Fixed rear backup sights

[YVK]

As in "fixed, cannot drift, no windage adjustment". I see a number of designs on the market, already available or incoming, that have this in place. Old Trijicon 1911 integral sight RMR plates, Agency AOS ACRO plate design, conceptually similar ATEI ACRO cut with a shim sight, lesser known Mac Defense plate (according to email I received, sight is bolted down from below). The new Unity Atom 2 seems to have the same thing going, rear sight is a part of the plate.

For some reason such designs bother me. I have my rear irons drifted a bit here and there on my carry guns. I also want a close, if not absolute, vertical alignment of my irons and my dot. I use it to make sure the dot hasn't lost the zero. If I can't drift the irons on a carry gun, I don't want such setup. Am I too much of an OCD these days?

[GearFondler]

As in "fixed, cannot drift, no windage adjustment". I see a number of designs on the market, already available or incoming, that have this in place. Old Trijicon 1911 integral sight RMR plates, Agency AOS ACRO plate design, conceptually similar ATEI ACRO cut with a shim sight, lesser known Mac Defense plate (according to email I received, sight is bolted down from below). The new Unity Atom 2 seems to have the same thing going, rear sight is a part of the plate.

For some reason such designs bother me. I have my rear irons drifted a bit here and there on my carry guns. I also want a close, if not absolute, vertical alignment of my irons and my dot. I use it to make sure the dot hasn't lost the zero. If I can't drift the irons on a carry gun, I don't want such setup. Am I too much of an OCD these days?Not in my opinion, no you're not. The ability to at least drift the rear sight will always be the best solution.
The reason for the proliferation of these integral sights is obvious but still not ideal for the end user:
- Simplicity in manufacturing
- Space saving on the slide
- Universal application across different platforms
- Increased reliability of RDS rendering BUIS less necessary (this is the most incorrect reason but will still gain traction over time. See the current popular stance that rifles no longer need BUIS)
Others will disagree with us I'm sure but I don't see my opinion changing anytime soon.

[Alpha Sierra]

Am I too much of an OCD these days?

I think so. At least as far as a handgun goes.

Think of a defensible (in court) scenario. Do you think a minor difference in POA vs POA from a rear sight that might not perfectly center the group is going to matter? I don't.

Same as vertical separation between the front sight and the dot. As far as I'm concerned they are two completely different sighting systems that need to be zeroed completely independently from each other. It makes no difference to me where the dot is in relation to the front sight once both sights are zeroed. Same goes for a rifle.

I don't look at the irons while I aim with a dot. I don't use iron sights to find the dot on the draw. So that's where I'm coming from.

[LOKNLOD]

My observation is that irons on RDS pistols are slowly becoming vestigial in the same way irons on rifles with reliable LPVO and dot optics have done in recent years. In fact on rifles I’m seeing them altogether missing more often. Obviously pistol optics aren’t quite there yet, but thinking about the guidance a few years ago, a lot of people were basically treating the cowitnessed RDS as a self-illluminated front iron sight that let you be target focused. “Draw to your sights and the dot all be where it need to be”. Almost like they were a symbiotic system and not primary/secondary pair. As techniques and reliability of the optics keep evolving the irons are more and more just there for peace of mind and to be just a step above needing to point shoot if the dot dies. And as you get shooters coming up focused on dot usage, irons will be less of a “i still want to be able to shoot a group at 25 with these” and more of a “minute of torso at 7 yards juuuuust in case” kind of thing.

[CCT125US]

Am I too much of an OCD these days?

No. Little things can make a difference in perception. Like a Heinie notch cut off center, it is just wrong and visually dirty.

[GJM]

A really nice thing about well regulated reserve iron sights is you can use them as a reference to make sure your dot’s point of impact has not shifted, or for prelim zeroing if replacing an optic. With Ameriglo BUIS with an orange front and multiple heights, it is nice to know your red dot could go out or awry, and you could turn the dot off and carry on with acceptable irons. Especially with a large display like the SRO, which make the BUIS easy to use. Is any of this necessary — probably not, but it costs me little and increases my confidence, just like knowing the exact zero of different loads.

[YVK]

Same as vertical separation between the front sight and the dot. As far as I'm concerned they are two completely different sighting systems that need to be zeroed completely independently from each other.

I don't look at the irons while I aim with a dot. I don't use iron sights to find the dot on the draw.

They are zeroed separately. I zero the dot first and reconfirm its zero over 2-3 sessions. I then shoot the irons with dot turned off and drift them as needed. When it is all set and done, my dots are usually at the right edge of the front sight's tip. I don't look for or use irons when I am use dot but I routinely do this


use them as a reference to make sure your dot’s point of impact has not shifted.

Whether this is gonna make the difference in the food court, I dunno. Maybe I need to find one of those AOS or ATEI guns and see how they print at 5 - 10 - 25.