The Colt Open Top Hammer Sight

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Joined
Dec 26, 2023
Messages
646
Reaction score
640
Location
Alaska
I thought this was worth its own post as 45D and I had the same reaction to cutting the Hammer Sight Notch deeper, you are not changing anything.

My take was you also would have to grind down the area above the sight slot and lower the whole top to lower your POI. Seems like front sight fix is a lot better.

And to add in a 2 cents, looking at that slot on my 47 Walker (a sample of one so I don't say it applies to all Open Tops) is that its at the wrong angle.

Putting a thin ruler in that slot when the hammer is full ****, its rakes up at a 30-40 deg angle. So the only part you can see is the very top of that slot for a sight picture. Be curious if anyone has original Colt Open top pictures of the hammer sight notch.

I have cut mine open more left and right to get more of a view and it has helped. But I am working on it at the top area as any more depth would require cutting down in that small spot. I may do it but I do this stuff a bit at a time.

And being the odd ball that I am, I also upset the front sight, its still lodged in the slot but rotated up and will see how much that helps. I don't think it will come loose but will keep an eye on it and its range only so I have control over that, not something you would want to try for a field gun. I did that last night and both the filing and the front sight will be a test to see how it affects the all too high POI (well the rear is for sight picture and the front is for lowering POI)

I can also access it to measure it for when I get a piece of brass that I can make into a higher front sight and install it. Then I have to see how the sight picture is with square, or open up the left to right on the hammer more or taper the front sight like it is.
 
The pictures are not great but not selling anything (grin). I think they convey what I am saying.

The ruler in the one shows how it lays if you rock it back and forth and take the flattest part of the notch. The other is at a normal sight of paralleled the barrel. That is the area I am working on for wider (not deeper)
 

Attachments

  • Notch  From Top.JPG
    Notch From Top.JPG
    49.1 KB
  • Notch Angle.JPG
    Notch Angle.JPG
    125.9 KB
  • Notch from Rear.JPG
    Notch from Rear.JPG
    100.4 KB
  • Notch The Way it should be.JPG
    Notch The Way it should be.JPG
    122.6 KB
  • Temp Displaced Front Sight.JPG
    Temp Displaced Front Sight.JPG
    107.7 KB
Thanks for those pics. They do help. I too am going to raise the front sight as my gun shoots a foot high at about 10 yards. She’s otherwise a peach so I want to wring the best out of her.

PS I’m thinking a nicely made and carefully installed dovetail front sight might be the ticket. Not authentic but I can keep it simple and traditional looking hopefully.
 
I think however you go about it is fine. The reproductions are not original so anything you do is not messing with somethi8ng that is authentic.

I would never touch an original with any mod but these are a place to do what you want that corrects things . Generally we are not on horseback shooting people at 50 yards these days.

I plan on copying the existing lower part of the sight and make the upper part a lot higher. Then I will see what the sight picture is like with a square front and decide how I want to shape it.

I love the Partridge type sight system so a less than great copy of that may be the end result with a wider r4ear notch that is squared off as best I can.

But it can be made ramped or square or undercut whatever works best for my eyes.
 
Lowering the hammer notch will fall short of lowering the point of impact because you wind up looking at the cylinder before it’s low enough. Raise the front sight first.

While I agree on what works best to lower POI, the cylinder on at least the 47 Walker is lower than the rear frame and front barrel.

I believe you could have some affect on lowering POI if you work it in the right spots but I don't think its worth it if you have to do the front sight and I don't know you could lower enough at the rear to get POI to match POA at 25 yards (that is my metric for shooting, others of course have greater or shorter ranges for what they do)
 
Last edited:
Lowering the hammer notch will fall short of lowering the point of impact because you wind up looking at the cylinder before it’s low enough. Raise the front sight first.

While I agree on what works best to lower POI, the cylinder on at least the 47 Walker is lower than the rear frame and front barrel.

I believe you could have some affect on lowering POI if you work it in the right spots but I don't think its worth it if you have to do the front sight and I don't know you could lower enough at the rear to get POI to match POA at 25 yards (that is my metric for shooting, others of course have greater or shorter ranges for what they do)
Vtigunparts has the Open top 1872 sights listed. They are taller than the 1860 sight blade and they’ll pop right in. Generally they’re just about right. So does the SAA sight blade but it’s very tall and would require a lot of filing.
 
Lowering the hammer notch will fall short of lowering the point of impact because you wind up looking at the cylinder before it’s low enough. Raise the front sight first.

That hasn't quite been my experience. Obviously it would do no good to lower the sight notch in the hammer to an unusable depth but you can relieve it enough to locate the top of the front sight "within" the rear sight notch to better find a POA / POI.
As I previously posted (as well as Bad Karma) putting a taller front sight will add to the range capability of the "fixed" sight as / if needed.

Mike
 
Last edited:
I messed up. That was intended to be a quote (or should have have been) from another poster.

Full on board as clearly the cylinder is lower than the frame or the barrel assembly.

Vtigunparts has the Open top 1872 sights listed. They are taller than the 1860 sight blade and they’ll pop right in. Generally they’re just about right. So does the SAA sight blade but it’s very tall and would require a lot of filing.

I have a 47 Walker - is the sight the same or ??????
 
On my Uberti Navy I replaced the front sight with a taller piece of brass rod. I filed to POA at 25. To correct the windage I bought another hammer and widened the notch in direction needed. The extra hammer was in case I screwed up.
 
I've always wondered if WE aren't applying our method of using a sight and expectations instead of how THEY used them when talking Cap-n-Ball revolvers? For example, at most handgun fight distances which are at 10 feet or less, would you be taking the time to "aim" using the sights, OR would you be point shooting?

At a distance where the sights would be used, are they not correct? The Hickock-Tutt fight of 1865 took place at what reportedly was 75 yards, and Hickock is reported to have used his sights, striking Tutt between the fifth and seventh ribs. As Tutt was standing with his left side toward Hickock when struck, the bullet traversed his chest cavity, and he died about a minute or less after impact.

That may be pretty accurate, but Hickock did not report where on Tutt he was aiming when he fired. IF Hickock was aiming at Tutt where Tutt's head met the shoulders, then that's a pretty good drop, but, perhaps Hickock knew that his pistols were good at 40 yards using the sights, and simply trusted the handgun would hit Tutt somewhere in the torso. I doubt Wild Bill knew Tutt was at 75 yards, and suspect he only knew Tutt was a "good way off, so hold a bit high". Hickock did use his left arm to steady his aim when firing at Tutt.

Have we tried out our Colt copies to see where those sights actually lob the bullet with proper self defense powder loads, or are we trying to make the sights work with light loads at twenty-five feet?

LD
 
I've always wondered if WE aren't applying our method of using a sight and expectations instead of how THEY used them when talking Cap-n-Ball revolvers? For example, at most handgun fight distances which are at 10 feet or less, would you be taking the time to "aim" using the sights, OR would you be point shooting?

At a distance where the sights would be used, are they not correct? The Hickock-Tutt fight of 1865 took place at what reportedly was 75 yards, and Hickock is reported to have used his sights, striking Tutt between the fifth and seventh ribs. As Tutt was standing with his left side toward Hickock when struck, the bullet traversed his chest cavity, and he died about a minute or less after impact.

That may be pretty accurate, but Hickock did not report where on Tutt he was aiming when he fired. IF Hickock was aiming at Tutt where Tutt's head met the shoulders, then that's a pretty good drop, but, perhaps Hickock knew that his pistols were good at 40 yards using the sights, and simply trusted the handgun would hit Tutt somewhere in the torso. I doubt Wild Bill knew Tutt was at 75 yards, and suspect he only knew Tutt was a "good way off, so hold a bit high". Hickock did use his left arm to steady his aim when firing at Tutt.

Have we tried out our Colt copies to see where those sights actually lob the bullet with proper self defense powder loads, or are we trying to make the sights work with light loads at twenty-five feet?

LD
That has always been my thoughts as well.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top