Other than a nebulous "it works at short ranges and is snag-free", I can't point to point to anything quantitative. I think that's in part because the design i

Other than a nebulous "it works at short ranges and is snag-free", I can't point to point to anything quantitative. I think that's in part because the design is uncommon. Trench sights show up every now and then (e.g., Colt New Agent), but the Guttersnipe is (and I think remains) unique in that the sight channel was tapered. For the sight picture, imagine a square divided into 4 triangles: left, right, and bottom would be from the sight, and the 4th would be an open triangle on the target. When sighting, one would balance the three sight triangles, and put the v notch that is formed on the target. There are some that claim that simple geometrical shapes, like triangles, have a speed advantage in optimizing the sight alignment (e.g., Advantage Tactical with their "pyramid" shape, or Steyr's trapezoid sights) over the more familar notch and post. That sounds like something that should be easy to test, but I'm not aware of a well-conducted study (amateur or otherwise) that sheds useful light on the question. Edit: Just occurred to me, the Guttersnipe does have a far shorter track length than conventional sights. Not sure how that is meaningful in practice though.