Change platforms for red dot. Yes/no

[Duke]

Would you adopt or switch platforms to a pistol that you don’t like simply because it is more readily equipped for a red dot than your current/preferred handgun

Is the dot that much an advantage now that it has aged a few years?

At one time I had 6 RMR guns of diffent makes.

I will say my personal use of these 6 at that time mostly was favorable. I did not find the concept to be as bombproof nor reliable as it was preached by those who marketed them

[theJanitor]

I went to a pair of glocks so I could "affordably" run the RMR. I'd rather have combined the money and got one installed on a 1911

[Will_H]

Would you adopt or switch platforms to a pistol that you don’t like simply because it is more readily equipped for a red dot than your current/preferred handgun

Is the dot that much an advantage now that it has aged a few years?

At one time I had 6 RMR guns of diffent makes.

I will say my personal use of these 6 at that time mostly was favorable. I did not find the concept to be as bombproof nor reliable as it was preached by those who marketed them

I Want very much to dabble in PMOs, but I'd rather take a gun I already have and shoot well and have it milled or otherwise adapted to fit a red dot than to change platforms to make swapping red dots easier. I'm concerned about the dearth of "buy once, cry once" options in PMO market right this second, so I'll keep my eyes on the market and see if something great isn't here by the end of 2019.

[Port]

Would you adopt or switch platforms to a pistol that you don’t like simply because it is more readily equipped for a red dot than your current/preferred handgun

Is the dot that much an advantage now that it has aged a few years?

At one time I had 6 RMR guns of diffent makes.

I will say my personal use of these 6 at that time mostly was favorable. I did not find the concept to be as bombproof nor reliable as it was preached by those who marketed them

I’m getting bogged down in the language of the question. I know that’s a me problem, but the only reason I don’t like a pistol is because it doesn’t fit my hand, and therefore don’t shoot it well.

Moreover, though more expensive than buying pre-milled, you can get just about any pistol milled now, so why not keep the one you like, just spend the cash and have it milled. Right?

Aside from that, this is about you, and if you didn’t find the system reliable, on a carry gun, I’d say heck no! As for me, i’m seriously thinking of adopting the red dot system, but i’ll have the weapons I like milled if I do.

[StraitR]

I voted no, but not "for irons" or "against tech/red dots", but because I think switching without necessity is a poor idea. If you require the use of a dot for things like vision issues or use with NVD, then by all means, switch. But, switching from a gun you like and shoot well to a gun you don't like (and potentially shoot worse) for the sake of playing with a red dot, seems frivolous to me.

[awp_101]

Would you adopt or switch platforms to a pistol that you don’t like simply because it is more readily equipped for a red dot than your current/preferred handgun

I answered "no" but the real answer is "it depends on why I don't like the other platform". If it doesn't fit my hand or is harder for me to shoot at the same level than what I already have, then no I wouldn't. If it's just a matter of aesthetics or company ethics, etc then changing would be a definite maybe IF I had long term access to a similar setup so I could be sure it really was an improvement for me.



Moreover, though more expensive than buying pre-milled, you can get just about any pistol milled now, so why not keep the one you like, just spend the cash and have it milled. Right?
Because not everything can be milled. Beretta 92 series comes to mind and until recently, there wasn't an option to have the PX4 milled either.

[Port]

Because not everything can be milled. Beretta 92 series comes to mind and until recently, there wasn't an option to have the PX4 milled either.

It’s funny, the 92 is exactly why I said you can “just about”... speaking in absolutes is always dangerous. That’s why I try not to unless I’m describing how I feel. Clearly not every gun can be.

[Duke]

I’m getting bogged down in the language of the question. I know that’s a me problem, but the only reason I don’t like a pistol is because it doesn’t fit my hand, and therefore don’t shoot it well.

Moreover, though more expensive than buying pre-milled, you can get just about any pistol milled now, so why not keep the one you like, just spend the cash and have it milled. Right?

Aside from that, this is about you, and if you didn’t find the system reliable, on a carry gun, I’d say heck no! As for me, i’m seriously thinking of adopting the red dot system, but i’ll have the weapons I like milled if I do.


I answered "no" but the real answer is "it depends on why I don't like the other platform". If it doesn't fit my hand or is harder for me to shoot at the same level than what I already have, then no I wouldn't. If it's just a matter of aesthetics or company ethics, etc then changing would be a definite maybe IF I had long term access to a similar setup so I could be sure it really was an improvement for me.


Because not everything can be milled. Beretta 92 series comes to mind and until recently, there wasn't an option to have the PX4 milled either.

Yes and yes.

I didn’t care to conjure the demons from the “it doesn’t fit my hand thread” but yes that why I don’t like them. Well - mostly. You can easily mill/mount RDS to a vp9/p320/M&p and I may shoot those well, but that puts us back to the fully cocked striker/ aiwb issue.

my brig tac and elite LTT can’t be milled really. Maybe my P30 can but those I’ve seen place the optic pretty tall In the saddle so to speak and don’t fully support the optic width at all

[GJM]

I think it depends.

1) if all you are interested in is self defense today, you are pretty satisfied with your current ability, and your eyes are decent, iron sights are still the reliable choice.

2) if you are interested in accelerating your technical shooting development, a red dot is a major help, even if you carry iron sights.

3) if you plan on doing this for a number of years, then a red dot surely is the future.

[HCM]

I voted no, but not "for irons" or "against tech/red dots", but because I think switching without necessity is a poor idea. If you require the use of a dot for things like vision issues or use with NVD, then by all means, switch. But, switching from a gun you like and shoot well to a gun you don't like (and potentially shoot worse) for the sake of playing with a red dot, seems frivolous to me.

This ^^^.

Switching platforms will also introduce too many variables and give a distorted picture of how effective (or not) the RDS performs.

[Port]

The “argument” that is compelling me is that everything gets thrust into one sight plain. You can glum your eyes onto your threat, and still see the dot clearly vs trying to focus on the front sight while keeping your target in view and knowing what’s behind/around your target.

That’s huge. Another semi-huge advantage it can give you is better marksmanship out at distance. Now, maybe in town that’s not a big concern, but out in the openness of the Midwestern country, where it’s so open that cover could easily be 50 yards away, that’s comforting.

Good eyes or not, those reasons appeal to me. I’ve been using a red dot as a backup to my scope on my AR since the day I got it. I’m a fan. But at this point it’s still a pretty darn expensive endeavor! Putting a $400 red dot on a 2K AR seems easier to swallow than a $500 pistol lol! Putting it on and having the gun milled kind of feels like a commitment.

[MGW]

I know you’ve tried a couple different pistols. I wonder though, have you reached the peak of your ability with what you have? Is the pistol you have holding you back?

I know that doesn’t really get to the point of the question you are asking but it’s worth consideration. I think if you really want to explore the dot then you should as long as you are clearing defining what you want to accomplish first.

[GJM]

I know you’ve tried a couple different pistols. I wonder though, have you reached the peak of your ability with what you have? Is the pistol you have holding you back?

I know that doesn’t really get to the point of the question you are asking but it’s worth consideration. I think if you really want to explore the dot then you should as long as you are clearing defining what you want to accomplish first.

This is an interesting philosophical discussion.

I think it is safe to say that most shooters are interested in reaching the peak of their shooting ability as opposed to reaching the peak of their ability with a specific platform.

What is harder to know, because it varies by shooter, and varies by different times with the same shooter, is when a hardware change helps and when a hardware change hinders progress. Certainly changing every few days, or within an individual session is going to retard progress. I am not convinced that shooting the same platform for say ten years is the universal answer either.

Another approach is focusing on your progress line as opposed to an exact method. As long as progress continues, I think that means your method is working. My approach lately, which doesn’t mean it is right for someone else, is to shoot one platform exclusively, and dedicate all my effort to that platform, until I decide to change, then throw all my effort into that next thing.

[RevolverRob]

I answered the poll No. But the reason is because I don't trust the tech - not because I don't think there are substantial gains to be had in red-dot pistols. I think there absolutely are, just that the current tech is not sufficiently mature for me to consider switching platforms just for the dot.

When the technology is more mature, I'll revisit. I know a lot of folks are hot and bothered by the Aimpoint Acro as the next generation of pistol-mounted dots. And to be clear the Acro is the next generation. But I have my doubts that the Acro will resolve all of the issues of MRDS optics. If I'm terribly frank, I think the Acro is at best Gen 1.5. It may increase durability, but by virtue of being a tube-type optic is has all the problems inherent with that as well.

I think the future of good, functional, MRDS optics will actually be holographic reticles. They won't suffer bloom, won't suffer washout as much, and by virtue of the way they function, will have closed electronics, while still offering a more open eye-box and lower profile that doesn't effect concealment. The tech just isn't there - yet. But I think it will get there in the next 5-10 years. I look at the progress we've made with Reflex-type sights in the past 6-7 years and I recognize it's been very impressive.

ETA: Also, one component of the next generation of pistol optics will be internal rechargeable batteries that recharged via a USB-C port. Just like we're seeing now with flashlights. Until someone actively incorporates this technology in - we're just pretending to play the game for keeps. An internal rechargeable battery can be placed anywhere within the optic, really freeing up design possibilities (it can also be higher voltage, higher capacity, or lower capacity, but higher voltage). Plus it removes one of the most fickle parts of the MRDS currently, battery replacement drawers/lids and battery connections. If Trijicon wanted to blow everyone away at SHOT they'll drop the RMR Type 3 Rechargeable, close up the emitter, flatten the glass, embiggen the window and boom.

[Duke]

Great input thus far.

For clarity sake - my vision is very good.

I’m not terribly interested in pursuing the competitive aspect of pistols - though the benefits are many. Nearly all of my trigger time focuses on what (for me ) seem my most likely types of pistol deployment.

Like everyone though....I’m looking for an advantage.

[pangloss]

Never "switch" platforms, just add platforms*. For years I only shot Glocks, but the proliferation of cheap, high quality pistols since the 2016 election has broadened my horizons. Right now I am really enjoying a HK P30. If you want to try something, give it a try. The decision is not irrevocable. You might end up losing a few hundred dollars but the learning experience is worth something.

*not to be confused with having a carry rotation.

Sent from my Moto G Play using Tapatalk

[YVK]

Would you adopt or switch platforms to a pistol that you don’t like simply because it is more readily equipped for a red dot than your current/preferred handgun



Yes, not as in "I would" but as in "I have". Glocks aren't most easiest to shoot well but very easy to set with RDS and that's what I've done. Three out of my four Glocks are now have RDS on them, all of them now are carry pieces.
As a secondary benefit, I learned how to shoot Glocks a little better.






Is the dot that much an advantage now that it has aged a few years?


I will say my personal use of these 6 at that time mostly was favorable. I did not find the concept to be as bombproof nor reliable as it was preached by those who marketed them

1. My primary utility for a dot wasn't and isn't an advantage but an incredible teaching tool that it is. There is so much stuff I didn't understand or see until I went this route, it is not even funny.

2. Incidentally, yes, I think it is that much of an advantage but only after certain time investment and skill growth. For me getting the draw down and picking it up at awkward angles were the thresholds. Once I got to the point of hitting a 2 inch dot at 7 yards in 1.2 (PR) to 1.5 (expected average time) from my game rig, I felt that my speed was sufficient enough for any practical use. Once the speed was sufficient, all other benefits such as target focus, shot/miss calling, increased accuracy, and better SOM performance made me reluctant to go back to irons, like maybe ever?

3. I agree they aren't boombrpoof, or as reliable, and some of them are just pitiful. That's why we have backup irons.

[Duelist]

I haven’t played with one that I would invest in yet, so no. When that happens, I will probably put it on a Glock. Or a PX4. So, maybe.

[Bucky]

I voted an emphatic NO!

I went down this path 10 years ago. Wait, what? Yes, except at that time it was laser grips. I wound up moving to guns that were ideal for me, to other guns less ideal, just because a laser sight was made for that platform. LOTS of money spent on that endeavor, and gave up some stuff I wish I could have back.

Ironically, if your current platform does accept a laser grip, that could be an alternate consideration.

[JAD]

. An internal rechargeable battery can be placed anywhere within the optic, really freeing up design possibilities (it can also be higher voltage, higher capacity, or lower capacity, but higher voltage). Plus it removes one of the most fickle parts of the MRDS currently, battery replacement drawers/lids and battery connections.

I would like that, but:
1) secondary batteries have way less energy density than primaries.
2) the optic designer would need to use a shaped pouch rather than a catalog coin cell
3) the optic designer would have to terminate the cell, and the terminations become a non-trivial vulnerability to shock
4) the charge port is a non-trivial space issue and an ingress vulnerability that has to be solved

It’s not a demand from DoD yet that I’ve seen on FBO, but now that you mention it I might do a search later and see if it’s been trod upon. It would have to be funded by government — the consumer market isn’t worth developing stuff like this for.

[JodyH]

I answered the poll No. But the reason is because I don't trust the tech - not because I don't think there are substantial gains to be had in red-dot pistols. I think there absolutely are, just that the current tech is not sufficiently mature for me to consider switching platforms just for the dot.
^^^ This ^^^
My wife uses a RMR on a Walther Q5 for USPSA (she's a very casual shooter and the dot does improve her accuracy).
I tinker around with a RMR as a toy but currently the juice isn't anywhere worth the squeeze for me when it comes to actually trying to live with one 24/7/365.

For example, I was doing "draw to hit" drills on 8" steel plates at 20Y from AIWB with my VP9SK and big fat Night Fision sights.
My average over 20 repetitions was 2.5 seconds (all the first shot hits were right at 2 seconds flat, any plates that took a second or third shot were in the 2.8-3 range).

Even if I was able to shave .25 seconds off that average by increasing my first hit ratio what actual real world gains have I made compared to the negatives that current RMR tech comes with as far as reliability, batteries, target visibility, use in awkward shooting positions and varying light conditions and just general bulk and inconvenience?
None that make a compelling argument in favor of doing anything drastic to make the switch (especially from a platform I was already competent with) to accommodate an RMR in my opinion.

[spinmove_]

Would I adopt or change platforms for the sake of a dot? Depends.

Here’s where I am personally. I don’t currently NEED a dot as my vision has not yet deteriorated to the point of requiring it, but I know that day is coming at some point. Thus I’ve already taken into consideration “is this platform PMO viable” when planning purchases. If it’s not, then I will generally steer clear of those options. It’s actually one of the reasons I decided to go CZ polymer over Beretta 92s in Production. Yes, I know, you can’t have a dot in Production. But you can in Carry Optics and Carry Optics is basically a lack of dots and half empty mags away from being Production. Pretty easy transition if you ask me.

For what I’m competing in, I would strongly like to carry something extremely similar day to day. P-09 in Production? P-07 does nicely on my hip. Was doing a G17 in Production? G19 works nicely EDC.

Most platforms these days are pretty solid. If they’re polymer, they can generally be molded or worked over to fit you better for way less than the cost of the dot and the milling/mounting. That said, why fight hardware when you don’t have to or need to? Make a list of platforms that can host a dot properly. Then distill that list down to what works for you.

So would I switch platforms to use a dot? If the platform I was using couldn’t properly support it and I NEEDED a dot, then yes. But if it CAN support a dot, then why change?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JodyH]

ETA: Also, one component of the next generation of pistol optics will be internal rechargeable batteries that recharged via a USB-C port.
Hey Grandpa... have you ever heard of QI inductive charging?
:p
The heck with plugging in a USB-C, how about just laying your pistol down on the inductive charging pad built into your nightstand and both your RMR and your WML are topped off within a few minutes?
:cool:

[98z28]

There's quite a bit here that I agree with, as usual (I should probably step out of the echo chamber more, but that's a different thread).

I particularly like the suggestion to add a red dot gun rather than switch. All of the carry benefits mentioned are there for the red dot (ease of shooting precisely at distance, single focal plane, etc.), but the trade offs involved make the value proposition of a red dot for carry unclear for most people (value proposition = benefits - costs).

Every red dot available has significant downsides for carry. They have either questionable robustness (Shield, DP Pro, Sig, etc), or they are challenging enough to use that you lose some of the benefits outside of a static range environment (RMR). All have open emitters that can be obstructed, glass that can fog, and a lense design such that any physical obstruction also blocks your backup irons. Heck, just cleaning the daily accumulation of lint off a carry gun optic is necessary in my experience.

In addition, you will probably want to mill a carry gun for the optic, which locks you into that optic on that slide. And from above, there isn't an obvious best choice in optic footprint yet. The general consensus is that all multi-optic solutions (Glock MOS, etc) are sub-par right now for a serious use gun.

All of that said, the training benefits of a red dot are big enough to set aside some ammo budget and acquire a gun with a dot. A laser can achieve similar results, but you can use the dot as a trigger and visual coach at any distance. The laser is limited to closer ranges, changes the grip, and often requires holster modification. Lasers are also less robust than red dots, in my experience. I've lost count of how many CTC grips I've broken in training. I have only killed one red dot, and it was a Vortex.

There are also less obvious costs when switching platforms. If you have a vetted set of guns, you have something very valuable. The last time I switched platforms, I switched to the Sig 320 ahead of Dropgate. I put lots of ammo through a brace of guns verifying function (including magazines), getting sights dialed in, choosing holsters, etc. About the time I was satisfied, Dropgate hit. I was thousands of dollars down a path that I had to abandon.

Manufacturers are always dealing with some kind of issue. When I went looking for a gun to replace the 320, gen 5 Glocks were having issues with trigger bars.

I will wait for an obvious red dot option for carry to emerge before dropping the cash on switching platforms. That assumes that there are no mitigating circumstances such as vision issues, a large hobby budget, etc.

[GJM]

^^^ This ^^^
My wife uses a RMR on a Walther Q5 for USPSA (she's a very casual shooter and the dot does improve her accuracy).
I tinker around with a RMR as a toy but currently the juice isn't anywhere worth the squeeze for me when it comes to actually trying to live with one 24/7/365.

For example, I was doing "draw to hit" drills on 8" steel plates at 20Y from AIWB with my VP9SK and big fat Night Fision sights.
My average over 20 repetitions was 2.5 seconds (all the first shot hits were right at 2 seconds flat, any plates that took a second or third shot were in the 2.8-3 range).

Even if I was able to shave .25 seconds off that average by increasing my first hit ratio what actual real world gains have I made compared to the negatives that current RMR tech comes with as far as reliability, batteries, target visibility, use in awkward shooting positions and varying light conditions and just general bulk and inconvenience?
None that make a compelling argument in favor of doing anything drastic to make the switch (especially from a platform I was already competent with) to accommodate an RMR in my opinion.

Pretty much every PR run I have done is with iron sights. However, I am way more consistent with a dot. Iron sights require interpretation, where a dot is either on the target or not. Except a low sun angle in your face, I find a red dot much easier to use in a range of lighting conditions, especially low light. A red dot is even is usable for me without my glasses or contacts, although it appears about 100 moa. It is also easier to get an exact zero with the red dot.

How do you like those sights on the HK? I would like something orange front with a rear that is rounded and won’t tear me and my shirts up.

[JodyH]

How do you like those sights on the HK? I would like something orange front with a rear that is rounded and won’t tear me and my shirts up.

Started a Night Fision thread (https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?34711-Night-Fision-sights&p=834288#post834288)

[jwperry]

I voted yes.

Beginning of 2018 I switched from P22x series to Glocks because of how easy it was to get into the optics ready platform. After 6 months I found that I still didn't like Glocks, but I saw a huuuuge improvement with my Glock shooting. So, I did what I should have done in the first place and started getting RMRs direct milled onto my Sigs.

Like some other members, my PR for speed based drills (bill drill & el presidente) is still with irons but anything that weighs accuracy > speed my RMR times are faster(super test). My vision is also faulting at arms' length and late last year I picked up my first pair of reading glasses. The RMR has removed the front sight focus issue and subsequent post-handgun shooting headaches I was previously experiencing from transitioning focal planes (target to front sight).

I like the weight, balance and handling characteristics of the PX4 FOW and I'm eager to get one of my PX4 compacts milled for a red dot to see how it works. Otherwise, I'm very happy with my RMR equipped P229s & P226s.

[CCT125US]

Would you adopt or switch platforms to a pistol that you don’t like simply because it is more readily equipped for a red dot than your current/preferred handgun

Is the dot that much an advantage now that it has aged a few years?

At one time I had 6 RMR guns of diffent makes.

I will say my personal use of these 6 at that time mostly was favorable. I did not find the concept to be as bombproof nor reliable as it was preached by those who marketed them

No.

Not in my opinion.

What additional info would you hope to glean from revisiting the concept? Having a knowledge base of 6 prior RMR guns seems fairly solid.

My personal, but very limited experience with RMRs showed me the the tech wasn't right for me. My first run was an RMR06 on a rifle. Very first range trip on an overcast misty day was interrupted because the moisture pooled on the emitter, creating a massive starburst. As in, the gun was exposed for maybe 5 minutes as I set up the target stand and stapled up targets. Pretty bad first impression.

Second trial was the use a a friends RMR G19. The tombstone shape, blue tint, distortion / magnification, and the Tritium suppressor sights, were not a good combination for me at that time.

Most recent experience with a dot was not an RMR but a Holosun HS403GL mounted on a PCC. Dot would not dial properly for W/E, it would jump under recoil. Since replaced under warranty.

My faith in electro sights is pretty low right now.

You may look into borrowing a setup to dip your toes back in.

[GJM]

I voted yes.

Beginning of 2018 I switched from P22x series to Glocks because of how easy it was to get into the optics ready platform. After 6 months I found that I still didn't like Glocks, but I saw a huuuuge improvement with my Glock shooting. So, I did what I should have done in the first place and started getting RMRs direct milled onto my Sigs.

Like some other members, my PR for speed based drills (bill drill & el presidente) is still with irons but anything that weighs accuracy > speed my RMR times are faster(super test). My vision is also faulting at arms' length and late last year I picked up my first pair of reading glasses. The RMR has removed the front sight focus issue and subsequent post-handgun shooting headaches I was previously experiencing from transitioning focal planes (target to front sight).

I like the weight, balance and handling characteristics of the PX4 FOW and I'm eager to get one of my PX4 compacts milled for a red dot to see how it works. Otherwise, I'm very happy with my RMR equipped P229s & P226s.

I was discussing this with Talionis a few days ago, I think there is about a ten percent speed pick up with a DP Pro over an RMR, when shooting multiple targets.

[jwperry]

I was discussing this with Talionis a few days ago, I think there is about a ten percent speed pick up with a DP Pro over an RMR, when shooting multiple targets.

I'm not that fast to begin with. :o
My personal take on the irons vs PMO is that, for me irons were/are faster on the pure speed drills due to my indecision with shooting a dot. With irons, there was a much larger focal object, covering a much larger portion of the target, but with the dot I'm trying to process more and deliver more precision due to the better clarity. All my dots are in the 3MOA range, the larger ones stimulate my astigmatism too much.

[awp_101]

Perhaps there's a middle ground here. If one is looking to have a dot JUST for the trigger control training, etc why not use one of the dovetail mounts and mount it on a spare slide instead of jumping to a whole new platorm? Doesn't even have to be a complete top end, just swap over the barrel and recoil system from your carry or training piece and swap them back when you're done training.

[GJM]

Perhaps there's a middle ground here. If one is looking to have a dot JUST for the trigger control training, etc why not use one of the dovetail mounts and mount it on a spare slide instead of jumping to a whole new platorm? Doesn't even have to be a complete top end, just swap over the barrel and recoil system from your carry or training piece and swap them back when you're done training.

Good suggestion. EGW, as an example, makes a number of dovetail mounts for pistols, including the HK P30/VP9.

[David S.]

Good suggestion. EGW, as an example, makes a number of dovetail mounts for pistols, including the HK P30/VP9.

Do you have any actual experience with these, or know anyone who does? Is this mounting solution harder on optics? Any problem with wandering zero?

Considering it for a P-09 or P30.

[GJM]

Do you have any actual experience with these, or know anyone who does? Is this mounting solution harder on optics? Any problem with wandering zero?

Considering it for a P-09 or P30.

Brian Nelson from TPC uses a dovetail mount with a DP Pro in CO competition. Think it is made by Henning. He thinks it is secure. I have had NO issues with a wandering zero with the DP Pro. The failure mode is loss of the dot.

[David S.]

Brian Nelson from TPC uses a dovetail mount with a DP Pro in CO competition. Think it is made by Henning. He thinks it is secure. I have had NO issues with a wandering zero with the DP Pro. The failure mode is loss of the dot.

Thanks. I just ordered one.

[41magfan]

Even if the technology was better, I wouldn't entertain the notion of using it for personal defense. My vision has gone to the dogs, but I have absolutely no illusions that a RDS is going to positively leverage the outcome of anything meaningful I'm likely to do with a carry gun.

[flyrodr]

Even with all the qualifiers for red dots (evolving, reliability issues, costs, bulk, etc), for myself, yes, I'd adapt my platform. Probably not change, but certainly adapt my preferred pistol. At my age and with my poor vision, I can shoot immensely better groups, perhaps a bit slower in close but considerably faster at distances, with the dot than with irons. Primarily, I shoot a dot-equipped gun with much greater confidence in making good hits. Not a one-size-fits-all solution by any means.

[miller_man]

All of that said, the training benefits of a red dot are big enough to set aside some ammo budget and acquire a gun with a dot. A laser can achieve similar results, but you can use the dot as a trigger and visual coach at any distance.



Good suggestion. EGW, as an example, makes a number of dovetail mounts for pistols, including the HK P30/VP9.


I was going to ask if this really was considered to be good advice or worth it. But, WOW, after looking into EGW, I could easily see myself getting into a super cheap red dot set up just for dry work and light range use/training. I already have a complete p07 slide mostly collecting dust since putting the kadet kit on. That might make one nifty trigger coaching package (22LR slide + red dot slide) to haul to the range to learn from.

[David S.]

That’s what I have in mind. I’ll mill the slide for a defensive gun

[DocGKR]

I voted yes, but fully concur with GJM's comments:


I think it depends.

1) if all you are interested in is self defense today, you are pretty satisfied with your current ability, and your eyes are decent, iron sights are still the reliable choice.

2) if you are interested in accelerating your technical shooting development, a red dot is a major help, even if you carry iron sights.

3) if you plan on doing this for a number of years, then a red dot surely is the future.

[Duke]

Purchased awash with self loathing and confusion

34429

[LOKNLOD]

Purchased awash with self loathing and confusion

34429

That is neither a Beretta nor an HK, dude. Do you need to borrow my avatar?

[Duke]

That is neither a Beretta nor an HK, dude.

Man I have been super sick lately.

Not sure it didn’t get in my head somehow

[Lon]

If I could see better I wouldn’t have jumped on the RDS bandwagon. But my eyes aren’t what they used to be.