When shooting handguns what sights do you prefer? Fixed vs. Adjustable? Black-on-black? Hi-viz fibers? 3-dot?
And why do you like this?
I shoot 3-dots and prefer them because they’re what I have the most experience with, and I like the contrast as they show up well against light backgrounds as well as dark. But the bottom line is its what I’m used to. You guys any different?
I’ve shot everything from plain old irons to three dots, to hi viz and I’m back to a front dot and standard back sight configuration. As I get older, I find it’s harder and harder to change focus from target/sights/target and the single dot seems to work well for me. http://www.novaksights.com/products/sights/index.html#descriptions the first rear sight on the left, and the second front sight from the left (tritium night).
Not to link whore, but…
http://www.newbieshooter.com/2011/01/using-your-sights/
I’ve gone back to flat black in the back. Seems to work well for me.
Triple-dot, with the front one being a light collimation (fiber optic) or otherwise illuminated (I would love tritium, but cannot rationalize/afford it) set-up is my new favorite.
For carry purposes, I prefer fixed sights, just to minimize knocking them off-center, and because they are generally less sharp-and-pointy.
And, likewise, I would love a laser (hey, it is a kind of sight), but have not seen fit to rationalize that cost either ;).
Yeah I wish Lasers were less spendy. Of course I’d only go Crimson Trace, as its just the best design out there, but a set of 1911 grips would totally fatten up my carry gun, and those slim grips really keep it from digging into my ribs when I carry, and the J-frame grips would cost as much as my friggin’ J-Frame….
Got to say that it very much depends on the gun.
My 1911 Commander has a white dot front blade sight with red/orange Hi-viz adjustable rear target sights and Crimson Trace laser grips. The different target acquisition mechanics between the two makes for a gun that needs regular practice to stay competent with both techniques (head down sight-target-sight as well as head up focused on dot on target) (the difference between the two for retaining SA just adds to the challenge). Both techniques have their advantages and limitations.
My 431PD J-frame revolver has a white dot front blade and a channel milled down the center of the top strap. This gun seems much more frequently accurate using a modified isoscoles (sp?) grip than a standard Weaver for example. In fact, it’s one of the few guns I regularly shoot that is actually easier to acquire and maintain a target/sight picture from a one-handed straight arm grip than a two.
You didn’t ask, but I also prefer my rifle scopes mounted on extended height rings to permit using the iron sights with a scope mounted. The additional sighting options this permits outweigh the requirements of a modified cheek weld and odd-to-everone-else scope eye relief in my experience.
I suspect most shooters have different sight preferences for particular shooting circumstances along with personalized hybrid arrangements that don’t make much sense to others.
Fixed plain black
I used trijicon (green front, yellow rear) for a number of years, and now have all green TFO sights. I like the TFO better, for the dayliight brightness, but would prefer less intense rear sights. The yellow tritium is not as bright as the green, provising nice contrast.
AE
All of my carry guns (G23,31,32) run trijicons front and rear, green/green. If there is moderate ambient light, they appear as white dots front and rear, very easy to align esp if the sights are out of focus (since I am not the only gunny with horrible vision).
Targets? BIG BLACK adjustable rear, patridge style front. Time tested and proven.
I like the trijicons quite a lot. They work really well, are adjustable, and basically are the SHIT. Plus they do last years longer than they claim to. I have some on an old paintball gun that are going on 20+ years and still glow like mad. (It came that way. It’s custom and a very high end awesome shooter/collectible from way back.)
I can work well with irons too.
Dot front, black rear. I prefer tritium in front but a gold bead or green fiber optic is alright. I’ve taken to adding fluorescent orange tape sealed with clear nail polish on the front sight, with a hole punched for dot (unless it’s a plain white dot, then I don’t bother). That seems about perfect for me.
I was surprised how much the single dot improved my sight acquisition over three dots; it was strange at first but now when I use the occasional pistol with three dots it feels like a very crowded sight picture. I imagine a straight eight setup, or a dot and vertical bar, or anything other than several dots in the same horizontal plane would be fine.
I am not at all a fan of black on black. The only time black on black is okay is with a ramped front. I find the orange or red insert on some of my revolvers to be more difficult to use than a plain black ramp: it’s hard to pick out the top edge of the sight if there’s any glare at all. I strongly prefer a gold bead partridge on a revolver over any ramp sight, though, I’ve just been too lazy and cheap to change over.
I’m late to the party, but here’s my opinion:
For carry, you need a night-sighting system on the pistol. This can be a laser or light or night-sights. I carry a black rear and tritium front, and it’s a good configuration. A Heine-style straight-8 or simply a 3-dot tritium system is better in the dark, but (for me) slower in low-light or light conditions.
For competition, including in the dark (IDPA), I’ve switch back to black-on-black, after trying 3-got tritium and large fiber-optic.
Clearly, I prefer simpler sighting systems. Why? I think there’s less going on to distract my eyes, and I can snap from target to front-sight and back as I drive the gun. With a large fiber, the eyes snap from the target, to the blade, *to the fiber*, and back. Likewise with a white dot. I’ve heard small fibers don’t have this issue, but I have not tried them.