Fixing the Vaquero sights once and for all!

J

Jim March

New member
Gents,

As you know, I've been trying to figure out how to put a GOOD rear sight on a Ruger SA, one that doesn't overhang the rear and screw up hammer access.

Front sights are easy. Ashley sells a universal revolver barrel front base that takes a variety of heights of dovetailed front sights of whatever height and type you're into.

It's the rear that's tricky.

So:
vaquerorearsight.gif


Waddya think?
 
Doesn't do a thing for me, but my FLG has been sketching similar ring sights for months, now. So you may both be on to something.
 
Jim March, I hope you want some feedback on your idea, so here we go. The idea looks good as i myself like ghost rings on my handguns. The position though raises some concerns for holsters, but this can be over come. Another area that i need clarification on is the height of the sights, and again this coming from a holster side of things. All in all it sounds like a project that could work.

One suggestion, and take it for what it is worth, have you looked into just machining a glock slot into the topstrap and mounting an Aro-Tek Ghost ring there? Don't know if it would work but it would be lower profile and shorter overall. just a thought take it for what it is.
 
Popbang: the upper surface of the topstrap isn't at all flat, it's got a "double wave in it". In order to get a good dovetail fit, you'd either have to grind away a flat (reducing strength) or weld on more metal and re-treat it, which is expensive as hell.

This would involve only two very small holes in the topstrap, and the tube would fit "down inside" the normal sight channel really well.

Come to think, you could do minor elevation adjustments with small shims folded around the under curvature of the sight tube.
 
As to holsters: one word for ya, KYDEX.

We're not dealing with CAS/SASS here, this is about a fast-handling combat gun that in terms of "first reactive strike" is a match for anything made.
 
Woods gun capable of fast-handling reactive defense against critters, also capable of longer shots than the Vaquero sights can normally pull, and if you're crazy enough, the ultimate CCW SA :D.

Basically, the only thing close is the Freedom Arms 97 frame with adjustable sights. Similar handling, but can't handle .44Mag power levels the way a Vaquero can.

With a DA gun, we think nothing of being able to do relatively fast first shots via a "grab, draw, DA stroke" and still have good sights if you need to take a long shot. But with SAs, esp. Rugers, we're forced to choose between fast-draw capable Vaqueros with crummy sights, and decent sights on the Blackhawk that screw up fast thumb-knuckling on the draw.

I want BOTH, dammit! :). And A), I can't afford an FA regardless, B) I want more horsepower than you can get out of the FA97 and C), I don't want to lug around a .454-sized FA.

So put a geniune sight on the Vaquero, and you've finally got the answer.

That, or find an old-model flattop .357 and put a Glock dovetail on it!?
 
Yes, I've seen that.

It's as bad as a Blackhawk, in terms of hammer access. Might make for a "prettier" overall gun, but that's about it.

Look, compare the rear sight positions to the hammer locations. Since it's the same hammer in the "original blackhawk" and Alpha Precision pictures, you can line up the "dish" in the hammer (and the point where it ends to go horizontal as it goes into the frame) with the back of the sight.

If anything, Jim Stroh has created more of a "rear overhang" problem than the Blackhawk has. The results are expensive and useless for my needs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top