FO for a Duty / SD Gun

[NorthernHeat]

I have been running Ameriglo Spartan Tactical sights on my duty/off duty guns and have been looking at trying a fiber optic front and black rear setup to see if I like it.

I was wondering who all have been using FO/black rear setup's for a while on carry/SD guns and how you have liked them compared to a more traditional night sight setup?

I have been looking at Warren Tactical, 10-8 Performance, Dawson Chargers, Proctor Y-Notch... any others I should look at?

Does anybody have experience with any of these that they would feel makes a certain one superior to the others?

Thanks

[JHC]

I've used a couple types but in recent years only 10-8. They are range guns for the most part although I would not mind carrying any of them either. My G19s and G26 just happen to sport tritium night sights.

I prefer the 10-8 mostly because the front post is constructed such that even in bright sun the FO has never flared out the outline of the square post for precision shots. There is just a skosh more metal up in the top of that frame.

What I've also noticed is the FO rod on the 10-8 is sits in a deep recess so that they are a harder to remove if you want to change color or whatnot. I list that as a feature as this makes them pretty resistant to being easily broken and lost it would seem.

[Mr_White]

I have traditionally been a user of night sights, but I got over it and went to black rear/FO front on carry guns. I had been using that setup for a while on my practice/competition gun, but I want as much commonality as I can get and eventually went with the same sights on my carry guns too. I use the Dawson Chargers and like them (sorry, no experience with the other options.)

That decision was based on a change in my perception of the likelihood of needing night sights, needing a flashlight, and needing to make a difficult shot, combined with me being a severely daytime person and having made (in training) some pretty confidence-inspiring shots with black sights in near darkness.

What I like about the Dawson Chargers are the serrations and slimmer dimensions. I'm not the best data tracker these days, not that I ever was, but I feel better about precision shooting with sights that have slimmer dimensions than you can get with night sights. The Dawson Chargers are a .105" wide front and a .125" rear notch. The serrations also allow the front blade and rear notch to be remain visible in some lighting conditions that result in glare on non-serrated night sights, which then only let me aim with the big white ring or whatever hi-visibility element is around the tritium on the front sight.

The last night sights I used were an Ameriglo Operator rear with a yellow T-CAP front. Didn't really like it. It is great if the world is pretty dim, but not dark. The big yellow square in the front contrasts strongly with really dark targets and surfaces. But, when the lighting was darker, to the point that the tritium could be seen glowing, the smaller tritium lamp in the T-CAP front was pretty hard for me to see since it was so small. When the lighting was brighter (like daytime) I was pretty shocked at how dark a target the super light colored T-CAP front washed out against. I shot my carry gun with those sights at a USPSA match one day. I expected the T-CAP to wash out against white-painted steel. I was very surprised that it also washed out and was very hard for me to see even against the brown cardboard targets.

Before the T-CAP, I used straight up Ameriglo Operators and they were a good general use set of sights. The problems I have with those are wider dimensions than I prefer, and a lack of serration allows a lot of glare and loss of visual awareness of the front blade and rear sight in some lighting conditions. They are a really good general purpose set of sights though.

Very much liking the Dawson Chargers for now.

[JHC]

I like the sound of that skinny post and narrow rear notch. I've tried and rejected thin front posts but I never had such a narrow rear notch to match them to. I will check those out.

[Mr_White]

I like the sound of that skinny post and narrow rear notch. I've tried and rejected thin front posts but I never had such a narrow rear notch to match them to. I will check those out.

It's probably worth trying, especially if you are inclined to experiment with sights anyway, but like I said, I don't have any real concrete data telling me it's better, just my subjective impressions from using them a while. Also, I know I have seen reports from PF members who have gotten excellent precision accuracy out of pretty fat sights like the HDs.

[Sasage]

I used to run 10-8s but I like a traditional notch better.

I now run a Ameriglo .115 FO and .150(Defoor) rear.

GFT-113

Comparing it to my Pro Glo front with black out rear.

[Mr_White]

I now run a Ameriglo .115 FO and .150(Defoor) rear.

You know I forgot, there was a time I used exactly that combo. It was when I was using Defoors and wanted to try out a FO front. Got one of the right height from Dawson and used it with the Defoor rear. That was what was on my gun at Rogers and it worked fine. I did kind of like the short, stubby heights of all the Ameriglos I've used.

[CCT125US]

For many years I used Heinie Straight Eights. I became curious about using a plain rear, and went to the 10-8 RS paired with a Dawson front Tritium. I used that combo for several years and roughly 40K rounds. I had to really focus on the FS, but they worked well. Again, I got bored and went with a Dawson fiber front for 2K rounds. I personally did not care for FO. I then started shooting a P2000 with stock Trijicon 3 dots. What I am currently experiencing, is that the destraction some talk about with 3 dots, can be more of an awareness for myself. I am finding that the rear vials allow me to use a softer overall focus and has improved my shooting.

[Sasage]

You know I forgot, there was a time I used exactly that combo. It was when I was using Defoors and wanted to try out a FO front. Got one of the right height from Dawson and used it with the Defoor rear. That was what was on my gun at Rogers and it worked fine. I did kind of like the short, stubby heights of all the Ameriglos I've used.
The 10-8 front was .215 and for some reason stock .165 works for me

Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

[JHC]

It's probably worth trying, especially if you are inclined to experiment with sights anyway, but like I said, I don't have any real concrete data telling me it's better, just my subjective impressions from using them a while. Also, I know I have seen reports from PF members who have gotten excellent precision accuracy out of pretty fat sights like the HDs.

Yes some of the best groups I've shot have been with HDs.

[Sasage]

[/B]

Yes some of the best groups I've shot have been with HDs.
HDs seem to be on the majority of the pistols I see.

Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

[GRV]

You know I forgot, there was a time I used exactly that combo. It was when I was using Defoors and wanted to try out a FO front. Got one of the right height from Dawson and used it with the Defoor rear. That was what was on my gun at Rogers and it worked fine. I did kind of like the short, stubby heights of all the Ameriglos I've used.

I've been going through a very similar journey as you regarding sights. I very nearly bought a stock height Dawson. However I guess I could never justify spending the cash, and now this magical mystical orange TCAP has finally materialized, so we'll see how that goes.

[Mr_White]

I've been going through a very similar journey as you regarding sights. I very nearly bought a stock height Dawson. However I guess I could never justify spending the cash, and now this magical mystical orange TCAP has finally materialized, so we'll see how that goes.

Even though I haven't been loving that kind of hi viz front sight lately, the idea of the orange TCAP is appealing and I might look at one sometime...

[El Cid]

I love the glow they provide but haven't paid them much attention lately. Has anything been done about the durability of FO front sights? I've lost count of how many shooters I've seen at matches who have the FO disappear during a stage of fire. That would be my chief concern on a duty/SD pistol.

[HopetonBrown]

I love the glow they provide but haven't paid them much attention lately. Has anything been done about the durability of FO front sights? I've lost count of how many shooters I've seen at matches who have the FO disappear during a stage of fire. That would be my chief concern on a duty/SD pistol.

I'm not seeing the same amount of problems you are. And if the fiber does fall out, your sights still work.

[Sasage]

I don't shoot competitions and use a holster that covers the front sight so I have not had any issues yet.

I do know that the 10-8 comparative to the Ameriglo FO had more material covering the rod.

[JTQ]

Here's a Hilton Yam article (I couldn't find it on MSW for some reason. Maybe he's changed his mind on them) https://silvercore.wordpress.com/2014/06/02/the-fragile-fiber-optic-front-sight-silvercore-training-bc/

Caleb's got an article in Gun Nuts Media http://www.gunnuts.net/2014/05/30/are-fiber-optics-too-fragile-for-ccw-use/

[Maple Syrup Actual]

I'm not seeing the same amount of problems you are. And if the fiber does fall out, your sights still work.
Personally, I have seen a fair number of broken FO rods, and while the sight is still there even if the rod is gone, you have to realize that.

I've seen several people in moderate lighting draw and float their guns around as they hunt for the glowing dot they're expecting to see. Yes, they usually work it out. But it's never been instant when I have seen it.

I think in low light it would be slower still.

A lot of people seem to be cool with FO sights, but I'm not, and I'm fine with that being a minority opinion. I have personally seen too many break, and while maybe I'm a statistical anomaly, that's what I've seen.

[JTPHD]

I've been using FO sights for about 5 years on my carry/competition guns, and am really liking the Proctors. I mainly shoot a G17 and find that they give me the perfect balance of light around the front post for speed and accuracy.

Also, here is a response from Mike Pannone about why he uses FO sights- food for thought.


I've done a lot of low light shooting and found the following: if I can't ID the target then I can't shoot so I need a light regardless of whether I can see my tritium or not. That said, with an artificial light (hand held or gun mounted) I don't need tritium. During the day fiber optic is superior for combative shooting and at night with a flashlight fiber optic is superior. The only time tritium is better is if I have no flashlight and at that point I can't positively ID my target anyway. At dusk tritium is barely more visible and only if it is an extremely bright sight set. I carry a fiber optic front and black rear on all my guns: carry, sport and training and I am 100% confident in that decision.
Shoot them in low light with and without a flashlight and both types of sights and you might find some interesting things. I did.
Also, I put a small dab of super-glue on the fiber optic and I have never had one fall out. I've used FO front on my G19 in IZ and know guys who've carried fiber optic sights to include adjustable rear's in combat and have heard no inordinate complaints. That's my 2 cents based on practical experience not theory but go out there and test it for yourself.