Stupid Night Sight Question (Be Easy)

[SouthSideSteve]

I bought a used P220 with nightsights and it shoots horrible. I dont like the DA/SA anyway. But if I get Ameriglos on my 26 what are the chances the sight alignment will be off? Does the rear sight fit in the slot just 1 way? Or can a smith mess it up and make the glock shoot off? Also Ameriglo smooth slopes v. Operators? the operators look like they dont have a white outline on the back and I dont like the idea, is it better in practice? The smooth slopes look better for day firing, and how conceable are they v. the operators?



Thanks.

[TurkeyTrack]

I asked in another thread, why not just knock the sights off and use it that way? In close range point shooting, no sights are needed! Now, having said that, if your punching paper, sights work. That begs the question, "Do you punch paper in low light/no light situations?". If not, why night sights.

[CombatVet]

Your best bet is to get new sights then have them boresighted.

[Brasso]

Perhaps that sig shoots bad, but I tend to think it's just you not being used to the gun. Things would have to be waaaaaay out of spec for it to shoot so bad as you would notice.

In answer to your question, yes the sights can be installed so that the point of aim is off, but the sights themselves are adjustable in the dovetail. I haven't seen a glock where the sight needed to be anywhere but dead center though.

[gary newport]

Originally posted by SouthSideSteve
I bought a used P220 with nightsights and it shoots horrible. I dont like the DA/SA anyway. But if I get Ameriglos on my 26 what are the chances the sight alignment will be off? Does the rear sight fit in the slot just 1 way? Or can a smith mess it up and make the glock shoot off? Also Ameriglo smooth slopes v. Operators? the operators look like they dont have a white outline on the back and I dont like the idea, is it better in practice? The smooth slopes look better for day firing, and how conceable are they v. the operators?



Thanks.

First, ignore the nonsense about NOT needing sights. Second, by "off", I assume you mean a difference between your point-of-aim (POA) and the bullets' point-of-impact (POI). Glock (whether factory or aftermarket) fixed rear sights are diftable for windage. It is possible that a gunsmith will align the rear sight just right for you. It is also possible that a bit of tweaking may be necessary--drifting the sight left or right--for your eyes. Fixed sights do not allow elevation adjustments, so if the elevation POI is off, you either apply "Tennessee elevation" or change the sights. Glock factory sights, along with many aftermarket sights for Glocks, come in different heights. Make sure you get the "small frame" or "plus zero" version for your G27, and chances are that the elevation will be close.

Whether or not rear sights have white dots is largely a matter of taste (I prefer 'em). Just about any fixed sight you put on a Glock will be as "concealable" as any other. Some Glock adjustable sights have very tall fronts or actually hang off the back of the slide!

[gary newport]

Originally posted by Brasso
In answer to your question, yes the sights can be installed so that the point of aim is off, but the sights themselves are adjustable in the dovetail. I haven't seen a glock where the sight needed to be anywhere but dead center though.

I have!

[TurkeyTrack]

Originally posted by gary newport
First, ignore the nonsense about NOT needing sights. Second, by "off", I assume you mean a difference between your point-of-aim (POA) and the bullets' point-of-impact (POI). Glock (whether factory or aftermarket) fixed rear sights are diftable for windage. It is possible that a gunsmith will align the rear sight just right for you. It is also possible that a bit of tweaking may be necessary--drifting the sight left or right--for your eyes. Fixed sights do not allow elevation adjustments, so if the elevation POI is off, you either apply "Tennessee elevation" or change the sights. Glock factory sights, along with many aftermarket sights for Glocks, come in different heights. Make sure you get the "small frame" or "plus zero" version for your G27, and chances are that the elevation will be close.

Whether or not rear sights have white dots is largely a matter of taste (I prefer 'em). Just about any fixed sight you put on a Glock will be as "concealable" as any other. Some Glock adjustable sights have very tall fronts or actually hang off the back of the slide!

Looks like a "Walter" wannbe! "No sights" is not nonsense in CQB shooting! If you doubt it, you just might want to do a little research, as opposed to pontificating an undefensible position. Look at some of the PD's that teach this method of shooting. Check out the C.A.R. method, try it and see what happens. Then report back your findings.

[waktasz]

Nothing wrong with being a Walter wannabe.

[CombatVet]

Originally posted by TurkeyTrack
Looks like a "Walter" wannbe! "No sights" is not nonsense in CQB shooting! If you doubt it, you just might want to do a little research, as opposed to pontificating an undefensible position. Look at some of the PD's that teach this method of shooting. Check out the C.A.R. method, try it and see what happens. Then report back your findings.


I would like to be a Juror in the trial of the guy that took his sights off of his gun. What CQB training do you have? Only an idiot would say sights are not essential. Yes you look only at the front SIGHT in CQB, not the barrel. If you are L.E. I hope I never have to work with you on a JTF. Idiot!

[TurkeyTrack]

Originally posted by CombatVet
I would like to be a Juror in the trial of the guy that took his sights off of his gun. What CQB training do you have? Only an idiot would say sights are not essential. Yes you look only at the front SIGHT in CQB, not the barrel. If you are L.E. I hope I never have to work with you on a JTF. Idiot!

My, My, are we getting sophmoric, by the name calling of those who dare offend your self imposed importance! But thank you for your input. If you have looked at the C.A.R system, you would know that you do not look at the front sight in CQB! You focus on the subject and are aware of the gun, not the sights, in your vision. I say again, before denouncing, what you know nothing about, try it, see what happens, then report back. Ask a bird shooter(Quail) if they focus on the front sight. If they do, then a point shooter will take the bird before they even "think" about shooting. That comes from 55+ years of experience. By the way, thank you for your service.

[SouthSideSteve]

Thanks for the helpful reply. The 26 is a CCW weapon, so thought nnight sights would be a smart investment.

[TurkeyTrack]

Originally posted by SouthSideSteve
Thanks for the helpful reply. The 26 is a CCW weapon, so thought nnight sights would be a smart investment.

All this rhetoric aside, they would be! I have them on mine, it's just a point, that in a real event, you probably won't see them. While I strongly advise using them, they are not the end all. Just an aide for you. More important, is your being able to put you hits, on target and that does not take sights at CQB ranges. Try it, see how it works for you. It does take some practice but if you stay at it, I think you will see good results. Keep an open mind! Hope the best for you!

[gary newport]

Originally posted by TurkeyTrack
Looks like a "Walter" wannbe! "No sights" is not nonsense in CQB shooting! If you doubt it, you just might want to do a little research, as opposed to pontificating an undefensible position. Look at some of the PD's that teach this method of shooting. Check out the C.A.R. method, try it and see what happens. Then report back your findings.

Do you have a written contract stipulating that any self-defense situation to which you will be exposed will ONLY happen at very short range? I don't.

I would expect any decent training to involve shooting at various ranges--from contact distance (shooting from retention) to 25 yards or so. At distances greater than contact, but very close, some respected gurus still say to focus on the front sight. Others say index on the slide. And then there are the point shooters. I HAVE done "a little research" (though I'm not familiar with this C.A.R. dojo) and have never been impressed by true point shooting. as opposed to a front sight/slide index approach to VERY close range, in-a-big-hurry shooting.

Using sights at fairly close range "an undefensible position"? Oh, really? Now, who's being pontifical? Do you suggest that all/most/a majority of the major trainers/training schools/law enforcement agencies are C.A.R. followers?


At distances greater than a very few yards, sights are necessary for most mortals. And if you don't (think you) need 'em at VERY close range, you don't have to use 'em.

[TurkeyTrack]

Originally posted by gary newport
[
At distances greater than a very few yards, sights are necessary for most mortals. And if you don't (think you) need 'em at VERY close range, you don't have to use 'em. [/B]

All that previous Bull S**it aside, that is pretty much what I was saying! Glad to see that you agree on that. Please quote your sources, where the confrontations occurred, and were legal self defenses, at distances more, than a very few yards.