SIXGUN SIGHTS

[JimT]

The poll on Blackhawk and Vaquero got me to thinking. Looking at the comments, most choose adjustable sights because they test ammo, shoot different loads etc. And that's great.

I have never made it a secret that I like fixed sight sixguns. I prefer them for my carry guns and for general use. I am not saying they are better than adjustable sighted guns, and I would never say that! It's just that if I have a choice I will take the fixed sight pistol over the adjustable sight one. It could be my preference is due to growing up on Colt single actions, Smith & Wesson Victory Models and 1858 Remington cap & ball pistols.

A lot of my life was on a ranch and living in the mountains. In the “back country” I wanted things that would not come apart easily, that lasted, would not get out of adjustment and worked everytime I needed them. The fixed sight pistols fit the bill for me.

I carried Colt single actions and Colt copies. When I got a 454 Casull I got a fixed sight one. It never let me down. The Ruger Blackhawk .45 that I used was modified so that the rear sight was no longer adjustable and was locked in place.

Again, I am NOT saying these were “better.” They were and are what I prefer. Do I have adjustable sighted pistols? Of course! I just don't adjust them. I don't test various loads and ammunition much anymore and if I do, I just find where they are hitting and put a spotter on the target to aim at rather than messing up my sights.

Am I weird about this? Probably. That's what is great about this country. You can be as weird as you wish. Just look around when you go to town.

As to what is "the best" ... the best is what you choose and learn to use to the best of your ability. It is not what marketing propaganda is trying to sell you. From what you all post on here, I believe there are a bunch of us who understand that.

[Griff]

Thank you Jim. I've had & have adjustable sighted handguns... Ruger Blackhawk, Mdl 19 S&W, and a Colt Gold Cup. But, for working guns... I'll stick with fixed sights also. Modify 'em to shoot to POA, add an insert to enhance visibility, sure... 3-dot combos, great... but maintaining that durability of the fixed sight is important to me. I even prefer a fixed rear sight in the backstrap of the firearm, like the Colt SAA, S&W 65 and others... the dovetailed sight on a 1911 is somewhat less durable in my mind. I've never had one shift on me, and somewhat strangely now that I think about it, I never had to shift one from its centered position, even when shooting out to 50 yards!

[JimT]

I shot this target with my fixed sight Freedom Arms 454 Casull.

IMG_8608.JPG

[jeepnik]

I prefer adjustable sights because they are generally easier for me to see. As to needing the adjustability, I pretty much find a load that does what I want, and stick with it. I am not someone who makes up different loads just for stuff and giggles. So once I settle on a load and adjust the sights they stay there.

[Scott Tschirhart]

I like these sights.

[Galloway]

I believe Keith said if fine shooting was to done a sixgun should have good adjustable sights. That said i think plenty of things can be done without fine shooting.

[Ysabel Kid]

I like any sights I can actually see!

Well put Jim. I guess it's like ice cream. You can like one flavor over another, or like them all.

[Scott Tschirhart]

That being said, when I was doing police work I preferred fixed sights particularly on a SAA (yes I did carry one) or a Smith revolver.

A 3 inch Smith 13 or 65 is pretty much the perfect gun fighting gun in my opinion. Nothing to knock out of line or break.

I can’t tell you how many times I have seen an officer with a Smith revolver in his holster with a broken rear blade.

[Twodot]

That being said, when I was doing police work I preferred fixed sights particularly on a SAA (yes I did carry one) or a Smith revolver.

A 3 inch Smith 13 or 65 is pretty much the perfect gun fighting gun in my opinion. Nothing to knock out of line or break.

I can’t tell you how many times I have seen an officer with a Smith revolver in his holster with a broken rear blade.

hope it wasn't the same guy, more than once.
..

[Tycer]

I did upgrade my Blackhawk rear sight to the Bowen NM Field Sight. I never really thought about rear sights fixed vs adjustable. Just whatever came on the sidearm. If adjustable I often upgrade.
Gonna try the blue paint though.

[AJMD429]

.
Given my druthers, I do prefer fixed metallic sights.

The ones like the Vaquero has are good enough for most self-defense issues against human or animal, or for euthanizing livestock, or just practicing shooting rocks so you can do the other things better. I'm not a good enough pistol shot with anything other than a 22 Target Pistol to really have needed adjustable sights other than a couple instances with a torqued barrel - one I tightened the barrel a few degrees and 'fixed' and the other was in the other direction so I didn't want to mess with shimming or whatever, and the gun was a 'shooter' vs 'collector', so I just filed one sight of the Patridge front to make it more of a 'blade'.

I have been experimenting with the Marbles Bullseye fixed sight version along with a front fiberoptic on my CCW gun(s), and I am convinced they have all the attributes of a red-dot that are good but none of the bad (batteries, fragile, bulky), and the fiberoptics are overall not usually fragile and are still useable even if the fiber breaks out. The rear Bullseye sights are strong enough I'd not expect one to break anywhere near as easily as a regular adjustable rear open sight, much less a red-dot. And they are way faster to acquire for me than the red-dot, because you can already see the front 'dot' even before it is in the 'window' of the rear Bullseye sight.

[Safestuffer]

I recently bought a SAA that came with a slight modification that makes a HUGE difference, especially outdoors.

Just a small sliver of gold embedded in the front sight

20251108_154652.jpg

20251108_182739.jpg

[Lastmohecken]

I have some of both. I am ok with a fixed sight if it shoots true. But I like adjustable sights also. It depends on the use and application. But I have seen several fixed sights that did not shoot to point of aim. And frankly for me, I fix them or trade them off. Keep the ones that shoot straight.

[Malamute]

Having the sight exposed to damage was a holster problem, not a sight problem.

Ive carried and used Smiths pretty hard, particularly the 29 i bought new in 82. The only time the sight was damaged was camping (actually lived in a tipi and out under the stars for most of 5 or 6 years, the 29 was carried daily in all weather including riding on the motorcycle a lot in all sorts of weather, shot a fair bit but hardly ever actually cleaned, only a brushing off now and then with a toothbrush when the dust got fairly heavy), climbing over the tailgate of my truck with it stuck in my waistband, it fell out and hit the channel steel bumper and cracked the sight. It was still usable, but I replaced it. Thats the only one I ever damaged, but none of the holsters I made or bought had the sights hanging out exposed to damage banging into things.

Ive taken to painting front sights super bright neon orange, Salon Perfect Traffic Cone to be exact. With a heavy white base coat and light top coat of orange, its brighter in poor light than the fiber optic sights Ive seen. Even the fairly thin Cimarron/Uberti Old Model P tapered front sights show up pretty well in dusk light.

I generally prefer adjustables, not because I want to change them much, just to get them hitting exactly where I want, then never touch them again. Some rugers had the rear sight sitting too high when zeroed, so Id run the rear down to bottom, raise it 3 or 4 clicks, then zero the front sight with a file, that made the rear sit as low as it could and still have a little room to adjust. Better support, less likely to get knocked about. some work with a swiss file could get the rear a bit lower than OEM, they have rough castings in places, and some room to lower them a bit regardless. Smiths with the rear too high, they have several rear blade heights to help with that. Im not above filing a front on a Smith if need be either.

[Scott Tschirhart]

Having the sight exposed to damage was a holster problem, not a sight problem.

No doubt. I never saw a broken blade while we carried flap holsters. It was only after we went to the security holsters that officers would inadvertently bang their rear sight on a patrol car door or doorframe.

[ikocher]

This brings up a good point. I have pretty much abandoned my .45 Colt reloading project for the time being because the point of impact on my Pietta Cabela's Special hits so low with everything I've tried that I can't really use it for anything beyond making noise or maybe CAS.

I don't know if a much heavier bullet would help but I had been considering that I should have gotten the Blackhawk for the adjustable sights. Maybe the guns fine and I'm doing something wrong but I can't shake the feeling the sights would have been nice to have.

[Malamute]

This brings up a good point. I have pretty much abandoned my .45 Colt reloading project for the time being because the point of impact on my Pietta Cabela's Special hits so low with everything I've tried that I can't really use it for anything beyond making noise or maybe CAS.

I don't know if a much heavier bullet would help but I had been considering that I should have gotten the Blackhawk for the adjustable sights. Maybe the guns fine and I'm doing something wrong but I can't shake the feeling the sights would have been nice to have.

Be brave. A good file is your friend.

The several Ruger Vaqueros Ive had, as well as ones friends have had generally needed some work on the front sight to zero. The Cimarron/Uberti 45 I got last summer also did, it hit WAAAAAY low. I started loading 45 Colts with 8 1/2 gr Unique some time in the early 1980s, it was supposed to be a factory equivalent load (850 fps), though in a 4 5/8" Vaquero it clocked 925 fps with 250 gr generic commercial cast bullet. Accuracy ha always been pretty good in all guns ive shot it in and I have a bunch of ammo loaded with that load and variations on the bullet style, but same basic weight. That leading to the zero question. Im not loading to match the guns sights, theres nothing sacred about them. Im making the sights match my load.

First shots were so far low I couldnt believe it. regardless of it being 300 yards, it was crazy low. I got some premium target material, meaning a random piece of cardboard and sharpie marker, made a dot and started at 15 yards kneeling. First two were about 10-12 inches low. Insane, I took about 8 aggresive strokes with a sharp double cut mill file on the top of the front sight blade and checked, it moved up about 3 inches. Filed more, 2 more shots, up another 3-4 inches, file more, moved more. in roughly 6 shots it was close. new target to fine tune, shot 2, filed a little, then good. I couldnt find the first target, it may have ended up in the burn barrel, but this was the last one.

Once basically zeroed I use a small fine file to make sure the sight is flat on top (square), then shape so it looks good, then cold blue and paint rear face with neon orange nail polish. Done.

Aiming point was the bottom edge of the dot. I like them to hit right at or an inch above the exact top of the sight.

Uberti 45 zero group 2.jpg

Final product. you can see that the blade is a little flatter on top and less rounded on the rear part, which I chose to do for having a better rear sight face and less chance of a holster rubbing the paint off the sights. Its not sharp enough to snag or cut, but gives a nice sharp sight picture. All those historically correct soft rounded edges on the sight blade are gone, its a definite improvement on the factory front sight.

IMG_2025-07-02-11-56-17-895.jpg

[LeverGunner]

I prefer adjustable sights. I've never worked in law enforcement or been in such wild country that I couldn't repair a rear sight. That said, If I was in the way back country, I would want to have a spare rear sight assembly with me.

I have knocked the rear sight blade out of a Ruger Blackhawk, and I have broken the rear sight blade on a Smith 686. Both in the house, both from minor bumps against the guns.

I prefer adjustable sights because I don't shoot factory ammunition. I don't shoot a ton of different loads through my guns. I normally settle on a few loads for each, and I like when I can get those loads to hit together on paper.

[Malamute]

I will say, Rugers dont really have a very good rear sight design. For windage, one side has a spring, the other the screw, and the blade has a dovetail shape on its bottom intended to keep it in place, but if you hook a fingernail in the sight groove and push sideways to the side without the screw, then tip it up, the blade will generally come out. The spring under the sight also is a weak point, IF the gun needs to have the rear sight raised much to zero, then its put in a holster that pushes on the sight downwards, the elevation screw can back out. I had it happen as a kid wandering around in the wasatch mtns by myself. Luckily the screw was in the bottom of the closed end holster, but that began my running the rear down colse to bottom and filing the front to zero so the sight isnt hanging up in space waiting for calamity to strike.

The Smith sights are much better in the regards where Rugers are weak. The sight blade isnt coming out without tools, same for elevation adjustments.

This discussion has forced me to clean my porch in search of the missing target board. Cant complain, its about 60 deg, im out in t shirt, pants and flip flops. In January. In the Northern Rockies. Crazy world. Probably a sign of the apocalypse.

[ikocher]

This brings up a good point. I have pretty much abandoned my .45 Colt reloading project for the time being because the point of impact on my Pietta Cabela's Special hits so low with everything I've tried that I can't really use it for anything beyond making noise or maybe CAS.

I don't know if a much heavier bullet would help but I had been considering that I should have gotten the Blackhawk for the adjustable sights. Maybe the guns fine and I'm doing something wrong but I can't shake the feeling the sights would have been nice to have.

Be brave. A good file is your friend.

I knew I could file but my concern was how much I was going to file. It's a 4 3/4 inch barrel. I tried marking different points on the back to see how far it would need to go. It seemed like an excessive amount.

I was trying to settle on a 200 grain XTP for taking whitetail.

There's a whole lot about these fixed sights!

[Ray]

After 45 years of battling percussion revolvers that shoot exceedingly high, the problem of a low-shooting, fixed-sighted sixgun is incredibly easy and requires no filing. Simply raise the front blade in your sight picture. It is repeatable, especially with a horizontal reference line or mark on the front blade.

Here is Rev. Jim's illustration from a recent post.

IMG_20260114_142852.jpg

[Walt]

Malamute is exactly right. Take a good file with you to the range, make your file strokes as you shoot and when you're very close, take it home, put it in a vise and use a fine file to square the top of the sight. Make sure the rear of the sight is taller than the remainder, clean it up and cold blue it.

[AJMD429]

This brings up a good point. I have pretty much abandoned my .45 Colt reloading project for the time being because the point of impact on my Pietta Cabela's Special hits so low with everything I've tried that I can't really use it for anything beyond making noise or maybe CAS.

I don't know if a much heavier bullet would help but I had been considering that I should have gotten the Blackhawk for the adjustable sights. Maybe the guns fine and I'm doing something wrong but I can't shake the feeling the sights would have been nice to have.

1. Shoot the best most representative group you can - maybe 12 shots or so, at a realistic distance and an easy-to-see aiming point.

2. Then measure the cistance from the group's center to the aiming point.

3. Then measure the distance from the gun muzzle to that target, and the distance between the front sight and the narrow/rear portion of the notch rear sight.

4. You can then sketch it out to better visualize the sight adjustment needed.
a) draw a horizontal line with the left representing the notch rear sight, and the right the target.
b) put a dot maybe a fourth of the way on that line so it is a bit closer to the left ('rear sight') end; that will be your 'front sight'.
c) now draw a line from the left end ('rear sight') out towards the right (target), but below (since your gun shoots low) where the horizontal hits the target.
d) label the distance from rear sight to front sight, and the distance from front sight to target.
e) now label the distance on the target (how low your group is hitting).

5. The goal is now to figure out how far the two lines are apart from one another at the front sight distance, which is just a ratio. (I don't know how to draw it on this website but maybe I can import a photo of a sketch).

6. Example... If the target to front sight distance in inches, is 600 inches (50 feet), and the sfront-sight-to-rear-sight distance is 6 inches, and the group is off by 25 inches too low, then your sketch (which obviously you can't draw to scale) would show that the ratio of distance is 600:6 or 100:1 - so the ratio of heights (since the triangles are idential in angles) must also be 100:1 - meaning if you want to move the impact one inch, you file off 1/100th of an inch of the front blade, and you should bring the group one inch. If you have to bring the group up 25 inches then you'd need to file 25/100th's of an inch, or 1/4 inch or 0.25" or whatever you want to call it. That's a huge amount, but you get the idea - hopefully your groups aren't really 25 inches low at 50 feet...! (but if so, then you really do need to take off that much front sight...!)

OF COURSE I would be darned sure your groups really are reproducible and with the ammo you intend to use you are SURE how low the hits are.

AND I would only take off half the amount, then re-shoot a group or two, just to be sure you're headed the right way. If so, then I'd do another half the remaining amount, recheck groups, etc, until you get where you want pretty much. Make sure you take into account any final shaping or contouring you may want to do with the front sight at the end, which might further elevate impact.

IMG_7894.jpeg

[ikocher]

This brings up a good point. I have pretty much abandoned my .45 Colt reloading project for the time being because the point of impact on my Pietta Cabela's Special hits so low with everything I've tried that I can't really use it for anything beyond making noise or maybe CAS.

I don't know if a much heavier bullet would help but I had been considering that I should have gotten the Blackhawk for the adjustable sights. Maybe the guns fine and I'm doing something wrong but I can't shake the feeling the sights would have been nice to have.

1. Shoot the best most representative group you can - maybe 12 shots or so, at a realistic distance and an easy-to-see aiming point.

IMG_7894.jpeg

Many thanks! I'll whip up a batch of XTPs for testing and pull out a tape measure.

[AJMD429]

IMG_7894.jpeg

Many thanks! I'll whip up a batch of XTPs for testing and pull out a tape measure.

By the way if you encounter one shooting high, the same concept applies, but you then pretty much have to make the front sight taller, unless you can actually deepen the rear one safely and effectively. If I had to do that (and I've done it a couple times) myself, versus getting a gunsmith to just replace the entire front ramp and sight, I'd cut/file it flat then using a jig to steady and guide the blade, use a hacksaw to make a cut in that front ramp base parallel to the bore, and centered, so I could put a temporary sheet-metal blade in to fiddle with, then see what height I needed. In the process of adjusting that, I'd be sure the groups were centered, and then when widening the cut for my final thicker blade, widen whichever side is towards the errant group a bit more than I widened the other, if any. That's the part that can get dicey. But it IS doable too.

You just always want to double-check measurements, double and triple check 'directions' (the last thing you want to do is adjust your sight in the opposite direction) by drawing a diagram or looking down the sights at a target, and just making SURE that what you're about to do makes sense visually. Then cut and file SLOWLY because you can always cut or file more, but not less.

You should wind up with a finished reault to be honestly proud of - because YOU made it happen.

If you screw a project up, it stinks, but each time you mess something up you LEARNED something (that's how I got so smart - by screwing so many things up and getting to do them over again... )