# sights on G26... off



## BigDaveP (May 12, 2009)

My wife went with me to the range today to break in her new G26. We ended up deciding the sights were just not quite right.

after a hundred rounds or so, we put out a fresh target at 15 feet for one mag, aimed dead middle of the bull.

Result, 9 of the 10 shots were pretty much exactly two inches low. The other was a flyer.

There seems to be no way to adjust the sights, not that it would be a big adjustment anyway. But I hate to tell her to just aim high... I'd rather have the sights spot on. Anyone got a tip for this new Glock owner?


----------



## literaltrance (Dec 24, 2008)

BigDaveP said:


> My wife went with me to the range today to break in her new G26. We ended up deciding the sights were just not quite right.
> 
> after a hundred rounds or so, we put out a fresh target at 15 feet for one mag, aimed dead middle of the bull.
> 
> ...


If it's "new" new, I would seriously consider appealing to a well-known shooter friend and/or range master to get you a second opinion on the weapon. I've never seen a weapon with bad sights fresh off the factory line.

Also consider the batch of ammo as a possible cause....although at 7 yards, differences in ammo performance should not be 2 inches drastic.

Having your range master test would be ideal. Subcompacts can be quite finicky.


----------



## Spartan (Jan 1, 2007)

BigDaveP said:


> There seems to be no way to adjust the sights, not that it would be a big adjustment anyway. But I hate to tell her to just aim high... I'd rather have the sights spot on. Anyone got a tip for this new Glock owner?


I am going to go out on a limb here and say the gun is fine. With due respect, the Glock 26 doesn't come with adjustable sights and is only an option on compact/ full size Glocks (even still it is rare and unnecessary IMO) so you don't seem to be too familiar with handguns, or at least that gun in-particular. I agree with above - have someone else shoot the gun or have one of the range workers have at it. Hitting low is a classic anticipating recoil mistake.

I went through the same thing with my USPc, 40. Thing always shoot low left for me. I was thinking I just dropped 7 bills on this gun and it's no good. Gun was fine; user was flawed. Now I can hit a quarter 12 times in a row from 21'. Just keep practicing.

Remember, only a poor craftsman blames his tool.


----------



## BigDaveP (May 12, 2009)

First let me say I really appreciate the respect. I"m willing to accept that I, or she, might have bad technique, because we're not trained and don't have a ton of quality experience.

But fifteen feet is a short shot. And when I compared my Bersa to her Glock, using the same sight picture, I hit the bull repeatedly and easily with my Bersa and hit two inches below it repeatedly with her Glock. At fifteen feet. Bersa and Glock share the same sight design, the squared U rear with the dot on the front sight.

To hit the bull at fifteen feet, I had to obliterate it, to put it so low that I couldn't see it anymore.

That's just not right.

Is this something a smith can handle? Probably a small adjustment but definitely in need of one.

Also, the magazine baseplates pinch the crap out of our fingers on recoil. My hands are much larger than hers so the pinkies sit at different spots (using pearce pinkie extensions) and we both have blood blisters from our first range session. I"m thinking of chamfering the joint area, but don't want to carve on a GLock unless it's considered normal.

I wish things that came out of a box were perfect, but this isn't turning out like I wanted. Willing to stick with it, just need experienced advice.


----------



## BeefyBeefo (Jan 30, 2008)

BigDaveP said:


> First let me say I really appreciate the respect. I"m willing to accept that I, or she, might have bad technique, because we're not trained and don't have a ton of quality experience.
> 
> But fifteen feet is a short shot. And when I compared my Bersa to her Glock, using the same sight picture, I hit the bull repeatedly and easily with my Bersa and hit two inches below it repeatedly with her Glock. At fifteen feet. Bersa and Glock share the same sight design, the squared U rear with the dot on the front sight.
> 
> ...


I would still guess that it's not the gun. As mentioned above, you should have someone else shoot it (preferably a range master). The comparison between your Bersa and the Glock is almost irrelevant because you are familiar with the Bersa, and the triggers are different.

You may be right, and it could possibly be the gun, but you should expend all other options before having adjustments made to the gun itself. :smt023


----------



## BigDaveP (May 12, 2009)

BeefyBeefo said:


> I would still guess that it's not the gun. As mentioned above, you should have someone else shoot it (preferably a range master). The comparison between your Bersa and the Glock is almost irrelevant because you are familiar with the Bersa, and the triggers are different.
> 
> You may be right, and it could possibly be the gun, but you should expend all other options before having adjustments made to the gun itself. :smt023


I"m not sure I agree the comparison is invalid. The whole point is, the sight picture (same sights on both guns) is radically different. I can plant the dot in the front sight of the Bersa right in the middle of the bull and hit it, but the Glock aimed the same way hits two inches lower. If you raise it enough to hit the center of the bull, you can't see the bull anymore. That's a big difference in sight picture, and I don't think the second example is the way it is supposed to be... but I could be wrong.

I do agree, though, that we might not be doing it right.  I wasn't planning on sending it out until I'm absolutely sure, with experts help, that it's not right... I am waiting to be proven wrong and will appreciate it when it happens. 

Wife suggested heavier ammo, as we've been shooting 115 grn jacketed practice rounds. She knows her stuff for a rookie. :--) I gotta find me some 147 grain practice stuff.


----------



## BeefyBeefo (Jan 30, 2008)

BigDaveP said:


> I"m not sure I agree the comparison is invalid.


Sigh. I didn't say it was invalid, I said it was "almost irrelevant." It may show that you can hit the bullseye with one gun, which may represent trigger control, but this doesn't always translate from one gun to another.



BigDaveP said:


> The whole point is, the sight picture (same sights on both guns) is radically different. I can plant the dot in the front sight of the Bersa right in the middle of the bull and hit it, but the Glock aimed the same way hits two inches lower. If you raise it enough to hit the center of the bull, you can't see the bull anymore. That's a big difference in sight picture, and I don't think the second example is the way it is supposed to be... but I could be wrong.


The ways to align the target and sights does vary between different models/brands. I'm not saying that is the case here, though.



BigDaveP said:


> Wife suggested heavier ammo, as we've been shooting 115 grn jacketed practice rounds. She knows her stuff for a rookie. :--) I gotta find me some 147 grain practice stuff.


This won't make a difference at the distance we are talking about.


----------



## DevilsJohnson (Oct 21, 2007)

From what I've seen some Glocks are a little squirrelly for the first couple hundred rounds. I had a G19 that did it and I solved the trouble wit ha couple mags of rounds that I put jewelers rouge on them. King of a ******* lapping of the barrel. I had to take apart the mags after and make sure there was no left over crap in there to haunt me later. 

The POA of a Glock is Center mass. You want to hit the bull put the blade on the bull. Glock's are combat weapons and are sighted that way on propose. Target weapons will be sighted to float a target while the combat weapon is made to pout the hole where the blade is.

As far as the base plates there might be a grip issue that can help but there are those extended floor plates that can help put a bunch too.





I'll also say +1 on getting a range master or someone that is a well experienced shooter check it out too. Especially if they are a "Glock Person"


----------



## BigDaveP (May 12, 2009)

BeefyBeefo said:


> Sigh. I didn't say it was invalid, I said it was "almost irrelevant." It may show that you can hit the bullseye with one gun, which may represent trigger control, but this doesn't always translate from one gun to another.
> 
> The ways to align the target and sights does vary between different models/brands. I'm not saying that is the case here, though.
> 
> This won't make a difference at the distance we are talking about.


No need for "sigh" stuff, I"m not trying to be difficult.  I don't see a lot of difference between 'invalid' and 'almost irrelevant', that's all... I don't really know the full extent of the meaning of 'trigger control' except that when the striker or hammer hits the detonator, you're still sighted in... I think I"m doing okay there...

I have been told by another glock person that the sight dot should be right on the bull with the front and rear sights level... with this gun, the bull has to go under the barrel at 15 feet if I'm going to hit it.. maybe it's break-in... we'll see.. wife is not discouraged, likes the gun, wants to learn how to be accurate with it..

as to heavy bullets, I have read that a heavier bullet will leave the barrel higher because it takes longer to launch and the recoil force has more time to lift the barrel while the bullet's still in it during the explosion... but I'm sure you're right, at such a short distance it shouldn't make any real difference. it's a small percentage of difference in weight from 115 grains to 147... so I"ll try it, but I don't expect it to make much difference.

still working all this out, folks, thanks for the input.. didn't expect such a large difference between the two guns at such a short distance.. workin' it out...


----------



## jessemachone (Jan 8, 2010)

BigDaveP said:


> No need for "sigh" stuff, I"m not trying to be difficult.  I don't see a lot of difference between 'invalid' and 'almost irrelevant', that's all... I don't really know the full extent of the meaning of 'trigger control' except that when the striker or hammer hits the detonator, you're still sighted in... I think I"m doing okay there...
> 
> I have been told by another glock person that the sight dot should be right on the bull with the front and rear sights level... with this gun, the bull has to go under the barrel at 15 feet if I'm going to hit it.. maybe it's break-in... we'll see.. wife is not discouraged, likes the gun, wants to learn how to be accurate with it..
> 
> ...


I have a G26 with a pinkey extension on the mag. (not a plus two, just the pinkey extension) It shoots perfect with this setup. I did however have a similar issue with my G17 that you are having with your 26. It was shooting low. After a couple of cleenings I noticed a chunk of crap lodged in the barrel. I don't know how long it was there because it was very hard to see in the first place but once i got that thing out of the barrel, the pistol has been spot on.

I did not like the 26 when it only had the flat mag base plate on the mag.

While I do mention that I found something wrong with my weapon, take note that my friend was always able to shoot well with it. Since the day I got it, he was always able to shoot well with it. It always shot low for me until recently.

I now have about 1000 - 1500 rounds through it. (G 17) I don't think I have 500 throught the 26 yet.


----------



## JettaRed (Mar 14, 2014)

Here's a discussion you may find helpful: A Problem with Sight Picture with Glock Sights

You can also replace your rear fixed sights with adjustable Glock sights for about $20.


----------



## SteamboatWillie (Jan 24, 2013)

BigDaveP said:


> First let me say I really appreciate the respect. I"m willing to accept that I, or she, might have bad technique, because we're not trained and don't have a ton of quality experience.
> 
> But fifteen feet is a short shot. And when I compared my Bersa to her Glock, using the same sight picture, I hit the bull repeatedly and easily with my Bersa and hit two inches below it repeatedly with her Glock. At fifteen feet. Bersa and Glock share the same sight design, the squared U rear with the dot on the front sight.
> 
> ...


The reason people question the technique of someone shooting low, or low and left, with a Glock is because it is a very common complaint. Google it and you'll see what I mean.

Before you work on or change the sights, I suggest you try shooting from a bench rest and see if you get the same results. Different types of triggers; DA versus SA versus Striker-fired can affect your accuracy.

Think about it for a second. Moving the trigger to the rear introduces potential movement as you fire. If you use too much or to little trigger finger you'll find the shots hit left or right of center. If you don't understand arc-of-movement and rush the shot, you may jerk the trigger. _If the trigger is light vs. heavy it may affect where you hit the target until you practice with that particular gun.
_
So, it could be the gun itself, how you press the trigger, your grip or the sight picture. Shooting from a rest removes some of those variables and helps isolate the issue.

Just for grins you can also try the ball and dummy drill. Buy some snap caps (you might want them for dry fire practice anyway). Have your wife load a magazine and insert one of the snap caps in a random position (without you seeing where it is) with the live ammo. Then shoot while she watches what the pistol does when you pull the trigger expecting recoil and nothing happens but the "click". If the gun nose dives - you have found the problem.

Just some stuff to consider before you spend the money for different sights and potentially treat the symptom rather than the cause. Hope this helps.


----------



## cchmark (Dec 17, 2015)

I like GLOCK26 , and also expensive smallest Swiss 2 inches long mini handgun also . But Taiwan's law forbid . So I still can not have !


----------



## win231 (Aug 5, 2015)

I sometimes run into the same issue with Glock's standard sights. I have a Model 22 that was perfect with the standard sights. My Model 21 was shooting high with the standard sight but was perfect after I installed night sights. I usually replace the Glock sights with Glock brand night sights. They've always been right on for me. Or, for a cheaper solution you could replace the rear sight with the Glock adjustable sight.


----------



## SteamboatWillie (Jan 24, 2013)

Just a thought - some handguns are sighted for "target" (six o'clock hold) and some are sighted for combat (cover the desired point of impact). 

As an example My Sig 229 is sighted from the factory as combat. I changed my Glock 26 sights to Bid Dot 24/7 and at 7-10 yards the are combat as well.

My S&W 22a has adjustable sights but the factory setting was "target".

So, your Bersa may be "6 O'clock ( I don't know offhand) and the 26 may well be combat (I don't recall the factory sights)

Just a WAG on my part. Still, 2" seems like quite a bit.


----------



## ken grant (Nov 9, 2008)

Glock has non-adjustable stock rear sights with different heights just for this problem.
You don't have to buy the adjustable sights and they are kinda cheaply made anyway.

Go here for info on Glock rear sights.

http://eu.glock.com/english/options_rearsight.htm


----------



## jnichols2 (Feb 13, 2015)

steamboatwillie said:


> just a thought - some handguns are sighted for "target" (six o'clock hold) and some are sighted for combat (cover the desired point of impact).
> 
> As an example my sig 229 is sighted from the factory as combat. I changed my glock 26 sights to bid dot 24/7 and at 7-10 yards the are combat as well.
> 
> ...


bingo !!


----------



## Kennydale (Jun 10, 2013)

I have trouble with the Glock STYLE "DROP IN THE BUCKET" sights. I go with XS Big Dot Sights, my wife likes her moderate priced Meprolight Night Sights.


----------

