Trouble shooting 3 dot sights

[JP7678]

First some background. I grew up shooting mostly old 22s, 30-30, and 30-06 rifles all with open iron sights. The only pistols I used and used often were a couple of Colt SAA pistols and until I was 38 and bought my first semi auto, an M&P 9C (which I still have and enjoy) I had never seen 3 dot sights before that. Been working on improving ever since and with several different semi autos. The transitions hasn't been an easy one.

So I was out shooting my Bersa Thunder 380cc this week and something occurred to me. I scored really well despite it having nubs for sights, even at longer range distances. I was far more accurate than with any other semi auto I own. I know how folks talk about how its a blowback and a smaller caliber (low recoil) so its easier. I really think it is because I inadvertently found myself using the sights the way I grew up using all gun sights. That is line the tops of the front and rear sights, generally ignore the rear after this, focus first on the target, then shift focus to the front sight as the blade of the front sight comes up, the very tip of the thin front sight is the POA.

This highlights the problem I have been having. I have had a hard time transitioning to the 3 dot sights. I tend to ignore the rear sight dots paying most attention to the front. I grew up placing the POA at the tip (top) of the sight blade, not halfway down where a dot is. If shooting at a bulls eye circle with the fat M&P post sight it should obscure the bottom half of the circle leaving the top half still visible with the top of the sight touching the center of the target (sight picture). I am also used to front sights being a very narrow blade so you can still see the target rather than a big fat column like post sight that obscures the center of target. There is just something not intuitive for me about hiding the target behind a big fat front sight and when you can no longer see the target any more you assume you are lined up for the shot. Placing the dot entirely over the bulls eye of the target and with a tall post sight I can only try to imagine if I'm lined up vertically. Horizontally isn't so bad IF I can see the sides of the target (something the fat sight interferes with if at distance), but vertically its just guess work. I don't like guess work. Hell, the old GI 1911 style sights make more sense to me than these modern types.

Sorry for a long write up. Its a semi rant, but there is a real question here. Does anyone have any advise? How do you all compensate or is this not a problem for anyone other then me? Are there no thin front blade sight after market options for M&Ps or sights with POA at the tip/top of the front post? I would settle for the latter if that's all that was available. I assume not but just thought I'd ask. I really like semi autos much more than revolvers (unless they are old west types). My only frustration are the sights.

 

[OttoLoader]

When using a three dots type site, I change my way of thinking as to how they are intended to be used.
Usally point of aim should be point of impact, but based upon the dot not the top edge of the sight.
Also I do not see the gap to line up the target. What I mean is I hold the sights dots in a horizontal level while putting the front sight on the dead center (x-ring).
You are correct that the relatively fat front sight and the location of the dot will cover the target.
So what I do is I look at the target figure out a projection view of an estimated cross over the target.
So say the two rear dots are just larger than the target, then estimate a phantom vertical line that completes the cross. You then can get the proper elevation even though the dot and front sight covers the target.
I developed that approach after using indoor range with low light so I could not easily see the dark outline of the sight but could easily see the three dots.
Not sure if the designers intended to use the sight that way but for me it is very effective.

 

[one eye joe]

First some background. I grew up shooting mostly old 22s, 30-30, and 30-06 rifles all with open iron sights. The only pistols I used and used often were a couple of Colt SAA pistols and until I was 38 and bought my first semi auto, an M&P 9C (which I still have and enjoy) I had never seen 3 dot sights before that. Been working on improving ever since and with several different semi autos. The transitions hasn't been an easy one.

So I was out shooting my Bersa Thunder 380cc this week and something occurred to me. I scored really well despite it having nubs for sights, even at longer range distances. I was far more accurate than with any other semi auto I own. I know how folks talk about how its a blowback and a smaller caliber (low recoil) so its easier. I really think it is because I inadvertently found myself using the sights the way I grew up using all gun sights. That is line the tops of the front and rear sights, generally ignore the rear after this, focus first on the target, then shift focus to the front sight as the blade of the front sight comes up, the very tip of the thin front sight is the POA.

This highlights the problem I have been having. I have had a hard time transitioning to the 3 dot sights. I tend to ignore the rear sight dots paying most attention to the front. I grew up placing the POA at the tip (top) of the sight blade, not halfway down where a dot is. If shooting at a bulls eye circle with the fat M&P post sight it should obscure the bottom half of the circle leaving the top half still visible with the top of the sight touching the center of the target (sight picture). I am also used to front sights being a very narrow blade so you can still see the target rather than a big fat column like post sight that obscures the center of target. There is just something not intuitive for me about hiding the target behind a big fat front sight and when you can no longer see the target any more you assume you are lined up for the shot. Placing the dot entirely over the bulls eye of the target and with a tall post sight I can only try to imagine if I'm lined up vertically. Horizontally isn't so bad IF I can see the sides of the target (something the fat sight interferes with if at distance), but vertically its just guess work. I don't like guess work. Hell, the old GI 1911 style sights make more sense to me than these modern types.

Sorry for a long write up. Its a semi rant, but there is a real question here. Does anyone have any advise? How do you all compensate or is this not a problem for anyone other then me? Are there no thin front blade sight after market options for M&Ps or sights with POA at the tip/top of the front post? I would settle for the latter if that's all that was available. I assume not but just thought I'd ask. I really like semi autos much more than revolvers (unless they are old west types). My only frustration are the sights.

I HAVE NO ADVICE, BUT I AM HERE TO OFFER YOU SUPPORT.....

I GUT MY TEETH ON OPEN IRON SIGHTS OVER 60 YEARS AGO. I DON'T FAVOR THREE DOT SIGHTS, BECAUSE OF THE PROBLEMS THAT YOU IDENTIFY.....

THE WEAPONS THAT WEAR THEM ARE NOT INTENDED FOR BULLSEYE SHOOTING TYPE PRECISION. THEY ARE PRIMARILY DESIGNED FOR SELF DEFENSE, THE 3 DOTS AID IN RAPID SIGHT ALIGNMENT IN HIGH STRESS SITUATIONS---PRECISE ENOUGH TO ALLOW THE SHOOTER TO PUT ROUNDS INTO A HUMAN TORSO......

IMHO, THERE IS NOTHING BETTER THAN IRON SIGHTS, RED DOT OPTICS, OR CT LASER GRIPS---DEPENDING ON YOUR AGE OR YOUR VISION---TO ALLOW YOU TO SHOOT ONE RACCED HOLE GROUPS......

 

[CB3]

Your three dot OEM SW sight evaluation is correct. Here are better sight systems out there, but they usually do not come standard.

So, you have options:

1. Black out the rear dots and open up the rear notch with a small fine file. Black out the front sight too. Narrow it if you want.

2. Get aftermarket sights to your liking.
Heine I-Dot are easier to use than 3-dot and come with tritium visibly only in low light. They are metal. The front blade is narrow with good light and target visibility around it.

3. Many other replacement types and brands are available. I dislike the fiber rods. I don’t need colors confusing my fast target acquisition. Same with colored three dot. I don’t want a big dot set that basically obscures the whole target.

4. As I am 69 years old, my ability to use standard iron sights of any configuration is getting more challenged. My shooting is almost exclusively for self defense, but I want real accuracy capability, not “combat range accuracy”. When I use my slide mounted red dot sights with higher co-witnessed I-dot, I have the best of both worlds. It’s $$$, but worth it for a serious use gun. 20 minutes of good coaching while dry firing will get you started if you can find a gun. It’s like cheating because you can stay target focused rather than sight focused. Easier and faster.

Good luck. Try before you buy.

 

[ccssid]

@jp7678 I feel exactly the same as you regarding the 3 dot sights. I too grew up shooting with basic iron sights. Thank you for the write-up. After many thousands of rounds, I am now just getting used to 3 dot. Just takes lots of practice. I would like to point out, that during my 45 year working career, I did little to no shooting. So, effectively, I had to learn all over again. ......but....like riding a bike...ya know!!!

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

 

[Andy Lowry]

I usually apply a black magic marker to the dots.

 

[CBStuard]

First all my pistols have sights that use #2 in this picture
SIGHT Images by craig stuard, on Flickr
Some worked out this way as they came and some I had to change sight height. As you said, for me, covering the target bullseye w/ the front sight is a dumb way to shoot. Using this picture the apparent width of the front post would ideally be the same as the width of the bullseye. That ideal doesn't happen very often but I can center a smaller bullseye on top of the post. I can also align the post in the center of a fat bullseye. I use the dots as an assist in lining up the pistol and they are more or less useful depending on the color or brightness of the target. If shooting at a light target, I am using the sights and mostly ignoring the dots. But if shooting at a darker target, where the black sights themselves would mostly blend w/ the target, then the dots come into play. I do not use the front dot as the aiming device. I use it to assist me in seeing the sights and to make sure the the top of the front post is the same height as the tops of rear sight.

 

[Rpg]

For me, the best solution to three dot sights is a black magic marker or black shoe polish.

Not uncommonly, a file to widen the rear sights is helpful.

Dot sights are very slow and incredibly fussy gizmos.

 

[ultratec00]

If you're having difficulty aligning the 3, I've found the I dot system to be more intuitive. You're simply lining up two dots. Granted, in some high stress situations, most folks are probably only focusing on the front sight, but I've found lining up two dots quicker and less complex than three.

 

[H Richard]

What a couple of you are referring to seems to be the Heinie Straight Eight. One dot on the front sight and one dot in the center of the rear sight just below the sight notch. Stack one dot on top of the other and you are aligned, then concentrate on the front sight. It's one of the best in my book.

 

[gwpercle]

You are not alone in the three dot don't care for....some men who make a living shooting competition don't like them either and simply black them out . Testor's flat black model paint will take care of those pesky dots.
I , as you , shoot better with no dots and wide rear notch . My eye seems to center the front blade in a notch with a fair amount of space on each side .
Not all of us like dot's or shoot better with them.....Go back to what you like.
Gary

 

[rsrocket1]

On my M&P40 I have to use sight picture 3 because sight picture 2 (which is the way I was brought up too) puts the bullets 2"-3" low at 10 yards. With my XD45 it's even worse but if I line up the dots, I get bullseye hits but I notice the top of the front blade is considerably higher than the top of the rear blade when the dots line up.

What really helped me was to shoot with both eyes open. This makes it easier to line up the dots rather than carefully lining up the tops of the sights which is normal when aiming with one eye. Funny thing is when I do this when raising the gun up my first shot is usually dead center of the bullseye. Since I also shoot skeet, it helps to keep reminding myself keep both eyes open and don't aim, just point like with shotgun shooting.

 

[OttoLoader]

The only time I used a black iron sight for hunting was in 1982. Then, in the field I could not see the sights to make even an easy shot.
On the target range the same gun was great.
So based upon my experience if you are planning on using your gun in real-world not on the range use, good luck with black sights.
After that negative learning experience I only used brass or "silver" or red ramp white outline sights in the field. Eventually I got some of those fiber optic ones too.
Now many manufactures provide some type of contrast sights. Yet some do not.

 

[BigDog48]

What a couple of you are referring to seems to be the Heinie Straight Eight. One dot on the front sight and one dot in the center of the rear sight just below the sight notch. Stack one dot on top of the other and you are aligned, then concentrate on the front sight. It's one of the best in my book.

or the Meprolight I-dot...there are lots of similar configurations with dot over dot.

 

[Rastoff]

The three dots serve only one purpose; speed of sight acquisition. They are not intended to be used as an alignment device.

This is the correct sight picture for an M&P:

This is what an actual M&P looks like when sighting:

Notice how the dots don't appear to be the same size. Notice also that they don't line up when the tops of the sights are lined up.

 

[CBStuard]

...

This is what an actual M&P looks like when sighting:

Notice how the dots don't appear to be the same size. Notice also that they don't line up when the tops of the sights are lined up.

I have run into that on some other pistols. I end up doing a lot of painting etc so the tops of the sights are level at the same time the dots line up.

 

[CB3]

What a couple of you are referring to seems to be the Heinie Straight Eight. One dot on the front sight and one dot in the center of the rear sight just below the sight notch. Stack one dot on top of the other and you are aligned, then concentrate on the front sight. It's one of the best in my book.

And the Heine sights are regulated so the point of aim/impact is at the top of the front sight, rather than under the front sight dot at about 10 yards. The front sight blade is narrow and the rear notch wide. It’s actually easier to align and allows more view of the target.

As mentioned, covering the point of impact is never a good idea. However the design of three dots was for speed not accuracy. They are defensive sites. In theory you line up three dots of the same size and spacing horizontally, and concentrating on the front sight (which was a big deal for quite a while even for defensive shooting), you cover the desired point of impact with the middle dot. It is supposed to yield “combat accuracy’. IOW, at combat ranges inside of 21 feet you could get fast center of mass hits.

There numerous problems with this sighting approach. Same size dots do not appear the same size when they are different distances from your eyes. In a true life and death gun battle your mind will focus on the threat, and only the threat. Thinking that you would look at the threat then lineup the front sight in the notch of the rear sight with three little dots, with funky different colors (more brain twisting processing) lined up horizontally
then check that you are pointed on target by focusing on it and then focus on the front sight (dot) placed on the out of focus target then pull the trigger so you could get a combat accurate hit fast is . . . well, silly. Not all mass manufactured OEM guns/sights deliver this POA/I shot placement. Many people’s eyes cannot handle this shifting focus routine. It is unnatural, especially for defensive shooting. It supposedly enhances a 200 year old sight system, but not IMO.

It can be made to work, but it takes a lot more effort than more modern sighting systems.

Sights are for accuracy. If they don’t deliver slow, accurate hits when practicing carefully at the range, they will be worse for combat. You don’t need sights at all for close range survival shooting. Point shooting gets the job done fast and accurately enough.

When you need sights you are shooting at longer ranges. You have a little more time to align sights more carefully. Covering the target with the sights is ridiculous. Combat accuracy, which mostly is an excuse for not being able to shoot accurately using proper fundamentals, is not going to work beyond about 7 yards.

Find the sights you can shoot well with for your needs. I find 3-dot OEM sights are a generic compromise that do nothing well.

 

[dave1918a2]

I used to have a few with the three dot system You have. I'm 73 and just got rid of a cataract and see quite well. I also got rid of the three dot guns and went back to black. I have been using the old sights since the mid 50's and like You I had a problem adapting. So I quit trying and I enjoy shooting My pistols a lot more now. Any body need some sight black?

 

[ultratec00]

All mine are Ameriglo, but same concept.

or the Meprolight I-dot...there are lots of similar configurations with dot over dot.

 

[NewToGuns17]

I enjoy a blacked out rear sight and a bright front sight. I had hiviz sights on my 2.0 full size that I put on myself and after running orange in back and green in front I put the black pins in the rear sight and loved the gun. Then I got used to the tritium sights on my shield and switched to those. They're not that bad.