SpookyPistolero said:
While I agree that 'bells and whistles' are usually things that get in the way, I'm not sure I understand your statement about novaks, Jammer Six.
You said "Novaks elminate options, without returning any benefit relevent to modern life."
I assume you mean that since the novaks have a particular slide cut, you can't use other sights. But if you already think the novaks are great, why would you want to change them? I also don't see how they fail to give a benefit. They are easy to see and to use, but the design makes them smooth and snag-proof.
I definitely don't get the '..relevant to modern life' comment in any way. As far as modern needs go, the requirements for a good defensive pistol across time have not changed much. We've just seen what things are worth having and what aren't. On my list are sights you can see well and easily, relatively smoothed and dehorned, and perfect reliability.
No, I'm not talking about the cut. You can't rack Novaks on a belt- they're designed to slip off.
Modern life means that in Seattle, in 2005, I'm never going to take a shot in the dark.
That's a thing you do in a combat zone, not in modern America. Here, you're responsible for all your bullets. Here, you need to see your target.
Here, I have a flashlight, or I don't shoot.
With a flashlight, you don't need night sights. Iron sights show up as a nice, clear silhouette in the dark against an illuminated target.
If you can see well enough to identify your target, you don't need Novaks.
Novaks, therefore, specifically BECAUSE they are a "snag-free" design, eliminate a tactical option without delivering a balancing benefit.
You know, like the guide rod.
Fishing lures aren't designed to catch fish, they're designed to catch fishermen.
Novaks, the Loaded model, FLFRs, ambi safeties (unless you're left handed), all fishing lures.
Fishing lures are excellent moves for fishing lure companies, and all those things are excellent moves for Springfield.
But fishing lures are not good moves for fishermen.
In another sport, we call this phenomenon trying "to buy your way out of a problem", we call it a "convolution", and a solution for a problem that doesn't exist. We call it a hardware solution for a training problem.
The problem of snagging rear sights on cover garments doesn't exist. Dehorned rear sights are nice and soft, and don't catch on anything. The problem of a shot in the pitch dark is a training problem, and requires a piece of equipment that also solves another problem inherent to that scenario- a flashlight, which is necessary for target ID. Since you need the flashlight and the skill to use it, anyway, you don't need the Novaks.
I'll take training and skill over hardware "solutions" any day.
