Hunting revolver sights questions

Status
Not open for further replies.
MidRoad

MidRoad

Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2016
Messages
1,748
Location
Upstate ny
Couple of things I'd like some input on.

My gp100 currently has a set of hi-viz lightwave fiber optics on them. Nice sight ,pretty good in low light. I have it sighted in aligning the tops of the sights and if I were shooting bullseye I split the bullseye in half with the op of the sight,rather than use the fiber optic rod itself. I believe if i were to use the rod it would called driving the dot or combat hold. Am I better off with splitting to bullseye or combat hold for hunting? Top of the post is more accurate than using the dot I suppose? I'm used to combat hold with my p01,and for the Glock I used to have. Figured I'd see what most others do.

As for front sights what's your guys thoughts on night sights on a hunting revolver? It Would be even better in low light and I really like a single white Dot and black rear sight like my p01 and Glock ,night sights of course. My concern is meprolight makes the only night sights for gp100 and I swear I read somewhere they are wide. But can't find any specs. My current sight is .150 wide I believe. And I wouldn't want much wider than that. Anyone have experience with them?particularly the front meprolight with factory rear .I can buy just the front sight for 32 bucks shipped,so not bad deal vs 110 for front and rear meprolight set.

Lastly has anyone had rods break on these new lightwave sights? The sight seems to support the rod pretty good. it's not an auto loader so the thing isn't constantly facing the force of a slide recoiling . I've heard people don't like fiber optics as much as night sights because the rods can break. Not that this is my nightstand gun. Just curious is all. I do however have a lightwave on my sp101 and that is a carry gun.
 
Last edited:
I do not like Hi-Viz sights. I think the front sight covers up too much real estate down range. I prefer a blade on the front with an orange insert or fluorescent orange paint on a black front blade.
 
I really liked the gold dot front sight with the V-notch rear that Ruger had for the Redhawk. Maybe they fit the GP-100 or they have a version for it.
 
ColtPythonElite said:
I do not like Hi-Viz sights. I think the front sight covers up too much real estate down range. I prefer a blade on the front with an orange insert or fluorescent orange paint on a black front blade.
Click to expand...
I got a Ruger brand blade with the orange insert in the mail last night. Ordered it last week just to see what the sight picture was like. Not bad. It appears wider than the hi biz though,and no where near as bright in low light ( in my house ,have not tried out doors). But have to take it to the range next time to try it out.
 
entropy said:
I really liked the gold dot front sight with the V-notch rear that Ruger had for the Redhawk. Maybe they fit the GP-100 or they have a version for it.
Click to expand...
I looked around for some and didn't come up with much. I believe the gp's sights are a little shorter,but I'm sure I could make it work if I found one. I would love a full brass blade sight like Skinner makes for marlins,. But no one seems to make one for these rugers.
 
I'm the odd man out here....I've changed all my Ruger front sights from the factory ones with the orange inserts to fiber optic sights. I had a really hard time picking up the factory sights in low light and really needed to boost the sights visibility. There have been hundreds of top end loads run through my GP100 and SBHH and the sights haven't given out yet.......but if they don't work for you then you gotta do what ya gotta do......I think the GP100 and Redhawk sights are interchangeable.....at least the removable ones.
 
I’m a fan of the fiber optic front sights as well, I have them on my 6” GP100 and my 7.5” Super Redhawk. I have them both sighted in for a 6 o’clock hold.
 
Not a fan of the fiberoptic "lollipop" sight picture. It's fast, and easy to see, but it's not for me.

The all black, square notch, patridge sight is most precise. I like a white outline on the rear notch and a white center stripe on the front blade.

I do, however, use tritium sights on a lot of my hunting revolvers. I'm well practiced with 3 dot sights, I have tritium 3 dots on all of my carry pistols, and I do like the extra glow in low light hunting on my hunting pistols. It's not as precise as a well illuminated set of patridge sights, but in low light, it's still visible!

Meprolight makes the brightest tritium sights, and they make a set for the GP100/Redhawk/Super Redhawks. I use them on my RH's and SRH's.
 
Varminterror said:
Not a fan of the fiberoptic "lollipop" sight picture. It's fast, and easy to see, but it's not for me.

The all black, square notch, patridge sight is most precise. I like a white outline on the rear notch and a white center stripe on the front blade.

I do, however, use tritium sights on a lot of my hunting revolvers. I'm well practiced with 3 dot sights, I have tritium 3 dots on all of my carry pistols, and I do like the extra glow in low light hunting on my hunting pistols. It's not as precise as a well illuminated set of patridge sights, but in low light, it's still visible!

Meprolight makes the brightest tritium sights, and they make a set for the GP100/Redhawk/Super Redhawks. I use them on my RH's and SRH's.
Click to expand...

How does the width of the meprolight front compare to the factory front sights?I've looked at pictures,YouTube videos and tried to find the specs.cant get a clear cut answer. I'm leaning buying the meprolight front sight for 32 bucks and using the factory Ruger rear sight
 
Bones741 said:
How does the width of the meprolight front compare to the factory front sights?I've looked at pictures,YouTube videos and tried to find the specs.cant get a clear cut answer. I'm leaning buying the meprolight front sight for 32 bucks and using the factory Ruger rear sight
Click to expand...

Factory:
Rear Slot: 142.5 thou
Front Blade: 122.5 thou

Mepro:
Rear Slot: 140.0 thou
Front Blade: 133.5 thou

Yes, you can successfully mix and match the Meprolight tritiums and factory Ruger sights. I used a Mepro rear with a factory Alaskan front sight, same with an SRH Toklat, until my custom tritium sights were finished for both. Since I had the extra front sights left over from those kits, I put one on my RH Kodiak Backpacker and used it with the factory rear sight. The difference between the rear slot and the front sight is tighter in the Meprolight sets, and it is tighter when using a factory rear with a mepro front, but there's still visible light on both sides of the blade.
 
Varminterror said:
Factory:
Rear Slot: 142.5 thou
Front Blade: 122.5 thou

Mepro:
Rear Slot: 140.0 thou
Front Blade: 133.5 thou

Yes, you can successfully mix and match the Meprolight tritiums and factory Ruger sights. I used a Mepro rear with a factory Alaskan front sight, same with an SRH Toklat, until my custom tritium sights were finished for both. Since I had the extra front sights left over from those kits, I put one on my RH Kodiak Backpacker and used it with the factory rear sight. The difference between the rear slot and the front sight is tighter in the Meprolight sets, and it is tighter when using a factory rear with a mepro front, but there's still visible light on both sides of the blade.
Click to expand...
Exactly the info I was looking. Thanks for taking the time to measure. Appreciate it.:thumbup:
 
Varminterror said:
Factory:
Rear Slot: 142.5 thou
Front Blade: 122.5 thou

Mepro:
Rear Slot: 140.0 thou
Front Blade: 133.5 thou

Yes, you can successfully mix and match the Meprolight tritiums and factory Ruger sights. I used a Mepro rear with a factory Alaskan front sight, same with an SRH Toklat, until my custom tritium sights were finished for both. Since I had the extra front sights left over from those kits, I put one on my RH Kodiak Backpacker and used it with the factory rear sight. The difference between the rear slot and the front sight is tighter in the Meprolight sets, and it is tighter when using a factory rear with a mepro front, but there's still visible light on both sides of the blade.
Click to expand...

So are you're saying the Meprolight sights marketed for a SRH/GP100 will fit a regular Redhawk?

http://www.meprolight.com/default.asp?catid={0B7B71C6-C5C1-4011-93AE-A79C7B82AF8B}&details_type=1&itemid={DE2CDC7B-068C-4D6C-9A48-83474AEFB0AA}&tempTyp=1
 
I know you specifically asked about illuminated or FO iron sights but my $0.02 is that during the most active times of the day are when iron sights are the most difficult to see. I opted for a tube type red dot and can say I don't regret it one bit. I get to dial the intensity up or down to adjust for changing lighting conditions, and with a decent holster, it carries as well as an unscoped pistol.
 
98Redline said:
I know you specifically asked about illuminated or FO iron sights but my $0.02 is that during the most active times of the day are when iron sights are the most difficult to see. I opted for a tube type red dot and can say I don't regret it one bit. I get to dial the intensity up or down to adjust for changing lighting conditions, and with a decent holster, it carries as well as an unscoped pistol.
Click to expand...
When I eventually by a .44 I'm going to run a red Dot. I use my .357 as a side arm to my rifle.so planning on just iron sights for it. My father had an ultra dot on his black hawk.that thing is really slick
 
D.B. Cooper said:
What is a plunger type sight?
Click to expand...

Ruger has, for many years, used a plunger retained front sight on the GP's, Redhawks, and Super Redhawks. Some models use a simple pinned in sight like the Alaskan or the 3" GP100, some use dovetailed sights, like the Match Champion, 22LR, and 44spcl GP's. The new SRH's, including all of the Toklats, use a fixed (pinned & soldered) blade/base assembly, while older SRH's used the plunger style sights.

The plunger type front sights on these models have a notched "plunger" in the sight base which engages a tab in the bottom of the front sight blade. These can be changed in a matter of seconds, and many models in the past were shipped with different sight options. Below is a picture of an older SRH with the plunger type.

7090219_02_ruger_super_redhawk_44_mag_640.jpg
 
I put the One Ragged Hole peep from Warren Outdoors on my 44mag Ruger SBH so far I’m really liking it.
It doesn’t work real good in low light conditions but then my 62 year old eyes don’t either
 
Bones741 said:
Have you had any issues with their sight height and heavier loads? Some comments on optics planet and Amazon reported poi higher because the sight is shorter.even with the rear sight bottomed out.
Click to expand...

I have seen those reviews as well, and I can say after using them on multiple Redhawks, I have not shared this problem. I have not had any issue with the sights bottoming out on any Redhawk. I have them on a 44mag Kodiak Backpacker 2.75", and a pair of 7.5" Redhawks. One of which is a 357/44mag shooting 180grn pills at 1800-2000fps, the other a 44mag pushing 300 XTP's at 1300+.

The ONLY exception I have had where the Meprolight sight set did not work was a custom "reproduction" of a plunger type front sight I attempted with a new style fixed Super Redhawk front sight assembly, pictured below. I cut the blade and milled a mortise for the plunger tab, which I was planning to cross pin instead of run as a plunger, and milled a flat for the front sight to rest into the base flush. Unfortunately, THAT produced too low of sight height - the rear sight was not fully bottomed out, but it was low enough the bottom of the notch channel was visible in the sight picture - aka, the sight was angled down at the rear. I could zero my Toklat (300grn XTP's in 454C) with this arrangement, however, I simply didn't care for the presentation of the sight, so I fabricated a new blade and had a tritium lamp installed by Amerigun.

The BELOW modification for a current production Super Redhawk sight assembly base, using the Meprolight tritium plunger style front sight does NOT work.
35412625050_d366f2bcf3_b.jpg

The channel in the rear sight (not really a notch) sits lower in the sight body than the Ruger factory sight, so the rear sight does ride a bit lower than the front sight as well. The front is lower, and the rear is lower - life's pretty simple.

HOWEVER - I could absolutely believe and fully recognize the likelihood that the factory rear sight does not work with the Meprolight front sight. Because that rear sight channel is lower to the revolver frame in the Meprolight rear sight doesn't need to sink as low as would a factory rear sight to be used with the 20thou shorter Meprolight front. Using the Mepro front and rear together has worked for me without issues, but knowing the geometry of these sights, I'd almost guarantee the factory rear could not work with a mepro front. I don't believe any of the Ruger factory sight blades can produce a rear sight notch as low as the Meprolight rear sight. For Ruger factory sights, the LOWEST position holds the bottom of the rear notch notably above the top of the ears of the frame. With the Meprolight rear sight in its lowest position, the bottom of the rear sight channel/notch is actually well below the ears of the cylinder frame, so if it were used at its lowest point, bottomed out, you can see the sight adjustment screw, the shank of the sight body itself, and the cylinder frame in your sight picture, obscuring the front sight... So while I do not believe reviewers who say they can't get the Mepro front AND rear to work in their revolvers, I would absolutely believe the Mepro FRONT ONLY cannot be used with the Ruger rear sight. In considering this, I'm not certain for which models the Mepro FRONT ONLY could ever work.
 
Varminterror said:
I have seen those reviews as well, and I can say after using them on multiple Redhawks, I have not shared this problem. I have not had any issue with the sights bottoming out on any Redhawk. I have them on a 44mag Kodiak Backpacker 2.75", and a pair of 7.5" Redhawks. One of which is a 357/44mag shooting 180grn pills at 1800-2000fps, the other a 44mag pushing 300 XTP's at 1300+.

The ONLY exception I have had where the Meprolight sight set did not work was a custom "reproduction" of a plunger type front sight I attempted with a new style fixed Super Redhawk front sight assembly, pictured below. I cut the blade and milled a mortise for the plunger tab, which I was planning to cross pin instead of run as a plunger, and milled a flat for the front sight to rest into the base flush. Unfortunately, THAT produced too low of sight height - the rear sight was not fully bottomed out, but it was low enough the bottom of the notch channel was visible in the sight picture - aka, the sight was angled down at the rear. I could zero my Toklat (300grn XTP's in 454C) with this arrangement, however, I simply didn't care for the presentation of the sight, so I fabricated a new blade and had a tritium lamp installed by Amerigun.

The BELOW modification for a current production Super Redhawk sight assembly base, using the Meprolight tritium plunger style front sight does NOT work.
View attachment 769787

The channel in the rear sight (not really a notch) sits lower in the sight body than the Ruger factory sight, so the rear sight does ride a bit lower than the front sight as well. The front is lower, and the rear is lower - life's pretty simple.

HOWEVER - I could absolutely believe and fully recognize the likelihood that the factory rear sight does not work with the Meprolight front sight. Because that rear sight channel is lower to the revolver frame in the Meprolight rear sight doesn't need to sink as low as would a factory rear sight to be used with the 20thou shorter Meprolight front. Using the Mepro front and rear together has worked for me without issues, but knowing the geometry of these sights, I'd almost guarantee the factory rear could not work with a mepro front. I don't believe any of the Ruger factory sight blades can produce a rear sight notch as low as the Meprolight rear sight. For Ruger factory sights, the LOWEST position holds the bottom of the rear notch notably above the top of the ears of the frame. With the Meprolight rear sight in its lowest position, the bottom of the rear sight channel/notch is actually well below the ears of the cylinder frame, so if it were used at its lowest point, bottomed out, you can see the sight adjustment screw, the shank of the sight body itself, and the cylinder frame in your sight picture, obscuring the front sight... So while I do not believe reviewers who say they can't get the Mepro front AND rear to work in their revolvers, I would absolutely believe the Mepro FRONT ONLY cannot be used with the Ruger rear sight. In considering this, I'm not certain for which models the Mepro FRONT ONLY could ever work.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that info. As usually very informative.:thumbup:
 
Bowen has a replacement front sight for the new SRH's that utilize DX style front sight blades. I put one on my .44. Need to snap some pics of it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

4
  • Locked
What sights are your favorite for hunting?
Replies
11
Views
600
tecrsq
T
Guy B. Meredith
  • Locked
Fiber optics?
Replies
6
Views
717
Guy B. Meredith
Guy B. Meredith
Zaydok Allen
  • Locked
What kind of sights do you like on your revolvers?
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
DS-10-SPEED
DS-10-SPEED
MidRoad
  • Locked
Cz p01 night sights
Replies
8
Views
2K
v35
v35
Billy Jack
  • Locked
Night Sights for Ruger Redhawk
Replies
0
Views
505
Billy Jack
Billy Jack
Back
Top