Page 1 of 12 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 112

Thread: Night Sights vs fiber optics (August 2013 edition)

  1. #1
    Leopard Printer Mr_White's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Gaming In The Streets

    Night Sights vs fiber optics (August 2013 edition)

    Quote Originally Posted by ToddG View Post
    Today it's fiber optic.
    Tomorrow it will be a Ghost Holster.
    Next week you'll shave your head to cut down on drag as you run to position.

    Obviously meant in jest, dude. Whatever gets you to your goals faster. Good luck at the match!
    Thanks Todd! Heh, I actually just cut my hair tonight. Just want to try the FO. It's funny that you just lo-viz'd your front sight at the same time I hi-viz'd mine. I have seriously considered (and I know you disagree) using the Defoors on my carry guns. If I completely love the FO, I could conceivably carry that and just summarily tear up my Timmy card. : ) I did compare the red FO in modest light side by side with Caboose's CAP front and the FO was hugely more visible. My Timmy principles revolt against the idea of a FO on a carry gun, but who knows. It is an experiment right now and that's all.

    Quote Originally Posted by JHC View Post
    Maybe you'll have that "new gun" phenom and will be "out of body". Good luck.
    I am always out of body dude. I live in the sights. I am never too good for my home.
    Technical excellence supports tactical preparedness
    Lord of the Food Court
    http://www.gabewhitetraining.com

  2. #2
    Member JHC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    North Georgia
    Vogel used FO sights on his work gun too. Just sayin'.
    As a man sows, so shall he reap.

  3. #3
    We are diminished
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Quote Originally Posted by JHC View Post
    Vogel used FO sights on his work gun too. Just sayin'.
    And a dedicated flashlight, too, as I recall.

  4. #4
    Member JHC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    North Georgia
    Quote Originally Posted by ToddG View Post
    And a dedicated flashlight, too, as I recall.
    Oh yeah I'm sure. I just think the durability thing is way overblown.
    As a man sows, so shall he reap.

  5. #5
    We are diminished
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Quote Originally Posted by JHC View Post
    Oh yeah I'm sure. I just think the durability thing is way overblown.
    Vogel mentioned in class that if the fiber falls out, he's still got a thin black front sight. I took that to mean he'd experienced "fiber fail" in the past but don't recall anyone asking specifically.

  6. #6
    Don't mean to hijack your journal bro, but just my 2 cents on the FO thing, having run them almost exclusively since 2009: The fiber optic "fallout" is generally a result of improper FO installation in the first place. At some point with night sights or FO, you will be unable to see the tritium or the FO (Why Night Sights?). IME, this point comes about the same time or a bit earlier with a properly installed FO set-up. This point on a FO is also greatly dependent on the dot/rod size. Smaller dot/FO rod = loses brightness faster. At some point with ANY non-night vision capable sighting system, you will need a light. I found when using a light, handheld or weapon mounted, the sight picture is generally the same between tritium and FO sights. This stays true for most flashlight techniques until using the neck/FBI index, where I have found it to be advantageous to use FO. Some perks as I see them: bright daytime operation, thin front sight post ability (sub .125), easily replaceable optic rod, dot color variation (I have found green seems to work best for me), available in several variations dependent on how you want them set up (Patridge, ramped, multiple heights, etc). I'm not trying to bash on night sights, they are a very good and viable option, just giving my opinion based on my experience and that of some others. And for the "in the real world" guys, I happen to know for a FACT that several Tier One guys are currently using Dawson FO front sights on their work guns, along with Dawson adjustable rears (GASP!!!) and they are working just fine. But that's a topic for another day, lol.

  7. #7
    We are diminished
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Quote Originally Posted by AJZ View Post
    And for the "in the real world" guys, I happen to know for a FACT that several Tier One guys are currently using Dawson FO front sights on their work guns, along with Dawson adjustable rears (GASP!!!) and they are working just fine. But that's a topic for another day, lol.
    You mean the guys who operate in teams with weapon mounted lights, IR illuminators, and NODs? Because I'm not sure that has a high degree of relevance to what I need as a lone "operator" dealing with a criminal ambush.

    When I took Southnarc's AMIS one thing the students agreed on almost universally was that the lack of night sights on the Sim guns was a significant hindrance. There were plenty of times that I didn't want to project white light but could see well enough to locate the target. Without illuminated sights, though, it was just a black mass atop a black mass. It's a lot easier against static cardboard than a moving target.

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by ToddG View Post
    You mean the guys who operate in teams with weapon mounted lights, IR illuminators, and NODs? Because I'm not sure that has a high degree of relevance to what I need as a lone "operator" dealing with a criminal ambush.
    That was kinda my point. But undoubtedly, someone will try and say "In the real world" or "Well CAG and SEALs and super ninja's" shennanigans, which I wanted to squash before anyone even mentioned it.

    Quote Originally Posted by ToddG
    When I took Southnarc's AMIS one thing the students agreed on almost universally was that the lack of night sights on the Sim guns was a significant hindrance. There were plenty of times that I didn't want to project white light but could see well enough to locate the target. Without illuminated sights, though, it was just a black mass atop a black mass. It's a lot easier against static cardboard than a moving target.
    I have no doubt that the lack of a non-blacked out sighting system would be helpful, and as I wasn't there I wasn't privy to the exact situation so I can't really talk about your experience, AAR, etc, just offer some counter-points: Did anyone there run FO sights as their primary sighting system on non-sim guns? Could anyone there speak for FO in similar situations? Could anyone there speak to experience of using FO in situations where there was enough light to properly ID a target but not differentiate the front sight from the rear on blacked out sights? I have used both in similar situations, and while at some points the night sights did have an advantage, there were other times when FO had the advantage. Again, not arguing that night sights are a bad, or even inferior sighting system. Just pointing out that it may not be as detrimental as most believe it to be. I will for sure ask CD if he'll let me throw a set of FOs on one of the sim guns for AMIS.

  9. #9
    Member JHC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    North Georgia
    Quote Originally Posted by ToddG View Post
    Vogel mentioned in class that if the fiber falls out, he's still got a thin black front sight. I took that to mean he'd experienced "fiber fail" in the past but don't recall anyone asking specifically.
    Sure and that's part of my point of overblown worries about FO durability. If it breaks, you got a black sight that half of the competitors prefer anyway. I like Trijicon HDs myself for most purposes but one range/game gun has the .125 10-8 FO which I think is a better front FO sight than the Dawson or Warren/Sevigny I've used before.
    As a man sows, so shall he reap.

  10. #10
    Leopard Printer Mr_White's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Gaming In The Streets
    Quote Originally Posted by ToddG View Post
    There were plenty of times that I didn't want to project white light but could see well enough to locate the target.
    Locate it or ID and assess it too? As in, make a properly-founded decision to use deadly force against it? Or had it been 'pre-emptively ID'd and assessed' somehow?
    Technical excellence supports tactical preparedness
    Lord of the Food Court
    http://www.gabewhitetraining.com

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
  •