Anyone use the Wilson Combat Battlesight?

[Vinnie Boombatz]

I like to keep things simple and also find my eye wanders when using the stock 3-dot sights. Wondering if anyone out there uses a rear sight that doesn't have any dots and just uses a front sight with a white dot or no dots at all?

Thinking about either blacking out the two dots on the rear sight of the stock sight or replacing the rear sight with the Wilson Combat Battlesight pictured below.

Wondering if anyone has used this rear sight and what they think of it? If I went with it I'd just keep the stock front sight with the white dot since they do make the Battlesight in the proper height to be used with the stock front sight on a 92FS (mine has a Vertec slide, so replacing the sights is pretty easy).

[rodralig]

In action shooting - most would prefer one bright fiber optic front sight and an all black rear.

As noted by @IVC in another thread, in high-speed accurate shooting - having those two additional rear dots is just information overload.

It's very similar to using three dot sights at high speed - it will slow down the recognition of the sight picture at speed because there are too many details at once. With both eyes open it's even trickier because of difference between convergence point and focus distance - not only is there too much information, but the amount of extra information changes based on the targets (distance and difficulty).

That said, for Wilson's sights - only you can answer that... Some people prefer the U-notch, some people the square-notch, etc. Additionally, some people prefer a thinner front sight or corresponding a wider notch in the rear, etc.

Hell, I know a couple of FS HCM that swears by an ALL black front and rear.

I, personally, had to go through several iterations until I found what works for me, in action shooting matches, for precision, and for defense/tacti-cool, etc.


_

[DrewN]

The straight 8 style works far better for me than 2 dots rr and 1 dot front, for what that's worth. Straight 8 with fiber optic front and rear would be the ultimate plinking set up for me if it exists.

[HAVOC5150]

I had some on a Glock 43. They had really sharp edges, but I shot fine with them.

[Great Made America]

I like the Wilson sights because 1) I can focus easily on the front sight without distraction and 2) there is just enough space in the rear sight to make it easy to center/align the front sight.

They fix everything I don't like about the Trijicon HD XR sights, if that helps.

[Litespeeds]

The Wilson Combat U notch rear sights are good for fast acquisition but not as good for accuracy / target shooting.

[Vinnie Boombatz]

The Wilson Combat U notch rear sights are good for fast acquisition but not as good for accuracy / target shooting.

Why would they be any less accurate?

[heidad01]

In action shooting - most would prefer one bright fiber optic front sight and an all black rear.

As noted by @IVC in another thread, in high-speed accurate shooting - having those two additional rear dots is just information overload.



That said, for Wilson's sights - only you can answer that... Some people prefer the U-notch, some people the square-notch, etc. Additionally, some people prefer a thinner front sight or corresponding a wider notch in the rear, etc.

Hell, I know a couple of FS HCM that swears by an ALL black front and rear.

I, personally, had to go through several iterations until I found what works for me, in action shooting matches, for precision, and for defense/tacti-cool, etc.


_

This ^^^^^

Personal choice makes one look better than the other. However, A narrow black blade for front and all black rear sights provide for the most accurate aiming. That is why they have put them on rifles since ever.
Most dotted front sights are so wide/thick that they cover the very point you are aiming at plus a whole lot of real estate around that point. Also, if there is a notch to center with, why would you need a couple of dots there? Look at dotted sights closely, most all that I have seen (front and rear) have dots that are out of center with the center of the sight. Just more strain on the eye.

[Vinnie Boombatz]

This ^^^^^

Personal choice makes one look better than the other. However, A narrow black blade for front and all black rear sights provide for the most accurate aiming. That is why they have put them on rifles since ever.
Most dotted front sights are so wide/thick that they cover the very point you are aiming at plus a whole lot of real estate around that point. Also, if there is a notch to center with, why would you need a couple of dots there? Look at dotted sights closely, most all that I have seen (front and rear) have dots that are out of center with the center of the sight. Just more strain on the eye.

This is what I've always thought. I've actually blacked out the white dot with a black sharpie on the front sight and much prefer that and was also curious about just going with no dots at all, but was worried it might not be the best set up at an indoor range that I go to that has somewhat poor lighting.

[Vinnie Boombatz]

And to make it even more confusing a local range does steel shooting every Saturday evening into the night and I'm wanting to start going once everything opens back up.

Wondering what the best front sight would be in combination with the rear Battlesight.

[Litespeeds]

Why would they be any less accurate?

Easier to line up the sights on my Les Baer than my Wilson Combat. The gap is wider on the U sights.

[rodralig]

Here, maybe this may give some insights

https://www.dropbox.com/s/87fxupvlswcwguj/On%20Sights.jpg?dl=0

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[stormvet]

I really like them, have them on of course a WC CQB and also installed them on a couple Glocks.