new sights: boring plain all-black irons are cool.

[Guest CK1]

I've gone to a set of plain all-black irons for the first time.

I am really surprised how awesome it is, and in case you're like me and you've never really gave 'em a chance, I'd recommend giving them a try at some point...

I've used different combos of tritium, white dots, orange dots, luminova, and both green and red fiber, varying widths from .125-.140... some looked/worked better than others, and without getting into what I've liked about each, I'm convinced that what one feels is best just depends on one's eyes and how one shoot's, 5 guys may give 5 different answers as to what works best or what is most "tactical" or whatever (for instance, for me, night sights are not a must have, but that's just me, others insist on them being on any gun they carry).

Anyways, in my case, I noticed I had "hit a wall" with my shooting where my speed and accuracy 10 yards on in had out-ran my skills out beyond 10 yards, and noticed that my super-high visibility-ultra fast acquisition-type front sights that I was fond of using had me guessing once I was shooting at distance, if I was in a lane at a range, sure I could make a nice slow-fire group no problem, but on the clock like at an IDPA match or when practicing from the draw, what looked good when I pulled the trigger and what I was getting wasn't where I wanted it to be... for anyone who shoots IDPA, 15 yards out, I was -3ing myself to death when I thought I was hitting 0's or -1's.

Well, I kinda feel like last guy to the party... the plain black sights (well, serrated front blade, smooth plain rear to be exact) give a real "high-quality" sight picture, guess I'd best describe as "simple and un-fatiguing" or maybe "uncomplicated or elegant"... in other words it has me at a thinner front and narrower notch than I could run before (.115 front, .150 rear notch) because all my eyes are looking for are the contrast between the blades and light bars, and while my older ones I used to prefer may have really been faster to pick up, they were also "christmas trees" by comparison, "dazzleing" my eyes and I would launch shots without really being able to measure their precise placement.

These feel like a welcome change, I've only had a chance to put 100rds downrange with 'em so far but it's already no contest, they're staying.

Just figured I'd post this in case anyone else may have been toying with the idea of going to just plain irons, but like me was reluctant.

As with all things, YMMV.

These are Ameriglo "Defoor Tactcal's" on a G17, same ratios as the popular Warren/Sevigny's but cut more like the traditional Glock profile... new to me.

Edited April 12, 2010 by CK1

[deerslayer]

+1 for plain black Sevigny Comps. I have Ameriglos on some guns, too. It's amazing what a little daylight on each side of the front sight will do for your speed. Tritium inserts and fiber optic dots are just a distraction to me (until my vision takes a dump).

[wipfel]

so, could you break down the theory behind the all black sights? when i first saw this type of sight, i figured it was a really dumb idea, but after reading some things from master shooter, i realized there must be something to it.

[Guest CK1]

so, could you break down the theory behind the all black sights? when i first saw this type of sight, i figured it was a really dumb idea, but after reading some things from master shooter, i realized there must be something to it.

I can try... My take on it is I think there is something to it; the fact that these type of sights tend to be favored by Masters or just plain guys who can shoot.

From where I stand, and from what I've gathered, part of it is like this: the black on black sights aren't for the guys who are still looking for the front sight... these are for guys who have gotten past that and are to the point where they're calling their shots and tracking their sights under recoil (like on double-taps or bill drills, always getting a sight picture before pulling the trigger even though it may seem so fast that it may look like they aren't).

The light bars are really the measure that dictates all the precision for windage, and when there's not a whole lot going on to distract your eyes, they're maybe more relaxed to measure that the bars are equal, the post is centered, and that the front post is indeed even with the top of the rear notch at perfect alignment... you know, the info your eyes and brain should be processing to put the hole exactly where you want it. So I think really it's the fact that they're an uncluttered puzzle for your brain to solve when combined with all the other elements that make shooting handguns well such a task like grip, stance, trigger control, etc.

In my case, I found that I was in the habit of settling for getting my bright front sight where I believed it was centered in the notch and that trusting that was enough of a measurement to pull the trigger... turns out that's good enough to hit 0's all-day long at 7 yards, and will have you off the paper at 25 yards if you're not careful (a wide front sight doesn't help either).

A wide enough rear notch for your brain to easily center the front blade is all that's really needed... and there are guys who've gotten pretty darn good who have figured out that that doesn't necessarily mean a .125 front blade paired to a .125 rear notch like was just fine in the past era, seems a .150 rear notch is now the "norm" when talking speed as well as precision, it's not really considered "wide-notch" anymore. Pretty much, light bars are good, no light bars is bad.