Advantage Tactical Sights for FNS, FNX Pistols

Advantage Tactical Sight

The FNS and FNX pistols are the latest handguns added to the Advantage Tactical Sight line from WrenTech Industries.  According to company president Richard Nasef in a June 23 blog post, the sights for the FN pistols should be ready around the end of July.

The MSRP on the new Advantage Tactical Sights (ATS) will be $98.49.

If you are not already familiar with the ATS set-up, the front sight is a pentagon, while the rear sight has two lines that trace up and in at about a 45 degree angle from the edges of the slide.  When aligned, the front sight completes the lines in the rear sight to basically form a pyramid or triangle.

I don’t know if this sight picture is faster or more accurate than other sighting systems.  However, I really like that WrenTech uses very bright colors for the sights, and that the front sight is relatively large.  Both of those things help the human eye pick up the front sight when in body alarm response or high stress.





Richard Johnson

An advocate of gun proliferation zones, Richard is a long time shooter, former cop and internet entrepreneur. Among the many places he calls home is http://www.gunsholstersandgear.com/.


Advertisement

  • Derpoington

    When will Steyr sell their polygonal sights as aftermarket parts for different pistols is what I want to know.

  • MightyGrey

    Neither is a double-stack full-size .45

    • Lolinski

      Why isnt it? I remember someone compare the width and the doublestack was less wide than the singlestack. But they have more square grips.

  • milo

    the aesthetics seem a little off for me, but then again if it does its job and does it well that is an afterthought. that and i’m more used to those on my P99

  • Anonymoose

    It’ll look really cool in the next Call of Duty though!

    • Slim934

      Too late. The smart pistol in Titanfall has these sights already.

  • vyse.04

    Looks like a picture someone would edit in MS Paint. Neat concept though.

  • jimmarch

    Richard,

    Do a search for a particular video: an episode of the PBS series “Nova” called “Secrets of the Mind”. One portion shows that we have two different visual processors in our brains. The more modern one is what we use to, for example, read webpages. And for that matter evaluate gunsights, which is a problem in this case because the more primitive visual processor, the one we >should< be using in a gunfight, is colorblind.

    Ooops.

    The more primitive visual processor is the one hard-wired straight to our muscles. It's what allows us to duck a rock somebody throws at us without thinking about it. It can spot motion better than it can do still images, it can shapes just fine and it works in black and white.

    Tim Sheehan at Goshen Enterprises figured all this out which is why he has the only post-modern "super iron sight" the ("Hexsite") that is pure black, and is set up to avoid glinting completely. It's also a target-focus sight instead of front-sight-focus so you just look at something with your conscious visual processor, decide to shoot and there's this weird feeling where the sights auto-align first guided by the more primitive visual processor you don't have conscious control over. Look at something else, decide to shoot it, pull the trigger again. No more trying to lengthen your focus to do target ID and then shortening it up to focus on the front sight to shoot.

    But this "Advantage" sight? No. It looks great – to your conscious visual processor that if you're smart is NOT what you're going to use in a gunfight.

    • Thanks for your response. I’ve not seen the specific episode of the TV show Nova you refer to. I have, however, spent a lot of time reading research papers on the human eye and the effects of a perceived deadly threat on human performance, body alarm response (BAR), SNS discharge and related topics.

      I can tell you that based on my research and experiences, vision is not “either/or,” rather the human encountering a deadly force situation can respond to it along a continuum of nearly infinite possibilities. How vision is affected and to what extent is influenced by how much of a BAR the person has. Many, many factors come into play.

      Talking to a number of people involved in shootings, the recollection of using sights vary. I’ve talked with a number of older deputies who carried Smith & Wesson revolvers with those bright orange inserts on the ramp. They recalled seeing a big “red blob” when involved in shootings.

      Their recollections match what Dave Spaulding found in his interviews of gunfight survivors also. http://www.handgunsmag.com/2010/09/24/tactics_training_what_happens_gunfight/

      Under high stress, the human eye is more likely to see a front sight that is large and of a brightly contrasting color to that of the environment. That doesn’t mean the shooter -will- see the sight; it just means he or she is more likely to see it as compared to small, non-contrasting sights. I don’t know if the Advantage Tactical Sight system is superior or worse than anything else that is out there, but it is an option for people to explore.

      There is a lot of research available for free on the internet for anyone who is interested in learning more on vision under stress. It is a fascinating subject.

      • jimmarch

        Richard, you need to see that episode before you respond further:

        As you’ll see you cannot track usage of this secondary visual center by what people “report”. Use of it is also known as “blindsight”. You have no conscious control over it. If you lose the use of your main visual processor (near the top of your head) due to brain damage and retain only the secondary (at the back of the head) you’d be able to walk down the street and avoid objects but you won’t know how you’re doing it. You also wouldn’t be able to read or recognize people’s faces. You would be “blind” in all aspects EXCEPT such people can navigate on foot (kinda) and dodge rocks or the like being thrown at them.

        Using a Hexsite feels bizarre because you are not consciously aware of WHY the gun is auto-tracking like it’s on robotic control on whatever you look at. It’s not a conscious thing. You do (thankfully) have conscious control over what you look at and what the trigger finger is doing, and that’s it.

        Figuring out how to use this secondary visual processor in a gunfight wasn’t exactly easy. Tim pulled it off and few people so far have noticed.

        • Dr. Ramachandran’s theories on how the brain is mapped and how it responds to various damage is interesting. However, unless there is a fourth video that I did not see that talks about his theories on how the brain interprets vision under varying degrees of stress, not damage, I don’t see how they are on point.

          If you are suggesting that SNS discharge is equal to brain damage, I emphatically disagree. There are varying degrees of stress and they are mitigated by factors such as anticipation, experience, physical fitness, age and more. Body alarm response is not a binary choice of “all on” or “all off.” Consequently, there are varying degrees of impact BAR has on vision and other bodily functions.

          Additionally, if you suggest that everyone under stress is seeing things that are not there, and that people’s experiences are not useful tools for improving sighting systems and training, I again disagree. There is evidence beyond Dr. Ramachandran’s research that has shown the brain can insert memories where an absence of information exists. But, this is a person-to-person experience and not something that has been shown to happen in the majority of high-stress situations.

          You keep bringing up your friend’s sighting system, but I don’t see how it proves anything. His use of a hexagonal rear aperture is interesting and possibly an improvement over traditional ghost-ring or peep type sights, but I don’t see it as revolutionary. It probably works very well for many people.

          Some of Dr. Godnig’s research that is mentioned on your friend’s site can be interpreted differently than you suggest, and it certainly does not contradict my views. Quite the opposite actually. I’ve read a lot of Godnig’s research over the years, as well as that from many other researchers.

          I am guessing you will continue to disagree with me, which is fine. Disagreement allows for people to explore their ideas and thoughts leading to learning of new ideas and/or confirming of old ones. But unless and until credible research is done to show otherwise, I still believe that a brightly contrasting, large front sight is the best way to improve a shooter’s ability to see and use the sight in a high-stress, lethal force encounter.

          • jimmarch

            >>If you are suggesting that SNS discharge is equal to brain damage, I emphatically disagree.<<

            Nonono…we're still talking at cross-purposes here.

            The existence of people with specific damage to the "conscious" visual processor allows us to get insights into how the unconscious visual processor works. What I am suggesting is that it is very powerful and effective within it's limitations.

            It is fast as hell and it appears to be "directly wired" somehow to our muscles. This is how we dodge an incoming object for example without having to think about it – and by "think about it" I mean process the information about the threat and what to do about it consciously.

            What I am telling you, and it has to be experienced to be believed, is that lining up a Hexsite-type sight with a target feels "automatic" in the same way that dodging a thrown rock is.

            The POSITIVE characteristics of the more primitive visual processor are:

            1) Fast as hell.

            2) Able to work in low-light conditions.

            The downsides are:

            a) Better at spotting movement than things that are still, so you are better off taking a shot through a Hexsite "immediately" on lining up a target. This is also why some snakes (most famously cobras) move their heads back and forth before striking: they're doing a trick whereby they put the foreground target in motion against the still-image background, even if the foreground target is still. The more primitive visual processor is sometimes called the "reptilian" visual processor and reptiles lack the more advanced consciously-controlled version. Which is why your pet dog can recognize your face while your pet turtle can't.

            b) Works in black'n'white only!

            c) You can't play back anything from this visual processor in your memory, because it doesn't go there! It is for "survival purposes only".

            Now. Taken all this together, this is why I will never, ever own sights that have colored glow bits of any sort, ever again. Colors disrupt the functioning of the secondary unconscious visual processor and force you to rely purely on the much slower conscious visual processor.

            Let me re-phrase it one more way: if you have a computer with two different video cards, you want a way to lash them together to get them both working on a complex graphic problem. Everything will run faster that way. This is no different, except that adding color to sights throws out access to the most efficient visual processor you've got and forces you back onto the slower visual processor – THAT MOST PEOPLE DON'T EVEN KNOW EXISTS.

            Once you do know it exists, and people with "blindsight" (damage to the conscious visual processor) are proof that it does (in all of us), then getting sights tuned for that and learning to use it by noting it's effects is seriously worthwhile for the ridiculous speed boost available – esp. on transitions between targets, and on initial target ID as well.

  • Cornelius Carroll

    I’m a really big fan of this sight design. Just makes sense to me. I kind of wish they’d make a version for AR patterned weapons.

  • Lance

    So???? You can get the same for a good Glock or Beretta.

    • Chadd

      Are you saying you can buy a good Glock or Beretta for under $100USD; that you can buy these sights for a Glock or Beretta or that you can bu a good Glock or Beretta for the same price as an FNX/FNS?
      ATS makes these sights for quiet a few different pistols and rifles/shoguns.
      And not everyone one likes Glocks and Berettas. And if don’t believe me, look around online at other gun manufacturers, notice that they exist because not everyone likes the same stuff as you.

  • Aaron

    I’ve seen these on other handguns. Despite the initial raised eyebrow at the larger sights with neon colors, I was pleasantly surprised to see how quickly I could line up the pyramid. Not a high stress moment, but much faster than traditional 3-dot sights.