Am I the only one???

I find fiber optics absolutely awesome for fast combat type shooting or IDPA, but very distracting when I'm shooting for groups or at long range.

Anyone else have this issue?

Yeah, Pretty much the same.

I like FO front on my field guns with open sights - pistols and rifles. I combined the FO front sight on my Ruger MKIII Hunter with a ghost ring rear, and realized an improvement in accuracy at speed while shooting sagerats - over standard target sights. I can still produce better group with the standard target sight though. For field use though, I'll stick with FO - because I see a big advantage in low light situations, and especially when shooting small game with a dark background. The only thing better, IMO, is a compact dot sight - which I have progressed to on the MKIII, with the FO as backup.

I'm seeing the same thing with my 336 carbine. Faster alignment with FO under field conditions, but not quite as precise at the range as standard open sights.


My favorite setup though for small game with pistol is still the Buckmark with FO front and standard blade rear. I had the stock front blade modified to add the FO rod, because noting else was available to fit that gun at the time. It gives a cleaner sight picture IME than any of the other FO front sights I've tried, and I can still get good precision when I take the time.

I hate the damn things.

I hate them too. They might be fine for quick shots at close range but are too coarse and in the middle of the day, they wash out the target area. I pretty much hate all flashy sights, orange inserts, white dots, white stripes, white outlines, etc..,etc., no thanks.

Yeah for fine shooting the brightness of the fiber optic rod washes out the edges of the front sight and makes it hard to see if I have equal amounts of light on either side of the front sight.

I do most of my handgun shooting between 50-150 yards, so that precise sight picture is very important to me. But I'd consider the FO on a defensive carry gun, I think that would be worthwhile.

I tend to shoot better with them. I have the Dawson Precision models on 2 of my pistols. The fiber rod on them is tiny and doesn't over power the target. Just a tiny red dot that my eyes focus on quickly. Both pistols have the solid black adjustable rear sights which seems to work really well.

I have a set of Tru-Glo's on a LC9 Pro. They have the big fiber rod with tritium behind them. They aren't as precise as the Dawson's but are a huge upgrade from the factory sights.

Are any of them sturdy enough for a defensive pistol?

I guess that depends on what you do with your pistol. Most of them I have probably won't stand up to hammering on them, except for the one on my Buckmark. I don't have one on a defensive pistol yet, but I don't see any reason why they can't be as robust as any tritium sight. I know they aren't all made the same.

There are purpose built FO sights for defensive use. Look at the TruGlo's for Glocks that have FO and FO/Tritium. Never heard anything bad about them. Maybe they wouldn't hold up to military service, but for us mere mortals who don't use our guns as a hammer, they'll hold up just fine.

I run the Truglo's on my LC9 Pro. With the tritium inserts and fiber optics they are always ....on. IMO great sights for a defensive pistol.

Here is a picture of the Dawson sights I mentioned earlier. I shoot better with these than than I do with most sights. They illuminate the only thing I let my eye focus on before I squeeze the trigger. It's a very small area and doesn't over power my sight or the target.

I would consider them range gun sights though as they aren't rugged by any means.

Yeah, the TruGlos on the LC9 look plenty sturdy.

This

I've found I can shoot a little better when I can see my sight,so yes I like them.

I've installed the Tru-Glo TFO's on A Glock 43,22,and 19.
Mike

CONTEMPT.

That's what I have for fiber optic sights.

well , I really like them , but maybe alot of you fellas are not 60+ and dont have the problem of your blurry old eyes seeing nothing but dark shadows when you try to sight on something in bad light.....

Yup. It's easier to aim with three fuzzy bright dots than with a black blur. If you can persuade your attacker to wait while you put on your glasses, then I suppose regular sights will be fine. Laser grips combined with fiber/tritium is probably the ultimate setup.

I have to agree that F/O sights ain't the best for targets. I keep hoping that some bright feller will come up with a F/O sight featuring an illuminated center line like the white line on XO front sights, but so far it hasn't happened. The sights that combine a small dot inside a Patridge blade seem to be the best design available now.

I'm not a big fan, especially for a gun that gets carried for serious purposes. I've had a couple fiber optic front rods break or disappear while in use.

have it on my hunting handgun with a one ragged hole rear. works like a charm

Have used fiber optic sights on every one of my issued and personal pistols (except the ones that have red dots) for going on ten years and so has every one of my teammates. And adjustable Dawson's at that.

We're talking several million rounds when taken as a whole and I've seen 2 or 3 busted adjustable rears. No issues with fiber optic fronts.



As to accuracy- my job depends on my ability to shoot the 700pt Agg, FBI Bullseye Course, etc. We all shoot fiber optics or red dots.

I only have limited experience with F.O.'s, but, I like them because they show up much better for me in most situations. Dawson's are my favorites.


Dave.

My new 4 inch SP 101 in 327 came with an FO front. I liked it so well that I took the single seven down and had a set of Williams Fire Sights put on it.

I most commonly shoot at four inch steel and rocks and such. No formal competition. My eyes can definitely pick up the FO easier than a black post.

few years ago points at cabella's bought me a classic S&W 29.

Since it had a pinned in front sight, it was easy to replace with one I think off the 329, the one with a F.O.
I wanted something for quick sight alignment, not target shooting. Works just fine, but it does cover up area for bullseye shooting. Which is okay for me, as i wanted the gun for other purposes. But Idaho Shooter's comment works for me too.

Zero the pistol for POI to match the tip of the front sight post, not on the dot. For precision- use the top edge as normal. For speed use the dot.

Easy, peasy.

Have a love hate relationship w/ a 22/45 Hunter, having a set of those fiber optic front bead w/ v-notched rear sights. Dang those things are a pain in the rear, designed to force you to center the bead in the notch w/ point of impact dead smack in the middle of the bead. Not enough adjustment to use the top of the post. Maybe on a point blank stop the charge of something big firearm, but a bad match for something that is accurate enough to shoot little things at distance.

This thread has prompted me to give the pistol one more chance tomorrow, if I cannot find the love, those sights are going into the trash.

I like them for general & SD use......seem faster than most other sights for me.

For target, precision sights, there are better choices.

MM

I have one on my Springfield Xdm 9mm; I like it for fast, close work.