Page 1 of 2

Millett rear sight on MKI will not allow enough elevation

Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2008 11:12 am
by Tigerbeetle
I replaced the old fixed sight on my Ruger MkI, and installed a new Millett front blade (036-102 & 036-202) a week or two back. A parts tech. at Ruger said I would need the higher front blade on the MKI. I went out to the range this past weekend to see how the new sights would be. Like the sights, but I am at maximum elevation with the adjustment screw and still shooting 3 inches low at 25 m. My question: Do I reinstall the shorter front sight & loose my white face, or take out my trusty file and shorten the front blade until I get to zero? I also want to back off on the adjustment screw a little bit so I have some wiggle room in the future if I go to standard velocity ammo. I would really appreciate the advice of all you knowledgeable forum members.
Tigerbeetle :)

Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2008 5:10 pm
by wlambert
You already answered your own question.

The front sight is too high.

I would probably go with the file. Set the rear sight in the middle of its travel, then adjust a little at a time with the file. Go in small amounts until you are happy with the result.

You can darken the top of the front sight with cold blue.

wlambert

Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2008 5:38 pm
by bearandoldman
wlambert wrote:You already answered your own question.

The front sight is too high.

I would probably go with the file. Set the rear sight in the middle of its travel, then adjust a little at a time with the file. Go in small amounts until you are happy with the result.

You can darken the top of the front sight with cold blue.

wlambert
that is the way I would do it, but I am a little crude and just use a black felt pen

Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2008 6:53 pm
by wlambert
Hey Old Man,

I think a felt tip pen is a good idea. My problem is that I have this 8oz bottle of Oxpho-blue from Brownells. A little lasts a long time. I am pretty sure it is going to be part of my estate. So I use it any time I can.

Scratch Bear under the chin for me.

wlambert

Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2008 7:17 pm
by bearandoldman
wlambert wrote:Hey Old Man,

I think a felt tip pen is a good idea. My problem is that I have this 8oz bottle of Oxpho-blue from Brownells. A little lasts a long time. I am pretty sure it is going to be part of my estate. So I use it any time I can.

Scratch Bear under the chin for me.

wlambert
I'm frugal or really simply, cheap

Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2008 10:04 pm
by Bullseye
Welcome to the forum Tigerbeetle!

I need to know what size barrel your standard has so I can compute the amount of material to remove from your front sight. Also I need to know how low the hits are when you are at mid range of the elevation on the rear sight.

I know that at full elevation your 3" low but what is it at mid adjustment?

R,
Bullseye

midrange on millett

Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 2:49 pm
by Tigerbeetle
Boy, I wish my wife hadn't thrown my targets away yesterday. Bullseye, my best guess is that I was probably five inches low. When I first started shooting I was printing pretty near the bottom of the 8.5 x 11 4" pistol target (25 m). I am not sure whether the site was a the bottom of deflection or not when I started out. I just fired for effect, was on the paper, and went from there. Real scientific, I know. On the 4 inch bull, I was printing pretty much at the bottom of the bull, or slightly lower, using a 6 o:clock hold with the front sight even with the top of the rear sight. My old Ruger has the 4 3/4 barrel. As I understand, it is a fairly early Ruger, the serial number starts at 15 - xx, and I have seen Rugers with 14 as the first two digits. Does Ruger have a service like Browning or Winchester were you can determine when you gun was manufactured? I really appreciate your help. My original site was 6.65 mm from the top of the mounting bracket; and the new Millett is 12.091 mm from the top of the site bracket. Nearly twice as high. As the fellow at Ruger told me the original site would not be tall enough, I reckon the sweet spot will be somewhere in between. I'll be curious to see if your calculations come out close to 9 mm above the sight bracket. From the top of the barrel, to the top of the new sight, it is 15.91 mm. I just got a new electronic caliper from Midway so this gives me a chance to use it. Thanks again, Tigerbeetle :)

Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 3:11 pm
by Tigerbeetle
Bearandoldman, I think we have both been kicking around about the same length of time. I had a black lab, Maggie, that hung out with me pretty much. She's been chasing ducks up yonder for several years now. I have some bluing that dates back 25 or 30 years too. Never know when you are going to need to touch something up. I found that the forearm on a '84 model Citori I got this fall had rub the bluing off in little strips where the wood rubbed. I "floated" the forearm when I refinished the stock and forearm and touched up the bluing. Can't hardly tell there was ever a rub. Had to do the same on my 1100 a while back. I will probably use a felt tip until I get the sight set where I want it, then I will blue it. Take care of Bear. TB :)

Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 5:46 pm
by Bullseye
According to your information to change 5" at 25 meters you need to lower the top of the sight by 1mm. If you were shooting at 25 yards instead of meters then you should lower the front sight height by .040".

R,
Bullseye

Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 5:48 pm
by bearandoldman
Bullseye wrote:According to your information to change 5" at 25 meters you need to lower the top of the sight by 1mm. If you were shooting at 25 yards instead of meters then you should lower the front sight height by .040".

R,
Bullseye
Not much difference ther emaybe .0003?

Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2008 8:02 am
by Tigerbeetle
That is great! How did you figure that out. Trigonometry or geometry. Sorry to say math was never a good subject. Luckily I was a forest entomologist as tree and insect names came easily.

I will take it down and see how it does. TB :)

Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2008 10:54 am
by bearandoldman
Tigerbeetle wrote:That is great! How did you figure that out. Trigonometry or geometry. Sorry to say math was never a good subject. Luckily I was a forest entomologist as tree and insect names came easily.

I will take it down and see how it does. TB :)
Yes, it is one or the other or a combination of both, worked as an engineer, machinist and service tech when I was working so that kind of stuff comes easy for me just a bugs and trees do for you.
My knowledge in your field is minimal, bugs either fly, crawl, walk or hop or a combination of all four and there are 2 kinds of trees ones with leaves and ones with needles.

Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2008 4:42 pm
by Bullseye
The formula is relatively elementary. (Sight radius X Error)/distance The distance between the sight blades times the amount of correction you desire to apply divided by the total distance the error appears. As long as you keep all the numbers in the same units of measure the formula is quite easy to compute.

R,
Bullseye

Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2008 5:22 pm
by Tigerbeetle
Okay, if you say so. I will get out my slide rule, uh, I think I sold that in a garage sale about 35 years ago.... my calculator and give it a try. Any entomologist's favorite saying is " All bugs are insects, but not all insects are "bugs." The is one order of insects known as "true bugs." And no one but another entomologist would give a dern. And I still miss Montana. It will be a week or two before I get to try it out at the range. I'll come back on then and let you know how it worked. Next is the trigger I guess. Hope it isn't too hard to get apart. TB :D

Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2008 5:33 pm
by Bullseye
As far as the formula goes, it looks a lot harder than it is to compute. As long as the numbers you gave me were good then that is all you need to remove from the top of your sight blade. Follow the profile of the sight just lower the overall height.

Follow the steps on my web help pages and you should be fine with your maintenance.

R,
Bullseye