Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns Best Carry Gun Sights

Looking to upgrade sights on my carry gun.

Considering a low profile red dot. Anyone have experience with a red dot they could share?

If not a red dot, any suggestions.

There are a lot of great choices out there, and I have no experience with pistol red dots. But, for open sights, you might look at XS Big Dots. All of my carry guns wear them. They are very quick to acquire in a stress condition. JMO

I've been shooting pistols for the last 20 something years.

I didn't think a red dot belonged on a pistol. Just didn't.



One of mine has an optics cut. Figured I'd give it a whirl.


I put a RMR on it.

At first.. yep. See. This thing is useless. No need to be there. Slows me down.


After a wee bit of practice...yep. I love it.


When I saw wee bit of practice I mean wee bit. It didn't take long at all to get the acquisition down.

It's wicked accurate. I've shot 50yd groups that I've watched guys with deer rifles fail to shoot lol.

It's fast. I'd say faster and more accurate than a sight just because it's a finer aiming point.


It's a shame because I wanted to dislike it. I REALLY loved the Sig sights that came on my AXG Scorpion.


"Well I bought the gun for concealed carry...so the red dot has to come off anyways. "


Wait...this thing is pretty small...and they make CC holsters for optic setups. OK I will try it.


Hasn't left my belt since. Every day I make a habit to draw from it at least once or twice to keep the muscle memory of the acquisition.

I've put a few hundred rounds through it..various "drills" I'm definitely faster and more accurate than I've ever been and have several thousands of rounds through various iron sight pistols.


Biggest reason for the RMR is its track record. Guys that try to destroy them fail. Sure it lacks some of the newer features. It's more expensive. But my life depends on it. I want it to work if that moment arises.


Biggest thing guys like to blast it for is it has to be removed from the gun to cha ge the battey.... which lasts for FOUR YEARS! So...changing it every 2 years to be safe and going to the range to verify zero hasn't moved isn't a deal breaker for me. And with the plate I have, I haven't saw a zero shift the few times I've swapped it just to see.


Your experiences may differ. But I'm absolutely glad I tried one out.

Just watch that it doesn’t come loose on you. That’s the biggest issue with red dots that you have to remove to change the batteries.

I’ve had an RMR, JPoint, Vortex Venom and now a Holosun 507c. Still have Trijicon HD XR sights on my carry gun. If Aimpoint gets their ACRO sorted out I’ll get one of those and things might be different.

I run an RMR.

There are a BUNCH of red dots on the market. Just like there are a bunch of semi auto handguns meant for self defense.

The Trijicon RMR is your Glock 9mm of the red dot world. Everyone tries to produce one that is "Just as good" or the "Glock killer".


The punchline is , if you want a dead nuts reliable out of the box self defense handgun, buy a Glock. If you want the same thing in a red dot optic, buy an RMR.

Iron sights are subjective to what they might be used for and user preference. That being said, I have red dots on multiple pistols. They make me hate iron sights. I have or have had RMR,s, Holosuns, Aimpoint Acros, DeltaPoints and a SRO. The SRO and the ACRO have been my favorite. If you get the dot, you need to commit to getting the reps to see the advantages

I put an RMR on my 1911 just to see what all the hype was about and sure, that .45 is more accurate for me than it was with the iron sights. I don't typically carry an edc handgun and if I did, that RMR sighted 1911 is larger than I'd use. Yes, for longer range more accurate placement a red dot helps a lot. For edc at defensive ranges I think my CZ 75D PCR with the Dawson fiber optic sights would be a better choice. Even though that RMR is a fairly low profile sight, it does stick up higher than the iron sights and drawing from concealment I think could snag on clothing. As mentioned above it does take some getting use to for muscle memory to not hold it too low to see the dot right away. The fiber optics just seem more intuitive to me to get off an aimed shot quickly.

Am having Tru Glo fiber optic sights installed on my Glock 44-22LR.

Should be installed end of next week.

I have fiber optic sights on my EMP 9mm and like them well.

Virgil B.

MS, what size dot do you prefer?

I've always used the 3 dot night sights on my carry guns. Trigicon or Meprolights.

I picked up a Glock 48 yesterday and took it to a shop with an indoor range to have a set of Meprolights installed. The shop owner had a red dot sight on his Glock 17 which he allowed me to try out while I was shooting the 48. I had never used a RDS on a handgun before and while I doubt that I would ever carry a handgun with a RDS, I can see how it could be advantageous.

According to Sage Dynamics, the Holsun is a close second to RMR durability.

The testing is tortious from Sage Dynamics. He does an a 200 rd test dropping the weapon on the site from shoulder height onto concrete 4 times. The updates the tests at 10,000 rds.

I tried an RMR on a G17 about 10 years ago. I have astigmatism so the dot looked like a cluster of grapes, which was problematic at longer ranges. I also had trouble when it got wet, which made the dot hard to see.

That said, I now have a Gen5 G19 MOS specifically to revisit the idea. I just haven't executed on it yet.


Okie John

I've only used two brands of reflex or red dot sights - three Burris Fastfires both II and III, two Sig Romeo 5's and closely examined a Leupold Delta Point pro. None of them have a clear, round, precise dot although the Leupold had a fairly defined triangle reticle. They all start as a somewhat misshapen thing at dimmer levels - one Romeo 5 reticle looks like a comma or a jelly donut with a leak, then they turn into a starburst at brighter levels including the Leupold.

Is that just endemic to the breed or do the better (higher priced) ones have a nicely defined dot? I can see how a slight starburst effect wouldn't hurt for self defense use since you just slap it on the middle of a relatively large target, in fact it's probably a lot easier to pick up. But I want something that can be used for more precise work so I keep going back to open sights where you can exactly delineate the edge of the blade, or just limit the reflex ones to a dimmer level.

I've really tried to like them as evidenced by owning 5 so far - the Burris's and Sigs, and have used them on everything from a Ruger Mk III, Smith Model 17, various Marlin lever actions, a couple Ruger 10/22's on up to a Ruger 77 .30-06. Except for one Romeo5 left on a 10/22 I keep going back to some other sight and specifically peep sights on the rifles since I can get a more precise sight picture a lot further out.


So - is all this just just because I've only used the lower end models? Do the $500 sights negate my issues here? Btw, it's not my eyes making the dots irregular, I verified that.

I just purchased a Holson 507C retail of $309.00. The 2 MOA with 32 MOA circle is clear and sharp to my eyes

Sorry but it probably is your eyes making the dots explode.

I’ve fought dots for 10 years or more starting with Aimpoints and EOTechs to RMR’s, JPoints and Sig Romeo’s. None of them show a perfect dot to my eyes but people I know without astigmatism see a perfect dot.

I have noticed it’s worse when I’m tired but right now I have an Aimpoint PRO, H2, Holosun 507c, a tube type Holosun and a Romeo 5. I can line them all up and they all appear the same to me.

" Btw, it's not my eyes making the dots irregular, I verified that." Well, my previous statement's wrong, turns out it is due to a bit of astigmatism in my left eye.

Went and read reviews on the Holosun, that lead to searching for "reflex sight reticle sharpness" and that lead me to an article that showed how to verify the shape of the dot by taking a picture of it with a camera. Turns out the pictures show a perfectly round dot on one of the two Burris Fastfire III's I own so I'll assume the other is the same.

The good news is that medical developments in my life may have fixed that somewhat. I haven't looked through those sights in a year or more, they've just sat on a shelf. During that time, December 2020 and February 2021 to be exact, I had cataract surgery on both eyes with the replacement lenses being set for "distance" which is basically anything just beyond arms length.

I just tried the Burris and Sig again. Still can't see the dots as being perfectly round with the unaided eye but I also got new glasses to go with the new eyes. My distance vision is fine so they are set up as computer and reading glasses. If I look through the very top of them the dot now appears nice and round. Still unusable for handgun sights since I have to literally use the very top edge of the glasses lens but on a rifle that might be doable.

The Sig seems a little better, maybe that's just the 2 MOA dot vs the 3 MOA of the Burris.


These aren't the greatest pics but they do show the reticle as a nice round circle.






Sonuvabitch. In one way it kind of sucks that I've been beating my head against this for several years now but it's also good to find out that it's always been me and not the sights. Now that I have a workaround I might go out and try some different ones again, maybe try some holographic sights to see how they stack up.

Went through the same thing blaming the sights and not my eyes. Finally figured it out and just accepted it, started focusing on the targets and making hits with the comet or starburst depending on the day.

A trick you may know for rifle shooting like AR’s is when you have time and need precision, look at the dot through the peep sight. It shapes it right up for me. But do that only when you need precision, red dots are for speed.

Update on this.

A few years ago I had a set of glasses made up with the optical center in the upper right corner of the left lens specifically to use with peep sights. With the new Bausch & Lomb eyeballs I got during cataract surgery I don't need those anymore so had new lenses made for those frames just to correct my astigmatism with a focus set at infinity.

Just picked them up and hot dang, I'm here to say they work great with the red dot sights! The Burris Fastfire dots are now round, not commas or leaking jelly doughnuts and the Sig Romeo5 on the 10/22 has a nice, fine aiming point. The new lenses weren't too expensive, about the price of a new Fastfire and mount, but they now let me make full use of three sights I'd previously not been able to and open up the possibility of getting more.

Getting older still kind of sucks in the vision area but it's great to have these solutions available.




Now I just need to work on my persuasion techniques so if I get into a gunfight I can convince the bad guy to wait while I put on my other glasses....

"The BEST sight" is not something that can be said to exist objectively. Sights are no more than a way for a person to align his gun bore to throw a projectile where he wants it to intersect with his line if sight. That's true on a shotgun with a simple bead and all the way up to the most expensive and sophisticate rifles scopes. Said another way, a sight is just something to give a reference point to align the trajectory of your projectiles the same way each time.

So the BEST carry gun sight is the one that you can A. Carry easily and B. use the easiest. Both of those considerations are more about the shooter then the hardware.

I retired from teaching less than 2 years ago, but right up to my last week I used a swinging target to show students what to use, what they carry, and in MANY cases they find what they carry is not as easy to use as they thought it would be.

My target is 2 up-right poles with a cable stretched in-between and I can vary the angle of that cable to effect the speed of the movement. The actual targets can be varied from 5 gallon buckets full of fire wood all the way down to 6 OZ water bottles, and in the hardest cases we'd put 6 OZ water bottles slung on light bungy cords so not only is the target small and fast, but it's also "jumping" up and down. The degree of success in the training that is achieved by students that learn to hit MOVING targets is extreme. The very best of them learned to hit the large moving targets almost 100% and the very small moving targets maybe 1 in 5 tries. (20%) But when they go back to paper and steel targets it's as if they can't miss.

One thing I have seen in many (actually most) cases of students using red-dots and optical sights in handguns is how poorly they do on moving targets. The sights are very precise and easy to shoot with on non-moving targets and if they practice enough they do very well on moving targets, but most people can't or don't practice enough with them to be able to acquire their sight when the target is moving as fast (and faster) as a moving man. A sprinting rabbit target is even more difficult. But in real fights the enemy is almost never still, and is often moving as fast as you are or faster. Like a runner who trains with ankle weights, making the targets harder to hit then real enemies is a VERY good way to practice. Train hard! Make is VERY hard. Get better so the "impossible" targets get hit 20% of the time. Then when you have to shoot a 12" target instead of a 3" target, and you have to shoot at it going 1.5 MPH instead of 16 MPH, you'll find it's quite easy.

So what is the "best sight"? That depends on the shooter.

Overall, I have seen better progress from students with standard issue sights on the moving targets. But in the cases of those that truly do take the time and burn the ammo to learn to use red-dots and optical sights and acquire them as fast as they can a standard iron sight they do shoot the best. But those students and those gun sights comprise less then 3% of the successful trainees when learning how to hit fast erratic moving targets.

I did have a Trijicon red-dot on my Walther 9MM for about 2 years and to be honest I never learned to use it well on moving targets. I could not acquire the dot fast enough to hit the targets before they were behind the barriers. Some of my students did learn to do it well however.

I went back to shooting my DA revolvers to "show off". I have shot DA revolvers for about 50 years and they are like a part of my hand, so it was evident it was not because of poor quality or poor design of the Trijicon sight that I was unable to hit the fast movers, but because I WAS UNABLE! But give me what I know, what I have lived with, what I have carried and used for over 1/2 a century and I could demonstrate to the classes what to do and how to do it, and made a lot of hits. Even shooting the 6 OZ bottles at high speed suspended on the bungee cords I made hit with DA revolvers' about 40%-50% of the time. Shooting 1 liter bottles at top speed on the bungees, I was to a point my hits were very close to 100%. That was with S&W revolvers, some of which has fixed (top groove) sights.

So I believe we ask the wrong question here. It's not about "the best sight" it's about the sight you can use and carry the best.