Competition Sight Choices

[Mikey]

I have been using a standard black Dawson sight with a narrow FO red front since I started shooting a few years ago. My new Glock 34 just arrived and I am now reconsidering my choices in sights. I am currently ranked EX and plan to shoot the 34 next year on my quest for MA. My knee jerk reaction is to just run out and buy another set of Dawson’s as I think they are pretty great, but they are a little difficult to use on the low light stages and I kind of like Amerigo combo front sight I keep on my home defense gun (GL-212-OR-C) matched with a black rear. I know most folks say to use what you carry but I live in MD and we do not yet have the right to carry. So my question to you all is what do you recommend in a competition only sight?
Thanks!

[Noleshooter]

Maybe a Heinie ledge with the tip of the front sight painted neon red? During the day it would be somewhat close (I think) to your Dawson setup and would offer night sights for low light.

My only concern is the width of the front sight. I'm not sure how similar a narrow front Dawson setup will look compared to the Heinie setup.


*edit* This is my plan, I don't know how close the sight pictures will be. I can tell you I tried the Ameriglo I-dot Pro setup for my carry pistol to have something close to my DP fiberoptic and they look nothing alike. The big orange ball on the I-dot completely overwhelms the sight picture compared to the thin (.100) DP fiberoptic. I find it very difficult to shoot the I-dot accurately at distance (~25 yds) compared to the thin DP fiberoptic.

[Mr_White]

I am actually just now trying out a (Dawson) FO front sight on my practice/competition gun. So my opinion of it is not formed yet.

But my overall favorite sights for competition - for me that's USPSA and GSSF - are Ameriglo Defoors (fully black.)

I do not find fully black sights easier to see. I do find them to force me to be better and more disciplined at seeing them. I also think they rope me into paying attention to the most precise parts of the sight picture: the top edges and the light bars.

[justintime]

I really like the heinie ledge painted and the tritium versions would work well

http://i1043.photobucket.com/albums/b431/davisjustin10/761aa078-d10c-44b6-b69f-da720d546ad9_zps731fb0c7.jpg (http://s1043.photobucket.com/user/davisjustin10/media/761aa078-d10c-44b6-b69f-da720d546ad9_zps731fb0c7.jpg.html)

[AJZ]

I use a Dawson (.110) front w/green FO and a 10-8 (.140) rear, and thus far it is my favorite sight set-up. The nice thing about the Dawson front sights is there are sooooo many options. Some of my older carry guns have the Heinie Ledge Straight-8 sights on them. You can easily get a Heinie rear and pair it with a Dawson front of the same width and height of the Heinie tritium front. The green FO is a very similar sight picture to the Heinie tritium fronts, though the FO burns brighter during the day. If you don't want to do the work, Warren Tactical has some great sets that will serve your purpose, both FO and tritium.

[Mikey]

Thanks all for your imputs thus far!

I looked at the 10-8, Dawson, and Heinie rears and I can't really figure out the difference between them. I know they come in different widths, but is there any other reason to pick on or the other?

[AJZ]

10-8 uses a "U" shaped notch, Heinie and Dawson use a square notch, warren uses both.

[justintime]

Thanks all for your imputs thus far!

I looked at the 10-8, Dawson, and Heinie rears and I can't really figure out the difference between them. I know they come in different widths, but is there any other reason to pick on or the other?

I think they are all so similar that you can't go wrong either way. I do like that heinie melonites.

[Mikey]

I have not tried a U shapped sight in a while. I had a set (warren) on an M&P a few years ago and at speed I seemed to put the fiber in the bottom of the U causing all my shots to all be really low. Anyone else do that? I am likely the only one with this issue, but I could not seem to correct it so I sold the sights.

[VolGrad]

Check out the "Vogel" sights on the Taran Tactical Innovations website. I just put a set on my G34 IDPA gun and like them just far. I was previously using a very thin painted front post and black rear from Ameriglo. That combo worked well for me but I wanted to try the FO front. The TTI set came with both a red and green rod. I am using the green rod.

I haven't shot a match with them yet as I just put them on a week or so ago but have been to the range once to zero. I like them a lot so far. I would prefer the rear notch to be just a smidge wider though.

[jetfire]

I've pretty much standardized on Sevigny Competition sights for all my semi-auto pistols. Revolvers are another story since good aftermarket sights are a little bit more difficult to come by than autos.

[AJZ]

I've pretty much standardized on Sevigny Competition sights for all my semi-auto pistols. Revolvers are another story since good aftermarket sights are a little bit more difficult to come by than autos.

Do you modify, or try to get close to the same sight picture on your revolvers as your semi guns? Or do you just treat it as a different animal?

[jetfire]

Do you modify, or try to get close to the same sight picture on your revolvers as your semi guns? Or do you just treat it as a different animal?

I used to, but now I pretty much just deal with it. I'll paint out any white outline on the rear sight and change the front post to an all black factory post, but that's about it.

[bigtimelarry]

I've tried every sight there is and came back to the Sevigny's. I use the wide .150 rear sight and when i sight in my pistol it's usually off so i do the Dawson formula and order a new front sight from them but i get the .125 wide front. I like the wide Sevigny rear for quick target acquisition but found that there was too much distance with the .115 wide front so i went with the .125 wide front and it closed the gap to a perfect sight picture and the wider front sight doesnt cover up the targets.

[Mikey]

That sounds like a good combo.

I have a .110 width front on my .45 and it seems a bit too small and the smaller fiber doesn't glow quite as bright at the .125. I was thinking about the .155 (.230 height) rear with a .125 FO front. The Dawson website says the larger rears are for poor eyesight. My eye sight is fine, so I'm still hesitant to pull the trigger.

What is the preferred sight width ration from front to rear for folks with good vision?

[bigtimelarry]

That sounds like a good combo.

I have a .110 width front on my .45 and it seems a bit too small and the smaller fiber doesn't glow quite as bright at the .125. I was thinking about the .155 (.230 height) rear with a .125 FO front. The Dawson website says the larger rears are for poor eyesight. My eye sight is fine, so I'm still hesitant to pull the trigger.

What is the preferred sight width ration from front to rear for folks with good vision?

I'd call em up. But if i was going to get the Dawsons and my next sights i will try them i will probably get the 250T/.145N Rear Sight and
then i will get the .235T X .125W Front Fiber Optic front. That should be close so when you sight in your pistol if you need to swap it Dawson
will swap the front sight no charge. My Sevigny's are a .150 wide and getting a .145 wide would be perfect. So then you got a .145W rear
with a .125W Front. It's a great sight picture. The .115W fronts were just too narrow. JMO

[Doc_Glock]

I am actually just now trying out a (Dawson) FO front sight on my practice/competition gun. So my opinion of it is not formed yet.

But my overall favorite sights for competition - for me that's USPSA and GSSF - are Ameriglo Defoors (fully black.)

I do not find fully black sights easier to see. I do find them to force me to be better and more disciplined at seeing them. I also think they rope me into paying attention to the most precise parts of the sight picture: the top edges and the light bars.

Do you still use the Defoors a few years later?

[Mr_White]

Do you still use the Defoors a few years later?

I have stuck with the Dawsons, and like them a bit better because of the serrations and slimmer dimensions.

[Doc_Glock]

I have stuck with the Dawsons, and like them a bit better because of the serrations and slimmer dimensions.

Thanks

I have Defoors and am considering Dawsons, but just don't know if I want a fiber optic or not. Leaning toward the Charger. Dawson folks are great and you can get them in essentially any width front and rear one desires. Then I look at the entire package and the Defoors give me the front and rear widths I want at essentially half the price if I just go black sights.

[Luke]

I run a .90 front with green fiber pretty sexy. Tight rears too, not sure but think .120

[Mr_White]

Thanks

I have Defoors and am considering Dawsons, but just don't know if I want a fiber optic or not. Leaning toward the Charger. Dawson folks are great and you can get them in essentially any width front and rear one desires. Then I look at the entire package and the Defoors give me the front and rear widths I want at essentially half the price if I just go black sights.

That's how I felt about the FO when I first tried it. I don't mind it and sometimes it's pretty nice. I do have to say I am really glad I spent a couple years with the fully black Defoors BEFORE I went to the FO. Even apart from the vision development that helped me find, establishing the discipline to shoot the top edges and the light bars when they are needed, is invaluable.