Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: When is a sight to thin or two fat?

  1. #1

    When is a sight to thin or two fat?

    I have been looking off and on at Langdon's site, and the Ameriglo pro glow (.125 verses .140) as well as glock sights that are similar (.125 verses .140).

    From looking at Brownell's the .125 are for smaller guns, but is there some reason not to use them on larger guns?

    Thanks in advance.

  2. #2
    The 1/8" front sight has been an industry standard on all sizes of gun, like say .44 Magnum, for a long long time.
    There is even a S&W Model 10 dash number for when they went from 1/10" to 1/8".

    There are a lot of choices now to suit your eyesight and your technique but sight width is not based on the size of the gun.
    Code Name: JET STREAM

  3. #3
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    ABQ
    I am running suppressor height sights on a duty gun. As my eyes age I REALLY like suppressor height 1/8 inch sights. Tall and skinny. I have seen references that you want the rear notch and the front blade to be the same so perspective handles the "equal light". I think, at this point in my shooting career, that I want a WIDE notch and a NARROW blade. It just seems to work better for me.

    pat

  4. #4
    My understanding is that when shooting for extreme accuracy a sight combination that has less light showing on either side of the front blade is better. Think Bullseye competition. But for higher speed, more light via narrower blade or wider rear notch, makes things pop more quickly. Think IDPA, USPSA etc.

  5. #5
    Site Supporter Oldherkpilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Location
    Warren, Ohio
    Also, keep in mind that the sight radius plays into the equation. I like a little more daylight on both sides of the front blade. I have the same front blade on my G19, G17 & G17L. Visually, the 17 sight picture is perfect. On the shorter 19, the blade appears noticeably wider. On the 17L, the blade looks almost too narrow. Skeeter Skelton preferred a 1/10" blade on a 5" N frame and that picture has always looked right to me.

  6. #6
    Member jtcarm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Location
    Texas Cross Timbers
    Quote Originally Posted by Oldherkpilot View Post
    Also, keep in mind that the sight radius plays into the equation. I like a little more daylight on both sides of the front blade. I have the same front blade on my G19, G17 & G17L. Visually, the 17 sight picture is perfect. On the shorter 19, the blade appears noticeably wider. On the 17L, the blade looks almost too narrow. Skeeter Skelton preferred a 1/10" blade on a 5" N frame and that picture has always looked right to me.
    Bingo.

    The S&W 1/8” post gives me a perfect sight picture on a 6-6.5” target revolver, but on a 4” there’s not enough daylight. On my guns with pinned front sights, they get replaced with a 1/0” FO.

    Personally, I don’t think the thinner blade forfeits much in precision. I think the eye naturally centers the sight in the notch.

  7. #7
    Dave Spaulding talks about thinner vs. thicker:


    <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yEBxxzfQEdA>

  8. #8
    Member John Hearne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Northern Mississippi
    I've developed a strong preference for thinner. I've gone to a lot of hassle to get a .125" front sight (if tritium is desired) and find it just plain works better. I have a strong preference for a hi-viz front sight like the CAPs. I just wish I could get a TCAP for the P320. I'm having to homebrew something and not having much luck.
    • It's not the odds, it's the stakes.
    • If you aren't dry practicing every week, you're not serious.....
    • "Tache-Psyche Effect - a polite way of saying 'You suck.' " - GG

  9. #9
    Site Supporter taadski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Colorado
    I also strongly prefer thinner front sights. I have .100s or .125s on my iron sighted match pistols.

    Typically, the thinnest fronts available with tritium are .125. So they’re what live on my work/carry pistols. In my case either Dawson or Heinie tritium sets.

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Rochester Hills, MI
    For pistols I generally like .100-.125 front sights. I generally don’t like rear sights any wider than .150. I’m also generally a fan of green fiber or orange paint on the front sight and blacked out rear sights.

    Deviating too much from that either gives me TOO chunky of a sight picture or not enough light around the front sight. Generally anything on my rear sight is annoying and unacceptable. All of this is dependent on sight radius.

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •