Whenever I read some of the strange things that are claimed about night sights, I feel an obligation to those who are considering their use and yet have no personal experience with them.

If someone has night sights that are so dim that it must be dark enough that the target can’t be seen to some degree, then the sights should be replaced either with new or with different sights that are brighter.

For years I have conducted annual low light firearms qualification sessions that require the shooters to engage targets without the use of supplemental lighting, i.e., aiming with the night sights on their handguns. The ambient lighting is always bright enough to see the target, otherwise it would be impossible to know where to shoot, and not once have any of the countless officers I’ve run through the course multiple times ever claimed that they couldn’t see the lamps of their sights. In recent years the sights have all been no more than a few years old, but when I started, some were a decade or more older and therefore had lost a significant degree of brightness.

I also inspect the night sights on my and my agency’s pistols whenever I service them to ensure they are functioning properly. That’s usually in the basement of my house with the lights turned off, but during the day the area is illuminated by a small window at the top of one wall. Although the area is highly cluttered, I don’t have any problem seeing things well enough to walk around without running into things. In fact, it’s light enough for me to read the (larger) titles on some of the many books. I have pictures of people and animals on the walls and have no problem identifying them.

And to ensure my memory wasn’t misleading me, I repeated the experiment just now. I walked downstairs from my brightly lighted office so that my eyes weren’t well dark-adapted, and confirmed that I had no problem seeing the lamps of the X-RAY3 sights on my daily carry P229. Plus of course anyone who has actually paid attention knows that the light can be pretty dim in a typical residence at night and it still be possible to see something like a human form, at least in silhouette. Then the night sight lamps will be even easier to pick up. In addition, there is the whole self-defense scenarios thing: Even if we can’t see the target clearly, clues offered by loud noises and flashes of light may be enough to know where to point our gun using the night sights.

I am not the least concerned whether night sights are usable with optical devices, but people who are considering acquiring night sights deserve to not be misled about their value. Under the right conditions they are not only valuable, but vital. As a final point, though, don’t take my word for any of this. If one has decent night sights available, it can be confirmed—or refuted—with a few minutes’ effort. But if you can’t see your lamps when it’s still light enough to see a human target, then you need new ones.

Your expertise always welcome.

Conveying your experiences and expertise may safe a life one day (if not already).

See the target, sure. You can see a silhouette target in pretty dark conditions. It's always a silhouette target, it's always fully faced, and the shooter always knows in advance where it is. What about a person in dark clothing, crouching in a backyard? Or a guy holding something ambiguous? it's difficult to positively identify a target in a scenario where tritium sites would otherwise be useful. That's my only point.

quote:

Originally posted by DaBigBR:
it's difficult to positively identify a target

Yes, it’s difficult to identify a target if you can’t see the target because it’s hidden: Got me there.

Are we back to the ... old, “Night sights don’t allow you to identify a target” complaint?
I haven’t seen that here in a while, but if so, other than (sometimes) a magnifying sight such as the sort that are typically used on precision rifles, what sort of sights make it possible to see and identify a target that we can’t see and identify without them? The only purpose of any nonmagnifying sight, including the optical sights being discussed in this thread, is to allow us to aim the gun correctly, not to locate or identify the target.

And lest we get diverted, this was your statement I was responding to:

quote:

Originally posted by DaBigBR:
If it's dark enough to see the tritium, it's not light enough to see the target.

Night sights have more uses than simply allowing you to aim in the dark. When I lay it on a nightstand, perhaps in a hotel, they sure do jump out at you when you are roused from sleep in a dark room. If someone is screwing around at my motel door at 2AM, I sure wouldn't want to have to feel around on the top of a nightstand for my Glock in a strange room when I'm just waking up in pitch dark. Those sights are like beacons when you wake up in a dark room.

I am not sure what DaBigBR's issue is but its simply way outside the norm of defensive pistol use. We use night sights on pistols because they are potentially a tremendous benefit in sighting in low light, and unlike many other items you might consider literally have no downsides. We use lights with defensive pistols so we can see what we are potentially deciding to act on. And I use NS on optic pistols so that when the optic isn't an available option I'm in at least as good a shape as I can be. The idea of using backup irons to an RMR without tritium to me is just plain dumb. But of course that's just based on my personal experience shooting in all kinds of light and conditions.

Plus the rear tritium NS help me find the pistol on the night stand in the dark.

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:
Plus the rear tritium NS help me find the pistol on the night stand in the dark.

That's what I really like about that. My current setup is all black irons, so I added some GITD tiles to my holsters. They stay glowing overnight.

all good for finding the gun. But all black irons is just not the best strategy. what is wrong with you people. Do you not try shooting these guns at night? In difficult and changing light, with optic issues, etc. etc. I'm lost for sure on the idea. But use what works for you. Now you found the gun in the dark, try shooting it.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:

quote:

Originally posted by DaBigBR:
it's difficult to positively identify a target

Yes, it’s difficult to identify a target if you can’t see the target because it’s hidden: Got me there.

Are we back to the ... old, “Night sights don’t allow you to identify a target” complaint?
I haven’t seen that here in a while, but if so, other than (sometimes) a magnifying sight such as the sort that are typically used on precision rifles, what sort of sights make it possible to see and identify a target that we can’t see and identify without them? The only purpose of any nonmagnifying sight, including the optical sights being discussed in this thread, is to allow us to aim the gun correctly, not to locate or identify the target.

And lest we get diverted, this was your statement I was responding to:

quote:

Originally posted by DaBigBR:
If it's dark enough to see the tritium, it's not light enough to see the target.

Poor phrasing on my part. Substitute "see the target" with "identify." Like hearing versus listening. I don't find even bright tritium very effective behind a 1000 lumen weapon light and even less effective with many handheld light techniques

quote:

Originally posted by hrcjon:
I am not sure what DaBigBR's issue is but its simply way outside the norm of defensive pistol use.

My "issue"? Please.

I have an opinion that is different than yours, that's all. "Way outside the norm?" Who sets the norm? By many standards, optical sights on pistols are "outside of the norm." In some places, weapon mounted lights are "outside of the norm." Or pistols with any modification.

Night sights are not the panacea that some folks make them out to be. They serve a purpose, but is very limited, particularly on a pistol with a red dot sight when you consider:

-Co-witness height may be too low to see the tritium.
-Lens glass may effect brightness of tritium.
-Tritium plus dot may be cluttering to some.
-The optic is already night visible and unlikely to fail.

I own guns with night sights, I own guns with fiber optic sights, I own guns with painted fronts, I own guns with plain black sights. I used to go out and buy night sights for everything and after spending a fair amount of time shooting in low light and carrying a gun in the dark as a cop for a long time, I stopped seeing them as a "must have."

But, you're entitled to your opinion as well.

quote:

Originally posted by hrcjon:
all good for finding the gun. But all black irons is just not the best strategy. what is wrong with you people. Do you not try shooting these guns at night? In difficult and changing light, with optic issues, etc. etc. I'm lost for sure on the idea. But use what works for you. Now you found the gun in the dark, try shooting it.

There's really no need to be rude about it.

OK fair I certainly did not mean to sound rude about it. Apologize on that, just trying to get people to reflect on what they are doing. How about this for the discussion. Is there a large volume pistol purchase by any agency or department that did not specify night sights. Example the M17/18 purchases did. I'm sure that will give us a sense of what most think about the issue.

Fellas, take a breath.

It’s all cool.

Wouldn’t a fiber optic front sight and WML work better than tritium sights?

After reading all these posts one could get very confused. First of all the "night sights" I use on my favorite carry gun have a fiber optic sight that is great in the daytime and great at night.

As for red dot I am not sure. Last Feb. I ordered a Kimber Aegis Pro 9mm 1911, still waiting. So the LGS calls me and says a Kimber 9mm 1911 5" Aegis comes in with a Vortex red dot do I want it? After waiting 10 months I say what the hell and buy. Now I will find out how I feel about a red dot. If I ever want to carry it will need a new holster between the high iron sights and red dot it does not fit a regular 1911 holster.

I was slower at first shooting a RMR. Coming from a precision rifle competitive back ground had a tough time letting go of having the dot perfect on the target. Unable to see that with irons. Trained myself to pull the trigger when the dot is anywhere on the target, let go of that need to be perfect. Some refer to that as a flash sight. Spent a lot of time dry-firing with a shot timer to get to that point. For a couple thousands round shot my range G19/RMR with out sights. I also made a slight change to my draw, almost no punch out and a slight re-clock of my grip. Now I'm absolutely faster with with a red dot then irons.

I'm pulling the trigger if the dot is anywhere on the line of the 3x5 card.... hope that helps.

In a perfect world I prefer night sights, X300 and RMR on my pistol. Thats my set up because why cheat yourself out of any advantage in a gunfight? Theres no downside to night sights vs blacked out sights but there is a benefit. If its a money thing I promise you from very real experience, you'd love to be able to pay $70 every 12 years to win your life. We can what if a weird scenario to talk ourselves out of anything but I've not once wished I didn't have night sights on a pistol. Its a fun discussion but if you are looking at putting something in your holster for anything other than a game give yourself the advantage.

Anybody have any experience or insights into the Polymer 80 slides?

Good quality and reliability? Good fit for gen 3 19? Will I need an adapter plate / shim for the RMR or is it direct bolt on like the Zev / Brownells slides?

https://www.natchezss.com/poly...e-black-nitride.html

ETA: I see some slides that have raised bolt holes like the Brownells or Zev. I see other slides where the bolt holes are flush with the slide. I assume that the screw is just different lengths between the two. Or maybe not, just the raised bolt hole may have more threads. Is one better than the other? I'm guessing the raised bolt hole is better (more threads)?

That slide is precut for an RMR. The odds are that they are having a manufacturer make them for them as they look very similar to the Brownells slides, which are also made by a separate company. I prefer the appearance of the Brownells slides myself, and I believe that they are a little bit cheaper, but that's up to you, I guess.

I think Polymer 80 is making the slides. Seem GtG for glock frames but not sure about their slides. Seems like they would be okay but not sure. Can't find many reviews.

But also not sure about the bolt holes. Again, raised vs flush and not sure if I need some sort of adapter or shim plate. The brownells/zev slides are direct attach to the RMR; not sure about this flush bolt hole (like the Grey Wolf slides) - need an adapter (which I don't have)?

I would default to the brownell slide but I don't think they'll be back in stock for months. P80 seems like a good alternative if the bolt holes aren't an issue - can direct attach the RMR.

The Polymer 80 slide, like a Brownells slide, uses a combination recoil boss and screw hole. it should come with the appropriate screws. I personally don't like this type of attachment method as much as separate recoil bosses and screw holes, but it is better to just rely on the screw in a flush hole to hold the optic in place laterally. There is no adapter required, however since the RMR is wider than the slide, a ceiling plate would be recommended to keep the assembly waterproof.

polymer 80 may be making the slides themselves, but the style is very similar to several other popular ones on the market, which have mostly been established to come from the same original manufacturer.