Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 28

Thread: Large dot vs small dot and why

  1. #11
    Site Supporter dontshakepandas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    I think your vision can play a big part in this decision.

    My astigmatism can make a 3.25 moa dot on an RMR look quite a bit larger so if I start off with a dot that is already that size there are times where it just appears too large.

    I did find that the 5 moa dot on an SRO worked better for me than the 2.5 moa since the dot was a little cleaner, but I also found that the auto brightness mode on the SRO just didn't work as well for me as the RMR so the bigger dot was almost necessary to see it.

  2. #12
    Site Supporter LOKNLOD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Oklahoma
    I don't think this is too much scope* creep for the question -- where does a small circle functioning like a large dot - a-la-407CO with 8moa ring only - fit into the picture? Some some folks running 32moa ring only?



    *optics pun, ha
    --Josh
    “Formerly we suffered from crimes; now we suffer from laws.” - Tacitus.

  3. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by dontshakepandas View Post
    I think your vision can play a big part in this decision.

    My astigmatism can make a 3.25 moa dot on an RMR look quite a bit larger so if I start off with a dot that is already that size there are times where it just appears too large.

    I did find that the 5 moa dot on an SRO worked better for me than the 2.5 moa since the dot was a little cleaner, but I also found that the auto brightness mode on the SRO just didn't work as well for me as the RMR so the bigger dot was almost necessary to see it.
    Full disclosure: I'm a RDS pistol noob, and have less than a case of ammo worth of real dot experience to draw from. I've shot a variety of dots on rifles for a long time though.

    This is one reason I went with a 3.25 MOA RMR vs the 6 MOA version... if I bloom the dot a bit, it seems bigger. My very slight astigmatism adds to the "bloom" factor a bit, in all but the brightest light conditions. I started out with a decent index, so finding the dot doesn't seem to be an issue for me, and I'm not sure a "circle dot" would help me much. The steadiness of the dot strong hand is good for me. I do see a lot more wobble in my WHO grip, but I'm working on that ( right arm is out of commission due to rotator cuff repair recently). Being able to turn the brightness down and "clean up" the bloom factor, and end up with a smaller aiming point did make zeroing pretty easy, but that isn't super applicable to carry or gun games... you're probably not going to have time to dick with the dot during a stage or in a violent encounter.

    In all reality, I'm sure a 5-6-7 MOA dot is plenty useful for most handgun applications, as its still probably smaller than the width of an iron sight front blade. Shooting very precise shots at longer ranges would probably benefit from the smaller dot sizes... but that isn't a real world consideration for most people. I know I have hit fairly small targets with my rifle (say golf balls), at longer ranges where a 4 MOA dot covers the whole of the target. Center hold and floating the dot where you want the bullet to impact. Instead of trying to see "around" the dot... see "through it" is the best way I can put it into words.

  4. #14
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Upper Michigan
    I much prefer the 3.25 on my RMRs or 2 on my 507s to the 6moa on my 407K.

  5. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Missouri
    I like 5 - 6.5 moa dots for comp & carry.

    To my way of thinking, if I’m truly target focused I want the dot to be obvious.

  6. #16
    Anyone calculated what a .100, .125, .140 and .165 width front sight would translate to in moa?

    With the two moa Holosun dots, I run them in manual so I can bloom the dot and make them appear larger. Having a speck sized dot without an outer ring, like for example 1 moa, means I need to stare at the dot like a first focal reticle on low power. With a larger dot, I can leave the intensity down, look at the target and have the dot come into my vision without looking for it.
    Likes pretty much everything in every caliber.

  7. #17
    Site Supporter CCT125US's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Ohio
    Quote Originally Posted by GJM View Post
    Anyone calculated what a .100, .125, .140 and .165 width front sight would translate to in moa?
    You need the depth of front sight. For me it's 16 inches.


    16/.100 width = 160

    100yds = 3600"

    3600/160 = 22.5 inch at 100yds

    @GRV for math check..

    Or 3600/16 = 225 x .100 = 22.5
    Last edited by CCT125US; 02-05-2021 at 08:14 PM.
    Taking a break from social media.

  8. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by GJM View Post
    Anyone calculated what a .100, .125, .140 and .165 width front sight would translate to in moa?

    This is a spot (6:20 ish) in a Sage Dynamics video, where I remembered seeing a chart of apparent MOA sizes. Of course, the length of ones arms matters...

  9. #19
    I own a pair of type 2 RM06 RMRs and the only difference I can detect between my 3.25 MOA dot and my friends 6.5 MOA dot is the 6.5 bounces around a lot less, but that seems to almost be a non factor when shooting at speed since I'm shooting at the blur anyway. I can't say that I've ever noticed either being easier or harder to pick up but I don't think I paid much attention to it either.

    I still have good vision though and no stickmuhtisms so I wonder if that is a factor as to why I don't really have a preference. That's what drove my friend to the 6.5 MOA dot.

  10. #20
    First, let’s understand that the primary advantage of the red dot is that it allows us to focus on the target. For thousands of years, people have focused on the target/threat when engaging with a bow, spear, rock, sling, whatever. Firearms with sights have only been around ~400-450 years, but we are still wired to focus on the target/threat- which is why iron sights require a lot of training for peak proficiency, and is why RDS’s have a real advantage under pressure.

    I will point out that in the other “target focus” sport I have competed in for the past 35 years, including being a 5 time USA Archery team member representing the nation at World Championships and the World Games, having coached members of the Japanese Olympic Archery team, and having been a technical official for my sport at six Olympic Games, it is a universal truth that when sight pins are used in Olympic archery, the smallest visible pin- when a pin is used- tends to be preferred. This wasn’t the case in the 1970’s up to the early 90’s, when a 1/8” or slightly smaller ball pin on a post was commonly used- but scores have increased 100 points on a 1440 point round since those times, and the wider adoption of smaller pins, starting in the mid/late 1990’s.

    That’s not the only reason for the improvement, but it is a factor.

    What we discovered over those years was that larger pins cause subconscious “peeking” around the pin as the archer attempted to focus on the target impact point, causing execution problems and open groups for a significant percentage of shooters. This is why some shooters use an open ring rather than a pin- a solution that works very well with the round Olympic target face, as the human eye does very well at lining up concentric circles. Mind you there is no rear sight on an Olympic recurve, just a front aperture or pin. A 0.012” fiber optic pin held 34-38 inches from one’s eye aimed on a 12.2 cm 10-ring at 70 meters appears quite small indeed.

    Similarly, compound target shooters (who do have rear sights and magnified scope lenses) tend to prefer the smallest scope dots or pins (fiber optics inlaid into their scope lenses) that they can manage (except some of those with execution problems, some of whom resort to larger dots to obscure the center).

    Similarly, bowhunters tend to prefer the smallest pins they can manage, so they can “pick a spot” on the targeted animal. 0.019” fiber optic pins held at 35 inches from the eye are pretty common in this application- and bowhunting frequently requires very fast target acquisition and shot execution with focus on the target.

    I’ve also been shooting pistols for 30 years, and I would point out that this is one reason bullseye shooters have a 6 o’clock hold, precisely to help avoid the “peeking” phenomenon, whether they realize it or not- combat sighting is not suitable for precision over time, because it can cause the “peek” phenomenon in many shooters.

    The smaller dot lends itself to greater precision than the larger dot, and I do feel that it can lead to better shot execution in a shorter time, at least for some shooters.

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •