XD Sight Replacement
- Thread starter Mr.W.
- Start date
HVACDOC
Elite
I put the TFO sights on my xds and wasn't overly thrilled with them. I actually went back to the factory sights and was going to order a set of Trijicon for it. I ended up with a Hellcat somehow, technically a new set of sights right? At least that's what I told my wife
Mr.W.
Professional
Excellent. Thanks, Doc.I put the TFO sights on my xds and wasn't overly thrilled with them. I actually went back to the factory sights and was going to order a set of Trijicon for it. I ended up with a Hellcat somehow, technically a new set of sights right? At least that's what I told my wife
HVACDOC
Elite
What model of gun are they going on? If the XDS sight will fit you can pm me your address and I'll be happy to send you the TFO sights if you want to try them. They are just going to sit in the back of my gun closet otherwise.
Mr.W.
Professional
How kind! I'll think on it further and make contact with you should I decide to proceed. Can't thank you enough for the offer.
Mr.W.
Professional
It is an original XD S. Sorry.
HVACDOC
Elite
That's what I had them on. I will hold on to them for you.
Mr.W.
Professional
OK, but should anyone undoubtedly want them, please let them have them. I'll contact you when I've decided. Again, thank you.
Sights are *very* subjective.
There's a reason why so many notable shooters/instructors/schools have their names associated with so many different ones (Hackathorn, Vickers, Vogel, Sevigny, Taran, and Warren, are just a few that immediately roll off the top of my mind, but the list goes on and on and on.....
A big part of the issue is that we all "see" differently. While the science is the same, how each of us interprets those signals in our brains varies drastically.
Combine this with disease - or simply the disease of aging - and injury, and you're looking (no pun intended) at another completely different set of very, very impactful factors.
Now introduce personal preference to this already complicated mix, and you've got a real conundrum. How much daylight do you like between the front post and the rear notch? Do you like the shoulders on the rear notch to be rounded or sloped? Preference for triple dots, dot-in-outline/valley, dot-on-dot, dot-on-bar, dot-with-nothing-rear, or just totally blacked out "target" setups (and before you ask, yes, this is even applicable in "combat" sights)? You mentioned that you don't like that front F/O insert - can you elaborate on why? is it because of the color? or is it not shaped/melted-in correctly and causing a bloom? Or would your eyes (based on the aging/disease/injury factor above) fare better with a non-traditional setup like the Advantage Tactical?
Similarly, with the tritium insert, there's some considerations there as well. Do you want a simple insert into the narrowest front post possible? Or would you prefer a larger insert that works in conjunction with fiber-optics to also pick up daylight better, like the TruGlo TFO/TFX? How about a high-contrast, chemiluminescent front outline instead, supporting that inner trit tube?
It's virtually impossible for any one of us to tell another unique shooter what's "best." At-best, we can only tell you want has worked for us (and what hasn't), and why we feel the way we do - but what every shooter needs to understand is that until you put your unique eye balls behind those very sights on the gun that you're using those sights on (because the distance between that rear notch and the front post will matter, too) *and* have run that gun in the conditions which you deem most appropriate, there's really no true way of determining "best" for you.
I know that what I wrote above really doesn't help you, directly, much. At best, it sounds like a dodge because I lack experience - at worse, it sounds condescending. Please rest assured that I'm definitely not trying to be evasive (although it's true that I don't have *that* much experience, as relative to other shooters of my age-bracket, I started rather late), and at the same time, please both accept my apology if I came across as being condescending, as that is certainly not my intent.
I'm just trying to get across to anyone who may be reading this thread just how difficult the answer to this question truly is.
To wit: This is why you'll see that so many of us have tried so many different sights over the course of years. And why so many of us continue to do so - as we get older, if nothing else
- or as our preferences or needs change, as we either evolve as shooters or as we take on new aspects of this hobby (maybe we start getting into bullseye, or maybe we start in on an action-shooting sport, or start in on the fun with night-vision, etc.).
So, what can you do?
Either just be ready to swap out sights more than once......
Or better yet, head to a local training event or competition - or even your local public range - and just start being friendly and chat up some fellow shooters. Pay attention not only to what sight they use and what they say they like/dislike about their sights, but also to the type of gun (i.e. the physical dimensions) they have the sights fitted on as well as the ambient conditions (if they allow you to at least get your eyes behind the sights, if not get off a few shots).
For years, I've favored a thin front post plopped into a large rear notch. I first discovered this practice while shooting an assortment of really high-end and custom 1911s and 2011s that a good friend of mine laid out for me, as a part of a fun and educational range-day. From that experience, I swapped out the sights on my HD and EDC XDms to Dawson Precision units, via the care of @xdman - Front: 0.100 wide x 0.205 tall Dawson 021-019 fiber-optic, paired with the matched Rear: .125 notch DP Charger fixed rear, serrated, 018178.
Typically seen in action-shooting sports, the thin front post being allowed to roam around freely in a comparatively really wide rear notch makes for speedy engagements on forgiving targets at close ranges. Farther out, however, is where you'll really have to settle down: while the thin post means that you will actually be able to see your target in the sight package, the extra daylight visible on each side of that post can make centering a bit harder - personally, I actually find it harder to engage targets at the 75 to 100 (yards) with my sights than I do, say, sights that are sized/configured in the manner of factory Glocks.
Visually, since I favor white-light use in low-light (both handheld and/or WML, and yes, even my EDC is equipped with a WML) and train towards such (you'll see my training , these sights honestly are no different than any other. While I do lament the loss of self-luminous tritium inserts and the added capabilities those sights would bring to the fight, I am comfortable with my current trade-off.
In terms of tritium-enhanced "night sights," my preference currently is the Trijicon HD XR, again due to their slimmer front post. Additionally, I find that the high-visibility and luminescent ring surrounding the front dot to be very advantageous in transitional lighting (bright to dark, where either my eyes have not yet had time to adjust to the darkness so that I can pick up the tritium illumination or in instances where ambient lighting is bright enough that it washes out the tritium; note that this "photoluminescent ring" needs to be recharged by either sunlight or an otherwise bright light source in order to light up, so this necessarily a one-way street).
Alternatively, I also really like the XS Big Dot that's on my S&W M&P 340 snubby - it's huge and really, really bright, making it great for out-of-the-notch "point shooting."
There's a reason why so many notable shooters/instructors/schools have their names associated with so many different ones (Hackathorn, Vickers, Vogel, Sevigny, Taran, and Warren, are just a few that immediately roll off the top of my mind, but the list goes on and on and on.....
A big part of the issue is that we all "see" differently. While the science is the same, how each of us interprets those signals in our brains varies drastically.
Combine this with disease - or simply the disease of aging - and injury, and you're looking (no pun intended) at another completely different set of very, very impactful factors.
Now introduce personal preference to this already complicated mix, and you've got a real conundrum. How much daylight do you like between the front post and the rear notch? Do you like the shoulders on the rear notch to be rounded or sloped? Preference for triple dots, dot-in-outline/valley, dot-on-dot, dot-on-bar, dot-with-nothing-rear, or just totally blacked out "target" setups (and before you ask, yes, this is even applicable in "combat" sights)? You mentioned that you don't like that front F/O insert - can you elaborate on why? is it because of the color? or is it not shaped/melted-in correctly and causing a bloom? Or would your eyes (based on the aging/disease/injury factor above) fare better with a non-traditional setup like the Advantage Tactical?
Similarly, with the tritium insert, there's some considerations there as well. Do you want a simple insert into the narrowest front post possible? Or would you prefer a larger insert that works in conjunction with fiber-optics to also pick up daylight better, like the TruGlo TFO/TFX? How about a high-contrast, chemiluminescent front outline instead, supporting that inner trit tube?
It's virtually impossible for any one of us to tell another unique shooter what's "best." At-best, we can only tell you want has worked for us (and what hasn't), and why we feel the way we do - but what every shooter needs to understand is that until you put your unique eye balls behind those very sights on the gun that you're using those sights on (because the distance between that rear notch and the front post will matter, too) *and* have run that gun in the conditions which you deem most appropriate, there's really no true way of determining "best" for you.
I know that what I wrote above really doesn't help you, directly, much. At best, it sounds like a dodge because I lack experience - at worse, it sounds condescending.
Please rest assured that I'm definitely not trying to be evasive (although it's true that I don't have *that* much experience, as relative to other shooters of my age-bracket, I started rather late), and at the same time, please both accept my apology if I came across as being condescending, as that is certainly not my intent.I'm just trying to get across to anyone who may be reading this thread just how difficult the answer to this question truly is.
To wit: This is why you'll see that so many of us have tried so many different sights over the course of years. And why so many of us continue to do so - as we get older, if nothing else
So, what can you do?
Either just be ready to swap out sights more than once......
Or better yet, head to a local training event or competition - or even your local public range - and just start being friendly and chat up some fellow shooters. Pay attention not only to what sight they use and what they say they like/dislike about their sights, but also to the type of gun (i.e. the physical dimensions) they have the sights fitted on as well as the ambient conditions (if they allow you to at least get your eyes behind the sights, if not get off a few shots).
For years, I've favored a thin front post plopped into a large rear notch. I first discovered this practice while shooting an assortment of really high-end and custom 1911s and 2011s that a good friend of mine laid out for me, as a part of a fun and educational range-day. From that experience, I swapped out the sights on my HD and EDC XDms to Dawson Precision units, via the care of @xdman - Front: 0.100 wide x 0.205 tall Dawson 021-019 fiber-optic, paired with the matched Rear: .125 notch DP Charger fixed rear, serrated, 018178.
Typically seen in action-shooting sports, the thin front post being allowed to roam around freely in a comparatively really wide rear notch makes for speedy engagements on forgiving targets at close ranges. Farther out, however, is where you'll really have to settle down: while the thin post means that you will actually be able to see your target in the sight package, the extra daylight visible on each side of that post can make centering a bit harder - personally, I actually find it harder to engage targets at the 75 to 100 (yards) with my sights than I do, say, sights that are sized/configured in the manner of factory Glocks.
Visually, since I favor white-light use in low-light (both handheld and/or WML, and yes, even my EDC is equipped with a WML) and train towards such (you'll see my training , these sights honestly are no different than any other. While I do lament the loss of self-luminous tritium inserts and the added capabilities those sights would bring to the fight, I am comfortable with my current trade-off.
In terms of tritium-enhanced "night sights," my preference currently is the Trijicon HD XR, again due to their slimmer front post. Additionally, I find that the high-visibility and luminescent ring surrounding the front dot to be very advantageous in transitional lighting (bright to dark, where either my eyes have not yet had time to adjust to the darkness so that I can pick up the tritium illumination or in instances where ambient lighting is bright enough that it washes out the tritium; note that this "photoluminescent ring" needs to be recharged by either sunlight or an otherwise bright light source in order to light up, so this necessarily a one-way street).
Alternatively, I also really like the XS Big Dot that's on my S&W M&P 340 snubby - it's huge and really, really bright, making it great for out-of-the-notch "point shooting."
Mountain Man
Elite
I put the TFO sights on my xds and wasn't overly thrilled with them. I actually went back to the factory sights and was going to order a set of Trijicon for it. I ended up with a Hellcat somehow, technically a new set of sights right? At least that's what I told my wife
Instead of spending $200 on new pistol sights. Spend $600 for a whole pistol. Good deal right there. Got a bigger bang for your buck right?
HVACDOC
Elite
It sounded logical to me, at $500 they almost gave me the Hellcat by the time you deduct the sights!