Optic Mounted Pistols and Concepts in Application

[spinmove_]

Right, none of which has any fundamental place in reality.

Shooting A zones if vastly different from real life carry and application.

The goals are also different here, the conditions of application are different as well.

For the average CCW citizen the goal is to stop the threat and that may mean having to go to guns after you are on the ground, sprinting a different direction and/or retention shooting. An advantage is not gained by having a dot over irons in any of those very real world possibilities.

Furthermore, while I agree the answer to most issues is "train more" or "do more reps" there is a significant amount of time which has to be devoted to this system in order for the average person to become as proficient as they are with iron sights. That may be different for you than for me, but the idea of spending thousands, if not tens of thousands of reps for something I will only use in a game and is poorly applied to real life carry and application is a huge waste of time to me.

Here is another fact for you, iron sights technology may change one or two more ways in the next 50 years, maybe a glow, color, perfect size, etc. None of that will affect anyone who has done the reps of shooting iron sights. On the other hand next year an RDS tech may come out which may drastically change the way dots are used on pistols. Those who put the time in will either stay with their current system and/or begin to do the reps for the new system, as every adjustment, regardless of how minor, will require more reps and more work to become slightly marginally better than iron sights.

I rather invest my time in iron sights and get better overall with a system which does well, if not better than any other, in this platform at the statistically probable distances of engagement

So, just out of curiosity from a high drag, low speed civilian IT guy such as myself, how does shooting for the A zone (which is mostly high center mass) not indicative to real world application in a defensive situation? Since the dot is a target focused sighting system, how is the dot NOT an advantage if one takes Leatham's advice and simply "float the dot and shoot the shot" at ANY given distance, let alone fairly close where precision is not necessarily required?

I agree that we'll probably yet see some marginal improvements in iron sights for pistols in the near future before dots become ubiquitous, but as long as those improvements are still of notch and post variety, how much "transition time" will there really be in getting used to those new sights? To me that's less than a week of dry fire under normal reps. In general, sights are sights, dots are dots. There's not going to be a ton of difference in how those systems work between iterations.

I get that you don't do competitions and what your reasons are for not doing them. There are also other HSLD dudes that don't do competitions that do run dots with BUIS and recognize the benefits that they give them.

I say all that not to sound snarky or adversarial, but your stance and viewpoints seem to be inverse to what I'm hearing from other people in similar professions that have also put the time in.


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

[voodoo_man]

So, just out of curiosity from a high drag, low speed civilian IT guy such as myself, how does shooting for the A zone (which is mostly high center mass) not indicative to real world application in a defensive situation? Since the dot is a target focused sighting system, how is the dot NOT an advantage if one takes Leatham's advice and simply "float the dot and shoot the shot" at ANY given distance, let alone fairly close where precision is not necessarily required?

I agree that we'll probably yet see some marginal improvements in iron sights for pistols in the near future before dots become ubiquitous, but as long as those improvements are still of notch and post variety, how much "transition time" will there really be in getting used to those new sights? To me that's less than a week of dry fire under normal reps. In general, sights are sights, dots are dots. There's not going to be a ton of difference in how those systems work between iterations.

I get that you don't do competitions and what your reasons are for not doing them. There are also other HSLD dudes that don't do competitions that do run dots with BUIS and recognize the benefits that they give them.

I say all that not to sound snarky or adversarial, but your stance and viewpoints seem to be inverse to what I'm hearing from other people in similar professions that have also put the time in.


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

I do not want to turn this into a competition v real life thread so excuse me if I don't go down that rabbit hole.

The simple answer, as I've already posted twice about as well as in the article, non standard draw positions, varying environmental factors and other aspects where dots offer absolutely no benefit and add a detriment are the issues which can be avoided by simply being proficient with iron sights.

My point was about tech developments was not that there will be a learning curve between iron sight systems, there won't be as the front sight is always going to be in the same place on every pistol. Training that way is easy. The dot may not be, for all we know some company may develop a small dot with an open top which may be mounted forward of the barrel port. That would drastically change the way dots are run and trained with. Iron sights? Not moving anytime soon.

We can sit here and match HSLD guys until we are blue in the face, fact remains the vast majority still default to irons and probably will for a long time to come unless there are very specific reasons for moving to dots. As I stated in the article.

My stance, and viewpoints, are from someone who has enough gun in hand time to understand the requirements of real life application and seeing the very clear gap between systems when applied to reality, especially so for the average CCW citizen. Everyone is different and everyone has their own opinions, I would be doing people a disservice by simply jumping on the bandwagon and saying it's the best thing since sliced bread.

Now understand​ that I have thousands of dollars invested in optic mounted pistols, through variations of setups, dots, holsters, ammo, etc. I gave it a shot through my testing and evaluation process which I use for most items I review or am paid to t&e, the dots didn't do well when compared to irons. The rmr did better than the t1 in some areas and the t1 out performed the rmr in a few areas (specifically distance). These are my experiences, yours may vary, slightly.

[DocGKR]

Once again I will relate what we experienced in our LE service handgun RDS study which began in 2010, the results of which have been reported repeatedly since then:

"Lessons Learned After 5 Years of RDS Use On Service Pistols

For shooters who have difficulty visualizing standard iron sights, a pistol RDS definitely improves hit probability, especially at longer ranges. The use of RDS on all weapon systems (handgun, SMG/PDW, shotgun, rifle) creates a common sight picture across platforms. The RDS allows the shooter to remain fully focused on the threat and not have to transition back to the front sight prior to firing—this is an incredibly SIGNIFICANT factor in the real world!

Under 12-15 yards, conventional iron sights are generally are faster for most shooters; beyond that, a handgun with an RDS is tough to beat. A shooter is doing quite well, if when using a slide mounted RDS equipped handgun, they can EQUAL conventional iron sight performance during rapid fire shooting from around 12 yards and closer.

The real benefits of a pistol with slide mounted RDS occurs at longer ranges, with movement of the shooter or target, and in low light. Shooting at moving targets and when shooting on the move is dramatically easier with an RDS. When engaging a hostile target in a larger open area such as a school, shopping mall, airport, etc... that requires extensive movement and long shots, an RDS offers a substantial advantage over conventional iron sights based on numerous timed and scored practice scenarios. An RDS also offers advantages in reduced light shooting, as an RDS equipped pistol completely eclipses conventional tritium sights for low light shooting and is unsurpassed when using night vision.

Initially the larger 6-8 MOA size red dots were preferred, however, with increased experience using handgun RDS, the smaller 2-4 MOA dot size became more appealing for many shooters, especially for longer range targets. The ability to easily turn the dot off to allow practice with the BIS was appreciated. Likewise having the option to switch from auto intensity to manually adjusting dot brightness to optimize it for different lighting conditions was preferred. Much like with an AR15, awareness of the dot offset from the bore must be maintained at closer ranges under 10 yards or so. A 25 yard zero was used on all handgun RDS, allowing hits from 0-100 yards. Many shooters noted that it took several thousand presentations before they became fully comfortable with rapid target acquisition using the RDS. Almost all shooters quickly achieved large gains in their accuracy scores at 25 yards and farther. (Mounting RDS on inert training pistols like the SIRT can speed-up initial acclimatization to RDS equipped pistols and help new end-users more rapidly develop proficiency.)

Several older officers suffering from middle aged presbyopia had been plagued with steadily diminishing qualification scores over the past several years. After adopting an RDS equipped pistol they noticed a dramatic increase in their scores—some shooting better than they had 25 years earlier.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- For those with vision issues, an RDS equipped handgun can be the answer.
-- For certain specific operational requirements and mission sets, a handgun mounted RDS is an excellent tool, particularly for long range engagements and when using NV.
-- The ability to remain fully focused on the threat and not have to transition back to the front sight prior to shooting is a key advantage of a pistol with RDS for LE use.
-- Slide mounted, reciprocating RDS are harder to shoot and less durable than stationary, frame mounted optics.

If you don't need an RDS, you don't have to use one; on the other hand, those who do use them, find them quite helpful in many respects."

[octagon]

One of the big surprise issue for me has been the vision change with age. I just turned 48 and always had great vision. I tried early red dot slide mounted years ago and thought of it as neat but a bit gimmicky. I thought similarly for long guns as I learned on irons there too but quickly came around on long guns. When my near vision began to degrade a couple years ago enough to need a mild RX reading glasses I didn't have an issue with irons but now I do. i am experimenting with various RX upper glasses and just dominant eye RX lens but both are a crutch I won't have in a real shooting as I don't wear RX glasses except for reading. So I practice with blurry sights too. The red dot I use now to try the system out is to get comparison data to help determine what works for me and when I may need to switch over for the performance advantages.

Deteriorating vision happens with age to all of us. It may be sooner or later for each but maybe learning the dot earlier will be the way to go for more people as the systems improve. That will be an individual choice.

[RJ]

One of the big surprise issue for me has been the vision change with age. I just turned 48 and always had great vision. I tried early red dot slide mounted years ago and thought of it as neat but a bit gimmicky. I thought similarly for long guns as I learned on irons there too but quickly came around on long guns. When my near vision began to degrade a couple years ago enough to need a mild RX reading glasses I didn't have an issue with irons but now I do. i am experimenting with various RX upper glasses and just dominant eye RX lens but both are a crutch I won't have in a real shooting as I don't wear RX glasses except for reading. So I practice with blurry sights too. The red dot I use now to try the system out is to get comparison data to help determine what works for me and when I may need to switch over for the performance advantages.

Deteriorating vision happens with age to all of us. It may be sooner or later for each but maybe learning the dot earlier will be the way to go for more people as the systems improve. That will be an individual choice.

Good point. This is my situation at age 58. In the two environments I'm envisioning shooting (SD, and in training/matches), I'm going to be using my regular steel sights. I'm not able to justify the expense of 'trying' a RDS.

In the scant two USPSA matches I've done so far, my score is by far and away more affected by Mikes and hitting no shoots than any millimetric improvement in accuracy past 15 yards. (Note: I don't want to go into the SD vs. competition deal; this is just the basis for how I shoot.)

Anyway, this is an interesting and educational thread. I have never really used a RDS, except once with @HCM. It was pretty cool to just plop the dot on the target and press.

[voodoo_man]

Good point. This is my situation at age 58. In the two environments I'm envisioning shooting (SD, and in training/matches), I'm going to be using my regular steel sights. I'm not able to justify the expense of 'trying' a RDS.

In the scant two USPSA matches I've done so far, my score is by far and away more affected by Mikes and hitting no shoots than any millimetric improvement in accuracy past 15 yards. (Note: I don't want to go into the SD vs. competition deal; this is just the basis for how I shoot.)

Anyway, this is an interesting and educational thread. I have never really used a RDS, except once with @HCM. It was pretty cool to just plop the dot on the target and press.

If we ever end up in the same class lmk I'll bring both an rmr and a t1 for you to run for it.

Same goes for anyone who wants to run either one at a class I happen to be at.

[GJM]

This vision thing -- if we are lucky, we live long enough to age in our eyes, along with the rest of our body.

I can see the front sight well enough to shoot excellent groups with iron sights in bright daytime conditions. Where I notice the issue, is with fast focal shifts from front sight to target to front sight. Also, in reduced light, that front sight is no longer sharp. For both these situations, the red dot is a game changer for me.

BTW, handing someone a red dot equipped pistol to try, without proper instruction from a skilled red dot shooter, is not likely to end well.

[HCM]

BTW, handing someone a red dot equipped pistol to try, without proper instruction from a skilled red dot shooter, is not likely to end well.

Can you clarify this ^^^^ ?

[HCM]

I don't "need" an RDS yet but I am looking to the future. What will my eyes be like in 20 years ? We all think we are going to age like fine wine but reality is a harsh mistress.

A side benefit is the RDS pistol is a great dry fire tool. You see EXACTLY the effects of grip, presentation and trigger errors, particularly with novices who have not mastered shot calling.

[GJM]

Can you clarify this ^^^^ ?

Sure, for example, you end up with people thinking that shooting 1-3 shots with iron sights, before transitioning to the dot, (which is the dot equivalent of condition three carry) is the way to go. Or, new shooters focusing on dot wiggle, instead of the target. Or trying to stop and stabilize the dot, before breaking the shot on shot one, and wondering why they are slower. I have made most of these mistakes, which has slowed the process of figuring out how to shoot the dot. If someone showed me this stuff five years ago, I would be way far ahead in time and cartridges expended.