"When opportunity knocks!!!"

Robert in NC · 03-15-2017, 02:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DonVoigt

GT,

A guy that wanted to calculate how much 1/1000 at the front sight would move the point of impact at some yardage- could do that if he were so inclined. I'm not!

.

I'm that guy. For a Luger with a 4 inch barrel a change in height of the front sight of 1/1000 inch will change the point of impact by 0.22 inches at 50 yards.

G.T. · 03-15-2017, 03:09 PM

So, ...each .025" will result in approx. 5.5" of change at 50?..... Now there's a whole'nother'dog in the fight!

... Would it be half that at 25 yards? Good job Don & Robert.... Keep thinking and pondering... it's helping me make a decision...

...GT

gunbugs · 03-15-2017, 06:10 PM

The formula is simple, sight radius x error on target, divided by distance to target,all measurements in inches. This tells you how much to move the sight.

DonVoigt · 03-15-2017, 06:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gunbugs

The formula is simple, sight radius x error on target, divided by distance to target,all measurements in inches. This tells you how much to move the sight.

I did not mean to imply it was not simple, just that I was lazy!

Rick W. · 03-15-2017, 07:52 PM

Are we sure of the 50yd and 0.22" on a 4" with 0.001" increment?

naturally, tis only a theoretical line of sight calculation. 9mm drops like a rock past 50yds in reality.

DonVoigt · 03-15-2017, 09:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rick W.

Are we sure of the 50yd and 0.22" on a 4" with 0.001" increment?

naturally, tis only a theoretical line of sight calculation. 9mm drops like a rock past 50yds in reality.

Why don't you double check the calculation?
I find empirically that these heights would be ok.

Also, a 9mm(and all other rounds) drop just like a rock from the time they leave the muzzle!

Rick W. · 03-15-2017, 09:38 PM

I did a calculation the old fashioned way and got a nominal 0.225" at 25yds, then tried the 50 yds, got double that as one might think. 4 inch barrel, with 0.001" offset. This only has the barrel length and not the barrel length plus action length to rear sight.........ie sight radius, which as most knows, varies with model.

I then tried the parameters in this Brownell's software set, no familiarization with this piece of software; first time to try it.

http://www.brownells.com/GunTech/Sig....htm?lid=13093

G.T. is going to put out some bucks for this, just wanting to make sure he got the right stuff. Only asking someone mathematical to double check.........if I am wrong, I am sorry; but my home brew approach and the software above agree. Plug in the numbers and see if you agree or not.

I have no dog in the fight on what to offer as to sight heights. Only inquiring about the theoretical calculation. I have moved on to adjustable rear sights and even scope bases on my Lugers now.

Someone will appreciate the availability of front sights again, I am sure. The old Marble's 27 was a nice sight for some applications, but not produced for a while now.

My best to G.T.'s offering.

John Sabato · 03-16-2017, 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DonVoigt

Also, a 9mm(and all other rounds) drop just like a rock from the time they leave the muzzle!

Tis' true... all things (including moving bullet projectiles) drop at the rate of 32 feet per second, per second...up until the time they reach maximum resistance to the moving air based on their mass and physical size...

I remember that from General Science class back in the middle of the last century... and I don't think they have repealed the laws of physics...(at least not just yet)...

ithacaartist · 03-15-2017, 10:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rick W.

Are we sure of the 50yd and 0.22" on a 4" with 0.001" increment?

naturally, tis only a theoretical line of sight calculation. 9mm drops like a rock past 50yds in reality.

Hah! 9mm does indeed drop exactly like a rock! But then again, so does every other caliber! Galileo demonstrated as such around 1590. Velocity is the only variable in this case.

Rick W. · 03-15-2017, 10:52 PM

I reckon the comment on dropping like a rock after 50 yds, suggests that 50yds might be considered a maximum yardage for iron sight height for the Luger. That is really all was intended.

I thought your comment on the single tall height sight was a good one; offers something to everyone with minimum outlay. One have to consider such an offering being in competition with the 98 sight or a guy with tooling to add metal and rework.

Speed of course is one of the parameters. I agree. but getting off track some here. I have no doubt that GT will think it all out; he is a contributor.

Robert in NC · 03-16-2017, 11:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert in NC

I'm that guy. For a Luger with a 4 inch barrel a change in height of the front sight of 1/1000 inch will change the point of impact by 0.22 inches at 50 yards.

Here's my math if anyone's interested. I can't say I never make mistakes but I'm pretty sure this is correct. Of course the change would be different for different sight radii.

Rick W. · 03-16-2017, 02:50 PM

I am far from being right at times, but the attempt is still there. One has to get beat on for whatever to keep the faith sorta speak.

you might take a look at the first equation for tangent of the angle. Is it 8.1 or 81.1?

My stuff is not completely right either, as used a component of barrel length rather than sight radius.

Thanks for the nice presentation and pictorial; lot more than I did.

regards,

Rick W.

Robert in NC · 03-16-2017, 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rick W.

I am far from being right at times, but the attempt is still there. One has to get beat on for whatever to keep the faith sorta speak.

you might take a look at the first equation for tangent of the angle. Is it 8.1 or 81.1?

My stuff is not completely right either, as used a component of barrel length rather than sight radius.

Thanks for the nice presentation and pictorial; lot more than I did.

regards,

Rick W.

Opps! I did the calculation with 8.1 but mis-typed 81.1 on the figure. 81.1 inches would make a mighty long pistol barrel! The math as shown is correct with 8.1". I have corrected the image. Thanks for catching that!

Rick W. · 03-16-2017, 05:23 PM

I concur with your calculation. I went back to my scribbling, and plugged in the total sight radius.......8.1 I assume, and got the 0.22222222" number as you did. You did it more easily than I did, but in the end, agreement. Guess we both are hoping to help hit the mark.

I went on the Brownell's deal and it concurred as well with the 8.1 sight radius. Now........is that the real sight radius that is in mind?...

I flubbadubbed the barrel length by using 4 inches(stupid on my part), rather than the total sight radius, so my initial numbers were out of wack. Sorry about that, but has been a long week here and then some.

G.T. · 03-19-2017, 05:02 PM

First, thank you Kiwi Mark... Can you tell me what you ended up with in over all height of the front sight blade from top or sight base to top of sight?.. I'm guessing around .250" overall... And also thank you Robert, Rick, and Don.. you guys have opened my eyes some in the method behind the madness!!!!

... Well, here's the final S.O.S!!! I need a couple of samples of original P.08 front sights... in "AS NEW" condition?..... Let me know price and trade preference, I'm at your mercy!...

I need two ro three.... and will listen to all offers... Let me know Guys! Best to all, til....lat'r....GT

BTW, at this point, still looking like .225" / .250" / .300" ... still listening for suggestions though???.....

03-15-2017, 03:09 PM	#2
G.T. Lifer Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Chandler Arizona Posts: 3,541 Thanks: 1,342 Thanked 3,743 Times in 1,020 Posts	so.......if that's so... So, ...each .025" will result in approx. 5.5" of change at 50?..... Now there's a whole'nother'dog in the fight! ... Would it be half that at 25 yards? Good job Don & Robert.... Keep thinking and pondering... it's helping me make a decision... ...GT

03-15-2017, 09:38 PM	#7
Rick W. User Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 339 Thanks: 81 Thanked 359 Times in 198 Posts	I did a calculation the old fashioned way and got a nominal 0.225" at 25yds, then tried the 50 yds, got double that as one might think. 4 inch barrel, with 0.001" offset. This only has the barrel length and not the barrel length plus action length to rear sight.........ie sight radius, which as most knows, varies with model. I then tried the parameters in this Brownell's software set, no familiarization with this piece of software; first time to try it. http://www.brownells.com/GunTech/Sig....htm?lid=13093 G.T. is going to put out some bucks for this, just wanting to make sure he got the right stuff. Only asking someone mathematical to double check.........if I am wrong, I am sorry; but my home brew approach and the software above agree. Plug in the numbers and see if you agree or not. I have no dog in the fight on what to offer as to sight heights. Only inquiring about the theoretical calculation. I have moved on to adjustable rear sights and even scope bases on my Lugers now. Someone will appreciate the availability of front sights again, I am sure. The old Marble's 27 was a nice sight for some applications, but not produced for a while now. My best to G.T.'s offering. Last edited by Rick W.; 03-15-2017 at 10:33 PM.

03-19-2017, 05:02 PM	#15
G.T. Lifer Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Chandler Arizona Posts: 3,541 Thanks: 1,342 Thanked 3,743 Times in 1,020 Posts	OK, here's where we are at.... First, thank you Kiwi Mark... Can you tell me what you ended up with in over all height of the front sight blade from top or sight base to top of sight?.. I'm guessing around .250" overall... And also thank you Robert, Rick, and Don.. you guys have opened my eyes some in the method behind the madness!!!! ... Well, here's the final S.O.S!!! I need a couple of samples of original P.08 front sights... in "AS NEW" condition?..... Let me know price and trade preference, I'm at your mercy!... I need two ro three.... and will listen to all offers... Let me know Guys! Best to all, til....lat'r....GT BTW, at this point, still looking like .225" / .250" / .300" ... still listening for suggestions though???.....

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

03-15-2017, 06:10 PM	#3
gunbugs Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Fairbanks, Alaska. Home of the best moose. Posts: 681 Thanks: 375 Thanked 1,227 Times in 414 Posts	The formula is simple, sight radius x error on target, divided by distance to target,all measurements in inches. This tells you how much to move the sight.

03-15-2017, 07:52 PM	#5
Rick W. User Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 339 Thanks: 81 Thanked 359 Times in 198 Posts	Are we sure of the 50yd and 0.22" on a 4" with 0.001" increment? naturally, tis only a theoretical line of sight calculation. 9mm drops like a rock past 50yds in reality.

03-15-2017, 10:52 PM	#10
Rick W. User Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 339 Thanks: 81 Thanked 359 Times in 198 Posts	I reckon the comment on dropping like a rock after 50 yds, suggests that 50yds might be considered a maximum yardage for iron sight height for the Luger. That is really all was intended. I thought your comment on the single tall height sight was a good one; offers something to everyone with minimum outlay. One have to consider such an offering being in competition with the 98 sight or a guy with tooling to add metal and rework. Speed of course is one of the parameters. I agree. but getting off track some here. I have no doubt that GT will think it all out; he is a contributor.

03-16-2017, 02:50 PM	#12
Rick W. User Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 339 Thanks: 81 Thanked 359 Times in 198 Posts	I am far from being right at times, but the attempt is still there. One has to get beat on for whatever to keep the faith sorta speak. you might take a look at the first equation for tangent of the angle. Is it 8.1 or 81.1? My stuff is not completely right either, as used a component of barrel length rather than sight radius. Thanks for the nice presentation and pictorial; lot more than I did. regards, Rick W.

03-16-2017, 05:23 PM	#14
Rick W. User Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 339 Thanks: 81 Thanked 359 Times in 198 Posts	I concur with your calculation. I went back to my scribbling, and plugged in the total sight radius.......8.1 I assume, and got the 0.22222222" number as you did. You did it more easily than I did, but in the end, agreement. Guess we both are hoping to help hit the mark. I went on the Brownell's deal and it concurred as well with the 8.1 sight radius. Now........is that the real sight radius that is in mind?... I flubbadubbed the barrel length by using 4 inches(stupid on my part), rather than the total sight radius, so my initial numbers were out of wack. Sorry about that, but has been a long week here and then some.