A compromise normally denotes both sides, in this case, contact range vs extended range, finding an appropriate middel ground. The Suresight, from what I can see, offers nothing in the extended range avenue, and posibly something at extreme close range. Looks to me that the Big Dot is a much more practical design, as at the ranges the SureSight may actually be useable, no sights or a Gutter Snipe would be just as useful.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Suresight is finally here.......
- Thread starter UH1-D Rotorhead
- Start date
A compromise normally denotes both sides, in this case, contact range vs extended range, finding an appropriate middel ground. The Suresight, from what I can see, offers nothing in the extended range avenue, and posibly something at extreme close range. Looks to me that the Big Dot is a much more practical design, as at the ranges the SureSight may actually be useable, no sights or a Gutter Snipe would be just as useful.
UH1-D Rotorhead
Moderator
Chaim....
...some of those folks on Glock talk claim having bought your sights at MidwayUSA....after scouring their on line catalog, and scouring my paper version, followed up by a call to Midway, where they state they don't carry your sites, as well as a call to Dallas Tactical...another company mentioned that sells your sights, also deny ever having them... how did these Glocksters buy sights that don't exist in Midway's or Dallas' inventory?
...some of those folks on Glock talk claim having bought your sights at MidwayUSA....after scouring their on line catalog, and scouring my paper version, followed up by a call to Midway, where they state they don't carry your sites, as well as a call to Dallas Tactical...another company mentioned that sells your sights, also deny ever having them... how did these Glocksters buy sights that don't exist in Midway's or Dallas' inventory?
UH1-D Rotorhead,
If you look at the dates of their posts, you'll see those folks bought product several years ago. This is back when the product was distributed by TRUGLO. The TRUGLO version of SureSight hasn't been available for years.
At this time, the SureSight website is the only place to purchase the new version. (Actually, until next week, you'll have to sign up HERE in order to pre-order)
Hope that clears things up,
--Chaim
If you look at the dates of their posts, you'll see those folks bought product several years ago. This is back when the product was distributed by TRUGLO. The TRUGLO version of SureSight hasn't been available for years.
At this time, the SureSight website is the only place to purchase the new version. (Actually, until next week, you'll have to sign up HERE in order to pre-order)
Hope that clears things up,
--Chaim
glock glockler
New member
I just thought I'd give this thread a bump, hopefully there has been some more experience with these sights that could give us insight to how they work in the real world, I certainly find the idea interesting and would be interested hearing about testing in the field.
I have no taste for crow, nor do I feel entitled to a helping. This was the one online review I found, but not everything exists on the internet. I have absolutely no problems trusting James Yeager. Him refusing to try the sights is completely inconsequential as I, for one, do not need to eat poop to know what it tastes like
If you had 100 people line up to be fed a teaspoon of poop I am betting all of them would agree that it actually tastes like poop, I'd read reviews by many people who like these sights. If people were being fed poop why would they say it tastes like ice cream?
The sight makes no sense, and answers a question not asked. What benefit it serves at extreme close range, if any, is far offset by the detraction from intermediate to long range accuracy
Why, necessarily, would these sight be worse at range than notch and post sights? These have a smaller aim point which would therefore be more precise, and the rest is a matter of maintaining a shape while shooting: with these it's a triangle and with the notch and posts it's a rectangle.
If this is your cup of tea, then fine, but I have no need for a "square wheel."
The opinion would have vastly more weight if you actually tried the product in question.
I have no taste for crow, nor do I feel entitled to a helping. This was the one online review I found, but not everything exists on the internet. I have absolutely no problems trusting James Yeager. Him refusing to try the sights is completely inconsequential as I, for one, do not need to eat poop to know what it tastes like
If you had 100 people line up to be fed a teaspoon of poop I am betting all of them would agree that it actually tastes like poop, I'd read reviews by many people who like these sights. If people were being fed poop why would they say it tastes like ice cream?
The sight makes no sense, and answers a question not asked. What benefit it serves at extreme close range, if any, is far offset by the detraction from intermediate to long range accuracy
Why, necessarily, would these sight be worse at range than notch and post sights? These have a smaller aim point which would therefore be more precise, and the rest is a matter of maintaining a shape while shooting: with these it's a triangle and with the notch and posts it's a rectangle.
If this is your cup of tea, then fine, but I have no need for a "square wheel."
The opinion would have vastly more weight if you actually tried the product in question.