LP 10 - taller front sight?

[John Ariani]

Does anyone know if it's possible to obtain a higher front sight for the LP 10. I'm using the 5mm width version, but would like to have a taller front sight as I'm running out of adjustment due to a change to try the 12 oclock hold.
By the way - I have the new model with the ball bearing trigger. I'm not experienced enought to feel the difference from the LP 10 model I had before. But, the trigger is very smooth and I like it.

[Richard H]

Just shim under it, you might need longer screws. I don't think there is a stock longer front blade available for it as the sights have more than enough adjustment for the normal range (some pistol don't). I tried the 12 o'clock thing once for a practice session and I don't remeber having any issue with running out of sight adjustment, didn't really like the 12 o'clock thing so went back to the sub six.

[Reinhamre]

Why do you need a taller front sight?
Is it perhaps the rear sight that is too high?
Take og the grip and rear sight may becomes loose.
Tighten the sight and put the grip on again.

Kent

[pauln]

.
By the way - I have the new model with the ball bearing trigger. I'm not experienced enought to feel the difference from the LP 10 model I had before. But, the trigger is very smooth and I like it.[/quote]

Good feed back on the trigger thanks

[Richard H]

I kinda wondered how much a bearing is going to do on a shaft/pivot that only moves a couple of mm in arc length.

I'm sure it wouldn't hurt but I really didn't figure it would make that much of a difference.

[Fred Mannis]

I kinda wondered how much a bearing is going to do on a shaft/pivot that only moves a couple of mm in arc length.

I'm sure it wouldn't hurt but I really didn't figure it would make that much of a difference.

Makes good advertising copy. And look at all the discussion/interest it has generated in the 'new' LP10. :-).

[John Ariani]

I too think that Steyr have introduced the ball bearing trigger as a way to 'update' the LP 10. I'm a good example. My previous LP 10 was only a year old. Out comes the 'new' model with the ball bearing trigger. I'm one for not wanting to be 'missing out' on some new tecnology improvement - no matter how small - so sell one to buy a new one. As with Fred's comments, it's a great way for Steyr to generate discussion and interest, even mystique about their new improvement. Thereby generating sales.
However, in reality I absolutely don't know the difference from the old one. But I've told myself it's a whole heap better (a bit like a placebo I suppose?) so I like the feel and I'm happy with the purchase.
Back to my front sight. I've tried things like a shim or washer underneath, but find that the front sight doesn't sit firm in position when doing this. The slightest touch - such as returning the pistol to it's case can move the front sight ever so minutely (left - right) which is quite annoying. With no Steyr part available - that'll have to do though.

[Fred Mannis]

John,
I believe the Steyr front sights are made from steel, in which case the height can be increased by welding a 'blob' on top and then dressing it down to match the original profile. I had this done with sights on my FP and if you can find a competent gunsmith, you can barely see the demarcation. The welding must be done with a TIG welding apparatus by an experienced 'smith.

[kbc]

A good way to increase the front sight height is to add a stencil under it, just like using a washer. It is better to have the stencil made to the shape of the front sight base. This will ensure the stability of the front sight. You can also chose the thickness and material type for the stencil. Typical cost of making a sheet of stencil is $100 to $200. A typical sheet (template) size ranges from half a page to one full page size, (US letter size). You can also add different shapes into the template. So you can have a bunch of stencils made in one production run. Material can be stainless steel, magnetic steel, magnetic stainless steel, etc, lots of choices.

kang

[Frafjord]

Does anyone know if it's possible to obtain a higher front sight for the LP 10. I'm using the 5mm width version, but would like to have a taller front sight as I'm running out of adjustment due to a change to try the 12 oclock hold.
By the way - I have the new model with the ball bearing trigger. I'm not experienced enought to feel the difference from the LP 10 model I had before. But, the trigger is very smooth and I like it.

Hello.. I got a LP10 with a 5mm Morini CM84E front sight that doing it for me..

Regards Kenneth Frafjord, Norway..

[cdf]

You could try to crazyglue a small piece of black plastic card ( available from hobby shops ) , this wouldnt involve any permanent modification , an be readily reversible .

[tenex]

Hello John,
I'd go to a local hobby shop and get a small piece of aluminum shim stock, and just cut out a spacer for the bottom of the sight. I think you can get stock 0.050" thick, that should get you more than halfway there. I'd use aluminum, since it's soft and you're just going to squash it under the sight anyway (and it shouldn't mark up the gun like a steel washer might).

Steve.

[John Ariani]

Thanks to all of you for the options. I resorted to making both a plastic and aliminium spacer for both my LP 10 and the Morini. The hardest part was findning the right width as the original front sight sits in a sort of 'channel' - which stops the sight making any sideways movement. Earlier spacers I made would move no matter how well I had the sight screwed in - when I wiped the barrel over with a cloth or knocked the front sight when putting it in and out of the pistol case.
I made a much longer spacer so it can be screwed both front and back, as I'm using the middle position on the barrel for the front sight. That way the spacer cannot move sideways. Then some contact glue on the bottom of the front sight is enough tension to hold it in place, but also not so strong as it cannot be removed later if I was to resort to the normal set up.

[Steve Swartz]

John:

As a student of the game, I'm sincerely curious . . . 12 O'Clock Hold? Not sure I even know what that is.

Please explain?

Steve Swartz

[John Ariani]

You are 'having a lend of me' for the New Year aren't you Steve?!!!
Well, firstly, Happy New Year to you, and I hope after your op you'll be back on the range soon.
Back in December 2006 you posted eight seperate times in a post titled, 'alternative point of aim' which had some other great posts in it, most notably Ed Hall.(as he'd tried to discuss 12 o'clock many moons before but no-one was interested) You had direct dialogue with both myself and Ed (as well as others) over the 12 o'clock hold. It's a thread well worth going back to and reading - for all.
I think that's the best way to 'please explain'.

[dlinden]

Just as we know close six and deep six holds, there are the lesser known close twelve and high twelve holds. In the old West, it was commonly known as a High Noon hold. I think that is what we are referring to here. That's why cowboys often required three inch tall front sights. Difficult to holster and soon lost favor.

Dennis

[Fred Mannis]

It appears that both Steve and Dennis were up well past midnight ringing in the New Year :-)

John, never heard the expression 'having a lend of me' . My initial reaction was that perhaps Steve was now in S3 category (the one I am in) :-)

Best wishes for a healthy and peaceful New Year.
Fred

[Steve Swartz]

Guys:

Yeah I know my whole "Socratic" style can get tedious . . . but even on New Year's eve (yes, "alcohol was involved =;^) I do like to get dialogue started *first* by trying to clarify underlying assumptions and points of view.

A more direct way of asking my question(s) probably would have been something along the lines of "John, what are you thinking with respect to using a 12 O'Clock hold . . . why did you change and what are the tradeoffs in your mind?"

But if I had asked it that way, we might have blundered on for several posts not even knowing if (that) we had two totally different definitions of exactly *what* a "12 O'Clock hold" was in the first place.

I tried to ask it in such a way that we could tackle the nature of the 12 O'Clock hold first and then transition to a discussion of pros and cons. Or I suppose we could have just cut/pasted the previous discussion as a time-saver!*

Sorry about the obtuse style. Hope not too many people think I use it just to irritate them . . .

Steve

* This brings up the whole issue of "recycling threads" vs. trying to keep the decks clear for "newer stuff." I know, sometimes I get peeved with the umpteenth thread on topic x- but then again, sometimes it takes umpteen tries before we all get to the heart of an issue!

[Another stinkin' guest]

I do like to get dialogue started *first* by trying to clarify underlying assumptions and points of view.

A more direct way of asking my question(s) probably would have been something along the lines of "John, what are you thinking with respect to using a 12 O'Clock hold . . . why did you change and what are the tradeoffs in your mind?"

But if I had asked it that way, we might have blundered on for several posts not even knowing if (that) we had two totally different definitions of exactly *what* a "12 O'Clock hold" was in the first place.

I tried to ask it in such a way that we could tackle the nature of the 12 O'Clock hold first and then transition to a discussion of pros and cons. Or I suppose we could have just cut/pasted the previous discussion as a time-saver!*

Sorry about the obtuse style. Hope not too many people think I use it just to irritate them . . .

Steve

* This brings up the whole issue of "recycling threads" vs. trying to keep the decks clear for "newer stuff." I know, sometimes I get peeved with the umpteenth thread on topic x- but then again, sometimes it takes umpteen tries before we all get to the heart of an issue!

Actually, it would have been even quicker to more carefully read his query and answer (or not) as appropriate. I believe that all the original poster wanted was some info. on a taller front sight. After re-reading his posts several times I still haven't found any request for advice or enlightenment regarding the definition of, or merits of, a 12 o'clock hold. He just wanted information on where to acquire a piece of hardware. That was the "heart" of the issue.

If YOU want to start a thread on the definition and merits of a "12 o'clock hold" then you can ponder whether to begin a new thread or simply post a link to previous threads.

I'm sorry, but you do come across as a little over-inflated on occasion. Not that it should matter to you, but you'd have come across much better if you had simply let us believe that you had suffered a temporary inadvertent lapse rather try to justify your response as you did.

[John Ariani]

Fred - I thought 'having a lend of me' was an expression from your home country? The UK. For some reason I can picture in my mind watching episodes of 'Minder' - many, many years ago - and hearing that phrase. For the love of me I can picture the two main characters (the younger one using the phrase) but can't remember the names. (no - not alcohol related....yes...S3!!!)
Steve, there's not much I can add from my posts in the previous mentioned thread of 13 months ago. The biggest advantage is not seeing the black 'distracting' bull. The hardest part....having the belief and trust that by not seeing it, it's the perfect sight alignment and steadiness of stance and hold that should produce the centre of target hit.
For me and my way of thinking and reasoning (with myself) when I was sub six I asked myself what was my main problem when getting off a shot. Answer: allowing the big black round bull to interfer with my intense focus on the front sight. Question: (to myself) What are you going to do about it? Answer: Get rid of the big black round bull!!! Admittedly the answer probably should have been - try harder focussing on the front sight. But I thought, what the heck, if when sub six we are only supposed to be glued (eyes) to the front sight with total disregard to all else - why can't I be holding above the bull instead of below it? And still have total disregard to all else. Result so far? Best comp score sub six: 546. best super 12: 558. Above all else, I'm enjoying the sport as there are no distractions on my target. I'm just wondering if there are World Class shooters out there who also use this hold - we just don't know about it???!!! I suspect it's a yes. (now there's food for dialogue!)