Glock Pro Forums banner
1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
There is very little information available for these sights on the internet so I wanted to get a thread started on here for anyone who might be curious about them.

Jason Falla of Redback One Training Systems partnered with Hilton Yam of 10-8 Performance to create these sights. The concept was to take an already great platform created by Hilton Yam and "fine tune" it to make the ultimate set of combat sights for the Glock platform. The RB1 sights feature a .125" wide by .215" tall front sight with a small .60" tritium insert set as high as possible in the blade without any sort of distracting outline. The rear is a plain black sight with a .156" square notch, both front and rear sights have 40lpi serrations to reduce glare.

These sights are very similar to the 10-8 Performance sights, however only come in one configuration and size option and you must purchase them as a set. Some of the other main differences are the square rear notch, a slightly smaller and higher set tritium vial in the front, and the front has a slightly different side profile. I really like all these changes to the standard 10-8 sights and I think this setup definitely fills a niche for a lot of people out there. I placed an order on Tuesday and on Thursday they were delivered to my door by Fedex, excellent customer service in my opinion. For anyone who has any previous experience with 10-8 sights, the quality and craftmanship are both top notch.

Weather has not allowed me to shoot with these yet, but just from dry firing and a few presentations around the house I can tell that the .156" square notch in the rear coupled with the thin .125" front blade is going to be an extremely fast and accurate combination. I replaced a set of standard 10-8's with these, so the transition should be quite easy and after I get some trigger time I will report back with my "performance" impressions. For now here are some pictures.

The sights can be purchased here.









 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
6,982 Posts
Nice set of sights... Similar dimensionally to the Sevigny Competition sights...

Let us know how you like them once you get to shoot with them...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 · (Edited)
Nice set of sights... Similar dimensionally to the Sevigny Competition sights...

Let us know how you like them once you get to shoot with them...
i've never used the sevigny before but everything i've read is positive. the 2 advantages i personally like of the RB1/10-8 over the sevigny are the lack of white outline on the front tritium (gives you some night capability but also closely mimmicks all black sights during the day) and the "shelf" on the front of the rear sight which allows for one handed slide manipulation on equipment. the "ramp" on the rear sight is one thing that deterred me from the warren and sevigny line-up on a carry gun, but if that is not a huge issue for you those are both very popular and well made sights also.

i've been shooting with 10-8s so there shouldn't be a huge learning curve other than the square notch instead of a "U", but like I said just from playing around the house the square actual seems a little more natural for my primitive brain anyways. i still have the 10-8s installed on my M&P, so i should be able to do some fairly good comparison and side by side shooting going forward.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 · (Edited)
i meant to update this a while ago and never got around to it. i only have 500 rounds through my g19 since installing these 2 weeks ago, but i'm definitely digging this sight picture. i haven't done anything too crazy, just some minor plate and bullseye shooting in the backyard, but it was enough for me to order another set for my gen3 g19. hopefully they will be here tomorrow or thursday and i'll get them installed in time for some use this weekend.

as i suspected i am really favoring the wide square notch over the "U" notch of the 10-8s i was using previous, although i know some prefer the "U" so to each his own. i think the light bars on either side of the front sight are easier to distinguish with the square edges and i get better lateral accuracy at speed. it's almost like the front sight just wants to stay completely centered with so much light on either side of it, even with side to side transitions. POI on my g19 is just about 1-2" high at 25 yards and slightly lower at closer distances. I would imagine on a g17 these would hit dead on at 25 yards.

i look forward to using them at the beginning of march in my first IDPA match of the year. just need to decide if i want to start in SSP with the gen4 or move right to ESP with the gen3.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
I like the read on these. Thanks for posting and for the great pics.
the only information i could find on the internet was in the m4carbine forum. i'm not quite sure why these haven't picked up more speed other than being new and targeted at a specific genre of shooter. if i hadn't been familiar with 10-8's platform i probably wouldn't have found them. those who do have them are very pleased so far. the redback one team just got back from SHOT, i'm awaiting news on whether they will be expanding to any other guns.

those pictures are not great, but i appreciate it. it was raining that whole week and the lighting was pretty bad. i'm going to get a few better ones this weekend if the sun decides to show itself.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
6,982 Posts
Very nice sight writeup... Especially the inclusion of the pictures...

I like the serration on the back of the RB1 sights... Very classy looking... The Sevigny/Warren rear sights are smooth, but have the back edge sloped backwards to reflect light down instead of back towards the shooter... I expect it also helps keeps the Sevigny/Warren sights price lower...

Scott Warren reportedly uses the rounded "U" shape of the rear notch to draw your eye to the center of the notch... I don't know about that, but I like the square rear notch better... Plus, Sevigny shoots pretty well and he uses the square rear notch...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,962 Posts
Scott Warren reportedly uses the rounded "U" shape of the rear notch to draw your eye to the center of the notch... I don't know about that, but I like the square rear notch better... Plus, Sevigny shoots pretty well and he uses the square rear notch...
I read somewhere recently, not sure where, the U shape in theory doesn't tend to draw your eye to the rear sight as much as a hard, right angle would. Again, not sure how valid that hypothesis is but I do like the U shape rear sights. I have 10-8s on my 1911s and a set of Trijicon HDs on a GLOCK with the U shaped rear.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
i've been using a U rear notch for the last couple years in one form or another. the first sights i had with that setup were ameriglo I-dot pros, which aren't a true "U" notch but more close in shape to the warren rear. i switched from the i-dots to the 10-8s because of the blacked out rear sight, thinner front sight, and unlined tritium vial. the i-dots are nice, but the front sight is thick at .140" and the rear notch is like a small canyon at .180".

the concept of the U is to eliminate all the hard corners and lines in your sight picture with exception of the only one that matters, the top of the front sight in relation to the top of the rear sights. what i've come to realize is that this does in fact help to find the front sight while shooting at speed, but for distance and target shooting i always have to over compensate the height of my front sight because i have a tendency to aim high. i don't know if it's just me or an optical illusion type effect from the curved rear notch, but i always had to make a concious effort to drop the front sight a little lower in the sight picture than what i thought seemed right.

with the extra wide square notch of the RB1 sights i find myself able to shoot just as quickly and don't have a problem finding the front sight at all. the sight picture also seems much more natural, for me anyways, and i don't find myself feeling like i'm having to adjust my natural aiming point.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
76 Posts
The following is from RedBackOne's website:

"The .215" height is our standard for combat sights and provides point of aim, point of impact from 25 meters to 100 meters using the Redback One standard handgun, a Glock 17."

In the real world, most of us shoot 7, 15, & 25 yards with a handgun not 25 to 100 yards. I'd like to know how far off the POI is from the POA at 7 and 15 yards.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
The following is from RedBackOne's website:

"The .215" height is our standard for combat sights and provides point of aim, point of impact from 25 meters to 100 meters using the Redback One standard handgun, a Glock 17."

In the real world, most of us shoot 7, 15, & 25 yards with a handgun not 25 to 100 yards. I'd like to know how far off the POI is from the POA at 7 and 15 yards.
jason falla's explanation on the m4 carbine forum for claiming "POA/POI from 25 to 100 yards" is with combat accuracy, striking a silhouette target in an 8 inch upper thoracic area at all distances tested. on their website blog he outlined the field testing they conducted to arrive at this conclusion, which you can read here if interested. people were taking that statement out of context of being "combat accurate" by asking how that was possible at such a wide range of distances, and he had to explain that the sights are not magical and are not shooting lollipop or bullseye targets at those distances.

that being said, i am not as good of a shooter and like you do not shoot out to distances beyond 25yards, and rarely even at that. with the normal arch pattern trajectory of a bullet, if sights are "zeroed" for POI at 25 yards your rounds will impact slightly lower at distances closer than that and slightly higher at distances beyond 25 yards until the round naturally loses elevation from gravity and again begins to drop (which depends on the weight of the bullet and the velocity). with handgun loads and the distances we are typically shooting handguns this is not going to be extremely noticeable or show as much deviation with where the rounds impact, there is probably more variation from user error than the distance from which you are shooting.

this weekend i will shoot a couple groups from the distances you asked about and post some targets so you can get a better idea of how much the POI changes from a typical non-professional shooter at closer ranges.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
the weather was nice today; not a cloud in the sky, about 50 degrees, and only gusty winds. i put about 300 rounds through my gen3 g19 that recently got their own set of the RB1 sights this week. the break down was 250 rounds of 147gr speer lawman, 50 rounds of 124gr federal HST, and 15 rounds of 147gr federal HST that have been rotated out of my carry stash. after the question was raised about POI at closer ranges than 25 yards, i decided to do some testing at different distances today. i'm no pro, but i think the targets show that there is very little variation from 5 yards through 25 yards, and the ammo and shooter probably have more to do with those than the distance did.

i started with the 147gr lawman at 5 yards, then pushed back to 10, 15, 20, and finally 25. each target got 5 rounds. after i was through all distances with the lawman i switched over to the 124gr HST and repeated the testing (shooting 6 rounds at 15 yards because i knew i pulled one as soon as it happened). i can't say i was surprised, but it was interesting to see how much flatter of a trajectory the HST maintained all the way out to 25 yards vs. the lawman.

i'm now close to 1k rounds using the RB1 sights between my two g19s and what little learning curve there was is now behind me. i am still very pleased and will almost definitely be putting these on all my future glocks and keep my fingers crossed they are released for some other models as well.

here are some pics.











 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
6,982 Posts
Nice shooting, JBarbaresi... Thanks for taking the time to shoot and post the pictures, too... I always think pictures help tell the story!

It looks like your targets are the proof of your theory... Most of the time, pistol caliber ammunition will have trajectory paths on the box...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
JBarbaresi, Thanks for that. Regards to POA, how were you holding? Six o'clock, top of front sight, or "pushing the dot"?
sorry, should have specified POA. i was holding center of the red bullseye, or as close to it as i could, for all shots at all distances. i always aim with the top edge of the front sight and try to ignore all markings on the sights, which is one of the reasons i really like the RB1 and 10-8 sights.

i just placed an order for a case of 124gr speer lawman so i will repeat this experiment using that load as soon as i get a little familiar with its properties.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
Nice shooting, JBarbaresi... Thanks for taking the time to shoot and post the pictures, too... I always think pictures help tell the story!

It looks like your targets are the proof of your theory... Most of the time, pistol caliber ammunition will have trajectory paths on the box...
thanks, i'm not sure if it's the lighter weight bullets or the fact that they are SD rounds, but the HSTs are definitely flatter shooting. about 90% of my shooting has been with 147gr bullets over the last few years because that is what i carry. this experiment opened my eyes to how much better i shot with the 124gr bullets, so it might warrant a change for competition and range use. i'll see how the 124gr lawman shoot.
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top