Sights

[Hawkmoon]

Experts, please educate me.

I'm a certified olde pharte. Back when I learned to shoot, shortly after the invention of gunpowder, I was taught to put the front sight in the vee or 'u' of the rear sight, align the tops of them, then set the bullseye on top of the front sight. A few years ago, when I took the required handgun class for my state's CCW permit, there was a picture on the wall at the shop that showed this sight alignment, so I guess someone must still think this is the way it should be done.

And with my few-years-old Para P12, that has sights similar to 1911 GI sights, that's the way the sights are set up. However, when I got a Para LDA12 that came with Novak-style white-dot sights, I found I was always grouping a few inches below the point of aim. Finally figured out that I had to place the white dot of the front sight ON the bullseye rather then have the top of the sight touch the bottom of the bullseye to hit where I was shooting at.

Since that moment of epiphany, I've noticed a few comments in various gun reviews and articles that suggest to me that this type of sight is actually intended to work that way. Is this correct? If so, why did we suddenly change the way we've been taught to shoot for over 100 years?

And whether or not this is true, do any of the gunsmith experts here have any suggestions as to the best way to bet my LDA to shoot like it should ... with a "normal" sight picture. If this were the only pistol I owned I suppose I could learn a different way of sighting, but I own a couple of rifles with iron sights and some other pistols and revolvers that all sight normally. Since the LDA is primarily a carry gun, it would be best if the sites worked like all my other guns.

Ideas?

[John]

Hawkmoon,

The difference between the two sighting methods has to do with their intended purpose.

The reason we used to aim the sights at the bottom of the bullseye, is because it is easier to align them when they are on a white background, and the black circle is right above the front one. If you try to do the same thing, but align the sights in the center of the bullseye, you will notice that you can never be 100% sure when they are actually above the center of the circle. Too much margin for error, thus less accuracy. The first sighting method is thus very suitable for precise target shooting.

On the other hand, when you are shooting in a defense situation, you usually do not have the time to align the sights precisely. You normally aim for the center of the mass of your target and put your front sight there and fire the shot. For distances up to 10 meters, this is enough to guarantee the placement of your shots at the chest of your opponent (or at the center of your target, in general). In such conditions, the opposite is true, you do not have a perfect circle which can be aligned with the top of your sights to assure you of proper placement. Since there is no circle, there is no way to be sure of the precise alignment, therefore this is useless (in addition to be dangerous, no time to do such a precise alignment).

In reality, with the traditional method, your shots are placed 2-3" above the area where your sights were. With the newer method, your shots are placed right where your sights were. Which one is better?

For a defence situation, I prefer the second one. I want my shots where I aim, not some distance above.

Rgds

[stumbler]

Phor what it is worth, . I try to setup my carry guns to be the same. Some required philing , while others didn't (you are not the olny "olde Pharte"). My hands and eyes don't accept change too well.


The placement of the phront sight is a personal choice (whether on the bullseye or below it) as long as sight alignment is maintained. I like to practice on a blank target and keep the phront sight in the middle.
Have phun, and good shooting :)

[Hawkmoon]

In reality, with the traditional method, your shots are placed 2-3" above the area where your sights were. With the newer method, your shots are placed right where your sights were. Which one is better?

For a defence situation, I prefer the second one. I want my shots where I aim, not some distance above.
I also want my shots to go where I aim them. This is why I do NOT like the "new" sight alignment scheme. It means my mind has to remember NOT to aim my primary carry pistol the same way I aim every other handgun and rifle I own. And if I alternate between the P12 and the LDA12 for carry, then I have to remember in a stress situation "Oh my gawd! Which gun am I carrying today? Do I aim at the point of impact, or below it, or above it?"

Like Stumbler said, all my guns should work the same.

[cav_scout1]

Like Stumbler said, all my guns should work the same.

Well take the weapon to a gunsmith and have him install a set of low profile two dot adjustable rear sites and adjust the sight picture till your hearts content!



Jeff

[bearandoldman]

Well take the weapon to a gunsmith and have him install a set of low profile two dot adjustable rear sites and adjust the sight picture till your hearts content!



Jeff

That's what I did, my SA loaded standard and my SA Micro compact both have HiViz fronts and adjustable rear from SA made by LPA. My 2 Ruger 22/45's, low cost practice guns have HiViz front and the Ruger adjustable rear. Get the same picture every time,

[bearandoldman]

PM'd Hawkmoon earlier and questioned him as to being an olde pharte, told him I was older. He said he is a certified olde pharte but you could appoint me as a certified older pharte. Couldn't sleep and had sommepaperwork to take care of for the gun club so her I am.

[Gammon]

I guess I can have my cake and eat it too! I prefer Novak high visibility sights on myb 1911s. No machining as the rear sight fits the factory dovetail; you only need to stake in a new front sight. I don't like white dots and use either balck on black, or a red fiber optic front sight (my eyes aren't what they used to be). I install a higher than needed front sight and file it down to adjust elevation when sighting in. My preference in sighting in comes from many years of IPSC competition; I use a neck hold (base of the head of an IPSC target) to produce a centered hit on the head, three inches above point of aim at 25 and 50 yds. This allows me to use a six o'clock bullseye hold on longer shots, but shoot point of aim/point of impact at distances of 15yds or less. 20yds is the transition point, you hold low on the head or plate, but not quite at the bottom. This sighting system has served me well for many years.