Vickers Elite Battlesight For Glocks

I was talking with Larry Vickers last week on the subject of pistol sights. Specifically I wanted to talk with him about the new Glock sights he worked on with Wilson Combat.

Larry told me he prefers a rear sight with a fairly wide U notch and a fiber optic front sight. Ideally he prefers a dot over the dot variety. This type of pistol sight is very fast on target and makes one of the best if not the best pistol sights you can buy for a defensive pistol. At least that’s my firm opinion.


Vickers related this project of design, selecting material and working out numerous other details has taken almost a year to complete and get the final product in Wilsons catalogue. Larry said when Wilson put them for sale online the first batch was sold out in less than half a day.


As you can see from the photos the rear sight has a near 90 degree angle on the front allowing the shooter to use the rear sight to work the action and chamber a round should one hand or the other become disabled. The rear sight fits the factory Glock dovetail. I had to file a small amount but had the rear installed in about twenty minutes. Once the sight is lined up properly the user tightens two screws on top of the sight locking it securely in place.

The front sight can be purchased with a fiber optic insert, Tritium insert, plain and gold dot. The front sight comes in two sizes. The correct size for full size Glocks in 10mm and 45 acp is .230 while all other calibers use the .245 size.The user can also file down the front sight to adjust POI. Installation of the front sight is simple. Use a Glock front sight tool to remove the old sight then place the new sight in securing it with the shorter screw that comes with the Vickers/Wilson sight. Before putting the screw in the front sight use a small amount of medium Loctite to ensure it stays in place. That’s all there is to it. It’s a half hour project at most.

Additional information on choosing sight size.

Note: The Vickers Elite Glock® Sight set requires the use of a .245” tall front sight for all caliber Glock® pistols except for .45 ACP and 10mm which will typically require the .230” front sight. Sights may require minor fitting and may not be returned after installation. These front sights are taller than factory Glock® and not compatible with standard factory rear sights without adjusting the sight height.

If you note in the photos the rear sight has a lighter colored steel area machined into the U shape like the notch. This is a real plus making it even faster to line the sights up. The retail price is $49.95 for the rear sight and $39.95 for the front fiber optic sight. The other front sights vary in price depending on the material used for the dot.


I have U notch sights on almost all my pistols so I’ve gotten very used to them. These sets of sights are the best I’ve used. The lighter gray insert in the rear sight makes it faster on target than the plain U notch. The fiber optic isn’t terribly large which to me is a good thing. Some companies make the fiber optic so large they fill the notch in the rear sight.


I’m leaving these sights on my Glock 23 and they are offered for the 1911 as well. The price certainly makes it affordable to change your sights on more than one gun.

Have a look at this sight system on Wilsons website at Vickers Elite Battlesight

Phil White

Retired police officer with 30 years of service. Firearms instructor and SRU team member. I still instruct with local agencies. My daily carry pistol is the tried and true 1911. I’m the Associate Editor and moderator at TFB. I really enjoy answering readers questions and comments. We can all learn from each other about our favorite hobby!


  • ClintTorres

    I would love to see a test comparison with these vs. the Hexsite.

    • ClintTorres

      …with Jerry Miculek doing the drivin’.

    • hum I don’t know about those—–

      • ClintTorres

        yeah, I’d like to see if the “focus on the target” concept has merits vs. a traditional sight picture.

        • iksnilol

          On rifles it works, don’t know about pistols – haven’t tried it yet on them. Do want to try it on a pistol.

          Source: personal experience.

    • iksnilol

      Seems like a good idea.

      I remember reading that Ed McGivern prefered using an aperture sight with a gold bead in front for accuracy shooting with revolvers.

      Haven’t tried it, will probably in the future.

    • “The All New Superior Composite Construction HexSite® Sighting System”

      Makes me think of the plastic Glock sights that everyone lists as the one thing that you should definitely change on a Glock pistol.

      • Hyok Kim

        Supposedly stronger than steel.

  • Colonel Panic

    Can I get them for my Vickers machinegun? 8^)

  • iksnilol

    I don’t know.

    “Combat”/Self defense pistols are used at so close distances (25 meters or less) that you might as well just point-shoot. Sure, it won’t be bullseye accuracy but good enough for COM.

    • zach

      I really don’t understand this mentality. You are responsible for the impact of every round you fire and using sights, even just the front sight, greatly reduces the probability of hitting an innocent bystander. “Good enough” should not be what we strive for in firearms handling.

      • I want the best I can find. Good enough just doesn’t get it for me. I want it to work up close and farther away. I found these to work well for both. The smaller green dot makes a precision shot easier than those oversize fiber optics.

      • iksnilol

        I do use target sights, it is just for SD scenarios it is easier to just point-shoot. Mainly due to being much faster without being distracted by trying to line up the sights.

        Also I wear glasses, without them I can’t see the sights. So I learned to shoot without them as a precaution if I don’t have them on me.

        • Hyok Kim

          You might want to try Jerry Miculek method of ‘soft focus’. It even works (in fact, works better than those big tactical dot sight.) on old blade style front sight. It’s fast, accurate, and works on both stationary, and moving targets, and both high light and low light situation. Both slow target style and fast SD shooting, and multiple targets as well.

          • iksnilol

            Going to check that out but I can’t find much info on it. Did he make a video showing this technique?

          • Hyok Kim

            He did, but you’re going to have to pay for it. I’ll explain as best as I can in words.

            1. Line up the sights, both rear and front superimposed on the target as you normally would.

            2. Squint your eyes slightly, not too hard, both but still open to the point that the rear, the front sight and the target all become hazy, but you can still see the outlines of them all superimposed.

            Do not focus on any of them. (I know this is contradictory of focusing on the front sight or the target as advocated by most shooting experts, but that’s what Jerry Miculek advocates.)

            3. Now, you would be able to see clearly the the outline of the front sight clearly superimposed on the outline of the target, with the rear sight appearing as the semi-ghost ring. Notice I emphasize the outline of the target, and the sights, not the target or the sights themselves. You don’t care what color or the texture the target or the sights have. All you care about is the outline.

            4. So the thinner the front sight, the more accurate centering one could achieve by this method. So in a sense, the old fashioned blade style front sight works wonders.

            In a sense, this is akin to the depth of the field concept in photography, the nothing is in clear focus, but the field becomes more 3 dimensional and as a result, can more clearly distinguish the near object, intermediate object, and the further objects, in this case, the rear sight, front sight, and the target.

            Also this explains why this method works both in low light, high light, and with or without glasses.

      • Rob Gonzalez

        As I discovered you can be very accurate at 6 to 10 feet without sights. I fully surprised myself when it was required in instructor training but it sure couldn’t hurt to try your front sights. Just be sure it doesn’t slow you down even for a split second. It always comes down to training and lots of practice. I will even try it at 7 yards just for practice. I am getting better but at seven yards it becomes a little harder to hit the target.

    • Geodkyt

      Since “stopping power” is more related to “location, location, location” than almost anything else, “good enough” to pepper the torso randomly may well not be “good enough” to actually do the job.

      If you don’t have time or cannot take a sight picture, sure, you do what you have to. But I would rather have a capability and end up not using it, then need it and not have it – especially when it is as easy to implement as this.

    • Do you even IDPA?

      • iksnilol

        No. Don’t know what to call it, shoot at 25 meters (27 yards) with target pistols.

    • Hyok Kim

      No aiming at 25 meters? I think Jeff Cooper said it best. Unless one is able to hit a 10″ group consistently, one should not.

      • iksnilol

        Typo, meant 15 meters. Sometimes I see wrong. Cost me a lot of points on math tests.

        • Hyok Kim

          I used to get F in math all the time in SK before moving to the states. After I moved to the states, I found out that Asian stereotype of doing well in math, so I tried hard to live up to the stereotype, and ended up getting A’s in math classes.

          • iksnilol

            Not Asian or a stereotype. I try hard too, just I quite literally don’t see my mistakes during a test. I can see that I did something correctly then after the test I can see that I wrote something else.

  • SafeArmsReview

    I agree with others that there are some sights that make it easier to line up however in an armed self defense scenario are sights even needed?

    Consider that rape, home invasions, muggings, car jackings, assault, murder, etc are almost all conducted at close range; which I consider 20 feet or less. The stats from Sept 1854 to Dec 1979, 254 officers died from wounds received in an armed encounter. The shooting distance in 90% of those cases was less than 15 feet.

    Contact to 3 feet … 34%
    3 feet to 6 feet …… 47%
    6 feet to 15 feet ….. 9%

    Nice stats but the job of LEO is vastly different than an everyday citizens defending themselves. Civies do not conduct traffic stops, chase down drug dealers, etc so we have to compare apples to apples. What we DO see is that close distances are found in both LEO and civi self defense scenarios. If you read the NRA survival stories almost all armed self defense situations occur at similar close distances and rarely are sights used. Lets look at the following info…

    In 70% of the cases reviewed, sight alignment was not used. Officers
    reported that they used instinctive or point shooting. As the distance between the officer and the threat/s increased, some type of
    aiming was reported in 20% of the cases. This aiming or sighting ran from using the barrel as an aiming reference to picking up the front sight and utilizing fine sight alignment. The remaining 10% could not remember whether they had aimed or pointed and fired the weapon instinctively.

    So the question we need to ask is it worth it to buy expensive, new fangled sites ever time someone makes a new set? According to the info I have read most don’t even remember focusing on the sights but rather just pointed and shoot till the threat/s changed their minds. I have encountered so many students that attend a class and have a new pair of sights each time. The problem I see is not an equipment issue but a skill/confidence issue – IOW the shooter is not confident or well practiced in their

    Now as a gun person I like trying out new sight and I have found a set that me and my family like, SpeedSights

    Mind you I shoot at longer distances at the range for fun and with my eyes aging, to me its easier to line up large diamonds than any other sites. With my students I don’t really care what sites they use (I don’t push what I have on them). I focus on them being able to shoot COM with their gun and equipment. I don’t want groupies I want students to take the best stuff I learned over the years and lessen their learning curve.

    Thats my 2 cents.

    • Rob Gonzalez

      Good points. When I took my NRA instructor course we did a little close quarters defense scenario to demonstrate how a semi-auto doesn’t work when pressed against a body. We had to pull back a few inches, fire, then step back and fire a few times more at the other “perp” attacking from a different angle. I fired 2 shots while moving backwards and hit dead center without sights, but as you say, it was only maybe 6 to 10 feet after stepping away from the secondary target. I amazed myself as I had never fired at a target without sights until then….and it worked great….even while stepping backwards away from the second attacker. I think you are right on when it comes to distances in a typical scenario and hope I never have to experience that myself. Be safe and thanks for the input.

      • iksnilol

        What about attaching a piece in front to prevent the slide from stopping?

        Something like a glass breaker (preferably without all those snaggy sharp bits).

        • Rob Gonzalez

          Wow! What and where is that? Sure looks intimidating. Is that a 1911? Can’t see enough to tell. Not sure that would solve the problem. It’s an issue with all semi-autos. I haven’t seen any solution except pulling the gun back a few inches, which is pretty quick anyway.

          • iksnilol

            It is an airsoft gun, just found a random pic.

            You could make something like this yourself, just attach two metal plates to the light rail of your pistol. One horizontaly lengthwise and the other vertically in front of the muzzle.

            Would probably require custom holsters but could be useful. Not for me though, since I use suppressors which would necesiatte a really long one to reach in front of the silencer.

          • Geodkyt

            It’s actually NOT an issue with “all” semiautos — only MOST of them.

            But squeezing teh trigger while withdrawing will probably work just fine, without crapping up the end of your pistol with something that throws off balance, requires special holsters (probably custom made or totally formless “universal” floppy nylon), etc., in teh VERY unlikely case to find yourself in this situation.

            Frankly, teh proposed “solution” causes more problems than it solves, and it will cause those problems ALL THE TIME while only helping in one very specific and extremely unusual scenario.

            I don;t have a mouse trap slung on my saddle, and I won’t have one of these.

        • Garret

          GG&G made something like this called the “Alternative Force Block”. Supposedly it was developed by a former Navy Seal by the name of Chris Caracci to prevent the slide from going out of battery if you were to give someone a friendly poke with the end of your P226. Just google “GG&G Alternative Force Block” and you’ll get all the info you need along with some pictures of it on some 226’s and 1911’s.

      • Hyok Kim

        “When I took my NRA instructor course we did a little close quarters defense scenario to demonstrate how a semi-auto doesn’t work when pressed against a body.”

        Even fixed barrel semi-autos?

        • Rob Gonzalez

          I didn’t qualify that statement by stating that not all semi-autos suffer from the same “being pushed out of battery” issue. Don’t know anything about fixed barrels but I would say most semi-autos out there have the issue. I have 4 classic 1911s, a Glock 17, a Barreta PX4, and a Springfield XDs and they all have that issue. I honestly don’t know if a fixed barrel pistol will go out of battery when pushed up against a body. Would appreciate a link to some info on fixed barrel guns…if you have one in mind. Thanks for your input.

          • Hyok Kim

            Actually, true fixed barrel semi-autos cannot get out of battery if only the barrel is pushed against the body. All the pistols you mentioned above are moving barrels.

            Examples of true fixed barrel guns are HK P7, P9S, VP70, Walther PP series, Benelli B76? and others of the same design.

            Now, there is one moving barrel design semi-auto (even though incorrectly assumed as fixed barrel) that may not get out of battery when its barrel is pressed against the body, it’s famous Luger.

          • Rob Gonzalez

            I appreciate that info. I learned something new (for me) about guns that don’t do that. I didn’t know there were any semi’s that didn’t go out of battery when pushed up against something. Time for me to do some research and education and find another excuse to get another gun. I do like the PPK/PPS pistols which kind of explains why the luger works the same way since Walther and Luger are relatives.

          • Hyok Kim

            Glad that my info was useful.

            “I do like the PPK/PPS pistols which kind of explains why the luger works the same way since Walther and Luger are relatives.”

            Reminder, PP series’s trigger pull is not in the league with 1911s.

            Luger’s lock up mechanism is actually quite different and a lot more complicated than PP series. Luger’s barrel is fixed to the receiver, and barrel and the receiver moves straight back a very short distance, and then the toggle lock unlocks, letting the empty case eject. The reason why I think Luger may be the only moving barrel design that does not go out of the battery when the barrel is pressed against the body is that technically the gun is not out of the battery within the certain distance of the rearward travel of the barrel/receiver assembly (the part done by the pressing the trigger, not the case moving backward).

    • Normally the distance is 7 yards or less. It will most likely always be that way. There are always exceptions you need to be prepared for. One incident I had the shooter was 75 yards away when he ambushed my partner and I. On the other hand I had another that started at contact distance and ended at contact distance. You never know until it happens which is why you need to train for just about any circumstance that arises.

      • Hyok Kim

        I thought we’re talking about typical self defense scenario. What do you think is the odd that jury would think a homeowner shooting at someone at 75 yards in legally justified self-defense?

    • J.T.

      This is why my CCW instructor, who is a police officer and weapon’s instructor for his department, did training for point shooting in addition to using the sights. He also trained on shooting from retention, shooting while moving, and shooting around barriers. It is how all CCW training should be done as opposed to just standing there shooting at targets.

      • Rob Gonzalez

        Wow. Wish my course was like that and I agree that’s how it should be. I got some of that during my NRA instructor course but the CHL(Texas) course was very basic.

  • Mark Dietzler

    10-8 Performance has had something similar for a while. I run one of their rear sights on my 9mm M&P, since my eyes are getting middle aged.

  • The Hun

    the way people make it out anything with “elite” and “vickers” must automatically kickass- like I just took a “vickers elite dump”.

    • Not automatically in this case. At least not from my viewpoint. If they work good great if not I’d tell you. I’m not impressed by names only results.
      Don’t get me wrong I respect everything Larry has done in his life of service and with this product he and Wilson did well.

    • J.T.

      I agree. There is a bit of a circlejerk when it comes to anything with his name on it. It is just his name being used in order to charge a premium price.

      • Hyok Kim

        Actually, even though I do agree with most of Mr.Vicker’s views on firearms, both hardware and sofware wise, I don’t agree with everything he advocates. However, if you go to his site and read his views on ‘marketing gimmicks’, you wouldn’t think Mr.Vicker just wants to charge a lot of money, using his name. Mr.Vickers was very critical about some gun companies branding some of their guns, names like ‘Special Force’ or ‘Commando’. He said it was very insulting.

        • Hyok Kim

          Edit: I am sorry, I misplaced the name. I was referring to Mr.Lauck of DLsports, not Mr.Vickers.

  • Rob Gonzalez

    I might consider these for one of my 1911s. I’m willing to give them a try as long as they don’t screw my eyes up. Old eyes are very sensitive to some sights.

    • Old eyes do well with this type of sight trust me:-)

      • Rob Gonzalez

        Gotta admit the sight picture shown on their website is quite different and appealing. It’s pretty obvious they are quick aquisition sights. I really like that lime green front sight. I tend to see green better than other colors on sights.

        • No doubt green is much easier to see for the human eye. I know it’s much easier for me to pick up. These and the rear U notch type are fast but you can also be pretty precise with them.

          • Rob Gonzalez

            Just read something about a new u-notch sight. Wide “u” and medium size front sight. This tech is getting very interesting and always somethin-g new and better. We can thank the engineers and draftsmen for that. Actually they create an Autocad drawing and then plug the file into the CNC machine which reads the file as is and cuts the part in seconds. I used to work with engineers and draftsmen that did that. It’s pretty amazing and cheap once in full production.

          • Agreed the process is amazing. When you consider how labor intensive it used to be it’s even more so.

          • Rob Gonzalez

            Well thanks for taking time to chat with me. I know you’re probably pretty busy and appreciate you taking the time to chat. I’ll be sure to read your future articles. I found this one very interesting and your knowledge very helpful. Thanks again.

          • iksnilol

            That is Phil for, both interesting articles and conversations.

            No offense to other TFB writers, I still like you 🙂

          • LOL—– Thanks–

          • Thanks Rob. I enjoy having conversations with you guys:-)

  • TGM

    Is that an after market polymer frame?

  • Chris

    Man, I love the extended beaver tail on Gen-4 glocks. Makes me want to pick one up!

  • Dragonheart

    These look like the Trijicon HD sights I already have on my Glock 34. My problem is all these sight companies act like Glock is the only handgun made, so sight choices are limited unless you own a Glock and even then finding an adjustable sight other than for a 1911 is difficult or impossible.