can "fixed" sights be adjusted

[plumberfishes]

I have a taurus .357 4" ported barrel its titanium, with a rear frame notch, and front post not removable .
It shoots high, several people have tested it from a bench, and it shoots high. We tested it to be approx 6" to 8" at 10 yards.
I need this gun to be on... now I can put a set of laser grips on it, but I would rather stick with the iron sights.
This is my shtf gun for bowhunting in the back woods, it could be used for defending my life from rogue squirrels to actually defending my self from druggies.
?#1 Can this be corrected easily with what the gun has on it...ie iron sights?
?#2 Would it be cost worthy to have it milled for adjustable sights?
?#3 Should I simply learn to shoot as it is, adjusting for the rise based on shot distance?
?#4 Suck it up and buy laser grips?
thanks
Doug

Read More

 

[KalamaMark]

You may want to experiment with ammo. In my experience, heavier loads with heavier bullets in a handgun will hit higher than lighter loads with lighter bullets. Something about the heavier recoil causing the muzzle to rise more before the bullet leaves the barrel. Seems counter intuitive to me, a rifle guy, but I've witnessed this to be true myself.

 

[branson4020]

Have you talked to Taurus customer service?

 

[plumberfishes]

Kalama, thanks, and we only had 158's with us, I will be loading some 110's and some 200ish rounds for future testing and see where it goes.
Branson, I have not yet hadn't really thought about it, but I will do that and see what they say, I need this up and running by fall bear season.
Thanks

 

[deadshot2]

I had this "problem" with a S&W 686. It had Partridge sights on it and it "shot low" no matter what the ammo. I finally just started to use a different "sight picture" and it was dead on.

 

[Straight Shooter]

Here is the deal with revolvers. Low velocity ammo will shoot high. High velocity ammo will shoot low. If you are a rifle shooter this will sound opposite to your experience. The reason for revolvers to do this has to do with the dwell time the bullet in in the barrel while rotating from the recoil. Low velocity is in the barrel longer. High velocity less. With a pistol length barrel this phenomina is exagerated. Being this is a ported gun high velocity ammo will have higher gas pressure which will help the ports push the muzzle down. Get some proper magnum ammo and I bet it shoots much closer to where the sights are regulated to.

 

[plumberfishes]

Deadshot no offence intended but are you trying to tell me that aiming a gun in the same way every time and having different guns hit in different spots is my fault???? I'm sorry but when I pick up a gun, and take the extra half second to carefully aim I expect the weapon to hit where I aim.. and 4" at 10 yards is a VERY significant problem for me, I own 4 revolvers currently, and 3 of them I can make print 2" groups at 10 yards. number 4 prints 2" groups 4" above the other 3, and I need to learn to shoot this one gun different? is that your solution? because that does not work for me. Not trying to bust your chops there strait, and it shoots the same 4" at 10 yards with mags and .38s both 158 grn.

 

[oli700]

what do you mean by rear frame notch ? A groove machined in the frame to be used as the rear sight or a dovetail for removeable fixed sights ?

 

[plumberfishes]

groove in frame, not machined for sights other than what were"cast?" into it at production

 

[oli700]

Man that is a tough one. Seems like you had enough other people shoot it so it has to be the gun. I have had to use Kentucky Windage on guns before that had no adjustment. If it turns out you have to shoot with a hold over at least it shoots high. Way better than shooting low because you don't have to hold covering the target.....but then again if it shot low you could at least file the front sight.......I would learn where to hold over for the desired POI, not much choice.

 

[Spitpatch]

On this one, KalamaMark is a Straight Shooter. Straight Shooter is not a KalamaMark, but he lives up to his own moniker. Plumberfishes, you should be thanking your lucky stars that your problem is not one of windage. THAT would be a quandary. I would experiment incrementally, even trying DIFFERENT 158g loads (even comparing cast vs. jacketed) before going lighter and faster. Then go to 140's of various propulsion, then to the 125's, etc.

Another strategy might be to go with the lightest/fastest you can find (you mentioned 110's) to see if the gun shoots LOW. Then search for the happy medium.

The 125g jacketed bullet in the .357 is very often overlooked or not considered by newer arrivals to the caliber. Some sort of dedication to penetration characteristics of the stouter bullets is likely responsible for this oversight. A very many years ago, law enforcement encounters which required the use of deadly force with a handgun were analyzed statistically with the criteria being this: "What caliber/load (with the first shot) most often results in the instant desired result of making the perpetrator cease doing what he was doing that required deadly force"?

Note that the criteria was NOT "one-shot kills" . Very often, a shot that is a killing shot does not immediately stop the perpetrator's actions. The criteria made much more sense than one of fatality; not only for this reason, but the purported goal that deadly force is to be used to cease action, not necessarily to kill.

This study was conducted at the advent of the .40's and the 10mm's being tried by many departments as an upgrade from their currently approved/sanctioned calibers and weapons. Fortunately, it was conducted early enough that large numbers of departments were still using .38's and .357's.

The winning load (by an undeniable HUGE margin) was the 125g jacketed hollowpoint in the .357 Magnum. If memory serves, second place (but noticeably behind the winner) was the .45 Auto 180g hollowpoint load.

The conclusion of the study postulated that fast and comprehensive tissue destruction is what renders parts of a body to cease to work instantly. Greater penetration may often provide more "one-shot-kills", and it is for this reason that heavier, stouter bullets are the better choice for big-game hunting with the .357; but one is well-served by not forgetting the 125g bullets in their pursuit for what might work in any particlular gun.

For this application, the "happy medium" was a 140g bullet: allowing better trajectory and more rapid expansion than a 158, but adequate penetration on a Pronghorn Antelope at 110 yards:
Colt Trooper MKIII .357, 8 3/8" barrel, 2x Leupold M8.

 

[oli700]

Here is the deal with revolvers. Low velocity ammo will shoot high. High velocity ammo will shoot low. If you are a rifle shooter this will sound opposite to your experience. The reason for revolvers to do this has to do with the dwell time the bullet in in the barrel while rotating from the recoil. Low velocity is in the barrel longer. High velocity less. With a pistol length barrel this phenomina is exagerated. Being this is a ported gun high velocity ammo will have higher gas pressure which will help the ports push the muzzle down. Get some proper magnum ammo and I bet it shoots much closer to where the sights are regulated to.

Does this translate to auto loading pistols as well? I am experimenting with hand loading cast and plated 9mm being shot from my CZ 75

 

[iusmc2002]

If it's shooting low consistently, wouldn't filing the front site down a bit bring the barrel up higher when sighting along it? Or am I backwards? I think a lower front sight would force the barrel into a higher position. What do you think Spitpatch?

 

[oli700]

yes thats right, but the OP is shooting high

 

[iusmc2002]

yes thats right, but the OP is shooting high

Oops. Reading comprehension fail. Sorry 'bout that

 

[Spitpatch]

I2002, yes. But the OP's gun is shooting high. To get his gun to shoot lower with the same load, he would need to ADD to the height of the front sight, thus forcing the barrel lower to attain good sight picture. Such addition to the front sight could be attained only if the blade of that sight is removeable, or by (a darned good smith at significant expense) building it up metallurgically. We move our front sights OPPOSITE the direction we want the target group to go. (If the gun shoots high, we RAISE the front sight.)

Another possible option if the OP is emotionally attached to 158g loads, is to deepen the rear sight groove, and/or draw file the "ears" of the rear sight groove. This would, in effect, LOWER the rear sight, and therefore LOWER the group on target. I fear this option (considering what metal is there to remove) would not deliver the necessary reduction of group altitude that could be attained by lighter/faster loads.

6" to 8" high at 8-10 yards is pretty darned high. I wonder (since this is a gun to be carried in the hunting field) if a more "field appropriate" range should be tried. I prefer my iron-sighted carry revolver for the hunting field (NOT the scoped Trooper as a primary hunting weapon)to be sighted in at 25 yards. This is common "cottontail/grouse" range. Also, should I be accosted by a black bear (or naked-ape "druggie") coming on fast, I'd like to be doing things to discourage him at ranges somewhat greater than 8-10 yards. Should the accosting BEGIN at 8-10 yards, I doubt very seriously if my sight picture would get even fleeting attention.

 

[plumberfishes]

ok back on topic... I do not want to have to "hold over, or under" I need to know if this is somthing that can be adjusted.. if not I am going to have it milled for proper adjustable sights or at the least have the it dovetailed so I can put in some sights I can adjust to fit me. I need a weapon that is ultra light weight(titanium revolver) in a good all arounf caliber(38/357) and shoots where I point it. now so far I am 2 for 3 , and the gun prints well 2" groups with me behind it is good. so...
Is riches in donald the best choice, or is the someone else I should consider?

 

[Spitpatch]

I apologize if my last post seemed off topic. I was of the belief the second paragraph addressed your topic precisely. a Jeweler's file, carefully applied will deepen your rear sight groove. A draw file (just as carefully applied) will shorten the ears of the rear sight.

The suggestions regarding trying lighter, faster loads are the time-proven universal solution to your problem of fixed sights on a pistol shooting high. Again on topic, in my estimation.

Your statement of usuage being a field gun prompted a suggestion that you change the range at which you are sighting in. This was offered as an honest (on-topic) practicality: 10-yard shots in the bowhunting woods might be what you are striving for with your bow (I am a bowhunter), but rarely what the handgun (or at least my handgun) is used for. The only thing I've ever shot at 10 yards with my pistol in the bowhunting season was a porcupine.

I don't do gunsmith work for a living, but I do a lot of it. The more technical machining aspects I regularly pay to have done, and usually have a pretty good idea what such work costs. I'm guessing your solution of fitting adjustable sights to the gun (dovetailing/milling and/or drilling, along with the price of the sights) would certainly cost more than $100, and probably closer to $200. The solutions offered by myself and others here are a much more economical route (not necessarily "better"), and worth trying. Certainly worth trying for a guy on a Taurus budget rather than a Smith and Wesson budget (on topic). This is no denigration of Taurus. Just a noting of your choice of economic sensibility. Recent guns from Taurus that I have examined and fired have opened my eyes to the proper respect they deserve.

I hope my efforts here have helped to show that what I (and others) offered was done in full consideration of your problem and your criteria. Only one of us offered "kentucky windage" as a solution, but I would guess his reply was induced by your #3 on your list of possible avenues.

 

[plumberfishes]

sitpatch, was not meaning to be rude or an a$$, but I have never owned a gun that did nit shoot where I pointed it, and I will not! I like the fileing the notch deeper, to me that would be the best way to go, because I am a kiss kind of guy, if I can maintain the factory sights then I would like to..... I would not try to do this myself, but I would rather spen $200 and have it hit where I want than have a gun I have to worry and or think about where to hold. gun up find the front, settle it in and squeeze.. not find sight lower slightly but not too much, shoot over, reccorrect, shoot under,,, not me, I want a gun that hits where I piont it. I will be testing the bullet weight thing, and I will be starting with vastly different weights to see where the rounds hit , or if they move and how much, if shooting 125's is the answer I can live with that, but not a gun that hits off from where I point. thanks for all the advice.

 

[Sheldon]

It maybe easier to replace the front sight for one taller. I had that done to my S&W 586 and it has an adjustable rear sight. I did it to mine because I wanted a patridge front sight and not the red insert ramped one on it. The gunsmith had to machine the front sight off on that gun because it was an older model where the front sight was part of the barrel and then he machine a dovetail and installed the sight I wanted.