What does a 33% sight radius increase get you?

[98z28]

There are so many moving parts that it is difficult to predict what your individual results will be. I'll say the obvious only because I haven't seen it explicitly stated yet: try the experiment yourself and see what happens under the conditions you care about.

In my experience with iron sights, shorter-barrelled guns tend to offer the best potential accuracy, and longer-barrelled guns tend to offer better practical accuracy. This conclusion is over many tests with similar guns setup with similar sights (e.g. G26, 19, 17 and 34; M&P compact and M&P full size, all equipped with the same sights). When shooting these guns at 25 yards from a rest, I consistantly got the best groups from the smaller guns (G26 and M&P compact compared to G17/34 and M&P full size). When I take the guns off a rest and start shooting free hand under time pressure, I tend to get better groups from the larger guns.

There are too many factors in play to declare my results as the rule, or even for me to expect it to repeat with a different brand or sample of guns.

[DAVE_M]

I believe @JohnO is referring only to how a longer slide can theoretically deviate "more" from center in terms of sighting than a shorter slide and still result in the same POI given the angle of deviation increases the closer you, or in this case the sight/muzzle, move towards the target.

Your point regarding sight dimensions and the effect this has on the shooter's perception and management of said dimensions, is connected to his point, but still subtly different.

Conversely, a short sight radius with a wide front sight and narrow rear will cause a similar effect.

Sight radius is relative to sight width. Otherwise, a 15 degree deviation is identical regardless of the length of the slide.

[JohnO]

Conversely, a short sight radius with a wide front sight and narrow rear will cause a similar effect.

Sight radius is relative to sight width. Otherwise, a 15 degree deviation is identical regardless of the length of the slide.

What we as shooters are ultimately trying to do is align the bore axis with the intended impact spot on the target. You can't look down the bore so another method is required for accurate alignment. Sights on a pistol are that indicator of bore axis alignment. How well the sights are regulated and how skilled the shooter determines the accuracy of the weapon system.

Additionally a bore axis misaligned by 15 degrees (angular distortion) will manifest itself as a increasing error as distance increases. However slide length, barrel length, sight width or sight radius is irrelevant.

I agree that sight width and sight radius can effect things. For one a wide front sight paired with a narrow notch rear sight may work better on a longer radius depending on dimensions. If for example the front sight when viewed through the rear aperture fills the entire aperture it may be difficult to determine if it is properly centered. Transplant those same sights on a longer sight radius and now you have space around the front sight in the notch enabling equal light around the sight (centered).

Still as I said initially a longer sight radius (all other things being equal because the original poster asked 'what does a 33% increase in radius get you?") the longer radius enhances the ability to visually perceive a misalignment. It doesn't by itself make a longer version (with longer sight radius) of a particular gun more accurate. However some skilled shooters welcome a longer sight radius because they understand the relationship and how to exploit it.

[HeavyDuty]

I didn’t look at this thread before because the title didn’t pull me in.

I shoot my 34 (and 41) better than my shorter guns due to the longer sight radius - but it’s a focus issue, not due to inherent precision. The longer slide puts the front sight in a better position for me and my bifocals, I get a much sharper front sight picture than I can with my 26, 19 or similar.

[Gio]

What we as shooters are ultimately trying to do is align the bore axis with the intended impact spot on the target. You can't look down the bore so another method is required for accurate alignment. Sights on a pistol are that indicator of bore axis alignment. How well the sights are regulated and how skilled the shooter determines the accuracy of the weapon system.

Additionally a bore axis misaligned by 15 degrees (angular distortion) will manifest itself as a increasing error as distance increases. However slide length, barrel length, sight width or sight radius is irrelevant.

I agree that sight width and sight radius can effect things. For one a wide front sight paired with a narrow notch rear sight may work better on a longer radius depending on dimensions. If for example the front sight when viewed through the rear aperture fills the entire aperture it may be difficult to determine if it is properly centered. Transplant those same sights on a longer sight radius and now you have space around the front sight in the notch enabling equal light around the sight (centered).

Still as I said initially a longer sight radius (all other things being equal because the original poster asked 'what does a 33% increase in radius get you?") the longer radius enhances the ability to visually perceive a misalignment. It doesn't by itself make a longer version (with longer sight radius) of a particular gun more accurate. However some skilled shooters welcome a longer sight radius because they understand the relationship and how to exploit it.

@JohnO nailed it. Putting all the subjective good feels aside, a longer sight radius will help with any kind of defensive or action pistol shooting, all else being equal. You may not personally notice a difference, based on your ability, the difficulty of drills you're shooting, and not using a solid measuring or tracking system, such as scoring your results in hit factor and plotting them over time, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. A longer sight radius will absolutely be more forgiving than a shorter one.

We strive to make a perfect shot when the front sight is perfectly aligned in the rear notch. With a G34 and a G26, with perfect sight alignment and identical mechanical accuracy, they will shoot the exact same group size off a sandbag or ransom rest. The problem is we don't always have a "perfect" sight picture when we add any kind of time component, and we shouldn't have one outside of bullseye-type shooting. The goal is to shoot as fast as your sight picture allows you to, based on the distance and difficulty of the target you're trying to hit. If I'm trying to hit an A-zone at 7 yards, my front sight doesn't have to be anywhere near perfect alignment in the rear notch. At 25 yards on a bill drill or other fast drill, it has to be closer to perfect for each shot, but it still doesn't have to be perfect.

A G34 with the front sight aligned slightly off-center in the rear notch is going to have a much smaller angular displacement of the shot impact down range than a G26 with the same slightly off center front sight. Therefore, you can have a much wider range of acceptable sight pictures on a G34 than a G26.

[strow]

I don't follow the USPSA/IPSC standings anymore but are there any super squat level shooters who are shooting iron sighted pistols with slides shorter than the G34 when not required to by rules? Butler, Voigt, Sevigny, Vogel, etc. Just curious.

[feudist]

I don't follow the USPSA/IPSC standings anymore but are there any super squat level shooters who are shooting iron sighted pistols with slides shorter than the G34 when not required to by rules? Butler, Voigt, Sevigny, Vogel, etc. Just curious.

That's a good question.

Also, @GJM, because he mentioned sight radius in the LTT Custom thread about the sight radius effect of a 92 vs a PX4 compact.

[NH Shooter]

Practically speaking in self defense.

IMO, the longer-barreled pistol is more of a liability than an advantage for everyday civilian SD purposes.

In comparing my 5-inch PPQ (7.125" sight radius) to my PPS (5.375" sight radius), the longer sight radius of the PPQ allows me to more easily see any sight misalignment. Theoretically this should allow me to align the sights more precisely, but seeing "perfect alignment" and having the ability to actually squeeze the shot off with them remaining so are two different things. If the trigger breaks with the sights well-aligned, the shot goes where I want it. If I have the time to perfectly align the sights and carefully squeeze the shot off, the longer sight radius is an advantage. The PPQ is a very pleasant pistol to shoot as well.

On the other side of the coin, the main (and considerable) disadvantage of the PPQ for me is the long slide offers too much real estate for an assailant to grab hold of in a CQC encounter. While the longer slide and sight radius are an advantage for longer-range engagements, it seems to me a major disadvantage at arm's-length battle.

I've always been able to shoot the PPS well. Even out to 20 yards, I'm able to hold carefully-squeezed shots on a 3X5 card. At 7 yards and under, I am able to drill the shots with great speed to where they need to go. Though the PPS is only 8 + 1 maximum capacity, at close range I actually prefer it because there's little for anyone to grab hold of in front of the trigger guard, leverage advantage remains firmly with the person whose hand is on the grip. Of course, the PPS carries and conceals well.

If I knew I was going to be in a protracted gun battle with only a pistol, the PPQ and extra 17-round mags would be a no-brainer for me. But for EDC and the SD scenarios I'm most likely to be placed in, the PPS is my preference.

PS - I am a student of William Aprill and his disarming techniques course.

[JohnO]

IMO, the longer-barreled pistol is more of a liability than an advantage for everyday civilian SD purposes.

In comparing my 5-inch PPQ (7.125" sight radius) to my PPS (5.375" sight radius), the longer sight radius of the PPQ allows me to more easily see any sight misalignment. Theoretically this should allow me to align the sights more precisely, but seeing "perfect alignment" and having the ability to actually squeeze the shot off with them remaining so are two different things. If the trigger breaks with the sights well-aligned, the shot goes where I want it. If I have the time to perfectly align the sights and carefully squeeze the shot off, the longer sight radius is an advantage. The PPQ is a very pleasant pistol to shoot as well.

On the other side of the coin, the main (and considerable) disadvantage of the PPQ for me is the long slide offers too much real estate for an assailant to grab hold of in a CQC encounter. While the longer slide and sight radius are an advantage for longer-range engagements, it seems to me a major disadvantage at arm's-length battle.

I would not spend too much intellectual capital on the potential disarming vulnerability of a large verses small handgun. More important consideration would be the efficacy of deploying a handgun at bad breath distances. The gun is not always the solution to the problem.

[NH Shooter]

The gun is not always the solution to the problem.

True, but sometimes there may be no other options. At "bad breath distances" I'd much prefer something that is more difficult for an assailant to take control of.