View Full Version : Am I crazy for wanting these sights on my Glock 19?
brickboy240
05-10-13, 10:32
http://www.kyledefoor.com/2010/03/defoor-tactical-sights-for-glocks.html
No dots...no bar-dot set up...nothing glowing in the dark or fibre optic.
Metal black sights only.
After now running 2500 trouble free (...and BTF free) rounds through my G19 with the Apex extractor, I feel it is now "ready for prime time" as my carry/defensive pistol and I am starting to mod it out. Starting with a set of sights.
So...am I crazy for just wanting black metal sights like this? I have long been a fan of K.I.S.S. and these sights seem to ring my bell. LOL
-brickboy240
http://www.kyledefoor.com/2010/03/defoor-tactical-sights-for-glocks.html
No dots...no bar-dot set up...nothing glowing in the dark or fibre optic.
Metal black sights only.
After now running 2500 trouble free (...and BTF free) rounds through my G19 with the Apex extractor, I feel it is now "ready for prime time" as my carry/defensive pistol and I am starting to mod it out. Starting with a set of sights.
So...am I crazy for just wanting black metal sights like this? I have long been a fan of K.I.S.S. and these sights seem to ring my bell. LOL
-brickboy240
I have them, used them for a brief period of time, and liked them for their accuracy (slim front post), but found that it was hard to pick up the front sight (quickly) in all but the brightest of light. Went with the Hackathorn sights and haven't looked back since. They may not be the best for drilling tiny groups at 25yds plus, but up close, it's like shooting with a red dot!
G19 here as well btw...
Code3Patriot
05-10-13, 10:53
I have Defoors on most of my Glocks (19s, 17s, 34s and a 17L) and prefer them hands down to many other sight combos I have tried over the years.
I paint the front sight bright Orange (after several base coats of white) with Testors Enamel Paint Markers to give my eyes contrast between front/rear.
The nice thing with the Defoors is that they are inexpensive enough that if you try them out and decide to go another direction, you didn't set yourself back very much money wise.
brickboy240
05-10-13, 11:06
That was another appealing thing...they are inexpensive and seem pretty tough.
I might look into the Hackathorn sights as well.
My other Glock (22) wears Meprolight night sights (factory) and I am not all that thrilled with them.
-brickboy240
I have them on my carry G19, training G19, dedicated G19/AA .22 trainer and my SIRT. Love these sights.
That was another appealing thing...they are inexpensive and seem pretty tough.
I might look into the Hackathorn sights as well.
My other Glock (22) wears Meprolight night sights (factory) and I am not all that thrilled with them.
-brickboy240
Go with the Defoor's first. The cost is what drew me in, figured I couldn't lose. I should have painted the front sight bright orange and tried it before I scrapped them, but I really like the Hacks now.
DreadPirateMoyer
05-10-13, 12:03
Yes, when you can have these with the brass bead front sight:
http://www.10-8performance.com/products/Glock-Front-Sight.html
http://www.10-8performance.com/products/Glock-Rear-Sight.html
Yes. A carry pistol needs a shiney front post at a minimum.
No dots...no bar-dot set up...nothing glowing in the dark or fibre optic.
Metal black sights only.
That's all I ever run on my pistols.
I used to reverse the plastic sights on the glocks... but now I swap them for Irons of the same basic shape.
All I install on my guns are all black sights. I prefer the clean sight picture. I have them on my glock 17 and shield. My eyes are still pretty good. I know down the road I will need to upgrade.
I do like a front fiber optic sight, but they are a bit more fragile.
Voodoo_Man
05-10-13, 15:09
I have a 34 with them.
Very accurate sights, a bit slow on the acquisition part but people paint the front orange or yellow.
It's not crazy at all, i have 6 Glock's and 4 of them have the Defoor's. They are great, and i will buy more in the future.
they don't work well for me but I am near sighted and even with corrected vision of 20/15 I need something bright and shiny up front and a naked rear sight for my eyes to work well with them. My buddy only runs all black sights though and they work great for him. If you have never shot a set of all black I would say try to find a gun with that setup first unless you don't mind buying a different front if it doesn't work out.
policetested
05-10-13, 17:07
the sight picture may be perfect while shooting a beige paper target if you have 20/20 vision; but most things we may need to shoot at are not beige and they are in poor light. If you are well over 40 as I am; this fiber optics or front tritium vial make seeing the sight in poor lighting easier.
I run the defoors on my 26 and 17 primary guns. Durable, accurate, and does not hurt the bank account. Everyone has their own preference, and you can modify the front if need be to meet your needs.
Magic_Salad0892
05-10-13, 18:32
I prefer the 10-8 sights.
All black sights are absolutely useless in low light.
I have a set on my back up 19 and like them allot. But I have CT laser also for low light.
I prefer the 10-8 sights.
All black sights are absolutely useless in low light.
'Til the X300 comes on!
I run DeFoors and love 'em. Been through several low/no light classes with 'em on a 19, no problems.
I have Defoors on most of my Glocks (19s, 17s, 34s and a 17L) and prefer them hands down to many other sight combos I have tried over the years.
I paint the front sight bright Orange (after several base coats of white) with Testors Enamel Paint Markers to give my eyes contrast between front/rear.
The nice thing with the Defoors is that they are inexpensive enough that if you try them out and decide to go another direction, you didn't set yourself back very much money wise.
Same here!
I prefer the 10-8 sights.
All black sights are absolutely useless in low light.
Uh...k...im going to have to disagree with that.
Do you carry a handheld? Do you carry a weaponlight?
What exactly are you shooting at without positively identifying the target?
Stating an absolute like that is simply wrong. They may be worthless for you but plenty of people do just fine with them in a multitude of roles.
I'm waiting on a 30S to come in. I wouldn't mind trying these on there. But i think the 36 slide takes a different front sight so that maybe a no go in this case.
If you want no nonsense, durable all black sights that work just as easily for close in stuff as punching B8's at 25, there really isn't a better option than a set of Defoors.
Defaultmp3
05-11-13, 08:37
Uh...k...im going to have to disagree with that.
Do you carry a handheld? Do you carry a weaponlight?
What exactly are you shooting at without positively identifying the target?
Stating an absolute like that is simply wrong. They may be worthless for you but plenty of people do just fine with them in a multitude of roles.
http://pistol-training.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/neednightsights.jpg
Pretty straight forward, yes? I shot it with my phone sitting on my couch in the living room. Literally, without moving my butt one inch while reading the aforementioned thread I was able to look up and see a very typical lighting condition which seems to be completely ignored by most people in the debate about night sights.
Is there enough light downrange to identify my target properly? Yes.
Is there enough light on the gun to line up my sights properly? No.
Is there enough light downrange to line up my sights properly? No.
Simple. So in the above situation, either you’ve got night sights that allow you to align the muzzle with the target, or you pay homage to your own little “hope & change.” It drives me crazy when people, especially trainers, say things like “If I can see the target well enough to know I should shoot it, I can see my sights.” Bull crap. It should be obvious to anyone, but in case it’s not, it requires far less visual acuity to identify a deadly threat than you need to line your sights up properly. Seriously, you’re pointing your gun at it already… you probably did that identification thing already, didn’t you?
I recommend a pretty straightforward experiment to evaluate this yourself. First, take the slide off your pistol. Now walk around your house with it, holding it where you would if you were shooting. Aim at objects everywhere: out in the open, in corners, in nooks and crannies. Go from room to room just like you normally would. Don’t turn lights on or off, just leave them as they are normally. Try to get a real shootable sight picture like you literally had to make a hit, just like in real life. If you can, try to do it during daylight, at dusk, and at night. You’ll quickly see that there’s a tremendous range of lighting conditions. Sometimes you and the target will be in the same light. Sometimes the target will be lit but you (and your gun) are in shadow. Sometimes the opposite will be the case.
Odds are you’ll come to two conclusions. First, sometimes, night sights aren’t enough. Second, sometimes, night sights (front and rear) are the difference between being able to aim and not. It’s not rocket science. Though I guess it is nuclear science…
Source: http://pistol-training.com/archives/7668
Absolutes are almost always wrong, but the statement of "hey, I'll always have a handheld/WML" doesn't do much to solve the issues with all black sights in less than ideal lighting conditions.
I prefer the 10-8 sights.
All black sights are absolutely useless in low light.
Disagree here too. When you fire up your light, the Night sights are useless. Thus hence... why pay for em?
Absolutes are almost always wrong, but the statement of "hey, I'll always have a handheld/WML" doesn't do much to solve the issues with all black sights in less than ideal lighting conditions.
I certainly couldn't see if someone had a weapon in that light. The one scenario I could buy off on for advocating a night sight is if your light went down in the middle off a fight.... after you've already established the need for force.
But even then.... you're probably in full crap out mode and not likely to be admiring your tritium bulb.
I've had these on my 17 for a year or so, and while I like the precision they offer at distance I've found them a little slow to pick up for me at speed.
Does anyone have any experience with just replacing the front? I like the sights that have a tritium vial with orange/yellow circle surrounding. Any suggestions/links for a straight swap out option?
I have warren sevigny FO sights on my 34 and they are wicked fast to pick up, but I don't want to put FO on my carry gun.
Defaultmp3
05-11-13, 09:32
I certainly couldn't see if someone had a weapon in that light. The one scenario I could buy off on for advocating a night sight is if your light went down in the middle off a fight.... after you've already established the need for force.
Maybe not in the area where you'd be interested in shooting (COM), but considering how much lighting conditions can change in just a matter of inches, I could easily foresee a situation where you can see the gun distinctly, and have, say, a guy's chest and head to be obscured, but have his arm and hand be clearly illuminated, e.g.guy is being illuminated by light through a window or a door, where there is a clear change in amount of light.
Just look at the huge amount of difference in lighting in the picture I linked from where the sights are pointed and just 6 inches to the right, where there's plenty of light cast on the TV. I think it's quite reasonable to say that in such lighting conditions, you could positively identify that someone is a threat, yet be unable to get a clean sight picture of the COM or the head. Or, maybe guy is wearing a dark shirt, but carrying a nickel plated sissy pistol, which makes identification of a weapon easy, but picking out your sights hard. Etc., ad infinitum.
Maybe not in the area where you'd be interested in shooting (COM), but considering how much lighting conditions can change in just a matter of inches, I could easily foresee a situation where you can see the gun distinctly, and have, say, a guy's chest and head to be obscured, but have his arm and hand be clearly illuminated, e.g.guy is being illuminated by light through a window or a door, where there is a clear change in amount of light.
Just look at the huge amount of difference in lighting in the picture I linked from where the sights are pointed and just 6 inches to the right, where there's plenty of light cast on the TV. I think it's quite reasonable to say that in such lighting conditions, you could positively identify that someone is a threat, yet be unable to get a clean sight picture of the COM or the head. Or, maybe guy is wearing a dark shirt, but carrying a nickel plated sissy pistol, which makes identification of a weapon easy, but picking out your sights hard. Etc., ad infinitum.
In my home i have a weaponlight and a drawer full of handhelds available to me. I also have lights in every room of the house. I live with family members so i cannot fire shots unless i have positively ID'd what i am shooting at.
We, as civilians are not tasked with anything offensive, ie clearing houses, or putting ourselves into harms way. We are either IDing targets in our homes via white light or we are shooting attackers off of ourselves. I do not advocate point shooting but in most instances, in defensive gun use, instinctive shooting is a very valuable methodology to which, tritium adds nothing.
To each their own but saying that tritium is absolutely required on a defensive pistol is an opinion, an opinion shared by a lot of people i respect like Mr Vickers and Todd Green. Having said that, it does not mean it is the best option for me.
great for accuracy, but a bit slow to focus (for me at least). the front is thinner than stock, would be hard to replace with a tritium post. Kyle like to run handgun drills at 25y and even 50y and these are geared more towards that IMHO.
I prefer these on a CC weapon...
http://www.ameriglo.net/sites/default/files/gl-212-ORQ.jpg
http://www.ameriglo.net/sites/default/files/GL-405L.jpg
That rear sight is pretty interesting. I wouldn't mind giving that a try.
Magic_Salad0892
05-11-13, 19:55
Disagree here too. When you fire up your light, the Night sights are useless. Thus hence... why pay for em?
Because if you use the "flash bulb" technique then there will be times where you're shooting while the light is off.
Also on subcompact pistols that do not have a rail, you won't have that option.
And I don't usually carry a weapon mounted light. Though if you do, I can see your point.
Devildawg2531
05-11-13, 22:37
great for accuracy, but a bit slow to focus (for me at least). the front is thinner than stock, would be hard to replace with a tritium post. Kyle like to run handgun drills at 25y and even 50y and these are geared more towards that IMHO.
I prefer these on a CC weapon...
http://www.ameriglo.net/sites/default/files/gl-212-ORQ.jpg
http://www.ameriglo.net/sites/default/files/GL-405L.jpg
This. AmeriGlo Hackathorn or CAP's for CCW - it's hard to understand why anyone wouldn't spend $80 or so to be able to see their front sight at night for a CCW.
DevilDawg,
Not crazy at all. You are looking at a sight from a quality company (they have had some QC issues, but who hasn't?) While straight black sights are not my thing for what I intend my pistols, they may be "your thing". Once one gets into the "quality product" category of things, it is totally personal preference. Everyone gets way too spun up about hardware. If you put those sights on your pistol and can shoot the lights out, keep rockin' 'em! If later you think you may want tritium or FO, start with changing to a tritium/FO front and see where that takes you. I am not a "this cool guy uses these and they are the best type"; however, I doubt Mr. DeFoor would put his name on anything that isn't rock solid!
Devildawg2531
05-11-13, 23:05
DevilDawg,
Not crazy at all. You are looking at a sight from a quality company (they have had some QC issues, but who hasn't?) While straight black sights are not my thing for what I intend my pistols, they may be "your thing". Once one gets into the "quality product" category of things, it is totally personal preference. Everyone gets way too spun up about hardware. If you put those sights on your pistol and can shoot the lights out, keep rockin' 'em! If later you think you may want tritium or FO, start with changing to a tritium/FO front and see where that takes you. I am not a "this cool guy uses these and they are the best type"; however, I doubt Mr. DeFoor would put his name on anything that isn't rock solid!
Yes I'm sure they are high quality and would be great at the range and gaming. I don't see how they are not a disadvantage for CCW vs a front night sight. It appears about a $40 difference for these vs quality night sights.
DevilDawg,
My personal preference is always to have a tritium front sight (at least the front). The more dots/bars/horshoes, green clovers and silver moons on sights just confuse me (although I LOVE the Viking Tactics sights on the M&P VTAC pistol....waiting for them to be available for Glocks-----heard sometime this year). My previous post was just pointing out to get what you think would best suit you and your needs. If you (or anyone) came to me for a sight recommendation for a CCW/defense/duty handgun, I would recommend they check out several brands of high quality sights, and choose a setup with at least a tritium front. Is the extra $40 worth it for the tritium front, for me, absolutely.
Because of work, I have always used ( been issued) the three dot style of some form and actually prefer having a tritium front sight and all black rear sight. But if it floats your boat, go for it. The sights won't break the bank and if you don't like em, I'm sure you could find a buyer for them somewhere.
10-8 Sights or Warren 2 dot. The problem with three dots is I've seen people align the front sight on the outside of the sight picture in the dark.
Hello folks,
Any chance someone could share a picture of their Glock with these sights? Have a 26 I'm debating on adding these sights too. A search on google images turned up a few hits but I'd appreciate a few more. Thanks in advance
I use plain black on everything including my glocks - using a hand held light I find the black sights show up fine in this instance.
When I was in Iraq and Afghanistan the first thing I did to my issue beretta is color in the front dot black. In low light I always used a hand held light with more than adequate sight visibility
Voodoo_Man
05-15-13, 14:24
Hello folks,
Any chance someone could share a picture of their Glock with these sights? Have a 26 I'm debating on adding these sights too. A search on google images turned up a few hits but I'd appreciate a few more. Thanks in advance
Pix on my blog, comparing to ameriglo
http://vdmscar.blogspot.com/2012/10/ameriglo-pro-i-dot-vs-defoor-sights.html?m=0
The best way to know is to try it.
brushy bill
05-15-13, 17:45
'Til the X300 comes on!
I run DeFoors and love 'em. Been through several low/no light classes with 'em on a 19, no problems.
'xactly. Very pleased with mine. Not crazy at all.
You've successfully shot in low light with blacked out sights? How low light? Did you have a light on the gun? Were you fast? Were you accurate? Would you be better off with night sights? Whether or not you had a light on the gun?
These questions are genuine, my low light training is limited.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.