I have a few choices for the "house gun." One is a c-more sight with the red dot and the ability to see through the optic to use the iron sights should it fail.

The other is a Trijicon 1-4 with the green (or amber) triangle. I love the Trijicon, but the post in the middle requires the removal of the scope if it fails, for me to use the iron sights.

Your thoughts?

The c-more seems more frail and requires batteries. The Trijicon is like a tank and does not.

I'd just run the trijicon. I'd trust it more than the CMore, and enough that I wouldn't worry about slow access to irons.

of the two just use the iron sights and a weapon light.

How rough are you on your gear, do you think you could make the scope fail or in the case of a red dot kill the battery by running it constantly. Not saying that its not possible to fail a scope because they do, but IMHO odds are in your favor the scope will do well. I don't run iron sights anymore given the choice, and most of my buddies don't run them. Once again its just what we prefer and what our experiences have pointed us towards when running our rifles. In the end do what inspires confidence in your rifle for you, who cares what the other guy does if you don't trust your rifle or don't feel confident with it, then odds are you will under preform with it. A wise man once told me that and it holds true for a lot of guys, and if it didn't then everyone would run the same setup. Have fun and put some rounds down range....

Using a Trijicon Accupoint 1.25-4 on mine - just decided to use one of the quick release Burris PEPR mounts to make it easier to remove for using the back-up sights.

I was surprised to hear from a competitive pistol shooter that the c-more was what most were going to. They didn't have a good rep in the AR world but who knows...

I have one gun set up with a micro Aimpoint and irons. The battery is going on 3 years now and I never have turned it off, let me repeat, it's always on. If it ever fails, my irons are right there ready to go. I also have a light on this gun at all times, it is my house gun but I am comfortable with it out to 100 yards or so on coyotes.

Another gun I have set up with a Leupold VX6 1-6 scope with the fire dot reticle. It's mounted in a LaRue QD mount, I have flip up irons should I need them. It's really quite useable in the house and of course out as far as one should use a 6x scope.

While not the same as your choices, after running my two, I'd easily take the 1-4 Trijicon over the c-more. Just use a good QD mount and flip up irons, mount a light on it and start practicing.

As to a house gun, IMHO you could get by without sights for all practical purposes.

IE if the scope fails and you can't get to irons or etc... at least not right now.... its point and shoot ranges anyway.

I am guilty of not using sights much up at close shoots... more or less pointing the bulk of the blurr onto the center of the target. Generally works more than well enough.

Not that its how I'd prefer to do it, but I would not worry about the blocking of irons that much inside the house.

If I were so worried, I'd probably "cowitness" it with a laser. Hell a good surefire type light that was centered on the group at close range would probalby suffice too as backup.

If you need sights in a house well chances are you aren't going to make it. A rifle wouldn't be my go to in a house. But if I needed to for whatever reason, I am with rost495 for all practical purposes you don't need sights.

A zero mag red dot is going to be quickest.

Dave,

I'm running an Aimpoint H-1 (not NV compatible) with a high Larue mount (LT660) on a Noveske Thunder Ranch Special Edition.

Given a non-PC thirty-shot magazine loaded with 40Ballistics, the alleged pukes will not make it down the hall and into our bedroom.

And if they do, other surprises are in store for them and for our entertainment.

God Bless You,

Your Brother Steve

Me thinks rost has lost his mind.

Everyone thinks an intruder will look just like a torso target I guess, what if they're trained to use cover and body armor? Give me a red dot, either in a low powered scope or my Aimpoint and that'll be one less thing I'll need to worry about.

Never seen anyone who does CQC neglect sights of some kind. There might be a reason for that.

My guess in a "Hot" situation, looking for a red dot on the intruder won't be your primary objective. Being familiar with your gun in any encounter will pay dividends over the sighting device you decide you want to use...

I didn't say you don't attempt sights. I said that in a pinch, if you can't get a few rounds 12 feet across a room without use of them..... a shotgun is same as a rifle in that instance because you have no spread, and yet they rarely have much of anything for sights. Mine has a ghost ring and front post, but could do just as well at 12-20 feet across the bedroom without.

You NEVER intentionally dont go without. My point was the quick change options are not that horribly important as long as you get something you are comfortable and confident with.

Really in the middle of a bedroom shootout if your X craps on you, are you going to have time to flip up irons and keep running? Or will you finish or attempt to finish whats started and in a lull so to speak, then attempt to worry about reverting back to irons.

Of course thats one reason I tend to lean back to irons mostly, nothing else to go wrong so to speak.

And if you can't hit the head of a target at bedroom distances with a handgun without sights, then you have a larger issue IMHO.

After all you are supposed to be running weapons that fit you and work with your NPA, not something you have to crane around to make sights work. Its VERY much relevant the same as it is with shotguns IMHO. Thats why one of the things that we look for in handguns is something that fits your hand and points naturally. If everytime i picked up a defensive hadngun and pointed at a target, I had to realign my grip and aquire sights... rather than tweak what was almost good.... time for a new gun.

I'll give ya this though, a red dot will allow co witness of a fixed front post very easily.

And a final question, at typical engagement ranges, even though you go through tons of training with a handgun, how many folks do you think in the heat of the moment do anything other than point and shoot? I'd be betting that IPSC and IDPA are about the only ones that shoot enough to be well trained enough that sights would be witnessed regardless the pressure.

Granted if I'm shooting at anything past say 7 yards to 10 yards, it gets to where you have to witness sights to be good. 25 yards and beyond for dang sure.

But tell me how folks shoot a bow instinctively and do so well at it? With no sights. Not using tip of arrow for reference. And not knowing distances. They are deadly accurate to 30 yards pretty easy.

OTOH probably not many have even tried point shooting these days.

Wise words - Training, handling, and experience will pay back more than the latest gadget strapped on.

Some of the replies are preparing for an armed, equipped, and trained assualt on their home by an organized force. Sounds more Waco than what I would expect on a daily existance. I would hard pressed to get to that level of response, without any knowledge, of what I had done to attract that amount of attention.

Others are preparing for a home break-in with murderous intent, aka, home invasion or drunk "ex". Probably more in line with what I'd expect to be encountered in my area.

If the attackers are in the same room, it's point and shoot, iron sights...maybe.

Down the hall, red dot, weapon light, iron sights if there is time and distance.

Across the house or yard, red dot, irons, light if needed.

For the OP: The C-More has been a very distant choice for the AR platform. Colt has marketed it as a co-witness sight, it works, but it's not a rough and tumble sight. The aluminum model is better, but all have the diode mounted about 2.5 inches from the screen. Anything on top of the diode (mud, snow, glove, etc), or between the diode and screen, blocks the projection of the red dot.

Not a poke, how are you defining a scope "failing"?

As in no illumination from the scope?

Or broke lens/recticles from physical damage?

IIRC, the Trijicon rectilces are glass etched?

I actually shoot my bows instinctively but it requires the whole sight picture, not just any one part of it.

Chances are if an intruder makes it to your bedroom, your both gonna be shot. But after running a red dot for several years, I can guarantee you the dot will be plain as day while your searching for the target. Why do you think entry teams use them? I'm all about having a gun fit me and practicing with it until its second nature but I want all the odd stacked in my favor. Remember no one said it was gonna be easy but if you want to suggest point shooting to the OP go right ahead.

Scope failure is any failure to perform. Cracked glass, lost reticle, whatever.

I run a red laser on my house gun. At 25 yards (the furthest shot in the house) the laser and green triangle on the Trijicon are in the same place, as are the iron sights.

I will aim my gun thank you unless the perp is up against the flash hider. I cannot see a 1-4 scope use for inside a house, aimpoint yes, iron sights yes, C-more maybe TWR is on to something as I also have been reading about C-more mounted on glock slides. I use laser-light combo's on pistols and find them effective in the dark.

For the record, I wasn't reccomending the c-more. I have never heard anything good about the older ones on AR's but a buddy at the range who shoots competitively said most of the shooters were going to them when I asked about red dots on pistols. He shoots a J-point and a Doctor optic?

I went with a Burris Fast Fire II on my Buckmark pistol. It was reccomend to me from a guy who shoots one on a Benelli out of a helicopter at coyotes. I will say running the Buckmark with the Fastfire and suppressor is too much fun but I still reccomend the Aimpoint for an AR.

I searched the op and didn't see where he said he wanted a sight that would allow him to not train.

Training and equipment are not mutually exclusive.

In a house, red dots or iron sights. I prefer a red dot in the form of an Aimpoint T1. Have never heard anything good about the c mores.

i like the guys that say its hard to look thru a T1.

I put the Warne RAMP mount on mine, thinking I would run irons at an offset. I still think it's a plausible idea, but haven't done it yet. Anyway, they are worth checking out...

John

I took the C-More and the Trijicon 1-4 to the range yesterday. The C-More was lighter, and a better fit for a house gun, but the 1-4 was almost as fast, and at 1X, easy to acquire and hit the targets.

I like both. The 1-4 is on the truck gun now, the C-more back on the house gun.

I think what most are saying is that it's a training issue to look through the tube of the Aimpoint, with both eyes open. The tubular design of the Aimpoint makes the view darker than the surrounding environment.

The brain is trained from birth to default to the "better" view, which is usually the one not looking through the Aimpoint. You overcome it with use, but most know don't "the why" it's an issue when you first use one.

If they'd close the front cover and run em for awhile, they might start to see why a red dot works.

my house gun is a Springfield 1911 A1, optimized by their custom shop for reliability. I have night sights, and a Surefire X300 mounted.
My house AR is a Spikes Tactical with an EOtech mounted. I am ordering a mount, to attach a Surefire G2ZX light.
I like having a white light on a HD weapon.

Practice with both the pistol and carbine, with the weapon light, and without, are a constant part of my agenda.

Which is an excellent way to to train with it.

think the guys with issues are having a hard time mentally. Not physically. Also, I see a lot of guys new to red dots still closing one eye.