Lets talk Red Dots on handguns

[Podmonkey]

Yes I understand what you’re saying and I agree with you. I’m just saying plans don’t always go as planned and if your red dot isn’t working then what? Yes maybe point and shoot is good enough with your target being in the window of the red dot. I don’t have a pistol red dot so it would be interesting for one of you guys to try it and see how it goes. Shut off the dot and shoot the target in the sight window, sure would be cool to see the outcome.

Well, that's an instance where co-witnessing the irons through the red dot would be handy. It's why I like red dot setups that sit low and it's why that Holosun SCS interests me. Low profile, direct mount that co-witnesses the factory irons.
The factory setup of the P320 RXP also co-witneses the irons.

 

[Saltwater60]

Well, that's an instance where co-witnessing the irons through the red dot would be handy. It's why I like red dot setups that sit low and it's why that Holosun SCS interests me. Low profile, direct mount that co-witnesses the factory irons.
The factory setup of the P320 RXP also co-witneses the irons.

Yes sir and I agree with you.

 

[Beerman]

 

[kemo357]

Robin hasn't posted in a year either.

@Robin is around. I spoke with him.

 

[Will556]

Ken's has plenty of experience but he's stuck in his ways and wrong. The majority of the “complaints” Ken has with red dots are all based around training issues and not true negatives. It mainly him whining that he would need to shoot 101,000 rounds with a red dot to “cancel out what that subconscious mind has programmed in”. He complains dryfire won’t help but thank you have people like Ben Stoeger who literally says that dry firing is one of the best tools out there and has books written about it. I also have no doubt Ben would smoke Ken in a competition. People run red dots on rifles for the same benefits that you receive by running them on pistols. If they truly believed irons is all they need and that red dots have no “pros” to them, then they wouldn’t run optics at all on anything. Red dots allow you to stay completely target focused and no need to be hard front sight focused and leaving you target blurry. You have one focal plane to focus on. The majority of the fastest and accurate pistol shooters run red dots on their pistols. Even some of the best pistol shooters that run irons and red dots, shoot better with their red dot setups. The improvement on the timer and the target itself by only switching from irons to red dots are completely undeniable. It’s not a coincidence that the better shooters run a sighting system that has a finer point of aim which is faster to acquire, instead of purposely choosing to try and stay with irons and keep up with red dots just to say it can be done.

 

[Podmonkey]

Ken's has plenty of experience but he's stuck in his ways and wrong. The majority of the “complaints” Ken has with red dots are all based around training issues and not true negatives. It mainly him whining that he would need to shoot 101,000 rounds with a red dot to “cancel out what that subconscious mind has programmed in”. He complains dryfire won’t help but thank you have people like Ben Stoeger who literally says that dry firing is one of the best tools out there and has books written about it. I also have no doubt Ben would smoke Ken in a competition. People run red dots on rifles for the same benefits that you receive by running them on pistols. If they truly believed irons is all they need and that red dots have no “pros” to them, then they wouldn’t run optics at all on anything. Red dots allow you to stay completely target focused and no need to be hard front sight focused and leaving you target blurry. You have one focal plane to focus on. The majority of the fastest and accurate pistol shooters run red dots on their pistols. Even some of the best pistol shooters that run irons and red dots, shoot better with their red dot setups. The improvement on the timer and the target itself by only switching from irons to red dots are completely undeniable. It’s not a coincidence that the better shooters run a sighting system that has a finer point of aim which is faster to acquire, instead of purposely choosing to try and stay with irons and keep up with red dots just to say it can be done.
View attachment 181762

I think he is right here. I am, as yet, not sold on red dots for CCW. I would have a hard time justifying the extra expense and bulk for a gun that will be used at 10 yards or less.
With my level of ability I am still shooting my G19 w/ irons slightly better than my P320 RXP and that is a compact vs full size.
The only thing the red dot allows me to do is connect with .one range shots out to 75 yards.
However at my current ability at realistic defensive range a red dot offers no real advantage and I prefer the lower bulk and complexity of irons for a CCW. The red dot is fun to mess with at the range.
This could change as I gain experience, at which point I am liking that SCS. I Still shoot Glocks better than anything for some reason.

 

[Will556]

I think he is right here. I am, as yet, not sold on red dots for CCW. I would have a hard time justifying the extra expense and bulk for a gun that will be used at 10 yards or less.
With my level of ability I am still shooting my G19 w/ irons slightly better than my P320 RXP and that is a compact vs full size.
The only thing the red dot allows me to do is connect with .one range shots out to 75 yards.
However at my current ability at realistic defensive range a red dot offers no real advantage and I prefer the lower bulk and complexity of irons for a CCW. The red dot is fun to mess with at the range.
This could change as I gain experience, at which point I am liking that SCS. I Still shoot Glocks better than anything for some reason.

But again you’re comparing monetary and personal training issues…not that red dots don’t have benefits over irons. Just saying I don’t like the expense and bulk of them isn’t a real argument. Train with your red dot more and you’ll shoot it better. And I don’t like the type of statements where people pigeonhole themselves by saying it’ll only ever be shot 10 yards and in…no one knows what situation they’ll end up being in when the time possibly arises. 10yd is not far and pretty much anyone can find themselves in places that easily exceed 10yd all the time (Malls, grocery stores…). Also admitting to shooting Glocks better isn’t gonna be a fair comparison either. Take a Glock 19 w/ irons and one with a red dot…then do a comparison and take monetary value out of it.

 

[Will556]

If irons are just as good or better, when is the last time someone achieved GrandMaster in open division with them? There is absolutely nothing stopping a shooter from entering into open division with irons. They can trick out their race gun with whatever they want, porting, comps, lighter springs, all the bells and whistles they want. If they honestly believed irons were better, they’d run them. Why do you not see GM’s with irons?! The average target distance is usually somewhere around 5-20yd.

 

[Podmonkey]

But again you’re comparing monetary and personal training issues…not that red dots don’t have benefits over irons. Just saying I don’t like the expense and bulk of them isn’t a real argument. Train with your red dot more and you’ll shoot it better. And I don’t like the type of statements where people pigeonhole themselves by saying it’ll only ever be shot 10 yards and in…no one knows what situation they’ll end up being in when the time possibly arises. 10yd is not far and pretty much anyone can find themselves in places that easily exceed 10yd all the time (Malls, grocery stores…). Also admitting to shooting Glocks better isn’t gonna be a fair comparison either. Take a Glock 19 w/ irons and one with a red dot…then do a comparison and take monetary value out of it.

If irons are just as good or better, when is the last time someone achieved GrandMaster in open division with them? There is absolutely nothing stopping a shooter from entering into open division with irons. They can trick out their race gun with whatever they want, porting, comps, lighter springs, all the bells and whistles they want. If they honestly believed irons were better, they’d run them. Why do you not see GM’s with irons?! The average target distance is usually somewhere around 5-20yd.

You are missing the point, most people are not grandmaster shooters. Most people don't compete at all. Hell most shooters go through less than a case a year. The point of the video is that a red dot on a pistol is of value primarily to those with lots of practice with one.
For the price of a decent red dot one could purchase a case of ammo and the value of that is greater. Now that is a temporary, correctable situation, however let's not put the cart before the horse.
As for pigeon holeing, let's be honest the odds one will actually fire a gun are slim, the chances that it will be a long range shot are a fraction of a fraction of a chance and the chance that the a red dot will have made the difference is vanishing.
It's not a matter of irons vs red dots being better, red dots have the advantage. It's a question of whether a red dot offers as much value, in terms of capability as a case of ammo for most shooters.
And there is always the issue of bulk and complexity. Handguns are an item of convenience and infrequent need. They sit in a holster passively to be called on in an instant in a chaotic circumstance, the KISS principal applies.
For cops it's a little different. An officer carries openly and is more likely to use a handgun and in more varied circumstances in which high degrees of precision are likely to be necessary. I think for LE use red dots are a bit more relevant.

 

[Will556]

You are missing the point, most people are not grandmaster shooters. Most people don't compete at all. Hell most shooters go through less than a case a year. The point of the video is that a red dot on a pistol is of value primarily to those with lots of practice with one.
For the price of a decent red dot one could purchase a case of ammo and the value of that is greater. Now that is a temporary, correctable situation, however let's not put the cart before the horse.
As for pigeon holeing, let's be honest the odds one will actually fire a gun are slim, the chances that it will be a long range shot are a fraction of a fraction of a chance and the chance that the a red dot will have made the difference is vanishing.
It's not a matter of irons vs red dots being better, red dots have the advantage. It's a question of whether a red dot offers as much value, in terms of capability as a case of ammo for most shooters.
And there is always the issue of bulk and complexity. Handguns are an item of convenience and infrequent need. They sit in a holster passively to be called on in an instant in a chaotic circumstance, the KISS principal applies.
For cops it's a little different. An officer carries openly and is more likely to use a handgun and in more varied circumstances in which high degrees of precision are likely to be necessary. I think for LE use red dots are a bit more relevant.

But then Ken and yourself are contradicting yourselves because with his own philosophy and words he states “I’m convinced new shooters, somebody new to shooting will pick up using a red dot much faster” but you are saying “The point of the video is that a red dot on a pistol is of value primarily to those with lots of practice with one.” His issues are only based off of him complaining that he’s been shooting irons for so long comparatively.

Just because everyone isn’t a Grandmaster shooter doesn’t mean that the information and results based off of them doesn’t hold weight. The benefits of red dots for the best shooters in the world are the same for the regular Joe, the GM’s are just better at it. So might as well take the advantage of it and learn to excel at it.

Also having someone shoot a 1000rd case of ammo and comparing it to someone with a red dot who doesn’t shoot a case of ammo are not the same at all. A fair comparison would be someone with a red dot and someone with irons running through the same amount of ammo. Then at the end see who’s shooting better. If this was done on a larger scale with more shooters, I have no doubt the ones with red dots would be scoring higher. And with Ken’s own words admitting new shooters pick up red dots quicker…he himself is admitting that the red dots would be winning that competition too.

I also argue the “complexity” argument you’re presenting. What’s more complex? Seeing your target and just superimposing a dot over it? Or…Seeing your target, aligning a front sight in between the rear sight equally by width and height, then hard focusing on front sight making your target blurry?

The additional “bulk” I don’t see as an issue either. Where is a red dot really preventing anyone from carrying one on the pistol? Maybe a tiny pocket pistol makes it difficult to impossible to make it fit that size, but on sub-compact and up…it’s not that much harder to conceal at all.

 

[Podmonkey]

But then Ken and yourself are contradicting yourselves because with his own philosophy and words he states “I’m convinced new shooters, somebody new to shooting will pick up using a red dot much faster” but you are saying “The point of the video is that a red dot on a pistol is of value primarily to those with lots of practice with one.” His issues are only based off of him complaining that he’s been shooting irons for so long comparatively.

Just because everyone isn’t a Grandmaster shooter doesn’t mean that the information and results based off of them doesn’t hold weight. The benefits of red dots for the best shooters in the world are the same for the regular Joe, the GM’s are just better at it. So might as well take the advantage of it and learn to excel at it.

Also having someone shoot a 1000rd case of ammo and comparing it to someone with a red dot who doesn’t shoot a case of ammo are not the same at all. A fair comparison would be someone with a red dot and someone with irons running through the same amount of ammo. Then at the end see who’s shooting better. If this was done on a larger scale with more shooters, I have no doubt the ones with red dots would be scoring higher. And with Ken’s own words admitting new shooters pick up red dots quicker…he himself is admitting that the red dots would be winning that competition too.

I also argue the “complexity” argument you’re presenting. What’s more complex? Seeing your target and just superimposing a dot over it? Or…Seeing your target, aligning a front sight in between the rear sight equally by width and height, then hard focusing on front sight making your target blurry?

The additional “bulk” I don’t see as an issue either. Where is a red dot really preventing anyone from carrying one on the pistol? Maybe a tiny pocket pistol makes it difficult to impossible to make it fit that size, but on sub-compact and up…it’s not that much harder to conceal at all.

I guess ultimately the point here is that red dots are not the ultimate necessity. They can confer advantages but for pistols are not the universal sighting system like on a rifle, you can do fine with irons.
As for bulk, we'll as I say I really like that SCS and for a compact like a Glock 19 I could see myself carrying one. However I will never put a red dot on my Shield as the whole point of that gun is to have something as small and simple as is practical for point blank defensive use.
Part of my problem with pistol red dots is the clumsy integration of them. I hate the idea of mounting plates and high mounted sights. I also think an electronic device on a rapidly reciprocating slide is sub optimal. I hope more direct mount options like the SCS become available and ultimately I'd like to see pistol designs evolve beyond the reciprocating slide along with more efficient integration of electronic sights. One of the things I really like about the P320 RXP is that the sight is mounted directly to the slide.
I imagine as I continue to get trigger time on the P320 my opinions will change but for now I am not planning to put a red dot on every handgun I own.

Oh, and as for the complexity part, I am referring to multiple things, batteries for one. Batteries need to be replaced, they can fail, short ect. Also mounting plates, it's an extra thing sitting between the pistol and the other extra thing that is the red dot itself. Also red dots are themselves an additional complication. It's different for rifles which are a primary weapon and something that is only going to be carried if you expect to use, or at least anticipate an urgent need for. A handgun is just an EDC item you carry, it's just there. Ideally it's something you'd like to be able to largely ignore and not have to do much with........... it shows that I am more of a rifle guy than a handgunner huh?

In summation my argument is that stuff is a pain in the ass, extra stuff is more of a pain in the ass and electronic stuff even more yet.
I want my carry gun to be the smallest pain in the ass as possible.

 

[Defilade]

I guess ultimately the point here is that red dots are not the ultimate necessity. They can confer advantages but for pistols are not the universal sighting system like on a rifle, you can do fine with irons.
As for bulk, we'll as I say I really like that SCS and for a compact like a Glock 19 I could see myself carrying one. However I will never put a red dot on my Shield as the whole point of that gun is to have something as small and simple as is practical for point blank defensive use.
Part of my problem with pistol red dots is the clumsy integration of them. I hate the idea of mounting plates and high mounted sights. I also think an electronic device on a rapidly reciprocating slide is sub optimal. I hope more direct mount options like the SCS become available and ultimately I'd like to see pistol designs evolve beyond the reciprocating slide along with more efficient integration of electronic sights. One of the things I really like about the P320 RXP is that the sight is mounted directly to the slide.
I imagine as I continue to get trigger time on the P320 my opinions will change but for now I am not planning to put a red dot on every handgun I own.

Oh, and as for the complexity part, I am referring to multiple things, batteries for one. Batteries need to be replaced, they can fail, short ect. Also mounting plates, it's an extra thing sitting between the pistol and the other extra thing that is the red dot itself. Also red dots are themselves an additional complication. It's different for rifles which are a primary weapon and something that is only going to be carried if you expect to use, or at least anticipate an urgent need for. A handgun is just an EDC item you carry, it's just there. Ideally it's something you'd like to be able to largely ignore and not have to do much with........... it shows that I am more of a rifle guy than a handgunner huh?

In summation my argument is that stuff is a pain in the ass, extra stuff is more of a pain in the ass and electronic stuff even more yet.
I want my carry gun to be the smallest pain in the ass as possible.

Did you just say. "Keep it simple stupid"? Lol

 

[Podmonkey]

Did you just say. "Keep it simple stupid"? Lol

..........um...yes?

 

[Will556]

I guess ultimately the point here is that red dots are not the ultimate necessity. They can confer advantages but for pistols are not the universal sighting system like on a rifle, you can do fine with irons.
As for bulk, we'll as I say I really like that SCS and for a compact like a Glock 19 I could see myself carrying one. However I will never put a red dot on my Shield as the whole point of that gun is to have something as small and simple as is practical for point blank defensive use.
Part of my problem with pistol red dots is the clumsy integration of them. I hate the idea of mounting plates and high mounted sights. I also think an electronic device on a rapidly reciprocating slide is sub optimal. I hope more direct mount options like the SCS become available and ultimately I'd like to see pistol designs evolve beyond the reciprocating slide along with more efficient integration of electronic sights. One of the things I really like about the P320 RXP is that the sight is mounted directly to the slide.
I imagine as I continue to get trigger time on the P320 my opinions will change but for now I am not planning to put a red dot on every handgun I own.

Oh, and as for the complexity part, I am referring to multiple things, batteries for one. Batteries need to be replaced, they can fail, short ect. Also mounting plates, it's an extra thing sitting between the pistol and the other extra thing that is the red dot itself. Also red dots are themselves an additional complication. It's different for rifles which are a primary weapon and something that is only going to be carried if you expect to use, or at least anticipate an urgent need for. A handgun is just an EDC item you carry, it's just there. Ideally it's something you'd like to be able to largely ignore and not have to do much with........... it shows that I am more of a rifle guy than a handgunner huh?

In summation my argument is that stuff is a pain in the ass, extra stuff is more of a pain in the ass and electronic stuff even more yet.
I want my carry gun to be the smallest pain in the ass as possible.

I never said the red dots are a necessity, but there is no denying they 100% have pro’s over irons. The numbers and stats are quantified and have been proven time and time again that red dots have a finer point of aim and are quicker. Like you said “you can do fine with irons”, but why settle one “fine” when you can do better with red dots.

People act as if red dots are some new invention that’s just coming around and the technology isn’t there and they don’t have enough R&D/T&E to trust them. Electronic red dots have been around for about half a century when Aimpoint created the first electronic red dot back in 1974/1975. That’s not counting when that same style of shooting was used when utilizing the Normark Singlepoint EOG which utilized a fiber optic red dot which was created in the 60’s and used back during the Vietnam War.

You also mention how you dislike how they are mounted and don’t like high mounted optics. How much higher is the middle of the window/reticle of a red dot over irons on a pistol? It’s really not that much higher…it’ll obviously going to be different depending on which optic is chosen but it’s gonna be around +/- .5” of an increase of height over bore, that’s it. And if that’s installed on a Glock, that’s probably much closer to the factory height over bore of say a factory XD or even an Sig which has a higher bore axis anyway.

As for optics needing batteries to be replaced, sure they do. But everything needs to be replaced at some point or another, barrels, firing pins, extractors, springs, bolts…just because parts will eventually need replacing doesn’t stop people from using their guns. Having optics that run on batteries on rifles doesn’t stop people from utilizing them either, so it shouldn’t stop them from using them on pistols. That’s just a maintenance issue, change your batteries periodically and it’s a non-issue.

You also bring up direct mounting optics as if they haven’t been an option. Direct mounting optics has been around forever. There’s nothing stopping people from having their slide milled for an optic and having it directly mounted to their slide, which lowers the height over bore as well. Not that it’s a huge amount either way. A slide milled to mount a Trijicon RMR to it is only milled down to about a .125” depth, which is like 1/3rd the diameter of a 9mm to begin with. You wouldn’t even notice that difference much on paper shooting a direct milled vs. adapter plate. Which even using an optic on an adapter plate is lower than most USPSA race guns which have their optics mounted even higher and it sure doesn’t seem to stop them from shooting extremely well. People will argue how they don’t like how their pistol red dot sits .125” higher on a plate but at the same time have no problems running a red dot on top of a Unity 2.26” FAST Riser on their AR. It all comes down to training and knowing how your guns perform.

As for the adapter plates, there are solid options out there like Agency AOS, or going with a single plate option like the FCD OPF-G. Don’t use crappy plates like the factory MOS plates and make sure it’s installed correctly. Correct tools like an in-lb torque wrench, degreasing all threads, and using proper liquid fasteners will be good to go. People throw parts on guns that have specific specs and then they disregard them. They give it an ugga-dugga by hand and then are surprised when their parts fail.

One of the benefits of having a reciprocating slide on a pistol is helps remove any debris that might have found itself on the lenses (especially if it’s an open emitter), unlike a rifle. Where on a rifle, if you have debris on your optics it’s staying there until you physically remove it yourself usually. This is one of the main reasons enclosed emitters are what everyone is turning to. No chance of debris occluding the emitter down inside an optic if it’s completely enclosed.

Another disagreement I have is you saying “It's different for rifles which are a primary weapon and something that is only going to be carried if you expect to use”. If you’re carry a handgun on you when you go out, you should already expect to use it if you ever need to, that’s the point of having it. 99.99999% of people aren’t going about their day with a long gun slung around them which is going to be their first option. The weapon you currently have IS you primary weapon. So If you’re going about your day and you carry your handgun with you everyday, then that pistol is your primary weapon…not your rifle that’s most likely sitting in your safe at home. Even if you have an AR in your vehicle, if you’re not using it at the time it’s not your primary because it’s out of the equation and is completely worthless at the time.

 

[Beerman]

Keep in mind that taller sights, so that you can cowitness the irons with the dot (green is best, ha!) can frequently occlude/impede/block/interfere with each other, making a mess out of things. On a handgun, pick a method that YOU like, and run it. Be safe out there!

 

[Will556]

Keep in mind that taller sights, so that you can cowitness the irons with the dot (green is best, ha!) can frequently occlude/impede/block/interfere with each other, making a mess out of things. On a handgun, pick a method that YOU like, and run it. Be safe out there!

The way around that is moving the rear irons forward. For me, that’s my preferred setup. With the rear irons in front of the optic, you’ll never occlude the reticle with them. You so shorten the irons sights radius by doing so but the optic is you primary aiming setup anyway, and might as well make your primary aiming setup better. Besides shortening the irons sight radius is still completely usable. If using the irons forward method, you pretty much make the sights radius of a 17 down to a 19. A 19 down to a 26, and so on…

 

[Beerman]

The way around that is moving the rear irons forward. For me, that’s my preferred setup. With the rear irons in front of the optic, you’ll never occlude the reticle with them. You so shorten the irons sights radius by doing so but the optic is you primary aiming setup anyway, and might as well make your primary aiming setup better. Besides shortening the irons sight radius is still completely usable. If using the irons forward method, you pretty much make the sights radius of a 17 down to a 19. A 19 down to a 26, and so on…

My dot is my only aiming setup. The rear sight is removed on a 365X when you take the factory cut plate off to mount a dot in its place. Rear sight is attached to that plate, do no more rear sight.

 

[Defilade]

I wonder is this pertains to Handgun also, Anyone tried this??

 

[Drinkthekoolaid]

<--- late to the party guy.

Anyway I finally got my hands on a pistol with a red dot. It was a sig 320 rxp with a factory installed Romeo.

I liked it. However when I was naturally bring up a presentation I was having a hard time finding the dot. I don't know if it was because the grip angle being more vertical than I am used to or something else. I was consistently presenting the muzzle low so the red dot was not in my sight picture I had to constantly remind myself to present high so the red dot would be visible.

Can you relatively easily train yourself for a subconscious change in presentation and to pickup the red dot?

Fwiw I really think I would like a red dot if I get used to it.

 

[Will556]

<--- late to the party guy.

Anyway I finally got my hands on a pistol with a red dot. It was a sig 320 rxp with a factory installed Romeo.

I liked it. However when I was naturally bring up a presentation I was having a hard time finding the dot. I don't know if it was because the grip angle being more vertical than I am used to or something else. I was consistently presenting the muzzle low so the red dot was not in my sight picture I had to constantly remind myself to present high so the red dot would be visible.

Can you relatively easily train yourself for a subconscious change in presentation and to pickup the red dot?

Fwiw I really think I would like a red dot if I get used to it.

It all comes down to taking the time to get the reps in and build the memory. Once you have it you’re good to go. You have more leeway with picking up the dot in a window than you do with perfectly aligning irons. One of the nice things with quality red dots is there is no/minimal parallax. Say you don’t get the perfect draw or didn’t build a 100% solid grip right away, but during your presentation you pick up the dot in the left, right, top, or bottom of the window…it doesn’t matter. The round is going where that dot is as long as you do your part.

You don’t really get that ability with irons. If you draw and you’re slightly to the left, right, high, or low…your irons look off and you can’t tell exactly where that round would go until you completely align the irons.

And if you think about it, picking up the dot shouldn’t be that hard. Your dot is going to be relatively very close to the where you irons line up (unless your irons are completely F’d up and not correct for the gun to begin with). So if you can draw and line up your irons without an issue, you’ll find the dot there as well. Once you get that, you’ll realize you have more room in the window to pick up the dot earlier and much quicker than irons.

 

[togmaster]

When you index the gun properly the dot is there. Using a dot will show you everything you've been doing wrong in the past. People freak out when they can't find the dot right away and go back to irons without putting it any effort. Working on a consistent grip and draw will make you a better shooter and the dot will force you to it.

 

[Phazer]

Can you relatively easily train yourself for a subconscious change in presentation and to pickup the red dot?

ABSOLUTELY!

Plus, training with the proper presentation technique for a red dot will also make iron sight acquisition faster.

 

[Will556]

View attachment FullSizeRender.MOV

 

[RedBreast21]

It's the latest trend and a new trend will replace it.

I could get into a long diatribe of pro's and con's, situations and such but I won't. There isn't a one size fits all/most solution to rapid consistent engagement with a handgun. I'm sure there is already heated debates on this topic. What isn't in dispute is constant reps, reps, reps, reps, reps. Thousand of them.

I will say that if you are one of those people who carry a firearm for self defense, there are a reality checks you will have to contend with ahead of any unfortunate situation.

1) When the decision is made to draw your weapon in the face of a threat, you're already behind the power curve with a lot of ground to make up.

2) Body alarm response. Is asking your brain in that moment to take your eyes off the threat and find a dot asking a bit much? For context, stop your knee from reacting when the doctor checks your reflexes.

If your still hard headed and live in Hollywood movie land then don't do this.

Strip down to shorts and safety glasses. Stand off against a buddy at 5 yards, airsoft pistols in hand and shoot at each other when the first one raises their airsoft pistol. That's your reality check. That shit hurts. Even if you are brave enough to take the first few hits for science, you will suddenly change the way you engage. You will not be able to tell anyone what your 1st, 2nd or 3rd sight picture was. lol

If you haven't done that, which IMHO would be the bare minimum of experience for which to comment on, don't comment until you have. lol

 

[Will556]

It's the latest trend and a new trend will replace it.

I could get into a long diatribe of pro's and con's, situations and such but I won't. There isn't a one size fits all/most solution to rapid consistent engagement with a handgun. I'm sure there is already heated debates on this topic. What isn't in dispute is constant reps, reps, reps, reps, reps. Thousand of them.

I will say that if you are one of those people who carry a firearm for self defense, there are a reality checks you will have to contend with ahead of any unfortunate situation.

1) When the decision is made to draw your weapon in the face of a threat, you're already behind the power curve with a lot of ground to make up.

2) Body alarm response. Is asking your brain in that moment to take your eyes off the threat and find a dot asking a bit much? For context, stop your knee from reacting when the doctor checks your reflexes.

If your still hard headed and live in Hollywood movie land then don't do this.

Strip down to shorts and safety glasses. Stand off against a buddy at 5 yards, airsoft pistols in hand and shoot at each other when the first one raises their airsoft pistol. That's your reality check. That shit hurts. Even if you are brave enough to take the first few hits for science, you will suddenly change the way you engage. You will not be able to tell anyone what your 1st, 2nd or 3rd sight picture was. lol

If you haven't done that, which IMHO would be the bare minimum of experience for which to comment on, don't comment until you have. lol

“Is asking your brain in that moment to take your eyes off the threat and find a dot asking a bit much?” this concept is wrong. You don’t have to ask your brain to take your eyes off of the target. That’s the great thing of red dots, it creates a single focal plane to focus on. You look at the target and superimpose the dot over it. Unlike irons which is a triple focal plane setup where you have to focus on the irons to align them. Sure standing at 3,5, or 7yd you can shoot that all day long with no sights, and hit a target but that’s not the point of it. Out of the two systems the red dot is a simpler and easier concept and less for your brain to figure out.

Let’s take the examples where you could most likely make the shot without using sights out of the equation and let’s look at one’s where you would HAVE to align sights to honestly be confident to pull the trigger. With an iron sights setup you recognize a threat (1st focal plane) and draw your handgun. Your brain now has to tell your eyes to see the front sight (2nd focal plane), then see the rear sight (3rd focal plane) and perfectly align the two irons which are on separate focal planes correctly, all while your target is now kinda blurry, especially when they’re at 10-15yd or even further. No human can focus on two focal planes at the same time, it’s completely impossible neurologically. So if your eyes are looking at the irons to align them, your target will be blurry…how blurry is dependent on target distance.

Now with a red dot setup you recognize your threat (1st focal plane) and draw your handgun, you then superimpose the dot over your target which maintains your eyesight on the 1st focal plane. Your eyes never have to leave the focal plane that your target is on ever.

Now comparing them both like that, which one sounds like it takes more time for your brain to figure out?

 

[RedBreast21]

“Is asking your brain in that moment to take your eyes off the threat and find a dot asking a bit much?” this concept is wrong. You don’t have to ask your brain to take your eyes off of the target. That’s the great thing of red dots, it creates a single focal plane to focus on. You look at the target and superimpose the dot over it. Unlike irons which is a triple focal plane setup where you have to focus on the irons to align them. Sure standing at 3,5, or 7yd you can shoot that all day long with no sights, and hit a target but that’s not the point of it. Out of the two systems the red dot is a simpler and easier concept and less for your brain to figure out.

Let’s take the examples where you could most likely make the shot without using sights out of the equation and let’s look at one’s where you would HAVE to align sights to honestly be confident to pull the trigger. With an iron sights setup you recognize a threat (1st focal plane) and draw your handgun. Your brain now has to tell your eyes to see the front sight (2nd focal plane), then see the rear sight (3rd focal plane) and perfectly align the two irons which are on separate focal planes correctly, all while your target is now kinda blurry, especially when they’re at 10-15yd or even further. No human can focus on two focal planes at the same time, it’s completely impossible neurologically. So if your eyes are looking at the irons to align them, your target will be blurry…how blurry is dependent on target distance.

Now with a red dot setup you recognize your threat (1st focal plane) and draw your handgun, you then superimpose the dot over your target which maintains your eyesight on the 1st focal plane. Your eyes never have to leave the focal plane that your target is on ever.

Now comparing them both like that, which one sounds like it takes more time for your brain to figure out?

I think you missed my point completely. Run my test with a buddy and report back. So many lessons in it. Until that, it's just your opinion from nothing but hope. Keep in mind, these situations will not be a flat range you set up.

I'm fine with a dot, fine without it and fine point shooting. Run the test. You will be surprised and better educated for it.

 

[Will556]

I think you missed my point completely. Run my test with a buddy and report back. So many lessons in it. Until that, it's just your opinion from nothing but hope. Keep in mind, these situations will not be a flat range you set up.

I'm fine with a dot, fine without it and fine point shooting. Run the test. You will be surprised and better educated for it.

I didn’t miss any point, I stated facts not opinions. Nothing I mentioned had anything to do with hope. I stated the science behind something and the reasoning why it’s easier for a human to process using a red dot than irons. It’s not just made up random jargon. I’m also not some random guy that barely shoots or who doesn’t train at all. I absolutely understand how a humans body reacts when introduced to a threat. I don’t just shoot at a B8 at 10yd on flat ranges and call it a day. I do real force on force training in real structures, not just flat range garbage. Airsoft hurts but sims hurt more.

 

[MikeyCNY]

I didn’t miss any point, I stated facts not opinions. Nothing I mentioned had anything to do with hope. I stated the science behind something and the reasoning why it’s easier for a human to process using a red dot than irons. It’s not just made up random jargon. I’m also not some random guy that barely shoots or who doesn’t train at all. I absolutely understand how a humans body reacts when introduced to a threat. I don’t just shoot at a B8 at 10yd on flat ranges and call it a day. I do real force on force training in real structures, not just flat range garbage. Airsoft hurts but sims hurt more. View attachment 182355

I really want to up my training with some sort of Force-on-Force - is your training strictly LEO or is it outside classes?

 

[Will556]

I really want to up my training with some sort of Force-on-Force - is your training strictly LEO or is it outside classes?

I train with my department and also take outside courses that do force on force as well. It’s definitely an eye opener when it’s your first time doing fof.

 

[lrick]

“Is asking your brain in that moment to take your eyes off the threat and find a dot asking a bit much?” this concept is wrong. You don’t have to ask your brain to take your eyes off of the target. That’s the great thing of red dots, it creates a single focal plane to focus on. You look at the target and superimpose the dot over it. Unlike irons which is a triple focal plane setup where you have to focus on the irons to align them. Sure standing at 3,5, or 7yd you can shoot that all day long with no sights, and hit a target but that’s not the point of it. Out of the two systems the red dot is a simpler and easier concept and less for your brain to figure out.

I've been thinking about getting a red dot. Probably a Holosun 507. Still researching.

I have progressive lens glasses and older eyes. Trying to find that sweet spot where I can bring all 3 elements into decent focus is a pain. With glasses my target is in focus but my sights are fuzzy. Without my glasses (range glasses only) my front sight is in good focus but my target is a bit fuzzy. Focal length changes with age. I can still hit my target but it's not ideal and of course it limits my range and speed.

To compensate I run XS Big Dots on my EDC and I have a TLR-8 mounted on my "house" gun.

What you mentioned sounds like the ideal reason for me to go that route. Does your experience bear that out? Have you encountered people with a similar situation? Seems like for me it would allow me to only really have to focus on the target. Agree?