FO vs Tritium With WML?

[Sam]

I've really been enjoying Dawson FO sights for sometime now. I just picked up a P30 for carry and I'm looking at sights for it. The traditional carry sights for most people seem to have tritium. With a light, FO and HD fronts turn into a dark outline and in good lighting conditions I'm able to be more accurate with FO.

Am I losing anything by staying with FO on my new gun if it is going to have a dedicated WML?

[Paltares8]

I'm also curious to see other people's opinions on this. I keep a light mounted for HD and generally have an easier time picking up a red front sight than green for whatever reason. I've never tried the night sights were the front is outlined in orange, but I don't think they're available for either of my carry guns anyway.

[joshs]

There are lighting conditions where it's possible to see the target well enough to shoot it with tritium sights without using a white light. You have to decide if that benefit is outweighed by your ability to shoot the FO sights better in good light.

[BillSWPA]

There may be times when you do not want to activate the weapon mounted light but you need to see the sights.

[Nephrology]

If you are always going to be carrying it with a light, I don't see why not.

Otherwise, I think tritium is the way to go. I have FO sights on my game guns that serve as back up home defense pistols to my 2x G19s. My g19s wear Hackathorns. The FOs are far better for precise shots, no doubt.

[HopetonBrown]

Mike Pannone on fiber optics: http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=159742

And Frank Proctor: http://www.recoilweb.com/a-few-thoughts-on-fiber-optic-sights-and-carrying-a-light-59795.html

[joshs]

Mike Pannone on fiber optics: http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=159742

And Frank Proctor: http://www.recoilweb.com/a-few-thoughts-on-fiber-optic-sights-and-carrying-a-light-59795.html

They're both making it seem as if there are no situations where you can identify a threat, but can't see black/FO sights. Like all categorical statements, this is wrong. :P

I'd be interested if they have any thoughts on using carbine optics without an illuminated reticle, as the illuminated reticle provides the same benefit as tritium. It provides a visual aiming reference where there is enough light to see and identify your target, but not see your reticle/sights.

[spinmove_]

I've personally debated this quite a bit. Essentially it boils down to what you can actually see and how your eyes work.

Personally, for me, if there are dusk environments or transitional lighting where I can positively ID a target/threat, but either can't see my sights or really have to struggle to see the silhouette, I can definitely see the tritium in my sights far faster. Being able to see my sights in ANY lighting condition trumps my ability to shoot better, real or perceived, with fiber optic sights in conditions where they shine. I can't pick when and where I have to use my pistol for defensive purposes, but I can pick the sights that I can see in any "when and where" scenario when I do have to use my pistol for defensive purposes.

That said, you still have to positively ID the threat before force can be used. How you do that depends on a ton of different variables.

[psalms144.1]

They're both making it seem as if there are no situations where you can identify a threat, but can't see black/FO sights. Like all categorical statements, this is wrong. :P
I can't find it now, but Todd (God rest his soul) posted a photo looking from his couch towards a hallway where black on black sights disappear, but tritiums are clearly visible. This was, IIRC, with the house lights on.

FO might work in those conditions, might not, but a flashlight was definitely not necessary. On the other hand, I have Ameriglo CAP (Yellow) front sights on all my Glocks, and I can see those sights in any condition that doesn't require illumination to ID a target. Been shooting for the past three days on an indoor/outdoor range (outdoor range with solid overhead cover and solid walls to about 3' from the roof, with 3' of "light" coming into the space. Basically a well-lit cave. I have no problems seeing the CAP sights, but the couple of black on black sights I've shot (older 1911 and a S&W 59) were very hard to pick up.

[Josh Runkle]

There are so many things at play here: I guess I would start with this: I can make a semi-accurate shot (like a headshot) without sights at close distance (under 7 yards). Hackathorn does a very good job showing this in his classes when he tapes up your sights and has you shoot on a timer. So, my thinking is, that there really isn't an edge of one type vs another under 7 yards as long as you are well practiced with your setup in all sorts of lighting conditions.

But...I personally find that I am slower at distance with a fiber optic sight, just because I have spent so many years with night sights. The reverse would be true of someone with a different setup that they are well practiced on.

So, my advice would be to disregard an advantage of one or another within a small enclosed space, and instead see which has an edge for you at a long distance, like 50-100 yards at night.

[Tom Duffy]

In terms of home defense, I think it a common scenario to aim with your night sights in a dark house and then turn on your WML to positively ID your subject. A 500 lumen light would blind someone for enough time to let you decide if you needed to escalate.

[Chuck Haggard]

In terms of home defense, I think it a common scenario to aim with your night sights in a dark house and then turn on your WML to positively ID your subject. A 500 lumen light would blind someone for enough time to let you decide if you needed to escalate.

If I wasn't sure of my target I wouldn't be aiming at it.

[Whiskey_Bravo]

If I wasn't sure of my target I wouldn't be aiming at it.

I agree with you 100% on this. Aaron Cowan of Sage Dynamics has a couple great videos on YouTube discussing tactics/deployment of hand held lights and weapon mounted lights. I have tried to incorporate some of his techniques into my skill set while on duty.

[spinmove_]

I couldn't agree more with Chuck and Whiskey. If I don't know for sure, I'm not aiming at it. That being said, you can still make use of your WML to PID the threat without aiming. Having a handheld light to do the same task is even better.

[psalms144.1]

If I wasn't sure of my target I wouldn't be aiming at it.I can't like this post enough

[Beat Trash]

There may be times when you do not want to activate the weapon mounted light but you need to see the sights.


If I wasn't sure of my target I wouldn't be aiming at it.

Both excellent points.

Fiber Optic sights are excellent for shooting outdoors when natural sunlight and the fiber optic can work together.

Indoors and at night, I question how effective the fiber optic would light up from the eight of the WML.

Chuck's point can not be emphasized enough. Especially within your own home. But once you have positively identified the individual as a threat that needs to be addressed, you may find yourself in a position where leaving your WML turned on continuously is a bad thing. Having the option of tritium sights is one of those options that you may not need. But if you do need them, you really need them. Not all of my defensive handguns have a WML on them. But all of my defensive handguns, to include my wife's Glock 43, has tritium sights on them. I feel that it's better to have them and not need them than the alternative.

[BillSWPA]

Both excellent points.

Fiber Optic sights are excellent for shooting outdoors when natural sunlight and the fiber optic can work together.

Indoors and at night, I question how effective the fiber optic would light up from the eight of the WML.

Chuck's point can not be emphasized enough. Especially within your own home. But once you have positively identified the individual as a threat that needs to be addressed, you may find yourself in a position where leaving your WML turned on continuously is a bad thing. Having the option of tritium sights is one of those options that you may not need. But if you do need them, you really need them. Not all of my defensive handguns have a WML on them. But all of my defensive handguns, to include my wife's Glock 43, has tritium sights on them. I feel that it's better to have them and not need them than the alternative.

An excellent point. I would add that, even if you can see gun flashes from your attacker's gun, you still need to know that there are no family, friends, or third parties in the line of fire before returning fire.

Once I have identified the target as well as whatever may be in proximity to the target, then I do not want my sighting system dependent on a light that it may be inadvisable to activate.

Adding some thread drift, this is one issue I have with most or all of the light/laser combinations I have seen so far: activation of one is somehow tied to activation of the other.

[Kevin B.]

I want as much capability/versatility in my handgun as possible. I want to be able to see my sights independent of a secondary light source. That means tritium sights. The idea that if you cannot see your sights, you cannot see your target is not necessarily true.

I have used guns with FO sights and while I appreciated the increased visibility, I did not see any perceptible improvement in performance.

[RJ]

Compared to the folks above ^^^ I have zip for experience. I just wanted to add, as a noob to carry, I attended Tom Givens' low light lecture at Tac Con 2016 in Memphis couple weeks ago.

From that, I came away pretty much convinced "Night Sights" and / or a WML for a carry gun were not really useful, and I'd be better off spending the $130 for Trijicon HDs and $$$ for a WML on a case or two of ammo and range time. YMMV, of course.

[Sam]

Compared to the folks above ^^^ I have zip for experience. I just wanted to add, as a noob to carry, I attended Tom Givens' low light lecture at Tac Con 2016 in Memphis couple weeks ago.

From that, I came away pretty much convinced "Night Sights" and / or a WML for a carry gun were not really useful, and I'd be better off spending the $130 for Trijicon HDs and $$$ for a WML on a case or two of ammo and range time. YMMV, of course.

Waaaiiittt...you want me to practice?!?!?!

I'm somewhat disappointed because these arguments in favor of night sights make sense.

Is there a preferred night sight set with a thin front sight that will take orange paint well and a blank rear?

[joshs]

Waaaiiittt...you want me to practice?!?!?!

I'm somewhat disappointed because these arguments in favor of night sights make sense.

Is there a preferred night sight set with a thin front sight that will take orange paint well and a blank rear?

The thinnest front sights with a .076 full size tritium vial are usually .125. The one I've found to take orange paint the best is Heinie's due to the serrations.

That being said, I used to think that a tall, thin front sight was optimal for good pistol shooting. Except for a short while when I gave FO sights another shot last year, I've been using a .140 wide x .165 tall Ameriglo Cap front sight, and I don't notice any appreciable difference for shooting smaller/farther away targets.

[Beat Trash]

I've come to prefer the Ameriglo Spartan Operator sights for my Glocks and the similar set up for my M&P's.


https://ameriglo.com/collections/glock/products/glock-spartan-operator-sets?variant=7556140545

[M2CattleCo]

If you're gonna have a light, get whatever sights you shoot best during the day.

Once the light comes on, the front sight is solid black.

A green fiber optic lights up the same color as muzzle flash at night. A casual observation only.

[lukejr985]

At a recent low light/no light class, the guys running tritium were no quicker nor more accurate than people with FO sights. In fact in some cases the guys with night sights were searching for the tritium bulbs rather than just aiming, probably a training issue, but worth noting.

[Chuck Haggard]

At a recent low light/no light class, the guys running tritium were no quicker nor more accurate than people with FO sights. In fact in some cases the guys with night sights were searching for the tritium bulbs rather than just aiming, probably a training issue, but worth noting.

To have an idea what this means you'd have to know their level and type of training in low-light shooting. Very few people get quality, or any, night fire training.

[BobLoblaw]

With tritium, it's a lot easier to locate your off-body pistol when you're pulled out of REM sleep in a dark room.

[M2CattleCo]

With tritium, it's a lot easier to locate your off-body pistol when you're pulled out of REM sleep in a dark room.

That's about the most useful thing night sights have done for me. However, fresh 3 dot night sights work well in some street light conditions.

[LSP552]

Personally, my carry pistols have hi-vis night sights of the Trij HD or Ameriglo Pro-Glo flavor. They provide an enhanced speed in the day (for my old eyes) and allow good hits in dim light. There are PLENTY of situations where shooting someone without using a light would be useful. As always, YMMV.

[Kevin B.]

I can't find it now, but Todd (God rest his soul) posted a photo looking from his couch towards a hallway where black on black sights disappear, but tritiums are clearly visible. This was, IIRC, with the house lights on.

http://pistol-training.com/archives/7668

[Sigfan26]

With tritium, it's a lot easier to locate your off-body pistol when you're pulled out of REM sleep in a dark room.

Very true. I called a guy a few weeks ago when I saw he'd ordered a tritium rear (single Dot in the rear) fiber optic front. That was his rationale, and it made perfect sense.

[BillSWPA]

http://pistol-training.com/archives/7668

The picture in the linked thread looks similar to what I would expect in many urban areas or small to medium sized towns at night, and is a perfect example of why I put tritium sights on any pistol for which they are made, and why availability of tritium sights is one of my criteria in pistol selection.

[Chuck Haggard]

I learned quickly while working night shift, and starting before the days tritium was easily available, that there was indeed an advantage in varied urban lighting to having sights that glow. The Ameriglo front orange tritium sight set has been my choice for a few years now due to what I found over those years.

[Mr_White]

On the other hand, I have Ameriglo CAP (Yellow) front sights on all my Glocks, and I can see those sights in any condition that doesn't require illumination to ID a target.

This stuff sure seems individual-specific. I'm not disputing what you've experienced at all. For me, when I've used the yellow TCAP front sight, it washed out during daylight, on brown/buff cardboard. I never would have expected it to wash out on that dark of a target. White steel, I would have expected. Not the cardboard though.

[Chuck Whitlock]

I always come back to, "Is having tritium detrimental to me?" So far, the answer has been "no".

[joshs]

This stuff sure seems individual-specific. I'm not disputing what you've experienced at all. For me, when I've used the yellow TCAP front sight, it washed out during daylight, on brown/buff cardboard. I never would have expected it to wash out on that dark of a target. White steel, I would have expected. Not the cardboard though.

I had the same problem with the yellow TCAP. I haven't had that problem at all with the .140 wide orange CAP sight. In relatively weak indoor lighting, you can see how bright it is in this video (for comparison, FO fronts don't really do much in this lighting condition):


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9SA6jqM5bQ

ETA: It makes it much easier to see the sight if you make the video full screen.

[pr1042]

Josh,

Did you choose the larger sight over the orange TCAP? Or was the orange TCAP not available at that time

[joshs]

Josh,

Did you choose the larger sight over the orange TCAP? Or was the orange TCAP not available at that time

The TCAP wasn't available in orange, but I'd probably still stick with the CAP even now because I like the larger tritium vial, the larger painted area is more eye-catching, and Ameriglo discontinued the standard width Operator rear with yellow tritium.

[Wondering Beard]

I just tried to reproduce for myself the photo that Todd took; went into a dark room that opened onto a sunlit room.

I took my G34 with 10-8 FO sights and thought that since the room I would be aiming at (in this case a sunlit bathroom with white tile, distance about 7 yards -aiming point at bottom of bathtub as best backstop), the FO (green on this gun) should receive some light and be visible. It wasn't but the black outline of my sights was.

Then I picked up a flashlight, used a Harries stance, the light bounced off some from the darkened walls and the FO was very clear to see.

Then I tried it with a 1911 that has a gold bead in the front sight (no flashlight) and I had no problems seeing the gold bead.

Personal and tentative conclusions:
1) for a fiber that is supposed to conduct light, the FO should be doing a better job when it is pointed at a lit area even if you're in a dark room; I'd like to see some advances in that technology especially when a gold bead is better at that job.
2) if strong light coming at the FO from a closer source (in this case dark walls illuminated by a flashlight -200 lumens I think), it does mitigate the problem from 1) and it may indicate that a WML on the gun may help an FO sighted gun. However, this 'experiment' was conducted indoors where light could bounce off things close by and I have no idea whether it would also work outdoors.

P.S. In my house, at night, but with the blinds down and thus having some mild illumination from street lights, I can 1) easily identify whether I'm dealing with a bad guy, good guy or neutral and 2) cannot see my FO, barely see my gold bead and clearly see my tritium. I did not have a flashlight handy at the time (some 6 months ago when I got curious about FO sights for a carry gun)

[joshs]

These photos show the view out my front window while I'm holding the slide of a G19 w/ CAP front and yellow Pro Operator rear vs. a G26 slide with .105 Dawson FO red front with Heinie Ledge .156 rear sight. The photos show the outside to be substantially darker than it is to my eyes. I can see well enough to PID except in the shadows of cars and trees.

http://i913.photobucket.com/albums/ac338/josh_savani/Mobile%20Uploads/image_31.jpg

http://i913.photobucket.com/albums/ac338/josh_savani/Mobile%20Uploads/image_30.jpg

I'm not claiming that shooting at these distances would not be possible with a good index, but it's clear that tritium provides visual verification in this lighting that is not provided by FO or black sights. These lighting conditions are also pretty common throughout NoVa, which is part of my reasoning for currently favoring tritium sights. Though I do think FO front sights are slightly easier to track in bright sun than any other iron sights. And a thing FO front with all black rear is more visual pleasing to my eyes than my current CAP/Pro Operators.

If only there were a way to combine the benefits of both types of sights (https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?16778-FO-Tritium-Sights-Idea&highlight=tritium+fiber+optic).