Red dot sights on pistols?

[texag]

First off, I have no experience with a RDS on a pistol, so my ideas are all theoretical. It seems to me that mounting a RDS on a pistol would allow one to use a target focus. As a LEO, that seems to be a huge advantage, as there will be times when I have a gun drawn, but my shoot/no shoot decision hinges on the actions of the offender after the fact. Add in what would seem to be a much better low light sigthing reference and I think there would be some solid advantages over iron sights. I currently carry a gen 4 g17 on duty, and have been strongly considering buying a gen 3 g17 and having Bowie Tactical do a grip reduction/stippling and mount a leupold deltapoint on the slide. I guess my point in posting this is to get feedback form people who have actually used a slide mounted RDS and get their take on it before I spend a few hundred $$$ on the setup I'm considering.

-Is the RDS a significant detriment to draw speed?
-Will the easier sight picture make a difference in shooting quickly?
-Will the ability to maintain a focus on the target help significantly in shooting moving targets, shooting while moving, and shooting moving targets while moving?

I don't have a great handle on the advantages and disadvantages of a slide mounted RDS, so I was hoping to gain some insight from members here that have firsthand experience.

[MTechnik]

There was a great discussion (http://www.firearmstrainingandtactics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1072) on this very topic on FTT.

[JM Campbell]

Great link, thanks for the quality read.

[Odin Bravo One]

This is my input onto this topic on another board. I have had to chop and edit it a bit so that it makes (a little better) sense without the context of the other forum users and their responses.

Initial Post:
This set up is pretty popular among some hard core pro shooters, but as has been mentioned by some others.....the technology is not there yet. When someone else is footing the bill for the a replacement sight, and swaps it out for you on a moments notice, and you have unrestricted access to a range and infinite ammunition to re-zero and also train with it, it becomes a very attractive set up. I ran a pistol mounted RDS for a few months, and there is certainly a learning curve, but one that is overcome with time and training.

My biggest issue is reliability and durability. Round counts are all well and good, but are not the end all, be all for a durability or reliability test. The reality is that competition guns don't see the abuse that real world guns do. Real world guns get slammed against walls, dropped on rocks, slammed on floors, rained on, snowed on, coated with mud, dirt, dust, etc., in addition to the training and real world rounds expended. And they don't always get cleaned right away. Pistol mounts also are a little weak in the design as well. Mounts that replace rear sights suck. Bad. Machining the slide so the MRDS can bolt straight to it is better, but the beating it takes from recoil just shortens the service life of current optics available. Many won't last more than a few range sessions, and even the top end ones fail pretty quickly (by comparison with a carbine mounted sight) when they are being used a lot. Not a problem when there are 500 more on a shelf that the gunsmith can grab and throw on your pistol.......but for those of us that buy our own kit, that is a lot of coin to throw away every few months, or even a year or two later.

Real world optics don't get a cover put on them for the majority of their life either, or sit in the safe or range bag, and are subjected to dust, dirt, rocks, etc., and the plastic lenses in most of the low rent MRDS's scratch so easily that they become worthless in a matter of a few weeks of exposure to the elements. The higher end stuff with quality glass lenses do better, but are far from immune. Even the T-1 Micro, of which I am a HUGE fan, can get pretty dinged up in short order, especially since it does not have any sort of shroud to protect the lenses. The Trijicon and Docter types don't fare much better, and the dirt, dust, mud, and sand that work into the crevices around the lenses can be a bitch to get out without scratching the lenses.

We are getting there. Certainly the demand for such devices among the professionals is helping to speed the process. But it also leads many people to think that because the Ninja Special Forces Recon Delta SEAL Mossad Spetznaz black helicopter guys are using them, that somehow we have arrived at the answer. Almost, but not yet.



2nd entry: Discussing the definition of "real world"
Certainly some environments are harsher than others, even among people who share the same profession. While the majority of my shooting years have been military, I spent a few years in LE, and when quitting time comes, I am a regular civilian too. LE in the form of BP in the deserts of AZ are going to find a similar environment as our troops in the various deserts of the world. LE in downtown LA are going to have a different real world environment. Civilians carrying concealed will have a different real world but are actually going to fare better in terms of protecting the sight just by the very nature of carrying it concealed helps protect the lenses. But the slamming of a pistol in a door, or against a wall or the hard asphalt ground is something that anyone carrying a firearm could very easily experience in a lethal force encounter. I am decent sized guy, but have still had my ass kicked on a few occasions. Protecting my optic was not the immediate thought running through my mind.

Height above the boreline can be an issue. My gun was machined to accept the sight, negating that to an extent, and co-witnessed with taller irons. But yes, the learning curve was steep. Especially since I fall into the "old dog, new tricks" category. I kept looking for my front sight during press outs, which was obscured by the optic until I was at full presentation. One place where I found the MRDS really shined was taking the longer shots such as the 25 yard line of the Bianchi steel drill. The dot gives a much cleaner sight picture at the tiny little plate at that range, and increases the confidence pressing the shot without wondering if the plate is actually behind your iron sights since I could actually see the target behind the RDS. I also had it on a compact Glock, which just flat tore the web of my hand apart, causing blood loss at every training evolution, and every time I fired the pistol. I had a Docter at first, then two RMR's over the course of 9 months. The Docter made it about 2 months of high volume shooting and just stopped working. The first RMR cracked the lens after about a month, while involved in a fist fight that went to concrete. The second RMR endured the rest of the time I had the gun, but there were some noticable scratches on the lens. Especially noticable at night when using artificial light to illuminate the target. It would have needed replacing before much longer.

I will probably look at having a slide machined to accept a T-1 along with some irons in front like the Glock was set up, similar to the Bowie guns at some point. Haven't decided in front or back just yet. I may well put an T-1 on my revolver as well and see if that somehow increases the longevity. It will be an interesting experiment since both guns would be in 9mm, one with a reciprocating slide, and one not moving. I have a few extra T-1's, so I suppose I am willing to break one or two for the sake of science.


Post 3: Addressing perceptions I am dead set against such a set up.....

I think perhaps I have sent the wrong message in some of my previous posts........

Is it a viable set up? Sure. Depending on configuration and choice of set ups. The issue is the number of MRDS available on the market today, vs. the number of MRDS that are suitable for mounting to a handgun directly to the slide. Having been intimately involved in the testing and procurement of over 20 different MRDS's from 17 manufacturers over the course of 3 years, there are about 5 that I would consider for purchase, and only 2 that I would consider mounting to the slide of a pistol. The LED version of the RMR and the T-1. That is not to say that others might not be suitable, and that the other manufacturers won't catch up and make something suitable. But if it won't hold up to the harshest conditions I can imagine, I will not put it on a gun that I will rely on in a fight. Because the reality is that the fight is likely to a much harsher environment than the one you imagined it would be.

I am of the opinion that as long as the iron's are available and usable, then you really take away some of the reliability concerns. Much like we did when we first transitioned to the RDS on the carbine. Of course, the RDS improved by leaps and bounds after we started mounting them on carbines, and the industry caught on that the future was upon us and started providing products to match.That being said, we are really still at the early stages of the MRDS, and the capabilities and durability. Combine that with the idea of mounting it to a pistol, we are likely to see several evolutionary changes to the configurations until we find a system that gives us the advantages of the MRDS, with the quick transition to a more traditional iron sight method of aiming should it become necessary.

In my opinion, (and this is just one man speaking), whether in combat on the streets of some foreign shithole, or on picture perfect Wisteria Lane back home, if I end up going to guns with a pistol, a great number of factors have conspired against to me to go wrong. And I think I can reasonably argue that if I had to go to my pistol, one of two things have happened: A) My rifle/carbine went down, or B) I did not have a rifle/carbine to start with. Given that, if I felt the need to go to a pistol, I needed that pistol in the worst possible way. And I need it to work, and be able to hit what I want.

If we find that balance of technology and "old faithful" with the pistol and MRDS, I don't think we are pushing the limits any more so than with similar set ups on the carbine in the early days. But it is also either our last resort(Scenario A above), or only resort (Scenario B). Getting iron sights to where they are useable is the real trick, and we are getting there with some innovators and people willing to fork out the cash to support the R&D. Higher than standard sights are becoming more prolific, and fairly easy to come by. But one concern I still have with both the standard RDS on a carbine, or a MRDS on a pistol.....what happens when the optical lens spiderwebs and I can no longer see through the RDS? I solve this on a carbine with a quick release mounting system that allows me to completely remove the optic and fall back on strictly iron sights. How do I solve it on a pistol?

I am still looking for the solution myself, and not afraid of putting some time, money, and effort into finding the solution that gives me the advantages of the MRDS, with the reliability and fall back of iron sights.

[jetfire]

I actually was just talking about this topic this morning with an instructor; he's been running a Trijicon RMR daily on his Glock 19 for quite some time now. We're both of the opinion that the technology needs just a slight push in the right direction and you'll start seeing red-dot optics on LE issue pistols just like you saw the entire military switch over to having some type of optic on their rifles.

My personal experience extends to running a G23 with an RMR with their new dovetail mount for a little bit at a class. The "weird" part for me is not having the front sight to track in recoil meant that I slowed down initially trying to "find" the dot again. I suspect that would be an issue that would be corrected with loads of practice.

[ToddG]

I doubt it would, caleb. The whole reason sight tracking works is because you have visual control over the gun in recoil. Give that up and you're going to be slower on aimed fire. Until the technology can keep the dot visible throughout the arc of recoil, that won't change.

The folks who report great success with MRDS are the ones who aren't tracking their sights. Now in fairness, that's the vast majority of gun owners. For them, the MRDS just might be an improvement.

The other thing I've found in very limited practice is that having tall (suppressor style) sights on an MRDS-equipped gun gives you a front sight that sort of takes over for the sight tracking part, giving you visual reference until the gun comes back down on point and the dot appears. My guess is that it would still require quite a bit of practice, but that combo might prove to have enough benefits that it's a superior choice.

Of course, none of that counters Sean's point about durability and overall suitability as a piece of kit you would literally stake your life on.

[texag]

Thanks for the replies and links. I'm gonna hold off on this, the money would be better put to training and ammo anyways.

[LittleLebowski]

I think we're about 2-4 years out on this being very widespread.

[jetfire]

I do think that the best solution for the MRDS is on a fixed mount, not a slide dovetail mount. The issue of course is getting that to work in a way that doesn't interfere with a holster or light mounts.

[MTechnik]

I think we're about 2-4 years out on this being very widespread.

I'd be inclined to agree.

I'm sure the manufacturers have all the reasons in the world to push(buy new gun/slide/parts), and so will the gun rags (thanks to advertising), and we all know the mall ninjas will need them immediately.

Haven't red dots made big inroads on pistols in competition already in open classes?

[ToddG]

Red dots were popular on Open pistols before they were popular on carbines (gaming or fighting). But on Open guns, the optic is usually:

bigger,
mounted solidly to the frame, so it's not reciprocating back and forth with the slide, and
living atop a compensated pistol with extremely little muzzle flip to begin with.

[MTechnik]

I do think that the best solution for the MRDS is on a fixed mount, not a slide dovetail mount. The issue of course is getting that to work in a way that doesn't interfere with a holster or light mounts.

Because of the abuse the RDS takes? Or are there other factors for keeping it on the frame?

[jetfire]

Actually it's because on a fixed frame mount the optic moves less than on a slide mount. With a gun that has minimal muzzle flip, it's easier to pick up the dot when the optic isn't bouncing around on the slide.

[YVK]

The other thing I've found in very limited practice is that having tall (suppressor style) sights on an MRDS-equipped gun gives you a front sight that sort of takes over for the sight tracking part, giving you visual reference until the gun comes back down on point and the dot appears. My guess is that it would still require quite a bit of practice, but that combo might prove to have enough benefits that it's a superior choice.


I've tried that - I have a spare slide for my G19 with suppressor height irons and JP optic - and it absolutely didn't work for me. Too many things to pay attention to - front sight, sight picture, that blur of a target, and dot comes in pretty late. By that time, I am pretty much on target with irons and it isn't worth switching my focus to dot.
Following many of these discussions, I've come to conclusion that pistol reddot users rely extensively on index, or hand-eye coordination, whatever term one prefers.

I have also asked reddot users to post any quantifiable evidence of improved performance especially in speed department, and I am yet to see anybody to say "My FAST or El Pres went up by so much". In my own record-keeping, reddot considerably improves long-range slow accuracy, but slows me down in any [attempt on] speed shooting.
The disclaimer is that I've not spent a lot of time with my dot setup.

[LittleLebowski]

Actually it's because on a fixed frame mount the optic moves less than on a slide mount. With a gun that has minimal muzzle flip, it's easier to pick up the dot when the optic isn't bouncing around on the slide.

I don't see folks carrying this sort of setup as opposed to a slide mounted optic.

[jetfire]

They don't, because as far as I'm aware there isn't really a good way to set it up that doesn't interfere with the holster. Unless we all switch to open front race holsters concealed under fairly large fishing vests.

[MTechnik]

They don't, because as far as I'm aware there isn't really a good way to set it up that doesn't interfere with the holster. Unless we all switch to open front race holsters concealed under fairly large fishing vests.

Hey! This one is a camera vest!

[YVK]

Saw this posted elsewhere

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvmRHHpFNE4&feature=related

Shows quite well that one can't track the dot through entire ark of muzzle flip; of course, this would only affect those who are capable of such tracking.

[DocGKR]

YVK--My RDS equipped pistol worked pretty well in a shooting on the move class ToddG was teaching today--of course maybe I am one of the "mall ninjas" MTechnik has referenced...

[YVK]

DocGKR, good to see you on this website.

Somebody has reported that reddot equipped pistols do well on the move. I think I may see that.

Did you shoot any F.A.S.T drills, or it is not a part of SOM curriculum?

I am taking Pat Rogers two-day pistol class in 7 weeks. I've been kicking around an idea to shoot the first day with irons and second day with reddot. Pat runs a lot of quals so comparative data will be there.

[DocGKR]

No traditional FAST drills in the SOM class.

As I have stated before, it does take a lot of dry firing/drawing and several thousand live rounds to become proficient with an RDS. I am still not as quite as fast using the RDS, however, I am substantially more accurate with the RDS, especially at longer ranges. Shooting at moving targets and when I am moving is substantially easier with the RDS. In addition, the RDS allows me to remain fully focused on the threat and not have to transition back to the front sight prior to firing—this is an incredibly SIGNIFICANT factor!

If I still had perfect vision, I might consider staying with iron sights due to the speed advantage; however, given the vision changes following my bicycle accident induced basilar skull fracture last year, as well as the onset of middle-age presbyopia, I personally NEVER want to go back to irons.

I believe it is critical for a duty/CCW pistol to have back-up iron sights. With BIS, I never have to worry about finding the red dot, even in awkward shooting positions—just line up the iron sights as normal and the red dot is there.

Until you have fired at least 1000 rounds or so and have spent a lot of time working on dry-fire presentation and press-out, I would not recommend an advanced class using an RDS, as you would likely end-up frustrated.

[YVK]

Very valid point in last paragraph. I can certainly shoot one or three thousand rounds with reddot in next month-two and do some dry firing; not sure if that would be sufficient. Bigger barrier, though, is that I feel one needs to become adequately proficient with irons before experimenting with reddot; I've not met my proficiency standards with conventionally sighted pistols.

Speaking of proficiency with irons, how do you plan to structure your practice/training for 2011? I imagine you wouldn't want to let your performance with iron sights slip below certain level. Do you plan to set a certain amount of time for shooting with irons? Or shoot some sort of quals with them and practice with them only if results decline?