Cobalt sites or Lazer grips?:

[TPC]

Any takes on the Lazer Grips?;
http://www.shooters-resource.com/category/Gl.html

We Googled Cobalt sites, nothing came up.
Are they still available?

Any takes?

 

[Yellowboat]

lasers can be a great training tool. they allow you to see what you are doing the triger. other then that I don't care for them.


glowing night sites have just as many pros as cons, if you like them, use them.

 

[Outnumbered]

Try before you buy. Depends upon the gun and the sight brand. May make the grip too fat for your hand or difficult to reach the mag release. Also depends on your use. Lasers are pretty useless in the daylight. I would recommend the Tru Glo Tritium fiber optic night sights. I cannot think of a reason not to have them. They enhance daylight and are a must in low light.

 

[Yellowboat]

I can, they stop glowing, can give away your postion, don't like cleaning solvents, can actually distract some shooters( me), can't get them with a narrow blade up front... etc


if you like them, great, get them.

 

[IRRebel]

I can, they stop glowing, can give away your postion, don't like cleaning solvents, can actually distract some shooters( me), can't get them with a narrow blade up front... etc


if you like them, great, get them.

I use tritiums on both my carry guns (a .45 and a 10mm, both S&W), and like them, but they are very distractive at night.

In low light, they're great, where most of us use them, if at all, target shooting early in the morning or late in the evening. At night, however, when I drag one out at 3 in the morning for an unusual "Bump" in the night, they're like the kids glo sticks they carry for Halloween! Good luck seeing your intended target around them, or even focusing, should there be one!

I have blacked out the rear sights on mine and only the front sight glows now. Hoping that if it needs to be employed, instinct and all that practice will put the rear sights where they need to be. (Should be).

Never been a fan of lasers of any kind. They work both ways, for one, and on heavy calibers like a 45 or 10mm, or a handgun that gets jostled around quite a bit, I seriously doubt they hold zero.

Ray

 

[Chico&Zeus]

For my Glock 21, Lasermax internal laser is the only way to go. No exterior pressure switches and no conflicts with any holster. Laser is a strobe flash that your eye picks up very fast.

 

[Flyinbowtie]

Ross,

I have a set of Trijicon sights on one of my Sigs. They are grest for night work, and seem to be impervious to Break Free, which is what I primarily use for cleaning the weapon. They can give away your position if the weapon winds up in the bad guy's line of sight.
We trained to avoid this at work.
I like them.
I had a set of Crimson Trace LaserGrips on another Sig. While they are a neat idea, I could not get them to hold zero well enough to suit me. They did fit very well and did not impact my grip, but the zero issue was unacceptable, they came off and were traded for other stuff.
I don't have any personal experience wth any of the other units, but have heard the same complaint about them.

 

[Staubi]

I have teh Crimson Laser grips, no change to the size of the grip and I like the fact that it is pressure activated so it only lights up the target the moment before I shoot. Ideal for low light and situations that are of an extreme threat do to the fact that usually when threatened you focus and fix on the threat and not the sites of the weapon. Laser grips allow you to aquire your target and have a refrence point on target as to the general location of where the round should strike, no need to stare down and try to line up your sites. just point and shoot (with practice) very practical I believe for home defense at night with little to no light.

 

[HolyMoly]

Like with anything else, it is personal preference.

Lasers have a specific use tactically. Mostly used when you cannot, or should not have enough light for your sights, but your target is easily identified. They are also good for situations when you cannot sight-in in any situation day or night. Lasers are really good for training, especially if you are trying to improve point shooting. You can watch what your muzzle points at as you present. You can see how bad your muzzle dips due to lack of trigger control.

Night Sights, or really better described as Low Light Sights are really only useful for about 40 minutes per day....when the light is low enough to positively identify your target, but not enough light to see your sights. When it is dark, those night sights tend to broadcast "shoot here." When I do night shoots, it is kinda fun to see all the people with night sights....they are like day-glo sticks. And some of the brighter ones actually ruin your night vision.

I do a LOT of night shooting (doing some tonight!), I have neither a laser nor night sights. I use a tactical flashlight (Harries method) and once I light up my target, I can see my sights very easily. Night shooting with a tactical light also tends to help you shoot better because the sillouettes of the sights are really easy to acquire and focus on. The problem with the Harries Method is that it is fatiguing! But, I can use any flashlight with this method. I like to say that there are no bad methods, but in the case of Night shooting, the FBI method sucks and is just plain stupid.:thumbsup

 

[Staubi]

I like to say that there are no bad methods, but in the case of Night shooting, the FBI method sucks and is just plain stupid.:thumbsup

would this be the method of crouching holding the light above your head???

I have the Z2 surefire which I like, I like the fact I can keep a two handed grip with it along with the momentary on function.

 

[HolyMoly]

would this be the method of crouching holding the light above your head???

I have the Z2 surefire which I like, I like the fact I can keep a two handed grip with it along with the momentary on function.

Yes. FBI holding the light above their heads...they actually light themselves up very well with that method making it easy for the adversary to pick and choose where he wants to shoot. The idea was that the adversary would shoot at the light...and by moving the light away from your center of mass, you would be less likely to take fatal rounds. Good idea in theory, just not very good in real life.

The method you use is called Rogers. It is a very good method, but you can really only use tactical lights designed for that. Remember, 1 light = no light, so have at least one spare. If you hands are big enough, you can use most small tactical lights. Rogers also works well for both Weaver and Isosceleshttp://mathworld.wolfram.com/IsoscelesTriangle.html stances/styles of shooting. The method I train on, Harries, is only good for Weaver.

 

[Staubi]

Yes. FBI holding the light above their heads...they actually light themselves up very well with that method making it easy for the adversary to pick and choose where he wants to shoot. The idea was that the adversary would shoot at the light...and by moving the light away from your center of mass, you would be less likely to take fatal rounds. Good idea in theory, just not very good in real life.

The method you use is called Rogers. It is a very good method, but you can really only use tactical lights designed for that. Remember, 1 light = no light, so have at least one spare. If you hands are big enough, you can use most small tactical lights. Rogers also works well for both Weaver and Isosceleshttp://mathworld.wolfram.com/IsoscelesTriangle.html stances/styles of shooting. The method I train on, Harries, is only good for Weaver.

When I was doing SECFOR with my unit I always had at least 2 one Mag and the Z2 on occassion I'd carry a green laser with a flood lens on it works great for temp blinding of adversary as well, all good for CQC. Used the Harries tech with the Maglite, it was a 6 cell probably bad habit but could rest the back of the light on my shoulder

isosceles is nice but dont care for how much it exposes the body but great sturdy shooting platform

 

[460]

I couldnt get grip to hold zero worth a shit.

 

[Staubi]

I couldnt get grip to hold zero worth a shit.

and you probably never will, just like once it is zeroed, its only zeroed at that specific distance. so unless you know for a fact your threat is exactly 20 meters away its only gonna give you a good reference of point of impact. In home defense if you place it center mass you will hit your intended target, all takes practice tho. and personal preference is a big factor as well

How far off zero are you talking about????

 

[460]

and you probably never will, just like once it is zeroed, its only zeroed at that specific distance. so unless you know for a fact your threat is exactly 20 meters away its only gonna give you a good reference of point of impact. In home defense if you place it center mass you will hit your intended target, all takes practice tho. and personal preference is a big factor as well

How far off zero are you talking about????

Its been so long since we tried them. I think we went 10,15,20 ft. I didnt like them because they made the grip bigger. Didnt sit well in my hand.

 

[Froggystyle]

The method I train on, Harries, is only good for Weaver.

...which is only good for target practice...

Isosceles baby... I can't believe they are training you guys tactically on Weaver...

 

[Baja Big Dog]

Give me white outlines, not illuminated, non glowing, just plain ole white outlines and white front sight, for a few reasons, ....

I like the lazer stuff, got a few with them, but its a novelty.

Flashlights?? Cant see the coordination required to handle this, but I do drive the short bus.

 

[Staubi]

Disregard.....lol I've had a couple already and had a massive brain fart.....

 

[Staubi]

Give me white outlines, not illuminated, non glowing, just plain ole white outlines and white front sight, for a few reasons, ....

I like the lazer stuff, got a few with them, but its a novelty.

Flashlights?? Cant see the coordination required to handle this, but I do drive the short bus.

Yea I'd never substitute for regular sites but do like the fact that i can shoot from an off possition and target acquisition is quick if ever the need should arise. again a good reference of point of impact when a quick shot may need to be made, not something to use regularly

 

[VoodooMedMan]

...which is only good for target practice...

Isosceles baby... I can't believe they are training you guys tactically on Weaver...

I'm glad the seal said it before me. I didn't want to be too nitpicky.

 

[Froggystyle]

I'm glad the SEAL said it before me. I didn't want to be too nitpicky.

Actually, I could give a shit... I was just messing with HM. If they are teaching good, safe gun use and deployment, I don't care how they aim.

That said, the only way we teach and learn is with Isosceles, for about a million reasons, only 500,000 or so of which actually pertain to the average civilian shooter.

It is a better, more stable, more maneuverable, stronger, easier to strike from form though, and from a tactical perspective, I can't imagine why you would ever teach Weaver, except that the goofy hold actually does decrease the effort needed to hold the gun up... so I guess it would be good for women and small guys.

I wonder how many people have no idea what I am talking about?

On that note, if you shoot Weaver and don't know what I am talking about, point your gun at the far wall, and then, without moving your feet, shoot the wall to your left... Oh, wait... never mind... you can't.

 

[VoodooMedMan]

One other really good reason is that if a bullet enters at let's say your right nipple and you are standing Isosceles then it goes through one lung. Now if you are standing Weaver then how many other organs does it get to.

Actually, I could give a shit... I was just messing with HM. If they are teaching good, safe gun use and deployment, I don't care how they aim.

That said, the only way we teach and learn is with Isosceles, for about a million reasons, only 500,000 or so of which actually pertain to the average civilian shooter.

It is a better, more stable, more maneuverable, stronger, easier to strike from form though, and from a tactical perspective, I can't imagine why you would ever teach Weaver, except that the goofy hold actually does decrease the effort needed to hold the gun up... so I guess it would be good for women and small guys.

I wonder how many people have no idea what I am talking about?

On that note, if you shoot Weaver and don't know what I am talking about, point your gun at the far wall, and then, without moving your feet, shoot the wall to your left... Oh, wait... never mind... you can't.

 

[Froggystyle]

One other really good reason is that if a bullet enters at let's say your right nipple and you are standing Isosceles then it goes through one lung. Now if you are standing Weaver then how many other organs does it get to.

I choose my shooting stance based on the principle that I am the one doing the pitching, not the catching...

Fuck profile... the guy who gets the largest number of bullets into the largest number of booger eaters is going to win the fight. "Don't get shot" is a great rule, and it applies to stance.

 

[HolyMoly]

Actually, I could give a shit... I was just messing with HM. If they are teaching good, safe gun use and deployment, I don't care how they aim.

I didn't even see you given me grief! LOL!

 

[HolyMoly]

Wes...sorry for my inaccuracy...I should have said Modern Weaver of possibly Modified Weaver, which is quite different from the original Weaver. Kept the isometric grip, but the stance is very shallow. Perhaps you should get caught up on how this stance has evolved?

 

[Froggystyle]

Wes...sorry for my inaccuracy...I should have said Modern Weaver of possibly Modified Weaver, which is quite different from the original Weaver. Kept the isometric grip, but the stance is very shallow. Perhaps you should get caught up on how this stance has evolved?

Can you shoot it with a gas mask on, and sling fire your weapon like that? Then it is still Weaver... and still basura...

Sounds like in order to improve the Weaver stance, they made it more like Isosceles... Hmmmmm..

 

[Deleted Account]

Wes...sorry for my inaccuracy...I should have said Modern Weaver of possibly Modified Weaver, which is quite different from the original Weaver. Kept the isometric grip, but the stance is very shallow. Perhaps you should get caught up on how this stance has evolved?

LMAO. I learned isos originally. Front Sight said hey, just try this new stance out on my first training class... So on the last day they sent us through the shoot house. I got in the zone and everything got hit twice, double tap, from isos.

The instructor just looked at me and shook his head...:thumbsup

 

[Froggystyle]

LMAO. I learned isos originally. Front Sight said hey, just try this new stance out on my first training class... So on the last day they sent us through the shoot house. I got in the zone and everything got hit twice, double tap, from isos.

The instructor just looked at me and shook his head...:thumbsup

Cool. For shooting and moving, nothing beats Isosceles. Even better for striking with the weapon, switching from primary to secondary, stacking up on a door in a train, firing from retention, then presenting, and even firing blind... the Isos stance will allow a natural point of aim that even with your eyes closed will still put you in a 12" group at 7 yards or so. Try that with any name of Weaver...

It is a great combination of bone support, symmetrical muscle strain, better absorption of recoil, easier failure manipulation, yada yada yada. It is just better.

 

[Deleted Account]

We just booked a Magpul handgun class. They teach isos. It will be a bit interesting comparing the two schools of thought. I just plan on going in with an open mind, ready to learn...

Oh and Frank, it's 2,000 rounds for the 3 day course...:thumbsup And I bought a new Wilson CQB, so no more band-aids from the TRP checkering!

http://www.magpuldynamics.com/training/b_handgun.shtml

 

[HolyMoly]

Can you shoot it with a gas mask on, and sling fire your weapon like that? Then it is still Weaver... and still basura...

Sounds like in order to improve the Weaver stance, they made it more like Isosceles... Hmmmmm..

Froggy: You are using Bonetti's Defense against me, ah?

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000144/HM: I thought it fitting considering the rocky terrain.

Froggy: Naturally, you must suspect me to attack with Capa Ferro?

HM: Naturally... but I find that Thibault cancels out Capa Ferro. Don't you?

Froggy: Unless the enemy has studied his Agrippa... which I have.

 

[SHOCKtheMONKEY]

Saw this the other day, pretty cool...


[video=youtube;ZTr8xvkUWp4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTr8xvkUWp4[/video]

 

[Froggystyle]

Froggy: You are using Bonetti's Defense against me, ah?

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000144/HM: I thought it fitting considering the rocky terrain.

Froggy: Naturally, you must suspect me to attack with Capa Ferro?

HM: Naturally... but I find that Thibault cancels out Capa Ferro. Don't you?

Froggy: Unless the enemy has studied his Agrippa... which I have.

But how would you present a weapon if you had six fingers on one hand?

 

[HolyMoly]

But how would you present a weapon if you had six fingers on one hand?

 

[Froggystyle]

Ironically... his name was Wesley also...

 

[HolyMoly]

Ironically... his name was Wesley also...

But no one would take the Dread Pirate Wesley seriously.

 

[Froggystyle]

But no one would take the Dread Pirate Wesley seriously.

No one would surrender...