Beretta 92 Brigadier hits terribly low; Dawson doesn't make a front sight short enough

Status
Not open for further replies.

1KPerDay

Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2006
Messages
20,849
Location
Happy Valley, UT
I've been shooting groups and doing the calculations trying to get fiberoptic fronts for my CZ75B Omega which hits annoyingly high (but still usable; 2.4" high at 20 yards or 1.2" at 10), and Beretta 92FS Brig which his ridiculously low (1.75" LOW at 10 yards or 3.5" at 20).

They have the right (.150") tall sight for the CZ but their calculator says I need a .104" tall front for the Brig, and the shortest they make is .130". OEM front is .135" tall.

Wilson combat only sells .173" tall fronts to go with their rears. Which would make it worse.

Ideas? It's bad enough that I can't shoot this pistol in matches for fear of missing the plates low.

Even if I buy a front/rear set, I'm afraid it won't fix the issue as they're all made to the same relative height (to each other) as the OEM sights, and this pistol doesn't shoot to the sights.

Don't really want to get an adjustable rear... there are already enough things in the way of racking the slide on this thing.
 
Last edited:
You can file the front sight down. I initially did that on my 92G Elite II. The problem was that I ended up with a front sight that was so short that I could see part of the slide through the rear sight notch. Mine was hitting a lot lower than yours, so maybe this won't be a problem for you.

Something to keep in mind if you decide to change sights--the front sight on my EII was ridiculously tight in the dovetail. I couldn't get it to move even with considerable "encouragement" applied.
 
How are you measuring sight height?

My 1998 Brigadier has front sight about .22"ish tall above the bottom of the dovetail. It seems to shoot to the sights with 124 gr 9mm NATO.
 
I measured from the top of the sight to the top of the slide the way Dawson wants you to.
John, if you file down 3 dot sights doesn’t the dot get scalped?
 
Something to keep in mind if you decide to change sights--the front sight on my EII was ridiculously tight in the dovetail. I couldn't get it to move even with considerable "encouragement" applied.

I suppose I could hacksaw/chisel it out if I had to. It’s kinda worthless as is.
 
If you file the sights, the dot will get closer to the top of the blade. If it's enough filing, you'll start to lose the dot. Of course, you can fill the dot with something like Bondo, file it flat and drill/paint a new dot lower on the blade once you're done--assuming that there's enough room left on the blade.

The EII front sight was plain black--no dot--so I didn't have that trouble.

.455_Hunter has a good point. You might try some different ammo first. I don't see a lot of POI variance with different ammo in my autopistols, but it's always a good idea to try some different loadings before altering the gun.
 
Beretta 92 series are sighted in to cover with the front sight what you want to hit. So if you want to hit a plate you have to cover it with the sights as the plate is behind the white dot of the front sight. Beretta 70 series: same thing.
You can try to find a higher rear sight or better yet an adjustable one, Novak style for example.
 
I've heard that but I have never found that to be true, except at very close range where all guns tend to shoot low due to the bore being below the sights. The one notable exception was my 92G EII Brigadier. That model had a known sight problem and mine shot about 10 or 11 inches low at 15 yards--not something you can fix by covering the target with the dot.
 
I've heard that but I have never found that to be true, except at very close range where all guns tend to shoot low due to the bore being below the sights. The one notable exception was my 92G EII Brigadier. That model had a known sight problem and mine shot about 10 or 11 inches low at 15 yards--not something you can fix by covering the target with the dot.
Every single experience I had shooting Berettas 92/98 as well as every 70 Series confirmed that fact in my case. But I know experience may vary.
 
Last edited:
Beretta 92 series are sighted in to cover with the front sight what you want to hit. So if you want to hit a plate you have to cover it with the sights as the plate is behind the white dot of the front sight. Beretta 70 series: same thing.
You can try to find a higher rear sight or better yet an adjustable one, Novak style for example.

this has been my experience with Berettas as well.
 
Dunno what to tell you. The half dozen or so Berettas I've owned (maybe 4 or 5 92 series, a PX4, and an 86) and any others I've shot over the years all shot to roughly a 6 O'clock hold at 25 yards and only put the bullet behind the front sight at very close ranges. That's with the exception of the aforementioned 92G EII that had a known issue with the sights and shot almost a foot low at about 15 yards.

And, of course, virtually any pistol will shoot behind the front sight at close ranges because the bore is below the sights so the bullet has to start out below the sights.

Beretta used to state on their website that their pistols were sighted for a 6 O'clock hold, but at some point in the last few years, they've changed their website. Now they state that the front sight should cover the point of impact, but the picture they provide actually shows a combat hold where the bullet impacts directly above the front sight (as if resting on top of it), not behind it. That would be consistent with what you would expect at 5-7 yards from pistol that's sighted for roughly 6 O'clock @ 25 yards.

That may be a big part of the issue here. A pistol won't shoot to the same point of aim at all distances. So if 3 people pick up the same gun (say one that's set up to shoot 6 O'clock @ 25yds) and shoot it at different distances, they'll all see a different point of impact.

The guy shooting at 25 yards will say the pistol is sighted for a 6 O'clock hold where the bullet hits a few inches above the front sight, the person shooting at 5-7 yards with the same gun and ammo will say it's sighted for a combat hold where the bullet impacts directly above the front sight as if resting on top of it, and the person shooting at closer ranges will say it's sighted to put the bullet behind the front sight.

Anyway, what I do know is that the changes to Beretta's website did not, surprisingly enough, change how the Berettas I own shoot. :D

For what it's worth, the OP is having a different issue because his gun is shooting lower as the range increases. That's what you see when the sights aren't set up right and are set to shoot too low. The bullet starts out below the bore and then just keeps getting lower the farther downrange it goes. A normal sight setup has the bullet starting out below the bore and then coming up because the sights are set up to aim the bore slightly upwards. So (at least until the trajectory arc peaks--which usually happens beyond 25 yards) the bullet keeps rising as it gets farther downrange.
 
Dunno what to tell you. The half dozen or so Berettas I've owned (maybe 4 or 5 92 series, a PX4, and an 86) and any others I've shot over the years all shot to roughly a 6 O'clock hold at 25 yards and only put the bullet behind the front sight at very close ranges. That's with the exception of the aforementioned 92G EII that had a known issue with the sights and shot almost a foot low at about 15 yards.

And, of course, virtually any pistol will shoot behind the front sight at close ranges because the bore is below the sights so the bullet has to start out below the sights.

Beretta used to state on their website that their pistols were sighted for a 6 O'clock hold, but at some point in the last few years, they've changed their website. Now they state that the front sight should cover the point of impact, but the picture they provide actually shows a combat hold where the bullet impacts directly above the front sight (as if resting on top of it), not behind it. That would be consistent with what you would expect at 5-7 yards from pistol that's sighted for roughly 6 O'clock @ 25 yards.

That may be a big part of the issue here. A pistol won't shoot to the same point of aim at all distances. So if 3 people pick up the same gun (say one that's set up to shoot 6 O'clock @ 25yds) and shoot it at different distances, they'll all see a different point of impact.

The guy shooting at 25 yards will say the pistol is sighted for a 6 O'clock hold where the bullet hits a few inches above the front sight, the person shooting at 5-7 yards with the same gun and ammo will say it's sighted for a combat hold where the bullet impacts directly above the front sight as if resting on top of it, and the person shooting at closer ranges will say it's sighted to put the bullet behind the front sight.

Anyway, what I do know is that the changes to Beretta's website did not, surprisingly enough, change how the Berettas I own shoot. :D

For what it's worth, the OP is having a different issue because his gun is shooting lower as the range increases. That's what you see when the sights aren't set up right and are set to shoot too low. The bullet starts out below the bore and then just keeps getting lower the farther downrange it goes. A normal sight setup has the bullet starting out below the bore and then coming up because the sights are set up to aim the bore slightly upwards. So (at least until the trajectory arc peaks--which usually happens beyond 25 yards) the bullet keeps rising as it gets farther downrange.


That’s a great point. I shoot 7-10 yards at an indoor range.
 
If you file the sights, the dot will get closer to the top of the blade. If it's enough filing, you'll start to lose the dot. Of course, you can fill the dot with something like Bondo, file it flat and drill/paint a new dot lower on the blade once you're done--assuming that there's enough room left on the blade.

The EII front sight was plain black--no dot--so I didn't have that trouble.

.455_Hunter has a good point. You might try some different ammo first. I don't see a lot of POI variance with different ammo in my autopistols, but it's always a good idea to try some different loadings before altering the gun.
I’ve tried all weights but the real upshot is I’m not going to load specific 9mm for one pistol. It’s just not worth the trouble to me. Thanks for the ideas though.
 
Well you could start with taller rear then get a shorter front from dawson. Dawson also will custom make sizes they don't show on the website if you call them.
 
Beretta 92 series are sighted in to cover with the front sight what you want to hit. So if you want to hit a plate you have to cover it with the sights as the plate is behind the white dot of the front sight.
I have a few SIGs and a couple other Berettas so I’m very familiar with the “combat hold.” This one shoots too low for me
 
Well you could start with taller rear then get a shorter front from dawson. Dawson also will custom make sizes they don't show on the website if you call them.
Thanks I’ll look into it. Truthfully replacing both sights doesn’t bother me other than the additional cost. I don’t like three dot sights anyway and was planning on painting the rear white dots black.
 
Well you could start with taller rear then get a shorter front from dawson. Dawson also will custom make sizes they don't show on the website if you call them.
Anyone know how Novak measures their rear height? Is it from the base to the notch, base to top, slide to notch or slide to top?
 
If you file the sights, the dot will get closer to the top of the blade.
.
And does that mean that the alignment of the three dots will be off? Or will that stay the same.

LOL I guess it stays the same, but the impact should be closer to the top of the front sight, right? Because the sight is shorter.

I’m a writer, not an engineer, Jim! LOL
 
When you are shooting low are you aligning the dots or the top of the sights?
Aligning the dots, are the top of the sights aligned?
I'm asking because I don't shoot using the dots or fiber or whatever, only top of the sights aligned.
I also don't remember which hold you are using: 6 o'clock? Center mass? Cover up?
 
Last edited:
When you are shooting low are you aligning the dots or the top of the sights?
Aligning the dots, are the top of the sights aligned?
I'm asking because I don't shoot using the dots or fiber or whatever, only top of the sights aligned.
I also don't remember which aiming method you are using.
Top of the sights. But the dots are aligned when the top of the sights are aligned. Currently.
 
Ok, thanks. And which hold are you using?
Doesn't really matter which hold. I want the impact to be at the top of the front sight. It isn't, so I'm going to swap or adjust the sights until it does.

Even using a combat hold, which I find annoying, puts the impacts lower than the dot. But I see what you're saying... for my "3.5" lower than desired" groups I was using the top of the front sight as the desired impact point and holding the POA object there. That's where I like my pistols to hit, and most of them do, or close enough. I have fixed the POI with Dawson fronts on a couple that hit lower than I could stand, but the CZ is the first one I've had that hits too high for me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top