View Full Version : XS Big Dot Sights?
Any comments on experiences with these sights for CQB applications? I understand about their two main differences from standard sights:
- non-6 oclock sight picture
- oversized front sight
I just put some on a G27, and I like them. The rear sight takes some getting used to, but for me the big front is so easy to pick up...."cover and press" inside 20m is automatic. Longer shots you use the top edge of the front...it works. They are combat sights and inside 20m they are nice...I bet they really shine when acquiring a moving target. I know these sight have good and bad reviews. They are not for everyone, but they are for me and work very well on my G27.
NCPatrolAR
03-24-08, 23:24
This should get interesting. :D
Personally, I dont like them. Tried them for several months and just never warmed up to them. For me, a Straight 8 formatted sight is the way to go.
Jay Cunningham
03-25-08, 00:43
Any comments on experiences with these sights for CQB applications? I understand about their two main differences from standard sights:
- non-6 oclock sight picture
- oversized front sight
Not that you did anything wrong, but Big Dot threads tend to be controversial because a rather controversial instructor endorses them.
They seem to work well for some...
^ I've run across those threads. One of the things I am interested in hearing about is the ease or difficulty shooters had in transitioning to big dots, and if they have, did they transition 100% or do they continue to use standard sights as well?
I gave the XS sights an honest try six or seven years ago. I put them on a Beretta 92G Vertec for a couple of months. During that time I shot thousands of rounds in training and also shot a major IDPA match (AZ State Championship). In addition, I've seen other shooters, particularly new and beginner-level shooters, try them.
Basically, my opinion of them is that they're more gimmick than improvement. Can you make them work? Yes. It's certainly possible to shoot accurately with them, if you practice and understand how they work. But that shouldn't be the question we're asking. The question is whether they will work better in some measurable way. The answer to that, in my experience, is no.
The XS sights are supposed to be "faster" but for novices I don't find this to be true because most novices aren't on the front sight when shooting fast regardless of the sight.
The XS sights are supposed to be "faster" but for experienced shooters I don't find this to be true be experienced shooters know how to track their front sights.
The XS sights are supposed to be "just as accurate" and in rough terms that's probably true. However, because you get a much "rougher" sight alignment with the XS sights, it's harder to judge if your front sight is moving out of place during the trigger press. Therefore, it takes more time & effort to get the same accuracy.
This "rough sight alignment" issue applies to closer and faster shooting, too. Calling your sights becomes harder, meaning you've got less visual feedback telling you "ooops you yanked the trigger" or "you broke that shot too early" or whatever.
To me, XS sights are nothing more than a way for shooters to have something "different" on their pistols for the sake of having something different.
One exception, though, is shooters with poor vision. If the Small Dot or even Big Dot is the only front sight you can see, it's better than having no front sight at all.
Alpha Sierra
03-28-08, 17:49
They work much better for me than conventional sights.
My new M&P will be wearing them soon. I go by my own experience and not blindly follow any controversial instructor that may be hyping them.
Thanks everyone, especially Todd for his detailed explanation.There are vision issues involved.
bluedog -- A sight you can see beats a sight you can't, every time! :cool:
Alpha Sierra
03-30-08, 12:01
I found this bit attributed to the late Colonel Jeff Cooper in a similar discussion on 10-8:
From Jeff Cooper, December 1997
"After considerable testing and discussion, we have concluded that the proper answer for a pistolero whose eyes have begun to go is not a pistol ghost-ring, but rather a pistol express sight. The express sight, as you know, was pretty standard on the British heavy rifles of the Great Days. It consisted of a shallow "V" rear sight, mounted well forward on the barrels, in combination with an ample round bead on the front. This sight was intended for very quick use on very dangerous animals at very close range, and it served its purpose well. It was by no means a target sight, but it was a superior defensive sight.
Consider then that a pistol is intended for very quick use at very close range against very dangerous targets. The similarity is inescapable. I am not content with the pistol ghost-ring, for a number of reasons, but the pistol express sight just may be the only important development in pistol sightings in modern times."
I've had great success with Big Dots.
It took me maybe 200 rounds to really get them figured out.
I can shoot groups just as tight with them at close range....and I can hit the target just as well at long range. I've shot them side by side with a 3 dot night sight on the same gun (G19)...and I don't find it 1 bit easier to use the 3 dots, for any purpose.
A few of us were shooting 12x12 steel plates the other week at 50 yards. 1 of us had Trijicons on a G17, and I had Big Dots on my 19. We each tried each others pistols. I was hitting just about the same with both guns, but found the Bid Dots "easier" to use.
I haven't been able to track the front sight and see it lift and return through recoil, yet. What I find is that it's much easier for me to use Big Dots while moving, than it is 3 dot "notch and post" sights.
I'll really know what I think of them in fall, after I get to train with LAV.
I think I can see how they're not the choice for "experts" who can see the sight travel through its recoil cycle, and have 10k+ rounds of muscle memory helping them find their front sight....but for use on a defensive pistol, especially for folks who don't train hard and often with their gun...I think they're worlds better than a notch and post.
I've had great success with Big Dots.
It took me maybe 200 rounds to really get them figured out.
I can shoot groups just as tight with them at close range....and I can hit the target just as well at long range. I've shot them side by side with a 3 dot night sight on the same gun (G19)...and I don't find it 1 bit easier to use the 3 dots, for any purpose.
A few of us were shooting 12x12 steel plates the other week at 50 yards. 1 of us had Trijicons on a G17, and I had Big Dots on my 19. We each tried each others pistols. I was hitting just about the same with both guns, but found the Bid Dots "easier" to use.
I haven't been able to track the front sight and see it lift and return through recoil, yet. What I find is that it's much easier for me to use Big Dots while moving, than it is 3 dot "notch and post" sights.
I'll really know what I think of them in fall, after I get to train with LAV.
I think I can see how they're not the choice for "experts" who can see the sight travel through its recoil cycle, and have 10k+ rounds of muscle memory helping them find their front sight....but for use on a defensive pistol, especially for folks who don't train hard and often with their gun...I think they're worlds better than a notch and post.
Good feedback and analysis. Thanks.
Gutshot John
04-01-08, 07:25
I think I can see how they're not the choice for "experts" who can see the sight travel through its recoil cycle, and have 10k+ rounds of muscle memory helping them find their front sight....but for use on a defensive pistol, especially for folks who don't train hard and often with their gun...I think they're worlds better than a notch and post.
So what you're saying is that beginners or those with old/bad eyes find them easier, but that those with more experience don't like them/find them overrated. I think that's all that's been said. If your eyes can't outperform the sights, than you're fine. As you get better you will notice their limitations.
10k rounds is not a lot of shooting if you consider yourself a devotee but if it takes you that long (short of physical limitations) to master your sights, than you've got bigger problems.
As for what's training hard/often...due to my schedule I don't get to go to the range near as much as I would like and it's certainly adversely impacting my shooting, but while range time is important, you don't need it to practice.
If you can't go to the range, I'd recommend SAFE dry-fire in your home/backyard. Find the smallest aim point you have on a wall (preferably close to a mirror where you can watch your technique) and do a 50-100 trigger pulls a day. Check to see how your sights line-up/move as you pull the trigger. You'll be able to catch yourself slapping the trigger. It develops all the muscle memory you want...and its free.
You'd be amazed at how well dry-fire works. If I do it religiously, I find that when I do shoot my skills haven't degraded. If I haven't done it, then I have problems.
Erick Gelhaus
04-01-08, 09:34
Find the smallest aim point you have on a wall (preferably close to a mirror where you can watch your technique) and do a 50-100 trigger pulls a day.
John-
I understand why you'd suggest the use of the mirror ... however ... the problem with even having a mirror in play is the tendency to keep looking at how you look, rather than keeping the focus on the trigger manipulation and sight alignment / picture.
So what you're saying is that beginners or those with old/bad eyes find them easier, but that those with more experience don't like them/find them overrated. I think that's all that's been said. If your eyes can't outperform the sights, than you're fine. As you get better you will notice their limitations.
10k rounds is not a lot of shooting if you consider yourself a devotee but if it takes you that long (short of physical limitations) to master your sights, than you've got bigger problems.
What I'm saying is that if you've got a very consistent draw and extension, that you can probably look at a target, close your eyes and draw, and hit it.....just from muscle memory. When you've got your presentation that mastered, you know where your sights are going to be, and having the big "LOOK HERE, STUPID!" front sight, isn't gonna do much for you.
As for what's training hard/often...due to my schedule I don't get to go to the range near as much as I would like and it's certainly adversely impacting my shooting, but while range time is important, you don't need it to practice.
If you can't go to the range, I'd recommend SAFE dry-fire in your home/backyard. Find the smallest aim point you have on a wall (preferably close to a mirror where you can watch your technique) and do a 50-100 trigger pulls a day. Check to see how your sights line-up/move as you pull the trigger. You'll be able to catch yourself slapping the trigger. It develops all the muscle memory you want...and its free.
You'd be amazed at how well dry-fire works. If I do it religiously, I find that when I do shoot my skills haven't degraded. If I haven't done it, then I have problems.
Most people who carry a gun don't do this, IMO.
Yes, dry fire helps...but only so much. I dry fire practice a good bit, myself. I also shoot almost every day. I still haven't been able to keep my eyes on the front sight as the slide cycles...after the shot breaks, I see it once it stops moving.
Were my eyes able to track it through recoil, maybe I'd be able to use a jet black notch and post sight....ala Sevigny....with a greater degree of speed and precision than Big Dots.
I think they're a great sight that the majority of people could benefit from using...the experts are gonna change their sights anyway...so why not start offering these sights as a stock option on defensive pistols?
Gutshot John
04-01-08, 12:09
What I'm saying is that if you've got a very consistent draw and extension, that you can probably look at a target, close your eyes and draw, and hit it.....just from muscle memory. When you've got your presentation that mastered, you know where your sights are going to be, and having the big "LOOK HERE, STUPID!" front sight, isn't gonna do much for you.
Most people who carry a gun don't do this, IMO.
Yes, dry fire helps...but only so much. I dry fire practice a good bit, myself. I also shoot almost every day. I still haven't been able to keep my eyes on the front sight as the slide cycles...after the shot breaks, I see it once it stops moving.
Were my eyes able to track it through recoil, maybe I'd be able to use a jet black notch and post sight....ala Sevigny....with a greater degree of speed and precision than Big Dots.
I think they're a great sight that the majority of people could benefit from using...the experts are gonna change their sights anyway...so why not start offering these sights as a stock option on defensive pistols?
Every serious shooter I know dry-fires religiously. It's awfully good for breaking bad habits and deconditioning flinching before the bang. It's especially vital if you can't get to the range.
I don't know what to tell you. Other than you're an exception to the rule.
Every serious shooter I know dry-fires religiously. It's awfully good for breaking bad habits and deconditioning flinching before the bang. It's especially vital if you can't get to the range.
I don't know what to tell you. Other than you're an exception to the rule.
I agree with you about dry firing helping to break some bad habits. What I'm referring to is the speed at which shooters are able to find their front sight on the target.
This is independent of how good of a trigger pull they have. I'm talking about their ability to find and keep their front sight on target on the first shot till the last...moving shooter, moving target, rapid fire strings, etc.
If your grip/ stance/ presentation is so hard wired into your brain that you always know exactly where your front sight is, and is going to be...then Big Dot's probably aren't going to knock your socks off. If you're at this point, you could probably "point shoot"/"metal and meat index" your way though an IDPA course, and still do well.
But for target to target transitions, moving targets, moving shooter...I've handed my gun (with Big Dots) to some pretty good shooters, who don't have any problems with accuracy...and they've been pretty impressed.
The "Masters" and "Grand Masters" probably have enough muscle memory built up that they could shoot without sights, and still get 90% A-Zone hits...so it makes sense for them to use something which just gives them the ability to line up the precision shots.
But I think for people who find themselves trying to find their front sight (be it from not managing recoil well, poor eyesight, a lack of practice, heavy movement, etc) that these sights have a lot to offer.
As always, YMMV.
CarlosDJackal
04-01-08, 14:03
My 2 pennies: I can see this sight's usefulness for those who may have vision issues. But when I tried them on my Glock 30, I had a heck of a time making hits on an FBI "Q" target at 25-yards (as required by our 50-round qualification course). I found that the front dot covered up the widest part of the "Q".
Plus, the front tritium on mine died at around the 20-round mark so I sent it back (to their credit, I did not get any kind of fuss from the makers about this). Someone pointed out that I could make those 25-yard shots by using the sights differently. But I feel that it is ridiculous for me to change how I line up my sights at distance because of the sight's short-comings.
I currently use TFOs on my duty (Glock 35), off-duty (Glock23), and BUG (Glock 26) guns and so far I like them. YMMV.
What I'm saying is that if you've got a very consistent draw and extension, that you can probably look at a target, close your eyes and draw, and hit it.....just from muscle memory. When you've got your presentation that mastered, you know where your sights are going to be, and having the big "LOOK HERE, STUPID!" front sight, isn't gonna do much for you.
... assuming you aren't moving ...
... and your target isn't moving ...
... and the acceptable hit "zone" is large enough ...
... and you're not forced into an awkward position/stance by cover or circumstance ...
... etc. ad infinitum
I'm not suggesting that most people look at their front sight under stress. But if one isn't looking at the front sight, who cares which front sight is there? It's the situations where a front sight is going to matter (more challenging low-percentage shots) that I can't afford to have a huge lollipop on my front sight.
Most people who carry a gun don't do this, IMO.
Yes, dry fire helps...but only so much. I dry fire practice a good bit, myself. I also shoot almost every day. I still haven't been able to keep my eyes on the front sight as the slide cycles...after the shot breaks, I see it once it stops moving.
You can't learn sight tracking through dry-fire.
The fact that you shoot every day doesn't mean you're improving or learning the skills you want. You don't say how long you've been working on it, but if you're shooting every day and have been for the past six months and you still aren't tracking your sights, something is more fundamentally wrong in your technique.
I think they're a great sight that the majority of people could benefit from using...the experts are gonna change their sights anyway...so why not start offering these sights as a stock option on defensive pistols?
Because the experience of most serious trainers is that the sights don't actually help students of any level. The only people who benefit from them are those whose vision has deteriorated to the point where a normal front sight isn't discernible.
Alpha Sierra
04-01-08, 17:30
Because the experience of most serious trainers is that the sights don't actually help students of any level. The only people who benefit from them are those whose vision has deteriorated to the point where a normal front sight isn't discernible.
Some of us are smart enough and observant enough to be able to discern what helps us in our shooting without need for experienced trainers to constantly hold our hand. Some of us have even found out that Big Dots help us even if we can see traditional sights well enough. Imagine that.
Your statement is mildly condescending and not at all correct.
Your statement is mildly condescending and not at all correct.
You might find it condescending but my statement (that "the experience of most serious trainers is that the sights don't actually help students of any level") is demonstrably correct ... as any search of this site and the comments made by experienced instructors will attest.
Soulrack223
04-01-08, 17:59
I have them on a Glock 27 and really like them. If I were to buy a new set of tritium sights they'd be XS 24/7 big dots. In my experience they are faster than the traditional three-dots-in-a-row sight picture and on par with a bar dot or straight 8 sight picture. I only have thousands of rounds down range though and no impressive curriculum vitae, so take my opinions as just that, my opinions. I shoot much better when I am concentrating on the front sight and aligning the front and rear sights vertically and not horizontally. YMMV
Alpha Sierra
04-01-08, 18:37
You might find it condescending but my statement (that "the experience of most serious trainers is that the sights don't actually help students of any level") is demonstrably correct ... as any search of this site and the comments made by experienced instructors will attest.
My experience contradicts theirs.
If they help me, then the absolute statement you have made is false. And I am neither of such poor sight that I cannot discern a post sight nor a novice shooter.
My experience contradicts theirs. If they help me, then the absolute statement you have made is false. And I am neither of such poor sight that I cannot discern a post sight nor a novice shooter.
Okie dokie. :cool:
Erick Gelhaus
04-01-08, 19:13
Hopefully, disagreements can be had with things turning into a urination contest.
Two reasonably serious trainers that I know have a modified Express sight set-up on their pistols - Louis Awerbuck and Bill Jeans. By modified, I am referring to a stock front, Big Dot or small Dot, with a ball cut (tunneled out) rear sight. There are others that use either the complete express sight or a modified version of them.
Not that my opinion matters a bit, but my current and former duty pistols (call it 4+ years worth of carry total) sport a modified express sight.
Just saying ...
Erick -- Agreed. Sorry if I came across otherwise.
Two points come to mind reading your post.
First, there is a substantial difference between using one of the XS-brand front sights in conjunction with a completely different rear sight design, and using the XS Express Sights. The issue with the XS Express set-up has always been much more about the rear sight than the front. If anything, I would think the choice of Lou (who I've met) and Mr. Jeans (who I've not) would bear that out.
Second, I would guess at at least in Lou's case, the decision is based in part on eyesight. I haven't seen him since I took his H.I.T.T. class in WV in '04, and I do not know whether he was using the sights at that time but I do know he never mentioned or advocated them during the 3-day class. As I've said previously in this thread and others, I can understand how the XS sights would be a benefit for people whose eyesight isn't what it once was.
There are a number of valid ways to make one's front sight more visible or noticeable, and certainly using one of the XS-brand fronts would accomplish this. I've just always used the white outline around my front tritium capsule (instead of the top edge of the front sight), but I've seen people use fingernail polish, paint, or tape on the front sight to make it "pop out" more and I'm sure the XS Small Dot would accomplish much the same.
(I was going to post a link to a SIGforum post with a great discussion about making one's front sight more visible, but I'm at a Panera Bread and while m4carbine.net is allowed, SIGforum is a "Banned -- Weapons" site according to their content filter ... God Bless America)
I'd certainly be interested in exactly how set up your sights and why. If you feel it's too much thread drift, feel free to PM me.
http://lightfighter.net/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/1931084651/m/5681022663/p/1
I've recently equiped my G19 with a set of Big Dots. Up until then I used Merpo NS on my all handguns. After a few range trips I've grown to like the Big Dots. I do believe that they take some getting used to. I'm getting to the point where my group accuracy at extended range is improving. I feel that this is attributed to my learning how the sights work. My accuracy has remained consistent with my pistols currently equiped with Mepros so I don't believe the Big Dots have hurt my ability to shoot with my Mepros. That having been said, I've been qualifying with higher scores with my Sig 229/Mepros than my G19/Big Dots. After all of the reviews and opinions that I've heard and read about Big Dots I've come to the conclusion that they are love/hate. It's one of those things I guess you have to try to decide where you stand. If anybody is ever in my neck of the woods and would like to try them out before they buy let me know.
http://lightfighter.net/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/1931084651/m/5681022663/p/1
That was ... interesting.
David Thomas
04-01-08, 22:22
I have a set of XS 24/7 big dot sights on a Glock 17 and Glock 19. Shooting at night with a x200 or x300, the XS sights are much faster than any other sights I have used.
During the daylight hours, I am not sure if they offer enough of a speed advantage on targets inside of 25 yards to make up for the lack of speed at distances longer than 25 yards to consider them an real advantage for me.
Heinie straight eights will continue to be my preferred sight for 1911's. My 17 and 19 will continue to wear big dots. My other glocks probably will not.
I agree that a new set of sights will not make up for a lack of skill. I also think that two different shooters at the same skill level can disagree as to which set of sights is the best, and both shooters could/would be right. Sights are as personal as the pair of eyes looking at them.
... assuming you aren't moving ...
... and your target isn't moving ...
... and the acceptable hit "zone" is large enough ...
... and you're not forced into an awkward position/stance by cover or circumstance ...
... etc. ad infinitum
I'm not suggesting that most people look at their front sight under stress. But if one isn't looking at the front sight, who cares which front sight is there? It's the situations where a front sight is going to matter (more challenging low-percentage shots) that I can't afford to have a huge lollipop on my front sight.
You can't learn sight tracking through dry-fire.
The fact that you shoot every day doesn't mean you're improving or learning the skills you want. You don't say how long you've been working on it, but if you're shooting every day and have been for the past six months and you still aren't tracking your sights, something is more fundamentally wrong in your technique.
Because the experience of most serious trainers is that the sights don't actually help students of any level. The only people who benefit from them are those whose vision has deteriorated to the point where a normal front sight isn't discernible.
Todd, I don't think you really read my post for meaning..... that or it really sounds a lot better in MY head.
I said dry fire only takes you so far....my point was that you couldn't learn sight tracking with it. To think that you could is just foolish.
My speaking on muscle memory and shooting with your eyes closed was to explain why (perhaps) non of the IPSC Grand Masters use them...they know where there front sight is going to be when the bring up the gun, and as they shoot it. They can get away with a front sight that is harder for the eye to find.
Re: my shooting.
I've actually made leaps and bounds in my shooting. I didn't know you had to focus on the front sight (and not mash the trigger) 16 months ago... If I could keep them all on an 8x10 piece of paper at 7 yards I was happy.....and now I could qualify Master class in IDPA with a little practice, I'm already cleaning up in Expert class in the matches I've attended. I think my practice has been fairly productive.
When I say I shoot almost every day, it's 5 rounds here or 5 rounds there. I shoot a couple customer guns every day, and a group or two through my own...slow fire, striving for the best group possible. I usually get a good 400 rounds in a month on top of that, just shooting my own drills and groups. My eyes just don't see the front sight cycling through it's recoil arc. My eyes aren't perfect to begin with..and it just doesn't happen. I'm trying to watch for it...but I typically just see the front sight once it has stopped moving.
Today I shot a 9mm sized hole at 10 yards with 3 rounds out of a S&W 952 (Bomar sights)...same f*ckin hole....I can't be doing that much wrong.
My huge lollipop front sight has enabled me to hit a 12x12 plate at 50 yards with about 75% success...and I've been shooting for less than 2 years. I shoot about 5" groups with a well-used stock G19 at 25 yards....and you can attribute half of that to the mechanical accuracy of the gun. I don't shoot any better groups with a target sight, either. Before I started shooting w/ Big Dots....my "groups" were more like 16" at 25 yards.
RE: using your sights differently at distance....
It's not that hard, just hold the gun .1" lower. Your not changing the sight alignment, your just want to see what you're trying to hit on the top edge of the dot....the front to rear alignment is the same.
RE: trainers on Big Dots.
Can you provide some links? This is news to me, and I'd be interested in reading their feedback.
RE: Big Dots not helping shooters at any level...
I've watched shooters shoot better groups with 2 mags through my gun/ sights. I've personally noticed a substantial improvement. I therefor disagree with them not helping shooters at any level.
Like I said, I've shot them side by side with 3 dots, and seen the difference...
I'm not saying everyone would benefit from them...but they're far from being a scam.
My speaking on muscle memory and shooting with your eyes closed was to explain why (perhaps) non of the IPSC Grand Masters use them...they know where there front sight is going to be when the bring up the gun, and as they shoot it. They can get away with a front sight that is harder for the eye to find.
I don't think it's just IPSC GMs who tend to shy away from them, though. I'm certainly not a GM. I've never seen any serious competitor advocate them or use them. But your point is a very good one (and something a lot of people tend to forget), just because something is better for a world champion doesn't make it better for the average Joe.
My eyes just don't see the front sight cycling through it's recoil arc. My eyes aren't perfect to begin with..and it just doesn't happen. I'm trying to watch for it...but I typically just see the front sight once it has stopped moving.
It takes dedicated practice. Not just dedicated shooting practice, but dedicated sight-tracking practice. There are a couple of drills on my site that are directly related to sight tracking, I'll send you a PM with the links in case you're interested.
Today I shot a 9mm sized hole at 10 yards with 3 rounds out of a S&W 952 (Bomar sights)...same f*ckin hole....I can't be doing that much wrong.
That's outstanding practical accuracy. Speed & accuracy aren't the same thing, though. I'm guessing that 952 didn't have XS sights on it, either. ;)
My huge lollipop front sight has enabled me to hit a 12x12 plate at 50 yards with about 75% success...and I've been shooting for less than 2 years. I shoot about 5" groups with a well-used stock G19 at 25 yards....and you can attribute half of that to the mechanical accuracy of the gun. I don't shoot any better groups with a target sight, either. Before I started shooting w/ Big Dots....my "groups" were more like 16" at 25 yards.
I think I've posted a pic here in another thread of a sub-2" group I shot with XS Express sights years ago on a Beretta 92G Vertec. I've never claimed the XS sights are inaccurate. But accuracy without a time measurement is not particularly important for anything other than bullseye shooting. In my experience, the XS sights are slower when trying to get that level of accuracy.
RE: using your sights differently at distance....
It's not that hard, just hold the gun .1" lower. Your not changing the sight alignment, your just want to see what you're trying to hit on the top edge of the dot....the front to rear alignment is the same.
How do you decide when to change from using the lollipop to using the top edge?
RE: Big Dots not helping shooters at any level...
I've watched shooters shoot better groups with 2 mags through my gun/ sights. I've personally noticed a substantial improvement. I therefor disagree with them not helping shooters at any level.
Like I said, I've shot them side by side with 3 dots, and seen the difference...
Shot better groups? Shot faster as measured with a timer? Shot faster & more accurately? Using otherwise identical guns? Lots of variables here.
That's outstanding practical accuracy. Speed & accuracy aren't the same thing, though. I'm guessing that 952 didn't have XS sights on it, either. ;) Nope, adjustable Bomars. What I've learned on the XS sights has translated to all sights, I guess.
In my experience, the XS sights are slower when trying to get that level of accuracy. And I can't really say that I disagree....because I haven't timed myself with both sights at range. What I know is that I CAN hit at distance with them given enough time....and I can hit faster/ better at close range employing faster movement. To me, these sights help bridge the time gap between Point Shooting, and precision Sighted fire....I can watch that golf-ball bounce around on the bad guys chest and KNOW I'm going to land better hits than just by point shooting. I can move the way I want to, and have more conformation of where my bullets are going, than I could with a 3 dot sight setup.
Given the distances where most gunfights occur for civilians....I'll take a time handicap at 25 yards if I can pickup a noticeable improvement inside of 10-15 yards.
How do you decide when to change from using the lollipop to using the top edge? When I can't see the edges of the target around the front sight. With a small bullseye at 25 yards, I'll use the top edge. With a pie plate at 25...I'll just plant the FS in the center of the plate. Group sizes tend to be the same, for me.
Shot better groups? Shot faster as measured with a timer? Shot faster & more accurately? Using otherwise identical guns? Lots of variables here. Beginners who just shot a better group size, and more experienced shooters who were able to keep the same group size, but fire at a faster pace.
I've let first time shooters use my gun, who after shooting it...understood the whole "Oh, THAT'S what you mean by look at the front sight!". Older shooters whose eye sight was holding them back. And guys that are great shots and shoot groups, who noticed that they could find the sight faster, and shoot at a quicker pace...with the Big Dots.
With all the people who've converted to them after shooting my gun...I should be getting a kick-back from XS by now.
Like I said before, I'll know what I think a little better, after getting my ass kicked by LAV this fall.
I should also mention, that I've let a few of my peers shot these sights....all of whom shoot just as well (or better) than myself....non have switched over...nor have they given them more than a box to test out. I know they're not for everyone, but they are certainly a damn good option.
NCPatrolAR
04-02-08, 07:19
One thing I have noticed in this discussion (and others on other forums) is that when people compare the XS sights to others; they always compare them to 3 dot sights. I wonder if people arent spending time trying to align all three dots and not using the top edge of the front sight and this is why the sights are "slower" for them? Also, do the people who have problems with 3 dot sights have the same issues when using Straight 8 formatted sights?
When it comes to Bill Jeans using a modified XS sight; I never knew that. I'm doing another class with him at the end of next month, so I'll try to take a gander at his pistol if I get a chance.
Gutshot John
04-02-08, 11:21
John-
I understand why you'd suggest the use of the mirror ... however ... the problem with even having a mirror in play is the tendency to keep looking at how you look, rather than keeping the focus on the trigger manipulation and sight alignment / picture.
IMO that's an overrated concern. Technique is technique...consistency in your form is as important as consistency in your trigger pull. It's all conditioning muscle memory.
The point of looking is to examine where you end up without needing a coach so that you're instilling good technique rather than reinforcing bad habits.
Do your presentation...aim...dry-fire the gun...then look in the mirror to see where you've ended up...then critique and try again. If you can film yourself even better.
One thing I have noticed in this discussion (and others on other forums) is that when people compare the XS sights to others; they always compare them to 3 dot sights. I wonder if people arent spending time trying to align all three dots and not using the top edge of the front sight and this is why the sights are "slower" for them? Also, do the people who have problems with 3 dot sights have the same issues when using Straight 8 formatted sights?
Personally, no to the dots...yes to the straight 8's.
A narrow notched rear, with a post front...feels much slower to me, after having used Big Dots.
The best set of sights I've liked aside from Big Dots, were a wide open rear Novak type sight, with tritium lamps (no outline) and a Narrow post front sight with an outlined tritium dot.
I found those faster to use. To me, 3 dots are quite distracting. So are the OEM Glock sights.
Gutshot John
04-02-08, 12:21
Though I can't speak directly to your case. From a physiologic point of view it's probably slower for you because you've learned to compensate for the sight's flaws and now it's extra hard to decompensate.
You said yourself "feels much slower to me, after having used Big Dots"
If you're learned to use them effectively, then by all means continue, but I don't see the value of recommending them for someone who would have to re-learn a sight picture and who doesn't have physical limitations.
Though I can't speak directly to your case. From a physiologic point of view it's probably slower for you because you've learned to compensate for the sight's flaws and now it's extra hard to decompensate.
What? I think it means I've seen how much easier it can be.
You said yourself "feels much slower to me, after having used Big Dots"
Yep, as in I've seen a better way. No doubt how people feel going back to iron sights, after running an EOTech for 2k rounds....
If you're learned to use them effectively, then by all means continue, but I don't see the value of recommending them for someone who would have to re-learn a sight picture and who doesn't have physical limitations.
The value would be having a sight that is quicker and easier to use in the context of the reactionary gunfight. The sight picture is caveman simple. You put the dot on the target and shoot. Took me 3 or 4 boxes to turn my brain off and quite worrying about precision alignment....then the hits "came forth".
NCPatrolAR
04-02-08, 13:14
I prefer a Straight 8 format over any type of sight I have used to this point. I typically run a wide notch rear with a standard size front sight and have very good results with this system. When I switched to the Big Dots, I saw decreases in my speed and accuracy. After switching to a Small Dot/wide 10-8 setup; I still had the same problems.
Any feeling about how fast you are is meaningless. Even the best shooters can perceive their speed in an imprecise and incorrect way. If you want to know if something is faster you have to use a shot timer or similar repeatable timing mechanism.
The best speed shooting happens when you feel like you're moving a lot slower than you really are.
Alpha Sierra
04-02-08, 14:16
Why do some people insist on evaluating how Big Dots perform on square range drills skewed towards precision????? It's like trying to evaluate a Jeep Wrangler at the 12 Hours of Sebring. :rolleyes:
Why can some people not help but project their negative experience with these sights onto others? Some of us KNOW they work for us, do not need objective evidence to know so, and simply do not care what the "experts" have to say about it.
Let it go.
Jay Cunningham
04-02-08, 14:21
Why do some people insist on evaluating how Big Dots perform on square range drills skewed towards precision????? It's like trying to evaluate a Jeep Wrangler at the 12 Hours of Sebring. :rolleyes:
Why can some people not help but project their negative experience with these sights onto others? Some of us KNOW they work for us, do not need objective evidence to know so, and simply do not care what the "experts" have to say about it.
Let it go.
Last time I checked this was a discussion board, and individuals were free to express their opinions in a respectful manner. Most opinions here are from first or very close second hand experience, which is better than most other gun forums.
So I'm thinking everything looks cool...
:cool:
Why do some people insist on evaluating how Big Dots perform on square range drills skewed towards precision????? It's like trying to evaluate a Jeep Wrangler at the 12 Hours of Sebring. :rolleyes:
Rather than argue that I (and I believe others) have not been doing that, instead let me ask you two simple questions: Under what circumstances do you think the Big Dot works better?
What is your definition of acceptable accuracy/precision?
Alpha Sierra
04-02-08, 15:38
Under what circumstances do you think the Big Dot works better?
When the need to make hits to a vital area under self defense (actual or simulated) conditions presents itself.
What is your definition of acceptable accuracy/precision?[/list]
Hits to a vital area under self defense (actual or simulated) conditions.
When the need to make hits to a vital area under self defense (actual or simulated) conditions presents itself.
How do the XS sights work in a way that makes them better at hitting a "vital area under self defense ... conditions" without making them better at hitting "on square range drills," then?
Fast & accurate hits are fast & accurate hits.
Hits to a vital area under self defense (actual or simulated) conditions.
Can you please give me some dimensions to work with? Are we talking a 3x5 card, 5x8 card, 8" plate, IDPA target, IPSC target? I ask because I don't want to jump to conclusions based on your "skewed towards precision" statement earlier.
Alpha Sierra
04-02-08, 17:49
How do the XS sights work in a way that makes them better at hitting a "vital area under self defense ... conditions" without making them better at hitting "on square range drills," then?
Fast & accurate hits are fast & accurate hits.
You've been told several times here why. It has to do with how each individual's eyes work. I will not repeat what has been said.
Can you please give me some dimensions to work with? Are we talking a 3x5 card, 5x8 card, 8" plate, IDPA target, IPSC target? I ask because I don't want to jump to conclusions based on your "skewed towards precision" statement earlier.
Quit framing the discussion in competition/square range terms and maybe you'll understand. An anatomy book might help.
I'm honestly done here.
You've been told several times here why. It has to do with how each individual's eyes work. I will not repeat what has been said.
I have a fair knowledge of how the human eye works anatomically as well as how vision works. I haven't seen anything in this thread demonstrating that there is something about the XS sight that suddenly starts working better "in a fight." You obviously feel there is some kind of demonstrable difference, I'm just asking for an explanation.
How does the human eye perceive differently "in a fight" than, say, under the stress of competition or during force-on-force training?
To the extent that our perception is different "in a fight" than during calm range practice (and I certainly concede there is a difference), how does the XS sight work better "in a fight" than the more mundane sighting systems which outperform it during the calm range practice?
Quit framing the discussion in competition/square range terms and maybe you'll understand. An anatomy book might help.
How is asking for a target dimension somehow "competition/square range terms?" I know what I think are good anatomical analogues for training, but rather than assume that we agree on that I'm asking for your standard so I can discuss your original statement from a common starting point.
I respect everyone's opinion in this thread, and I noted in my first post that there were polar opinions where these sights are concerned. I can't speak for everyone but maybe when someone uses the word "better", it means better for them, and them only. We all vary greatly in our sensory make-up....people see things and learn things differently, there is no "one way". If someone shoots "better" with these sights then fine..if they shoot worse with them don't use them. I mentioned that I like the front and am working to get comfortable with the rear. "Better" doesn't have to mean across the board...maybe just better for that individual. It doesn't boil down to just those with decreased visual acuity....the information that our eyes take in is passed to the brain, when it is processed and there is a vast difference in how information is processed between individuals. If these sights help someone shoot better, then aren't they "better" for that individual? I know I'm brand new here, and I mean no disrespect to anyone, but things are not always black and white.
Alpha Sierra
04-02-08, 18:38
I respect everyone's opinion in this thread, and I noted in my first post that there were polar opinions where these sights are concerned. I can't speak for everyone but maybe when someone uses the word "better", it means better for them, and them only. We all vary greatly in our sensory make-up....people see things and learn things differently, there is no "one way". If someone shoots "better" with these sights then fine..if they shoot worse with them don't use them. I mentioned that I like the front and am working to get comfortable with the rear. "Better" doesn't have to mean across the board...maybe just better for that individual. It doesn't boil down to just those with decreased visual acuity....the information that our eyes take in is passed to the brain, when it is processed and there is a vast difference in how information is processed between individuals. If these sights help someone shoot better, then aren't they "better" for that individual? I know I'm brand new here, and I mean no disrespect to anyone, but things are not always black and white.
You are quite right, but some people just can't let it go.
NCPatrolAR
04-02-08, 21:24
Why do some people insist on evaluating how Big Dots perform on square range drills skewed towards precision?????
We arent talking about shooting a slow-fire course at 100 meters here. If your sights cant produce an acceptable (whatever this means to the user) level of accuracy on a square range under ideal circumstances how are they going to do it when things are going sideways?
Why can some people not help but project their negative experience with these sights onto others?
Why can't some people understand that people are stating their experiences with certain pieces of equipment in order to counter the vocal minority that loudly proclaim that select pieces of gear can make up for deficiencies in skill, cure cancer, etc. We aren’t projecting anything. We are stating our issues with the sights. Sorry if our personal experiences ran contrary to yours.
Robb Jensen
04-02-08, 21:26
I respect everyone's opinion in this thread, and I noted in my first post that there were polar opinions where these sights are concerned. I can't speak for everyone but maybe when someone uses the word "better", it means better for them, and them only. We all vary greatly in our sensory make-up....people see things and learn things differently, there is no "one way". If someone shoots "better" with these sights then fine..if they shoot worse with them don't use them. I mentioned that I like the front and am working to get comfortable with the rear. "Better" doesn't have to mean across the board...maybe just better for that individual. It doesn't boil down to just those with decreased visual acuity....the information that our eyes take in is passed to the brain, when it is processed and there is a vast difference in how information is processed between individuals. If these sights help someone shoot better, then aren't they "better" for that individual? I know I'm brand new here, and I mean no disrespect to anyone, but things are not always black and white.
What's asked is 'what's the definition of better'?
Some people think that firing 5 rounds in 5 seconds is fast. Then they are those that know better. Which is right?
NCPatrolAR
04-02-08, 21:32
Quit framing the discussion in competition/square range terms and maybe you'll understand. An anatomy book might help.
I didnt see his comment as being framed as a comp/square range question at all. Some of us dont work in an environment where a shot anywhere on a suspect counts. If you cant say if you can put rounds on a certain target area how can you say you can put them where an anatomy books says is a good place to put them?
Your comments remind me of trainers in my agency that advocate point shooting and just getting hits on suspects. I train myself and others that each shot should be viewed as a proverbal hostage rescue shot. If you permit yourself to be loose with shots in training, the same thing is going to occurr on the street.
What's asked is 'what's the definition of better'?
Some people think that firing 5 rounds in 5 seconds is fast. Then they are those that know better. Which is right?
No. What was asked is how are "these" sights better than "other" sights. There is no "best" for everyone. We are all different. It will vary among individual user. If someone shoots "better" with them why do you care? Your definition of better has no bearing on their definition of better. I don't have a dog in the fight but it seems that any positive comments made abut these sights are met with venom. Live and let live. If you don't run these sights why do you care if I or others like them?
Again let me state, I'm here to learn, not to burn bridges, but the first step to learning is to realize there is no "one way", so I tend to question concrete statements or views. No disrespect intended.
Again let me state, I'm here to learn, not to burn bridges, but the first step to learning is to realize there is no "one way", so I tend to question concrete statements or views. No disrespect intended.
You're fine dude.
We're all aware (at least most of us are) that there is no "one way" but rather multiple ways. As long as people here are sharing their first hand experience and expressing their opinions based on that first hand experience we're all good.
:)
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.