ghost ring or rear grove?

[Rawhide20]

For overall usefulness and accuracy, is a ghost ring sight or a standard rear grove going to be better for accuracy and acquisition? Assume the intended purpose is a Glock for SD, plinking and low light conditions.

[cysoto]

I asked this same question to a friend of mine a few weeks back and, this is what we concluded. Let me begin by saying that this particular friend is a POST Certified Firearms Instructor whose knowledge of firearms and related topics I have quite a deal of respect for.

According to him Ghost ring sights will allow you fast target-acquisition, but they have their disadvantage too. The main issue with them is that they can cover a larger portion of your intended target. In other words, they create a quasi-tunnel-vision effect. This may play a negative roll in case you had to defend your life or that of a loved one against an attacker. Think of it this way: it might take you an extra fraction of a second to look over your sight to identify your attacker and then again to locate his (or her) center of mass. This fraction of a second may not sound like much but it may make the difference between life or death. By the same token, that same tunnel-vision effect that we mention again prevents you from being fully aware of any other threats in your surroundings.

Now, in the case of plinking around, the same holds true. The ghost ring encloses your front sight in a way that you can’t be certain that your sight is zeroed in on your intended point-of-impact. This is mainly an issue with long range shots where your front sight covers most (if not all) of your target and it’s easier to miss hitting center-of-mass; which BTW is the same problem caused by front sights with a huge dot (like the 24/7 sights).

So we are back to square one… Now is up to each shooter to decide what is more important, 1)fast target acquisition or, 2)accurate target hits.

[The Lambinator]

Removed for privacy concerns