Sight Orientation.

[Brazos John]

This was one of the photos of a gun-for-sale, where a comment said that the sight
was backwards, but another comment said it wasn't.
The sight on my rifle is the same way.
It makes more sense to me as shown, but I'm no authority.
What say ye authorities or educated shooters?

 

[BJamesBeck]

That sight is installed correctly.

 

[Brokennock]

This was one of the photos of a gun-for-sale, where a comment said that the sight
was backwards, but another comment said it wasn't.
The sight on my rifle is the same way.
It makes more sense to me as shown, but I'm no authority.
What say ye authorities or educated shooters?


View attachment 115427

Traditionally speaking it seems backwards.
However, for reasons of glare reduction and sight picture crispness, I prefer it the way you have it.

 

[Tom A Hawk]

Its correct. While opposite to many ramped modern handgun sights you want to see the taller end when looking through the rear sight notch. This provides a crisper sight picture especially in bright sun light. I also have square back "Patridge" style sights on my unmentionable hunting handguns.

 

[Larry (Omaha)]

This was one of the photos of a gun-for-sale, where a comment said that the sight
was backwards, but another comment said it wasn't.
The sight on my rifle is the same way.
It makes more sense to me as shown, but I'm no authority.
What say ye authorities or educated shooters?

Bingo!! Your common sense is telling you correct. No matter what someone may think about appearance of a mounted sight, it needs to be placed so it is the most functional to the human eye. If it were 180 deg to as shown, the eye would have to scan through/over the sloped section to find the highest point. Not Good!
Larry

 

[tenngun]

It’s the way all my sights go on

 

[Brazos John]

I knew y'all would know!
Thanks!

 

[Larry (Omaha)]

I knew y'all would know!
Thanks!

Hey, give yourself some credit too! You already knew the answer, just wanted to ask us pupils.
Larry

 

[hanshi]

Absolutely correct IMO. It also allows you to file the face flat for something like a "patridge" configuration.

 

[oldwood]

Correct as is. If backwards , the other way , penumbra from the slope will change the point of aim depending on light conditions

 

[andy52]

I only have one gun that I installed the sight in reverse on.
It's a Kentucky pistol, I just like the look of the front sight and had to do it in reverse, or I would have had a short bayonet on the front.

 

[ord sgt]

I just like the look of the front sight and had to do it in reverse, or I would have had a short bayonet on the front.

I have the same front sight on my Jaeger flintlock rifle. Same sight orientation. I do get good groups at 50 yards. Most of my other rifles have the barley corn front sights that are reversed from this one. The sight picture is good with either type sight. IMHO, it doesn't make any difference which way the front sight is mounted. If it looks good to you, go for it.

 

[longcruise]

Whatever way suits you. The early rifles had it in reverse of yours. Look at pictures of colonial and post colonial rifles and you will see that.

 

[BJamesBeck]

Whatever way suits you. The early rifles had it in reverse of yours. Look at pictures of colonial and post colonial rifles and you will see that.

That's not necessarily true. Most original rifles I have seen have a symmetrical low "half moon" front sight blade that would look the same orientated either direction.

 

[Col. Batguano]

Ramped modern (service) handgun sights are that way for ease of smooth drawing from a holster. If you look at most dedicated target gun sights they are sharper to the rear. Holster / scabbard draw is generally not a large concern with long guns, especially long rifles.

 

[hanshi]

All mine have front sights oriented the same as yours, except for the "turtle" sight on the smoothbore.

 

[jackpine54]

Looks correct to me.

 

[longcruise]

That's not necessarily true. Most original rifles I have seen have a symmetrical low "half moon" front sight blade that would look the same orientated either direction.

That's pretty murch what I meant but didn't describe very well.

 

[Col. Batguano]

How the heck those guys from the olden days were able to cope with those extremely low and small sights continues to confound me, yet they seem to prevail.

That's the one part of my builds I tend to deviate from the originals on. I don't make them to modern heights, but the lowest I can make them, and still be able to use them reasonably quickly in situations other than "perfect light"..

 

[flashpoint]

You are totally right. The sight is not sdrawkcab.