Taurus® Defender 856 38 SPECIAL +P

[CSW]

That night sight dot is too low in the sight and I'm not a fan of the orange inside black outline. I'd rather just paint the standard sight orange.

I called Taurus on that very thing.
Their "answer' was that it was very much engineered as a sight for point shooting in dark environments.

[OlongJohnson]

The Taurus replacement is cheap and accurate. Night sight dot in the middle of orange.

Attachment 87045

Where is the dot supposed to be in the sight picture? In the image above, it's half obscured by the bottom of the gutter in the frame. Would be almost completely obscured if the top of the post was level with the edges of the gutter. If tops of everything aligned is a correct sight picture, then raising the dot so it's fully visible will have you shooting high. Especially with the barrel length of a snubby.

[CSW]

Where is the dot supposed to be in the sight picture? In the image above, it's half obscured by the bottom of the gutter in the frame. Would be almost completely obscured if the top of the post was level with the edges of the gutter. If tops of everything aligned is a correct sight picture, then raising the dot so it's fully visible will have you shooting high. Especially with the barrel length of a snubby.

Yes, in a 'normal' sight picture, when all 3 flats are aligned, the tritium is obscured.

In a dark environment, when aligning the black fixed rear with the front, it's a bit "different".
My point I guess, is that if you point at the intended target in the dark, you'll at least see the tritium.

Was it Defoor who had designed a sight of similar?

[Lester Polfus]

Where is the dot supposed to be in the sight picture? In the image above, it's half obscured by the bottom of the gutter in the frame. Would be almost completely obscured if the top of the post was level with the edges of the gutter. If tops of everything aligned is a correct sight picture, then raising the dot so it's fully visible will have you shooting high. Especially with the barrel length of a snubby.

It seems like you would hit pretty high to me. It wouldn't be the first time Taurus has had a great idea with flawed execution. As a friend of mine once said, Taurus assembles all the right ingredients to bake a great cake, then takes a shit in the batter.

It sounds like maybe they improving though.

[BN]

Is there a size differential between the 856 and a J frame that's significant? That orange sight looks nice.

The window in the frame is a little taller for the 6 round cylinder. Everything else is J-Frame size. I can swap grips between the 856 and J-Frames although the locating pin is in a slightly different spot. The 856 won't fit many J-Frame holsters because of the frame height and cylinder size. I have a Safariland pocket holster that works for both.

https://www.handgunhero.com/compare/...6-2-ultra-lite This is a pretty close comparison but the 856 grips are a little longer but the grip frame is the same size.

The steel 856 weight compares roughly to a S&W 60 and the Ultra-Lite 856 compares to a S&W 442.

My eyes don't see orange as well as green so I painted the top half of my 856 sight. Using the tritium dot would cause you to hit very high. I'm going to experiment with S&W pinned sights to see if I could narrow the tenon to make them fit the 856.



My Ultra-Lite 856 should be here in a couple of days.

[Dave T]

I confess to being a little surprised at those of you who want a perfectly aligned sight picture on a gun of this type.

Now don't get me wrong, I was taught by Jeff Cooper (among others) to always used the sights as they confirm proper presentation and alignment. But for me this would be a "git off me" gun. If you had the luxury of bringing this gun up to eye level it's still a "put the colored part in the middle" kind of aiming strategy.

For get off me distances of say 3-5 yards I train to put the bight colored sight on the bottom "V" of the ribs or there abouts and fire a few for effect. If you're well practiced you might just crack the sternum with a round or two, which is a pretty good "get off me" statement.

Just sayin',
Dave

[OlongJohnson]

You never know what you're going to need to do with the gun. Having sights that enable you to get hits at 10-25 yards doesn't impair the utility of the gun as a get-off-me, but sights that are really only useful for get-off-me but don't work well at 10-25 yards will be a problem if you need to shoot something at 10-25 yards.

[Jim Watson]

What I call "shotgunning" a target with just a front sight reference.

Chic Gaylord said of such things as small or no sights and no hammer spur, "suitable for an affair of honor in a telephone booth."

Question: Is anybody doing real action work on these things as is commonly done on Smiths? Or is it just a case of apply manly strength to a stock action? Or put in limber springs and hope they are enough to overcome the Factory Friction?

[OlongJohnson]

Question: Is anybody doing real action work on these things as is commonly done on Smiths? Or is it just a case of apply manly strength to a stock action? Or put in limber springs and hope they are enough to overcome the Factory Friction?

I'm obviously tempted, but have so far resisted the urge.

[BN]

I confess to being a little surprised at those of you who want a perfectly aligned sight picture on a gun of this type.

Now don't get me wrong, I was taught by Jeff Cooper (among others) to always used the sights as they confirm proper presentation and alignment. But for me this would be a "git off me" gun. If you had the luxury of bringing this gun up to eye level it's still a "put the colored part in the middle" kind of aiming strategy.

You can still do this at 40 yards. 10 out of 12 and I'm not sure the misses weren't me.