What does a sight radius increase do?

[feudist]

Specifically the difference between a Glock 19 and a 34, assume the same sights for each.

This for a police patrol duty weapon. Current setup is a Gen4 19 with the orange Trijicon HDs. I am considering the Dawson fiber optic front(.100-.110).

Is there a practical increase in precision? Or is this P.I.I.?

BTW, I have 56 year old eyes and my new glasses let me see my front sight very clearly, for the first time in several years.

Not looking for an excuse to buy a new gun, I've been buying ammo and shooting instead.

[GJM]

I definitely find more sight radius helpful in USPSA shooting, although that is in a game designed to magnify very small differences in performance. From an open carry holster, the greater butt length of a 17/34 is a definite advantage for me, but I have large hands.

[jeep45238]

Larger sight radius magnified errors, making them more detectable and aid in increasing accuracy. Just like anything, there’s a point of diminishing returns which will vary by person.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[feudist]

At extended ranges or tight short range shots do you see a difference that the approximately 20% increase buys you? I'm trying not to overthink this(perhaps failing) but no one shoots a short

gun when they're shooting for accuracy.

[GJM]

In the Gen 5 thread, a few pages back, I shot the 19X and G5/34 back to back on Gabe’s test, and found the 34 significantly easier to shoot the test with. That is a pretty close range test, and differences would magnify as the targets get smaller or further. I see the main advantage of the 19 to be an easier to conceal size, but that should not be a consideration open carry. A G5/17 with BOLD sights would be very appealing for the use you describe.

[jeep45238]

At extended ranges or tight short range shots do you see a difference that the approximately 20% increase buys you? I'm trying not to overthink this(perhaps failing) but no one shoots a short

gun when they're shooting for accuracy.

I notice definately notice the difference between a P226 and P239 (sorry, but it's my only comparible setup). When I had a G34 there wasn't much effort to hitting steel pigs at 300 yards with 124 +p HST ammo - fire a round to figure the drop and that was it.

[MistWolf]

Specifically the difference between a Glock 19 and a 34, assume the same sights for each.

A longer sight radius has finer alignment with the target, but it's slower to align the front and rear sights with each other. A shorter sight radius is faster to align the front and rear sights, but alignment with the target is coarser.

The sight radius of a Glock 19 is 6.02 inches. If your front sight is misaligned with the rear sight by .013 inches and the target is at 25 yards, point of aim will be off by 2 inches.

The sight radius of a Glock 34 is 7.52 inches. If your front sight is misaligned with the rear sight by .013 inches and the target is at 25 yards, point of aim will be off by 1.6 inches.



Let's look at it in another way-

Your Glock 19 is shooting 2 inches to the left at 25 yards. You would need to adjust the rear sight .013 inches to the right.

Your Glock 34 is shooting 2 inches to the left at 25 yards. You would need to adjust the rear sight .017 inches to the right.

As you can see, with the same deviation, the longer the sight radius, the smaller the change in point of impact. Only you can decide if you want finer alignment with the target, or faster alignment of the front & rear sights.

[NH Shooter]

BTW, I have 56 year old eyes and my new glasses let me see my front sight very clearly, for the first time in several years.


Congrats on that, seemingly a small thing for younger shooters with good eyes but a diminishing commodity with old age. Enjoy it while you can!

The disadvantages of a longer handgun are obvious - heavier, not as easy (or comfortable) to conceal and in a struggle, offer more real estate for an assailant to grab hold of. I also find the longer the sight radius, the greater the perceived sight misalignment and unsteadiness of hold. With my recently-acquired 5-inch Walther PPQ (sight radius 7-1/8 inches) the slightest movement is amplified and for me can create a bit of a negative feedback loop trying to get a perfect alignment. With my Walther PPS (sight radius 5-3/8 inches) any misalignment or unsteadiness is not nearly as apparent and I tended to get an "aimed shot" off faster. I had the PPS for six years before getting the PPQ so I've had to "re-wire" somewhat to accept a less-perfect sight picture to avoid delaying the trigger pull and equally acceptable shot placement.

All of that said, as expected I have found the longer sight radius an overall advantage. The longer sight radius enables significantly better precision, especially using any kind of support to steady the hold. I also find that I can track sight alignment easier during up-close-and-fast shooting with a longer sight radius. With the PPQ packed in a JMCK IWB #3 holster (http://www.jmcustomkydex.com/p/IWB3.html), I find minimal concealment/comfort difference vs. carrying the PPS;

http://www.canonshooter.com/photos2/jmck3-1.jpg

With the 5-inch PPQ came this unexpected advantage - with the longer sight radius obviously comes a longer (and heavier) slide that uses a lighter recoil spring. I find the longer slide of the 5-inch PPQ much easier to manipulate. With the PPS it's strictly the over-the-top slingshot method gripping the rear of the slide due to limited area up front and the heavier recoil spring needed for the lower reciprocating mass. In comparison slide manipulations with the PPQ are a joy, easily done with a pinch of the front of the slide (where it tapers down at the last inch of barrel) from underneath with the support hand thumb and index finger. Seems like such a minor thing but it's an advantage I have come to appreciate. Overall, I find I'm faster and smoother running the 5-inch PPQ vs. any other pistol I've owned, the longer slide IMO contributing significantly to it.

So along with the capability of more precise sight alignment (and longer range precision) of a longer sight radius comes these other (perhaps unexpected) benefits.

[LSP552]

Not mention yet, but a longer sight radius increases the perceived light bars on standard sights. This can be a definite advantage when using stock sights with a wide front and narrow rear notch.

[willie]

One thing that more precise sight alignment means is less aiming error when making adjustments. Hence, one reason why many have difficulty shooting 2 inch snub revolvers accurately as opposed to longer barrel revolvers.

[Jim Watson]

Sight radius matters to the shooter.
I had a G19 and a G17, have shot G34 and G26 but now own a Plastic M&P and wish it were a Pro or 9L.
I have most of the 1911 family, GM, Commander, and OACP.

I can shoot the longer guns better, they are more (operator) accurate. I, for one, do not find them slower on the draw or transitions.
But not so much better that I would wear one all day. Seat bump would be a major annoyance.
The G19 is widely recommended for good reason.

I use fibre optics for competition where the light is usually good and the targets clearly defined.
But the color-around-tritium you have is more versatile in differing lights. I have one factory gun and a couple of nail polish jobs to give that sight picture.

[feudist]

Thanks for the thoughtful answers, gents.

[feudist]

With a practiced index, will the finer sights like Dawson(for example) yield better groups at distance?

[EJO]

Specifically the difference between a Glock 19 and a 34, assume the same sights for each.

This for a police patrol duty weapon. Current setup is a Gen4 19 with the orange Trijicon HDs. I am considering the Dawson fiber optic front(.100-.110).

Is there a practical increase in precision? Or is this P.I.I.?

BTW, I have 56 year old eyes and my new glasses let me see my front sight very clearly, for the first time in several years.

Not looking for an excuse to buy a new gun, I've been buying ammo and shooting instead.

I have used a Glock 19, 17 and 34 at some point in my career. For me I've found the Glock 17 to be the sweet spot. I found the grip on the 19 to be a tad too short and I don't have large hands. I wear size medium gloves. The Glock 17 grip is more purchase to grab which works better for me on a fighting pistol. I also found the 19 to be a little less accurate when compared to a 17 or 34. Having said that I did not find the 34 to be that much more accurate over the 17. So for me I settled on the 17. This is for patrol use and for my application, yours may be different. The 17 is what I feel most comfortable with if I have to fight and I don't have my long gun.

Now for UC work or training days I do carry a Glock 19. Off duty is normally a 26. Different tools for different situations...

[NH Shooter]

With a practiced index, will the finer sights like Dawson(for example) yield better groups at distance?

As long as your eyesight allows for a sharp sight picture, yes. As long as you can hold the pistol steady enough to take advantage of the more precise aim, yes.

Wider front sights with a larger rear notch allow faster alignment but generally at the expense of precision, especially if there is too much light in the rear notch on the sides of the front sight. My 5-inch PPQ came with a .120" front blade and a .180" rear notch, which didn't work for me.

Unfortunately, sight configuration is very user dependent so it will take some experimentation. For my PPQ I'm now using the 10-8 rear sight (http://www.10-8performance.com/walther-ppq-rear-sight/) with a .140" U-notch and their .125" serrated front with tritium insert (http://www.10-8performance.com/walther-ppq-front-sight/). The combination seems a good balance between speed and precision for me.

[TiroFijo]

IME, the G17 is a bit easier to shoot accurately than the G19, but the G34 only yields minimal accuraccy increases, mainly with deliberate, slow shooting. The G17 fits my hand better than the G19, so it is difficult to isolate the influence of sight ratio.

Grip size and fit to the hand are also important, as is personal preference and technique. Some people seem to be less sensitive to short sight ratios than others. I tend to shoot short barrels very well, even plink wiht snubbies at 100+ m.

[Bucky]

IME, the G17 is a bit easier to shoot accurately than the G19, but the G34 only yields minimal accuraccy increases, mainly with deliberate, slow shooting. The G17 fits my hand better than the G19, so it is difficult to isolate the influence of sight ratio.


I know it's a generalization, but as I like to explain it, the extra sight radius of the 34 helps me make the really tight critical competition shots that you'd never take in a real world scenario. ;)

[GunRacer]

I've tried a few different combinations over the years. In my experience, you have to balance handling with accuracy. For example, 6" 2011s have nice sight pictures, but tend to "wobble" and suffer from muzzle dip. Some light 5" pistols have that issue too-- my M&P Pro comes to mind. It really depends on the platform. As a general rule, however, I believe that shorter pistols recover better than longer ones. I settled on service length models with thin front sights (.90-.100).