Irons and Red Generational User Question

[IDontDoQuests]

I know this has been done to death. So I am not going to be discussing the pros and cons between the two sighting systems (though I understand that they'll probably still be brought up), but instead posing a user related question. Given that within the try hard community, meaning us, the red dot is considered to be superior in EVERY WAY... Why do many high level shooters, who shoot better than you, me, and many others on here, still use irons? If I'm wrong please correct me, but I know Bob Vogel doesn't care much for dots, neither does Ben Stoeger, Ernest still prefers irons despite using red dots, Gabe White uses irons (and many others). Surely these guys who can wreck the F.A.S.T. or any test/drill for that matter must want to move onto a superior sighting system completely? And yet they don't, they obviously have tried dots, but still continue to prefer and/or use irons (all while remaining superior shooters than MOST of us). Could it be, like those who grew up shooting and using DA/SA revolvers and never switched over to autos, and guys who grew up shooting and using 1911s never switched over to Berettas, and so on and so forth... this is our generation of shooters who are comfortable with their generation's handguns, and don't want to switch over to the next best thing, meaning dots? Or is there some validity to their choices to keep using irons? Lastly, if you have some students, or even speaking about oneself, and you've/they competed with red dots, reached a high level of proficiency with them, but still see themselves/yourself being more comfortable or even doing better with irons, could an argument be made that the person should just stick with irons if they gave red dots an honest to God try, yet still prefer irons at the end of it all? Or should the person continue to strive to be better with red dots since they're supposed to be the superior sighting system and technically there's more potential to be "unlocked" using dots?

The background for why I'm even asking this question; I myself have always been an irons guy, despite being KINDA young, and being introduced to dots when I was 16, I've found myself preferring irons for carry/defensive use, despite reaching M level shooting in CO (GM is right around the corner!). I invested heavily in red dots, competed with them, reached what I personally feel is a decent proficiency with them, and always find myself enjoying and trusting my irons more. I guess, in some way, I want to see if someone can convince me to continue on the red dot path. Also, I'd like to add, I've spoken to many shooters/instructors in person, and many have personally told me that they prefer irons and/or still carry irons for their CCW piece. Naturally they don't advertise this fact since it could lead to people not wanting to take their classes by thinking of them as "outdated", but you'd be surprised just how many "red dot gurus" or modern shooters still prefer or trust irons. Kinda eye opening.

I know this isn't really a right or wrong answer. However, I wanted to hear your thoughts on the matter.

[Clusterfrack]

I feel the same. I prefer iron sights on handguns. I’m enjoying playing in Carry Optics, but do not plan to switch either for competition or carry.

There’s an obvious advantage to RDS for some types of shooting, but I reject that dots are superior to irons in every context.

I have no patience for fooling with battery life, dot zeros, replacing screws, and failed optics.

Fortunately my vision remains excellent for iron sights, and my optometrist says it’s likely to stay that way.

[YVK]

If I'm wrong please correct me, but I know Bob Vogel doesn't care much for dots, neither does Ben Stoeger, Ernest still prefers irons despite using red dots, Gabe White uses irons (and many others).


For competitive shooters, maybe they are better than their competitors in irons divisions but not as good in the dot divisions, choosing the divisions they are more likely to win in?
For defensive instructors, maybe they haven't had a chance to get their dot level commensurate to their irons level? Maybe still don't feel that dot tech is reliable and robust enough?

BTW, I don't think Stoeger doesn't not care for dot. I am pretty sure he took first overall with a dotted Glock in some big match last year, he posts pics of his RDS Glocks regularly. I think he teaches some his clients on them too.



I invested heavily in red dots, competed with them, reached what I personally feel is a decent proficiency with them, and always find myself enjoying and trusting my irons more. I guess, in some way, I want to see if someone can convince me to continue on the red dot path.

If you're trusting the irons more and, even more importantly, enjoying them more, I would just shoot the irons. I can't think of any legit argument to convince you to stick with the dot.

[okie john]

We’re talking about life and death encounters so what you bring to the dance is up to you.

I tried a dot and I liked it. But I have astigmatism so where you see a dot, I see a cluster of grapes. I’m looking at Lasik, etc., but I’m all irons all the time until I can put that together.



Okie John

[MickAK]

Petulance

[JCN]

IDontDoQuests

CO GM here.

By that logic we should all shoot rifles instead of handguns because they’re more objectively more effective tools, until they are not.

You have to define what scope you’re looking at.

Competition division?
High overall?
Carry?
Enjoyment?

If you took a Vogel and Stoeger… and you told them there was no longer a dedicated iron sight division…

They might change their mind on what equipment they use.

But barring that, they might just like the game the way their game is.

For carry? Likely any card carrying M/GM is going to be good enough from a mechanical standpoint that their sighting system won’t likely be the limiting factor in whether they win or lose. Carry is about personal religion and superstition, with most choices being made as a magic talisman choice anyway.

Personally?
I pretty much only shoot dots these days but I can still rock irons on a snub from 25 yards to an A zone.

But I switched to a dot on carry to have better low light resolution and have a redundant sighting system. Irons can also get knocked out of whack so redundancy is nice.

[FNFAN]

I work for an agency that has a very good, but not very progressive firearms program and we're probably more likely to go to being unarmed "coaches" than ever see dot sights on handguns. I've gone to a class where the instructor is a great advocate of the dot sights and does outstanding work with them. For me personally, a monthly match or two; a bare bones draw and dry fire program and an annual pistol class on my dime take up all of the time I have to spare in the realm of firearms skill and maintenance.

[IDontDoQuests]

IDontDoQuests

CO GM here.

By that logic we should all shoot rifles instead of handguns because they’re more objectively more effective tools, until they are not.

You have to define what scope you’re looking at.

Competition division?
High overall?
Carry?
Enjoyment?

If you took a Vogel and Stoeger… and you told them there was no longer a dedicated iron sight division…

They might change their mind on what equipment they use.

But barring that, they might just like the game the way their game is.

For carry? Likely any card carrying M/GM is going to be good enough from a mechanical standpoint that their sighting system won’t likely be the limiting factor in whether they win or lose. Carry is about personal religion and superstition, with most choices being made as a magic talisman choice anyway.

Personally?
I pretty much only shoot dots these days but I can still rock irons on a snub from 25 yards to an A zone.

But I switched to a dot on carry to have better low light resolution and have a redundant sighting system. Irons can also get knocked out of whack so redundancy is nice.

By WHAT and WHO's Logic exactly? I don't know what you're referring to. I posed a question. And made sure not to infer anything with the exception that perhaps people on here consider the dot to be superior (a belief that I will neither confirm or deny).

[IDontDoQuests]

I have no patience for fooling with battery life, dot zeros, replacing screws, and failed optics.

This is one of my bigger reasons for sticking with irons but since it's probably been discussed to death I chose not to bring it up. But you've opened up a can of worms buddy! I've had TWO Trijicon RMR's with wandering zeroes that had to be returned. And they were completely replaced. The replacements HAVE held zero, but it was pretty eye opening nonetheless. To not once, but twice, be in situations where the bullets are hitting all over the place during a range session, and then you check the dots relation to the back up sights and realize the zero has gone haywire. These are sights that had not been knocked around with the exception of the forces from the reciprocating slide mind you. However, I know thousands of shooters have had zero issues with red dots, so I will chalk it up to bad luck. (though I do see a disproportionally high number of reviews from people complaining about broken red dots, and you almost never hear anyone complaining about their irons purchase). That is my continuing allure for irons, the simplicity. But to be fair, I do have to replace the tritium sights every 10-15 years, so there's that.

[MistWolf]

Sometimes you like something because you like it even if it’s not the best tool for the job.

[JCN]

By WHAT and WHO's Logic exactly? I don't know what you're referring to. I posed a question. And made sure not to infer anything with the exception that perhaps people on here consider the dot to be superior (a belief that I will neither confirm or deny).

Easy tiger. I was trying to understand what you were really asking through the block of circular text.

Are you talking superior in performance or enjoyment?

Because the two don't necessarily go together.

I like driving manual transmission cars and would race one in an all manual transmission racing division.

But a good PDK is better performance wise hands down.

I think red dots on pistols will be like red dots on rifles in 15 years.

You'll still have people who compete with lever action rifles in lever action rifle competitions though.

[IDontDoQuests]

Easy tiger. I was trying to understand what you were really asking through the block of circular text.

By WHAT and WHO's Logic exactly? The logic of the "try hard community, meaning us."



I do actually believe that a handgun with a red dot AND FUNCTIONAL BUIS is superior to irons in EVERY WAY.

In another generation when technology keeps improving, irons on pistols will be like irons on rifles currently. You don't see many agencies issuing rifles with irons only, do you?

But some people like irons on rifles at the range and in competition. Some people like manual transmission cars despite that they are worse in performance.

The more succinct way of answering your question about high level shooters using irons... for every iron leaning Stoeger, there is a dot leaning Max Michel. Then you have Grauffel and Sailer who compete with both because they enjoy being versatile.

High level shooters using irons in dedicated iron competition divisions doesn't imply that they think they're higher performing, just that they enjoy them.

I expect in 30 years irons on pistols will be like irons on rifles. Or manual transmission cars. Or maybe even internal combustion vehicles.

How do you live with yourself? Have you been diagnosed with some behavioral disorder? To the other users of this board, is this guy serious? LOL.

[JCN]

How do you live with yourself? Have you been diagnosed with some behavioral disorder? To the other users of this board, is this guy serious? LOL.

Bizarro land man, I'm not serious at all. Do you need more medication for your blood pressure?

[JCN]

How do you live with yourself? Have you been diagnosed with some behavioral disorder? To the other users of this board, is this guy serious? LOL.

Were you trying to justify your love of irons because some high level shooters use them in a dedicated iron divisions?

RU MAD, BRO because I'm saying love doesn't have to follow logic or performance and you can enjoy something that is worse performing as long as everyone else is similarly handicapped?

Even though you were thinking you were being objective, you were asking a question to support your bias.

If pointing that out makes you uncomfortable, I'm not really sorry. That's my behavioral disorder and that's why I'm particularly annoying to a number of people, but very useful to others. That's how I live with (and love) myself.

[Hambo]

How do you live with yourself? Have you been diagnosed with some behavioral disorder? To the other users of this board, is this guy serious? LOL.

The forum has 'ignore user' and 'ignore thread/forum' features.

[psalms144.1]

Without getting into the dick measuring this has turned into, I'm still and irons guy because (a) I haven't found a pistol optic yet that meets my standards for reliability and usability, (b) my near vision is still good, so I can see the irons just fine while my far vision is failing, so being able to make easier 25 yard shots on a fuzzy (i.e. NOT positively identified) target isn't a consideration for me. At close to middle ranges, I can clear a plate rack just as fast, if not faster, with my iron sighted G19 as the one with an SRO (which is a purely gamer optic I'd NEVER carry for serious purposes). Shrink the window size down to RMR/Holosun size, and picking up the dot slows me down even more.

As CF pointed out, batteries fail a lot more often and inconsistently, in my experience, than iron sights get knocked askew. I've had optics from every major manufacturer (except Aimpoint) fail on me unexpectedly, and every one of those has needed factory replacement. The "BUIS" are still there when the dot fails (if you can see through the glass), but they're REALLY hard to find in a hurry.

There's also a cost factor. A quality optic direct milled into a slide costs damn near as much as a base pistol, for, to me, limited gains.

Lastly, I'm a curmudgeon. I carry a single stack 1911 more often than anything else, unless I'm lounging around the house in shorts.

[CCT125US]

At this point in time, I vastly prefer irons. Every single red dot I have used, has failed me in some way. Either mechanically, or visually. I don't trust them personally, however, I understand they work well for plenty of others. I'm happy for them.

[BehindBlueI's]

Given that within the try hard community, meaning us, the red dot is considered to be superior in EVERY WAY...

I think that sentence is the heart of your confusion. I don't think anyone believes that in such a simplistic way as you put it. Even red dot advocates are going to say there is a downside in terms of cost, in terms of complexity of logistics, in terms of size, etc.

There is broad consensus that a dot increases technical performance in most contexts. Is that improvement meaningful? If you have technical skills that are already deep into diminishing returns for defensive encounters, is that extra little bump worth the downsides? When I worked uniform patrol I saw a non-zero amount of incidents were guys had a duty gun and holster packed with mud. Your BUIS are completely useless if your RDS window is obscured by mud, they aren't offset. It snows here. Irons are very weather proof. Dots may or may not be. Irons are very difficult to obscure and very quick to clear if they do get mud or something on them, dots less so. All considerations.

I'm not a competitor but as others have pointed out, equipment changes the division you compete in. Someone can like the technology of top fuel cars and nobody doubts they are the fastest accelarating race cars, but still want to run NASCAR or dirt track. They may already be entrenched in their sport, they may just like their sport more, etc.

So nobody is saying they are superior in EVERY WAY. They are saying they are superior in SOME WAYS, which may or may not be relevant to any given user in any given context.

Signed, Gen X dude who's dot curious and experimenting but still not quite all in.

[Trooper224]

Seems to me, you've decided dots are the ONLY way and you're simply looking for near religious affirmation.

[JCN]

BehindBlueI's

Excellent assessment as always!

Do you think that in time with improved technology, reliable closed emitter optics on handguns could address enough of those issues to become worthwhile?

I think that’s where rifles are at for duty currently but rifle and pistol have different uses.

And while this is like a bad meme, I wonder if someone could integrate offset irons into a pistol slide to overcome mud packing of lenses.

I think closed units with lenses treated with rainx might mitigate a good bit of the issue, maybe cleared with a quick tap or shake of the pistol similar to if there was a glob of mud on your irons. Open emitter you’re fucked though.

[BehindBlueI's]

BehindBlueI's

Excellent assessment as always!

Do you think that in time with improved technology, reliable closed emitter optics on handguns could address enough of those issues to become worthwhile?

I think that’s where rifles are at for duty currently but rifle and pistol have different uses.

And while this is like a bad meme, I wonder if someone could integrate offset irons into a pistol slide to overcome mud packing of lenses.

I think closed units with lenses treated with rainx might mitigate a good bit of the issue, maybe cleared with a quick tap or shake of the pistol similar to if there was a glob of mud on your irons. Open emitter you’re fucked though.

I think they are likely worthwhile now for many users, including many in uniformed patrol, but care must be taken in holster selection and protection of the optic. A hooded holster can already address many of the issues. The gun-bucket-with-a-strap holsters are probably no longer a good idea. I carry concealed now, both on and off duty, so I'd have to be a right mess to get mud under my suit jacket, although of course there could be some Lemony Snicketts Series of Unfortunate Events that lead to me having glass obscured by mud/blood/whatever is available. I'll still likely go to a dot for on duty carry once they are authorized.

I suppose you could incorporate some sort of offsets, although I don't know how that'd work with holsters and if it would be worth it.

I do like the idea of treatments on the glass. Fogging would likely be mitigated as well.

[JCN]

I'll still likely go to a dot for on duty carry once they are authorized.

I suppose you could incorporate some sort of offsets, although I don't know how that'd work with holsters and if it would be worth it.

I do like the idea of treatments on the glass. Fogging would likely be mitigated as well.

It’s one of the ways that gaming can at least give more data that might be applicable to practical use as there are thousands of man hours of inclement weather dot pistol shooting to draw from.

The emitter and open window is the biggest issue for a lot of weather related failures. To the point where I thought about putting a closed emitter on a frame mounted Open gun.

RainX works great and a little shake / tap / blow on it clears the window. Shooting also self-cleans water but that’s not ideal for the first shot.

What I was thinking about irons was like this:

Glock 23 at 7 yards with a barrel laser, sighted using the upper outer corner of the slide as “sights.”

It works very well even out to 15 yards.

77066

77067

I could see that being taught as a “oh fuck my dot window” backup to the BUIS if you have a slab sided gun.

[BehindBlueI's]

Glock 23 at 7 yards with a barrel laser, sighted using the upper outer corner of the slide as “sights.”


We were exposed to using the slide as an aiming tool, but I never used the corners. That's a good thought. I suppose one could incorporate a trench sight into the corner of the slide to make it a bit more precise.

[JCN]

We were exposed to using the slide as an aiming tool, but I never used the corners. That's a good thought. I suppose one could incorporate a trench sight into the corner of the slide to make it a bit more precise.

While it would be gross overkill and engineering to have a backup to a backup to a backup sighting system (as opposed to just carrying a BUG), if I had unlimited resources and was going to overengineer something I’d do a gutter with a fiber optic embedded in the corner.

A simple fiber rod would suffice but if there was space to get fancy, I’ve really enjoyed using these:

77068

Could be put in a corner with the light window for fiber cut in the side of the slide.

[Hambo]

Lastly, I'm a curmudgeon.


Signed, Gen X dude who's dot curious and experimenting but still not quite all in.

-When pistol mounted optics hold up like rifle mounted optics, I'll start looking at them. If they start needing software updates, I'll never consider them.
-I probably shouldn't shoot anyone at 25 yards or farther. It's not the sights, it's how it looks to teh state attorney. There's also the reality that if there are any gunfights in my future, they will likely be at a distance where irons=dots.
-I don't compete at the level I used to, or any other level these days, so there's nothing there.

I get the attraction. If RDS had hit this point twenty years ago, I'd have been on them like a motherfucker.

[HeavyDuty]

I’m 59. I am forcing myself to become more comfortable with RDS, to the point of having a RDS only carry gun in the works (a 26.5 at Battlewerx being milled for a RMRcc) - but I left room for a rear sight to be added if the experiment is a failure. I do believe RDS will become the norm, but I don’t think modern irons only guns will ever completely fade away. For me, it’s a practical issue because as my eyes age the RDS becomes easier to use than irons.

[JCN]

-When pistol mounted optics hold up like rifle mounted optics, I'll start looking at them. If they start needing software updates, I'll never consider them.
-I probably shouldn't shoot anyone at 25 yards or farther. It's not the sights, it's how it looks to teh state attorney. There's also the reality that if there are any gunfights in my future, they will likely be at a distance where irons=dots.
-I don't compete at the level I used to, or any other level these days, so there's nothing there.

I get the attraction. If RDS had hit this point twenty years ago, I'd have been on them like a motherfucker.

I resisted putting a dot on my carry gun for a long time but finally succumbed.

I personally feel that we each have to choose the equipment that best suits our preferences and addresses the types of self defense scenarios we might encounter.

The thing that finally pushed me over the edge was how much performance loss I had with black irons when lighting wasn’t good and the target had poor contrast. Hit confidence suffered quite a bit at speed even within 10 yards.

The dot shines (pun intended) in this kind of scenario as long as you have a good auto-adjust light sensor that doesn’t blind you with intensity.

So thinking that an evening parking structure attack might be a scenario I would want to address, I reluctantly embraced the dot for carry.

[Corse]

-

I get the attraction. If RDS had hit this point twenty years ago, I'd have been on them like a motherfucker.

Pistol mounted red dots from 20yrs ago. CC that thing.


77069


Also, I have been shown techniques, similar using the back of the slide on iron sighted guns, to aim with the body of the optic.

[HeavyDuty]

I went with an RMRcc for this 26 and have a second one waiting for either a 43 or a P365, but I hope that we will see smaller closed emitter sights suitable for CC before much longer. Something like a mini-ACRO. People need to see that there is a balance between window size and concealability, and designs that have minimal or no frame will help that. How that will be done, I have no idea - but the Docter MOS sight was an interesting first attempt:

77070

[Cheap Shot]

My vision at distance is good, but I have Presbyopia. When people talk about front sight focus, I always wonder which one, and why are they all fuzzy?

Ive got an RMR on a gun I use for CCW and USPSA. Its allowed me to continue to "aim". Its failed once in 7ish years. The RMR came loose, I discovered and tightened it when preparing for a class. A couple days later at the class it came loose again. The nstructor ID'd the problem. Awkward:eek:

Sometimes you learn things the hard way. I sighted the gun in shooting offhand during class exercises and drove on. Loctited the @$&?+/ RMR as soon as I got home. Much higher vigilance now monitoring the RMR mount.

[GJM]

Assuming the P2 arrives, and does what we think it will, pretty much all the excuses about red dot mounting and optic failures go away.

[1Rangemaster]

We were exposed to using the slide as an aiming tool, but I never used the corners. That's a good thought. I suppose one could incorporate a trench sight into the corner of the slide to make it a bit more precise.

Erick Gelhaus of GUNSITE posted a succinct article where there were several options for dot failed/irons completely obscured and one must take a shot on a practical target. “Horns” of the RMR, an Aimpoint as a big aperture sight or the silhouette of the slide centered on target. Jim Cirillo wrote about indexing by the revolver cylinder, and that seems to follow.
To the OP: maybe the fast guys like their irons and can see them well. Iron sights won’t be going away anytime soon. I wouldn’t/couldn’t pocket carry or ankle carry with an optic. If you can see your sights well, happy for you, drive on. I am 68 and dots help me maintain some semblance of competence. But I can also pass my state’s back up gun qual with a G26 and BOLD sights.
One other reason irons will be around for awhile: the really good ones are expensive.

[Clusterfrack]

Assuming the P2 arrives, and does what we think it will, pretty much all the excuses about red dot mounting and optic failures go away.

Agreed. But the Acro is BIG. I thought I would carry my P-07 with a WML (TLR8), but with my 31" waist it's just a little less comfortable than the P-07 w/o a WML. So, I end up carrying that a lot more. I suspect that adding a large optic would push it over the edge to too big for me AIWB.

Which brings me to an interesting conclusion: I would rather carry a double-stack compact like the P-07 without WML or RDS than a smaller gun like a G48 with them. Shootability is the reason for that choice.

For field use OWB, no problem adding the ACRO obviously.

[MistWolf]

I think red dots on pistols will be like red dots on rifles in 15 years.

2 - 3 years. We've already passed the tipping point, like a rollercoaster shooting down that first drop with the fuse is lit on the JATO bottles.

Us iron sight guys have less than a year to get up to speed or be left at the gate. During that time, we're gonna see makers of cheap red dots get Darwined out of the game as demand explodes for serious use sights.

That's why I picked up a PDP and pre-ordered an ACRO P2 from Euro Optic.

[Default.mp3]

Us iron sight guys have less than a year to get up to speed or be left at the gate. During that time, we're gonna see makers of cheap red dots get Darwined out of the game as demand explodes for serious use sights.Uh... wouldn't the proliferation of RDS on pistols only drive further development of cheap RDSes on pistols? Most folks don't use their shit for serious use, so they would never spring for a quality RDS; then there's also the question of "what's cheaper than a cop?" that will also drive cheap, shitty RDS sales. Just look at rifle RDSes, plenty of cheap crappy ones out there despite the existence of Aimpoint.

[GJM]

Given the initial post, it is a miracle this thread hasn’t completely gone off the rails. The short answer is no, Vogel, White and Langdon are not dinosaurs, everyone shooting a dot is not an idiot, and nothing is “superior in EVERY WAY...”

With that out of the way, I think the question to ask, is how the benefits of a red dot, like single point aiming, target focus, and low light capability compare to the benefits of iron sights for defensive use of a handgun. That can be an interesting discussion, but at the end of the day, nobody is changing anyone else’s opinion. I will also note that there are two schools of thought:

1) the dot is too expensive, too unreliable, prints too much, takes too frequent battery changes, and is too hard to mount.

2) the dot is my choice, and I will do whatever I have to, to carry a dot equipped pistol.

[PNWTO]

I will also note that there are two schools of thought:

I’d like to add my take/thought(s), which is a little apathetic: I have no doubt that a pistol optic would increase my performance and capability but I’m currently mildly satisfied with my on-demand performance and would prefer to use the time and money necessary for a transition to pursue other experiences in life.

[MistWolf]

Uh... wouldn't the proliferation of RDS on pistols only drive further development of cheap RDSes on pistols? Most folks don't use their shit for serious use, so they would never spring for a quality RDS; then there's also the question of "what's cheaper than a cop?" that will also drive cheap, shitty RDS sales. Just look at rifle RDSes, plenty of cheap crappy ones out there despite the existence of Aimpoint.

Your point is valid. But the really cheap red dots have been falling to the wayside and there are cheap dots that have improved enough that some on this site are willing to to try them and even exchange failed dots with the maker until they get a good one. (I wouldn't recommend this to anyone but I'm not going to rally a crusade either.)

Yes, there will always be cheap RDS sought by Gunshow Bargain Commandos and Mom's Basement Airsoft Warriors, but the lines between cheap, good enough and duty approved are going to grow ever clearer in the coming months.


Given the initial post, it is a miracle this thread hasn’t completely gone off the rails. The short answer is no, Vogel, White and Langdon are not dinosaurs, everyone shooting a dot is not an idiot, and nothing is “superior in EVERY WAY...”

With that out of the way, I think the question to ask, is how the benefits of a red dot, like single point aiming, target focus, and low light capability compare to the benefits of iron sights for defensive use of a handgun. That can be an interesting discussion, but at the end of the day, nobody is changing anyone else’s opinion. I will also note that there are two schools of thought:

1) the dot is too expensive, too unreliable, prints too much, takes too frequent battery changes, and is too hard to mount.

2) the dot is my choice, and I will do whatever I have to, to carry a dot equipped pistol.

There is the third school of thought-

3) Go shoot and find out for yourself.
- a) Irons, red dots and scopes all work.
- b) Familiarize yourself with all three.
- c) Choose what works for you.
- d) Mission drives the gear train.

[BWT]

Assuming the P2 arrives, and does what we think it will, pretty much all the excuses about red dot mounting and optic failures go away.

Agreed - the window / frame will get only better with time too.

I think one distinction in the difference in handguns and rifles.

Rifles are actively held in hands or slung and often kept away from the ground. If someone’s crawling prone they’re going to have the rifle across their back, if they’re walking around, the gun will be exposed to the elements and not heated up (or atleast not appreciably like a pistol RDS) to a point of fogging when brought to the cold. A holster stays in place and is not so much carried as it is attached to a person.

I think this will always be more of a hindrance of the pistol optic versus a rifle. But, carrying a rifle will always be more difficult than a pistol.

I think improvements of all types are inevitable but some things like your body heat on a pistol may just be a bit unavoidable. But! I bet like JCN and others have said - closed emitters and Rain X will offset the difference.

I don’t think RDS are the only way to carry - having put one on a pistol for the first time in the last six months. I do think it’s probably the best improvement we’ve seen in pistols since polymer frames for weight savings and double stack 9’s for capacity. It’s big advantage. Just another incremental improvement IMHO.

[HeavyDuty]

That brings to mind another needed improvement.

Nikon (and I’m sure other photographic and optical companies) have been pushing out new lens coatings that repel spooge and oils. I think I’ve seen them offered on high end eyeglasses, too.

This is something that would be very useful on RDS.

[JCN]

That brings to mind another needed improvement.

Nikon (and I’m sure other photographic and optical companies) have been pushing out new lens coatings that repel spooge and oils. I think I’ve seen them offered on high end eyeglasses, too.

This is something that would be very useful on RDS.

Something something spooge resistant eyeglasses, something something.

Dirty mind wandered off somewhere.

[HeavyDuty]

Something something spooge resistant eyeglasses, something something.

Dirty mind wandered off somewhere.

I can see that, on its face.

[Clusterfrack]

... new lens coatings that repel spooge and oils.


Something something spooge resistant eyeglasses, something something.


I can see that, on its face.


It doesn't matter, JCN! You never dick a guy in the shooter (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oP_Yf87KfaA)! Everyone knows that! Dicking a guy in the shooter!? That's just...that's just weak...I can't believe you, JCN.

[Sal Picante]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8u01q4w-su0

^ my take on this discussion.

[psalms144.1]

All LOUD NOISES aside, my biggest complaint with every single optic I've tried is lack of useable auto adjust. The dots I've used, if turned bright enough to be seen against a light colored background/target in full sunlight, are completely unusable in dim light - the flare washes out the ability to see the target.

The auto adjust models I've tried have either been not responsive enough to rapidly changing light conditions (e.g. moving from well lit/out doors to indoor to dim indoors), or unable to "brighten" when shooting from a dim location at a target that's brightly lit.

When someone fixes this problem, I'll give it another go. If you can put it in a package with a window the size of the SRO, with the durability of an Aimpoint, and battery life that's measured in months, not days, those would be pluses.

[JHC]

I feel the same. I prefer iron sights on handguns. I’m enjoying playing in Carry Optics, but do not plan to switch either for competition or carry.

There’s an obvious advantage to RDS for some types of shooting, but I reject that dots are superior to irons in every context.

I have no patience for fooling with battery life, dot zeros, replacing screws, and failed optics.

Fortunately my vision remains excellent for iron sights, and my optometrist says it’s likely to stay that way.

+1 and the bolded part is #1 for me. I prefer simplicity in weapons and that's not what I'm seeing from the high tempo optic enthusiasts. I totally get the top of the food chain in public sector combatants are leveraging the optics advantages. I ain't them, nor can I drop off any problems with the unit armorer and use the identical 2nd or 3rd spare.

Re the OP, it may well be generational to some extent in my case.

[JHC]

I’d like to add my take/thought(s), which is a little apathetic: I have no doubt that a pistol optic would increase my performance and capability but I’m currently mildly satisfied with my on-demand performance and would prefer to use the time and money necessary for a transition to pursue other experiences in life.

Me too. I think my first use case for an optic one of these days will be for hunting or as a secondary small bag toted PDW (which is a concept that is more appealing to me than an AR pistol, but I don't really need I don't reckon).

[JHC]

For me, it’s a practical issue because as my eyes age the RDS becomes easier to use than irons.

+1 I thought that was me about a year ago, that my vision was hitting critical mass for shit. Then last Fall got double cataract surgeries and I have terrific distance vision and very workable sight pictures. Best in years.

It sounds weird but I wish I'd gotten those cataracts 20 years ago. ;)

[JCN]

All LOUD NOISES aside, my biggest complaint with every single optic I've tried is lack of useable auto adjust. The dots I've used, if turned bright enough to be seen against a light colored background/target in full sunlight, are completely unusable in dim light - the flare washes out the ability to see the target.

The auto adjust models I've tried have either been not responsive enough to rapidly changing light conditions (e.g. moving from well lit/out doors to indoor to dim indoors), or unable to "brighten" when shooting from a dim location at a target that's brightly lit.

When someone fixes this problem, I'll give it another go. If you can put it in a package with a window the size of the SRO, with the durability of an Aimpoint, and battery life that's measured in months, not days, those would be pluses.

As an aside, the best auto light sensors I’ve found are the RMR and the RMSc.

Both have been excellent for me in a variety of lighting conditions.

You do have to take care that the sensor is clean and unobstructed for best performance.

Holosun’s light sensor isn’t very good.

For the extreme case of sitting in darkness and shooting to a bright sunny outside, accurate BUIS are helpful in that case.

[GJM]

As an aside, the best auto light sensors I’ve found are the RMR and the RMSc.

Both have been excellent for me in a variety of lighting conditions.

You do have to take care that the sensor is clean and unobstructed for best performance.

Holosun’s light sensor isn’t very good.

For the extreme case of sitting in darkness and shooting to a bright sunny outside, accurate BUIS are helpful in that case.

Agree on the RMR and RMSc on auto function, although I am more inclined to pick a manual setting and go with it. Neither Aimpoint or Eotech have offered auto on their carbine optics, and that hasn’t held back their proliferation.

[BehindBlueI's]

Agree on the RMR and RMSc on auto function, although I am more inclined to pick a manual setting and go with it. Neither Aimpoint or Eotech have offered auto on their carbine optics, and that hasn’t held back their proliferation.

I don't know the need is as relevant to rifles, though, since using a rifle is seldom a surprise event. For my context, if I have time to get the rifle I have time to turn the dot to 'good enough'. I've had to adjust a few times on a call, notably when a guy was holding himself hostage deep in a dark garage and I was out in the sun taking cover behind a tree. Handguns may not have that luxury. I'm solely using manuals on handguns right now, because I don't trust any automatic to be right, but it's not exactly the same as carbine use in my world.

[GJM]

I don't know the need is as relevant to rifles, though, since using a rifle is seldom a surprise event. For my context, if I have time to get the rifle I have time to turn the dot to 'good enough'. I've had to adjust a few times on a call, notably when a guy was holding himself hostage deep in a dark garage and I was out in the sun taking cover behind a tree. Handguns may not have that luxury. I'm solely using manuals on handguns right now, because I don't trust any automatic to be right, but it's not exactly the same as carbine use in my world.

On the Acro P1, one click down from max is my do all setting. Other than in pitch dark, it is very usable, and even there if you use white light.

[IDontDoQuests]

Were you trying to justify your love of irons because some high level shooters use them in a dedicated iron divisions?

RU MAD, BRO because I'm saying love doesn't have to follow logic or performance and you can enjoy something that is worse performing as long as everyone else is similarly handicapped?

Even though you were thinking you were being objective, you were asking a question to support your bias.

If pointing that out makes you uncomfortable, I'm not really sorry. That's my behavioral disorder and that's why I'm particularly annoying to a number of people, but very useful to others. That's how I live with (and love) myself.

No I don't disagree with you, I actually agree on the information and have zero disagreements there. It's the way you approach people that's unhinged and I was genuinely confused if this was your forum shtick or if that's who you really are lol. FYI some others here think I was being biased towards red dots, some think I was being biased towards irons. Goes to show that depending on your own biases, you can turn my OP into whatever you want it to be.

[IDontDoQuests]

I think that sentence is the heart of your confusion. I don't think anyone believes that in such a simplistic way as you put it. Even red dot advocates are going to say there is a downside in terms of cost, in terms of complexity of logistics, in terms of size, etc.

There is broad consensus that a dot increases technical performance in most contexts. Is that improvement meaningful? If you have technical skills that are already deep into diminishing returns for defensive encounters, is that extra little bump worth the downsides? When I worked uniform patrol I saw a non-zero amount of incidents were guys had a duty gun and holster packed with mud. Your BUIS are completely useless if your RDS window is obscured by mud, they aren't offset. It snows here. Irons are very weather proof. Dots may or may not be. Irons are very difficult to obscure and very quick to clear if they do get mud or something on them, dots less so. All considerations.

I'm not a competitor but as others have pointed out, equipment changes the division you compete in. Someone can like the technology of top fuel cars and nobody doubts they are the fastest accelarating race cars, but still want to run NASCAR or dirt track. They may already be entrenched in their sport, they may just like their sport more, etc.

So nobody is saying they are superior in EVERY WAY. They are saying they are superior in SOME WAYS, which may or may not be relevant to any given user in any given context.

Signed, Gen X dude who's dot curious and experimenting but still not quite all in.

I don't necessarily believe that myself, because I am convinced that durability alone goes to irons, but since I've lurked these forums for years, I know the general consensus here is that red dots are superior and if you say otherwise it devolves into silly arguments of red dots vs irons pros and cons, when I just wanted to discuss more so if some users are better served with sticking with irons. Whether they are, or aren't losing anything important performance wise.

[IDontDoQuests]

All LOUD NOISES aside, my biggest complaint with every single optic I've tried is lack of useable auto adjust. The dots I've used, if turned bright enough to be seen against a light colored background/target in full sunlight, are completely unusable in dim light - the flare washes out the ability to see the target.

The auto adjust models I've tried have either been not responsive enough to rapidly changing light conditions (e.g. moving from well lit/out doors to indoor to dim indoors), or unable to "brighten" when shooting from a dim location at a target that's brightly lit.

When someone fixes this problem, I'll give it another go. If you can put it in a package with a window the size of the SRO, with the durability of an Aimpoint, and battery life that's measured in months, not days, those would be pluses.

Which one have you tried? The Trijicon RMR has worked well for me so far. Perhaps a little washed out in very bright conditions, but works well enough in dark rooms, indoor, and night areas. The Holosun 507c's auto function has been unusable for me, as it's too low for any condition, at least for my eyes (and I have 20/15 vision)

[MickAK]

I'm pretty sure JCN unhingededry is both a forum shtick and who he is, but he's good so whatevs.

To elaborate on the petulance comment, I put a lot of damn work into getting really good with irons and I'm annoyed that something else is better. I know exactly which dots I'm going to switch to, where I'll send the slides to be milled, how often I'll change the screws and so on but damn, it grinds my gears.

Those hours aren't wasted, cowitness is a thing, but hell, that was a lot of effort. Doubt I'm the only one.

[JCN]

I'm pretty sure JCN unhingededry is both a forum shtick and who he is, but he's good so whatevs.

To elaborate on the petulance comment, I put a lot of damn work into getting really good with irons and I'm annoyed that something else is better. I know exactly which dots I'm going to switch to, where I'll send the slides to be milled, how often I'll change the screws and so on but damn, it grinds my gears.

Those hours aren't wasted, cowitness is a thing, but hell, that was a lot of effort. Doubt I'm the only one.

Totally agree. It’s my schtick for recreation and who I am. Solid, well thought out logic and information in posts… but the more insecure the recipient, the more visceral the negative reaction.

MickAK this might not be what you want to hear but getting good with dots might just take your irons to another level (in a good way). It’s such good dry fire practice feedback that you can notice things that were pretty subtle with irons.

It won’t be wasted time at all. You’ll see.

[GJM]

FYI some others here think I was being biased towards red dots, some think I was being biased towards irons. Goes to show that depending on your own biases, you can turn my OP into whatever you want it to be.

In fairness, your initial post in this thread was written in such a way that a careful reader might think that you were looking more for controversy than a thoughtful discussion. There are, of course, other possible explanations for what you wrote.

[MickAK]

Totally agree. It’s my schtick for recreation and who I am. Solid, well thought out logic and information in posts… but the more insecure the recipient, the more visceral the negative reaction.

MickAK this might not be what you want to hear but getting good with dots might just take your irons to another level (in a good way). It’s such good dry fire practice feedback that you can notice things that were pretty subtle with irons.

It won’t be wasted time at all. You’ll see.

That was the first thing I noticed with a dot. That just makes it more annoying though.

The feedback a dot gives you could have been implemented into irons training long before the tech and commercial availability made dots a pretty easy choice. Inertia is a bitch.

[JCN]

That was the first thing I noticed with a dot. That just makes it more annoying though.

The feedback a dot gives you could have been implemented into irons training long before the tech and commercial availability made dots a pretty easy choice. Inertia is a bitch.

Annoyance is just wasted negative energy that could be spent doing positive things.

Doesn’t matter what was, it just matters what is and what will be.

Inertia is like that pillar of salt thing. Just keep looking forward and moving forward.

If you’re good with irons, it won’t take much to translate that over to dots. Because solid mechanics are the fundamentals that vision adds to. That part won’t be wasted at all.

[JCN]

MickAK

If you run into any trouble crossing over to dots and would like some help, I have a pretty good track record of helping iron shooters pick up dots.

https://www.glocktalk.com/threads/jcn-and-trench-sweeper-red-dot-thread.1875458/#post-29942110

I helped my buddy who had failed multiple attempts to “like” dots but was a great iron shooter to appreciate the dot.

77124

77125

Just shoot me a PM if I can help.

[Caballoflaco]

I don't necessarily believe that myself, because I am convinced that durability alone goes to irons, but since I've lurked these forums for years, I know the general consensus here is that red dots are superior and if you say otherwise it devolves into silly arguments of red dots vs irons pros and cons, when I just wanted to discuss more so if some users are better served with sticking with irons. Whether they are, or aren't losing anything important performance wise.

You asked us in the first post to convince you to continue the dot life. What you got were a lot of people giving their personal accounts of why they choose one or the other.

It sounds like you have enough shooting experience to make your own decisions about what sighting system you want to use for either sport or personal protection without asking a four paragraph long question that you didn’t really need to be answered if you just had a little trust in yourself.

[MickAK]

MickAK

If you run into any trouble crossing over to dots and would like some help, I have a pretty good track record of helping iron shooters pick up dots.

https://www.glocktalk.com/threads/jcn-and-trench-sweeper-red-dot-thread.1875458/#post-29942110

I helped my buddy who had failed multiple attempts to “like” dots but was a great iron shooter to appreciate the dot.

Just shoot me a PM if I can help.

I do appreciate it and you're a great addition to the forum despite your first heretical Israeli Carry thread but....

I'm already better with dots. I just hold onto my iron sights from petulance, as mentioned. My last holdout was Alaskan bush conditions would put a dot out of commission but GJM had to be a dick about that too.

I was taught poorly on irons and I had to find my own way through hard work and the help of this forum to get good. It's satisfying to do the work and get the results with irons. That's it.

I think that goes with the theme of the thread. Do you have a reason not to switch or are you looking for a reason?

[JCN]

I was taught poorly on irons and I had to find my own way through hard work and the help of this forum to get good. It's satisfying to do the work and get the results with irons. That's it.

I think that goes with the theme of the thread. Do you have a reason not to switch or are you looking for a reason?

I feel you. I’m the same way about manual transmissions on sports cars for enjoyment. I’ve had some sort of manual transmission daily driver sports car consistently for the last 30 years.