A critical review of so-called "Simple Sights"

Gun, shooting and equipment discussions unrelated to CHL issues

Moderator: carlson1

Post Reply
User avatar

Topic author
KLB
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 821
Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2016 10:57 am
Location: San Antonio

A critical review of so-called "Simple Sights"

#1

Post by KLB »

Tamara Keel does not like the new sights on display at last month's Shot Show in Las Vegas. Called "Simple Sights," the two rear-sight posts have semi-circles on the inside edges, and the front post has two semicircles on the outside edges. The idea is to match up the semi-circles so you have two complete circles.

Ms. Keel argues that human eyes cannot simultaneously focus on both the front and rear sights, as this new design requires. I haven't tried, but what she says makes sense to me.

http://www.recoilweb.com/not-so-simple- ... 34686.html

LeonCarr
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 483
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2007 6:42 pm
Location: DFW

Re: A critical review of so-called "Simple Sights"

#2

Post by LeonCarr »

IME the simpler the sights the better.

I prefer all black sights. I do realize the advantage of tritium dots in low light conditions, but IME the advantage is negated with the increased use of firearm mounted lights and people carrying small but high lumen flashlights and employing sound flashlight techniques. I took a class from a former USAF Pararescueman who stated that if you carry a gun, you should be carrying a flashlight.

When the defecation hits the oscillation you have a lot more to worry about than trying to align sights that are covered with dots, dashes, triangles, etc.

Just my .02,
LeonCarr
"Whitetail Deer are extinct because of rifles with telescopes mounted on them." - My 11th Grade English Teacher
Post Reply

Return to “General Gun, Shooting & Equipment Discussion”