What replacement sights for Glock Gen 5?

[Mjolnir]

AmeriGlo GL-947 or AmeriGlo GL-847


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Warp]

In my opinion, Trijicon HD's is the holy grail of night sights, although expensive. I favor the U-notch and slightly taller sights.

That's where I am sitting.

I too am curious if Trijicon HDs would work on the Gen5. I like the Ameriglos but I have HDs on all my G19s and would like to keep the sight pictures the same. Do they require different height sights from previous Gens?

Old post I know, but I'm not happy with my 'old' Trij HD model on my Gen5 G26.

G26.5 with Trijicon HD GL101-Y

I have a request: since we don't know 100% if the Gen 5's require a different sight height.....


If you purchase sights meant for previous generations, would you for the benefit of other members test them out on your pistol and report back to us if they shot to POA on your Gen 5?

That would make this thread much more useful.

I personally think we will find out fairly quickly that most will be fine, but I could be wrong.

For me, it shot high. And not just with 147gr ammo, with all of it.

Here was a back to back I did to compare.

Old Faithful G19.4 with GL101-Y


G26.5 with GL101-Y

Would that be enough to notice a "significant" difference in POA if you installed Gen 4 height sights on a Gen 5, or are those few thousands/hundredths of an inch not even going to be noticed for the most part.

EDITED TO ADD:

Let me clarify. Obviously there would be difference, but for practical accuracy would it translate to a difference in "inches" of POA, or just "fractions of an inch" in POA?

For me in my comparison so far, it's a self-defense-relevant discrepancy. I haven't been shooting Glocks the last month or so to put more effort into determining if an ammo swap would cover it, etc, but the fact is that with multiple ammo types (including lighter weight than the 147 pictured above), the G26.5 with the same old Trij HD sights printed noticeably higher for me, same sight picture same everything, than several other Gen3/4 Glocks with the same sights shot the same way with the same ammo. Only the Gen5 threw them high.

Maybe I should start my own thread to ask this question but this seems as good a place as any since it’s already about Glock sights. Who here has actually seen with their own eyes a set of stock Glock sights break?I mean you saw it, you were there. It happened to you or a friend and you have first hand knowledge of it. Not something you read on a forum or heard about from some you tuber. I ask because I have recently acquired a gen 5 19 and a gen 5 26. I’ve already purchased new sights for them because that’s what everyone says you’re supposed to do, that and I had Amazon points to burn. But I can’t help wondering just how necessary it is to replace them. I’ve had both guns to the range with the stock plastic sights and I shot rather well with them, and I didn’t really mind the goal post and dot arrangement like I thought I would. Reading through this thread I see where some people are considering leaving the plastic sights on, and others consider that to be foolish. I just wonder where the whole “you have to replace them first thing” deal came from. Thanks.

I haven't seen it. I have also replaced the sites on all of my Glocks before even taking them to the range for the first time over at least the past decade.

If it is to be a defensive pistol it ought to have (tritium) night sights anyway IMO

[ST911]

Maybe I should start my own thread to ask this question but this seems as good a place as any since it’s already about Glock sights. Who here has actually seen with their own eyes a set of stock Glock sights break?I mean you saw it, you were there. It happened to you or a friend and you have first hand knowledge of it. Not something you read on a forum or heard about from some you tuber. I ask because I have recently acquired a gen 5 19 and a gen 5 26. I’ve already purchased new sights for them because that’s what everyone says you’re supposed to do, that and I had Amazon points to burn. But I can’t help wondering just how necessary it is to replace them. I’ve had both guns to the range with the stock plastic sights and I shot rather well with them, and I didn’t really mind the goal post and dot arrangement like I thought I would. Reading through this thread I see where some people are considering leaving the plastic sights on, and others consider that to be foolish. I just wonder where the whole “you have to replace them first thing” deal came from. Thanks.

They can last a long time and many have good luck with them. Most who do simply don't use them in enough volume or intensity. The plastic pinned on models could come off over time or when hit just right. In duty holsters, the edges would wear or round due to internal friction. Some duty and CCW holsters are worse than others. The sight picture is also a little wonky until the gen5 variant. In the earlier, shooters would often align the sights high so that the ball was round when in the bucket, rather than the bottom third cut off for proper placement in the rear notch. This is corrected in the gen5 version. Pin-on fronts were replaced with screw-on years ago. Still plastic though. They could be functional, but there are better options.

I have replaced dozens of front sights due to the above.

I routinely reinstall improperly installed screw-on aftermarket front sights. Many folks don't use a thread locker, or enough torque, or bother to straighten them.

[Chipper78]

Thanks for the replies. I’m going to go ahead and change them out since I have them. Hopefully I don’t run into any issues with them shooting high.

[RHINOWSO]

On my Glock 19s I have been using Ameriglo I-Dot Pros, however I tried a set of the Ameriglo Agent sights and really really like them. They have some specifically for the Gen 5 (mine are all Gen4s).

[SickMAK90]

My 19.5 came with a 6.5 marked rear sights while my 26.5 came with a 6.1 marked rear.

I’m about to order a set of sights for the 26 but I can’t decide which I should buy. The sights on the 26.5 appear to be the same height as the front and rear factory sights from my 19FS.

Should I get gen 4 or gen 5 sights?

[OxWhite]

I have seen ameriglows. They are nice

[L-2]

My 19.5 came with a 6.5 marked rear sights while my 26.5 came with a 6.1 marked rear.

I’m about to order a set of sights for the 26 but I can’t decide which I should buy. The sights on the 26.5 appear to be the same height as the front and rear factory sights from my 19FS.

Should I get gen 4 or gen 5 sights?

-Measure the sights on your G26Gen5 to ensure what you actually have installed right now. One person's Gen5 may have different height front or rear sights that someone else's.

-If you're OK with how it's already sighted-in, then, if you can, order the same heights for front & rear.

My G19Gen5 and G17Gen5 came with the standard .165" fronts (~4.1mm); and 6.1mm rears. Another guy got the .165" front with a 6.5mm rear.
I hit fine with the G19Gen5 with those sight heights, but hit better using the G17Gen5 using a 6.5mm rear.

I've also read a report somewhere where somebody got the newer 4.9mm front sight (~.192") on his new G26Gen5.
All this may be further confused if going with some of the newer Ameriglo night sight sets. I don't know how tall the Ameriglo rear sights are folks are buying and Ameriglo has some night sights with individual front sights of .180", .200", or .220".

[SickMAK90]

I’m going to have to take it for another range session before I decide. It did seem to be shooting low at 10 yards but seems about right at 25. I was also shooting a g19 that day so next time I’ll take the 26 only to verify where my zero is.

[titsonritz]

Do some one-handed clearance drills, you'll see how long stock Glock sights last pretty fast.