Defensive Carry banner

1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
168 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Pardon the rant, especially given these photos were taken all too imperfectly (as I didn't have a tripod and just winged it with my old iPhone), but I wanted to demonstrate a point about rear sight serrations.

Often I hear people say they don't need them because they've never experienced glare. I'm sure some have, but I also have never experienced "glare" per se (that hurt my eyes like we usually associate with the phenomenon). But the real purpose isn't so much to protect our eyes, it is to provide more contrast with the front sight so that the rear sight, especially ones that are blacked out, don't get washed out in darker backgrounds and transition lighting.

As a rule of thumb, contrast and movement make things stand out in nature (at least with our eyes). Contrast can be color, luminance, various patterns etc., or any number of things that might make an object stand out from the background. Most things in nature are not pure black (if anything they're some shade of grey or other color), which is why camouflage, FDE, ODG, etc. are so popular on many firearms. As such black is rather conspicuous, and although not necessarily ideal for a firearm in the field, it can make for a good sight picture. As such, it is important to see the rear sight to ensure proper alignment (equal height/equal light, not that you can see that demonstrated in my photos).

Notice whether the camera if focused on the front (first picture) or rear sight (second picture), the serrations or grooves make the rear sight appear darker. I can assure you that looking at these with the naked eye, they look like the same color gray but one is darker. In fact, what you see especially in the second picture is that the spaces between the serrations (grooves) are the same color on the left as the non-serrated sight on the right. The only thing different is the deeper parts of the sight (within the serrations), but this is enough overall to make it look significantly darker in virtually all lighting conditions (and the contrast is even better with the naked eye in this demonstration).

Depending on the background, one sight/color will be an advantage over the other (i.e. contrasting with lighter vs. darker shades). A darker background will favor the lighter lines on the serrated sight (or the sight with no serrations) and a lighter grey background will favor the darker sight (with the grooves).

As an aside, I like the shape of the Ameriglos on the right because of the more diminutive rear sight profile cuts down on the mass obstructing your target & beyond. I like the sights on the left, however, because they provide more contrast and seldom get washed out compared to sights lacking serrations.

This is why white dots or other types of markings are important for some people on a rear sight. Personally I prefer blacked out tritiums if I can get them, but serrations are always better whether you have night sights or not (and weather you have white dots or outlines or not).

In fact, I've never seen a rear sight that benefitted from not having serrations (and that can go for front sights as well which is even more rare). Maybe there is an exception such as a modest advantage when co witnessing or partially co witnessing with red dots sights, but in general all iron sights stand to benefit from serrations and I wish manufacturers would make them available for all their sights.

That said, not all rear sight serrations are equal. I find that the shallow/thin serrations on many rear sights do next to nothing to provide contrast and are utterly useless. The HiViz sights that came on my M&P Performance Center pistol come to mind. Even the Ameriglos are not all equal. These are much better than the HiViz, but the serrations on Glock's Bold, Agent, and Trooper sights are even better.

Serrations are better, period. And all things considered, there does not seem to be much of a difference in manufacturing costs from what I tell and I wouldn't be happy to cover the extra expense that exists to always have them. Yet, there are relatively few HD iron sights with rear sight serrations. Why? I understand the advantage of having bare bone options for some people, but this is hardly one of them. Rule number one, hit your target. Contrast helps with this, especially with anything beyond close range (where you might just point and shoot).

Okay, rant over. :)

IMG_3573.JPG

335148
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,107 Posts
If you like serrations, use them. Serrations make no difference to me. When I shot competition, the front sight was the focus. The rear sight was the least important element of the sighting equation. The rear sight is just there to provide an aperture to frame the front sight. And the aperture is an empty space, whether the rest is serrated or not. I have a stainless revolver and a nickel revolver where the rear sights are naturally silver-colored. That doesn't mess up my sight picture at all.

IMHO, the bottom photos represent a focus that should not happen when sighting. The top photos are the correct focus and both of the apertures frame the front sight equally well as far as I'm concerned. But each to one's own preferences.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,897 Posts
Different strokes. Don’t want or need them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,019 Posts
That's a pretty strongly held opinion. How do you feel about pick-in-up trucks, LOL? Just kidding. I like serrated sights too. But probably not as much as you I think!
 

·
Registered
Pistoleer
Joined
·
547 Posts
Call me old fashioned but I don't like those serrated or non serrated type of rear sights as I have removed both types from pistols I have purchased and replaced them with standard two dot rear sights.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
168 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Different strokes. Don’t want or need them.
I'm not saying it would be worth throwing out perfectly good sights just to get a pair that is serrated, but are you telling me you would not welcome more contrast?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
168 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
  • Like
Reactions: CavemanBob

·
Banned
Joined
·
168 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
That's a pretty strongly held opinion. How do you feel about pick-in-up trucks, LOL? Just kidding. I like serrated sights too. But probably not as much as you I think!
Why is that a strong opinion? Greater contrast makes sights easier for most people to use. That's a reality not worth debating in my opinion. Whether it merits the additional cost for someone already using non serrated sights is a matter of preference, but the advantage of a serrated sight is not in my opinion. Moreover, the $10 or $20 extra dollars is kind of silly to haggle over when you consider how important sights are on a gun.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
168 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
I say this with all due respect, but I am surprised at the responses thus far, and I suspect they are similar to those people have when someone hears a report of a safety issue concerning a gun they own. For example, it's reminiscent of the denial original SIG P320 owners had upon learning that the pistol was not drop safe. To this day many rationalize the "upgrade" program in lieu of a mandatory recall, or in some cases doing nothing at all, which is at best an unhealthy bias (if not poor judgment). This is a relevant comparison in my opinion because some people tend to take their firearm and accessory choices so personally that they lose objectivity. Maybe I am wrong, but I don't think so. Rear sight serrations improve the sight picture, period, and the costs associated are negligible in my opinion. Again, I'm not saying it's worth throwing out perfectly good sights to get the same ones with serrations (though I would personally), but I can't see why anyone would not encourage manufacturers to go this route in the future, especially when they are increasingly having to compete with optics. Serrations create more contrast in most lighting conditions which makes them quicker and easier to pick up and align unless your eyes see in infrared or something. Anyway, that's just my opinion and everyone is entitled to theirs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,663 Posts
I can't do a completely black rear sight.
These sights work for me, Trijicon HD's and Truglo TFO (green front / yellow rear). Pictured.
Also acceptable is XS Big Dot.
I've never paid much attention to the fact that the HD's have a serrated rear.
335190
 
  • Like
Reactions: nj709

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,019 Posts
@liberty1 - I was just joshing you a little about the title of the thread. But from your additional posts I can see that you may be more serious minded than me. You are not wrong about serrated sights - but your opinions may not be shared by others. That doesn't make them ( or me ) science deniers; just folks who see things differently ( pun intended ). Ease up a little on us radical types. The important thing is that we all like to shoot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PEF and ctr

·
Registered
Joined
·
36,247 Posts
Great . . . Another I'm right and everyone else is wrong thread.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,897 Posts
I'm not saying it would be worth throwing out perfectly good sights just to get a pair that is serrated, but are you telling me you would not welcome more contrast?
I can’t see both sights and the target at my age. Contrast won’t do anything for an old guy.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,897 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,705 Posts
I'm usually focused on the front sight only or the threat when shooting rapidly, depending on distance. I'm not sure if the rear sight contrast comes into play in those scenarios.

Anyway, OP, when you post an opinion, you are implicitly inviting feedback and other opinions. Some people may not share your enthusiasm on a certain topic. No big deal.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
996 Posts
Guns have rear sights?

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,019 Posts
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Top