Will an ageing baby boomer population with deteriorating vision make guns like the G19 and G17 MOS popular in the midsized CCW market? I have not seen any police departments going to these pistols nor did I see any mention made of MOS when the Rangers and others adopted the G19, maybe this is just another gimmick like lasers on pistols? Are the red dots a plus on a CCW?

They could be helpful or they could be a crutch. They require practice and can break or not function.

For shots past 15-20 yards, red dots are typically a little faster and more precise. Under that distance, most skilled shooters will be a little to a lot faster with irons. I forgot the site but someone compared several shooter's times with both. This assumes a reciprocating red dot, IE one attached to the slide.

A non reciprocating red dot has the potential to be faster than irons both up close and far away because it's easier to track the dot through the recoil.

I doubt they'll change much in regards to ccw pistols with the exception of people with poor eyesight and people looking for an edge in low light.

I had not thought about them being on the slide vs mounted on the frame. Good point, thus for more precise shooting they may be the ticket, but really just another electronic device to break thinking about it in the long run when mounted on the slide.

Yeah, that's a good point. I never thought about that either.

I bet some of those sight could be destroyed over time by a high volume shooter.

I tried one mounted to the slide and as stated I was slow, slow, slow with it. But when ranges get to 20yds and beyond it really shined.

I have not tried a frame mounted version.




Clark

I need to add turrets, but you definitely what the see through mounts so you can still use the irons.

ROTFLMAO. Is that the official Minnysota carry piece that comes with a 7600 rifle?

Is this your own experience, or just something you've read?

Since I do use slide mounted red dots on a couple of my carry guns, what you wrote sounds like it comes from experience with light recoiling gamer guns, or just plain theory, not a G19 or 23 with carry ammo.

Also, guys like Deflave saying you tried a slide mounted red dot and found it slow - you probably tried a dovetail mount without any co-witnessed iron sights, right? Big difference with iron sights to line up; the dot is always there. Just a red dot sight alone, yeah they suck and are slow, especially if they're mounted high up off the slide.

One big advantage in red dots is for guys who follow the "focus on the front sight" mantra. With a red dot, you can focus on the target instead.

I had a red dot on my Ruger 22 and my Buckmark. What yondering said about co-witnessing irons makes sense. Just trying to find the dot alone takes some getting used to.

I still use the J Point on my Buckmark but I have to get used to it every time I pick it up.

have you talked to sparks about getting an iWb made for that rig

The pistol I used was an M&P CORE in .40 S&W and the irons co-witnessed.

I couldn't get fast with it.




Travis

Most people don't have much trouble with speed if the setup has co-witnessed irons, in my experience. It can be a mental thing though; start off just using the irons instead of hunting for the dot, the dot will just appear when you use the irons. After a bit of learning curve you won't have to look for the irons any more, but there is a learning curve.

A red dot without co-witnessed irons is terrible for me though, and turns a decent gun into a range-only toy; way too slow hunting for the dot in other shooting positions.

I ran one in one match for fun. The guys used to shooting irons were able to blast some arrays much faster than me. When it came to running and shooting I was faster than usual, and beat them in those particular arrays.

This one came to mind, we recreated this stage, the iron guys smoked me as I did some dot hunting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0etoSfS7zLE

I guess I will just buy a shotgun when I cannot see the irons anymore. Slower than normal up close, possibility of breaking when mounted to reciprocating slide...bleah..

Never heard of those MOS models so had to look them up.

I can't imagine a bigger hook waiting to grab and get hung up on every piece of clothing near by. It looks to be battery powered, so I guess it's left on 24/7 for 15 or 20 or 30 years until it's finally needed?

As far as a game changer, yeah, that's what I'd call it. They may be an advantage in combat games or letting presbyopics still shoot groups that impress the folks in the next booth at the range. I do like my Fastfire III for some purposes, but concealed carry isn't one of them.

Folks can get what they want but for a concealed carry pistol to be used in situations where fractions of a second could determine the outcome I'd go with smooth and sleek for an unencumbered draw and employ the KIS principle as much as possible.

When carrying a concealed handgun, I personally, most often carry one of my secondary handguns, and not one of my primary duty pistols. As large a mixed bag pistol I care to conceal as a matter of routine, is a G19, but this would be without suppressor height sights and an added RMR above the slide. Having all that extra stuff, and then going up to a full sized G17 duty pistol, is a bit over the top for my needs in a dedicated conceal carry handgun as a matter of routine.

With all that said, there are quite a number of Glock nuts who routinely proclaim that suppressor sights co-witnessed w/ an RMR to be a god send due to their loss of eye sight and inability to use traditional sights alone. In that case, all that extra stuff added to the pistol is mandatory in order for the operator to function.

In this context, something along the lines of a G19, tall sights, and RMR, may be the answer. Otherwise, proper traditional sights having a bold front post design and high contrast, against a subdued rear notch having ample light gap may be a better route, especially being the duties of a conceal pistol are likely to fall into the range of under 15 yards on the defense, and not over 15 yards on the offense.

Best:)

Man, looking at the pic above with the Glock and a Leopold Delta point, those iron sights would have to be really TALL to co-witness with that sight.

I will add, with my carbine and red dot, being it is shoulder fired with greater body contact and reference, the dot is easily found, even with the BUIS folded down. This is not the case with my pistol, as it becomes much easier to lose the dot vs the carbine. So with the pistol, using the tall fixed sights as a reference while driving out the pistol makes finding the dot easier. Inside 15 yards,however, it is not necessarily faster.

Not necessarily. If you use the rear sight that Leupold makes for the Deltapoint--which fits within a recess on the rear of the dot-sight--then you can use a standard "suppressor height" front sight.

Absolutely!

Not a great picture and the deltapoint is shown with its protective cover, but it absolutely cowitnesses the suppressor sights. Same for my 9 Pro and Trijicon RMR.



I am decently fast with both but nowhere near as fast as the frame mounted cmore on my 38 super.

The frame mounts are immensely quicker but totally asinine for ccw. That said we are still out trying to fill the rest of our groups deer tags and the 38 super is on my belt owb with a Bladetech doh bracket to clear the pack straps. So far several coyotes hate it.

I'm guessing your splits are fast. But what about your presentation from concealment to first shot time?

I have considered putting a Fastfire sight on my carry pistol, but dismissed the idea. I have one on my MKIII, and yes, it compensates immensely for aging eyes while hunting small game at distance. But it isn't the quickest solution by a long shot. If the game is going to be up close, I am far quicker on the shot with the FO front sight ahead of the "ghost ring" rear blade. I've been using the gun with these two configurations for several years now, and although I am faster to the first shot with the dot than I was initially, the ghost ring is still faster on target up close.

For defensive purposes though, standard open sights with a big rear notch are what I still run with. KISS.

If an RMR or similar red dot milled into your slide is hanging something up on the draw, you seriously need to re-think your carry methods.

Then again, I'm guessing someone who's considering a cheap Fastfire for carry is probably not that serious about carrying anyway. Just a guess?

Why do so many people focus on being average, instead of being prepared to handle that more unlikely situation that requires a bit more skill? Can you really not imagine a scenario where you'd need to shoot farther than 15 yards? Stretch your abilities out a little guys, you might be surprised what you can do when you focus on being good instead of just average.

You shouldn't even need the sights to hit a chest at 15 yards. A red dot is good for more precise shots or longer distances; if someone has trouble hitting at bad breath distance they need more practice, not better gear.

I imagine most of these arguments also came up when dot sights first came to the market for rifles.

They're plenty reliable. Quality dots for pistols aren't going to wear out because the slide reciprocates. That's what they're made for. If you buy something like a Vortex, I'd expect it to be trash. You couldn't give me a Vortex red dot, for a pistol or a rifle.

The notion that they'll get hung up on "every piece of clothing" is crazy. They're not made out of velcro.

Slide mounted dots are here to stay. They seem to be incredibly polarizing, but they're not going away.

How often do you shoot at 15 yards without any sights on your gun?

And hitting a "chest" shouldn't be your goal, as most targets have "chests" that are nearly useless at depicting what you should be trying to hit. A "chest" and an 8" circle at 15 yards are two very different things, and hitting that 8" circle at 15 yards would be quite a trick.

Yep........

With Sig milling the 320 and selling it "packaged" with the new Romeo, it won't be long before we're seeing them on duty.

There are a few agencies around here allowing them on duty already.

That's why I asked. So, I assume your answer is that you have identified a dot sight that does not hang up. Thanks. But what about those times? (which include the time to align the sight) Are they the same or better than with iron sights?

As for the Fastfire, my "considering" ended where the difference in acquiring the dot compared to acquiring the ghost ring began. The RMR is faster than Fastfire?

Re: my seriousness - Ain't no operator here. Just a guy with a gun he's very familiar with.

Word.

Sightless shooting (not "point shooting") is high on my agenda. 8" circle at 15 yds is probably do-able with the right gun, but it would be much faster with the sights (for me).

You are right about all of that, but I was making a point about guys worrying about the best gear while having a mediocre mindset.

I'm aiming for a much smaller target at 15 yards if I'm trying to be precise, but I definitely can hit a chest size target every time at that distance without using sights, and your 8" circle most of the time. It's not really that hard with the right mindset and some practice.

The details weren't really my point though; I was trying to address the mindset that keeps so many ccw guys from getting better with their guns.

None of the red dot sights I've used have ever hung up on the draw, and that includes a lot of practice with dynamic movement and grappling/wrestling with an adversary. From what I've seen, the whole idea of the sights getting hung up is made-up internet legend from detractors of the red dot concept.

The one exception might be pocket carry, but the gun itself or your hand can hang up there too; hence my comment to re-think your carry method.

Regarding the discussion about times - one word: practice. It's a different system than plain iron sights; there is a learning curve. Do make sure you have co-witnessed sights, and use a quality red dot that's not going to crap out when you rack the slide against a bad guy's teeth.

I'm no "operator" either, but I'm serious enough about defending me and mine that I won't choose parts for my carry gun based on price. That is where my comment about the Fastfire comes from. Being "just a regular guy" doesn't mean cheap stuff is adequate for serious situations. Personally I'd rather have no red dot sight at all than a cheap one, when it comes to a carry gun.

I don't think red dot sights are as big a game changer as some claim, but at the same time, I think most of the claimed downsides come from people who haven't really tried them seriously. The one real downside I've found with them is that they obstruct the view down the slide for point shooting; that can be addressed with technique, and I hope will be improved on future generations of sights as new products are developed.

Not sure what the civilian situation would be that would justify shooting in self defense out beyond 15-20 yards? Nike defense would likely be a better choice

So, no actual time to first shot comparison then?

I'm with ya on the part I bolded in your quote. Personally, unless my eyesight is really failing, I don't see me going to a dot sight even if you buy it for me. My "regular guy" comment was in reference to the fact that I am about as likely to need such a device (for longer shots than I can do with irons, I assume) on my defense pistol as I am to win the lottery. And I don't play the lottery either. When it comes to having a usable dot sight or spending more on practice - I'm going with the latter......until my eyes really get bad.

But seriously - have you timed the difference?

After considering all of this including the idea that a G19 with an RMR and suppressor height sights is going to be more cumbersome to carry and again first rule "have a gun" I got to thinking more about just buying better sights. For instance the trijicon sight with the rounded U rear sight and the big orange ball front sight really is a big help. So while I remain intrigued with these more complex systems (but not anything vortex or for that matter Keltec) it is an added level of optical and electronic complexity on a fast mover, even the lasers don't reciprocate. Don't say anything about dinosaurs, wagon trains and flintlocks...

I have timed the difference, comparing a Glock 19 with a Leupold Deltapoint installed with an iron-sighted Glock 19. In the first week of practice the dot was slower; after a week the times were equal at 10 yards and the dot was faster beyond 10 for precise shots (dot-drill, not "point shooting for center mass").

A dot is slower the first time you try it and if you don't practice it willl never get faster. But if you put the time in, the dot has several advantages and most of the so called "disadvantages" are more apparent than real.

I have not compared them with a timer, but if I did it would be really close at shorter distances. Of my two Glock 19s (one stock, one RMR/irons), I'm pretty much equal with both out to 10-15 yards. The advantage of the red dot is in more precision past that distance, even though I have excellent vision and still shoot pretty well with irons.

LOL, posted at the same time, saying the same thing. Good explanation, probably clearer than I said it.

Are you using the original DP, or the Pro? I'm thinking of going with the DP Pro next time for the clearer glass compared to the RMR.

Jimmy - again, re-evaluate your carry method if an RMR is an actual (not theoretical) carry problem. Personally I can't tell the difference between my stock and RMR'ed Glocks in my waistband.

If your eyes are bad enough to need a big dot orange sight, a red dot sight would help you a lot. It does require practice though, a single 20 minute range session isn't enough to see the advantage. Oregon45 said it pretty well.

It was a Deltapoint Pro. I bought it because the glass was noticeably clearer than the RMR, and because I'm only a twenty minute drive from Leupold HQ so if it ever breaks, I can get it serviced quickly.

Making hits without sights on a moving 8" target circle in low light while you will also be moving to avoid attack? That's good shooting...

Help me out here. We're talking times to first shot on target - not splits?

So does the Glock MOS model's sights allow a co-witness with the standard sights.

Time to first shot on target.

No, the Glock MOS guns have the standard height sights.

The MOS models require irons that are a bit taller than normal suppressor sights to co-witness. The options are somewhat limited for now; I think Dawson makes some.

A non-MOS Glock slide milled for a red dot can use standard suppressor sights to co-witness though; there are lots of options for these. The red dot is held more securely with this method too, IMO. I'm not a big fan of the MOS mounting system myself, although I'll admit that's only from handling and reading about them, I don't own one.