The Official GLOCK Picture Thread

[Agile53]

Hacks. They're half the price and I actually prefer the sight picture. At 10' or so they perform about the same, but at 25yds I find I'm much more accurate with the Hacks. The only advantages of the HD is the rear tritium, but I think the front only gets the job done. The HD are also slightly taller and easier to manipulate one-handed using the rear sight.

Really you can't go wrong either way, but I'll never spend $120 on the HDs again after trying the Hacks.

Tell 'em SR & see my above post as Ken himself led me to them some 3yrs. ago when they were still in beta.

[CoryCop25]

The only advantages of the HD is the rear tritium, but I think the front only gets the job done.

If you call Ameriglo and speak with Rick or Sharon, you can get a set of Hack fronts and the iDot rear for a lot less than the HDs.

[Wake27]

I'm actually looking at getting the Hack front with Pro Op rears.

[CoryCop25]

I'm actually looking at getting the Hack front with Pro Op rears.

That is a great set up too. However, I find the iDot much faster.

[samuse]

This one has a regular Ameriglo .140"W tritium front and a regular black .165"W notch rear. Great setup and fairly cheap.

[Steve S.]

@ Wake. I wouldn't discount the HDs so easily. Nothing against the Hacks, I just find more difference than just "tritium in the back".

*I'll preface this by saying pistol sights are very specific to the user. Many factors such as desired application and eye sight come in to play.*

The tritium in the back is what ups the cost, but not the only thing that separates them. The biggest advantage to the HDs in my opinion is the photolumnescient paint. I thought it was a gimmick until I got some time behind them in different lighting conditions. If the front sight can catch even a sliver of sun or artificial light, then the front sight "glows" (no easier way to describe it). In full sunlight, this really helps. I've found a weapon light is often enough in closed spaces to spark up the photo-lum paint around / ontop of the tritium. Tritium tends to dull out when using something like an X300 indoors, and in the dark regular paint doesn't do much but add color.

The wide U notch rear is really fast. I really like it for speed, and I feel like the U gives more chance at accuracy than a square rear (when dealing with really wide rears like the Hack / HDs). Or maybe faster accuracy is a better way to put it, since the U acts as another reference point in addition to light on each side of the front sight.

The big ledge is good and bad. It took me a few dryfires to get use to it after using Hacks / Operators primarily for so long. It just sits a bit higher. I find I have to "shoot the dot" if I don't want low hits at anything under 10-15 yards. So it's either use a slight hold or have accuracy suffer.

I thought the ledge would be incredibly uncomfortable for CCW. It really isn't that bad. I love Ameriglo as a company, and Rick is a great guy (one of the best in the business), but I have to say that Trijicon finishes their sights better in my experience. Less sharp edges.

Do these things add up to almost double the price of the Hacks? Maybe, maybe not. I find at least one dot in the rear to be desirable the more I shoot at night - especially if I don't have a weapon light. BUT I do think a highly visible front sight and non distracting rear sight during daytime use to be much more important.

They are just different beasts. The Trijicon HDs cost more than the Hacks because you get "more" in the sights than the Hacks. For reference, I have the Operators, iDots, Hacks, and HDs on my guns. I find I prefer the Operators and HDs for my main CCW pistols. The Hacks are best for low profile "summer guns" (i.e. a G26), and the iDots can be great once gotten use to. I struggle with a dot-over-dot at night, but that is 100% a training issue on my part as many use and favor them. I think I was one of the first to post a detailed review of the iDots on here a year or two ago, since Rick was kind enough to get me out a set.

Some other important things to note are I am far from a pistolero expert, have poor eye sight without contacts (this affects my gear choices since I train with and without contacts), I don't have much experience outside of Ameriglo and Trijicon sights, and I have folks I consider friends from both companies. So I am biased to both parties.

Another note is I haven't tried the Ameriglo CAP, but I've heard great things about it and it would be much more inline with the HDs when comparing features.

Photo thread (my daily G19 with HDs).




As you can see in this (crappy) picture, the lighting was poor enough to light up the tritium, but the slight amount of light allowed the photo luminescent paint to light up. I also find I prefer the Yellow over the Orange HDs.

Sorry for the long post in the photo thread, but thought I'd share my experiences since it was being discussed.

[Cosmo M3]

[Nephrology]

The tritium in the back is what ups the cost, but not the only thing that separates them. The biggest advantage to the HDs in my opinion is the photolumnescient paint. I thought it was a gimmick until I got some time behind them in different lighting conditions.

Ameriglo uses Luminova on their Hackathorn front sight posts, which is also a photoluminescent paint and does an equally impressive job at catching light and amplifying its intensity.

[narco23]

Here is a picture of my MP .40 and G27. Posting in the Glock thread because it is currently the one I carry everyday. Also have a G23 that is not pictured.

[Split66]

Hey 19.....she dont remember....the queen of soul!