Illuminated Front Sight Only

[Suvorov]

What is the thought about only having the front sight illuminated when it comes to night sights?

I recently was able to pick up a excellent condition low mileage Beretta 92FS Compact which is no small feat in Kalifornia where they are not on the approved "roster." It is a gun that was built in 1990 and thus has the M9 style sights that I prefer over the 3-dot sights. Since this gun was purchased to be more of a carry/HD gun instead of a range gun, I want to have some tritium sights installed. Also since the front sight is part of the slide, I am kind of limited as to what sight options are available to me. As I will have to send the slide off to ToolTech or similar, I am considering having only the front sight done and keeping the original non-illuminated rear sight.

My reasoning here is that:
1) The traditional 3-dot night sights can be confusing in in the dark. I have done a fair amount of low light shooting and more than once or twice have gotten on of the rear dots confused with the front dot. I know this is part of the thought process behind many of the newer night sight configurations, but most of these newer designs are not made for legacy Beretta pistols.
2) It might actually facilitate a quicker shot in low light as the front sight will be easier to pick up. Also the loss of precision caused by not having the rear sight fully aligned is not as critical given the likely ranges that a "shot in the dark" would be taken.
3) It would allow me to retain the M9 style day sight configuration that I prefer.
4) It would be cheaper.

Is my reasoning sound or am I going down the wrong path here?

[BaiHu]

Pffft, screw night sights, this will solve your problem:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=Xfs0R-7cS_s

Although I see no proof, it is an interesting video.

[Mitchell, Esq.]

1) The traditional 3-dot night sights can be confusing in in the dark. I have done a fair amount of low light shooting and more than once or twice have gotten on of the rear dots confused with the front dot. I know this is part of the thought process behind many of the newer night sight configurations, but most of these newer designs are not made for legacy Beretta pistols.

Black magic marker darkening the rear sight solves the issue for me.

Dim rear, bright front.

[BaiHu]

Black magic marker darkening the rear sight solves the issue for me.

Dim rear, bright front.

My problem with this is that I get near NO light from my rears. But they are the painted on stuff direct from HK and not the tritium fronts with 'shaded out' rears. I forget which gun you run, Mitchell.

[Chuck Haggard]

I have found it rather easy to screw up my sight alignment with just the front dot type set-up.

[ToddG]

I have found it rather easy to screw up my sight alignment with just the front dot type set-up.

This.

Front dot only works great in a lot of simple all-or-nothing lighting conditions. Start adding dynamic and/or variable lighting (like, say, walking through your house at night) with shadows, areas of bright and dark, etc. and it becomes less workable. It's also extremely limited when dealing with a heavily backlit target in the dark.

[Suvorov]

This.

Front dot only works great in a lot of simple all-or-nothing lighting conditions. Start adding dynamic and/or variable lighting (like, say, walking through your house at night) with shadows, areas of bright and dark, etc. and it becomes less workable. It's also extremely limited when dealing with a heavily backlit target in the dark.

OK then, the "God's" have spoken

From what I have found, my only real option for the 92FSC is the standard 3-dot arrangement - do you know of any "better" arrangements that are available for legacy Berettas?

Maybe ToolTech could insert tritium vials in my rear sight without the white outline so during daylight I retain the M9 style sights?

Am I making too much out of this?

[ToddG]

ToolTech can do just about anything if you're willing to pay for it.

There just aren't a lot of great options for the rear sight on a Beretta because by necessity it has to be so narrow.

[BaiHu]

What does anyone think of this fix in order to make my rear sights more distinguishable from the front sight?

Step 1 some scotch tape:


Step 2 your ink/sharpie of choice:


Step 3 do the other side and then it looks like this:


Step 4 check it out in some low light:




It makes my eyes a bit crazy when I look at them in a dark room, but maybe I'll become accustomed to being cross-eyed They were easily distinguishable for me and I'll be taking a low-light class this coming Sunday so I'll post my findings.

[Bob Hostetter]

Just my opinion,

I am one of the small group of people who prefer running a trituim insert in the front sight only. While being able to see the sights as clearly as possible is always important I tend to believe that target identification in low/no light situations is even more important. While exceptions alway exist, if there is enough light to clearly identify something/someone as a threat requiring an application of lethal force there is enough light to establish a workable sight picture especially if the front sight is clearly defined by a tritium insert and there is no chance of getting the front/rears out of alginment left to right because they all have the glowing dot.

Additionally three dot systems (tritium or otherwise) tend to not line up perfectly for precise shooting nearly as well as using the tops and sides of the sights in the tradational manner.