SRO false dot with a low sun angle

[EricM]

GJM, do you think there's any chance having backup irons (maybe with a high-vis front sight) would have helped you recognize the situation? Like you subconsciously might pick up on the fact that hey the "dot" is on target but the front sight isn't where it ought to be? [Edit: I hadn't refreshed the page to see Archer's post or your response before hitting submit, so it seems the answer may be no.]

I'm just getting into red dots on pistols so I have not yet experienced this in real life...and the sun is nowhere to be seen here today...so I grabbed a flashlight to experiment. I was easily able to create a false dot with a small flashlight on low at close range. When the light is very close to the sight, I found it interesting that you can see the details of the emitter and orange peel reflector in the red refraction (if that's the proper term). As distance increases, the image rapidly shrinks to a point that looks like a false dot. Below is a quick pic through an SRO. With a brighter flashlight, the effect was easily created across the room. The other sight I had near is a Vortex Venom, and while it also projects a false image of the light, its false image is much dimmer, not tinted red, and could never be confused with the dot. When looking at the two sights from the front and observing the reflection of something like a ceiling light, the SRO reflects that light with a deep ruby red tint, whereas the Venom reflects it as a pale pumpkin orange. Surely Trijicon was aware of the different coatings and their effects, making me think it must be about tradeoffs somewhere, but what benefit of a coating could be worth the severity of the false dot?

Another thing I noticed with the flashlight test is when moving the sight (as in getting a sight picture), the false dot moved in the opposite direction of the real dot and much less rapidly. Have others noticed this in an actual low sun angle situation? If so, perhaps another clue the brain could use to recognize a false dot.

Close range flashlight and SRO:

[EricM]

Taping over the front may or may not help this specific situation with the SRO, because the reflection that creates the false dot comes from the flat emitter window, regardless of tape over the front lens.

Are we certain about this? You have a lot more red dot experience than I do but this was not what I experienced testing with a flashlight, either up close or across the room. I could completely cover up the emitter and it did not affect the false dot. Either the emitter is not the cause, or there are two separate causes of false dots to be concerned with.

[Archer1440]

Standing on flat ground is a different scenario than running, bending and leaning, all the while trying to have the gun up and aimed so you can fire as soon as you enter a position.

I am pretty sure I don’t have to tell you, you aren’t always “standing on flat ground” in a 499. Scrambler, for example. You make a good point though. And one point of difference between us- I do see value in a BUIS to help in alignment, for the real-world “shooting from inconvenient position” issues you touch upon.

Are we certain about this? You have a lot more red dot experience than I do but this was not what I experienced testing with a flashlight, either up close or across the room. I could completely cover up the emitter and it did not affect the false dot. Either the emitter is not the cause, or there are two separate causes of false dots to be concerned with.

I should clarify, the source of the dot in the issue in my class mentioned by Erick was the sun bouncing off the emitter window.

Certainly there could be other causes of false dots, depending upon the lens arrangement, coatings on the lens/lenses, interaction between lens elements and coatings, and angles between other reflecting elements (like emitter windows) and the light source. Single-layer lenses (like the inexpensive polymer lens on a Romeo Zero) might be more or less prone to certain types of false dots vs multi-layer lenses (like that on the SRO). The image you posted is related to refraction in the lens array.

This can be complicated stuff.

[TicTacticalTimmy]

Care to share those tips on refining presentation/index with a dot ? @Archer1440 @Erick Gelhaus

I experienced the same issue (see my post about the holosun 507c in the other thread on this topic) on a gun with BUIS. I dont think checking BUIS is a solution since you don't perceive the BUIS unless your brain perceives something to be wrong with your dot. The issue with false dots is everything looks good to go, even though your aim is crooked.

[THeHumbleMarksman]

Two things. First, I have read on Enos that if you start the match with your lens taped over, you have to finish the match that way to comply with USPSA rules. Second, some people’s eyes have issues with an occluded optic. Sometimes it seems to work for me and sometimes it causes my shots to deflect left. Possibly it is because of a torn retina I suffered five years ago, which messed with my eye dominance, as in certain lighting conditions my left eye will try to take over dominance from my normal right eye. There is one eye test that I struggle with as a result. Of course taping the lens is a competition fix and not practical for duty/EDC.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Eyesquared]

I never thought the SRO double dot would be an issue for me until it was at a Tim Herron class. I used one for maybe 8 months of weekly shooting before I ever saw a double dot, and when I did see it, in dry fire and slow-fire conditions it didn't make any difference. Where it becomes an issue is when you're shooting at a pace where the dot never really stops, because when you're shooting using a red streak for visual confirmation it is a lot harder to distinguish which red streak is real and which isn't, vs determining which dot is real. If you just try to send it anyways, it is easy to shoot misses on a static USPSA target, if you don't you turn a 0.2s split into a 0.5-1s split while you wait for the dots to stabilize and see which one is real. Tape solved the issue and thanks to the clarification from DNROI I have no issue continuing to use the SRO for USPSA.

[backtrail540]

I was hunting today and bored out of my mind. Happened to be in a prime position to see this and decided to experiment. Pretty easy to make it happen. The more acute the angle to the sun, the closer the false dot got to the center of the optic. I run the dot bright but if you didn't i could see how you could confuse them easily, especially at speed.

[HCM]

GJM, do you think there's any chance having backup irons (maybe with a high-vis front sight) would have helped you recognize the situation? Like you subconsciously might pick up on the fact that hey the "dot" is on target but the front sight isn't where it ought to be? [Edit: I hadn't refreshed the page to see Archer's post or your response before hitting submit, so it seems the answer may be no.]

I'm just getting into red dots on pistols so I have not yet experienced this in real life...and the sun is nowhere to be seen here today...so I grabbed a flashlight to experiment. I was easily able to create a false dot with a small flashlight on low at close range. When the light is very close to the sight, I found it interesting that you can see the details of the emitter and orange peel reflector in the red refraction (if that's the proper term). As distance increases, the image rapidly shrinks to a point that looks like a false dot. Below is a quick pic through an SRO. With a brighter flashlight, the effect was easily created across the room. The other sight I had near is a Vortex Venom, and while it also projects a false image of the light, its false image is much dimmer, not tinted red, and could never be confused with the dot. When looking at the two sights from the front and observing the reflection of something like a ceiling light, the SRO reflects that light with a deep ruby red tint, whereas the Venom reflects it as a pale pumpkin orange. Surely Trijicon was aware of the different coatings and their effects, making me think it must be about tradeoffs somewhere, but what benefit of a coating could be worth the severity of the false dot?

Another thing I noticed with the flashlight test is when moving the sight (as in getting a sight picture), the false dot moved in the opposite direction of the real dot and much less rapidly. Have others noticed this in an actual low sun angle situation? If so, perhaps another clue the brain could use to recognize a false dot.

Close range flashlight and SRO:

Using the irons in the way you describe is possible if you have true co-witness irons but it is impractical.

Like using irons to find the dot, it’s slower than simply using irons alone.

Personally, I hate true co-witness irons on pistol RDS. The optic is supposed to be your primary sighting system, IME taking up half the window to have co-witness irons (vs lower 1/3 or lower 1/4) compromises the effectiveness of the optic. At least with rear mounted BUIS.

[Archer1440]

Personally, I hate true co-witness irons on pistol RDS. The optic is supposed to be your primary sighting system, IME taking up half the window to have co-witness irons (vs lower 1/3 or lower 1/4) compromises the effectiveness of the optic. At least with rear mounted BUIS.

Any BUIS solution tall enough to actually provide a full co-witness with an SRO would have “688” stenciled on the side of the front blade...

[HCM]

Any BUIS solution tall enough to actually provide a full co-witness with an SRO would have “688” stenciled on the side of the front blade...

I guess you've never seen the Dawson MOS co-witness sights for the DPP and Cmore / Romeo 3 MAX ? C&H makes an agency sales only MOS plate for the DPP to let the optic sit lower as the required co-witness sights with a standard plate are too tall for available duty holsters.