixed sighted guns go flying too so i guess any sight can fail.

[kennisondan]

there's sights on you guys pistols ?
I really need glasses...
if I could just find my keys...I could...
dk

[Ken ONeill]

I guess the example of shooting over a rabbit is meant to illustrate the point, and I accept that. For clarity, 2 feet at 20 yards with the old pre 1982 Ruger rear sights is 25 clicks of elevation. With the later 16 detent screws, it's about 40 or more. That's a heck of a bump and a lot of screw turning!! It's never happened to me in 50 years, as I said, but heck, anyone else is free to use whatever kind of sights they want!

[williamlayton]

My point has been missed entirely---I guess it was those adjustable sights  .
My point was concerning adjustable sights and the work most of us do, or , the purpose of sights.
My point was not aimed at bulls-eye. It was aimed at self-defense.
My communication skills are lacking--I freely admit.
Blessings

[Ken ONeill]

Naah...your point was clear and well communicated. As you know, these threads sometimes take on a life of their own

[Davemuzz]

Thread change?

Morph
Highjack
Meander


Dave

[coyotejoe]

I guess the example of shooting over a rabbit is meant to illustrate the point, and I accept that. For clarity, 2 feet at 20 yards with the old pre 1982 Ruger rear sights is 25 clicks of elevation. With the later 16 detent screws, it's about 40 or more. That's a heck of a bump and a lot of screw turning!! It's never happened to me in 50 years, as I said, but heck, anyone else is free to use whatever kind of sights they want!

Ken, it isn't a matter of a "bump". The spring which pushes the blade upward also provides the pressure for the detent. If the blade is pushed downward there are no "clicks", the screw spins freely by vibration, it can even come completly out of the gun and be lost. This has happened to me when carrying a Ruger on horseback and happened to a friend who had a sight of similar design on a muzzleloader while carried in a case in his pickup, in that instance he shot right over the back of two elk before he discovered the problem and then never saw another elk.

[S.B.]

I like Heinie--low mounts--fixed--not adjustable.
I think the thought comes to the point that fixed don't move and are where they are and what they are--all the time.
Blessings

If your talking about Heinie sights for a Colt or clone 1911, usual combat distances are 3-7 yards? And I agree these are some of the best in the industry, have you seen his newer straight eight sights?

[coyotejoe]

My point has been missed entirely---I guess it was those adjustable sights  .
My point was concerning adjustable sights and the work most of us do, or , the purpose of sights.
My point was not aimed at bulls-eye. It was aimed at self-defense.
My communication skills are lacking--I freely admit.
Blessings

You're right, I did miss your point. I thought the point of any post was to seek the opinion of others and it seems to me you have gotten that, so if that is not what you wanted I still haven't gotten your point.
 If you're just saying you prefer fixed sights on a defensive gun I agree.
 if you're saying "the work most of us do" is self-defense, I disagree.
 If you believe your system of holding differently for different loads has any application to defensive shooting I strongly disagree.
 The bottom line is that both types have advantages and disadvantages and that is why both types are made and you are free to choose what best suits your own needs.
  Have I now addressed your point or have I still missed it?