Sights for a Glock 34 for IDPA or USPSA

[jdorp]

Just picked up a Glock 34 to do some competitions with this summer. Love the gun, hate the standard Glock sights. What sights would you recommend for IDPA or USPSA shooting. I have Meprolight night sights on my 26 and love them but I know that is probably not the direction I should go for competitive shooting.

 

[Craig T]

Warren sivigny

 

[Slawburger]

I think the idea is to install sights that will let you get on target quick for multiple shots. You don't want a target sight that is so tight that it takes too long to line up. You aren't trying to put two carefully aimed shots in a quarter sized group. You are trying to put two quick shots in the "A" zone.

I use the Truglo TFO (Tritium and Fiber Optic) like those below but with different colors on the front and rear.
Amazon.com: Truglo Glock Low TFO Handgun Sight: Sports & Outdoors

 

[Rob377]

I think the idea is to install sights that will let you get on target quick for multiple shots. You don't want a target sight that is so tight that it takes too long to line up. You aren't trying to put two carefully aimed shots in a quarter sized group. You are trying to put two quick shots in the "A" zone.

I use the Truglo TFO (Tritium and Fiber Optic) like those below but with different colors on the front and rear.
Amazon.com: Truglo Glock Low TFO Handgun Sight: Sports & Outdoors

Let us know how that works out for a 25yd mini popper or a target surrounded by no shoots.

Warren sevigney, or taran tacticals.

 

[rvb]

Warren sivigny

+1. I could do with just a touch narrower notch, but they are great sights.

-rvb

 

[Rob377]

+1. I could do with just a touch narrower notch, but they are great sights.

-rvb

The sevigney narrow notch are .130. With the ,105 front, its just perfect.

I agree, the .150 notch standard warren/sevigneys are a bit much.. I suspect as my eyes get worse, I'll reconsider though.

 

[rvb]

The sevigney narrow notch are .130. With the ,105 front, its just perfect.

I agree, the .150 notch standard warren/sevigneys are a bit much.. I suspect as my eyes get worse, I'll reconsider though.

Hmmm, i don't remember there being an option on the rear width, but I slept [and drank] since I bought these.... Way beyond my memory's ability... I'll look into that. I feel I take a little long making sure I'm centered sometimes. They're Fast up close where anywhere inside the notch is acceptable...

-rvb

 

[Slawburger]

Let us know how that works out for a 25yd mini popper or a target surrounded by no shoots.

Warren sevigney, or taran tacticals.

Well, okey-dokey then. You are too good not to pay attention to your opinion. I have been pretty happy with the Truglo TFO but haven't had to shoot at any very small targets over a long distance yet so maybe I don't know how much better it could be. I guess that I will have to look at your suggestions for my next upgrade.

 

[rvb]

Hmmm, i don't remember there being an option on the rear width, but I slept [and drank] since I bought these.... Way beyond my memory's ability... I'll look into that. I feel I take a little long making sure I'm centered sometimes. They're Fast up close where anywhere inside the notch is acceptable...

-rvb

Just measured. I have the .150. Using the calipers set to .130, it looks like it'd be perfect. I might give the .130s a try...

my front is .115, I'm guessing your .105 is w.o FO?

-rvb

 

[rvb]

Maybe the truglo things have improved, but the couple of people I knew that had them they came apart in a couple thousand rounds....

-rvb

 

[Rob377]

Well, okey-dokey then. You are too good not to pay attention to your opinion. I have been pretty happy with the Truglo TFO but haven't had to shoot at any very small targets over a long distance yet so maybe I don't know how much better it could be. I guess that I will have to look at your suggestions for my next upgrade.

I didn't mean that to come off as snarky as it might have, FWIW, but accuracy is important in both games. The quality of the sights and sight picture are important for the harder shots, but not so much for close hoser targets. MY opinion is to choose sights that work well for the former rather than the latter.

The usual suspects at Dawson and Shooter's connection don't carry the narrow notch that I've seen. The first one I ordered from Sevigney's website. The 2nd from CPWSA.

 

[Lunati]

I would personally go with Dawson Precision, you can find the smaller front sight at Shooters Connection. Had to order my rear from Dawson and my front from SC.

 

[jdorp]

Thanks for all the input. I find that I really like the night sights I have because I can really tell when my focus has shifted for the front sight by concentrating on whether or not I can see both the capsule and the white circle around the capsule. Is there some detail on the non-fiber optic sights to focus on whether or not your focusing on the front sight?

 

[Snizz1911]

Thanks for all the input. I find that I really like the night sights I have because I can really tell when my focus has shifted for the front sight by concentrating on whether or not I can see both the capsule and the white circle around the capsule. Is there some detail on the non-fiber optic sights to focus on whether or not your focusing on the front sight?

I think I understand your question not sure, the fiber optic should be extremely easy to focus on. There made to stand out, and most guys running them use plain rear sights, so when you see the fiber you see the front sight. A fiber front should be easier to find your front sight then a 3 dot night sight. once you find the fiber your lining it up with the rear sight just like any other similar system. Does that make sense or did I misunderstand your question?

 

[rvb]

Is there some detail on the non-fiber optic sights to focus on whether or not your focusing on the front sight?

most front sights are serrated (they're there not to focus on but to keep glare off the front sight... but they are a good visual clue your eye is focused on the right thing).

I prefer an all black front sight, but I run fiber optic. Sometimes you get a stage, especially early in the morning when the sun is low and in your eyes, that the sights are hard to find. The FO helps my eye find the FS faster in those cases (sometimes all you can see is the glowing FO dot for a couple targets on the stage). In bad lighting it helps me track it in recoil, too.

fiber doesn't hurt anything so long as you have the discipline to not start using it like a red dot... you still need to shoot the irons.

learn to focus on the FS w/o needing the reassurance of seeing circles, FO, etc. If it's crisp it's in focus. Any other 'verification' is just going to slow you down.

-rvb

 

[jdorp]

I researched Warren Sivigny but I am reading that some people say you need a .215 tall front sight for a 34 and some say to use a .245. What has your experience been?

 

[jdorp]

most front sights are serrated (they're there not to focus on but to keep glare off the front sight... but they are a good visual clue your eye is focused on the right thing).

I prefer an all black front sight, but I run fiber optic. Sometimes you get a stage, especially early in the morning when the sun is low and in your eyes, that the sights are hard to find. The FO helps my eye find the FS faster in those cases (sometimes all you can see is the glowing FO dot for a couple targets on the stage). In bad lighting it helps me track it in recoil, too.


fiber doesn't hurt anything so long as you have the discipline to not start using it like a red dot... you still need to shoot the irons.


learn to focus on the FS w/o needing the reassurance of seeing circles, FO, etc. If it's crisp it's in focus. Any other 'verification' is just going to slow you down.

Thanks for the advice. I see your point about the looking for detail slowing me down. Just need more practice. Thanks again!

 

[rvb]

I researched Warren Sivigny but I am reading that some people say you need a .215 tall front sight for a 34 and some say to use a .245. What has your experience been?

I have the taller of the two on both my 19 and my 34. They both hit dead on for me; I can center punch a paster at 10 yds. The shortr sight resulted in a 6oclock hold on my 34. Too lazy too look it up, but it hit several inches high at 25yds. With the taller sights my group is centered maybe 1" high at 25. Some shooters, incl Sevigny iirc, like the 6oclock hold... And I can see how it might be faster on steel or plate racks or even head shots.... It's just not what I was used to.

-rvb

 

[Rob377]

I have the taller of the two on both my 19 and my 34. They both hit dead on for me; I can center punch a paster at 10 yds. The shortr sight resulted in a 6oclock hold on my 34. Too lazy too look it up, but it hit several inches high at 25yds. With the taller sights my group is centered maybe 1" high at 25. Some shooters, incl Sevigny iirc, like the 6oclock hold... And I can see how it might be faster on steel or plate racks or even head shots.... It's just not what I was used to.

-rvb

Same here with 4 different G17s and 2 different 34s. All hit dead on with a .245

 

[Slawburger]

Okay Rob377 and rvb you talked me into trying them.

I just ordered a set of Warren Sevigny competition sights. I went with the .245" high fiber optic and the plain rear. I might try the plain front sight later but will start with the FO.