Adjustable Sights Versus Fixed Sights

[P94/GP100]

I recently contemplated getting a fixed-sight Security Six as a "tougher" compliment to my adjustable sight Security Six, but then I realized that I've never had any particular issues with the ruggedness and durability of any of my adjustable-sight revolvers.

What's everyone's take on this? In the back of my mind I'm thinking that while a fixed-sight might be incrimentally tougher/more impervious to damage, the reality is that unless you drop or wack an adjustable sight on a hard surface they're probably sufficently durable (and I'm thinking that one of the more popular police issue revolvers "back in the day" was the Smith & Wesson 686, which has one of the more exposed adjustable rear sight blades, not the semi-protected ones of the Ruger Security Six/GP100). I also have found that due to the size of the adjustable sight's rear blade notch and front sight that they're much easier/faster to acquire a a sight picture with (compared to that on a previous fixed-sight GP100).

Feedback appreciated!

Best, Jon

 

[AzRebel]

Hi Jon.

I've owned a lot of various handguns over the years, and I've only ever had one problem with an adjustable sight. I've owned/carried/shot a few different 686's, a GP-100, various Blackhawks, and so forth with no trouble.

Back in around 1997, I bought a Ruger 4 5/8 barreled SBH. I carried it quite a bit in the field, and it always shot good. One day I got it out to take it hunting with me, and noticed that the rear sight blade was missing.

I contacted Ruger, and they promptly sent me an entire new rear sight.

I eventually sold that SBH (which I've regretted since), but that single incidence did make me think a bit about such things.

I don't think I ever adjusted the sights on that revolver once it was "sighted in". I simply aimed different for different loads, and it worked well for me that way. And thinking back, that's what I've done with every ohter adjustable sighted handgun I've ever owned. Sorta like using a set of pins as a "reference" aiming device on a bow, I simply adjust my aim to compensate for distances and loads.

I use both fixed and ajustable sighted handguns the same way. For field use, my preference is for fixed sights. Once sighted in to hit to POA with a primary load, I can compansate for any other loads I might use. My ability for figuring numbers and working with visual mathmatics is better than average, and I think this helps in that regard.

While some may think this is strange, I find it much easier for my uses than changing the sights to match the load. If I change the sights, I then have to concern myself about which load it's sighted in for each time I take the firearm out hunting. By leaving the sights alone, I always know how it's sighted in, and can simply compensate according to the load I'm using.

Adjustable sights are oft-times easier to see and line up; fixed sights are more durable and are far less prone to movement or damage if bumped.

I think both make sense, depending on the needs and preferences of the shooter.

BTW-I do whatever is necessary to "sight in" a fixed sighted gun to hit POA with the primary load to be used in it. This eliminates most confusion for me.

Daryl

 

[DanChamberlain]

There are people who simply cannot "adjust" to non-adjustable sights. I understand that mentality and love my adjustable sights. At the same time, I own and regularly use guns with the groove on the topstrap. It's easy to regulate such a revolver, but I normally don't do it until I've found the load it likes.

There are people who will not take a file to a gun no matter where the sights shoot. I don't care if I can only use one load, but I do care if when I pull the trigger the bullet doesn't go where the sights are looking. So, once I have my load, I break out the file if I have to.

Dan

 

[Snake45]

On revolvers, I just prefer the more visible adjustable sights over the usually tiny groove of the fixed-sighters.

Dunno why no revolver maker has ever thought to just dovetail in a slightly higher drift-adjustable rear sight on revolvers, which would be the best of both worlds for certain applications. I think some of the older Single Sixes were made this way but I mean for carry DAs and suchlike. I think some of the SP101s had a simple windage-only adjustable rear sight, which is a step in the right direction.

 

[BlackEagle]

I think as far as ruggedness and durability are concerned, there is not much difference. The fixed sights offer fewer corners and edges to snag on clothes or brush, and adjustable sights give the ability to "easily" adjust for windage and elevation. You probably need both. Some days I like my fixed sights, some days I like the adjustable ones.

 

[maxpress]

as far a durability its never been a big concern.
where it affects me is range and speed. the farther out i get beyond 50yrds the more apreciate adjustable sights and thats what i use for long targets. however for SD and or concealment where speed is concerned be it for 2 legged or for legged critters i prefer fixed sights. i have gouged myself with highride holsters on the rear blade and they tend to hit me in the side from time to time. ive also had the rear blade catch on something a few times while drawing from the holster. these are rare instances but it has happened. anyway thats why i carry sp101s, speed six or a .44 mag vaquero for SD and an SBH for hunting.
i remember one time driving around in the mountains with an sbh in a cheap uncle mikes nylon holster when i got home i went to pull the gun out and it was stuck fast. i had to take the holster off and noticed it had frayed and some nylon had wrapped itself around the rear sight. that was a wake up.

 

[REP1954]

I have a 357 Anniversary whose sights were dialed in in the year of 2005. I have not had to change adjustment on them since. Not really sure why Ruger had to add the protectors on each side of the rear sight but I guess he felt the need. That being said I prefer the looks and feel of fix sighted revolvers. The grooved top strap and half moon front blade makes for a
clean snag free opperation. The sight picture given by most adjustable sights is most often cleaner and sharper looking resulting usally in better accuracy, which when hunting is what you owe to the game you are hunting.

 

[bisleyfan41]

I have absolutely no use at all for a fixed sight gun. I shoot many different loads through my guns, none seem to have identical POIs. I need the adjustabilty provided by adjustable sights. I have carried and hunted with them for years without any problems with breakage or losing alignment because of getting knocked around (and they occasionally do get knocked around and bumped.

As far as asthetics, I personally like the "squarer" looks of the frame of adjustable sighted like the Blackhawk as opposed to the rounded curves of the Vaqueros and such. Can't stand the looks of the front sights on those guns either.

 

[Jimbo357mag]

I think you make a good point. I wish my SP-101 had an adjustable sight like a GP-100.

...Jimbo

 

[Yosemite Sam]

Dunno why no revolver maker has ever thought to just dovetail in a slightly higher drift-adjustable rear sight on revolvers, which would be the best of both worlds for certain applications.

No problem. Freedom Arms offers this on their Field Grade guns.

While I agree with bisleyfan41 about the "looks" of the front sight on Vaqueros, from my perspective it's more about function. Those little rounded blades are awful indistinct when sighting. I sold my stainless Bisley Vaquero partly due to the front sight. It was well regulated for the loads I shot, I just couldn't see it that well.

-- Sam

 

[EDK]

I have VAQUEROS with the same barrel length as my BLACKHAWKS; the same set up in BISLEY mode also. My groups with the fixed sight guns runs 1 1/2 to 2X the adjustable sighted guns with ammo out of the same lot of reloads...all guns with a trigger job by ALPHA PRECISION.

Those little front sights leave a lot to be desired for good groups, but I like them for Cowboy Action Shooting. The first gun to be refinished will be getting the replacement front sight from POWER CUSTOM and we'll see how much that helps.

 

[WESHOOT2]

After a dozen years of 'hard use' I finally had a bit of trouble with my BoMar-base Caspian ghost-ring-bladed rear on my 'special' 1911. (I have an entire new sight assembly waiting to be installed.)
Only adjustable sight woe I've had.

I don't care how stuff looks on my guns; I care how stuff works.

 

[bisleyfan41]

:?: :?: No idea how my post got duplicated here :?: :?:
Sorry

 

[P94/GP100]

Thanks for the excellent feedback, folks. In one sense, I've got the best of both worlds, in that my stainless steel Security Six has the Millett Orange Bar front and Ruger plain black .140 wide-notch rear, and the revolver is usually carried in a Blade-Tech kydex holster which both provides excellent protection for the rear sight assembly overall, as well as expediting a fast draw.

Of course, far be it for common sense and an appreciation for what I already have to be preclusive from my obtaining the late production, heavy barrel, dished-recoil shield fixed-sight Service Six that I've got an eye on...ahh, the siren song of temptation...

Best, Jon