Red vs Green Fiber Optic Front Sights

[Matt O]

In my experience, red blooms too much in direct sunlight whereas green is a more refined dot. If you are only shooting at an indoor range either should be fine.

For general use though, green does behave more efficiently to the human eye in a range of varying light levels. I have fiber optic pins on the sight for my compound bow with green, red and orange pins right next to each other for various distances. The green is the first I can see clearly at dawn and the last I can still see clearly at dusk. I chose it specifically for my 20 yard pin because of this.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Kennydale]

I was at a range talking to an instructor about sights. He took from his range bag 2 (UNLOADED- No Mags Slides Locked open. I checked) two of his Sigs both with Fiber optic Sights Red Rears and green Front on one. The opposite on the other. The GREEN front sight just stood out so much better, even outdoors with all the greenery

[matt7184]

Anybody tried the blue?

The new Colt Competition 1911s come with blue FO rods...From limited use with them the blue FO is pretty terrible and dull.

[Appalachained]

I've switched back and forth a few times. I couldn't tell any difference in my times. I like the way Red looks so that's what I use.

[Trajan]

Red. I've tried green, red stands out better to me. I am red/green colorblind however. I can still see colors though, just different shades appear to be different for me. Red pops out much better. It's bolder, which helps me pick it up quicker. When I used green I found I would have to pause to go from target focus to sight focus. Could just be that I'm used to red, idk.

Green in low light indoors is overrated IMO. It could stand out more because it's lighter, but it has to be pretty dark (read: you can't see your sights) for that difference to be noticeable for me.

Green in general is easier for me to see, in non-illuminated things too. Maybe it's just the lack of boldness to the green.

Blue is absolutely horrid. Played with it on that new colt gun. Might as well be black.

At the end of the day, this is 100% how your eyes work for you.

[Mr_White]

I know none of this is new to you but my experience my help others.

Not exactly what you are thinking about but I ran black Defoor rears with an Ameriglo .125 night front all of last year. I like this set up a lot. The white front pops really well and is easy to pick up. It also stands out against different backgrounds really well.

The only thing I don't like about the tritium front is its a little wider than most fibers. The Taran Tactical sights are my all time favorite sights. The ratio between the front and rear is perfect for my eyes. The rear notch is nice and deep and I like that too. I also like the higher profile compared to the Defoors. I would sure like to see Taran make them for M&P's.

This isn't about the FO itself, but one thing I have come to strongly prefer about Dawsons over Ameriglos is the presence of serrations. I have gotten bad glare many times from the smooth faces of Ameriglo sights, and it forces me to use the bright ring around the tritium since that's all that is visible. But I like the top edges and light bars for a lot of shots, and that's what I prefer about the serrations.

[MGW]

This isn't about the FO itself, but one thing I have come to strongly prefer about Dawsons over Ameriglos is the presence of serrations. I have gotten bad glare many times from the smooth faces of Ameriglo sights, and it forces me to use the bright ring around the tritium since that's all that is visible. But I like the top edges and light bars for a lot of shots, and that's what I prefer about the serrations.

I have a really difficult time focusing on the top edge of the front sight if it is anything other than all black. My problem with all black sights is they are way to slow for me to acquire in low light or most indoor ranges.

I guess that's why I gravitate to sights that will allow me to drive the dot.

[Mr_White]

I have a really difficult time focusing on the top edge of the front sight if it is anything other than all black. My problem with all black sights is they are way to slow for me to acquire in low light or most indoor ranges.

I guess that's why I gravitate to sights that will allow me to drive the dot.

I'm not at all saying this to mean you are 'wrong' or something - how we work out all of this is very personal and mine is far from the only way.

Having a hard time paying attention to the top edge of the front sight when there is also a high visibility element to the front sight (FO, bright orange around the tritium, etc.) is far from unheard of. I've read plenty of comments from people in the competition world having accuracy problems from aiming solely with the very attractive FO dot when the shot requires the finer sight alignment that would have been provided by the top edges and light bars. I think it's more of a mental attention thing, than a visual thing, unless the FO is actually blooming. A strongly recommended antidote is time with all black sights. I've been using Dawson Chargers with a FO front sight for a few years now and really like them. They have great dimensions, plus serrations. I have to say I am glad I put in a few years before that with the Ameriglo Defoors (all black) because the difficulty you note about seeing them in an indoor range, which is where I most often shoot, led to a radically increased ability to use my vision better for shooting. All the vision stuff I've written about stems from that experience. So I don't know how it will really work for you, but if you shoot at an indoor range where it takes a lot of effort but is not impossible for you to see the black front sight sharp and clear, I wonder if you might experience a similar improvement from time spent with all black sights.

[Mr_White]

I messed around briefly yesterday with some sights. Need to do it again because I only had a few minutes.

I set up a lighting condition on the range where there is enough light to locate and engage a gray silhouette target, but it was still very reduced light. If decisionmaking were to hinge upon discerning an object in someone's hand, a flashlight would be necessary. Threat behavior might make it clearer and might allow for an engagement decision without a flashlight. But it would be really really hard to tell a cell phone from a small gun.

Glock with stock sights: sights looked black and were not visible. The very reflective white on the stock sights was nonfunctional in this particular light.

Glock with old night sights: tritium was visible and useable. I guess I set up a bit lower lighting condition than I talked about before (had intended it to be just a bit brighter than when tritium becomes visible, but where ok shooting could be done with any sights.)

Glock with Dawson Chargers (red FO): sights looked black and were not visible. Still could hit the target fine, but it was from index and coarse visual alignment.

Glock with Dawson Chargers (green FO): The green FO was surprisingly visible in very little light, and was about the equivalent of the tritium on the old night sights I looked at. Very interesting.

After I got home, I took the slides off a few guns and went around my place looking at the sights in different lighting conditions. This time I looked at the Dawson Chargers with red FO, Dawson Chargers with green FO, and Ameriglo Operators (green front/yellow rear) that still have pretty strong tritium. The night sights were by far the most visible in varied dim conditions. At the in-home distances, index and coarse visual alignment would be plenty of aiming reference for most shots, so it's not like the non-night sights wouldn't work, but the tritium was way more visible. The green FO was like a really gimpy front night sight - pale, visible, small, not very bright. The red FO disappeared for the most part.

I do want to mess around with this some more. I need to paint the white ring on the front of one of my Operators florescent red and try that. I want to play around with the green FO some more, both in dimmer conditions and daylight. I was saying I think I want to try the green FO in the local USPSA match this weekend, but I'm not so sure now. In light where the FO is glowing, my brain hates the green. I just don't like how it looks. It's pale and does not look 'right' to me, which could just be reflective of the time I have spent with red FO so the green looks wrong. Subjectively, the red stands out much better. I would consider going with the green if it ends up being a pseudo-night sight, but I think that might be more credit than it really deserves.

[spinmove_]

I messed around briefly yesterday with some sights. Need to do it again because I only had a few minutes.

I set up a lighting condition on the range where there is enough light to locate and engage a gray silhouette target, but it was still very reduced light. If decisionmaking were to hinge upon discerning an object in someone's hand, a flashlight would be necessary. Threat behavior might make it clearer and might allow for an engagement decision without a flashlight. But it would be really really hard to tell a cell phone from a small gun.

Glock with stock sights: sights looked black and were not visible. The very reflective white on the stock sights was nonfunctional in this particular light.

Glock with old night sights: tritium was visible and useable. I guess I set up a bit lower lighting condition than I talked about before (had intended it to be just a bit brighter than when tritium becomes visible, but where ok shooting could be done with any sights.)

Glock with Dawson Chargers (red FO): sights looked black and were not visible. Still could hit the target fine, but it was from index and coarse visual alignment.

Glock with Dawson Chargers (green FO): The green FO was surprisingly visible in very little light, and was about the equivalent of the tritium on the old night sights I looked at. Very interesting.

After I got home, I took the slides off a few guns and went around my place looking at the sights in different lighting conditions. This time I looked at the Dawson Chargers with red FO, Dawson Chargers with green FO, and Ameriglo Operators (green front/yellow rear) that still have pretty strong tritium. The night sights were by far the most visible in varied dim conditions. At the in-home distances, index and coarse visual alignment would be plenty of aiming reference for most shots, so it's not like the non-night sights wouldn't work, but the tritium was way more visible. The green FO was like a really gimpy front night sight - pale, visible, small, not very bright. The red FO disappeared for the most part.

I do want to mess around with this some more. I need to paint the white ring on the front of one of my Operators florescent red and try that. I want to play around with the green FO some more, both in dimmer conditions and daylight. I was saying I think I want to try the green FO in the local USPSA match this weekend, but I'm not so sure now. In light where the FO is glowing, my brain hates the green. I just don't like how it looks. It's pale and does not look 'right' to me, which could just be reflective of the time I have spent with red FO so the green looks wrong. Subjectively, the red stands out much better. I would consider going with the green if it ends up being a pseudo-night sight, but I think that might be more credit than it really deserves.

That's interesting. I might have to toss a green FO rod in the Dawson front that I have lying around and see how it looks to me. I don't remember it being all that great when I installed green last time, but its possible I didn't install it correctly either.