Optic Mounted Pistols and Concepts in Application

[voodoo_man]

Decided to put some of my thoughts in an article...

I ran my G19L with a Unity Tactical Atom slide, with an Aimpoint T1 2MOA, at an AMTAC Integrated Combatives class last weekend and a few old lessons became very obvious to me, and I wanted to share them. An AAR will be coming of an AMTAC Integrated Combatives class soon.



During the first parts of the class we shot at close range, 7 yards and in for a variety of drills, this was not a pistol class, rather a combatives class which covers pistol application as a tool. Both days had similar weather which consisted of bright sunshine. I turned the T1 brightness to be compatible with the conditions and ended up around the 10 setting (10 out of 12) which worked for the first day's shooting. When we got to the end of the second day, we all ran the Stress Course, which included various stress-inducing tasks, the shooting portion consisted of several differently sized B-C Steel targets which had to be hit in order to move forward in the stress course. Starting distance was around 35 yards and it gained in distance to around 43-47 yards, second set of targets were between 20-30 yards, then there were several targets as you got closer.

Link to full article -> http://www.vdmsr.com/2017/06/optic-m...ncepts-in.html

[Amurr]

Appreciate the thought provoking write up! Thank you.

I never understand the courtroom argument though. Will I ever need to fire at someone past 25 yards? I don't know. Probably less likely that 7 yards sure. However if at anytime I decide to fire at a target no matter the distance I know I will 100% believe there was a damn good reason for it and I will sort out the court issues later if necessary.

Other wise a lot of good info and thoughts. Nice work.

[voodoo_man]

Appreciate the thought provoking write up! Thank you.

I never understand the courtroom argument though. Will I ever need to fire at someone past 25 yards? I don't know. Probably less likely that 7 yards sure. However if at anytime I decide to fire at a target no matter the distance I know I will 100% believe there was a damn good reason for it and I will sort out the court issues later if necessary.

Otherwise a lot of good info and thoughts. Nice work.

Thanks for reading.

Of course I agree in that particular context, but there is a broader argument which has been made (I know of several local cases, specifically involving LEO's) which factors in distance and recklessness/negligence.

Taking a shot past 25 yards in a heavily wooded area against someone who is shooting at you, yeah probably good go to. Taking a shot past 25 yards in a dense urban area with the backdrop being a sidewalk or row of houses, there may be an argument to be made even if it is a good shoot, especially if that bullet finds its way into someone's house or skips down the block and kills little johnny riding his stolen bike. Better to be accurate than not accurate, and better to have thought out the legal end before getting involved in anything.

[43Under]

Agreed, great article, Voodoo. I'm mostly in agreement with you.

I wrote an article about a year ago outlining my own pistol-mounted RDS experience. After a year or so of using one, I reached the same conclusion and ditched it:

https://civiliangunfighter.wordpress...d-dot-journey/

My intention is not to clog up Voodoo's thread with my own "research", but thought it might be interesting for a few readers here. For people who don't want to read the article, the fast version is that I had one on a G19. But I have another G19, a G17, and a G26. I felt like every time I shot with the G19 with RMR, that was practice away from my other Glocks. Likewise, every time I practiced with the others, then that was practice time away from the RMR. Since I lacked (still do!) the cash to put an RMR on all of my pistols, I decided to drop the RMR.

[voodoo_man]

Agreed, great article, Voodoo. I'm mostly in agreement with you.

I wrote an article about a year ago outlining my own pistol-mounted RDS experience. After a year or so of using one, I reached the same conclusion and ditched it:

https://civiliangunfighter.wordpress...d-dot-journey/

My intention is not to clog up Voodoo's thread with my own "research", but thought it might be interesting for a few readers here. For people who don't want to read the article, the fast version is that I had one on a G19. But I have another G19, a G17, and a G26. I felt like every time I shot with the G19 with RMR, that was practice away from my other Glocks. Likewise, every time I practiced with the others, then that was practice time away from the RMR. Since I lacked (still do!) the cash to put an RMR on all of my pistols, I decided to drop the RMR.

Thanks for reading it.

No clogging at all, this article is posted here for critical, non-negative, peer review (as all concepts should be).

As I stated in the article, and right now I have two Glock's with optics, one with an RMR and one with a T1, I prefer the iron sights of my EDC as they just work better for me, given the amount of time I have already invested in reps and training. Maybe in a few decades when pistols will standardly equipped with essentially fool-proof micro-RDS optics and new shooters will begin to learn directly from that platform this article will be reversed as there will be a new standard developing. Currently, this is the reality of the situation. It would be an interesting test to see if a new shooter would gain competency and accuracy quickly given an optic mounted pistol over iron sights. However, not learning iron sights would probably be a serious handicap more difficult to overcome down the line.

[JCS]

Voodoo how much time have you spent behind a red dot pistol? How much time have you spent dry firing one?

Also have you compared your times/scores for drills and tests that incorporate multiple shots or moving? I'm curious if you have seen a performance increase or decrease when shooting while moving with a dot?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[voodoo_man]

Voodoo how much time have you spent behind a red dot pistol? How much time have you spent dry firing one?

Also have you compared your times/scores for drills and tests that incorporate multiple shots or moving? I'm curious if you have seen a performance increase or decrease when shooting while moving with a dot?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I have devoted less time to an optic mounted pistol than I have with iron sight pistols. I have done a little bit of self discovery with an optic mounted pistol just for familiarization. I have recently started dryfiring more but that is just for training purposes, as in trigger control diagnostics with a laserlyte.

As for drills, I can and have run consistently run drills with irons faster and more accurately, as most drills are run 7 yards and in. The only exception is a times accuracy shoot at a distance of 25+ yards.

I do not do movement the way most here would do it (cab walking). As such I don't use my sights when I move I use the backplate. That's a different topic of discussion tho.

[bravo7]

This has been hashed and rehashed hundreds of times and I am getting somewhat tired of the misinformation that is spread on every forum you visit with your anti RDS campaign. Ok, we get it you don't like it as you've stated countless times. If you perfected your presentation it wouldn't matter if it were irons or an RDS.

[YVK]

From the article

The fact is also that the first two or three shots are done not with the front sights in focus but with the bad guy in focus, only after the initial contact will the rate of fire slow down as the front sights are being picked up (we are talking under a second here for all these shots).

I don't know where that ^^^ comes from, not my area of expertise, but to me it makes a case for a dot, not the irons. If we're shooting first shots with a target focus, then a target focusing aiming system, which is a dot, should be superior.

Otherwise, to me the article points out what we kind of know: we want an RDS with a DPP's window, RMR's autoadjust and Aimpoint's battery life and durability and there isn't anything like it coming in the next decade.

[voodoo_man]

From the article

The fact is also that the first two or three shots are done not with the front sights in focus but with the bad guy in focus, only after the initial contact will the rate of fire slow down as the front sights are being picked up (we are talking under a second here for all these shots).

I don't know where that ^^^ comes from, not my area of expertise, but to me it makes a case for a dot, not the irons. If we're shooting first shots with a target focus, then a target focusing aiming system, which is a dot, should be superior.

Otherwise, to me the article points out what we kind of know: we want an RDS with a DPP's window, RMR's autoadjust and Aimpoint's battery life and durability and there isn't anything like it coming in the next decade.

Right, so at the statically probable distances the vast majority of pistol uses have been recorded which is sub 21 feet iron sights will work better for most people. It is also a distance which requires an RDS to be zeroed at a close range which is directly against the very reason to have an RDS on a pistol to begin with.

Anyone here can be as accurate with irons as with an RDS at 7 yards. Same cannot be said for distances past 25 yards.

If you have already made up your mind, and this is common knowledge for you, that's fine. For most people this isn't common knowledge and it's something which should be heavily considered as it has serious implications for the CCW citizen.