Red dot sights vs. Iron sights

[SLG]

There seems to be a lot of confusion about sights these days so I'm going to try and shed a little light. I don't expect to convince those of you who already know better, but I know most PF people are open minded and want to improve their understanding.

Shooter A is a top level shooter who is capable of tremendous speed and accuracy with iron sights. Shooter B is another top level shooter and is capable of more speed and accuracy with a dot gun. Both are at the top of their field. Shooter A may never be as fast as shooter B, even when using a dot gun. Shooter B has learned to see and read the dot in ways that Shooter A just can't manage with all his years of iron sight shooting.
Shooter B may never be as fast as Shooter A when using irons. His years of dot shooting have made it harder for him to use the irons at Shooter A 's level.

Shooter C is an iron shooter, who is just below shooter A's level. When Shooter C picks up a dot gun, he exceeds Shooter A's iron ability. Shooter C knows that dots are different than iron sights and "see what you need to see" needs to be relearned and applied a little differently when dealing with dots. Shooter C may or may not ever be as good with a dot as Shooter B, who focuses on dots, but Shooter C can shoot both irons and dots at a very high level.

Shooter D is also just below Shooter A's ability with irons, but unlike Shooter C, D is unable to go faster with a dot sight than he can with the irons he is so used to.

Shooters E-Z, spend more time on the Internet then on the range, and will never have the trigger time or understanding of Shooters A-D. They think that their experience with dots or irons has meaning beyond a simple statement of their ability. The smarter ones will recognize that their ability is only a reflection of them, and not an unbiased accounting of their equipment.

Factors that can affect Shooters when switching from irons to dots include things like age, vision, physical conditioning, see speed, understanding of how see what you need to see means in each case. Also things like inherent bias or preference can play a role.

The TLDR version is that all things being equal, a dot is capable of more performance than Irons. Your personal experience, nor the experience of your favorite shooting celebrity does not change that.

Yes, there are grades of " dots", and some are higher performance than others.

To make this more personal, every shooter has things they are better or worse at. Travis has an amazing reload, for instance.
My wife says that my standout is how fast I acquire a sight picture and see what I need to see. If this is true (she may be biased), then it helps explain why I see the performance differences that I do from one system to the next. If someone else has amazing splits, but doesn't see the way I do, then they may not "get" the difference in systems the same way. I'm sure you can think of examples in your own life.

If a tree falls in the forest...

[jetfire]

This is awesome, and captures a lot of what I'd been dealing with via dot sights. I started shooting dot guns and thought they were slower, so I went away from a slide mounted dot, then I came back to them for a while and realized that the performance ceiling with a well set up dot gun was above iron sights. I think the problem I'd had before that was that a lot of my dot guns weren't well built. The factory configurations that you get from major manufacturers are a nice gateway drug, but having the dot installed by a pro turned out to make the gun go a lot better.

[scw2]

A bit tangential to the OP, but is there a time in a shooter's development that you'd recommend them switching from irons to red dots for an extended period of time, even if they return to irons later? I've heard there are good potential growth gains to running the red dot for a while, but I know I can still improve a lot just focusing on irons currently.

ETA- when you're looking at a good versus poor setup/equipment, what should a newbie look for, esp given the mentions by both Caleb and SLG that equipment matters.

[MVS]

Call me dense SLG, but I am not seeing your hangup on this subject. I don't have any argument for anything you said in that post, except to say FOR ME a slide mounted RDS is slower up close. On balance I still prefer them though even if Tom Givens does get all over my butt for using them. I am not in the top 5% of shooters, probably more like too 25% so it is hard to say how that affects the scenario. In classes where I am one of the best shooters people say, "well yea he is using a dot". In classes where I am middle of the pack people say, "see those dot guns aren't all they are cracked up to be".

If I had not been "required" to shoot a dot gun while teaching at a previous job for marketing purposes I would have probably never went with one. Now I am still not sure it is the answer, but like it well enough to keep using it.

Do we have many advanced shooters who have been to Rogers and shot both? I would be curious to see those results. GJM?

[shane45]

A non SME thought for furthering the discussion. In the pistol world the choices are pretty binary. Irons or Dot. In the rifle world a ton of complexity enters the mix in terms of different reticles, horseshoe, chevron, dot, crosshair etc etc and then there is the entire gambit of magnification thrown in and how fast you can go with the relationship of distance to magnification. So my buddy and I did a fair amount of testing to pit many of the different configs against each other. We came away with data that did not make sense at all. As I rolled through a bunch of SME's on the subject I formed an answer. It was a rather simple one but it fit perfectly. The conclusion I came to was that some peoples brain would only accept certain sight pictures. For an example of this I will reference my issues with the chevron reticle. I just cant use it. My brain will not accept it. My brain accepts a single dot just fine. It will also accept a cross hair. The data we collected turned out to be a clear indication of which reticles each of our brains would accept. Our shooting ability is about dead even. So it was interesting to see how our accuracy and speed was directly affected given each variation. So my point in relation to this thread is that there may be people who's brain will simply not accept one sight picture as well as the other. My own experience with Dots on pistols has been that I had no issues with a large window RDS when I shot IPSC in the late 90's. But shooting some of the dots today like the Trijicon, I am struggling with the small window size. But this is purely anecdotal and without a significant amount of trigger time behind todays RDS equipped pistols. With that being said, shooting at night in low light no light, the dot was the heat!

[Luke]

E-Z checking in.

[Paul Sharp]

I have a friend who's 14 year old son has never shot irons. Dots on rifles, shotguns and now his USPSA pistol. It seems that if this kid can see it, he'll hit it. I'm amazed. There is no slowing of the mount to trigger press. He sees the dot on the target and let's it go. I much prefer a dot on a pistol but the technology isn't there yet to support a dot on a carry gun. When it is, I'm all over it even if it means starting over hopefully I'll be in Shooter C's category.

[Dave Williams]

Last I heard, Bill Rogers won't award a red pin to a guy shooting a red dot. Because of the advantage.

[GJM]

Last I heard, Bill Rogers won't award a red pin to a guy shooting a red dot. Because of the advantage.

Is that something new? Think I have a red pin I got from a week when part of the time I shot a 226 with a RMR.

[Oukaapie]

Another Non SME's findings are as follows.

I shoot and practice irons and red dots on the P320C and VP9. With the red dot equipped pistol I find up close I pick up my front sight first and just use that to start. After a shot or two the red dot appears and takes over at all distances. Once I'm at at the distance where I would be using my rear irons the red dot shows up automatically. Once the dot is in view transitioning to new targets is straightforward.

I do dry practice most days so if my dot is drifting or otherwise misbehaving it can be addressed.

[GJM]

A red dot on a carbine is a no brainer -- they are easy to use, durable and reliable enough for games and face shooting, and an obvious advantage over iron sights.

By comparison, the red dot on handguns is nowhere near mature. The red dot on a handgun comes with a significant learning curve, the available red dots are not reliable/ergonomic enough for hard use pistols, and as many people do worse with them as shoot better.

I really enjoy shooting a red dot in USPSA Carry Optics, but I am still carrying an iron sighted pistol.

[Dave Williams]

Is that something new? Think I have a red pin I got from a week when part of the time I shot a 226 with a RMR.

No not new, that was from my time there, 2010ish.

[GJM]

Originally, Bill thought the red dot was a massive advantage at Rogers, but over time I think he became more indifferent. I believe all three perfect 125 scores he shot were with an iron sighted Glock 17.

For some people, with bad eyes and/or eye dominance issues, the dot is a very big help. Others are struggling to quickly acquire the dot in the one hand tests.

The best week I had at Rogers was with an iron sighted CZ, where I shot Advanced all six tests.

[orionz06]

Originally, Bill thought the red dot was a massive advantage at Rogers, but over time I think he became more indifferent. I believe all three perfect 125 scores he shot were with an iron sighted Glock 17.

For some people, with bad eyes and/or eye dominance issues, the dot is a very big help. Others are struggling to quickly acquire the dot in the one hand tests.

The best week I had at Rogers was with an iron sighted CZ, where I shot Advanced all six tests.

Is it fair to assume that's because his tests cover a broad base of distances where slide mounted optics excel and slow people down?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[YVK]

The best week I had at Rogers was with an iron sighted CZ, where I shot Advanced all six tests.

Next challenge: go there with a red dotted CZ and become #5.

[GJM]

Next challenge: go there with a red dotted CZ and become #5.


That concept didn't work so well for #15.

[JohnO]

I've had the opportunity to try a few RDS outfitted pistols and did not care for them. In most presentations I found myself looking through a window and not finding the dot. Granted more time and practice would make a positive difference but I just don't see the juice being worth the squeeze. Additionally I find RDS equipped pistols to look butt ugly and whether or not they really are,to me they look cumbersome and too vulnerable to damage on a carry gun.

[farscott]

Originally, Bill thought the red dot was a massive advantage at Rogers, but over time I think he became more indifferent. I believe all three perfect 125 scores he shot were with an iron sighted Glock 17.

For some people, with bad eyes and/or eye dominance issues, the dot is a very big help. Others are struggling to quickly acquire the dot in the one hand tests.

The best week I had at Rogers was with an iron sighted CZ, where I shot Advanced all six tests.
This.

For me, the dot is the difference between being able to shoot accurately at distance and not being able to do so. Simply put, my eyes are bad and getting worse. I have a very tough time focusing on the front sight, and it gets harder each year. I can shoot well at seven yards with irons, but fifty yards is not doable with irons for me. Technology is extending my shooting time.

[GJM]

Even if you do not choose to carry a red dot pistol now, I think they are very valuable for a few reasons:

1) they help me be especially visual, and inevitably I feel like I can track iron sights better after shooting a red dot.

2) they provide a lot of trigger feedback in dry and live fire.

3) they are likely the sighting system of the near future, and even if not ready for prime time today, the effort you spend learning to shoot a dot will likely help you in the future when more mature optics reach the market.

[ranger]

I started shooting USPSA in 1986. I watched the first red dots start showing up after Barnhart had success. The original dots had issues with reliability, mount issues, wandering zeros, and such - but through innovation and trial/error they dominated USPSA such that non-Dot (and comp) shooters left to make a new sport called IDPA while USPSA added Limited then Production Class. Then lo and behold, optics started showing up on .MIL weapons - seldom do we see a US warrior now without an optic equipped rifle. I suspect that through innovation and trial/error again, that "duty" RDS or other optics will dominate service pistols over time.

[bravo7]

Someone is still butt hurt.

[Sigfan26]

Someone is still butt hurt.

Who would that be? I haven't seen that from anyone.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[busdriver]

I shoot open, not a GM or anything, just A class. Not that that's particularly amazing, but for reference about who's talking.

Dots are very unforgiving of a poor index/natural point of aim/whatever you want to call it. Watch an open shooter who doesn't practice SHO/WHO struggle when they lose it. The smaller the window, the more unforgiving.

The dot constantly moving, and focusing on the target and not the dot takes work as well. The tendency to want the dot to be still, over aiming, and focusing on the dot in recoil/during transitions will slow you down a lot.

[YVK]

That concept didn't work so well for #15.

Push the concept further by getting #5 and then tell no one. Would that not be fun?

[OnionsAndDragons]

I think it be hooves a shooter to be good with irons either way, up to their physical limitations. Dots fail, especially on pistols.

I absolutely think there is a massive learning benefit to being able to dry practice and to some degree live practice with a pistol mounted RDS. It shows what's going on in your trigger manipulation like nothing else. There are minute shifts that are obvious watching a dot or laser that just aren't when looking at irons.

[Mr_White]

I have a hard time with dots going blurry on me because I'm so habituated to getting the front sight sharp and clear.

[GJM]

I have a hard time with dots going blurry on me because I'm so habituated to getting the front sight sharp and clear.

Suggest you wait a few years until the front sight is blurry and it will make the transition to a dot easier.

[flyrodr]

Echoing what Farscott and GJM said, the "mysterious" disappearance of the front sight with age removes much of the debate of irons vs RDS, and is is a mighty motivation to embrace the RDS, with all its current warts.

[spinmove_]

Echoing what Farscott and GJM said, the "mysterious" disappearance of the front sight with age removes much of the debate of irons vs RDS, and is is a mighty motivation to embrace the RDS, with all its current warts.

At this stage in the game, I think this is what it largely comes down to. I, unfortunately, don't have any personal experience in shooting an RDS equipped pistol, but I have looked through a few of them here and there. I suffer from the same issue as Mr_White it seems as, upon initial presentation, I see a blurry smudge instead of a dot or triangle. I'm simply used to instinctively focusing on the front sight or ghosting the front sight on the target that my focus is just wrong for an RDS. Fortunately, even without my glasses, I can still make out a pretty crisp front sight. I'm sure as the years take their toll, that'll become less crisp, and hopefully by then, RDS equipped pistols will be as reliable as iron sight equipped pistols.

[Gray222]

I have a hard time with dots going blurry on me because I'm so habituated to getting the front sight sharp and clear.

Do not try to focus on the dot and the front sight at the same time. That's impossible. Instead... only try to realize the truth. Then you'll see, that it is not the dot or the front sight that focuses, it is only yourself.

[Randy Harris]

The best week I had at Rogers was with an iron sighted CZ, where I shot Advanced all six tests.

Just curious...how many times have you been?

[blues]

Do not try to focus on the dot and the front sight at the same time. That's impossible. Instead... only try to realize the truth. Then you'll see, that it is not the dot or the front sight that focuses, it is only yourself.

This...

http://www.spiritualunite.com/articles/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/third-eye-opening-1.jpg




However, if you're not diligent...this:



http://www.movieactors.com/photos-stars/slim-pickens-blazingsaddles-4.jpg

[Surf]

I continually struggle with a red dot. My vision now requires stronger reading glasses, so the irons are not as sharp but I am still a fan of fibers. I do play with a red dot quite a bit and slow fire accuracy especially at distance is great, but I am slower to first shot acquisition, have a harder time tracking under rapid fire and slower in target transitioning. While I might be slowly improving with a dot, I am still quite a bit faster and more efficient with irons. I am still open to red dots and admittedly need more time with them.

[GJM]

TGO fixed my issue with being slower to shot one with the dot with one tip -- press the trigger when the dot is on target but don't wait for it to stop.

[Gray222]

TGO fixed my issue with being slower to shot one with the dot with one tip -- press the trigger when the dot is on target but don't wait for it to stop.

It'll never stop, that's the game...

[DocGKR]

"I do play with a red dot quite a bit and slow fire accuracy especially at distance is great, but I am slower to first shot acquisition, have a harder time tracking under rapid fire and slower in target transitioning."

This is exactly what I have found.

[GJM]

I am surprised on slower transitioning, as an advantage of a dot for me is being able to stay target focused, avoiding visual focus shifts.

[Randy Harris]

The first weekend I got my RMR'd Glock upper I shot a GSSF match. I did demonstrably better with my iron sighted guns than with the red dot. Trying to track the dot in recoil was like trying to watch a particular fence post spinning in a tornado.....While at the same time watching the iron sights go back and forth on the other guns was what I was used to.....I also had issues with picking up the dot on the first shot. I felt REALLY slow and the timer bore that out. I was waiting for it all to "settle down" before pressing the trigger.

Fast forward several years and I have gotten used to finding the dot by simply looking for the irons and stopped trying to watch the dot in recoil on close cyclic rate engagement targets. What it allows on the back side of 25 yards is just not doable with iron sights as the irons cover up too much target. A plate rack at 25 yards is easy and at 50 yards a 1/4 size IPSC target is boring. BUT.....if you are used to tracking the sights visually then the dot sight will take some getting used to. When someone comes up with a light weight, unobtrusive , solid mount so that the sight does not reciprocate with the slide then it will be like some Star Wars stuff...

[nycnoob]

What is the current thinking about frame mounted red dots (ALG Six Second mount for example)
Are they any better than the slide mounted ones. Clearly the ALG solution is a bit bulky for
concealed carry but I was wounding about shootability.

[GJM]

Just curious...how many times have you been?

Five times, three as class coordinator. The first time I kind of block out of my memory, as I sucked so bad. The last time was to be there for my wife.

[busdriver]

stopped trying to watch the dot in recoil

That's the key, sort of....

With irons you're focused on the front sight, both your focal distance and the center of your visual attention (I'm making up terms now). With a dot your focal distance is at the target along with the dot. You'll naturally figure out the focal distance part. But visual attention isn't as natural for an iron shooter, it should also be on the target for all but the most difficult shots.

So when folks talk about tracking the dot, it should be like using a mouse pointer. You don't look at the pointer and watch it move over to the icon you want to click on, you look at the icon and move the pointer. The only time you actually look at the pointer is if you're trying to line up pixels in a paint program or power point.


I am surprised on slower transitioning, stay target focused, avoiding visual focus shifts.

If folks get in the habit of focusing their attention on the dot, it's easy to fall into the trap of doing that through a target transition instead of snapping their eyes to the next aim point. Leading with the eyes is where the speed comes from.

Also: Even frame mounted dots with big ass comps and popple holes move.

[GJM]

Something that occurred to me as I was discussing this with Gabe this evening, was the fact that Gary uses a RMR. I find the difference in transition ability to be significant between the RMR and the DP Pro. The Pro feels like looking through a large picture window and the RMR more like a port hole on a boat.

[busdriver]

I have an RMR'd glock floating around. I haven't shot it in a long time either...

[busdriver]

In case anyone cares about this still, shot an RMR'd G19 on the timer. Transition times between it and a full on open race gun were the same in dry fire at a scaled 10 yard target, the RMR dot size made it difficult to call the shots as alphas though. In live fire, there was a roughly .1 second difference on a 7 yard 45 degree transition to a 5.5 inch wide target. Considering the open gun has a sub 2 pound trigger and a totally different grip angle, I'm confident there would be no difference if I actually practiced with the glock. I forgot to actually shoot an iron sighted gun while I was there, but I know I'm faster with a dot.

Also shot a lone wolf comp on the G19. It needed +P to run, but it's effectively no different than an open division race gun.

[DocGKR]

"What is the current thinking about frame mounted red dots...Are they any better than the slide mounted ones."

Non-reciprocating handgun RDS are substantially more "shootable" than slide mounted RDS--like not even in the same ballpark. On the other hand, there are NO common duty holsters available for non-reciprocating RDS equipped handguns.

[JHC]

I only have a few instances and a few hundred rounds shooting a RDS on a couple of Glocks but most of it was with my KKM barrel and comp screwed into a friend's RDS equipped G19. I was flabbergasted at how the dot never left the view in recoil during strings, it just jiggled a bit. I did some shooting while scooting laterally pretty good and it was right there when I transitioned for a new target. This was with an RMR. I'm looking forward to the next gen of RDS for sure.

[Doug]

Non-reciprocating handgun RDS are substantially more "shootable" than slide mounted RDS--like not even in the same ballpark. On the other hand, there are NO common duty holsters available for non-reciprocating RDS equipped handguns.

Silly question. If safariland were to come out with a duty retention holster for one of the frame mount systems, do you think more leo/mil would look at?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GJM]

I am shooting in a two day match, and there are a number of Carry Optics shooters in my squad. Watching other shooters, I want to modify my comments about the benefit of the dot. In USPSA, at the higher levels, the dot may help, may hurt or may be neutral. At B, C and D class, I think the dot definitely hurts performance. Accuracy is pretty good, but speed is horrendous. That is with USPSA, where the draw is not very important, and there is a lot of difficult shooting.


I bet 5 PF dollars, that for a high percentage of shooters attempting the FAST, people would do worse with a slide mounted optic than with iron sights.

[OnionsAndDragons]

Non-reciprocating handgun RDS are substantially more "shootable" than slide mounted RDS--like not even in the same ballpark. On the other hand, there are NO common duty holsters available for non-reciprocating RDS equipped handguns.

Big agree. I have a few K on slide mounted RDS before I simply decided the RMR wasn't for me and I was waiting for more betterer offerings. I've shot lots of different Open-style guns from friends and just dudes at the range that wanted to trade off and try my HKs or more often one of the pricier 1911s I no longer have. The non-reciprocating options are exponentially better, IME. It's more like shooting an awkward miniature carbine than a pistol.


I am shooting in a two day match, and there are a number of Carry Optics shooters in my squad. Watching other shooters, I want to modify my comments about the benefit of the dot. In USPSA, at the higher levels, the dot may help, may hurt or may be neutral. At B, C and D class, I think the dot definitely hurts performance. Accuracy is pretty good, but speed is horrendous. That is with USPSA, where the draw is not very important, and there is a lot of difficult shooting.


I bet 5 PF dollars, that for a high percentage of shooters attempting the FAST, people would do worse with a slide mounted optic than with iron sights.

GJM, I honestly think that, for people without eye issues, the COMP is a much bigger advantage than the RDS when shooting something like the FAST. It's akin to the difference in shooting a Bill Drill with a P2000 vs a govt 1911 in 9mm to me. It shifts some of the importance of really solid recoil control/sight tracking, and makes it easier to get away with just a good presentation and index/press out. Just my own limited experience, obv.

[Maple Syrup Actual]

You know, every time I think about this (and I have a G34 MOS so it's at least occasionally) I think...how long until someone builds a fixed-barrel pistol with a slide like a Beretta 92 and a frame that extends up through the slide and provides a fixed mount for an RDS?

Because that really ought to be possible, and when it happens...zoom.

[Drang]

You know, every time I think about this I think...how long until someone revives the Automag in a mainstream caliber?

FIFY.

[El Cid]

You know, every time I think about this (and I have a G34 MOS so it's at least occasionally) I think...how long until someone builds a fixed-barrel pistol with a slide like a Beretta 92 and a frame that extends up through the slide and provides a fixed mount for an RDS?

Because that really ought to be possible, and when it happens...zoom.

Desert Eagle? Lol!

[Maple Syrup Actual]

Desert Eagle? Lol!

I mean basically yes...if there's a way to do it in 9mm with service pistol reliability, it'd be a huge leap in RDS pistols.

[DocGKR]

Yup--the pistol needs to be designed around the optic. Several large well known handgun vendors know this, but none have yet capitalized on their engineering talent to bring a product to market...

[Maple Syrup Actual]

Guesses:

Glock can't figure out how to do it in a manner that looks exactly like a Glock from 1990 and they're afraid of getting sued when they admit something could be improved

Smith and Wesson has a design that will totally work and be super amazing, but they're still figuring which corners to cut in production to wreck the thing before it takes off

Sig Sauer is working on it but can't decide whether to give the project to the team that makes P320s so it's an also-ran, or the team that makes rainbow diamond plate 1911s so it's an abomination

Colt had a good design but still remember what happened the last time they deviated from the 1911, plus they're planning on declaring bankruptcy a few times in 2017 and they're focusing their energy on that

Ruger has a totally workable version, but are torn on whether it should even be released since it'll be recalled immediately anyway and the cheap people want the Hi-point and the upscale people want the S&W

FN has a design on paper, but they're too busy rolling in money from LMG contracts to even check the date on a US service pistol trial so don't hold your breath

Karl Lippard has one that's accurate to 1000 meters and never needs maintenance and that's as far as that's ever going

Remington has one and it works great. But they literally just have that one. None of the others work at all.

Arsenal has one in the works but it doesn't do any of the things it's supposed to and nobody trusts those eurotrash motherfuckers anyway

HK has one and it works pretty well, but it has 6568 moving parts, and if you try to change any of the wear parts it explodes, plus the hydraulic trigger is kind of weird



I feel like I'm missing someone but I included Karl Lippard so come on, give me some leeway here

[DocGKR]

Definitely missing a big one...

[Drang]

I feel like I'm missing someone but I included Karl Lippard so come on, give me some leeway here
George Kelgren has one, but production will be so low that none will be seen in the wild until Ruger gives up on their own design and "improves" Keltec's.

[Sigfan26]

Guesses:

Glock can't figure out how to do it in a manner that looks exactly like a Glock from 1990 and they're afraid of getting sued when they admit something could be improved

Smith and Wesson has a design that will totally work and be super amazing, but they're still figuring which corners to cut in production to wreck the thing before it takes off

Sig Sauer is working on it but can't decide whether to give the project to the team that makes P320s so it's an also-ran, or the team that makes rainbow diamond plate 1911s so it's an abomination

Colt had a good design but still remember what happened the last time they deviated from the 1911, plus they're planning on declaring bankruptcy a few times in 2017 and they're focusing their energy on that

Ruger has a totally workable version, but are torn on whether it should even be released since it'll be recalled immediately anyway and the cheap people want the Hi-point and the upscale people want the S&W

FN has a design on paper, but they're too busy rolling in money from LMG contracts to even check the date on a US service pistol trial so don't hold your breath

Karl Lippard has one that's accurate to 1000 meters and never needs maintenance and that's as far as that's ever going

Remington has one and it works great. But they literally just have that one. None of the others work at all.

Arsenal has one in the works but it doesn't do any of the things it's supposed to and nobody trusts those eurotrash motherfuckers anyway

HK has one and it works pretty well, but it has 6568 moving parts, and if you try to change any of the wear parts it explodes, plus the hydraulic trigger is kind of weird



I feel like I'm missing someone but I included Karl Lippard so come on, give me some leeway here

You forgot Springfield! They are currently holding a Croatian engineers family hostage until he finds a decent way to mount an optic on an XDM (yes, that is a jab at how they are currently doing it).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Maple Syrup Actual]

Oh! Beretta has a great entry...it's just 5 pounds, holds less ammo than everything else despite having a grip designed for an NBA player, and only guns made tuesday through thursday will run without being actually dipped in oil between mags. Other than that, it's near-perfect.

[spinmove_]

Springfield has one in the works. It works ok, but it still has the same ridiculous grip safety that chokes on 3 grains of sand, has even bigger font where it says "Grip Zone", is still made in Croatia, and now has something on the top where another pic rail is called "Optics Zone". Rob Leatham will tell you Springfield has a new project called "Messiah", but won't tell you what it is until after he teases you with more marketing for several months.


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

[spinmove_]

Beretta has one and will be releasing it soon. It'll basically be a full sized PX4, but it'll have different grips, non-dovetailed sights, different mags, and only come in Type F that can't be converted into a Type G. It will have one hell of a trigger though. 2 years after they release it they'll come out with a G-SD with an improved Recoil system and dove-tailed sights, but will require a different holster.


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

[OnionsAndDragons]

Beretta has one and will be releasing it soon. It'll basically be a full sized PX4, but it'll have different grips, non-dovetailed sights, different mags, and only come in Type F that can't be converted into a Type G. It will have one hell of a trigger though. 2 years after they release it they'll come out with a G-SD with an improved Recoil system and dove-tailed sights, but will require a different holster.


SD version will also be 2x MSRP and only manufactured at a rate to meet 20% of demand, so it will end up around 320% of MSRP...

But it will still be worth it. :)

[BillSWPA]

I have a friend who's 14 year old son has never shot irons. Dots on rifles, shotguns and now his USPSA pistol. It seems that if this kid can see it, he'll hit it. I'm amazed. There is no slowing of the mount to trigger press. He sees the dot on the target and let's it go. I much prefer a dot on a pistol but the technology isn't there yet to support a dot on a carry gun. When it is, I'm all over it even if it means starting over hopefully I'll be in Shooter C's category.

Although it seems that the 14 year old has learned much about shooting, I respectfully submit that not having the kid shoot at least some iron sights is a mistake. What if the optic goes down at the wrong time? What if rain or other visual obstruction hinders the optic? What if he needs to use something not equipped with optics? What if he needs or wants to carry one someday, and needs a weapon that can be easily concealed in a wide variety of modes of dress?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DocGKR]

"I much prefer a dot on a pistol but the technology isn't there yet to support a dot on a carry gun."

And yet I've successfully had one on my carry gun for the past 6 years, as have other folks I know...

[SteveB]

I am surprised on slower transitioning, as an advantage of a dot for me is being able to stay target focused, avoiding visual focus shifts.

This highlights my problem with pistol dots and the difference, for me, between carbine and pistol. Because of the movement of the RDS with the slide, I catch myself looking at the dot instead of the target; never happens with the carbine.

[Jim Watson]

A friend dotted the G and brought it to a match. He adapted to it readily and shot fast and accurate... after he realized he should turn it on. Is battery life long enough to leave the sight on and just replace the battery periodically?

[SLG]

And yet I've successfully had one on my carry gun for the past 6 years, as have other folks I know...

As most here know, I'm not a fan of mrds guns for carry. Statistically, it just probably doesn't matter, as we all know. I just can't look at it that way for my own needs. So, removing my bias against them, and truly saying this with no snark or anything negative, since I hope you know how much I respect you, I would say that just because someone is or has done something, doesn't make it a good or viable idea. I'm sure you can think of many instances where that is true, maybe even in your professional life. I know I've seen some crazy stuff work over the years. Doesn't make what Paul said any less true.

I owe you a call, and will fill in a little that I'm unwilling to put out in public. Nothing you probably don't already know.

[Default.mp3]

A friend dotted the G and brought it to a match. He adapted to it readily and shot fast and accurate... after he realized he should turn it on. Is battery life long enough to leave the sight on and just replace the battery periodically?The RMR's battery life under typical use is measured in months.


The RM06 and RM07 battery should last four years of continual use at brightness setting #4. When left on at the brightest setting (brightness setting #8), the battery should last around 25 days.I typically use setting #7, and change my batteries every 6 months generally.

[shane45]

It would seem to me that one would need to consider when an RDS is a liability and when is it a significant advantage. For me, during the day, I see the RDS as a liability. I feel like it slows my initial shot way down. I never felt that way in IPSC. So I attribute this to the much smaller window of slide mounted red dots. I feel like these constraints make a cluttered sight picture. However, if I was a night owl or worked in an area in low light conditions for much of my time there, I would indeed like a RDS equipped pistol. That is where, for me, I recognized a significant advantage in my performance. Some have mentioned RDS on their carbine and that they don't have the same issue. I think this is because of the distance to the RDS. Its much easier to live "in the glass" when its close to your eye such as when on a carbine.

Just a disclaimer that my observations are probably akin to tinkering, I have not put in a lot of dedicated time on this like I have rifle optics.

[SLG]

It would seem to me that one would need to consider when an RDS is a liability and when is it a significant advantage. For me, during the day, I see the RDS as a liability. I feel like it slows my initial shot way down. I never felt that way in IPSC. So I attribute this to the much smaller window of slide mounted red dots. I feel like these constraints make a cluttered sight picture. However, if I was a night owl or worked in an area in low light conditions for much of my time there, I would indeed like a RDS equipped pistol. That is where, for me, I recognized a significant advantage in my performance. Some have mentioned RDS on their carbine and that they don't have the same issue. I think this is because of the distance to the RDS. Its much easier to live "in the glass" when its close to your eye such as when on a carbine.

Just a disclaimer that my observations are probably akin to tinkering, I have not put in a lot of dedicated time on this like I have rifle optics.

I think a laser is a generally a much better solution for that issue. They are far from perfected either, but the down sides (if your gun can take one) are far less, and the utility can be much greater.

[spinmove_]

I think a laser is a generally a much better solution for that issue. They are far from perfected either, but the down sides (if your gun can take one) are far less, and the utility can be much greater.

I keep forgetting about the option of a laser. What are some good solutions for lasers that could be concealed these days?


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

[GJM]

The Crimson Trace IR/visible laser grip model, is the best laser product I have used on a handgun.

[shane45]

Add me to the list of forgetting about a laser on a pistol!

[SLG]

The Crimson Trace IR/visible laser grip model, is the best laser product I have used on a handgun.

I would agree.

Some of the light/laser combos are also usable, if you prefer that for some reason.

Again, none of them are perfect yet, but the issues around them are generally much more manageable.

[spinmove_]

The Crimson Trace IR/visible laser grip model, is the best laser product I have used on a handgun.

That might be a no-go for me. I've held a G19 equipped with one of those and wasn't pleased with how that felt as it compromised my trigger reach enough to be annoying.

I have heard of consistently good reports of Crimson Trace stuff though. Do they have any rail mounted solutions worth exploring?


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

[SLG]

That might be a no-go for me. I've held a G19 equipped with one of those and wasn't pleased with how that felt as it compromised my trigger reach enough to be annoying.

I have heard of consistently good reports of Crimson Trace stuff though. Do they have any rail mounted solutions worth exploring?


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

There are definite limitations to lasers. I'm not a fan of the Glock options at all, though they do offer the Railmaster, which is pretty small and can go on any frame mounted rail, other than the useless USP rail. The Railmaster is one of the cheaper (cost and quality) options out there, but I have had a few since they came out and they have held up reasonably well. Not duty grade, imo, but again, the downsides to failure are minor and easy to know about with a tiny bit of PM.

[LSP552]

The Crimson Trace IR/visible laser grip model, is the best laser product I have used on a handgun.

My eyes have decided I probably need a set of CT on my P239....

[spinmove_]

There are definite limitations to lasers. I'm not a fan of the Glock options at all, though they do offer the Railmaster, which is pretty small and can go on any frame mounted rail, other than the useless USP rail. The Railmaster is one of the cheaper (cost and quality) options out there, but I have had a few since they came out and they have held up reasonably well. Not duty grade, imo, but again, the downsides to failure are minor and easy to know about with a tiny bit of PM.

Are there any duty grade options out there?

What is the PM needed to prevent failure on these items?


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

[jetfire]

There are definite limitations to lasers. I'm not a fan of the Glock options at all, though they do offer the Railmaster, which is pretty small and can go on any frame mounted rail, other than the useless USP rail. The Railmaster is one of the cheaper (cost and quality) options out there, but I have had a few since they came out and they have held up reasonably well. Not duty grade, imo, but again, the downsides to failure are minor and easy to know about with a tiny bit of PM.

The Glock models of LaserGrips are generally not great, primarily of how they attach to the gun, they tend to shift zero around, and they make the gun YUUUUUUGE. I also like the Railmaster, especially in green as an "all day laser." I have had several Railmaster Pro light/laser combos as well, which for me have worked pretty well, although people are somewhat down on them because they don't have all the lumens.

Full disclosure, I've had an extremely friendly/professional relationship with Crimson Trace for years, and they've sent me stacks of free things. They've even bought me beer a lot.

[SLG]

Are there any duty grade options out there?

What is the PM needed to prevent failure on these items?


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

Yes. Maybe? No, not really.

Take your pick, just like with MRDS, everyone has an opinion. I would say, no, not really.

I recommend them over MRDS for several reasons. Cheap and easy to install or remove without ruining your gun. Confirmation of zero is easy, though MRDS is basically the same here.

Easy to use one handed or weak handed, and especially from compromised positions.

Very fast on the draw and on follow ups shots.

Target focus is a good thing.

Great visibility in low light, reasonable visibility in daylight (especially green), and especially at the ranges typically needed. MRDS does tend to work better, even much better in the day and at range. Very rare to need that though, and they can't handle real calibers, so hunting is out. Which is a shame, since that would be an awesome use for them.

Usually works well with other accessories, and doesn't require anything else to get the most out of.

If it fails, no big deal, you have your normal sights right there.

Works great under nods, for those that care. In this regard, my old unit was looking at a solution to pistol shooting under Nods back in 2005, and I briefly worked with the then owner of CT to solve that problem. They mostly didn't want to seriously improve their product, which was a shame.

Same with gas masks.

Nothing will stop them from failing, but it is easy to see if they failed, and the consequences of failure are minor.

I'm probably leaving some things out, but you get the idea off the top of my head. Low entrance fee. Low consequences of failure. Easy use in awkward positions. Hard to really go wrong.

[jetfire]

Better availability of holsters if you're going with the CTC option as well; assuming there's a LaserGrip available for your pistol. To this day the M&P LaserGrip is the best integrated laser I've ever played with, and the one I'd recommend without hesitation to people.

[DocGKR]

I like a green laser with an RDS equipped pistol...

[taadski]

Crimson Trace's CS is some of the best in the business, IME. I've had issues with some of their stuff durability-wise over the years, but their response has always been phenomenal.

[busdriver]

I feel like it slows my initial shot way down. I never felt that way in IPSC. So I attribute this to the much smaller window of slide mounted red dots......
Just a disclaimer that my observations are probably akin to tinkering, I have not put in a lot of dedicated time on this like I have rifle optics.
This is more or less why I don't carry a MRDS pistol. I've never spent a full second wobbling an iron sighted gun around looking for the front sight. I've done that with my race gun; that I've shot 15k rounds through in the past year and spent hundreds of hours with in dry fire practice.

[GJM]

This is more or less why I don't carry a MRDS pistol. I've never spent a full second wobbling an iron sighted gun around looking for the front sight. I've done that with my race gun; that I've shot 15k rounds through in the past year and spent hundreds of hours with in dry fire practice.

I was at a two day match this weekend, and there were five CO shooters in my squad. I didn't have to hunt for the dot once over the about 400 rounds of the match. However, I spent a bunch of time watching my squad mates hunt for the dot, despite a number of them being open shooters.

That said, last weekend I was at a match, and one stage was a 20 second fixed par to take three arrays of steel. When I drew, I couldn't find the dot, and I am still not sure if the dot had blinked out (subsequently that dot started blinking out in recoil last week and I had to replace the Pro) or I just couldn't find it. I stood there for what seemed like eternity, finally just broke a shot, and then regained the dot. Here is the pain.



https://youtu.be/Qa6Q6U-bW9U


Sent from my iPad

[busdriver]

Ugh, I could feel your pain! It only happens anymore when I get forced into a strange position/ weak hand only. Given the amount of practice I do with that gun and compare that to what I'm willing to put in on my carry gun (which would be at the expense of the race gun), I'm happy to rock the iron sights for carry.

I just shot a match in single stack division with only around 2 hours of combined dry fire the week prior, and came in second. So I'm reasonably confidant in my shooting ability with the irons, even if it felt ridiculously slow. I did learn that I need to do that a bit more often than once a year though, the first stage was rough.

[MVS]

The RMR's battery life under typical use is measured in months.

I typically use setting #7, and change my batteries every 6 months generally.

I change once a year. One year I forgot with that battery lasting about 20 months before it died. That is with my original RM02.

[DocGKR]

Our original RMR02's went over 3 years without a battery change.

My current training G19 with RMR06 is using a battery from September 2012 and is still working, although it gets turned off when not in use. My current daily carry G19 with RMR 06 had its battery last replaced in Feb 2015 and is still working just fine--it also gets turned off at the end of the day.

[MVS]

Our original RMR02's went over 3 years without a battery change.

My current training G19 with RMR06 is using a battery from September 2012 and is still working, although it gets turned off when not in use. My current daily carry G19 with RMR 06 had its battery last replaced in Feb 2015 and is still working just fine--it also gets turned off at the end of the day.

I have been meaning to try something with a smaller dot and manual overide, but I have had such good luck with that 02 that I didn't want to be disappointed.

[GJM]

I have had zero issues with RMR battery life, with my original 02 models lasting multiple years, and I changed them even though they were still working. DP Pro is a different story.

[GJM]

I have been meaning to try something with a smaller dot and manual overide, but I have had such good luck with that 02 that I didn't want to be disappointed.

I find the 06 to be a major improvement over the 02. Being able to easily tune the dot intensity, when desired, is a big help in fringe lighting conditions. The smaller size dot with the 06 is helpful for zeroing and 50-100 yard shooting. I also like that I can turn the dot off for semi-extended storage.

[YVK]

Crimson Trace's CS is some of the best in the business, IME. I've had issues with some of their stuff durability-wise over the years, but their response has always been phenomenal.

For the first time they dropped a ball about a month ago, T. I've a green 1911 laser that doesn't want to turn off, sent an email, zero response. I've heard that they were bought out by S&W; I hope that they don't turn to the worse.

[taadski]

For the first time they dropped a ball about a month ago, T. I've a green 1911 laser that doesn't want to turn off, sent an email, zero response. I've heard that they were bought out by S&W; I hope that they don't turn to the worse.




I think a sad is in order. :(

Thanks for the info.

[Rc217]

I recently noticed I am shooting faster with supressor height sights on an MOS g34 than stock height iron sights. I have had a rmr mounted on it for months and recently moved the rmr to another gun. Last week I decided to see what the longer sight radius would do for me, if anything. I noticed I am acquiring the front sight faster and am shooting with both eyes open with irons more accurately. It also felt like it pointed more naturally with the taller sights than my g19 with stock sights. I don’t know if this is because of all the practice and live fire with the optic, but I think the optic has improved my iron sight shooting and at least for now I prefer taller iron sights. I thought it was interesting.

[GJM]

We were in Phoenix earlier this week and shot Tuesday Night Steel at Rio. My wife finished 36 out of 186 shooters, which was great for our second time at TNS, and especially given that she trashed one stage. One side note — on the fifth stage, that had a javalina steel target at 100 yards, the deal was if you hit it on your first shot, you got ten seconds off your total time for the stage, and if you never hit it you got a five second miss penalty. As luck would have it, I hit it on my first shot, and with the deduction ended up with a two second and change stage. This was despite a bungled grip that I fixed mid draw. I had visions of a top 5 finish, but unfortunately there was some issue, and they threw the javalina part of the stage dashing my hopes.

Here is that stage.


https://youtu.be/Mo1rbgqZe7s

The next morning we went for a hike at nearby Usery Park, and on the way down my wife took a tumble. She fell upside down landing on her strong hand, removing a big chunk of flesh, and as she tumbled got to see her Glock 43 come flying out of her IWB kydex holster and land on the back of the slide, with the muzzle pointing at her. Thank goodness for drop safe Glock pistols!

Since then, she has shot only support hand in practice, but today decided to tape up and go to a match with me. This is her hand this morning.

34198

Despite the hand injury, she did great in today’s match, shooting CO and finishing eight overall at 72.29 percent of the PCC match winner.


https://youtu.be/Tb1e9_vCOCg

[Doc_Glock]

Here She fell upside down landing on her strong hand, removing a big chunk of flesh, and as she tumbled got to see her Glock 43 come flying out of her IWB kydex holster and land on the back of the slide, with the muzzle pointing at her. Thank goodness for drop safe Glock pistols!

Since then, she has shot only support hand in practice.

Well done on the practice. And you might want to tension that holster up. Especially if she likes to do backflips dancing.

[GJM]

Well done on the practice. And you might want to tension that holster up. Especially if she likes to do backflips dancing.

With a Glock, unlike a 320, the important part is how you pick the pistol up!

My wife, no doubt as part of her effort to BEAT me, has figured out how to overlay our runs on an individual stage, to see where she can pick up time.


https://youtu.be/oypYb4jjuGU

[Bart Carter]

...My wife, no doubt as part of her effort to BEAT me, has figured out how to overlay our runs on an individual stage, to see where she can pick up time...

Some of us are taking bets as to when she does. :p

[alex]

I just had Lasik and I'm now 20/15 in both eyes. However, I'm finding it very hard to focus on my front sight now. Is it time for me to go RDS?

[Bart Carter]

As you get older, your eyes can't adjust to depth like they used to. You could have one eye done with lasik to the depth of your front sight, but not a good option. Lenses that let you see the front sight or (as I did) a red dot are the only solutions that I know of.

[ubervic]

I added a red dot and supressor-height sights to my G17.3 a few weeks back. I have fired just over 700 rnds with this setup. I'm still getting acclimated overall. But one thing is clear: shooting with a dot definitely does improve my shooting with irons.

Comparing viewing the constant movement & wobbling of the dot to the sight picture with irons makes irons seem absolutely dead still---and this seems to build the confidence level that I can place shots exactly where I want them, and easily. Sure, I still have to grip correctly and work trigger carefully, but these tasks seem to fall in line behind that seemingly rock steady sight picture. My overall shooting experience & results with dot and with irons are improving significantly.