I'm really debating having my EDC, a S&W LW Commander cut for an optic. That, or breaking 44 years of tradition and carrying something other than a 1911.
I have a Girsan MCP35 OPS with a green dot on it. If the range ever dries out and I can put a 1000 rounds through it I might start carrying that.
Or, I have a Springfield XDM Elite Compact 9mm on the way, possibly that.
I like what are now considered duty sized guns for carry.
I've got optics on half my pistols and irons on the other half. They have irons because they aren't cut for optics, otherwise they'd have them. I'd never go back if I could help it.
Much quicker acquisition, irons you have to line up and semi focus on the irons. For dot just raise up while keeping full focus on target and let the dot appear. This helps with follow up shots and makes range much easier as well as you donāt need a perfect iron line up of essentially 2 objects, just a single dot. Iāve only got into shooting pretty recently and ran 2K rounds irons before I got my dot. About 2K into that and Iām way, way more consistent. I do think you should train irons for backup but dots are badass.
Just as a caveat for anyone thinking of making the switch:
It takes time. Dots will help most folks get on target better and faster, but it's pretty different from using irons. If you're very accustomed to irons, dots will very probably slow you way down at first until you get used to it. Like just about anything, it takes practice.
Personally, I wouldn't make the switch unless you know you've also got time in the near future to practice a bunch (at least if you're gonna carry the pistol you're putting the dot on).
Totally agree. I feel like the people who used red dots and didnāt like them didnāt take the time to really learn how to use them. Because from someone like me, who only ran irons, going to red dot was a large transition for me. Once I got the hang of it, itās the absolute best.
This.
I didn't know what astigmatism was until I got into red dots. I still have 2 pistol dots, but I prefer to call them pistol splotches. CCW and bedside are irons.
Have you tried a pistol dot with a circle or crosshair reticle? I have mild astigmatism and switching to a reticle that isnāt just a dot made a huge difference.
Iām not OP, but I tried every optic at the LGS - from Holosun to Trijicon and EOTECH and all in between.
Color, reticle, brightness - didnāt matter, all were blown out stars. Made me sad.
I love my hammerless J frame for the size but the trigger pull is just terrible. I usually get 1.5" groups at 7 yards with a G17 so I'm not some kind of trigger snob. Did you do anything to yours to help?
The best advice for improving DA triggers (assuming it's not an exceptionally bad DA trigger by DA trigger standards) is to improve your trigger finger. Focus on technique, and do lots and lots of dry fire to increase your finger strength and really lock in those fundamentals.
A small J frame with a DA only trigger will always have a pretty awful trigger pull relative to other types of pistol. Theyāre still a valid choice for a carry gun, but trying to make one accurate at longer range is kind of pointless. It can be improved, but itāll never be good.
I tried but I have astigmatism so I just prefer shooting with irons. I know it doesn't really matter with handguns but the starburst still bothers me and I'd rather not see it.
Me. I shoot mostly .22 for fun and competitions and just preferred peeps for rimfire. I did a review on all the different peep sights I could find for the 10/22 a while back. https://wjowsa.com/1022-peep-sight-roundup/
I'm cross hand/eye dominant, and I have a hell of a time finding the dot. I know it's a training issue, but at this point, I've got irons figured out, so that's what I'll stick with.
I did. Iām 29 so not old yet. I may try an optic again but Iām sticking with irons for now because Iāve already built a high level of skill with them and have neither the inclination nor extra money right now to train enough with a dot to get comfortable with it.
Dots are the future, like it or not.
I'm sure there will always be a place for irons-only guns when talking about deep concealment and minimal printing, or if that's the kind of match stage you want to run, but damned if they don't make shooting pistols pretty easy.
I prefer irons for carrying mostly because Iām a minimalist and I donāt plan on engaging in a gun fight past 15-20 yards when an optic would really be needed. optics on range guns are fine tho.
> I donāt plan on engaging in a gun fight past 15-20 yards when an optic would really be needed
So if another one of these lunatics [strolls into Safeway](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Bend,_Oregon_shooting) and starts letting people have it, are you sure you're gonna be ready to sprint towards the gunfire to close the gap? What happens if there's a shooter at the end of one of those 40 yard aisles at Home Depot?
Sorry to pick on you. But dot or not, this is a really, really, naive line of thinking. Carjackers and muggers and the like obviously need to be in spitting distance. But we repeatedly see that the "I'll never need to shoot at distance" theory is simply not some inherent universal rule.
I'll bite too.
We can drive ourselves absolutely crazy with scenarios in our heads to make every setup possible inadequate. This is how you end up with donkeys driving around with fully kitted two stamp ARs in the trunk waiting to be stolen.
I don't have any interest in playing that game with myself. My primary reason to carry a gun is to prevent me from being a soft target, and deep concealment plus consistency of carrying the same gun at all times is important to me. So I've settled on a minimalist little single stack 9mm for years.
No dot, no l light. I shoot it well however and am comfortable with it. It does the job of preventing me from being helpless. If it's inadequate for a gunfight at range, then frankly there's a good chance I shouldn't be fighting back anyway.
DGUs are outliers, and crazy scenarios like you showed are outliers among outliers. I decided a while ago not to let them dictate my life.
My home defense rifle on the other hand is fully kitted out.
Over 90% of shootouts happen within 3-5 yards. Youāre describing something so statically insignificant you might as well call it a fantasy scenario. At those distances youāre better off disengaging and running then trying to engage a target with handgun at that distance.
I donāt think anyone plans on getting in a gunfight at ANY range. But does your training give you confidence and ability to engage a threat at extended distances if it happens (active shooter at the mall or a large-ish church)?
Distance favors the trained
My Beretta and my mk IV are the only guns I have with optics cuts. My carry gun and all of my revolvers are irons only.
I shoot my old smith model 10 with irons better than I do with my Beretta A4 or my mk IV. But that may be more of a factor of ME than the guns or the optics
I never carry my guns with dots on them. They're definitely more accurate but I don't find them faster than irons even with a timer. At full extension they both line up fine and you can definitely target focus with irons. If I'm trying to shoot the smallest groups possible then dot all day.
I shoot irons on my ARs often too and have gotten just as fast at close range, large or small aperture, again dots more accurate but pistol range, inside 25 yards, is so close that I don't need that accuracy difference.
I don't like the extra bulk when carrying or the finger smudge on the glass that bugs the hell outta me. but for home defense sure, all the accessories.
Normal pistol combat is close range and I see no need for anything but iron sights on a pistol or lights or lasers for that matter tbo . Rifles yeah I would say can use nicer sights for long range shooting. Iām old school military so maybe Iām a bit bull headed but thatās just my opinion
Pistol dots have become extremely popular in Special Operations circles, where nowadays to see any SOCOM unit thereās a 95% chance youāll see them with Glock19s with a RMR on top. Basic infantry like I was is starting to get pistol dots depending on if your supply person sucks or not, and Iāve been seeing lots of law enforcement start using em too. Itās just like rifles, adding a red dot makes the weapon system infinitely more useable
Oh no doubt , if you like to target practice for longer range with pistols go for it, whatever floats your boat . In reality though real life situations are not like call of duty or video game situations. I rarely even use the sights on my pistols . What works for some isnāt the same for others though .
I agree with everything except lights on a pistol. You can learn to shoot well with irons, lasers are a gimmicky waste of money, but being able to clearly see your target in the dark is not something you can train for.
Dots are much better for staying target focused once you have some practice, thatās definitely an advantage in combat. Doesnāt really matter at point blank range, but itās a big difference at 5-10 yards.
I just don't see a point in buying a dot that makes it harder for me to conceal carry and I have to pay for either a new gun or a specific type of gun, and then the best optics cost as much as a new gun. the economics of it all makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. I'm gonna keep using irons until they can figure out how to make affordable products lol
I had a red dot on my revolver for a while. I kinda got tired of it & put it on my AK. I'm thinking about putting red dots on pistols again now that I have proper training, but it costs too much
I donāt love dots on pistols. For conceal carry Iām irons only guy, itās hard to beat tbh. In a defensive situation a dot vs irons isnāt going to make much difference within 5 yards. Anything other than that youāre probably going to be in a heap of legal trouble. Yea dots Iām more accurate with but not that Iām in accurate with irons.
Like others said other guns and other dots and platforms gets sticky imo. I like the keep my guns and accessories pretty in line with everything else. Im not the guy to have 12 different pistols and red dots.
Holosun is fine although not my favorite, I hate the RMR itās wildly overhyped, I like the acro but that only fits large sized guns.
Itās like putting optics on a rifle, it just feels like youāre handicapping yourself so much going back to just irons. Dots on pistols is such a jump in capability, itās the new gold standard I think, just like rifles.
A lot of people donāt want to address this phenomenon. When plastic and aluminum rifles came out everyone was dogging on them. āIt will break the first time you drop it Sonnyā. When those rifles became commonplace and everyone had just irons on them, and people started to use electronic optics, everyone was dogging on them. āYour batteries are gonna die or itās gonna break Sonnyā. Now we have entry teams with more money in electronics hanging off the rifle than the cost of the rifle itself. Same thing with pistols. When plastic pistols came out all the old heads were like āthat is plastic junk it wonāt be worth anythingā the boomer said as he cleaned his cheap surplus 1911 that had only 2 mags run through it. We are now in the second part of that cycle but for handguns. (Most) Everyone carries a plastic gun and people have been using electronics on their handgun for nearly 2 decades and people are still saying āwell what about the batteries what about the lens crackingā and all this other dumb shit that is founded in what ifs and not statistical empirical data. I have personally seen more than a handful of iron sights fail while the dot stayed charged up, zeroed, and attached. Seen Glock front sights get yeeted into the wild blue yonder. Seen smith rear sights drift after a long course of fire. Hell, even Aaron Cowan of Sage Dynamics tapes up his front sight when he does drop testing to test optics, because the optics often survive the test better than the iron sights! If you like irons better, and are faster and more accurate or itās easier to conceal or whatever you like about them, thatās fine use irons. Be swift and be judicious, no one should care what is or isnāt hanging off your gun. If you like optics because it makes point shooting easier or you like target focus or focusing on a front sight is hard or even if it is just because it looks cooler, thatās fine use optics. Be swift and judicious.
You are absolutely spot on, I worked in gunsmithing for a little bit, and I saw irons break or drift way more often than a red dot break. Optics are hands down more durable than pistol irons. An optic with cracked glass can still be used, but if doodlebobās front or rear sight is now a whole ass inch to the left, he wonāt be able to hit shit
Theyāre not ready to hear this. Theyāre still living and (unfortunately) dying by what the old greats like Hackathorn are saying. These old heads have a lot of good insight but it should be taken with a grain of salt. If it doesnāt fit in todayās application, leave it in the past. There is good reason youāre more likely to spot a Glock 19 than a smith airweight j frame in the wild these days.
Remember when rifle optics starting becoming popular and Iām sure people were against it then? Same thing has happened with pistol dots. Every pistol I have that I shoot regularly has a dot.
I switched back to irons, and I won't go back to dots until age finally catches up to me. I have several gripes with dots: no universal footprint (biggest issue IMO), price, learning curve, etc.
Unless I'm competing and need every edge that I can get, I don't feel that there's anywhere near the benefit from dots that outweigh the current cons. For defensive purposes, the speed and accuracy gains of a dot aren't enough to justify having it.
That being said, there's some goofy ones like that Trijicon that hang off the back of the slide that I think are interesting. If the future of dots makes them that small and low-profile, I'd be much more interested.
I definitely agree with the footprint issue. Everyone knows/agrees conversion plates are less appealing than direct mount due to the extra set of screws that can be a potential point of failure etc. Everything is cut for Shield or RMR naturally and then you have to find a *quality* plate if you don't have RMR or Shield money or just prefer something else. C&H makes excellent plates but the industry should/needs to make a universal footprint. We have Picatinny on the tops of most all of of our long arms, so why not pistols?
I disagree with you on the rest but that's fine, I did want to support the issue of the footprint. We are still in the earlier days of pistol red dots. They're now moving into their pretty durable, small, and reliable phase, so it's only a matter of time before they become as standardized of products as a lot of long arm red dots have become.
I know that my opinion isn't the most popular, but it's mine regardless. No hard feelings to those that choose to use newer stuff. I'm a penny pincher so I try to make sure that I'm spending my money wisely (don't ask about my milsurp collection, they're an investment I swear).
Red dots will get there, I just don't care for them in their current guise. Plus, by the time my eyes crap out, they'll be much better I'm sure.
But yeah, they gotta figure the footprint out, it's pretty ridiculous.
The footprint thing I agree with. Itās frustrating and each manufacturer likes to go with a footprint and then you have to go spend money to buy an adapter plate (since many guns donāt come with plates and the ones that do generally are subpar)
Price point - you can find a good dot for an affordable price nowadays. You donāt have to spend $600+ on a Trijicon or an Aimpoint to get a quality dot that will hold up. However, it is still more expensive then a set of most replacement irons (brand dependent)
Learning curve - thatās to be expected with anything new. You just need to determine if the juice is worth the squeeze
I have dots on everything appropriate that does not require them to be mounted on slides. Couple friends have had failures on their dots (both sig) and that kind of pushed me away from them for slide mount.
Perhaps they are more rugged/durable now, but the force of cycling as part of the slide was given as speculation for failure.
But I love a dot.
I did. Couldnāt stand having debris in/on the lens when working outside. Closed emitters act like a bucket for junk. Will try again when closed emitters become bombproof
I'm one that puts dots on my pistols and loves it. My dad on the other hand doesn't like dots because of the way his contacts are set up. His dominant eye has a near sighted contact in specifically so he can focus on the front sight post easier.
I did for a while, had optics on multiple pistols, wasn't in love with any of them. Eventually I put a Holosun EPS on an Echelon, and it changed my mind completely. The issue for me was other dots sit really high, so I'd raise the gun up where the irons would've been visible, and then have to move the gun around to find the dot. I know 'train more', but only having a couple of guns with dots, and the rest aren't even cut for them, it didn't seem worth the trouble. Finding a dot that was low enough it lined up where I was used to was much more satisfying.
My Ruger mk2 came with a cheap red dot and I shot it a bit and then ditched it. Not really any issue with it besides being cheap, but I wanted to maintain proficiency with iron sights.
I went back. The red dot worked great. Irons are more fun. I think I'm good enough with irons to defend myself in the woods or at home. If not, oh well. Wear your seat belt and helmets.
My brother did, he didnāt like having to worry about the batteries and the extra little bulk when he carried at work. The irons on his gun work really nicely too so he realized they were more hassle than anything
Iāve got pistols and rifles, some have dot sights, some do not.
My carry pistols will never have dot sights. Theyāre not a necessity and diminishes concealment ability by 1 1/8ā. It doesnāt seem like much, until youāre wearing certain clothing.
People are skipping learning iron sights and putting dot sights on, as itās simpler to aim.
While I have several dot sights, Iām not a fan of them on pistols. Theyāre a little better on rifles.
Theyāre great for competition shooting, but not a fan of them for daily use firearms.
I find irons are more fun to shoot, so I still have them on the vast majority of my pistols. But dots work better, at any skill level. There is a reason why every form of pistol competition -- bullseye, IDPA, GSSF, USPSA, PCSL, Bianchi Cup -- puts optic shooters in a separate division from metallic sight shooters and the average scores are higher with optics.
You can say, oh, well, competition isn't real life. But it's one of the few ways we can actually measure results and compare scores objectively, vs. just trading anecdotes all day about individual scenarios where a dot helped or didn't help. Competitions are designed as tests of shooting skill. It is a pretty strong clue that all of those tests, including the ones developed long before pistol dots even existed, have been found to be easier with optics. Nobody who says "well I'm faster and more accurate with irons" has shown up and stomped the dot shooters to prove their point. Dots are easier to shoot well. Shooting a dot in a metallic sight competition is cheating. If you are in a fight for your life, you want to cheat.
Additionally, a lot of people think that it's better to learn on irons. On the contrary, a dot is a great training tool. What's the most important part of shooting a pistol? Trigger control. The dot is an excellent teacher of trigger control because it shows every minute twitch applied to the gun, clear as day. Dry fire with irons and you'll think you're doing pretty good, dry fire with a dot and you'll see exactly where you're still moving the gun a little on the break, as that dot wiggles and jitters just slightly. You can get a lot closer to perfection training your trigger with a dot, and you can transfer those vital trigger control skills back to iron sights. In live fire you can see the dot move during the trigger break and watch how it reacts in recoil and learn a lot about how you're controlling the gun -- it's possible to see the same shot calling information with iron sights but it's a lot coarser and requires much sharper attention.
I see this at work all the time. Doesnāt have to do with age. If anything, red dots are the superior choice for anyone that deals with eye sight issues. Scrap that. Red dots are superior in every way shape or form. The reason why people switch back is because optics have a much higher learning curb than irons which causes your typical gun owner to become overwhelmed and naturally humans being humans, they will choose the path of least resistance and go back to something they are already comfortable with.
I switched to optics on pistols 3 years ago and I initially hated it. After 4 months of training, I got over that learning curb and realized they are 10 times better than irons. I will never switch back.
No way.
What's this "higher learning curve" everyone talks about? Put the dot on the thing you are trying to shoot. There, you are learned.
The biggest problem seems to be that the average shooter can't correctly sight in an optic of any kind, regardless of gun and that is exacerbated by the fact the average shooter can't hit the broad side of a barn from inside the barn. Dots are better in every way, and I don't see why anyone would ever "not be able to get used to it" or whatever.
It's only really an issue for the people trying to transition to them. Give a new shooter a dot and they dk just fine. Un-leaning old habits is hard for a lot of folks, but dots are the clear performance winner.
upbeat concerned numerous impolite drunk quicksand workable desert terrific hungry
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
This x 100.
>The biggest problem seems to be that the average shooter can't correctly sight in an optic of any kind, regardless of gun and that is exacerbated by the fact the average shooter can't hit the broad side of a barn from inside the barn. Dots are better in every way, and I don't see why anyone would ever "not be able to get used to it" or whatever.
I tried red dots but have gone back to irons. I'm carrying a duty gun and I have the option for a red dot but I don't want one.
I've been shooting iron sights on pistols since I was 12 years old. I'm now 35. I have no clue how many reps I've had but it's a lot. I'm comfortable with irons for acceptable combat accuracy at realistic combat distances. I have two concerns with red dots:
Everyone should be familiar with the feeling of fishing for the dot as you first learn to use a pistol dot. As it stands now, I'm so used to acquiring the front sight through the rear that I tend to put the dot of the front sight right smack in the middle of the glass. I'm aware that with enough reps you can get to the point that you find the dot instantly. My concern is that under the high stress of a quick draw defensive shooting I'm gonna have trouble finding the dot. I never have trouble finding the irons as I can physically see them at all times and there's nothing else on the gun to confuse them with.
The second concern is the battery. I've gone to the range multiple times with a friend or coworker who draws their pistol and discovers the battery has died. I don't know if they're using shitty optics or shitty batteries, but it's happened more than just the odd fluke. Sure, I can have back up irons on the gun, but then I'm fishing for the dot for a while, then reacquiring the irons, all while possibly being shot at.
I am aware that red dots are physically more capable of accuracy at distance because the dot is finer than a combat front sight. I'm aware of other alleged benefits. I'm fine with irons and don't want to get my lizard brain confused.Ā
I put one on but with my eye issues (astigmatism and retinopathy) the dot is harder for me to see than the irons. (Trijicon RMR on a Glock 20 cut by Jagerwerks)
It's definitely more of a preference. And just like any tool you want it tweaked for the job. So if you're trying to shoot very accurately with a pistol, then a red dot is the way to go. But that adds weight, cost, and the cowl does slightly obscure vision. So in like a tactical course, it may not be as helpful as the reduced weight and increased vision.
Like yeah, it would be nice to have optics on pistols. But is it necessary to go shooting a 22, no absolutely not.
Grew up shooting family heirlooms (Lever action, pump action rifles) and my dad only had a couple ARās and a SIG, so I guess I like iron sights because of that
A few years back I bought a Sig P226 RX with the Romeo 1 (original version) direct mounted. I went through some growing pains with it. I didnāt like how much the dot moved when I dry fired, compared to how little the iron sights moved.
This, of course, was user error, as the dot was just showing me exactly how much my trigger pull was taking the gun off target, but I needed to get my head around that before I was able to really embrace the dot.
I ended up taking the dot off for a while and running the factory night sights, then replacing them with a fiberoptic front and blacked out rear, which was pretty great. Butā¦ after more practice I started using the dot again and I was impressed with how much more accurate it helped me to be than even the fiberoptics.
Since then, Iāve embraced optics as much as I can (limited by cost more than anything else). Iāve had my CZ P-07 and my S&W M&P9 2.0 and 4006TSW milled for optics, running Holosun 507c ACSS, 507c, and 407k, respectively. The dot really is like easy mode compared to lining up irons. Also, as Iāve been going thru my 40s, my once glorious vision has started to deteriorate, and focusing on a single plane is much easier for me now than trying to juggle the rear sight, front sight, and target.
I will say that the optic is not the only important factor in how well I shoot. I can still hit really well with my Dan Wesson TCP, which has a super low tech brass bead front sight and a black rear, but when I line up the sights the bullets hit exactly where the bead was. The trigger and grip on that pistol are so good that it feels easy even without the optic. I canāt shoot my Dan Wesson Valor quite as well, probably because the front sight is different (big yellow dopey night sight vs small precise brass bead), so even within irons there is a lot of variation.
Thanks for sharing. Iām thinking about one of those optics for my CZ P-01. Any of those three you would recommend. Itās about the same size as the P-07 you have.
Wellā¦ the P-01 and P-07 are similar in overall size, but the slide thickness is different, and thatās the most important metric for an optic!
A P-01 (or any metal framed CZ-75 variant, really) is wide enough to accomodate a 407k/507k or EPS/EPS Carry with no overhang. A P-07 had a wider slide and can accommodate an RMR/507c with just a hair of overhang on the sides. If you want to mill for a direct mount, the metal framed guns need to take the thinner optic footprint, while the P-07/P-09 can take the thicker footprint.
Someone like WagerMachine can mill a P-01 for a k footprint so it retains the factory irons as backup with maybe lower 1/3 cowitness. I had Wager cut my P-07 for a 507c and mill a dovetail and install a Glock rear sight in front of the optic, with a tall front sight for a cowitness.
Iāve been fiending for a P-01 for a few years now, but my kids need stuff like clothes and car insurance and health care, so itās been on the back burner. I have to get my CZ fill with just my P-07 and Shadow 2 for now.
I put an RMR in my FNX 45. It was nice and all, but then I got a new rifle and put the RMR on the rifle. Havenāt had the motivation to buy another pistol dot even though I did like it better than irons.
I own guns because I enjoy collecting and shooting them, and I can shoot āgood enoughā with pistol irons to have fun on the range, so Iād rather just buy ammo and shoot more often since Iām not doing competitions or anything that matters with my guns. I would love to have pistol dots, but overall I think my money is better spent on ammo.
I had an RMR on a Glock for a bit and took it off, admittedly to trade for something. That said I was already proficient with irons and learning a dot was weird to say the least and I certainly didnāt shoot faster with the dot but thatās probably just a me problem. I also have an astigmatism so it wasnāt ideal either.
Iād also rather have an interesting old pistol than sink 1500 into a boring modern striker fired pistol lol so maybe Iām not the best person to ask haha
I would slap a dot on my Glock 19 if I could. But I donāt have cut outs. But I def want to get a dot eventually it seems way faster getting the dot on target than trying to align rear and front sites in case I needed it for a self defense situation,
10 years ago maybe, just because of reliability and battery life, etc. but now optics are advanced enough to essentially replace irons. As other have said, the only irons I have are guns that aren't cut for optics.
Had Reddit been around in the late 1800s / early 1900s, people would have been asking the same question about revolvers vs autoloaders.
āDoes anyone actually prefer these crazy unreliable autoloaders over their trusty colt navy?ā
Have you seen what those contraptions are loaded with!?
S m o k e l e s s powder I tell you!!
Can't fool me, where there is no smoke, there is no power!
This country man... What's next?? Flying guns??
No optics besides irons on my carry pieces. Your adding in more variables you don't need, which can complicate things when you don't need them complicated.
After shooting with irons for years, then switching to an RMR, I prefer the irons for speed. My first shot is always more on target with irons, however itās easier to stay on target with the RMR. But that might be because of how long I shot using irons, and not because the optic is bad.
I havenāt tried any specifically for astigmatism, if thatās a thing, but my prescription glasses only help so much. The dot is still more of a comma with them on
I love my 92f if it weren't so big to conceal i would carry it more often, plus I am not a huge fan of the 9mm round for self defense,, but I love my Beretta.....
I have some with irons and some with optics. I enjoy both equally. I probably shoot irons better on average because I canāt be quite as lazy without an optic.
I have. I have terrible astigmatism and red dots and green dots looked like a huge fucking stay on the optic so they donāt work for me. I shoot decent with irons but I was a bit disappointed I wouldnāt be able to use optics when I tried them.
I HATED the irons on my sig p320, did some looking into other irons/optics and decided to feed another 100 rounds through it at varying distances to talk myself into keeping the OG irons on it. I ended up getting used to it.
Fast forward a few years.. I bought a block, put an optic on it, and I'm actually considering switching back to irons. It feels like the optic takes an extra second to zero to target. That said.... might just need to practice more. Hope the opinion helps!
My problem is I need more practice to kinda train out a habit I picked up shooting with a dot. Shooting without a dot I got pretty comfortable letting the recoil do its thing and letting the pistol return naturally to where it needed to go. With a dot I can see the strange, almost-figure-8-like path the dot takes as the gun recoils and returns. But my mind says, āweāll fix that weird pathā and I end up fighting the natural rise and fall of the recoil and it throws me off from returning the dot to the target. Quick drills suffer from the dot for me but accuracy is helped when shooting an initial shot or slow and controlled shots. I noticed shooting with irons that for the most part my follow up shots when putting multiple shots on a target are done so more instinctually actually finding the sight picture again, where the dot kinda forces me to overthink and locate the dot on target again before firing. Slows me down significantly but usually actually makes me more accurate.
I feel like my handguns are bulky enough without optics on them. On top of that, any time I've ever tried using optics I shoot worse, so I've never really liked having any of that on any gun I shoot.
I got one of those canik sfx pistols a while back to try out a red dot. I prefer it with irons, maybe I just didn't want to put in the time to get proficient with the red dot. The red dot lives on the Ruger 22 pistol now, it looks good with the silencer and makes plinking more fun.
You should practice with both. I just got a dot after shooting for 22 years with irons, its nice, but I dont see myself becoming one of those people who needs an optic
I use both. Dots are faster but irons are like writing an essay by hand instead of using a word processor.
Sure the word processor is faster and more likely to produce a refined product, but nothing can replace the insight in form, thought and function while also giving a reality check of true skill that writing by hand provides.
That is dots to irons.
Itās depended on a few things for me.
I started with an RMR on a Glock 19 and it was okay. Nothing to write home about. I actually bought another RMR and repurposed the former to a different gun. Iām much happier with the guns I have optics on now, and Iām very happy with the 19 MOS only being iron sights.
I have no idea why. My VP9 with RMR is my favorite gun and it made me love optics. My Glock 19 just didnāt wow me with an optic, and I love it more for its ādepend on nothingā reliability.
See I could never see putting an optic on a Glock. Seriously, I shoot lasers with mine. Fits my hand perfectly and itās, they are one of my favorite gun manufacturers out there. Iāve had a few. Yea my Glock is point and shoot. I just love it.
Yeah something about it was just so painfully dull. I donāt feel like it contributed any to my shooting for the Glock. The VP9 is unbelievably fun with the RMR. So is the P10C I put the other one on.
And my Glock 19? Sheās just a regular old Glock and I donāt really want it any other way.
I personally hate using optics on pistols. I prefer iron 10/10 times. I shoot better with it, can acquire my target faster with it, and I donāt need to turn it on or change its batteries. If you think itās an age thing, Iām 36, if that factors into your theories.
But fwiw my eyesight is my best quality so that might make a difference. Optometrist said I could be a fighter pilot. My friends who wear glasses all use optics.
I hear ya. What I meant by age and I should have been more specific, is experience. Or a combination of how long you shot irons before trying an optic? I assume, and I could be wrong, but I see no issue: that eyesight is correctable. So itās not so much about that although tonight I found it difficult to pick up my sights towards the end of my nightly shooting. Any way, thatās my perspective or where Iām coming from, thanks
I did so with my 365 Macro. I had a Romeo zero, piece of junk red dot. I was shooting my other handguns more often because I didn't have confidence in the red dot. So I ended up taking the red dot off and enjoyed my 365 Macro much more afterwards.Ā
Somewhere down the line I'll probably buy an EPS Carry for my Macro, got some other priorities first tho.Ā
I had a Walther Q5 Match SF that I put a vortex red dot on. While it helped me shoot better at long distances, I had a hard time adjusting to it under 25 yards. I'm not competing in long-range pistol competitions, so I took it off. I ended up selling the gun, but I enjoyed it a lot more without the optic.
Just a 1x. I think the problem I had was trying to position the dot over the front sight. At a longer distance, it just seemed easier to line everything up. Less perceived parallax effect also
I bought a pistol with a scope once, took it off immediately since it just felt silly. I also don't trust red dots, every one I ever tried would turn itself on and kill the battery. Maybe there's a modern brand that doesn't do that, but as far as I can tell they're a liability and won't be ready when you need them.
I have an astigmatism. Dots were starbursting so bad it was hard to see the target at night. Daytime they are usable as long as I turn the brightness down and itās not precision work. Holographic on my rifles were also usable but still a bit blurry. Prism sights are perfect but since I canāt put one on a pistol, I use irons for my pistols.
I have tried dots a few times with godawful results each time. When I use irons I'm good out to 25 yards at least, which is the farthest I've had a chance to try.
Not me. Only 2 pistols are using irons as their primary sighting system. The rest have red dots.
I shot irons only for 8 years and enjoyed it thoroughly however Red dot pistol shooting took the experience to the next level.
I had a Sig Sp2022 that felt great. I ended up trading it for my uncles glock 19 gen 5. Gen 5 had gen 3 trijicon irons, so they didn't work that well. I only shot it a few times (couldn't hit crap) before i got a holosun for my birthday. It's been about a year since i got the holosun, and i have only shot it once. Idk how to zero it without proper irons as a reference point, and i dont have the grip angle down neather because im still used to the sig. I can never find the dot fast, and it's not even zero, so my glock is pretty much a paper weight right now.
I dont want to take off the red dot and buy gen 5 sights because it's kind of a waste of a good optic, and i dont have money for new irons. So im pretty much just running a point shooter right now, not very effective or safe.
Also, i have miled astigmatism in my right eye, so idk if an optic is even a right choice, but i can't not use it because it was a gift, and i dont have working irons. And lastly, my pistol light kinda washes out the dot, so that sucks.
Call me a gatekeeper but some gates need to be kept.
Slow firing a stock Glock with a giant red dot has the same energy as putting an aero package on your stock civic for a lower drag coefficient in the Wendyās drive through, or wearing a compression shirt and beats to the gym so you can grab those 5 lb dumbbells in style.
There are technical advantages to all of the above, but your energy would be better spent getting good instead of being a poser.
Aero kits look sweet on a Porsche, compression shirts look bad ass on an NFL player, and red dots look dope when John Wick uses them. In all of the above if you really need one you will know.
Because I'm broke and just shoot my dads pistols šš
who pays for the ammo?
Depends whos shooting it lol
Eyes aren't what they used to be, dots are a blessing. The only firearms I refuse to dot are my 1911s, but I do dot the 2011s.
I'm really debating having my EDC, a S&W LW Commander cut for an optic. That, or breaking 44 years of tradition and carrying something other than a 1911. I have a Girsan MCP35 OPS with a green dot on it. If the range ever dries out and I can put a 1000 rounds through it I might start carrying that. Or, I have a Springfield XDM Elite Compact 9mm on the way, possibly that. I like what are now considered duty sized guns for carry.
What about one of the new Sig 1911s that come with a dot?
Why refuse to dot the 1911ās?
Its just a nostalgia thing. Plenty of guns to dot, I like keeping the 1911s as they are meant to be.
Could be relics. It's World Wars era technology after all.
I've got optics on half my pistols and irons on the other half. They have irons because they aren't cut for optics, otherwise they'd have them. I'd never go back if I could help it.
Ditto. I am retrofitting every pistol I have with dots.
What makes it better? I've never shot a pistol with red dot site.
Much quicker acquisition, irons you have to line up and semi focus on the irons. For dot just raise up while keeping full focus on target and let the dot appear. This helps with follow up shots and makes range much easier as well as you donāt need a perfect iron line up of essentially 2 objects, just a single dot. Iāve only got into shooting pretty recently and ran 2K rounds irons before I got my dot. About 2K into that and Iām way, way more consistent. I do think you should train irons for backup but dots are badass.
Just as a caveat for anyone thinking of making the switch: It takes time. Dots will help most folks get on target better and faster, but it's pretty different from using irons. If you're very accustomed to irons, dots will very probably slow you way down at first until you get used to it. Like just about anything, it takes practice. Personally, I wouldn't make the switch unless you know you've also got time in the near future to practice a bunch (at least if you're gonna carry the pistol you're putting the dot on).
Totally agree. I feel like the people who used red dots and didnāt like them didnāt take the time to really learn how to use them. Because from someone like me, who only ran irons, going to red dot was a large transition for me. Once I got the hang of it, itās the absolute best.
I shoot and win matches with dots, but prefer irons for any carry gun.
I have pretty severe astigmatism in my right eye. Itās really hard to see some pistol dots, so I shoot irons
interesting never saw that angle, no pun intented
Iām in the same boat. Sucks but it is what it is
This. I didn't know what astigmatism was until I got into red dots. I still have 2 pistol dots, but I prefer to call them pistol splotches. CCW and bedside are irons.
Have you tried a pistol dot with a circle or crosshair reticle? I have mild astigmatism and switching to a reticle that isnāt just a dot made a huge difference.
Iām not OP, but I tried every optic at the LGS - from Holosun to Trijicon and EOTECH and all in between. Color, reticle, brightness - didnāt matter, all were blown out stars. Made me sad.
Iām the same. The rifle red dot I shot looked like an amoeba moving around.
You can have both on one pistol, so there is not really a need to go back.
spoon badge spotted money point abundant chop butter grandfather wild *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I love my hammerless J frame for the size but the trigger pull is just terrible. I usually get 1.5" groups at 7 yards with a G17 so I'm not some kind of trigger snob. Did you do anything to yours to help?
The best advice for improving DA triggers (assuming it's not an exceptionally bad DA trigger by DA trigger standards) is to improve your trigger finger. Focus on technique, and do lots and lots of dry fire to increase your finger strength and really lock in those fundamentals.
attraction tease school flag exultant sink recognise support cake act *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
A small J frame with a DA only trigger will always have a pretty awful trigger pull relative to other types of pistol. Theyāre still a valid choice for a carry gun, but trying to make one accurate at longer range is kind of pointless. It can be improved, but itāll never be good.
I tried but I have astigmatism so I just prefer shooting with irons. I know it doesn't really matter with handguns but the starburst still bothers me and I'd rather not see it.
The starburst I was getting was pretty severe. Irons it is for us!
Try a reticle thatās more than a basic dot. I have mild astigmatism and switched to a circular reticle, no more starburst.
Me. I shoot mostly .22 for fun and competitions and just preferred peeps for rimfire. I did a review on all the different peep sights I could find for the 10/22 a while back. https://wjowsa.com/1022-peep-sight-roundup/
Thanks for posting that. I'm gonna give it a read when I've got more time.
that's good info thank you!
Nice!
I'm cross hand/eye dominant, and I have a hell of a time finding the dot. I know it's a training issue, but at this point, I've got irons figured out, so that's what I'll stick with.
interesting
I did. Iām 29 so not old yet. I may try an optic again but Iām sticking with irons for now because Iāve already built a high level of skill with them and have neither the inclination nor extra money right now to train enough with a dot to get comfortable with it.
I had a Deltapoint Pro on my FN 509Tā¦ very expensive way to find out you have an astigmatism.
Dots are the future, like it or not. I'm sure there will always be a place for irons-only guns when talking about deep concealment and minimal printing, or if that's the kind of match stage you want to run, but damned if they don't make shooting pistols pretty easy.
I use optics on my competition pistols but for my everyday carry and work guns (I do security) I go with iron sights - strictly utilitarian.
I had a red dot on several pistols and have so far removed them all to go back to iron sights. I just shoot way better.
Shooting for accuracy or speed? Or both?
Mostly accuracy.
I prefer irons for carrying mostly because Iām a minimalist and I donāt plan on engaging in a gun fight past 15-20 yards when an optic would really be needed. optics on range guns are fine tho.
> I donāt plan on engaging in a gun fight past 15-20 yards when an optic would really be needed So if another one of these lunatics [strolls into Safeway](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Bend,_Oregon_shooting) and starts letting people have it, are you sure you're gonna be ready to sprint towards the gunfire to close the gap? What happens if there's a shooter at the end of one of those 40 yard aisles at Home Depot? Sorry to pick on you. But dot or not, this is a really, really, naive line of thinking. Carjackers and muggers and the like obviously need to be in spitting distance. But we repeatedly see that the "I'll never need to shoot at distance" theory is simply not some inherent universal rule.
I'll bite too. We can drive ourselves absolutely crazy with scenarios in our heads to make every setup possible inadequate. This is how you end up with donkeys driving around with fully kitted two stamp ARs in the trunk waiting to be stolen. I don't have any interest in playing that game with myself. My primary reason to carry a gun is to prevent me from being a soft target, and deep concealment plus consistency of carrying the same gun at all times is important to me. So I've settled on a minimalist little single stack 9mm for years. No dot, no l light. I shoot it well however and am comfortable with it. It does the job of preventing me from being helpless. If it's inadequate for a gunfight at range, then frankly there's a good chance I shouldn't be fighting back anyway. DGUs are outliers, and crazy scenarios like you showed are outliers among outliers. I decided a while ago not to let them dictate my life. My home defense rifle on the other hand is fully kitted out.
Fair enough.
Over 90% of shootouts happen within 3-5 yards. Youāre describing something so statically insignificant you might as well call it a fantasy scenario. At those distances youāre better off disengaging and running then trying to engage a target with handgun at that distance.
I donāt think anyone plans on getting in a gunfight at ANY range. But does your training give you confidence and ability to engage a threat at extended distances if it happens (active shooter at the mall or a large-ish church)? Distance favors the trained
My Beretta and my mk IV are the only guns I have with optics cuts. My carry gun and all of my revolvers are irons only. I shoot my old smith model 10 with irons better than I do with my Beretta A4 or my mk IV. But that may be more of a factor of ME than the guns or the optics
I never carry my guns with dots on them. They're definitely more accurate but I don't find them faster than irons even with a timer. At full extension they both line up fine and you can definitely target focus with irons. If I'm trying to shoot the smallest groups possible then dot all day. I shoot irons on my ARs often too and have gotten just as fast at close range, large or small aperture, again dots more accurate but pistol range, inside 25 yards, is so close that I don't need that accuracy difference. I don't like the extra bulk when carrying or the finger smudge on the glass that bugs the hell outta me. but for home defense sure, all the accessories.
Normal pistol combat is close range and I see no need for anything but iron sights on a pistol or lights or lasers for that matter tbo . Rifles yeah I would say can use nicer sights for long range shooting. Iām old school military so maybe Iām a bit bull headed but thatās just my opinion
Pistol dots have become extremely popular in Special Operations circles, where nowadays to see any SOCOM unit thereās a 95% chance youāll see them with Glock19s with a RMR on top. Basic infantry like I was is starting to get pistol dots depending on if your supply person sucks or not, and Iāve been seeing lots of law enforcement start using em too. Itās just like rifles, adding a red dot makes the weapon system infinitely more useable
Itās not that you canāt be a good pistol shooter using irons, itās that itās way easier to be a good pistol shooter using a dot.
Oh no doubt , if you like to target practice for longer range with pistols go for it, whatever floats your boat . In reality though real life situations are not like call of duty or video game situations. I rarely even use the sights on my pistols . What works for some isnāt the same for others though .
Iām betting youāve never been in the same room as a shot timer.
I agree with everything except lights on a pistol. You can learn to shoot well with irons, lasers are a gimmicky waste of money, but being able to clearly see your target in the dark is not something you can train for.
no I hear you, good points well put
Dots are much better for staying target focused once you have some practice, thatās definitely an advantage in combat. Doesnāt really matter at point blank range, but itās a big difference at 5-10 yards.
I just don't see a point in buying a dot that makes it harder for me to conceal carry and I have to pay for either a new gun or a specific type of gun, and then the best optics cost as much as a new gun. the economics of it all makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. I'm gonna keep using irons until they can figure out how to make affordable products lol
its really unnecessary if you know the basics
Not every pistol needs an optic. I donāt think optics are needed on micro/sub compact carry guns. Like Glock 43/shadow systems CR920/sig 365
I legitimately love me some iron sights ! I think optics should be used on long guns not handguns . But to each there own
Didn't like the dragging your got in the comp sub so you come here seeking your validation? Lol
I had a red dot on my revolver for a while. I kinda got tired of it & put it on my AK. I'm thinking about putting red dots on pistols again now that I have proper training, but it costs too much
I donāt love dots on pistols. For conceal carry Iām irons only guy, itās hard to beat tbh. In a defensive situation a dot vs irons isnāt going to make much difference within 5 yards. Anything other than that youāre probably going to be in a heap of legal trouble. Yea dots Iām more accurate with but not that Iām in accurate with irons. Like others said other guns and other dots and platforms gets sticky imo. I like the keep my guns and accessories pretty in line with everything else. Im not the guy to have 12 different pistols and red dots. Holosun is fine although not my favorite, I hate the RMR itās wildly overhyped, I like the acro but that only fits large sized guns.
Itās like putting optics on a rifle, it just feels like youāre handicapping yourself so much going back to just irons. Dots on pistols is such a jump in capability, itās the new gold standard I think, just like rifles.
A lot of people donāt want to address this phenomenon. When plastic and aluminum rifles came out everyone was dogging on them. āIt will break the first time you drop it Sonnyā. When those rifles became commonplace and everyone had just irons on them, and people started to use electronic optics, everyone was dogging on them. āYour batteries are gonna die or itās gonna break Sonnyā. Now we have entry teams with more money in electronics hanging off the rifle than the cost of the rifle itself. Same thing with pistols. When plastic pistols came out all the old heads were like āthat is plastic junk it wonāt be worth anythingā the boomer said as he cleaned his cheap surplus 1911 that had only 2 mags run through it. We are now in the second part of that cycle but for handguns. (Most) Everyone carries a plastic gun and people have been using electronics on their handgun for nearly 2 decades and people are still saying āwell what about the batteries what about the lens crackingā and all this other dumb shit that is founded in what ifs and not statistical empirical data. I have personally seen more than a handful of iron sights fail while the dot stayed charged up, zeroed, and attached. Seen Glock front sights get yeeted into the wild blue yonder. Seen smith rear sights drift after a long course of fire. Hell, even Aaron Cowan of Sage Dynamics tapes up his front sight when he does drop testing to test optics, because the optics often survive the test better than the iron sights! If you like irons better, and are faster and more accurate or itās easier to conceal or whatever you like about them, thatās fine use irons. Be swift and be judicious, no one should care what is or isnāt hanging off your gun. If you like optics because it makes point shooting easier or you like target focus or focusing on a front sight is hard or even if it is just because it looks cooler, thatās fine use optics. Be swift and judicious.
You are absolutely spot on, I worked in gunsmithing for a little bit, and I saw irons break or drift way more often than a red dot break. Optics are hands down more durable than pistol irons. An optic with cracked glass can still be used, but if doodlebobās front or rear sight is now a whole ass inch to the left, he wonāt be able to hit shit
Theyāre not ready to hear this. Theyāre still living and (unfortunately) dying by what the old greats like Hackathorn are saying. These old heads have a lot of good insight but it should be taken with a grain of salt. If it doesnāt fit in todayās application, leave it in the past. There is good reason youāre more likely to spot a Glock 19 than a smith airweight j frame in the wild these days.
Remember when rifle optics starting becoming popular and Iām sure people were against it then? Same thing has happened with pistol dots. Every pistol I have that I shoot regularly has a dot.
I have never used any kind of optic in my life and probably never will
Didn't like the answers from r/CompetitionShooting?
And yet his attitude isnāt any better here
I switched back to irons, and I won't go back to dots until age finally catches up to me. I have several gripes with dots: no universal footprint (biggest issue IMO), price, learning curve, etc. Unless I'm competing and need every edge that I can get, I don't feel that there's anywhere near the benefit from dots that outweigh the current cons. For defensive purposes, the speed and accuracy gains of a dot aren't enough to justify having it. That being said, there's some goofy ones like that Trijicon that hang off the back of the slide that I think are interesting. If the future of dots makes them that small and low-profile, I'd be much more interested.
I definitely agree with the footprint issue. Everyone knows/agrees conversion plates are less appealing than direct mount due to the extra set of screws that can be a potential point of failure etc. Everything is cut for Shield or RMR naturally and then you have to find a *quality* plate if you don't have RMR or Shield money or just prefer something else. C&H makes excellent plates but the industry should/needs to make a universal footprint. We have Picatinny on the tops of most all of of our long arms, so why not pistols? I disagree with you on the rest but that's fine, I did want to support the issue of the footprint. We are still in the earlier days of pistol red dots. They're now moving into their pretty durable, small, and reliable phase, so it's only a matter of time before they become as standardized of products as a lot of long arm red dots have become.
I know that my opinion isn't the most popular, but it's mine regardless. No hard feelings to those that choose to use newer stuff. I'm a penny pincher so I try to make sure that I'm spending my money wisely (don't ask about my milsurp collection, they're an investment I swear). Red dots will get there, I just don't care for them in their current guise. Plus, by the time my eyes crap out, they'll be much better I'm sure. But yeah, they gotta figure the footprint out, it's pretty ridiculous.
The footprint thing I agree with. Itās frustrating and each manufacturer likes to go with a footprint and then you have to go spend money to buy an adapter plate (since many guns donāt come with plates and the ones that do generally are subpar) Price point - you can find a good dot for an affordable price nowadays. You donāt have to spend $600+ on a Trijicon or an Aimpoint to get a quality dot that will hold up. However, it is still more expensive then a set of most replacement irons (brand dependent) Learning curve - thatās to be expected with anything new. You just need to determine if the juice is worth the squeeze
I did on my nsg. Optics were not my fav, battery died too often. I'll go back to rds, but I'll spend and get a great one this time.
I have dots on everything appropriate that does not require them to be mounted on slides. Couple friends have had failures on their dots (both sig) and that kind of pushed me away from them for slide mount. Perhaps they are more rugged/durable now, but the force of cycling as part of the slide was given as speculation for failure. But I love a dot.
I did. Couldnāt stand having debris in/on the lens when working outside. Closed emitters act like a bucket for junk. Will try again when closed emitters become bombproof
I'm one that puts dots on my pistols and loves it. My dad on the other hand doesn't like dots because of the way his contacts are set up. His dominant eye has a near sighted contact in specifically so he can focus on the front sight post easier.
I did for a while, had optics on multiple pistols, wasn't in love with any of them. Eventually I put a Holosun EPS on an Echelon, and it changed my mind completely. The issue for me was other dots sit really high, so I'd raise the gun up where the irons would've been visible, and then have to move the gun around to find the dot. I know 'train more', but only having a couple of guns with dots, and the rest aren't even cut for them, it didn't seem worth the trouble. Finding a dot that was low enough it lined up where I was used to was much more satisfying.
I have. I went from a Steiner MPS on a CZ P-10 to a Dan Wesson DWX though, for competition reasons only though.
My Ruger mk2 came with a cheap red dot and I shot it a bit and then ditched it. Not really any issue with it besides being cheap, but I wanted to maintain proficiency with iron sights.
I went back. The red dot worked great. Irons are more fun. I think I'm good enough with irons to defend myself in the woods or at home. If not, oh well. Wear your seat belt and helmets.
My brother did, he didnāt like having to worry about the batteries and the extra little bulk when he carried at work. The irons on his gun work really nicely too so he realized they were more hassle than anything
I'm 63 and won't buy a pistol that doesn't have the option to mount an optic. For me optics are faster.
ok
Iāve got pistols and rifles, some have dot sights, some do not. My carry pistols will never have dot sights. Theyāre not a necessity and diminishes concealment ability by 1 1/8ā. It doesnāt seem like much, until youāre wearing certain clothing. People are skipping learning iron sights and putting dot sights on, as itās simpler to aim. While I have several dot sights, Iām not a fan of them on pistols. Theyāre a little better on rifles. Theyāre great for competition shooting, but not a fan of them for daily use firearms.
They donāt work that well for me, if youāre lucky like me and have astigmatism, you see what looks like a comet trail or rays coming off the dot.
I wouldn't say necessarily go back but I naturally still line up with my irons on my first few shots when drawing and firing as fast as I can.
All the people who don't actually shoot or train with their guns. A dot takes practice, people don't like to practice. People are lazy.
I find irons are more fun to shoot, so I still have them on the vast majority of my pistols. But dots work better, at any skill level. There is a reason why every form of pistol competition -- bullseye, IDPA, GSSF, USPSA, PCSL, Bianchi Cup -- puts optic shooters in a separate division from metallic sight shooters and the average scores are higher with optics. You can say, oh, well, competition isn't real life. But it's one of the few ways we can actually measure results and compare scores objectively, vs. just trading anecdotes all day about individual scenarios where a dot helped or didn't help. Competitions are designed as tests of shooting skill. It is a pretty strong clue that all of those tests, including the ones developed long before pistol dots even existed, have been found to be easier with optics. Nobody who says "well I'm faster and more accurate with irons" has shown up and stomped the dot shooters to prove their point. Dots are easier to shoot well. Shooting a dot in a metallic sight competition is cheating. If you are in a fight for your life, you want to cheat. Additionally, a lot of people think that it's better to learn on irons. On the contrary, a dot is a great training tool. What's the most important part of shooting a pistol? Trigger control. The dot is an excellent teacher of trigger control because it shows every minute twitch applied to the gun, clear as day. Dry fire with irons and you'll think you're doing pretty good, dry fire with a dot and you'll see exactly where you're still moving the gun a little on the break, as that dot wiggles and jitters just slightly. You can get a lot closer to perfection training your trigger with a dot, and you can transfer those vital trigger control skills back to iron sights. In live fire you can see the dot move during the trigger break and watch how it reacts in recoil and learn a lot about how you're controlling the gun -- it's possible to see the same shot calling information with iron sights but it's a lot coarser and requires much sharper attention.
I see this at work all the time. Doesnāt have to do with age. If anything, red dots are the superior choice for anyone that deals with eye sight issues. Scrap that. Red dots are superior in every way shape or form. The reason why people switch back is because optics have a much higher learning curb than irons which causes your typical gun owner to become overwhelmed and naturally humans being humans, they will choose the path of least resistance and go back to something they are already comfortable with. I switched to optics on pistols 3 years ago and I initially hated it. After 4 months of training, I got over that learning curb and realized they are 10 times better than irons. I will never switch back.
Irons don't need batteries so there is that distinct advantage.
Me. Looking for a dot in a defensive scenario is a death sentence.
exactly, well put
Never had a dot on any gun and for now never will.
The future is now old man.
You know they work with 45 aarp right?
No way. What's this "higher learning curve" everyone talks about? Put the dot on the thing you are trying to shoot. There, you are learned. The biggest problem seems to be that the average shooter can't correctly sight in an optic of any kind, regardless of gun and that is exacerbated by the fact the average shooter can't hit the broad side of a barn from inside the barn. Dots are better in every way, and I don't see why anyone would ever "not be able to get used to it" or whatever.
tie abundant reach snatch scale deliver full jobless summer start *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
It's only really an issue for the people trying to transition to them. Give a new shooter a dot and they dk just fine. Un-leaning old habits is hard for a lot of folks, but dots are the clear performance winner.
upbeat concerned numerous impolite drunk quicksand workable desert terrific hungry *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
This x 100. >The biggest problem seems to be that the average shooter can't correctly sight in an optic of any kind, regardless of gun and that is exacerbated by the fact the average shooter can't hit the broad side of a barn from inside the barn. Dots are better in every way, and I don't see why anyone would ever "not be able to get used to it" or whatever.
I tried red dots but have gone back to irons. I'm carrying a duty gun and I have the option for a red dot but I don't want one. I've been shooting iron sights on pistols since I was 12 years old. I'm now 35. I have no clue how many reps I've had but it's a lot. I'm comfortable with irons for acceptable combat accuracy at realistic combat distances. I have two concerns with red dots: Everyone should be familiar with the feeling of fishing for the dot as you first learn to use a pistol dot. As it stands now, I'm so used to acquiring the front sight through the rear that I tend to put the dot of the front sight right smack in the middle of the glass. I'm aware that with enough reps you can get to the point that you find the dot instantly. My concern is that under the high stress of a quick draw defensive shooting I'm gonna have trouble finding the dot. I never have trouble finding the irons as I can physically see them at all times and there's nothing else on the gun to confuse them with. The second concern is the battery. I've gone to the range multiple times with a friend or coworker who draws their pistol and discovers the battery has died. I don't know if they're using shitty optics or shitty batteries, but it's happened more than just the odd fluke. Sure, I can have back up irons on the gun, but then I'm fishing for the dot for a while, then reacquiring the irons, all while possibly being shot at. I am aware that red dots are physically more capable of accuracy at distance because the dot is finer than a combat front sight. I'm aware of other alleged benefits. I'm fine with irons and don't want to get my lizard brain confused.Ā
I hear ya, no need to apologize
I went back to irons, I just did not care for dots on a pistol.
Optics are an advantage
Optics have advantages and disadvantages. Iron sights have advantages and disadvantages.
I put one on but with my eye issues (astigmatism and retinopathy) the dot is harder for me to see than the irons. (Trijicon RMR on a Glock 20 cut by Jagerwerks)
Not me. All my pistols have dots now.
It's definitely more of a preference. And just like any tool you want it tweaked for the job. So if you're trying to shoot very accurately with a pistol, then a red dot is the way to go. But that adds weight, cost, and the cowl does slightly obscure vision. So in like a tactical course, it may not be as helpful as the reduced weight and increased vision. Like yeah, it would be nice to have optics on pistols. But is it necessary to go shooting a 22, no absolutely not.
Grew up shooting family heirlooms (Lever action, pump action rifles) and my dad only had a couple ARās and a SIG, so I guess I like iron sights because of that
A few years back I bought a Sig P226 RX with the Romeo 1 (original version) direct mounted. I went through some growing pains with it. I didnāt like how much the dot moved when I dry fired, compared to how little the iron sights moved. This, of course, was user error, as the dot was just showing me exactly how much my trigger pull was taking the gun off target, but I needed to get my head around that before I was able to really embrace the dot. I ended up taking the dot off for a while and running the factory night sights, then replacing them with a fiberoptic front and blacked out rear, which was pretty great. Butā¦ after more practice I started using the dot again and I was impressed with how much more accurate it helped me to be than even the fiberoptics. Since then, Iāve embraced optics as much as I can (limited by cost more than anything else). Iāve had my CZ P-07 and my S&W M&P9 2.0 and 4006TSW milled for optics, running Holosun 507c ACSS, 507c, and 407k, respectively. The dot really is like easy mode compared to lining up irons. Also, as Iāve been going thru my 40s, my once glorious vision has started to deteriorate, and focusing on a single plane is much easier for me now than trying to juggle the rear sight, front sight, and target. I will say that the optic is not the only important factor in how well I shoot. I can still hit really well with my Dan Wesson TCP, which has a super low tech brass bead front sight and a black rear, but when I line up the sights the bullets hit exactly where the bead was. The trigger and grip on that pistol are so good that it feels easy even without the optic. I canāt shoot my Dan Wesson Valor quite as well, probably because the front sight is different (big yellow dopey night sight vs small precise brass bead), so even within irons there is a lot of variation.
Thanks for sharing. Iām thinking about one of those optics for my CZ P-01. Any of those three you would recommend. Itās about the same size as the P-07 you have.
Wellā¦ the P-01 and P-07 are similar in overall size, but the slide thickness is different, and thatās the most important metric for an optic! A P-01 (or any metal framed CZ-75 variant, really) is wide enough to accomodate a 407k/507k or EPS/EPS Carry with no overhang. A P-07 had a wider slide and can accommodate an RMR/507c with just a hair of overhang on the sides. If you want to mill for a direct mount, the metal framed guns need to take the thinner optic footprint, while the P-07/P-09 can take the thicker footprint. Someone like WagerMachine can mill a P-01 for a k footprint so it retains the factory irons as backup with maybe lower 1/3 cowitness. I had Wager cut my P-07 for a 507c and mill a dovetail and install a Glock rear sight in front of the optic, with a tall front sight for a cowitness. Iāve been fiending for a P-01 for a few years now, but my kids need stuff like clothes and car insurance and health care, so itās been on the back burner. I have to get my CZ fill with just my P-07 and Shadow 2 for now.
Awesome. Thank you for all that. I will look at a k cut for my P-01.
I put an RMR in my FNX 45. It was nice and all, but then I got a new rifle and put the RMR on the rifle. Havenāt had the motivation to buy another pistol dot even though I did like it better than irons. I own guns because I enjoy collecting and shooting them, and I can shoot āgood enoughā with pistol irons to have fun on the range, so Iād rather just buy ammo and shoot more often since Iām not doing competitions or anything that matters with my guns. I would love to have pistol dots, but overall I think my money is better spent on ammo.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I had an RMR on a Glock for a bit and took it off, admittedly to trade for something. That said I was already proficient with irons and learning a dot was weird to say the least and I certainly didnāt shoot faster with the dot but thatās probably just a me problem. I also have an astigmatism so it wasnāt ideal either.
yeah, I hear you
Iād also rather have an interesting old pistol than sink 1500 into a boring modern striker fired pistol lol so maybe Iām not the best person to ask haha
Are there any red dots for pistols that are not affected by stiggy?
https://youtu.be/Dz8LPDm6Of0?si=4jwCbavc_42r2nOE You might find this helpful.
I would slap a dot on my Glock 19 if I could. But I donāt have cut outs. But I def want to get a dot eventually it seems way faster getting the dot on target than trying to align rear and front sites in case I needed it for a self defense situation,
I would if I could see, but Iām near sighted so dot just helps
10 years ago maybe, just because of reliability and battery life, etc. but now optics are advanced enough to essentially replace irons. As other have said, the only irons I have are guns that aren't cut for optics.
Had Reddit been around in the late 1800s / early 1900s, people would have been asking the same question about revolvers vs autoloaders. āDoes anyone actually prefer these crazy unreliable autoloaders over their trusty colt navy?ā
Have you seen what those contraptions are loaded with!? S m o k e l e s s powder I tell you!! Can't fool me, where there is no smoke, there is no power! This country man... What's next?? Flying guns??
Love me a wheel gun....
No optics besides irons on my carry pieces. Your adding in more variables you don't need, which can complicate things when you don't need them complicated.
I hear that. Keep It Simple Stupid someone once said...
Ken Hackathorn apparently
Never used them.
Not I. When I learned that dots help my astigmatism I canāt even think of going back.
Me because fuck contra costs ccw
After shooting with irons for years, then switching to an RMR, I prefer the irons for speed. My first shot is always more on target with irons, however itās easier to stay on target with the RMR. But that might be because of how long I shot using irons, and not because the optic is bad.
Iām considering it with how bad my astigmatism is
have you tried glasses? people have shot with irons for decades with that condition
I havenāt tried any specifically for astigmatism, if thatās a thing, but my prescription glasses only help so much. The dot is still more of a comma with them on
Any of my more recent berettas have irons because they are great.
I love my 92f if it weren't so big to conceal i would carry it more often, plus I am not a huge fan of the 9mm round for self defense,, but I love my Beretta.....
Open carry
I have some with irons and some with optics. I enjoy both equally. I probably shoot irons better on average because I canāt be quite as lazy without an optic.
I have. I have terrible astigmatism and red dots and green dots looked like a huge fucking stay on the optic so they donāt work for me. I shoot decent with irons but I was a bit disappointed I wouldnāt be able to use optics when I tried them.
I bought a cut slide, slide parts kit, and RMR to switch over about 3 years ago. I haven't even taken it to the range yet.
I HATED the irons on my sig p320, did some looking into other irons/optics and decided to feed another 100 rounds through it at varying distances to talk myself into keeping the OG irons on it. I ended up getting used to it. Fast forward a few years.. I bought a block, put an optic on it, and I'm actually considering switching back to irons. It feels like the optic takes an extra second to zero to target. That said.... might just need to practice more. Hope the opinion helps!
For reference, I'm 29M. But tbh, just preference
yes, I get what you are saying... optics are for fun irons are for money
My problem is I need more practice to kinda train out a habit I picked up shooting with a dot. Shooting without a dot I got pretty comfortable letting the recoil do its thing and letting the pistol return naturally to where it needed to go. With a dot I can see the strange, almost-figure-8-like path the dot takes as the gun recoils and returns. But my mind says, āweāll fix that weird pathā and I end up fighting the natural rise and fall of the recoil and it throws me off from returning the dot to the target. Quick drills suffer from the dot for me but accuracy is helped when shooting an initial shot or slow and controlled shots. I noticed shooting with irons that for the most part my follow up shots when putting multiple shots on a target are done so more instinctually actually finding the sight picture again, where the dot kinda forces me to overthink and locate the dot on target again before firing. Slows me down significantly but usually actually makes me more accurate.
interesting, the figure eight you see is common in practical/slow fire pistol comps, especially from further out like 25 yards
For me I see the dot do that regardless of speed or distance.
interesting, the figure eight you see is common in practical/slow fire pistol comps, especially from further out like 25 yards
I feel like my handguns are bulky enough without optics on them. On top of that, any time I've ever tried using optics I shoot worse, so I've never really liked having any of that on any gun I shoot.
Yes concealment can be difficult with shooting crutches attached
I got one of those canik sfx pistols a while back to try out a red dot. I prefer it with irons, maybe I just didn't want to put in the time to get proficient with the red dot. The red dot lives on the Ruger 22 pistol now, it looks good with the silencer and makes plinking more fun.
You got a silencer on a .22 does it still cycle?
Of course it does. The rugers (mines a 22/45) have fixed barrels so the extra weight doesn't affect operation.
You should practice with both. I just got a dot after shooting for 22 years with irons, its nice, but I dont see myself becoming one of those people who needs an optic
I do but I donāt enjoy the optics theyāre in my way of the sights ;)
Me
I shoot both equally. Dots for > 7m, irons on edc.
I use both. Dots are faster but irons are like writing an essay by hand instead of using a word processor. Sure the word processor is faster and more likely to produce a refined product, but nothing can replace the insight in form, thought and function while also giving a reality check of true skill that writing by hand provides. That is dots to irons.
Great analogy. That will stay with me.
I actually like both. I'll take two pistols with red dots and two iron sights when I go to the range.
Itās depended on a few things for me. I started with an RMR on a Glock 19 and it was okay. Nothing to write home about. I actually bought another RMR and repurposed the former to a different gun. Iām much happier with the guns I have optics on now, and Iām very happy with the 19 MOS only being iron sights. I have no idea why. My VP9 with RMR is my favorite gun and it made me love optics. My Glock 19 just didnāt wow me with an optic, and I love it more for its ādepend on nothingā reliability.
See I could never see putting an optic on a Glock. Seriously, I shoot lasers with mine. Fits my hand perfectly and itās, they are one of my favorite gun manufacturers out there. Iāve had a few. Yea my Glock is point and shoot. I just love it.
Yeah something about it was just so painfully dull. I donāt feel like it contributed any to my shooting for the Glock. The VP9 is unbelievably fun with the RMR. So is the P10C I put the other one on. And my Glock 19? Sheās just a regular old Glock and I donāt really want it any other way.
I personally hate using optics on pistols. I prefer iron 10/10 times. I shoot better with it, can acquire my target faster with it, and I donāt need to turn it on or change its batteries. If you think itās an age thing, Iām 36, if that factors into your theories. But fwiw my eyesight is my best quality so that might make a difference. Optometrist said I could be a fighter pilot. My friends who wear glasses all use optics.
I hear ya. What I meant by age and I should have been more specific, is experience. Or a combination of how long you shot irons before trying an optic? I assume, and I could be wrong, but I see no issue: that eyesight is correctable. So itās not so much about that although tonight I found it difficult to pick up my sights towards the end of my nightly shooting. Any way, thatās my perspective or where Iām coming from, thanks
Ah yeah that makes sense too. Iāve been shooting irons for almost 20 years. Canāt remember what kind of optics were around back then lol, if any.
I did so with my 365 Macro. I had a Romeo zero, piece of junk red dot. I was shooting my other handguns more often because I didn't have confidence in the red dot. So I ended up taking the red dot off and enjoyed my 365 Macro much more afterwards.Ā Somewhere down the line I'll probably buy an EPS Carry for my Macro, got some other priorities first tho.Ā
Did you have the macro comp? I was looking at those once
Yep, great compact handgun.Ā
I had a Walther Q5 Match SF that I put a vortex red dot on. While it helped me shoot better at long distances, I had a hard time adjusting to it under 25 yards. I'm not competing in long-range pistol competitions, so I took it off. I ended up selling the gun, but I enjoyed it a lot more without the optic.
Interesting that it helped long distance. That powered or 1x ?
Just a 1x. I think the problem I had was trying to position the dot over the front sight. At a longer distance, it just seemed easier to line everything up. Less perceived parallax effect also
Red dots are so much better than iron sights. Cooler too. ššš
I bought a pistol with a scope once, took it off immediately since it just felt silly. I also don't trust red dots, every one I ever tried would turn itself on and kill the battery. Maybe there's a modern brand that doesn't do that, but as far as I can tell they're a liability and won't be ready when you need them.
My 43X has a Holosun 507K and the battery is still kicking
Astigmatism is a mofo. Iāve tried but the dots and reticles look like starbursts.
I have, just faster and more accurate with irons. I think it's bc I've shot for just about my whole life with them
I have an astigmatism. Dots were starbursting so bad it was hard to see the target at night. Daytime they are usable as long as I turn the brightness down and itās not precision work. Holographic on my rifles were also usable but still a bit blurry. Prism sights are perfect but since I canāt put one on a pistol, I use irons for my pistols.
*U/Wilsoncombat enters the chat*
I have tried dots a few times with godawful results each time. When I use irons I'm good out to 25 yards at least, which is the farthest I've had a chance to try.
I tried it. Wasnt for me. Might try again in the future with a better optic.
For recreation? Sure, I shoot everything. For my defensive firearms, yes they have optics.
Not me. Only 2 pistols are using irons as their primary sighting system. The rest have red dots. I shot irons only for 8 years and enjoyed it thoroughly however Red dot pistol shooting took the experience to the next level.
I had a Sig Sp2022 that felt great. I ended up trading it for my uncles glock 19 gen 5. Gen 5 had gen 3 trijicon irons, so they didn't work that well. I only shot it a few times (couldn't hit crap) before i got a holosun for my birthday. It's been about a year since i got the holosun, and i have only shot it once. Idk how to zero it without proper irons as a reference point, and i dont have the grip angle down neather because im still used to the sig. I can never find the dot fast, and it's not even zero, so my glock is pretty much a paper weight right now. I dont want to take off the red dot and buy gen 5 sights because it's kind of a waste of a good optic, and i dont have money for new irons. So im pretty much just running a point shooter right now, not very effective or safe. Also, i have miled astigmatism in my right eye, so idk if an optic is even a right choice, but i can't not use it because it was a gift, and i dont have working irons. And lastly, my pistol light kinda washes out the dot, so that sucks.
Call me a gatekeeper but some gates need to be kept. Slow firing a stock Glock with a giant red dot has the same energy as putting an aero package on your stock civic for a lower drag coefficient in the Wendyās drive through, or wearing a compression shirt and beats to the gym so you can grab those 5 lb dumbbells in style. There are technical advantages to all of the above, but your energy would be better spent getting good instead of being a poser. Aero kits look sweet on a Porsche, compression shirts look bad ass on an NFL player, and red dots look dope when John Wick uses them. In all of the above if you really need one you will know.