Filing Down Front Sight

[LimeyJack]

I need to file down the front sight on my Old Vaqueros.  I got the bore-sighter out and checked out the Point of Aim at 10 yards, and it fell about half way down the front sight.  Is there any reason I don't want my sight to be POA?  I can understand that some loads might hit below POA, but are any going to hit above?  If not, then why does Ruger give you so darn much front sight in the first place?  Am I hopelessly confused here?

[Deadeye Dick]

Don't file down your front sight in regards to your bore sighter. First come up with the load and bullet you want to shoot and then  look at removing some front sight if you want to. Different powders, different bullets and different primers can change your POI. Better to have too much front sight than not enough. The bore sighter will usually tell you if you're on the target or not. They are not reliable for POI.
Deadeye Dick

[Danny Bear Claw]

All single action revolvers come with "too tall" front sights.  The manufacturers figure the owner will file it down as needed to bring POI in line with POA.  Deadeye is correct in stating do not file the front sight based on a bore sighter.  Find a good accurate load for your particular gun, i.e., one that gives good tight groups.  If it's dead on for windage but hitting the target low, then file off a bit of the front sight and try again.  Repeat as neccessary. This is a better idea if you load you own ammo because you may find a good factory load but factory loads can and sometimes are discontinued.  I do not load my own ammo, so I've never filed down a front sight.  I own over a dozen different single action revolvers and am fortunate that all but one shoots dead center as far as windage goes.  All but two shoot low.  Anywhere from 2 inches low to six inches low at 20 yards.  I have simply gotten into the habit of aiming at the 12 o'clock mark on the target.  It's been said that front sight removed can not be put back.  There are gun smiths who can weld up a front sight that's been filed too far down but it's my understanding that this is an expensive endeavor, so if file you must, do it prudently and a little at a time.  Good shooting and God bless.

[LimeyJack]

So, I filed down my front sight as instructed, and- sure enough -it was way above the boresight.  This had me totally confused, so I did a little research.  It turns out (you probably already know this) that the pistol is in recoil before the bullet leaves the barrel, bringing the the Point of Departure (what the boresighter was telling me) way up.  The lighter your load/bullet, the longer the bullet spends in the barrel, and the higher your point of impact is going to be.  That's why you need all that extra front sight, for those real powder-puff loads. 

Well, as I said, this is probably old news to you all.  Thought I'd post my finding in case anyone as dense as me is googling for this.

[Mustang Gregg]

Aw crap. Ya already done it. 

MY OPINION ONLY HERE, FOLKS!!!>>>>
But I would NEVER file down a front sight because a boresight indicated it need to be done. 
Shoot the hell outta them Vaqueros first & once they are settled in your hands with the loads you like....Then get out the file if'n you still need to. 
It is hard to add material back to a front blade.

I have had a bunch of "old" Vaqueros & none ever needed the front sight lowered [so far].

MG

[Shadow Catcher]

So, I filed down my front sight as instructed, and- sure enough -it was way above the boresight.  This had me totally confused, so I did a little research.  It turns out (you probably already know this) that the pistol is in recoil before the bullet leaves the barrel, bringing the the Point of Departure (what the boresighter was telling me) way up.  The lighter your load/bullet, the longer the bullet spends in the barrel, and the higher your point of impact is going to be.  That's why you need all that extra front sight, for those real powder-puff loads. 

Well, as I said, this is probably old news to you all.  Thought I'd post my finding in case anyone as dense as me is googling for this.

Think I'm gonna disagree here - the heavier the bullet the slower it goes - so the longer the dwell time in the barrel, resulting in more muzzle flip.

The heavier the bullet the more equal and opposite reaction you get - so the more muzzle flip.

If you file your sight down to the heaviest bullet you intend to use in the gun, then you'll have sight left over if you later need to file it even more because you've moved to lighter bullets. 

SAA's also have high sights because once upon a time it was considered reasonable that the point of aim might be 50 - 75 yd's away for a cavalry trooper in the field, unlike cowboy which is shot at point blank range.

Never remove more than you absolutely have to - or else you're going to pay to have a new sight silver soldered back on to replace it . . . . .

Shadow Catcher

[LimeyJack]

Think I'm gonna disagree here - the heavier the bullet the slower it goes - so the longer the dwell time in the barrel, resulting in more muzzle flip.

The heavier the bullet the more equal and opposite reaction you get - so the more muzzle flip.

Thank you.  Correct.  Lighter load/heavier bullet.

[Sir Charles deMouton-Black]

Its not dependant on load, or at least minimally.  Variations in the load see recoil and barrel time cancel each other out resulting in about the same amount of barrel flip.

The critical factor is BULLET WEIGHT.  The heavier bullet increases both recoil and barrel time, and both tend to increase barrel flip.

[LimeyJack]

Its not dependant on load, or at least minimally.  Variations in the load see recoil and barrel time cancel each other out resulting in about the same amount of barrel flip.

The critical factor is BULLET WEIGHT.  The heavier bullet increases both recoil and barrel time, and both tend to increase barrel flip.

Interesting.

So I've sighted in with 200gr at 780ft/s.  You're saying if I load up some corbon +p 300gr at 1300ft/s it will actually print high?

[Sir Charles deMouton-Black]

That is my experience.  I've also read it in gun articles, but for me it has ALWAYS worked out that way.