Pistol Peep Sights

[Bass Ackward]

I received my peep sights for my Redhawk today and I immediately installed the smaller of the two (7/32nds) as recommended by the manufacturer for target work at 30 yards or more.

After getting used to them I realized that I could benifit by a target change for these sights to a round target instead of my usual square. But after shooting several different known performance loads, I did not shoot any better than I did with the origional sights.

What I did do was be able to shoot as good as the other sights in any darned direction I wanted without worrying about time of day, or light, or background color. WHAT .... AN .... IMPROVEMENT! And there is greatly reduced eye strain too for longer shooting periods. Wah hoo!

The down side? Sad that there always is one isn't there.

These sights are point of impact sights only. That means that hold over for long range is something that you would have to really get used to because the top of your view is obstructed / limited by the ring. It also means that center hold is preferable than taking a 6 o'clock hold because that is how my eye naturaly ligns it up. Either that or you are going to have to use the larger aperature so you have more room above the front blade. Then you lose some precision for target work because there is more room for error. No free lunch. But you can see a lot of light around that front blade!

If you don't shoot a handgun much anymore because you can't see square notch / blade sights anymore and don't want to use a scope, then these put you back into the game and are worth the $25. IMO.

[XBT]

I shoot handguns often, not in any formal way, but just for my own pleasure. Over the years my groups have opened up some, but as I’m just plinking for fun it doesn’t bother me too much.

I tried a friend’s scoped contender once but was not impressed much by the 2X scope. I’ve never used a peep sight on a handgun but it sounds like it might be interesting to try. I do a lot of long range plinking and can understand why the peep might not work well for that.

About a year ago I bought this Ruger and installed a Leupold / Gilmore red dot sight. The groups average around ¾” when shooting from sandbags at twenty-five yards. I haven’t been able to shoot open sights that well for a very long time. When plinking I keep both eyes open and have found it easy and fun to shoot.

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y9/retiredBT/ruger2.jpg

The down side of this gun is its bulk and awkwardness, and the need to turn the scope on and off (It’s hard to get used to that).

Overall, I like this gun very much. I don’t suppose it will ever replace the S&W revolvers as my favorite, but it’s very accerate and easy to shoot well. What more could you want?

Jim

[fecmech]

I have looked at the Peep sights in the past but never gave them a try. After reading here and other places positive reports I think they might be worth a try. I have pretty much gone over to "Dot Side" myself, I like the precision it gives my old eyes but it sure does spoil the "handiness" of a pistol. I have 2 "J Points" one on my 1911 and one on my HiPower, they weigh less than an ounce and don't affect balance at all and are very compact. The down side is they cost $240. I'm going to be putting an order into Brownells this week and the peep sight will be on it. Nick

[BruceB]

As a long-time fan and user of target-quality aperture sights on RIFLES, both for hunting and long-range match shooting, I've long been puzzled by the use of "peep" sights on pistols.

This is because the use of such sights at arms' length is a direct violation of all the principles which make apertures so practical and useful on rifles. The guiding principle of a rifle aperture sight is that it is mounted so close to the shooter's eye that, if properly used, it is mostly IGNORED. The shooter looks THROUGH the sight, not AT it, which reduces his aiming problem to only two elements which are the front sight and the target.

By doing this, instead of trying to align THREE items simultaneously, he must only position the front sight and target properly. A parallel benefit to the RIFLE shooter using aperture sights is that his field of view is much improved over open sights, which effectively obstruct at least the entire bottom half of the field, if not more.

Putting such an aperture on a pistol creates a number of undesireable conditions, in my experience.

--the shooter still has to look AT the aperture, since it's so far from his eye, just as he does with the open sight;

--instead of reducing the sighting elements to two (target and front sight), the aperture on a handgun STILL forces us to try to align three elements, and using a small hole to do it, to boot, and...

--even worse than that, the aperture actually grossly reduces the available field of view by covering areas ABOVE the sighting plane....an area NOT obstructed by conventional open handgun sights.

One of the fastest rifle sights in creation is the "ghost ring" aperture, where the rim of the aperture is so thin as to be a mere shadow (ghost), and allows the eye almost unimpeded vision around the front end of the rifle for fast target acquisition. However, on a handgun such an installation does no more than clutter-up the field of view and make target pickup slower and less precise.

There IS a place for the aperture in handgunning, but it's on the shooter's glasses, where it serves amazingly well to deepen the depth of focus of one's eye and thus sharpens the sight picture to an astonishing degree. THIS is where the desireable attributes of an aperture come into practical play.

Many people claim great things for handgun-mounted apertures, and despite the fact that such installations fly in the face of optical principle, more power to them, I reckon. Before installing such critters though, I'd strongly recommend some sessions with an aperture mounted on one's glasses, to see what a difference THAT makes.

[Bass Ackward]

Putting such an aperture on a pistol creates a number of undesireable conditions, in my experience.

--the shooter still has to look AT the aperture, since it's so far from his eye, just as he does with the open sight;

--instead of reducing the sighting elements to two (target and front sight), the aperture on a handgun STILL forces us to try to align three elements, and using a small hole to do it, to boot, and...

--even worse than that, the aperture actually grossly reduces the available field of view by covering areas ABOVE the sighting plane....an area NOT obstructed by conventional open handgun sights.



Bruce,

I ran some comparrisons to these sights and a twighlight apperature on my Mod 70 just so I could respond correctly.

Your points are true to a degree. I still have no trouble with only two point lineup. What you need to do is see my pistol sights through my eyes.

The best way to do that is to place a piece of tape across the notch in your back sight even with the top of the blade. Now aim. That is the picture that I see with current sights unless I get the best lighting conditions or face the right direction. If I see light on either side of the front blade, I know I am off target left or right. Limiting huh?

So to see something .... anything .... left and right is a major upgrade? So now you understand how the peep helps me.

And strangely enough, the large (9/32nds) ring offers the same field of view as my twilight apperature does on my Mod 70. I wear 32" sleeves. I suppose shorter arms the field of view would be bigger and visa versa. I can manage 2" groups with the Mod 70 at 100 yards. Sometimes less. I don't have enough experience with the pistol peeps to make any claim.

For someone with my .... problem, peep sights do offer a significant any time of day improvement over conventional sights.

[Bigscot]

Bass,

Are you using the One Ragged Hole sight?

Bigscot

[Bass Ackward]

Bass,

Are you using the One Ragged Hole sight?

Bigscot

Scott,

Yes. That is what I was reporting on.

[Bigscot]

I have one on my Model 94. I am still playing with it. I have thought about getting the a couple of the Ruger handgun sights and see how they work.

Bigscot

[imashooter2]

Sounds interesting... do you have a link handy?

[wills]

http://oneraggedhole.com/

[Mugs]

In the early years of IHMSA a lot of the unlimited silhoutte pistols used peep sights. They had a lot of problems because as BruceB said you were trying to align three items. You never see them used anymore. In NRA Hunter Pistol and IHMSA Field Pistol shooters are starting to use peep sights at close eye relief in the Taco Hold position with good results. It only works for low recoil calibers.
Mugs

[Bass Ackward]

In the early years of IHMSA a lot of the unlimited silhoutte pistols used peep sights. They had a lot of problems because as BruceB said you were trying to align three items. You never see them used anymore. In NRA Hunter Pistol and IHMSA Field Pistol shooters are starting to use peep sights at close eye relief in the Taco Hold position with good results. It only works for low recoil calibers.
Mugs


All,

I tried my father without telling him first and his first reaction was, "Ohoooooooo, I can see!" He could see the orange color on the factory blade after 8:00 last night, aiming northwest. But he hasn't shot it. So his initial reaction was favorable too.

[imashooter2]

A shame they are only made for Ruger and BFR revolvers. Kind of leaves me out in the cold.

[7br]

In the early years of IHMSA a lot of the unlimited silhoutte pistols used peep sights.... . You never see them used anymore. Mugs
Actually, we have a guy that dropped a ton of money on Anschutz peep sights for his exemplar. The front is a circle. Center the target in the front, center the front in the peep and you are on target. I went three for three on turkeys with the setup. It is not for me though. Turkey kinda washed out in the front and it took some effort to keep everything centered. Also, field of view was minimal to say the least. His method was to lower the front sight until he looked between it and the hood through the peep to get the field of view, center for windage, raise sight to center for elevation. Squeeze off shot. Funny how ya think you are doing sumthing new and someone has already travelled that path.

[carpetman]

We are understandably getting varied opinions on peep sights on pistols. Most of us old geezers need our reading glasses and still hold things way off to read them. But you will see some folks take off their glasses and hold things real close to their eyes to read. Even with a scope,different people will not see it the same. My late brother and I would consistently(there really isn't an "A" in that word----it's true--look it up) group to a different spot if we used the others scoped rifle.

[Bass Ackward]

Well today's action was 400 rounds of slow fire spread over a 5 hour period.

I felt completely comfortable to shoot anytime. The last groups of the day were as good as the first. No eye strain perceived at any time.

The day encompassed everything from a lighting standpoint. Sunny and bright at times, and cloudy and raining 5 minutes later. Bright to shade on the targets. And I even closed the door and shot from darkness. My targets were 3" Lyman shooting squares (orange with a black perimeter) on a white, styrofoam pie plate. Ranges were from 35 to 50 yards.

I haven't been able to shoot like this for quite a few years. These sights may only cost $25, but they are worth more than that to me.

[unclebill]

i really want to try some of these.

[btroj]

The fact they work for you is all that matters Bass. I have wondered about them myself but I can still see well enough to use standard irons.
I do like to see innovation like this that allows people to enjoy shooting more than would be possible without it.

Brad

[ole 5 hole group]

Ole Post but if Bass is still using these sights he's probably learned to shoot with both eyes open, as that aperture won’t cover anything up when you feel a need for Kentucky windage.

I use the large aperture with a green optic front sight on my BFR’s. I like the larger opening and have found no difference in accuracy and for me anyway, I find the aperture sight to be much easier on the eyes and easier to hit with offhand at moving /stationary targets. That optic front seems to naturally align itself in the center of the aperture, whereas iron sights are slower for me getting the correct sight alignment on moving targets and it seems you really have to have your timing down very well to consistently hit the target with the irons, whereas using the aperture sights, I hit more often & when I miss it isn’t by much.

The reflex sight is better yet, so it just depends on what type of sights you want on your revolver. Once you practice with the reflex sight (JPoint/deltaPoint etc) you’re just a tad faster and the accuracy might improve a little as well.

BOTH EYES OPEN.

[unclebill]

just for giggles
i have an old williams sight in a drawer that i took out and set on top of the rail of the contender.
i had to remove the apeture and just use the threaded hole itself.
i sure like that sight picture.
i may just find some screws that are a bit longer and actually try this.