This issue gets brought up in other threads, and I don't want to add to the clutter.

Some say that having an "electronic" sight on their EDC pistol is an unacceptable/unnecessary risk. Yet, these same folks willingly, without objection, gamble their lives on the reliability of electronics in every other aspect of their existence--vehicles, planes, anything medical, microwaves, elevators, digital reloading scales, computers, phones, GPS's. The list of examples is infinite.

BUT...the mere mention of a red dot sight on a pistol has them freaking out. Why?

I made the switch to an RDS on my EDC pistols (Glocks and Sigs) and haven't looked back. I'm both faster and more accurate. My near-vision issues are now non-issues thanks to dot sights. Where I work, an indoor gunfight could easily involve distances of 50+ feet, and a red dot greatly improves my accuracy.

In my immediate circle of friends who shoot with dots, nobody has had one fail. I agree that the data sample is too small to make that fact statistically relevant, but neither do I see the interweb filled with reports of failures from reputable companies. Sig Romeo's sucked for a time, and Vortex low end stuff is reputably unreliable, but the current offerings from Trijicon, Holosun, Leupold, etc. are holding up well. In my own experience, I've had more iron sights fail than dots--I had a Glock front sight fall off (and I'm far from alone in that experience), and I've had a Sig rear sight fall off--two different times.

Regardless, having a red dot does not preclude you from having irons zeroed and ready to go. I've got irons on my guns.

So, what makes a red dot sight so unacceptable to you? (I anticipate some spirited discussion, but if we can maintain civility, it may prove more useful.)

I have no objection to them and infact have embraced the red dot sights

I don't object to them, I simply don't need or want one on a carry gun. I can see the utility on a modern, dedicated hunting handgun particularly for low light shooting.

I have a couple of semi autos with Trijicon RMR sights, and they perform as advertised. I often use revolvers though and just don't want to clutter the revolver up with a dang dot sight

I've been shooting handguns long before red dots came around. I have no dislike for the dots at all and even have a couple mounted on pistols myself. However not on a EDC.
I still think I can find the front sight faster than I can the dot.

I see a pistol as a short range defensive weapon and I don't have the urge to dress up my pistols with RD sights. "front sight, press" works for me.
I don't play video games so I don't think much of a pistol (my grandsons say I suck at games).
I would rather spend money on reloading supplies and go shooting (or upgrade my steel targets).

Self defense needs arise I. Low light as well. Red dots dominate speed shooting events and faster first shots are very important in a self defense situation

I want to thank Waders for asking this question.

Like Waders, I was fine with irons, eyesight issues forced me to change.


I've heard/read, "Irons are faster".

Set up right (IMO), they co-witness with the irons sights. So it's no faster with irons sights (only). Just like irons, they take practice.


Heard/read "why would someone buy a small conceal carry pistol and put a great big red dot on it", apparently they have not seen the conceal carry red dots, the bulk is imagined.


YMMV, not a RDS evangelist, just don't care for the statements made in ignorance.

Jerry

Th people that don't think the red dots are useful sound like people sounded about scopes on rifles when I was young. They didn't think scopes were better or faster. They were wrong just like they are wrong about red dots not being useful

It can be stated very simply as a violation of the principle of KISS, Keep It Simple, Stupid.

If you need it on your daily carry handgun due to a vision deficit (one that would dramatically diminish your shooting ability absent its use), then, of course, it's a different matter. I wouldn't tell a man with limited mobility not to use a walker because it over complicates the task of walking. For him, it's a significant advantage, despite the added complexity. Same here.

Red dots keeps it simple because tge irons are still usable

Everything has pro's and con's. I use traditional and red dot sights. The red dots are faster generally speaking. However, the glass and laser are prone to problems in rugged environments. The glass does fog in certain weather conditions, and the glass can get covered in rain/snow making it almost useless. Additionally the laser emitter can easily be covered by mud, dust, snow, rendering the red dot completely useless. For a CCW weapon in controlled environments, or competition pistol in same, I think they are great. For outdoors, backcountry, survival, hunting side arm, I'm not sold (yet).

It seems like the guys that are using them are the older guys with eyesight issues. I love them on my 22lr for pin shoots, but for the bigger centerfire pistols, don't need them. Not needed yet, as iron sights still work just fine for my eyes and needs. Getting on target quick is not a problem. A deficit with the red dot is sometimes finding the dot may take longer, which may require more practice to know exactly how to acquire it. That's a deficit for someone like me, where I don't shoot pistols much. I went for 11 months this last year without shooting any pistols. I see a lot of guys running them for CC. That is up to them, just learn to be proficient. That means at any range, not just 3 to 7 yards. I do agree with some here, that I can get on target and find the front sight quicker than acquiring the red dot. YMMV.. And yes, I have experimented recently with a new red dot on a pistol vs a new 9mm pistol I just bought. Better 40 yard times with the 9 and conventional sights.

Let's see, the arguments against RDS on a carry pistol that I am aware of are.....

1: RDS is slower
2: Pistols with RDS are harder to conceal
3: A lack of affordable or compatible holsters
4: Dust/fog/rain
5: Unreliability of electronics

I resisted the RDS for a long time, waiting for reliability history to shake out. At the same time, my eyes have aged. The two curves intersecting, I gave it a serious try on a serious carry pistol, and found that my speed and accuracy improved almost immediately. Argument #1 debunked. Next, I went searching for a compatible holster that would allow effective concealment, and found plenty available at reasonable cost. Arguments #2 and #3 debunked.

I dismiss #4 because we've all managed to avoid and/or work around the same issues with optics on long guns. #5 remains a question for certain models but not so much for others.

I'm transitioning to optics on everything that is designed or can easily be modified to accept them effectively. I think if you take your role as a defender of loved ones seriously, you should be grabbing every advantage you can. You guys who are determined to remain in the past are on your own.

For an average shooter, with poor or declining eyesight, it will probably help..

If you're having trouble finding the dot (if it isn't immediately visible), either your setup is bad (ie: poor quality or bad fit) or your presentation is bad, or both. Admittedly, it may take time and money to fix either problem.

That would describe me, but I notice that a huge percentage of top shooters with young eyes are using red dots.

My initial resistance was that I was slower in acquiring the dot. I've improved. And switching from a Trijicon RMR to a Leupold Delta Point Pro has helped, too.

Another issue is that red dots really show your shake. Of course, you shake just as much without a red dot. But it's not as noticable with irons as it is with an RDS. The upside is that it does a good job showing you things you need to work on.

The sign of the times for sure. A lot of younger people don't know how to use iron sights.. I'm not against using a red dot sight. They are cool, but just an extra un needed gadget that I don't need on a cc yet.. When my eyes go to schidt, that may change. Thankfully I can still see the irons on pistols with my right eye pretty well.

That bolded part is a lame argument. I doubt that you will find a single top competitor who doesn't know how to use iron sights.

I suspect that a lot of guys are convinced that is more of a downside, and would rather be unaware of those things.

If someone staunchly objects, did they forget that co-witnessed irons are available?

🦫🤷🏽‍♀️

Lots of new pistol owners who have damn little shooting time.

And lots of forum geniuses who can't deal with real life.

New shooter that can't aquire their sights will struggle with a RDS.

Hopefully you will soon be able to cope

...brown-nosing teacher's pet.....

I'm gonna steal your new girlfriend. She's good about keeping it low profile, can still work to iron things out, and lights up just right. I'm not real experienced in her world but I think she and I could make it work.

And that relates to my post, how?

Clever!

LMAO

🦫

You're still retarded. Go to any police academy and see what the recruits are carrying, and they're not old guys with eyesight problems. Every person I know who carries a pistol for work (where allowed) or CCW is using a red dot with the exception of my 84 year old dad.

They make hitting target easier. As long as unit is rugged with good track record and good adjustments (for intensity with changing light conditions, long na nattery life,.....) I do not have any objections.

Well as long as Cardenas approves.
Lol

Father knows best

Change is...hard. Ed McGivern didn't need no goldurn red dots for fast and fancy shooting. The apogee of combat shooting was achieved at Gunsite in 1984!

YMMV



mike r

We tried, but it's kinda hard to put a red dot on .38spl snubbie.

All my dots are RMRs. I’ve put a lot of rounds down range with open sights, but am quicker with more hits faster with a red dot. I didn’t think this would be the case but bought two pistols from the company out of Plano that makes Glock copies (can’t remember name). They mill their slides where sights and dots cowitness. One was milled for RMR and the other was not. Side by side with identical pistols both myself and my dad were noticeably faster with the RMR.

Mine is set up to cowitness so no big deal if it breaks. In that case I have iron sights.

Exactly those that refuse to try one don't realize the fact that RDS are superior. In every way

Case closed

Case closed, uhhh how many decades of experience with them do you have?

You gonna wait decades to catch up?

If it takes a personal decades to realize RDS are better then he is rather dim witted

I’ve gone back and forth for a few years now, this last hitch has been better than the first few goes.

I still carry and compete with irons but the dots are gaining. I give up very little yet gain a lot with a dot.

Reliability, I have seen irons fail more than once in a match, saw a Dawson FO front break right off at the dovetail. I’ve seen plenty of cheap dots fail but the two proven dots I trust are the RMR and the HS 507C. Seen lots of these and only read of the older RMR’s with problems. I don’t trust either’s auto mode. Batteries are cheap. I like the bigger window on the 507C.

Carry ability, I cut a notch out in my kydex IWB for the dot. It rides at my belt line. I don’t notice it.

Shooting ability, I’m still quicker to the shot with irons but it’s not by much and after todays match with an iron sighted 1911, I noticed I was taking more time on my first shots cause distances weren’t the usually quoted 7 yards and under… I have to have either fiber optic front or one with illuminecent paint to draw my attention and I embrace the blur.

What I gain is better accuracy, up close and at distances I used to not consider “pistol” distances. I can focus on the target and see the entire area in focus for my next targets in real time, better situational awareness. I can call my miss’s by knowing where the dot was when the shot broke.

Yes I still use irons and I will continue to use dots. I don’t care what others use but overall a good shot with irons will be a better shot with a dot. But only if you dedicate the time to train like you did with irons. If you won’t train then stick with what you know or at least think you know.

There are a number of things.

First, I use the top of the gun itself, not just the sights, as a coarse aiming "thingy" for close shots. Anything that changes the shape of the top of the gun makes it less usable. In this instance, its the same factor that makes a Glock a non-starter for me. The square, flat top simply does not lend itself to that shooting technique the way a rounded top does. ... and neither do dot sights.

Second, I do not like stuff on top of my handgun. Iron sights and nothing else. It is, to my eye, clutter.

Third, complexity / reliability. My iron sights are always on. I don't have to flip switches or squeeze dingly things to activate them. Batteries don't wear out, etc. I don't have to periodically stop and check iron sights to make sure they haven't quit on me.

I could probably think of more but that's enough to seal the deal for me and then some.

Tom

Was waiting to see this. First gen pro point circa mid 80’s. Sat on a 41 mag Blackhawk in a B-Square mount for about 10 years. Second pic shows the etching from the cylinder gap. Got a 1 gen aimpoint and B-square mount kicking around for Ruger MKII and GP100 just waiting for the day that they get mounted on something.





They have their uses but not on a carry gun. And no I didn’t wait decades to wise up.

I wouldn't put one of those monsters on a carry gun, but I really like the Holosun 507K and 507C

507K

Thankfully red dots have advanced over the years

Excellent answer. But, for a lot of people, that ain't good enough! It seems they simply cannot stand the fact that you don't like what they like. You don't do it the way they do it. Their way is superior! Don't you see???? You MUST do it like I do it, or else you're an idiot!....

And just tell them you don't like Glocks.... ho, man, the knives will come out!

Agreed that a man can like what he likes, but one correction to his post: my RMRs are always on. No switch flipping required.

Thanks for that useful survival tip.

Did you just seriously equate those things with the MRDS that are the current common carry optics?

I first tried my Leupold DPP on my 1911 but couldn’t reacquire the dot as quickly as a front sight. I might have been able to learn how to get back on target with it but patience isn’t one of my virtues. I switched it to my hunting revolver a S&W 629 classic 5” that truly rapid acquisition isn’t as critical to me. Rushing a shot at a deer isn’t something I would do at this point in life, it would get a pass. Defensive use is another thing entirely.

Everybody loves my girlfriend. Wait...

As to brown-nosing, this thread is awesome. LOL

I’ve seen a lot of people transition from irons to dots, of varying age, vision, and shooting ability. I’ve also now seen many shooters start out directly with dots.

With proper instruction they have all, all, been as fast up close and more accurate at long distance (50 yards as an example).

The biggest improvement is in the 15-30 yard range. Hitting reasonable size targets at speed is hard and anybody who disagrees is welcome to post up targets with times. Those previously hard shots become very obtainable.

Dots have essentially doubled my pistol engagement distance with no downside up close.

The key is seeking out the proper presentation technique. But if you’re not willing to do that then you’re probably not willing to purchase a quality dot or keep up with battery life or maintain the skills you acquired.

And that’s fine, iron sights still work. But it’s undeniable that they work as well for someone willing to learn something new.

KISS

If you want to keep it simple, I can think of no greater benefit than eliminating sight alignment and sight picture during the shot process.

1-See target and present the pistol.
2-Subconsciously know what level of sight alignment is necessary for the shot difficulty presented.
3-Obtain that level of sight alignment.
4-Verify the proper sight alignment is at the correct place on the target.
5-Subconsciously know where your visual focus needs to be for the shot difficulty presented.
6-Shift visits focus as needed…..Sometimes this will require you to stop looking at the thing that wants to kill you.

Or….
1-See target and present pistol.
2-See red dot on target.

This^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I just bought a p365 with plans to put a Holosun or Shield RMSc on it. But after shooting it a little and seeing how easy it is to hit with and feeling how easily it slips into a pocket or waistband I’m struggling to figure out what I’d gain by putting the dot sight on it. I know I’d lose some of the ease of pocket carry with the dot sight too

PS - I love red dot sights and have them on multiple shotguns and another handgun

Red dot sights are still growing on me. I like them on guns that I keep bedside, take in zippered cases on road-trips, plinking, and hunting. For carry guns, such as compact and subcompacts, I just haven’t worked one into the rotation as I feel more comfortable with good iron sights that I don’t have to worry about. Not trying to contradict myself but for true carry guns, I just like to keep it very simple. That could change the more I use them but I have preferred the clean lines of a carry gun, especially IWB without a dot/rmr setup.

None whatsoever! 😎

Well the phone I had back about that time isn’t quite like the phone I have today now is it? Same technology. Dial a # make a phone call. Just now they pack more sh*t in a smaller package.
Same for dot sights. Yes mine are old. Same tech, smaller package but still has the same advantages and limitations.

Bad analogy, for starters.

And no, they are not the same. Using them is not the same. Carrying them is not the same. It doesn't take decades to figure that out.

Spot on

Exactly! I always think of all the stories and quotes of people who said decades and decades ago that riflescopes were big, clunky, unnecessary pieces of junk that didn’t belong on top of a rifle. Guess the whole “scope thing” kinda caught on. Sure, some would never need, or want one, but millions of scopes have made millions of farther, more accurate shots possible for millions of people. If you are against dot sights, cool. Your call. That surely doesn’t make their realized advantages for shooters that use them, any less real than the advantages of using a scope on a rifle. Any minor shortcomings scopes or red dots/reflex sights may have, I’m pretty sure neither product is going away any time soon. I like em, I use em, I’m cool with it if you don’t. 😎

Doc_Holidude

Over the decades, I've owned enough flashlights to never trust a battery-powered object. Add to that, TV remotes, cars, and who knows what else, and how can anyone trust a battery?

Besides, they look funny on a good pistol.

Batteries in the Holosun that I have last a year, also I can use the co-witness sights if necessary

I have more than one handgun and less than thirty. All have open sites. Not willing to say never but not yet. Hasbeen

This could be the most internet thread of all time.

No objection here. In fact I now enjoy shooting handguns again. When I was 40 something my eyesight for near vision declined markedly. It's really not fun shooting when all you see is a blury sight or you clean up the sight and the target is blury. Red dots cleaned up the sight picture and are extremely easy to use. Only thing that I don't like is finding a holster that works well with a red dot.

I guess if you're too cheap to replace batteries on a schedule instead of when they go dead, that can be a problem.

Quality night sights are good for 7-10 years and if care is taken to zero them, plenty good for 50+ yards. I personally don't want anything, between my front & rear sights, that might catch rain/dirt/snow etc.

Personally?

They cost money.
When I've tried them, they were awkward.


I'm cheap and too lazy/cheap to learn to use them.

The rain-dirt-snow-etc issue is an exaggerated issue. The enclosed emitter optics solve the issues, but they were never that bad.

If the crud your pistol falls in his bad enough to obscure the lens, it’s also bad enough to clog up your read sight and stick to your front.

I’d add that although iron sights can be very accurate for some shooters, the dots make those shots easier.

I can hit at 50 with irons. With a dot at 50 I can get hits in sub 2 seconds with a lvl3 holster. Drawing to an A Zone at 50 is the normal practice.

I just feel the need to ponder off topic,(yet related to reply content) for second…

I wonder if any poster on here has a fire alarm or smoke detector or carbon monoxide detector in their homes? Seems these are small, technologically advanced objects that are mostly run by batteries, that make our lives safer and our minds more at ease. Also pacemakers come to mind as a NEEDED battery operated device that people literally trust their lives to.

To me, the not trusting batteries point carries little water in this discussion…especially when the irons are co-witnessed. Just my opinion, of course. 😎

Doc_Holidude

Well, there's an honest answer.

I suspect that's satire.

Maybe. But it's hard to argue with.

Cowboys never use Red Dot sights - They don't showup on Redskins.

Small batteries, if they haven't run down first, get changed every 12 months at my house. The type doesn't matter.

Being an avid and gullible gun magazine reader, I wondered what I’ve been missing not having a red dot on one of my handguns? Now after adding an RMR to my 1911 on a plate to replace the rear sight, I can report that I’d like to have my rear sight and $400.00 back. We have some friends visiting here from Australia where they don’t have handguns, so I took Steve shooting over the weekend. We started with a m43 S&W .22 and were hitting pretty well at about 20 yards. Next up was a CZ PCR 9mm with the fiber optic Dawaon sights and WOW shooting in full sun they really pop. Steve wondered where the battery was, they are that bright. Then came the 1911 .45 ACP with the RMR. Steve couldn’t find the red dot and finally after lots of coaching, he pointed it down far enough to see the dot. That handgun was sighted in for 10 yards, so my turn at 20 and the group wasn’t even on the 8.5x11 piece of paper, but below it several inches! Back at 10 yards it was right on again, wtf. Add to that we were shooting with a slight wind in our face and the blow back from the ejection port and muzzle was accumulating in the red dot lens and the image was getting more speckled with every shot.

I asked Steve what he liked best and felt most comfortable with. The CZ PCR and our targets confirmed that. The m43 was too light, the 1911 with that red dot was not even an honorable mention.

Maybe at a given sighted in longer range with muscle memory for finding that red dot more quickly a red dot might have some redeeming value, but for sure not on a CCW handgun for this shooter. Handguns are strictly short range defensive and expensive hole punchers for me and a red dot sure didn’t make that 1911 into a precision instrument.

I just want to send another big thank you to Waders.

"Steve couldn’t find the red dot and finally after lots of coaching, he pointed it down far enough to see the dot."

You know they make RDS plates for 1911's that have a rear sight... Would've taken the challenge out of finding that red dot though.

It's not rocket science... set it up right and spend a little time working with your pistol, or not, as it's your gun, your RDS, your choice.

Jerry

I have an 8" flinch at 20 yards.


Also, this sight sucks.

I’d have paid good money to see Steve receive that period of instruction.

I keep scanning the classifieds for these gently used, basically new, horrible, unusable RMR sights that some people bought, but are so distraught with that they cannot abide with owning them one minute longer!!!! Classifieds don’t seem to be inundated with such junk. To ease the pain, I’ll make an offer…if anyone has a quality RMR type sight in barely used, like new in box condition, I’d be inclined to help them end their awful, incessant suffering, and give them half of what they paid for the torture of owning said optic. Win-win for both parties. I will be patiently waiting and watching.

Doc_Holidude

I have 3 of these damn things and well my big objection is finding quality holsters that are designed to cover the things when holstered.....

Uncovered works for me.😎

The big bulbous thing sticking up over the top of a defensive handgun sure looks like one more thing to get snagged on clothing during a draw from an concealed carry holster. With my Austrian friend, I was interested in how a person totally unfamiliar with a red dot sight would react to shooting with one for the first time. His inclination was to put the front sight in the RMR window which of course would result in a very high shot. Telling him to hold it lower just resulted in him lowering his arm instead of canting his wrist forward lowering the front of the pistol. I'm sure my wife would likely do the same thing if she ever wanted to shoot that .45, which she doesn't.

Doc_Holidude and I might need to negotiate a little. There was a set of Tritium night sights on that .45 for a long time, but they went out eventually. An adjustable set of those Dawson fiber optics could be in it's future.

I'm not gonna lie, I've been carrying the 19 MOS with the HS 507C but I pulled my regular iron sighted 19 out of the safe last night and thought how "clean" it was without the optic and how it just points where I look. Then I remembered the last match I shot with an iron sighted 1911 and I kept telling myself how easy these targets would be if I had a red dot on it.

The good is beginning to outweigh the bad for me.

I don't understand how he could fail with such perfect instruction.

Just had my first range session ever with a 6 MOA green dot on my 365xlsc. 75 rounds of FMJ.

The third 25 rounds (two mags +1) showed a definite improvement with speed and accuracy.

Practice at home on presentation is key, and it sure has illustrated some bad habits I'd picked up over the years shooting only irons on handguns.

One session and I'm becoming a believer. A good training class with an instructor who preaches red (or green) dots on pistols is in my near future.

I don't want a big clunky thing on top of my handgun. It also makes it more difficult to get a decent holster without breaking the bank.

It's nice that we have choices - with my aging eyes, optics are a huge benefit. I haven't found them to be big/clunky and can't tell any significant difference carrying with or without an optic. I also haven't had any trouble finding decent holsters and options seem to be growing with the increasing use/acceptance of optics. I have this Mitch Rosen from the Sig Store for my P365XL and it's on my hip at work right now:



1791 Gunleather has several options with optic cuts and I have one for my P320 X-Carry:

https://1791gunleather.com/product-category/sig-sauer/sig-sauer-p320-x-carry

Vedder has optic cut options for a lot of their Kydex holsters and I have several in IWB and OWB.

Are you thinking about a tube type red dot or an open/exposed reflex type sight?

Exposed reflex style sights are pretty small when compared to an older tube style red dot.

I think they mean “I can’t find a $10 Uncle Mike’s that fits an optic I don’t have.

It’s an imaginary excuse.

Two minutes with a Dremel and you can convert 95% of the Kydex holsters out there to fit an optic.

Waders: I have several "red dot" sights on several of my heavy barrel 22 L.R. small game and Varminting pistols.
I love them and shoot quite well with them.
No "objections" from this quarter.
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

They work great for me.

No!

It is 100% honest.

Somewhere I'll find an open style one cheap. And mount it on
a MKII.


Too many people who aren't chasing status or the next new thing have
settled onto them and endorse them.

Well remember learning to use a rifle scope, later one on a SBH.
Sucked. Was much more confident with opens despite crappy vision.

Over time, learned scopes. (Never liked the pistol scope)

See dots as the same process.

I really dislike traditional pistol scopes. RDS love em' now that i have spent time with them

A rifle scope on a Super Blackhawk and it sucked?? I wonder why.

Mackay, what make/model is that one?

2x Leupold pistol scope.

That's not an issue.

Are you asking about the red dot or the Holster?


The Red dot is a Trjicon RMR on a Glock 17 9mm.

The holster is a Milt Sparks Optics Ready holster. Super comfortable, straight drop. Conceals nice. I use the holster both for guns that have an optic on the slide and ones that don't. I just really like how comfortable the holster is.

It was the holster I was curious about - Thanks!

I remember these same arguments when red dots were being considered for rifles. All the older crowd were piping the same old lines:

Fundamentals!

People will get killed when the batteries suddenly die!

You gotta learn iron sights first!

Red dots are worthless and never as good.

Iron sights have worked for hundreds of years!

TWO WORLD WARS!

Ad Nauseum.




The Aimpoint PRO has a battery life that allows it to stay constantly on for over THREE YEARS without needing to replace.

As it ended up, people didn't get killed.

The grumbling old timers were just plain wrong and eventually either retired or had to take their issued rifles with the new RDOs and go qualify.



One such old guy who stopped learning decades earlier kept a state agency stuck in the 1980s for the longest time. He hated any sort of technology. Hated ARs, Hated Glocks. Hated Red dots. Shortly after he retired we sent out a notice and the rest of us who were firearms instructors scheduled a gathering and brought the agency into the new century. Got rid of the Mini 14s and 1980s handguns and replaced them with select fire Colt M4s and Glock .45 autos. Now they have Aimpoints and Surefire flashlights. Welcome to the current century.

Get used to red dots as a modern aiming device.

You can continue to learn and improve yourself or you can stay stuck in the "Back in my day" nonsense.

DJ Shipley has a video somewhere on YouTube where he's training somebody to shoot with masking tape over the red dot optic. It's not just simulating a dead battery, it's simulating not being able to even see the front sight through the glass.

He aims with the back plate and correct positioning of the pistol.

Interesting to watch.

Would be interested in seeing that. I’ve seen and done occluded shooting where the front side is covered to teach target focus instead of dot focus.

But I’ve heard of folks taping over the front sight to teach point shooting I guess but that has limited range.

Been practicing that for years, before RDS on pistols were ever a thing. Even iron sights can fail.

Beat me to it.

A very large part of this going to be based on the individual and their level of training and commitment to do so.

Being proficient in presenting a weapon takes thousands of repetitions. When you have done it literally tens of thousands of times, as some competitors have it becomes a matter of unconscious competence. In other words, a person does not have to think about it they can simply perform the act.

Much like an individual who has been driving a stick shift for a few decades does not think about what it takes to run a stick and clutch while shifting and going through the gears and maybe negotiating an obstacle, an experienced shooter does not think about a weapons presentation.

Red dot optics for a person who has put in 10s of thousands of reps are exactly the same. If the RDO is taped up like above, based on the previous thousands of reps, the weapons presentation is still going to be the same. You can present the weapon and perform the same trigger press and you are going to get a hit on a reasonably sized target within a reasonable range.

It is not "instinctive shooting", it is merely muscle memory built in through untold thousands of reps.

Guys who complain about bringing an RDO up and not being able to find a dot, have simply not put in the time and effort to learn a new skill set. Learning iron sight shooting is no different. Nobody instantly was a Grandmaster class shooter the second the fired their first shot with a handgun.

The comments in this thread about inability are indicative of lack of training and ability and unwillingness to learn, Not of any mechanical shortcoming of the equipment.


I was talking with Rob Leatham one day when he was visiting a mutual friend John Shaw. We were going to dinner. Leatham is a professional shooter for Springfield armory and a very accomplished shooter. John Shaw used to compete on the national and world level as well. Long story short, we were talking about the topic of older eyes and shooting. Leatham had said that (paraphrasing, and this is a number of years back) you don't need to get a perfect sight picture as long as you have a great draw/solid grip and excellent trigger control.

I replaced the Trijicon RMR dual illuminated on my G17 Gen 5 MOS with a Leupold Delta Point Pro. The back up iron sites that cowitnessed thru the RMR aren't tall enough with the DPP. The sight are exactly as high as the base on ther DPP. So they won't cowitness thru the window on the DPP like they would the RMR.



When I shoot the pistol using the red dot on the DPP, the dot on the front sight is visible in the lower 1/4 of the window. That dot, and the two dots on the rear sight form and inverted V, a /\. I've gotten to where if I turn the red dot off, I can still shoot accurately because I know where the red dot would have been in relation to the dot on the front sight that I can see thru the lens. I just form that /\ with the sights, make sure the front sight is in the lower 1/4 of the window, and put the target in the center of the window. Been doing it for sometime now and it works very well. Sounds complicated, but its really easy to master. I'm pretty happy about that. I didn't want to replace the sights with extra tall sights just so they would cowitness. I don't think it would work with lower sights, because the front sight would not be visibile in the window at all taking away that reference point I use with these sights and the red dot off.

Which Holosun sight is that?

Especially when the person theorizing never practices their draw and doesn't own a timer.

I would like to piggy back off this:

Learning to use a dot has done more to correct my grip and presentation than anything I've ever used in the past. I still have to use irons on certain guns and since acclimating to the dot, I shoot everything better than before.

I took some training about a year ago and the instructor used a pistol with no sights on the slide to demonstrate how critical grip, presentation, and trigger work was to handgunning. He could shoot just as well all the way back to the 20 and demonstrated this at the start of the class.

I also liked your use of the word occlude.

HS507K X2 - the newer 'micro' size that came out in the last year or so.

Red dots are awesome, but they're harder to track under recoil imo.

As far as co witnessing iron sights with a RMR, is it better to get the higher iron sights or a raised mount for the RMR?

I have a slide milled for RMRCC so it sits low and the read sight is in front on the RMR

I need the RMR because irons do me no good without glasses and I don’t wear contacts.
It works for me

Reminds me of the Detonics.

The best thing about red dots is that they make aiming and hitting your target faster and easier. You just make sure the dot is on the target and pull the trigger. There is no lining up sites with the target and your eye.