Springer GI sight question. Rear: 10-8 vs YB retro. Front: Gold bead staked vs dove

[Myz]

Hi all,

First off, let me say thanks to the community at m1911.org. I've just joined recently, but have been browsing this forum for a while and have found it very informative and helpful.

I've finally tracked down a used Springfield GI 5" stainless (the GI, not Mil-spec) that I will be picking up soon. My first 1911 and my first gun! http://www.springfield-armory.com/armory.php?version=15 I've been shooting one at the range for a while, and I really like it, and I can't afford or plan to do much to change it. My vision is pretty good (read half of the bottom line on the chart the other day at the docs), but the low-profile black on black stock sights on the GI are hard to pick up quickly. I'd like to try IDPA sometime soon, so I'd like a sight picture that is quicker to pick up. So, I'm planning on a gold bead front with a retro rear. I’ve done a little research myself so I’ve included what I’ve found thus far.

As for the rear sight, I've narrowed it down to the Yost-Bonitz retro and the 10-8 (01-140) National Match retro. Here's links to their pics:

Yost-Bonitz:

http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct/?productNumber=520785&t=11082005

(Yes, I know they're discontinued at midway)

10-8 NM:

http://www.10-8performance.com/1911_Sights.html

The 10-8 website says their sight is “designed to fit into the dovetail of GI pattern 1911 pistols.” I’m assuming that either should fit on the Springer GI? I’m sure they’re posted somewhere, but I called Springfield to check, and their sight specs are:

Rear sight: .380” tenon, .240” high
Front sight: staked .080” medium tennon, .103” high

Both sights have a .140” wide notch, the 10-8 sight is .315” tall. Anybody know the height of the Yost-Bonitz? I think that John Harrison still sells them.

Also, it looks like the Yost-Bonitz is slanted, not vertical. I’d like to be able to retain the ability to rack the slide on a belt one-handed if need-be (I’m not saying I do this normally, but I’d like to be ABLE to do it if I only had one usable hand). Can the 10-8 and the Yost-Bonitz still be racked one-handed?

As for the front sight, I’d like to do a gold bead, and based on my math, it needs to be around .178” high to keep the same factory sight alignment.

(factory rear .240” - factory front .103” = .137”,
so the rear sight needs to be .137” higher.
10-8 rear .315” - .137” = .178”)

I’d like to get these sights installed spending the least amount of money possible (by a gunsmith), so would it be cheaper to get another stake-on sight than cutting the slide to fit a front sight dovetail? Also, would cutting for the dovetail lower the value of the gun, since it couldn’t be put back to stock?

Anybody know a good gold bead front sight that is about .178” high (staked or dovetailed) that would match up with these rear sights?

Thanks for your help! I’ll post some pics when I finally get my hands on my new firearm.

[Deadman]

welcome.
I'm just venturing a guess here...

I would think that another stake on sight would be cheaper.
machining takes time, and therefore money. depending on who does it you may also run into refinishing.
but the advantage is being able to change to another sight should your choices not work out.

I wouldn't worry about not being able to put the pistol back to stock condition.
though Springfield makes a very fine pistol it's a low cost, not entirely true to original replica. it will have no collector value in it's current state let alone modified with sights that you can actually use.

make the pistol yours and just shoot it and enjoy.

[samuse]

Well. I've had both of the rear sights you're debating paired with a gold bead front from Novak.

I settled on the Retro because the dovetail on my Colt had been filed a little bit and the 10-8 leaned back in the dovetail.

The Retro was a little bigger and fit snug, and I think it is a better looking sight anyway.

That being said, I really liked the sight picture with the 10-8 better. I have used the 10-8s on several guns and they are great.

The notch width on the 10-8 is .140", just right for a .125" front.

The notch width on the Retro is .135", just about the same as the 10-8.

The Retro and the 10-8 are within 1 0r 2 thousandths of each other in heigth.

The 10-8 will be the winner if you want to use it for one-handed slide manipulations.

The difference to me is that the notch on the Retro is too DEEP. When you look through the rear sight, you can see the top of slide and it is distracting. I think the retro may actually work better with a plain black front.(which is also a good option)

The U-notch on the 10-8s were designed for a round bead front (tritium, brass, gold, white, etc) and the Novak gold bead works well with it. It sets right in the rear notch when the tops of the sights are aligned.

As far as staked in vs dovetailed fronts go, a dovetail is more common these days, but a good, properly done staking will be more than adequate (John Harrison knows how). I recommend Novak for dovetailing and installing the gold front (they did mine). Either way will be sturdy as long as it was done properly.

Another good option that would be very effective and very cheap, would be a factory plain black rear from a new 70 series Colt (Brownells) and a front sight for a Springfield Mil-Spec (send the rear sight and your slide to S.A. for the install). The rear sight has a .135" notch that is about .100" deep and does everything you'll need it to for a lot less money and it looks more old-school than either of the aforementioned sights. And, you wouldn't have a set of sights that cost half of what the whole gun did...

I wish I would have gone with the factory 70 series rear and a staked in front. My gun is a pretty basic NRM series 80 (search for "the little Colt that could" on Glocktalk 1911 section) and I can outshoot the gun, so the expensive sights were really a waste of money. YMMV.