RDS on a SemiAuto

[Gabe Suarez]

I'm surprised that the two pistols pictured don't start arguing!

http://blog.suarezinternational.com/...we-put-it.html

Rosco

I dunno...a cage fight may be more entertaining.

[Gabe Suarez]

When it gets right down to it, rear BIS position is pretty irrelevant...

I disagree Gary. Most guys find the rear sight as a good visual anchor point to get onto the red dot. Can you run it the other way? Of course you can. Hell, for most civilian CCW problems you could run a bare slide with no sights at all. But if we are talking about the best results in training curve, maintenance of skills from RD and non-RD pistols, it does make a difference.

[ToddG]

Most guys find the rear sight as a good visual anchor point to get onto the red dot.

If I need an "anchor point" to find my aiming point, something is fundamentally wrong with my technique (and priorities).

[Gabe Suarez]

If I need an "anchor point" to find my aiming point, something is fundamentally wrong with my technique (and priorities).

I didn't come her to argue. I will say that -

1). One complaint guys have is they don't find the red dot quickly enough...at least not as fast as their sights. Yes...their draw has not been Leatham-ized, but that is what it is. Those sights are essentially visual anchors, or verifications that the pistol is aligned much in the same way that a stock on the rifle is an anchor point for the face creating uniform position from which to pick up the red dot on a rifle.

You may have perfect technique and be the envy of every tac-guy in a flight suit, but most people may not be that good and actually need something to get them where they need to be. Visually speaking. Rather than simply tell them that there is something fundamentally wrong with their technique, we tell them to do everything they are already doing...which is probably and usually just fine...simply not exercised enough. If they have skill at locating the sights...they also have the ability to quickly get to the dot.

2). If, as one guy said, that the position of the sights is irrelevant, then isn't a position that allows for the shortest training curve/transition time better? One that takes into consideration that which the student has already trained and developed? I would think so. Once the skills are there, you don't need irons to shoot. They are there simply as a just in case thing, and to get instant verification if the zero has changed...or to check for zero after a battery change, or at the outset of the day in the same way one checks chamber and magazine. But for the first time red dot shooter, it will make a difference and having a set up that is similar to what they have already been running makes training them faster and more certain.

Thats it.

Gabe Suarez

[ToddG]

I have no idea what a "Leatham-ized" draw is.

If they have skill at locating the sights...they also have the ability to quickly get to the dot.

I have the former. I absolutely do not have the latter, having tried it with multiple guns and multiple MRDS. More importantly, I have nowhere near the ability to track the dot (since that's not possible given the narrow arc in which it's visible) compared to the front sight in recoil which undeniably means that making accurate aimed follow-up shots takes longer with the MRDS.

I have no dog in the fight about where the rear metallic sight goes, because I don't like MRDS to begin with. However, given DocGKR's very extensive testing (both personally and on an institutional level), I'm inclined to assume it's not too important if he says it's not too important.

One place I think we agree, if I'm reading your post correctly, is that the MRDS has a benefit for poor and mediocre shooters ... which, sadly, make up the vast majority of both private and government folks who carry guns. For folks who aren't going to learn the proper way to get maximum performance out of iron sights, the MRDS gives shooters the ability to make hits as accurately as their trigger control will allow at speeds which are no slower than they'd be with iron sights. All of that with the added benefit of looking at the threat rather than giving any visual (or mental) focus on the front sight at a different focal distance.

For folks who actually have a good grasp of at least fundamental/partial sight tracking and the time/ammo to practice it, it's pretty easy to exceed MRDS performance unless we're talking about slow fire at distance. Though I'd also admit that an exception exists for folks who have deteriorating vision. Better to get the limited performance from a MRDS than to shoot without any precise aiming reference whatsoever.

[DocGKR]

I realize this is a very long thread. There is a benefit to conventional BIS location for beginning RDS shooters; however once a shooter is experienced with slide mounted RDS, the BIS location becomes relatively unimportant. Previously I have written the following on BIS:

"It is critical for a duty/CCW pistol to have a back-up sighting capability, such as BIS or a laser. With BIS, there is never a 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. When first learning to use the RDS, there are some perceived advantages to having the rear BIS behind the RDS (ie. RDS between the rear BIS and ejection port) as it is easy to quickly pick up the irons in the usual manner, resulting in the co-witnessed red dot ending up exactly where it needs to be, so no "hunting" to find the dot occurs. In addition, painting the front sight a bright yellow or lime green aids in quickly finding the front sight and rapidly acquiring the dot. Following numerous repetitions in presenting the RDS equipped pistol, finding the dot becomes much less of an issue and BIS location becomes a relatively moot point. Placing the RDS at the rear edge of the slide with the rear BIS in front of it (ie. BIS between the RDS and ejection port) has its own merits--the view of the RDS is uncluttered, access to rear controls is enabled (especially important on the Leupold Deltapoint and ITI MRDS), less holster modifications may be necessary, and the front edge of the optic is slightly protected by the BIS. In addition, a co-witnessed BIS allows a solid visual reference to ensure the red dot zero has not shifted."

[darkparadox]

Is there a common consensus on the best model of Trijicon RMR for pistol application ?

[SeriousStudent]

Is there a common consensus on the best model of Trijicon RMR for pistol application ?

I'm not Doctor Roberts, but on post 484 of this thread he gave some good recommendations.

My old eyes are looking into an RMR as well.

[DocGKR]

RMR06 is a good bet.

[KevinB]

Gary needs to get a DP Pro

Glock is going to offer slides for it next year (maybe full guns - I did not ask).