Originally Posted by __jb

Scott Warren reportedly uses the rounded "U" shape of the rear notch to draw your eye to the center of the notch... I don't know about that, but I like the square rear notch better... Plus, Sevigny shoots pretty well and he uses the square rear notch...

I read somewhere recently, not sure where, the U shape in theory doesn't tend to draw your eye to the rear sight as much as a hard, right angle would. Again, not sure how valid that hypothesis is but I do like the U shape rear sights. I have 10-8s on my 1911s and a set of Trijicon HDs on a GLOCK with the U shaped rear.

i've been using a U rear notch for the last couple years in one form or another. the first sights i had with that setup were ameriglo I-dot pros, which aren't a true "U" notch but more close in shape to the warren rear. i switched from the i-dots to the 10-8s because of the blacked out rear sight, thinner front sight, and unlined tritium vial. the i-dots are nice, but the front sight is thick at .140" and the rear notch is like a small canyon at .180".

the concept of the U is to eliminate all the hard corners and lines in your sight picture with exception of the only one that matters, the top of the front sight in relation to the top of the rear sights. what i've come to realize is that this does in fact help to find the front sight while shooting at speed, but for distance and target shooting i always have to over compensate the height of my front sight because i have a tendency to aim high. i don't know if it's just me or an optical illusion type effect from the curved rear notch, but i always had to make a concious effort to drop the front sight a little lower in the sight picture than what i thought seemed right.

with the extra wide square notch of the RB1 sights i find myself able to shoot just as quickly and don't have a problem finding the front sight at all. the sight picture also seems much more natural, for me anyways, and i don't find myself feeling like i'm having to adjust my natural aiming point.

The following is from RedBackOne's website:

"The .215" height is our standard for combat sights and provides point of aim, point of impact from 25 meters to 100 meters using the Redback One standard handgun, a Glock 17."

In the real world, most of us shoot 7, 15, & 25 yards with a handgun not 25 to 100 yards. I'd like to know how far off the POI is from the POA at 7 and 15 yards.

Originally Posted by DocDorle

The following is from RedBackOne's website:

"The .215" height is our standard for combat sights and provides point of aim, point of impact from 25 meters to 100 meters using the Redback One standard handgun, a Glock 17."

In the real world, most of us shoot 7, 15, & 25 yards with a handgun not 25 to 100 yards. I'd like to know how far off the POI is from the POA at 7 and 15 yards.

jason falla's explanation on the m4 carbine forum for claiming "POA/POI from 25 to 100 yards" is with combat accuracy, striking a silhouette target in an 8 inch upper thoracic area at all distances tested. on their website blog he outlined the field testing they conducted to arrive at this conclusion, which you can read here if interested. people were taking that statement out of context of being "combat accurate" by asking how that was possible at such a wide range of distances, and he had to explain that the sights are not magical and are not shooting lollipop or bullseye targets at those distances.

that being said, i am not as good of a shooter and like you do not shoot out to distances beyond 25yards, and rarely even at that. with the normal arch pattern trajectory of a bullet, if sights are "zeroed" for POI at 25 yards your rounds will impact slightly lower at distances closer than that and slightly higher at distances beyond 25 yards until the round naturally loses elevation from gravity and again begins to drop (which depends on the weight of the bullet and the velocity). with handgun loads and the distances we are typically shooting handguns this is not going to be extremely noticeable or show as much deviation with where the rounds impact, there is probably more variation from user error than the distance from which you are shooting.

this weekend i will shoot a couple groups from the distances you asked about and post some targets so you can get a better idea of how much the POI changes from a typical non-professional shooter at closer ranges.

the weather was nice today; not a cloud in the sky, about 50 degrees, and only gusty winds. i put about 300 rounds through my gen3 g19 that recently got their own set of the RB1 sights this week. the break down was 250 rounds of 147gr speer lawman, 50 rounds of 124gr federal HST, and 15 rounds of 147gr federal HST that have been rotated out of my carry stash. after the question was raised about POI at closer ranges than 25 yards, i decided to do some testing at different distances today. i'm no pro, but i think the targets show that there is very little variation from 5 yards through 25 yards, and the ammo and shooter probably have more to do with those than the distance did.

i started with the 147gr lawman at 5 yards, then pushed back to 10, 15, 20, and finally 25. each target got 5 rounds. after i was through all distances with the lawman i switched over to the 124gr HST and repeated the testing (shooting 6 rounds at 15 yards because i knew i pulled one as soon as it happened). i can't say i was surprised, but it was interesting to see how much flatter of a trajectory the HST maintained all the way out to 25 yards vs. the lawman.

i'm now close to 1k rounds using the RB1 sights between my two g19s and what little learning curve there was is now behind me. i am still very pleased and will almost definitely be putting these on all my future glocks and keep my fingers crossed they are released for some other models as well.

here are some pics.

JBarbaresi, Thanks for that. Regards to POA, how were you holding? Six o'clock, top of front sight, or "pushing the dot"?