Ruger LCR front sight problems....

J

JERRYS.

New member
reading the Ruger site the tritium replacement front sight will shoot 5" low at 15 yards (45 feet) with the .22lr/mag and 9mm; inferring that the .38 spl and .357 mag will be reasonably on. I could not find any data for the .327 fed mag.

based on velocity alone this makes no sense. the .22lr and .22 mag even the 9mm have velocities spreads and matches that equal the .38 spl and .357 mag (~850 fps ~1,200 fps). the .327 gun can fire loads anywhere in that range.

does anyone actually know the answer as to why the sights are not interchangeable based on the calibers the gun shoots? does anyone know of a tritium front sight that would work for the .22lr only gun? how about the .327 gun?
 
9

9x19

New member
Muzzle rise, or lack of it... the center-fire front sights are different in height (shorter), because the muzzle will begin to rise before the bullet exits the barrel. The rim-fires don't have nearly as much muzzle rise.
 
C

Carmady

New member
I measured a couple of 2" LCR front sights that weren't installed.

The 38/357 sight was .250" tall (top to bottom).

The 9mm sight was .218" tall.

Don't know why the .38 and .357 would use the same height front sight, but I'd guess convenience (for Ruger).
 
T

two4spooky

New member
re: LCRx front sight height

The LCRx 3" in 22lr does come from the factory with a shorter front sight than the LCRx 3" 357. On my recently manufactured 22lr 3" I could just barely zero at 25yds. with HV ammo, standard velocity was still ~2-3" high with rear sight all the way down(edit:said previous results were with the factory installed short sight). I used the MEPRO tritium front sight(38/357 height) from Brownells. I can now get correct POA/POI for SV and HV rimfire ammo. I would go with the MEPRO version front sight for the 3" LCRx. MEPRO has a narrower 0.125" width(same as factory) vs the other thicker tritium sights I found.
 
Last edited:
R

RancherinAz

New member
The LCR 357 does indeed have a front sight that is too tall . At least the two that I have do . I’m a pretty darn good shot and I’ve never had anything that hits low like these do . If you follow the channel that makes up the non adjustable rear sight , it’s plain to see that the front sight is way too tall . Some are saying that it’s done that way to compensate for muzzle lift but it’s just way wrong . If you know how to shoot , you don’t need a sight that does that . To me it’s completely annoying . It might work for an inexperienced shooter but that doesn’t make it right . I’ve learned to counter compensate but I think I’ll give Ruger a call and ask them why they saw a need to do this . I know this isn’t the newest of threads but just so the OP knows , he’s not the only one questioning this .
 
S

stinkeypete

New member
It’s easier to file some off than file some on. An experienced shooter can regulate a front sight that is too tall with a $5.00 file.

I consider the LCR to be an “instinctive shooting gun.” After a bit of practice and learning your instinctive grip, you can shoot nearly as well with the sights removed.

Long ago, a friend was teasing me that the only reason I was ahead of him by so much in the club Wednesday Night league was because I had a dot sight. So I turned the sight off and then we shot a round of slow fire. He owed me a beer and paid up. That’s at 50’ nra bullseye targets. At 5 yards… well…

It’s far better for a front sight to be too tall. When in doubt, file far too little then check. It’s easier to file more off than file a little back on.
 
4

44 AMP

Staff
Any, and every sight combination is going to be "on" for one bullet weight at one speed, and one distance, for one shooter.

The fact is that the sights are "on" for something, at some distance, but if it's not what you want, that's not the sight's fault, or the makers.

For example, if the factory registers the gun for 158gr @850fps and 25yds, the guy shooting 125s at 7 yards is going to complain the sights are "off".

And, they aren't going to be spot on for the guy shooting at 50yds, either.

Another factor is simply the sight picture, how the shooter lines up and views the sights. Center hold? 6 O'clock hold? something else??

And, in addition to that, is the way different people look through the same sights and get different points of impact.

My father used the 6 O'clock hold. He would hold underneath his target, and hit it. Shooting his guns, when I held underneath the target, that's where I hit, underneath the target. When I held on center, that's where I hit. People are different, and can, and DO get different results using the same sight setting.

Being the kind of person I am, I have always considered filing the sights to be the option of last resort. Using different ammo combinations to find one that hits where the sights point is my preferred option, aiming off (Kentucky windage) is next, filing on the gun is my last choice.

This is why I much prefer guns with adjustable sights. Even though I almost never touch them, I like having the option of adjusting them, if I ever needed it.

Filing the gun, adapting it, nearly permanently for one load (or one load and one shooter) works fine for the guy who does it, but what happens when you can't get that load anymore? or if someone else is going to use the gun?

What about if/when you decide to sell? are you going to be up front and honest and tell that you filed the sight? (to me, that reduces the value), or are you going to say nothing and let the next owner figure it out for themselves??

(for clarity, I'm talking about fixed sights here, the "permanent" kind, not easily replaceable front blades, which is a different matter)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top