Glock Sights

[Skold]

I tried searching this, but couldn't find anything good. What night sights are everyone running on their glocks these days?

[HopetonBrown]

I tried searching this, but couldn't find anything good. What night sights are everyone running on their glocks these days?

I've been using TTI and Dawson Chargers. I know Gabe White uses Dawson Chargers as well.

[LSP552]

I'm using Trijicon HDs and Ameriglo ProGlos. I prefer the orange vs yellow ring.

[Up1911Fan]

I use the Ameriglo TCAP's on all of my Glock's.

[45dotACP]

Warren Tactical...Plain black rear, tritium front. I've heard Dawson is pretty awesome though and I've been considering a switch.

In my experience, Wilson Battlesights for the 1911 have been great.

[StraitR]

I put 10-8 plain black rears on every pistol I own, if it's an option, and it usually is. Fronts are a mixed bag of 10-8 Fiber Optic, Warren tritium, and Ameriglo tritium.

Personally, I'd look at the Vickers Elite (Wilson Combat) rears and then match it to the front of your choice that regulates to your liking.

Vickers Elite Battlesight for Glock, Black Serrated (http://shopwilsoncombat.com/Vickers-Elite-Battlesight-for-Glock-Black-Serrated/productinfo/669B/)

Vickers Elite Battlesight for Glock, Tritium (http://shopwilsoncombat.com/Vickers-Elite-Battlesight-for-Glock-Tritium/productinfo/669T/)

[M2CattleCo]

I'm switching to Defoor rears and Dawson fronts. I don't like anything that extends to the rear of the slide on a carry gun.

My 34s have 10-8 rears and 10-8 fiber optic fronts.

[JSGlock34]

Right now all of my Glocks are sporting Trijicon HDs.

[Sasage]

Ameriglo Fiber front .115 and .150 blacked out rear.

I started with hacks and prefer a narrower front sight

Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

[Irelander]

I have always just used Glock OEM night sights...but I am ready for a change.

[NCmtnman]

On my G34 I have 10-8 sights. Black rear and red fiber optic up front. LOVE that set up. My G27 has the newer style Glock night sights. I prefer them as the Trijicon HD's I had on my Shield were sharp and stuck out from the gun too much. The sights printed more than anything on the weapon so I'm not sure if the HD's are for me.

[OnionsAndDragons]

One Defoor, one TCAP and one w Glock factory NS.

I really like the Defoors. I've been thinking of trying a ProGlo dot front again, but I haven't decided on the right rear. I want something w a good round notch.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[GRV]

Here we go again... If I had a nickel for every of these threads I'm subscribed to... And yet, I keep subbing, because I have been in the OP's shoes, and never really took them off.

Currently running an orange TCAP front with a Defoor rear (GL-400).

If I had my choice, I think I'd prefer a .115" wide tritium front. But the .gov doesn't seem intent on letting us have such things. I am willing to surrender to the .125" front, like the TCAP.

If I had my choice, I'd have a Classic Operator rear with yellow vials. That's yellow tritium, truly no outline, .150" square notch, stock height. It existed, but Ameriglo discontinued it. No one else makes it that I know of. Trijicon makes it only in suppressor height.

If I had my choice, lining up the top edges would make the tritium vials line up. The Trijicon HD's are the only sights I've seen make this happen, but I have tried and don't like those for other reasons.

[spinmove_]

I'm actually in the market again myself for sights. Looking at possibly going with a TCAP set in green. Currently have an M&P9 Shield with Ameriglo Pro-glo combo sights (SW-745) and a P229 and SP2022 with Siglites. The Siglites aren't bad, but I've grown to like how Trijicon does their outlined tritium vials over Meprolight's method.

[Beat Trash]

I use the Ameriglo Spartan Tactical on my Glocks.

[Tamara]

I've got Ameriglo I-Dot Pros on the Glock I'm carrying. I've never had an issue with them on the Glock, although my experience with them on my M&P was certainly...chec (http://booksbikesboomsticks.blogspot.com/2014/07/machines-break.html)kered (http://booksbikesboomsticks.blogspot.com/2015/06/all-guns-break.html).

I have CAPs on two of my other Glocks and think I might wind up going with those on this one, too.

[Coyotesfan97]

I have Trijicon HDs on all my Glocks. I like the big yellow dots for my aging eyes


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JonInWA]

My only Glock that currently has tritium night sights is one of my Gen 3 G19s, which came with Trijicon regular night sights as OEM; I've been vey pleased with them for both day- and night-sight sight acquisition and accuracy.

That's not to say that the more recent night sights (by Trijicon and others) aren't an improvement, at least in some aspects (such a providing a slide reciprocating spur, which is nice, but has nothing to do with it being used as a sight), but my suggestion is to clearly figure out how the weapon is to be used, and in what environment, and which sights/sight configurations/sight materials possess the characteristics and qualities that you really need, and then decide accordingly-not just because Secret Agent Tier One Operator Six is endorsing them (and some of those guys are turning out to be quite the little endorsement machines, aren't they?)

Best, Jon

[JonInWA]

If I was to pick one sight for my Glocks, for general purpose use (and I define general purpose use as a combination of carry, home/nightstand defense, IDPA and GSSF-at least for me personally) it would be either Warren Tactical or Sevigney/Warren Carry sights. I have the Warren Tacticals on my G34, and the Sevigney/Warren Carry sights on my G21, and Ive been exceptionally pleased with both. If push came to shope and I had to pick only one, the nod would likely go to the Warren Tacticals. The key ingredients for me are a wide rear notch (at least .140) and a relatively thin front sight (at least in comparison to the rear notch width). I'm still experimenting with how effective a brightly colored front sight is versus a plain black. The Warren/Sevigney Warrens also feature a serrated front sight face and a plain rear sight face, which I believe is also slightly canted downward to reduce glare.

Bottom line: A clean, quickly acquired sight picture combined with a clean triggerpull (and reset) with good overall platform ergonomics are the key elements of the total equation.

Best, Jon

[deputyG23]

I have always just used Glock OEM night sights...but I am ready for a change.

Yep. Have three sets on guns here at home. I too have wanted something different on the other four Glocks in the house.
I wish there were a sight "petting zoo" somewhere to check out all the possibilities before shelling out the $$.

[Tamara]

I wish there were a sight "petting zoo" somewhere to check out all the possibilities before shelling out the $$.

I think an ideal rental section at a range would have all kinds of aftermarket goodies sprinkled hither and yon amongst the rental guns.

[okie john]

I tried searching this, but couldn't find anything good. What night sights are everyone running on their glocks these days?

There is no consensus, but many excellent options.


Okie John

[LOKNLOD]

I think an ideal rental section at a range would have all kinds of aftermarket goodies sprinkled hither and yon amongst the rental guns.

A rental case with a handful of G19 frame/trigger setups and a dozen or so slides to pick from would be brilliant. Like a "build your own sundae" bar for shooters.

"I'd like to try the apex trigger with the rmr'd slide this time, Jim!"



Relative to the OP, I've settled on liking the Ameriglo Hackathorn (serrated rear) and Spartans (less contrast-y 3-dot tritium rear) for night sights.

I've done good (relative to me) shooting with Heinie straight-eight style (with the front painted orange), Warrens, Trijicon HDs....

Right now I've been shooting 10-8s with fiber front and plain rear and really like them (my first time playing with fibers) but they aren't night sights, I suppose.

[pangloss]

I have Warren Tactical rears on a couple of guns with Heinie tritium front sights. I have a 10-8 rear and a 10-8 brass bead front sight on a another pistol and I really really like this set up. If you're shooting with your back to the light, the brass bead really shines. If you're shooting into a better lit area, the outline of the sights are easy to pick up. Unfortunately 10-8 has stopped making this front sight for the time being. I think I'd like the 10-8's even more if their rear sight had a square notch.

[HopetonBrown]

Perhaps you could pair a Dawson rear with the Vickers gold bead front.

I have Warren Tactical rears on a couple of guns with Heinie tritium front sights. I have a 10-8 rear and a 10-8 brass bead front sight on a another pistol and I really really like this set up. If you're shooting with your back to the light, the brass bead really shines. If you're shooting into a better lit area, the outline of the sights are easy to pick up. Unfortunately 10-8 has stopped making this front sight for the time being. I think I'd like the 10-8's even more if their rear sight had a square notch.

[Skold]

Here we go again... If I had a nickel for every of these threads I'm subscribed to... And yet, I keep subbing, because I have been in the OP's shoes, and never really took them off.

Currently running an orange TCAP front with a Defoor rear (GL-400).

If I had my choice, I think I'd prefer a .115" wide tritium front. But the .gov doesn't seem intent on letting us have such things. I am willing to surrender to the .125" front, like the TCAP.

If I had my choice, I'd have a Classic Operator rear with yellow vials. That's yellow tritium, truly no outline, .150" square notch, stock height. It existed, but Ameriglo discontinued it. No one else makes it that I know of. Trijicon makes it only in suppressor height.

If I had my choice, lining up the top edges would make the tritium vials line up. The Trijicon HD's are the only sights I've seen make this happen, but I have tried and don't like those for other reasons.


Thank you for this information. Do the TCAP orange sights have the Luminova in them like the green or did that not pan out? Also, can I ask what you did not like about the Trijicon HD's?

[Skold]

Thank you everyone for responding to this thread! I am trying to go through everyones comments and sort everything out currently!

[camsdaddy]

I currently have HD's on my 19 and my 26. Before that I tried Ameriglo Defoors but the first time I took them off my 19 to see if I wanted another set for my 26 the screw stripped and I decided I was done with them. Before that I had standard Trijicons. I really liked them but they werent cool enough so I fell for the I want to be cool marketing. I like the HD's but the rear sight is sharp as a razor. I dont know that I am to a level of shooting that the HD's are worth it to me. I think the Standard trijicons are good enough for me.

[Irelander]

Yep. Have three sets on guns here at home. I too have wanted something different on the other four Glocks in the house.
I wish there were a sight "petting zoo" somewhere to check out all the possibilities before shelling out the $$.

My main gripe with the Glock OEM night sights is not enough light around the front sight. A wider rear sight notch might be all I need if it is compatible with the OEM front.

[Talking Monkey]

I have Warren Tactical 2-Dot sights on my G19 and the used G17 I bought came with Trijicon Bright and Toughs (my competition G34 has a Warren Tactical plain rear and FO front).

I like the 2-dot Warrens for everything but, oddly enough, shooting in low light. After using the G19 in a low-light match last year, I found it very difficult to find and align the two dots. The three-dot Bright and Toughs are much easier to align in the dark, however, I find the rear sights a bit distracting in normal light. The Trijicon HDs seem like they'd be a great compromise, but I prefer a thinner front blade. I’m thinking of trying a set of Warren 3-dot tritium sights next to see if they might hit the sweet spot.

[GRV]

Thank you for this information. Do the TCAP orange sights have the Luminova in them like the green or did that not pan out? Also, can I ask what you did not like about the Trijicon HD's?

They do not; I know that was a longterm plan but I don't think it's come to fruition yet. However, despite me really wanting to prefer the "green", and I do mean "really", I ended up preferring the orange even with the lack of Luminova.

At the time I ditched the HDs, I did so because I was experiencing a lot of vertical stringing issues. I believe the setup encouraged me to aim by centering the dot in the notch, and that the dot + u-notch setup lent itself towards the vertical stringing failure mode. I switched to a yellow/green TCAP front with a Pro Operator rear and immediately had a big precision and accuracy improvement. Now that I've spent some time with other sights, and refined my basics a bit on all-black sights, I'm not sure how big of a deal-breaker the dot in u-notch would be over the square in square notch. The "equal height, equal light" method is pretty engrained into me. However, what would primarily hold me back from going back to the Trijicon HD's is the .144" wide front. I'm now pretty convinced I don't want anything wider than .125" tops.

ETA: Also, I've been in a phase for a while where I like the stock sight heights. That too would rule out the Trijicon HDs. I see multiple benefits in the stock height, which makes the sights sit very close to the slide. But, I'm not crazy enough to believe that my opinion couldn't be changed at some point in the future.

[JTQ]

(my competition G34 has a Warren Tactical plain rear and FO front).

How do you like that configuration. I haven't used them, but it seems like the combination I'd like.

[Slalom.45]

Dove,
I appreciate that info. I have been using the Ameriglo i-dot Pro's for about 3 years. I like the dot over dot set up, but have wanted to go to a narrower front and rear than the .180/.140 of the i-dots. 10-8's didn't work for me. My eyes seem to need "something" on the back or I get lost and just see the FO glowing in the front.

The T-Cap looked like it might work, but I was unsure about the width of the rear notch. Do you know what it is? Any more thoughts about front sight color is appreciated as well. I am red-green color blind. Green FO stands out much more than the orange on my i-dot's, but oddly enough even though is might be a hair slower to acquire, I shoot the orange more accurately.

[Talking Monkey]

How do you like that configuration. I haven't used them, but it seems like the combination I'd like.

I'm very happy with this combo. I became a fan of the Warren rear sight shape while I was competing with my 2-dot equipped G19 for a year and a half. When I decided to get a G34, I wanted a more competition oriented setup and went with the plain rear and FO front. I like the precision of the thinner blade and the single light pipe really helps you to maintain your focus on the front sight.

[GRV]

Dove,
I appreciate that info. I have been using the Ameriglo i-dot Pro's for about 3 years. I like the dot over dot set up, but have wanted to go to a narrower front and rear than the .180/.140 of the i-dots. 10-8's didn't work for me. My eyes seem to need "something" on the back or I get lost and just see the FO glowing in the front.

The T-Cap looked like it might work, but I was unsure about the width of the rear notch. Do you know what it is? Any more thoughts about front sight color is appreciated as well. I am red-green color blind. Green FO stands out much more than the orange on my i-dot's, but oddly enough even though is might be a hair slower to acquire, I shoot the orange more accurately.

I don't know what the TCAP rear is, but I would guess that it is .150". I'm running the GL-400, the same rear in the Defoor set, which is an all-black .150" square notch.

The problem with the green is that, in practice, it's really a yellowish beige. I was hoping for an electric lime green, which it is not. Like everyone says, it washes out against a surprising number of light colored targets. Now, in a dot setup, this might not be a big deal, because you have the whole black sight around it to contrast the target. But, with the TCAP, most of the exposed portion of the front sight is painted, so there is only a thin black outline. Hence, the front sight can wash out pretty bad. FWIW, I also found the "green" (i.e. beige) to pop less than white. It kicks serious ass when it's glowing, but honestly, it's rarely glowing.

My philosophy on front sights right now is the following: You better be comfortable shooting all black sights against lighter colored targets, because for every set of sights there's some lighting that will make your sights look all black. If you are not comfortable shooting all black sights, this will take you off guard when it happens. If your sight tracking relies too heavily on having a bright colored front, it's going to bite you somewhere. The benefit is good, but you just don't want it to be a crutch.

At the same time, you do want some colored component on the front sight, at least white, because otherwise you will barely see your sights against dark (black) targets and backgrounds. For me, the orange TCAP often looks black in the lighting condition on my range at 7 yds when aiming at a light colored target. That's fine. I primarily want it so that I can actually see my sights on dark targets.

[spinmove_]

I don't know what the TCAP rear is, but I would guess that it is .150". I'm running the GL-400, the same rear in the Defoor set, which is an all-black .150" square notch.

The problem with the green is that, in practice, it's really a yellowish beige. I was hoping for an electric lime green, which it is not. Like everyone says, it washes out against a surprising number of light colored targets. Now, in a dot setup, this might not be a big deal, because you have the whole black sight around it to contrast the target. But, with the TCAP, most of the exposed portion of the front sight is painted, so there is only a thin black outline. Hence, the front sight can wash out pretty bad. FWIW, I also found the "green" (i.e. beige) to pop less than white. It kicks serious ass when it's glowing, but honestly, it's rarely glowing.

My philosophy on front sights right now is the following: You better be comfortable shooting all black sights against lighter colored targets, because for every set of sights there's some lighting that will make your sights look all black. If you are not comfortable shooting all black sights, this will take you off guard when it happens. If your sight tracking relies too heavily on having a bright colored front, it's going to bite you somewhere. The benefit is good, but you just don't want it to be a crutch.

At the same time, you do want some colored component on the front sight, at least white, because otherwise you will barely see your sights against dark (black) targets and backgrounds. For me, the orange TCAP often looks black in the lighting condition on my range at 7 yds when aiming at a light colored target. That's fine. I primarily want it so that I can actually see my sights on dark targets.

It's interesting that you mention that, because I've had similar experiences.

There's a range not far from me that happens to have a G19Gen4 with Ameriglo sights featuring a pro-glo lumigreen dot setup. While I could pick the front sight out against a blackened target, I did find that the green actually looked more like a beige or dull off-white color. Not super helpful in some situations. I've generally found that in more lighting conditions the orange or red front sights stand out better to me. This, however, takes a back seat once the lighting gets really "dusky" and tends to disappear more quickly than white or green. Coincidentally I've found that white on the front sight (with some degree of moderation) seems to be the best of most worlds.

Conversely, I've painted a dawson FO front sight white to compliment the fiber in darker environments. While this helped greatly in transitional lighting, it sucked against lighter backgrounds as the front sight simply blended in far easier with any amount of light around. I thought this would be offset by the glowing red fiber, to which shooting fast and up close it did, but shooting precision shots at distance was tricky as I had a hard time finding the top edge of the front sight.

Given the experiences that I've had and actually thinking about it, I think it would be best, at least for me, to run with a sight set that had a small white circle outlined tritium vial with either a plain black rear or a rear with borderless tritium vials. I'm thinking that Ameriglo's classic I-Dots might just be what I'm ultimately looking for (think GL-101).

I had thought about going with the Defoor tritium set and painting one or two serrations on the front sight white. The only thing holding me back from that is the fact that the tritium vial is set in the lower part of the front sight. That might be problematic for me as I have a tendency to use the "drive the dot" sighting method.

[GRV]

spinmove_, I'm totally on board with you. I have been increasingly temped to just switch to a white dot outline tritium vial front. However, there are some points in favor of the orange square (TCAP) that I see:

I wouldn't want a white square. Too much opportunity to wash out against common targets and lighting situations. Sure, there are situations that will probably make the orange square wash out, but I think they are much less frequently encountered.

With that said, I think the square does have benefits over the dot. At 7 yds my G17 shoots a little bit closer to the top edge, rather than drive the dot. In reality, it's somewhere between the two. Moreover, I think that being programmed to shoot using a equal-height-equal-light method (or "square in square") is more universally applicable in a wider range of lighting and target scenarios than the dot-focused methods. My friend eyemahm on here often complains when he can't see the white dot on his front sight on the range, I think he feels there's a significant performance advantage/disadvantage. I don't want to be caught lost looking for the dot. Right now, I honestly forget my sight has an orange square on it. I just look for the front sight.

Nevertheless, I'm with you, and the white dot might ultimately be the better choice. Undoubtedly, it offers better contrast against a wider variety of targets because there are significant portions of the front sight that are a) white and b) black. With the TCAP, the front sight is almost all orange. Which is to say, I don't think there's any lighting or background that would cause the dot fronts to actually wash out. Rather, the different scenarios just require using the sights in different ways.


Now, having said all that, I realize how happy I probably could have been over a year ago if I had just bought an Ameriglo Classic Operator set (.125" front, green tritium, white outline, with .150" rear, yellow tritium, no outline), instead of trying to chase after uber unobtanium combinations. The irony of course is that you can't get that set anymore.

[spinmove_]

spinmove_, I'm totally on board with you. I have been increasingly temped to just switch to a white dot outline tritium vial front. However, there are some points in favor of the orange square (TCAP) that I see:

I wouldn't want a white square. Too much opportunity to wash out against common targets and lighting situations. Sure, there are situations that will probably make the orange square wash out, but I think they are much less frequently encountered.

With that said, I think the square does have benefits over the dot. At 7 yds my G17 shoots a little bit closer to the top edge, rather than drive the dot. In reality, it's somewhere between the two. Moreover, I think that being programmed to shoot using a equal-height-equal-light method (or "square in square") is more universally applicable in a wider range of lighting and target scenarios than the dot-focused methods. My friend eyemahm on here often complains when he can't see the white dot on his front sight on the range, I think he feels there's a significant performance advantage/disadvantage. I don't want to be caught lost looking for the dot. Right now, I honestly forget my sight has an orange square on it. I just look for the front sight.

Nevertheless, I'm with you, and the white dot might ultimately be the better choice. Undoubtedly, it offers better contrast against a wider variety of targets because there are significant portions of the front sight that are a) white and b) black. With the TCAP, the front sight is almost all orange. Which is to say, I don't think there's any lighting or background that would cause the dot fronts to actually wash out. Rather, the different scenarios just require using the sights in different ways.


Now, having said all that, I realize how happy I probably could have been over a year ago if I had just bought an Ameriglo Classic Operator set (.125" front, green tritium, white outline, with .150" rear, yellow tritium, no outline), instead of trying to chase after uber unobtanium combinations. The irony of course is that you can't get that set anymore.

lol, it truly figures that they would discontinue that set.

Honestly there are so many different sight combinations out there and so many different sight attributes that it's hard to pick something from the vast sea of options. We've gotten to the point to where we're picky and I think we ultimately lose sight of a fairly simple notion: just shoot the gun with the damn sights. Any "benefit" or "advantage" that any particular sight picture claims to give you, real or placebo, is ultimately eclipsed by the overall skill of the shooter. This is kind of why I've largely gotten back to a thought process of "less is more" in how I move forward in search of a sighting system. I don't need no fancy schmancy sight picture. I just need to learn to do gooder. Besides, not every gun I pick up is going to have my special snowflake "flavour of the week" sight picture and I ain't got no budget to be puttin' the special snowflake sight picture on everything that I currently do own and will ever own.

The paragraph above is kind of why I'm actually considering either going with OEM Glock tritium sights or the Defoor tritium sights. I don't need the fastest fast split times EVAR in a defensive role carry gun. But if I can attain a skill level that is far more than competent with such sight pictures, both in terms of speed and accuracy, then I'd be willing to argue that I'd be that much better off if I were to end up with random special snowflake sights on a different gun.

[deputyG23]

My main gripe with the Glock OEM night sights is not enough light around the front sight. A wider rear sight notch might be all I need if it is compatible with the OEM front.

That is my issue with them as well. My issue G23 and off duty G22 and G27 have the GNS installed. One of my subordinates just bought a G4 G27 with a newer variety of Trijicons installed. He let me shoot it yesterday during range quals and I was impressed. Without my readers on, I couldn't make out the manufacturer's markings on the sights.
They did allow more light in from the sides, which I thought enhanced my shooting with this Glock.
If I figure out which set this was, I will buy a set to go on the G27 and the GNS from the G27 will go on my old G2 G17.

[GRV]

lol, it truly figures that they would discontinue that set.

Honestly there are so many different sight combinations out there and so many different sight attributes that it's hard to pick something from the vast sea of options. We've gotten to the point to where we're picky and I think we ultimately lose sight of a fairly simple notion: just shoot the gun with the damn sights. Any "benefit" or "advantage" that any particular sight picture claims to give you, real or placebo, is ultimately eclipsed by the overall skill of the shooter. This is kind of why I've largely gotten back to a thought process of "less is more" in how I move forward in search of a sighting system. I don't need no fancy schmancy sight picture. I just need to learn to do gooder. Besides, not every gun I pick up is going to have my special snowflake "flavour of the week" sight picture and I ain't got no budget to be puttin' the special snowflake sight picture on everything that I currently do own and will ever own.

The paragraph above is kind of why I'm actually considering either going with OEM Glock tritium sights or the Defoor tritium sights. I don't need the fastest fast split times EVAR in a defensive role carry gun. But if I can attain a skill level that is far more than competent with such sight pictures, both in terms of speed and accuracy, then I'd be willing to argue that I'd be that much better off if I were to end up with random special snowflake sights on a different gun.

I've grown to feel much of the same way. The more I shoot, the less worried I am about getting the perfect sights, which is why I don't feel any great pressure to change mine. Having said that, better gear is better, so I'll definitely continue to pick the best from what's available, I'm just not as worked up about it as I used to be.

You know, now that I look, it looks like Ameriglo is stocking the Classic Operator sets again, but only in the green rear variety. I may grab that rear hit the vials with red Sharpie.

[GAP]

Ameriglo Classic.. You can use their website calculator to buy different height front sights to match the zero you want. It works perfectly for me and they are better priced than their competitors in most cases.

[396]

With the plethora of sight options out there I was a bit overwhelmed when choosing a set of night sights for my first Glock. Figuring I had to start somewhere, I spent $57 on the OEM sights and all new slide internals combo from Glock.

[M2CattleCo]

With the plethora of sight options out there I was a bit overwhelmed when choosing a set of night sights for my first Glock. Figuring I had to start somewhere, I spent $57 on the OEM sights and all new slide internals combo from Glock.

Those sights are really the best deal going. I have a set on my carry gun and they're fine for what they are. I've shot many a match with 'em and while I wished for something better, I don't honestly think my scores were significantly worse the factory night sights than if I were using something faster.

For carry sights I like the Glock ones and Ameriglo DeFoors, for game/range guns I like Warrens and 10-8s. I waffle back and forth between the two but I think the 10-8s are less stabby than the Warrens.

[DacoRoman]

If I was to pick one sight for my Glocks, for general purpose use (and I define general purpose use as a combination of carry, home/nightstand defense, IDPA and GSSF-at least for me personally) it would be either Warren Tactical or Sevigney/Warren Carry sights. I have the Warren Tacticals on my G34, and the Sevigney/Warren Carry sights on my G21, and Ive been exceptionally pleased with both. If push came to shope and I had to pick only one, the nod would likely go to the Warren Tacticals. The key ingredients for me are a wide rear notch (at least .140) and a relatively thin front sight (at least in comparison to the rear notch width). I'm still experimenting with how effective a brightly colored front sight is versus a plain black. The Warren/Sevigney Warrens also feature a serrated front sight face and a plain rear sight face, which I believe is also slightly canted downward to reduce glare.

Bottom line: A clean, quickly acquired sight picture combined with a clean triggerpull (and reset) with good overall platform ergonomics are the key elements of the total equation.

Best, Jon

I also really like the warren sights. I use the warren sevigny carry tritium 2 dot sights on concealed carry G19s, and the warren tactical fiber optic .115" fiber optic front sight with the Sevigny .150" competition rear for a G17 that is set up more as a competition pistol.

[Velo Dog]

Bright & Tough™ Night Sight Set — Green Front & Yellow Rear
https://www.trijicon.com/na_en/products/product3.php?pid=GL01Y

[Velo Dog]

Trijicon color combination chart
6047

[secondstoryguy]

I'm switching to Defoor rears and Dawson fronts. I don't like anything that extends to the rear of the slide on a carry gun.

My 34s have 10-8 rears and 10-8 fiber optic fronts.

I agree with the sight not coming to the rear of the gun. A lot of sights that do also have serrated backsides that shred cover garments and any flesh that comes in contact sign them.