1911 - replacing a rear sight with an optic

[texas yankee]

I have an RIA 1911 longslide - I want to replace the dovetail-mounted rear adjustable sight with a red dot optic - I'm not interested in discussing the pros and cons of a red dot versus the original rear sight, nor discussing whether or not I should have the slide milled to "correctly" mount the red dot. I have a red dot that I'm happy with - it needs a mount plate with an RMSc footprint. There are several companies that make mount plates with the correct footprint - in addition to the footprint, there's the question of the sight cut - Novak, LPA, GI, Bomar, etc. Some of the companies produce a one-piece solution that includes the mount plate and the dovetail that fits snugly into the existing dovetail on the slide (EGW, for example - Amazon product ASIN B01G97Y2I8), and some produce a mount plate with a separate dovetail that fits loosely into the dovetail but "snugs up" as it comes through the mount plate (Leopold, for example - Amazon product ASIN B01BXZNNRM). The support folks at RIA \ Armscor tell me that " Our sight dimension is proprietary, but it is very close to Novak standard", and the support folks at EGW looked at the pictures of the rear sight area on my 1911 and they tell me that "We received some pictures of the rear sight on your gun and we confirmed that it is an LPA cut". I'm attaching a picture of the rear sight area (with the sight already removed) on my 1911 - given that the dimensions of the dovetail may be different ("some fitting required"), what'd be the correct designation of the sight cut on my RIA 1911? Thanks!

 

[Byrd666]

Just to verify, I'd give RIA a call. If I remember right, when I was initially researching my first 1911 acquisition, I called them about rear sight changes to something more conducive to one handed manipulations, they said it was a "standard Novak cut". That might have changed over the last decade or so.

For reference, an American Classic that I lost on my last boating trip, was a "standard Novak cut", only it wasn't, and I couldn't get workable replacement sights for it.

 

[BRD@66]

Be careful. You're bordering on blasphemy.

 

[t-astragal]

Be careful. You're bordering on blasphemy.

Cringing yet? lol. I built this strictly for 50 and 25 yard target competition.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[t-astragal]

Duplicate post

 

[Gordo]

Red dots, for people who don't want to practice shooting a 1911...

 

[Army 1911]

Check with Dawson Precision. I bet they can tell you or how to determine the cut.

 

[Army 1911]

EGW may make an oversized LPA mount in which case you would file the plate dovetail base until it fits. This assumes yours is an lpa cut.

 

[JandK]

Nothing inherently wrong with your plan,I still would want a iron site rear. Who knows what could go wrong in a fight,emitter gets dirty,glass shatters while diving over the Chinese food counter at food court.
If someone makes a optic mount with a rear sight that would be good. Although red dot is typically not heavy I would think about this mounting method in a kind of scientific manner.
The small amount if metal at top of dovetail attaching to a fairly long plate with a red dot atop of it theoretically from cycling of slide may become weeker especially if pistol is not properly sprung.

 

[t-astragal]

Nothing inherently wrong with your plan,I still would want a iron site rear. Who knows what could go wrong in a fight,emitter gets dirty,glass shatters while diving over the Chinese food counter at food court.
If someone makes a optic mount with a rear sight that would be good. Although red dot is typically not heavy I would think about this mounting method in a kind of scientific manner.
The small amount if metal at top of dovetail attaching to a fairly long plate with a red dot atop of it theoretically from cycling of slide may become weeker especially if pistol is not properly sprung.

I have dozens of pistols that exist purely for my pleasure and enjoyment. They are not “bad guy getters”. I have 2-3 for defensive purposes, and I don’t need optics on those. Not taking 50 yard headshots in self defense.

The word “toy” seems too disrespectful, but it’s a good label for 95% of my collection Back up sights aren’t needed on toys. As far as an optic riding a slide, that’s the preferred way to do it when precision is the objective. It works fine from tiny reflex sights to 30mm tubes like my Aimpoint 9000. No spring change needed unless the loads are toned down, which mine are.

Not singling out anyone particular, but so many people only talk about using guns as weapons only. I hope folks are also “playing” with them…a bunch. Otherwise the guns will statistically never be used for their purposes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JandK]

Agree with calling them toys to me that's what they are in a generic term of love, then I have my work go to war the world is over guns. The later are set up for fighting in the most brutal environment.
The only gripe I have even recreational type shooting with some of those rear sight dove tail mountes is the very small piece of steel left to hold it all. Can be a critical failure point. My problem is over think Construction and Design of everything . I allways look for the most reliable way to build and design things. It's why I have a limited number of toys from guns to everything else,I chase down the best with the cruelest and most brutal use I bring forth.
Keeping in mind I'm the guy who will throw my rifle down the range to prove product durability and reliability. Not everyone should think like that as sometimes it takes the fun out if shooting when you treat weapons as WORL TOOLS.
One my practical sensible side I agree with you Sir.

 

[A1Oni]

get it milled