Quick acquisition of the slide mounted red dot on a pistol

[GJM]

I have meaning to start this thread for a month or two, but was prompted by my experience earlier today with shooting a new Walther Q5 and a DP Pro red dot.

Some people think a red dot is necessarily slower to shot one. I don't think so.

Some people think you must use reserve iron sights to efficiently acquire the dot. I don't think so.

This is the method I use. I draw to the frame of the red dot, as opposed to drawing to the red dot. By "framing" the target, the red dot is inevitably there for me, whereas drawing to where I think the dot is, can lead to fishing. Initially, I do not even turn the dot on -- I just do presentations with the dot off, using the frame of the red dot.

Try it, and let me know what you think.

[Surf]

I told myself I was going to make an honest effort this year with a red dot. I have the DP already and the slide, barrel and parts ordered. To say that I struggle with quick acquisition with a red dot is an understatement. Your idea sounds more than reasonable and I will give it a shot. I will update when I get in the parts and have some time working it out.

[Erick Gelhaus]

I'm going to have try & then work on it. Thanks George.

[JHC]

The last one I used (G19) for quite a few reps was a custom cut/mounted RMR and it was pretty low. So low one could get by using the normal (aftermarket) sights as BUIS. Work by a young local gunsmith with a good and growing reputation.

I have very little time on these and just the normal draw to index and it was there. I was terrifically impressed although I can't compare it to a higher MOS mount.

[Bart Carter]

...This is the method I use. I draw to the frame of the red dot, as opposed to drawing to the red dot. By "framing" the target, the red dot is inevitably there for me, whereas drawing to where I think the dot is, can lead to fishing. Initially, I do not even turn the dot on -- I just do presentations with the dot off, using the frame of the red dot.

Try it, and let me know what you think.

I can't believe all this practice and this never occurred to me! I am going to a 4 day class tomorrow and I will be trying to incorporate it. Taking both my Leopold DP Pro and my Vortex Viper.

[GJM]

I can't believe all this practice and this never occurred to me! I am going to a 4 day class tomorrow and I will be trying to incorporate it. Taking both my Leopold DP Pro and my Vortex Viper.

If possible, please spend some time today, first dry firing with the dot off, and then dot on, using the framing method. That might us both look smarter tomorrow at the class. :)

[Bart Carter]

If possible, please spend some time today, first dry firing with the dot off, and then dot on, using the framing method. That might us both look smarter tomorrow at the class. :)

Already planned. ;)

[UNM1136]

I have been using the front sight as a reference to find the dot (despite what people think about Suarez, he has a multi day lession plan for red dot optic pistols that I really want to try out, and he is relatively nearby).

I will also be giving the the GJM Frame and Find technique a try. I will say that just using the window for fast, close COM shots seems to work, as well as using both the dip in the RMR frame, and the corner points as quick indexes for close in work. I'll play with it and see.

pat

[45dotACP]

I have been using the front sight as a reference to find the dot (despite what people think about Suarez, he has a multi day lession plan for red dot optic pistols that I really want to try out, and he is relatively nearby).

I will also be giving the the GJM Frame and Find technique a try. I will say that just using the window for fast, close COM shots seems to work, as well as using both the dip in the RMR frame, and the corner points as quick indexes for close in work. I'll play with it and see.

pat
Just don't take his class "How to kill within the law."

It's got "Intent" stamped on it with five inch tall bright red letters.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

[Randy Harris]

Draw hard to the sights...the dot is there.

[MisterHelix]

I have very little time on these and just the normal draw to index and it was there. I was terrifically impressed although I can't compare it to a higher MOS mount.

JHC's experiences mirror my own.

I've used a Trijicon RMR on a milled slide for my EDC for the last six years, and in my experience, the above statement accurately reflect the fastest and most reliable method for acquisition of the dot.

For me, the key is "index", with no focus on the visual plane surrounding the pistol at all.

It's been a while, but I think when I first started using the RMR, I was trying to locate off the front sight, with inconsistent results. I went back to training with irons, and practicing a consistent draw stroke and mechanical index, using the irons only for confirmation of POA after the draw was complete. When I returned to the RMR'ed pistol, the dot appears like magic, superimposed on the target, on which I have a hard focus.

(Edit: the above is strictly my personal experience and opinion, I am not a firearms trainer or expert, or competitor, or HSLD operator of any sort)

[John91]

Is the height of the MOS an issue or is it negligible? I am trying to decide between picking up a atom slide from unity tactical or the MOS. Getting an MOS would be nice because I would have a whole new pistol, but I will buy the Atom if it is worth it for faster acquisition of the dot. Thanks for your advice in advance, this will be my first time using a red dot on a pistol.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bart Carter]

Is the height of the MOS an issue or is it negligible?...

I just did a course with about 600 rounds with a Leupold DP Pro. As compared to my Vortex Viper, it sits appreciably higher. My current thoughts are that for me, the lower the better. It may be fine if you sight in for a particular distance, but I find that the Viper is pretty much on for all distances that I shoot. Just shooting the thoracic, does not matter. I also can sight in faster with a dot that is close to the height of iron sights.

Of course this is my point of view, what works for another or what another may train for can be completely different.

[Oukaapie]

I did a Super Dave course last year with my Sig P320C with RMR and found going front sight first would deliver the dot as fast as finding my rear sight.

[YVK]

For me, the key is "index", with no focus on the visual plane surrounding the pistol at all.



I think you're absolutely right. People who I know to be the fastest with this often times don't even have visible irons or any irons on their optic guns.
I think GJM's idea bridges the gap since optic's housing is big enough that it can be seen in periphery, without a hard focus shift. That said, for me (with my limited exposure to this), index works the best, and I find that not being spastic at the end of presentation and stopping the gun smoothly makes it or breaks it as well.

[Surf]

Some quick observations. I have a new slide and suppressor sights. The rear sight is in front of the optic which I am not sure if the concept is correct or not. I definitely think my eye isn't as easily drawn to the rear sight, but I don't have enough reps to have come to a conclusion yet. I think the DP on this set up can actually use standard types of sights that will create less clutter in the window and I will try a standard sight install to test it out.

In any case I started using various methods mentioned with mixed results. I started feeling like a natural index was producing the best or quickest results. I had zero luck with the front sight staying on the slide without loctite and letting it cure. So I took off the front sight and indeed for myself, the natural index seemed to work best. Not necessarily driving the dot to the front sights or framing the target in the window of the optic, but just relying on my natural index. Now of course index is a refined thing and comes more natural or repeatable with repetition, experience and skill, so that needs to be accounted for.

I found that one handed presentations were indeed complex. Primary shooting hand not too bad, but support side was indeed frustrating. No amount of framing in the window worked and my refined or natural index isn't as repeatable. So I did find a necessity to drive the red dot to the sights. Again however when I removed the front sight this became more problematic and a closer index to the eye with a pressout technique was necessary to be more consistent.

Of course I will need quite a bit more work to iron things out and I am still trying various methods.

[Jim Watson]

I think you're absolutely right. People who I know to be the fastest with this often times don't even have visible irons or any irons on their optic guns.
.

A friend has gone all dot, no iron sights whatsoever on his current pistol. He thinks they are a distraction.

[Redhat]

Some quick observations. I have a new slide and suppressor sights. The rear sight is in front of the optic which I am not sure if the concept is correct or not. I definitely think my eye isn't as easily drawn to the rear sight, but I don't have enough reps to have come to a conclusion yet. I think the DP on this set up can actually use standard types of sights that will create less clutter in the window and I will try a standard sight install to test it out.

In any case I started using various methods mentioned with mixed results. I started feeling like a natural index was producing the best or quickest results. I had zero luck with the front sight staying on the slide without loctite and letting it cure. So I took off the front sight and indeed for myself, the natural index seemed to work best. Not necessarily driving the dot to the front sights or framing the target in the window of the optic, but just relying on my natural index. Now of course index is a refined thing and comes more natural or repeatable with repetition, experience and skill, so that needs to be accounted for.

I found that one handed presentations were indeed complex. Primary shooting hand not too bad, but support side was indeed frustrating. No amount of framing in the window worked and my refined or natural index isn't as repeatable. So I did find a necessity to drive the red dot to the sights. Again however when I removed the front sight this became more problematic and a closer index to the eye with a pressout technique was necessary to be more consistent.

Of course I will need quite a bit more work to iron things out and I am still trying various methods.

So is the problem not picking up the RDS in your periphery vision as you draw?

[Norville]

Another vote for index. It seems slow finding the dot at first if you are hunting for it. At this level, cowitnessed irons help. After some more dry fire, the dot just "appears" on the target. My current USPSA setup is a G34 MOS with DP Pro. It sits higher than the RMR on a Suarez slide but at this point it is just as fast, maybe faster.

If we are talking purely gaming, when was the last time you saw back up sights on an Open class gun?

[vcdgrips]

I confess I am at the edge of my lane on this topic- Norville, while I concur that you do not typically see BUIS on an Open Gun, the red dot is also not slide mounted and is therefore not moving, nearly as much as the set ups being discussed above such that some type of BUIS for many shooters is key.

[Luke]

Here's my two cents.

Irons on a red dot carry gun are there for ONLY one purpose, and that's the have another way to aim should your dot go bad. If your using the irons to help you find your dot your doing it way wrong.

[GJM]

I confess I am at the edge of my lane on this topic- Norville, while I concur that you do not typically see BUIS on an Open Gun, the red dot is also not slide mounted and is therefore not moving, nearly as much as the set ups being discussed above such that some type of BUIS for many shooters is key.

David, while the relative difference in movement between slide and frame mounted dots influences dot movement between shots, it shouldn't effect initial acquisition.

As Luke references, I believe BUIS are there for a carry gun, but strike me as a crutch that only distracts from learning how to quickly find the dot. It would be fun to test some shooters learning the dot without installed BUIS, and another group with BUIS, and see where performance is after some experience.

[Mark Housel]

David, while the relative difference in movement between slide and frame mounted dots influences dot movement between shots, it shouldn't effect initial acquisition.

As Luke references, I believe BUIS are there for a carry gun, but strike me as a crutch that only distracts from learning how to quickly find the dot. It would be fun to test some shooters learning the dot without installed BUIS, and another group with BUIS, and see where performance is after some experience.
George,

Certainly on a defensive gun I agree they should be there as a backup at least, if not for assisting in acquisition. I know that other places one would be "burned at the stake" for suggesting that BUIS weren't necessary. :rolleyes:

But short of using shooters with essentially no experience how would you sort out any biased results based on the shooters previous experience with iron sights only?
The concept of using the entire window seems like a perfectly valid approach since if the target is centrally framed in the window the dot is likely to be there. Our eyes tend to like to try to center things in such framed openings (e.g. ghost ring sights) enhancing the technique.

Is there a difference between someone highly trained with iron sights to have them aligned on target and transitioning to the dot as the irons come into alignment where the dot may or may not be closer to what is being aimed at, as opposed to the same shooter framing the target in the optic window and transitioning to the dot without the irons to guide them?

I don't have a clue myself but the question occurred to me.

[GJM]

Mark, not sure.

There are two common approaches to shooting a red dot.

1) The Suarez, draw to the BUIS, and find the dot approach.

2) The USPSA, learn to find the dot, without BUIS. Those shooters almost exclusively, have extensive iron sight experience, yet still elect to omit BUIS, even on their CO pistols.

Next time I get a chance, I may turn my dot off and see what kind of results I get just centering my target in the frame of the DP Pro display.

[busdriver]

Considering the cover of Steve Anderson's "Get to Work" shows a shot timer with .79 on it (turning draw with an open gun) I don't think there's a speed disadvantage.

It does take practice, and a solid body index. But then again, being really fast with irons takes the same thing.

Many people over aim with a dot, because it's showing you a lot more of the gun's movement that you wouldn't otherwise be able to see with irons.

[ranger]

A very long time ago when we started hanging red dots on USPSA competition pistols, the common theme was finding the dot. This was before C Mores and the original popular dots seemed to be "tube" Aimpoint and Tasco ProPoints. A common technique at the time was to press out the pistol and use the "tube" to begin the acquisition and the dot was usually "there".

[GJM]

Considering the cover of Steve Anderson's "Get to Work" shows a shot timer with .79 on it (turning draw with an open gun) I don't think there's a speed disadvantage.

It does take practice, and a solid body index. But then again, being really fast with irons takes the same thing.

Many people over aim with a dot, because it's showing you a lot more of the gun's movement that you wouldn't otherwise be able to see with irons.

"Over-aiming" is what TGO pointed out to me, when I asked why I was slower to shot one with the dot. That fixed it for good.

[octagon]

A very long time ago when we started hanging red dots on USPSA competition pistols, the common theme was finding the dot. This was before C Mores and the original popular dots seemed to be "tube" Aimpoint and Tasco ProPoints. A common technique at the time was to press out the pistol and use the "tube" to begin the acquisition and the dot was usually "there".

That method is part of what Jerry Barnhart was teaching in his video series. He used a muzzle high drive of the gun with the rear coming up toward full extension and using the top knob as an intermediate guide like a rough front sight. I recently converted the VHS tapes over to dvd and remember that part of it.

[Luke]

If you can't draw your pistol with your eyes closed and then open them once it's out in front of you and the dot be there without any moving, you need some dry fire. I wouldn't expect anybody new to them to be able to find the dot immediately, but even a short dry fire session should straighten things out.

[45dotACP]

"Over-aiming" is what TGO pointed out to me, when I asked why I was slower to shot one with the dot. That fixed it for good.

Funny you should mention that...I found that I was getting some kinda shitty groups because I focused more on keeping the dot steady than I was on keeping the trigger press smooth and accepting the "wobble zone"...is that what the whole "over aiming" thing is about?

[GJM]

Funny you should mention that...I found that I was getting some kinda shitty groups because I focused more on keeping the dot steady than I was on keeping the trigger press smooth and accepting the "wobble zone"...is that what the whole "over aiming" thing is about?

What Robbie was telling me to do, was to press the trigger on the draw when the dot first arrived on target, as opposed to stabilizing it. That was on a relatively course target like an A zone at 7-10 yards.

Shooting groups with a dot, like on an upper A at 25 yards, will involve allowing some dot wiggle while pressing the trigger, when shooting from a non-braced position.

[Norville]

Some good thoughts here. Shooting sooner, as soon as th dot in is in the A zone has really helped my CO division scores. Accepting a dot that is not perfectly still and centered speeds up the shot, and fire the second as soon as the dot returns but not settled completely.

[Warren Wilson]

I hope you don't mind me posting an article instead of reposting all of the thoughts within.

http://modernserviceweapons.com/?p=16978

[voodoo_man]

http://www.breachbangclear.com/pistol-optics-red-dot-sight/

Dave Merrill posted an article on this topic last year. He prefers the magic red dot way of sighting which means you present the gun, muzzle slightly up and the dot magically appears.

Trick is that you still have to burn the reps for this. Reps you've already burned with iron sights which may or may not need to be burned again depending on your particular requirements.

[Surf]

A bit more time with this. I am still finding that relying on my natural index is the fastest for me at this time. Still early and still open and trying various methods. I find that the window on the optic is large enough even at full extension that the target can be easily framed dead center within the optic window yet a poor index leads to absolutely no visible dot. Now when I rely on index and the target is framed and the dot is visible.

Because the dots movement is amplified over just a front sight, I find myself chasing the dot (trying to micro manage its movement) and that is still a problem for me. Getting better, but still working on it.

[BehindBlueI's]

For those trying to learn the red dot, has it affected your use of irons either positively or negatively? As in you work with your dot equipped pistol than go back to a standard iron sight pistol, not trying to use irons on the dot equipped gun.

[GJM]

For those trying to learn the red dot, has it affected your use of irons either positively or negatively? As in you work with your dot equipped pistol than go back to a standard iron sight pistol, not trying to use irons on the dot equipped gun.

Using a red dot has made me more visually aware in tracking iron sights.

Using the dot has also provided me a lot of feedback about my trigger press, and what I can get away with. I jokingly refer to the dot as my trigger control coach that works for free and is always there.

[Luke]

Using a red dot has made me more visually aware in tracking iron sights.

Using the dot has also provided me a lot of feedback about my trigger press, and what I can get away with. I jokingly refer to the dot as my trigger control coach that works for free and is always there.

Exact same for me aswell.

[BehindBlueI's]

I'm not sure I know what "visually aware" means. Are you any faster or slower to the first shot?

[GJM]

I'm not sure I know what "visually aware" means. Are you any faster or slower to the first shot?

Visually aware refers to my ability to track iron sights in recoil, and accurately call my shots.

At this point, I do not notice a difference up close between irons and dot to shot one, but as the distance increases I become increasingly faster to shot one, and successive shots, with a dot.

[BehindBlueI's]

Visually aware refers to my ability to track iron sights in recoil, and accurately call my shots.

At this point, I do not notice a difference up close between irons and dot to shot one, but as the distance increases I become increasingly faster to shot one, and successive shots, with a dot.

Are you using a timer? On any given drill, what I'm looking for is:

What was your time to first shot with an iron before using a dot equipped pistol?
What is the time to first shot with an iron now?

[GJM]

Are you using a timer? On any given drill, what I'm looking for is:

What was your time to first shot with an iron before using a dot equipped pistol?
What is the time to first shot with an iron now?

I use a timer virtually every session. There is no difference in my times between irons and dot, warmed up, I am .70's-.80's to a one shot draw at an open target at seven yards from an open range holster.

[BehindBlueI's]

I use a timer virtually every session. There is no difference in my times between irons and dot, warmed up, I am .70's-.80's to a one shot draw at an open target at seven yards from an open range holster.

I'm not asking what the time difference is between dot and iron. I'm asking has using a dot improved or degraded or made no difference when comparing your previous time WITH IRONS vs your current times WITH IRONS.

[voodoo_man]

I use a timer virtually every session. There is no difference in my times between irons and dot, warmed up, I am .70's-.80's to a one shot draw at an open target at seven yards from an open range holster.

What are your times cold?

Have ran standards cold with both and compared the times?

Asking for comparison.

[GJM]

I'm not asking what the time difference is between dot and iron. I'm asking has using a dot improved or degraded or made no difference when comparing your previous time WITH IRONS vs your current times WITH IRONS.

As it turns out, I was heading out the door to shoot, and decided to set this up for you.



What are your times cold?

Have ran standards cold with both and compared the times?

Asking for comparison.


I am not sure what "cold" means. Not directed at you but a general issue with people quoting cold performance. Does cold mean the best time I have shot on stage one of a match, my average time on stage one, or my worst time. As a result, while I can tell you the best I have done, I am pretty much out of the business of predicting what I will be able to do on any particular day.

To try to get some data for today, I decided to head out, put up some targets at 7 yards, do three dry fire draws, then do three draws with my Q5 and DP Pro at 7 yards, immediately grab my PPQ with iron sights (which is as close as I have to the Q5 with iron sights with me), and repeat the three draws.


Walther Q5 with DP Pro, shot one .86, shot 2 .70, shot 3 .70, all A zone hits.



https://youtu.be/x272h2qVGOI

Here is the target.

15890



Then, the Walther PPQ iron sights, shot 1 .94, shot 2 .79, shot 3 .75, 2A, 1 close C hit.



https://youtu.be/07QUWgmhp3A



For fun, considering a 2.0 Bill drill is considered good, I pushed it to see what I could do for all three targets with two each, instead of just one target, 1.99 with two close deltas. An .81 draw helped with the overall time.


https://youtu.be/HjKAxGKIANw



Finally, here are draws to an eight inch steel at 10 yards, 4/5 hits, .98-.75.


https://youtu.be/C864BzH55oc

[voodoo_man]

Cold would be the level of performance without warming up, dry firing or otherwise with your particular gear setup.

So, you walk on the range and the first drills you run on a timer. I'd say first thirty or so rounds depending on the drills.

[BehindBlueI's]

As it turns out, I was heading out the door to shoot, and decided to set this up for you.


None of which answers the question I've asked. Thanks for trying, I guess.

[Luke]

None of which answers the question I've asked. Thanks for trying, I guess.

I'm not GJM, and idk if you care about my opninion or not, but for the sake of information here it is. Shooting a dot makes me a better shooter of irons. The only caveat being is I'm not a stagnant shooter, I'm getting better everyday. My irons capability is growing as well, but I shoot a dot much better. It's easier to see what you need to see to with red dots so your vision grows and helps with irons as well. It's like training your eyes

[busdriver]

I can actually somewhat answer the dot/irons question.

I stopped shooting irons with any regularity (essentially no dry fire, and only occasionally take an iron sighted gun to the range to screw around) around October of 2015. At that point I was unclassified in USPSA but had shot a couple matches and was finishing in the middle of the C class pack. I shot a match with a single stack gun back in November, I dry fired reloads the night before but that was the entirety of the "prep" beforehand. I shot 70% (dead center B class) on the classifier without pushing at all, came in second place for the division behind a fellow A class open guy shooting SS.

I know it's not time to first shot, but a year of shooting almost exclusively with a dot and I still improved with irons.

[cclaxton]

Are there any peer-reviewed studies about using the red dot compared to iron/fiber sights across a cross-section of shooters? For instance, I would like to see: Under 30yo, 30-55yo, 55-80yo, male and female, those with corrective vision, those who are farsighted, Master-level iron-sight shooters, average level IDPA/USPSA shooters, and novice shooters. I would love to see if there is more of an advantage for certain categories of pistol shooters.
Anything out there?
Cody

[voodoo_man]

Are there any peer-reviewed studies about using the red dot compared to iron/fiber sights across a cross-section of shooters? For instance, I would like to see: Under 30yo, 30-55yo, 55-80yo, male and female, those with corrective vision, those who are farsighted, Master-level iron-sight shooters, average level IDPA/USPSA shooters, and novice shooters. I would love to see if there is more of an advantage for certain categories of pistol shooters.
Anything out there?
Cody

I know of one but is obsolete given the fact rmr guns were very rare at that point very unreliable which was one of the issues. The study, I believe, was done by a sof or sf test group when the rmr first came out, so 2008-2009 time frame

[Sherman A. House DDS]

Karl Rehn of KR Training has peer-reviewed literature on the use of irons, dots and lasers. I think his research is on-going, as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DocGKR]

In my circle, "Peer-Reviewed" has a very specific meaning, that few typical firearms studies meet.

Having said that, we conducted quite a few assessments and tests with pistol slide-mounted RDS in the 2010-2015 time-frame. Officers with middle-age presbyopia (typically over 40-45 y/o), those of any age with vision issues, and all individuals when shooting at longer ranges (beyond 15-25 yds) did better with RDS equipped handguns.

[spinmove_]

In my circle, "Peer-Reviewed" has a very specific meaning, that few typical firearms studies meet.

Having said that, we conducted quite a few assessments and tests with pistol slide-mounted RDS in the 2010-2015 time-frame. Officers with middle-age presbyopia (typically over 40-45 y/o), those of any age with vision issues, and all individuals when shooting at longer ranges (beyond 15-25 yds) did better with RDS equipped handguns.

Do you have any data on users with astigmatism shooting with the RMR?


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

[Sherman A. House DDS]

In my circle, "Peer-Reviewed" has a very specific meaning, that few typical firearms studies meet.

Having said that, we conducted quite a few assessments and tests with pistol slide-mounted RDS in the 2010-2015 time-frame. Officers with middle-age presbyopia (typically over 40-45 y/o), those of any age with vision issues, and all individuals when shooting at longer ranges (beyond 15-25 yds) did better with RDS equipped handguns.

Precisely, Doc. (You and I run in the same nerd circles). The study that Karl has on-going is through either the ophthalmology department at a Texas state school, or through the optics/physics department at a Texas state school, or both. It's been a couple years since I've seen it. I will email him and ask for the current location, but I recall seeing it on PubMed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sherman A. House DDS]

In my circle, "Peer-Reviewed" has a very specific meaning, that few typical firearms studies meet.

Having said that, we conducted quite a few assessments and tests with pistol slide-mounted RDS in the 2010-2015 time-frame. Officers with middle-age presbyopia (typically over 40-45 y/o), those of any age with vision issues, and all individuals when shooting at longer ranges (beyond 15-25 yds) did better with RDS equipped handguns.

ETA: study is a collaborative between K&R Training and the Sports Performance Department of Texas A&M.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk