Wednesday, December 14, 2016

Sight picture

There are three common ways to hold that front sight on the bullseye.

Folks have gone over and over this in other fora.  Including here.

#1 is 'lollipop'

#2 I've been told is Navy hold, but I am not sure the people that told are right

#3 I don't know what that is called.  I've done it, but didn't like it.  I was shooting low then, and was doing anything to try to fix that anticipary jerk.  'Combat' sight picture?

I think folks that aren't shooting bullseye use #2, but I don't KNOW.  What do you people that can blow the center out of the target use?  Do you have guns set up to use #1 and others that do #2?

Or am I the only man in Christendom not doing Combat Sight Picture?

If #3 was the best sight picture for your gun would you make adjustments to make it #2 or #1?

If the new gun is really #1, lollipop, I may have to change it.


abnormalist said...

#2 is how i sight in all my guns. Just makes sense for best placement.

I have a .45 that came sighted in at #3, I replaced the sights until I could get it to work at #2.

Choose whatever works best for you and do it the same for everything is my practice

.45ACP+P said...

#2= center mass hold
#3= cover up hold.

Wolfman said...

I've always used a version of #2 that looks a little bit like #1 on a very small scale. My guns sight an inch high at whatever the appropriate range of use is, so the hold becomes the top of the front sight on the bottom edge of where I want the bullet to be. It is really more apt for rifle shooting with iron sights, but that's how I was taught by both my Pop and the BSA, so I've stuck with it in basically all situations, for consistency.

Mike V. said...

#2 for me as well.

Jerry The Geek said...

In IPSC competition, the targets are as close as 3 feet or as far as 100 feet. I want to sight in for 25 yards and figure the point of impact should be close to point of aim with sight picture #2.

Old NFO said...

Rifles with iron sights, always #1; pistols mostly #2, except for the bullseye pistols, they're all #1.

jon spencer said...

This is why I like pure peep sights on my non-scoped rifles, you put the circle in the circle and then you all you see it the target.

abnormalist said...

@jon spencer
You must run smaller peep sites than I do, or run them farther down the rifle. Usually in my peep sighted rifles, through the peep you can see much more than just the target, unless you're doing your work a lot closer than I am.

50 yards I can see the entire target stand
100 yards I can see much of the back stop

For reference rifle that comes to mind is a rossi R92 with the paco kelly wart safety replacement peep.

Will said...

The really bad thing about #1, is a precision bullet placement is almost entirely dependent on a consistently sized target circle. If you only shoot at the same identical target, at the same distance, not a problem. Change any variable, and you are screwed. You can mentally superimpose a circle on an unmarked target, and perhaps be reasonably accurate, but most people won't be consistent, especially if shooting multiple rounds at one target.

It's certainly adequate for general hunting purposes, though.

Number 3 hold occurs due to the human eye's ability to line up similar objects. White dots or nite sights, in low light situations, makes this a very natural hold. Good enough for "minute-of-BG". The potential drawback is when light is good, you would prefer to use the #2 sight picture, but some people complain about the sights being "too busy" at that point. Some people learn not to be distracted by it, and some can't handle it consistently.

Windy Wilson said...

For what it's worth, the Swiss use your #1 sight picture for the first 2-300 meters of shooting, and the #2 sight picture for targets out farther. It's how the sight ladder on the K-31 and earlier rifles are set up. The consensus at the Swiss Rifle Forum was that as range increased it became harder to see where the "six-o'clock hold should be and a center of mass aim point was easier to do consistently.