Fixed sights = bad?

Status
Not open for further replies.

rugerdude

Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2004
Messages
575
I'm set on a ruger .22 pistol for plinking at a maximum of 25 yards. I have not decided on whether it will be a single six or a MKII/MKIII but the models I'm interested in all seem to have fixed sights.

I'm not a target shooter, and I really just want to blast tin cans and my spinner target all day, and I need to know if fixed sights will ruin my fun. It seems to me like fixed sights would very rarely be on target.

Should I save more green and get the adjustable sights, or will fixed sight be alright?
 
I prefer fixed sights. Adjustable sights are useful when you are dialing in ammo for precision target use. Once you get used to your pistol with fixed sights and a specific type of ammo, you can hit anything you want.
 
And I prefer adjustable sights on all my pistols!!! I like my POA and POI to coincide and this is easiest with adjustable sights, ESPECIALLY if you change loads or grips or .... YMMV as shown by previous posts. Make your choice to satisfy yourself.

Good shooting and be safe.
LB
 
I, too, prefer fixed sights. That way I always know where to aim (whether I hit it or not is my own fault) and I don't have to worry about the sights "adjusting themselves."
 
I find that I rarely adjust the adjustable sights on handguns if I am hitting close. I always figured it was ME and not the gun. So, I work on form and so forth to shoot better.

I believe the Mark II and III's have adjustable sights unless perhaps it is the bottom of the Ruger line. Single actions frequently had fixed sights. Most Rugers have adjustables though. Maybe I just look at the more expensive models???

Added: Certain models of Rugers do in fact have fixed sights. Checked the catalog.

Before you buy, take a look at a heavy barrel (bull barrel) 5.5" Mark II or III Ruger and see if it feels good. I love to plink with mine and the heavy barrel just makes it balance better. It still is not too heavy to carry in a holster for woods use.
 
Last edited:
I prefer adjustable sights to the point that I don't own any handguns with fixed sights. Having said that, there's nothing about fixed sights that makes a gun unusable. For the uses you mention, rugerdude, I think fixed would be just fine.
 
Fixed sites on revolvers are fine if they're regulated. If they happen to be off, it either takes a file, pliers, or a lathe, frame, and barrel wrench to fix them. They can also limit choice of ammunition.
I prefer at least drift adjustable rear sites, which fixed site ruger 22 autos have.
 
Paper or plinking

With adjustable sights your can really tune your sights to hit where you want. Ever want to change from a center of mass sight picture to 6 oclock?
Or want to change bullet weights or two hand to single hand?
Fixed sights are ok for hitting within inches of POA. Just don't count on dotting all the i with them.
For a plinker, i'd get adjustable. In .22LR I prefer a semi.
 
^I'm with this guy. I won't even buy a gun unless it comes with adjustable sights, but I'm an accuracy nut. I like to be able to know that the gun is going to hit where it's aimed, and adjust for different loads. The 125 gr .38 spls go into a different hole than the 180 gr mags, and I want to be able to shoot both where they're aimed. It's not like a gun with fixed sights is unusable. They're good enough to be able to put it in an attacker for sd. But I've found good adjustable sights to be plenty tough enough for carry, no more bulky, and more precise, so no reason to give that up.
 
I own a Model I,II, and III. The one is a 6" fixed sight and rarely misses. the three is an adjustable sight. At this point I need to point out it's all about personal preference. If you have acess to a good range, you can try renting one. I like my model one best. You cant beat solid performance.
 
.22 ammo can/will shoot to very different POI. If your wish is to hit a quarter size target @ 25 yds., I would have adj. sights.
 
On .22 handguns I prefer adjustable sights. I have a MkII with fixed and one with adjustable sights and I prefer the option of adjusting it by simply turning a screw while I had to change the front sight on the fixed sight MkII.

Therefore I can hit brass that is lying downrange without guess work.
 
Ruger fixed sights can be adjusted -- with a file and a drift. But it's pretty much a one-time adjustment (if you file metal off, you can't file it back on.) If you are not sure you know how, seek advice and approach the project slowly!

If I were buying a new Ruger, I'd get the 5 1/2" bull barrel with adjustable sights.
 
Thanks for the replies everyone!

A friend of mine has a 22/45 target with the 5.5in. bull barrel and adjustable sights. I like the gun well enough, but I'd rather have something a wee bit different, and I prefer the looks and bolt release of the MKII/MKIII better.

He's never had to adjust his sights, and I was just trying to figure out if his experience was the rule or the exception.

In the end, it will all come down to fit, but at least I'm no longer worried about the sights.

Thanks!
 
I love fixed sights

And less than, or up to 25 yards, just a little Kentucky windage will be more than enough.
 
adjustable = good

All of mine have adjustable sights.

I don't know about you but my eyes aren't the same every day. Early in the day or tired late in the day, different light, different weather, different glasses, different loads, different ranges, different targets, 6 o'clock hold for bullseye or at POA for other target or just me. Even when plinking, I sometimes, not always, need to adjust just a bit. I like the flexibility.

While you can get used to one gun and allow for point of aim versus point of impact differences, when you have several guns and some that it has been a while since they were shot, I prefer to have the sights right and not try to remember where this one hits versus that one.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top