MRDS VS POINT SHOOTING?

I've used a Trijicon SRO for EDC since 2019. I've also taken ~100 hours of training with it. For those who don't immediately recollect the particulars of the SRO, it is a large window red dot sight. Compared to the RMR, it trades some ruggedness for a substantially bigger sight window. Even so, the glass has coatings on it necessary to reflect the red diode and the small glass window has to have a concave shape forming the collimating mirror that distorts the image.

The glass on reflex sights has to have a partially silvered multilayer dielectric dichroic coating to reflect the red LED while letting other light pass through. This is what gives reflex sights the "bluish" tint -- it's not that they're blue, but since they reflect/filter red, the image appears more bluish than natural. While color fidelity is not likely critical for a gun sight, the image is also darker because of the reflected light not passing through.

The concave collimating mirror surface also distorts the image. The way I understand it, this curvature is necessary to limit parallax error. This is, in essence, what makes the dot appear at "infinity" even though it is closer to the shooter than most traditional front sights. The dot is not, in fact, parallax free, but the error circle is equal to the diameter of the collimating optics for any target at a finite distance. Because handgun targets tend to be at fairly close range, a fairly small diameter (highly curved) mirror is used. There can be quite a bit of aberration off-axis.

What this comes down to is that the image of the threat through the handgun reflex sight is not that great. The decided advantage of the reflex sight is the smaller, more precise reticle that is easily visible. The claimed advantage of having the front sight focused at (near) infinity or target/threat distance is meaningful but diminished by the fact that the view of the target/threat is obscured by optical distortions.
 
At pistol distances, this is mostly an acceptable trade off (everything in optics is a trade off), though I will certainly agree it degrades the image in low light.
 
I've not had the opportunity to shoot a pistol with a RD.

When I was heavily shooting competitively, at anything 12 ish yards and in I was basically point shooting, and did pretty well. I practiced so much drawing and getting that front sight up that when the timer went off and I got some adrenalin I realized I wasn't even looking at the sights at those distances. I was focused on the target.

If you really practice the fundamentals hard core I'm of the mind that even irons don't really matter that much in a CQC defensive situation.

Now when you get out to 15yds or more I can see a dot being beneficial. But I'd imagine it's more of a competency/training thing.
 
At the beginning of 2022 I would have said I've never shot a red dot and don't need one.
Couple months into 2022 I decided to try a red dot on a MOS Glock, figured if I didn't like it I'd send it back to Amazon. Initially I wasn't sold on it, I was quicker with fixed sights inside 10 yards but the dot was advantageous at 25 so I kept it. Subsequently I got another MOS Glock and put a RDS on it too. I would take fixed sight Glocks and RDS Glocks to the range and compare. It took about 600 rounds but eventually I felt my speed inside 10 yards with the RDS was on par with fixed sights; after 800 rounds or so I always carry a Glock with a red dot.
It took several range sessions and about 800 rounds but I went from I don't need that to I'm carrying that.

Relevant info:
I don't (nor don't have to) limit myself to pocket carry; I'm willing and able to carry a holstered pistol on belt which is a factor in carrying a pistol with a dot.

I'm a bit nearsighted; I can see front sight fine with no glasses, target will be a bit fuzzy; with no glasses the red dot has a tail, looks like a comma but its useable.
With glasses on the red dot is clear as is the target, clearly (pun intended) it is advantageous to have both sighting system and target in focus.

Most of my shooting is at 8-10 yards at speed, fast as I can stay on a 6'' circle (think .25 - .33 splits); I am not content to just to hit inside a silhouette.
Good luck staying on a 6'' circle at 8-10 yards without using sights (point shooting).
 
I think red dot sights on an handgun are an advantage when shooting out beyond 10 yards. I do not use one. I have three reasons for that.

First, I have been shooting with iron sights since boot camp in 1959. I am very accustomed to them. They are reliable and have no batteries or technology to fail.

Second, I have studied and practiced point shooting beginning in 1961 when the M1911 became my primary weapon. Put the front sight on the target, level the gun axis, pull the trigger. It’s easily good at 20 feet, and it works at 30 feet but takes practice. I do not expect to get into a gunfight with someone more than 20 feet away. If I did, then I also am good at careful aiming with iron sights.

Third, I do not have the energy, time, or inclination to practice with a MRDS to the point of great proficiency. I am 80, and my days doing training on new tech are passed.

That said, I think the article was really good and accurate. I agree with its conclusion that police should consider the MRDS as a better tool than iron sights. LEOs often are shooting at long enough distances to gain the benefit of them, and they have more opportunity to practice at official ranges. They also face more threats than I ever will, and they ought to be given the best tools and training available.

If I were a LEO, I think I would want one on my pistol.
 
I currently dont have a red dot on any of my handguns, but do on a number of rifles. Knowing the impact they had there, the only reason I dont have one (yet) on a handgun is, I know Im going to like/want it and I just dont have the funds to put a proper one on all the guns I would need/want them on.

I think something that needs to be addressed though, red dot or not is, you need to shoot in as many different ways possible on a regular basis, to have a good base and background to be able to just shoot reasonably well, and with any gun you might pick up. Aimed fire, unaimed fire (thats actually a misnomer in most cases), static vs mobile shooting, etc, whatever, you need to actually do it, if you hope to be reasonably proficient at it.

The misnomer thing about "point shooting" is, its really not "unaimed" fire in most cases. You're just not consciously focused on the sights as you shoot, but there is aiming going on in the brain in the background.

The one common thing here with any of it is, you have to put in the time, effort, and ammo on a regular basis to be able to shoot reasonably well, at least in any kind of realistic manner. Youre focus should be on the target when you shoot, and you shouldnt have to "think" about any aspect of shooting the gun, it should just happen naturally, and however you need to do it, in the moment. The only way you get there, is to constantly shoot, in as many different ways as possible, in regular and constant practice.
 
dweis said:
I think red dot sights on an handgun are an advantage when shooting out beyond 10 yards. I do not use one. I have three reasons for that.

First, I have been shooting with iron sights since boot camp in 1959. I am very accustomed to them. They are reliable and have no batteries or technology to fail.

Second, I have studied and practiced point shooting beginning in 1961 when the M1911 became my primary weapon. Put the front sight on the target, level the gun axis, pull the trigger. It’s easily good at 20 feet, and it works at 30 feet but takes practice. I do not expect to get into a gunfight with someone more than 20 feet away. If I did, then I also am good at careful aiming with iron sights.

Third, I do not have the energy, time, or inclination to practice with a MRDS to the point of great proficiency. I am 80, and my days doing training on new tech are passed.

That said, I think the article was really good and accurate. I agree with its conclusion that police should consider the MRDS as a better tool than iron sights. LEOs often are shooting at long enough distances to gain the benefit of them, and they have more opportunity to practice at official ranges. They also face more threats than I ever will, and they ought to be given the best tools and training available.

If I were a LEO, I think I would want one on my pistol.
Click to expand...
You only have 10 years on me and I could not agree more.
I did put a dot on my Ruger Max 9 ( it comes optic ready) and have gotten some training on it at the range where I work but for me—and my boring lifestyle—it’s just a range toy.
 
I have a red dot on a Browning Buckmark and have found it to be useful out past 50' for plinking and target shooting.

I use iron on my carry guns as I have found I am just plain faster and more target-centric than with a red dot. However, my self defense shooting style is a little unique. I do not line up the sites, but rather keep the gun below my site line with the front site on my peripheral. This allows me to fully concentrate on the target and surroundings while still being able to easily hit the happy switch and put rounds wherever I want. This method works for me out to about 15 yards. Past that or if I need a tighter shot, it takes less than a second to lift the gun and establish a site picture. I have tried this with a red dot and it does not work for me. I can lift and align faster with iron.

Red dot vs iron is the same as chocolate vs vanilla. Neither one is wrong and it is a matter of personal preference.
 
“Good luck staying on a 6'' circle at 8-10 yards without using sights (point shooting).”

8-10 yards is a pretty irresponsible distance to be popping off rounds in Main Street USA.
A a 6 inch circle is a very unrealistic target on a moving, shooting back human.
Evan Marshal recently posted that being prepared for a bad breath distance gunfight is a lot more practical than a 40 yard headshot.
 
Becoming proficient with a red dot requires training and practice. If you aren't willing to do either then red dots aren't for you.

Point shooting (instinctive shooting) doesn't have anything to do with using the sights on your firearm. It has to do with trusting your mind and body to work together without having the human they are attached to get in the way.

This is a decent video on point shooting. It helps to listen to all the words Mr. Horner says.
 
Matthew Temkin said:
“Good luck staying on a 6'' circle at 8-10 yards without using sights (point shooting).”

8-10 yards is a pretty irresponsible distance to be popping off rounds in Main Street USA.
A a 6 inch circle is a very unrealistic target on a moving, shooting back human.
Evan Marshal recently posted that being prepared for a bad breath distance gunfight is a lot more practical than a 40 yard headshot.
Click to expand...
It is, but that shouldnt stop you from striving to be able to make those 40 yard shots should you have to.
 
Nothing that Mr. Marshal says contradicts that.
But be advised that should something go wrong with that 40 yard shot—such as hitting a bystander—your actions may not be deemed as reasonable.
I am a private citizen now and I carry a gun for the defense of me and mine,
And I have been in enough armed encounters to know how it will most likely go down.
 
Understood.

I just think a lot of people are woefully under prepared for most anything, and even the close range stuff can likely be sketchy. Hell, just look at how many cops miss at close range and they are supposedly "trained".

I would hope that if you choose to carry a gun, you are at least somewhat realistically competent with it and work with whatever it is you choose, regularly in some kind of realistic practice. If all you do is stand there and shoot tight little groups at close range and call yourself prepared, youre simply deluding yourself.

Im all for people carrying a gun, its just kind of scary knowing a lot of people are, and probably shouldnt be.
 
Matthew Temkin said:
“Good luck staying on a 6'' circle at 8-10 yards without using sights (point shooting).”

8-10 yards is a pretty irresponsible distance to be popping off rounds in Main Street USA.
A a 6 inch circle is a very unrealistic target on a moving, shooting back human.
Evan Marshal recently posted that being prepared for a bad breath distance gunfight is a lot more practical than a 40 yard headshot.
Click to expand...
3 yards is conversation distance.

5 yards is a car length.

7 yards is hallway distance.

15 yards is your car broken down on the side of the road and armed robbers pull up to exploit your vulnerability.

25 yards is the length of a tractor-trailer.

The consensus of many reputable trainers is an 8-inch circle target represents the vital zone on a human target.

"A gunfight is more like a fistfight than a tactical nuclear exchange." -- John Farnam

Farnam's observation is validated by the 67 students of Tom Givens who were involved in DGU incidents as intended victims. 61 of the incidents occurred between 3-7 yards, with the overwhelming majority being between 3-5 yards. 3 incidents were beyond 7 yards, with the longest being 21 yards (across the street). 3 of his students were murdered when they decided they didn't need to carry a gun that day.

Focus the majority of your training for the most likely distances, then include outlier distances when you have the luxury to do so.
 
Matthew Temkin said:
“Good luck staying on a 6'' circle at 8-10 yards without using sights (point shooting).”

8-10 yards is a pretty irresponsible distance to be popping off rounds in Main Street USA.
A a 6 inch circle is a very unrealistic target on a moving, shooting back human.
Evan Marshal recently posted that being prepared for a bad breath distance gunfight is a lot more practical than a 40 yard headshot.
Click to expand...

You're killing me :rofl: with those first two comments.

For perspective, today was my 12th rage session just since May (when I bought another frequent shooter card) this year, about 125 rounds each session.
I did not use a shot timer today but I have in the past enough to say I'm subjectively experienced when we get to the double taps & fast shooting.
I start at 25 yards, slow fire, unsupported 10 rounds each, Glock 34 then 22:
Dec6th1.jpg


Okay enough of slow. Time for speed, double taps, fast shots, about .25 - .33 sec splits - 10 yards. My beloved 6'' circles.
Dec6th2.jpg


Now when we (I) take the 6'' circles away, we (I) still make good hits at speed. These were two to body then two to head, repeat.
I'm pulling low at speed (head) with the 34 (9mm) so I check the dot (slow fire) on the little guy (top left); yea, dot is on just me pulling low shooting fast.
Dec6th3.jpg


Also, I bought Evan Marshalls "Handgun Stopping Power" in 1992 (I'm not new to this) and subsequently "Street Stoppers" & "Stopping Power".
 
Two thoughts...

First, it seems to me that dots are a good idea for people who aren't really "gun people", including quite a few cops. It seems to me that folks who shoot quite a bit are roughly as fast and accurate with irons as with dots (yes, the evidence is that at the cutting edge, dots are a little faster, but the difference is measured in fractions of a second over multiple stages) but people who haven't put in the effort to really master iron sights do much better with dots.

Second, I don't quite understand the thread title. I can point shoot (and hip shoot) just fine with my dot-equipped guns, so it's not a mutually exclusive concept - though of course, it's kind of hard to use the dot when it's not mounted on the gun...
 
I think the dots likely simplify things for those who dont have a lot of experience. If thats all they know though, it kind of limits them to that, and same as a long gun. Not that they, or specifically, their brain, wont pick up the other cues the more they shoot and become proficient. That part works the same, but again, there are some limits.

I also think the big advantage the older, long term, higher volume shooters have over those who are sorta "starting in the middle to end" here, and especially if they dont shoot much is, they've been through a lot of the different methods of how to shoot, and they've likely perfected each as they came along, and the experiences with "improvements", in both technique and tools that they have, gives them a much broader base to draw from, and they are likely going to be more adaptable and versatile.

There are enough varied cues and muscle memories stored up in their heads and time in practice with them, that they settle into a groove of this and that that works for them, and they dont really think about doing specific things, and just comfortably morph through them as needed. The dots of course will be included here too, as long as the shooter continues to move forward with their education, and will just be added to the database already in their heads.

Just having the dot, doesn't make all the other stuff just go away or get lost, and if and when things might go bad, your subconscious brain will likely use everything at its disposal, even if your conscious brain might start to tunnel vision or start to go into vapor lock.

The whole trick (and its no "trick") here, is to have a good, solid base of experience and just to be able to shoot without having to think about shooting, in any way you might have to shoot, and sights or no sights.

Its all very ZEN like Grasshopper, and the sound of one hand clapping is a rapid....Bang, Bang, Bang! :p
 
CDW4ME said:
You're killing me :rofl: with those first two comments.

For perspective, today was my 12th rage session just since May (when I bought another frequent shooter card) this year, about 125 rounds each session.
I did not use a shot timer today but I have in the past enough to say I'm subjectively experienced when we get to the double taps & fast shooting.
I start at 25 yards, slow fire, unsupported 10 rounds each, Glock 34 then 22:
View attachment 1119436

Okay enough of slow. Time for speed, double taps, fast shots, about .25 - .33 sec splits - 10 yards. My beloved 6'' circles.
View attachment 1119437

Now when we (I) take the 6'' circles away, we (I) still make good hits at speed. These were two to body then two to head, repeat.
I'm pulling low at speed (head) with the 34 (9mm) so I check the dot (slow fire) on the little guy (top left); yea, dot is on just me pulling low shooting fast.
View attachment 1119438

Also, I bought Evan Marshalls "Handgun Stopping Power" in 1992 (I'm not new to this) and subsequently "Street Stoppers" & "Stopping Power".
Click to expand...
CDW4ME said:
You're killing me :rofl: with those first two comments.

For perspective, today was my 12th rage session just since May (when I bought another frequent shooter card) this year, about 125 rounds each session.
I did not use a shot timer today but I have in the past enough to say I'm subjectively experienced when we get to the double taps & fast shooting.
I start at 25 yards, slow fire, unsupported 10 rounds each, Glock 34 then 22:
View attachment 1119436

Okay enough of slow. Time for speed, double taps, fast shots, about .25 - .33 sec splits - 10 yards. My beloved 6'' circles.
View attachment 1119437

Now when we (I) take the 6'' circles away, we (I) still make good hits at speed. These were two to body then two to head, repeat.
I'm pulling low at speed (head) with the 34 (9mm) so I check the dot (slow fire) on the little guy (top left); yea, dot is on just me pulling low shooting fast.
View attachment 1119438

Also, I bought Evan Marshalls "Handgun Stopping Power" in 1992 (I'm not new to this) and subsequently "Street Stoppers" & "Stopping Power".
Click to expand...
Nice shooting.
How exactly does this relate to a gunfight?
 
I'm past the mid point of my seventh decade. The RDS at this point in my life is interesting to read about but that's about it. I'm not going to have a hand gun modified for mounting a RDS or acquire one already setup for mounting of one. With standard OEM sights I shoot 10 yards with out problem and 25 yards adequately but could be better.
 
.38 Special said:
It seems to me that folks who shoot quite a bit are roughly as fast and accurate with irons as with dots (yes, the evidence is that at the cutting edge, dots are a little faster, but the difference is measured in fractions of a second over multiple stages)
Click to expand...
I’m not so sure about this. Over the weekend I did an informal head to head stage after a USPSA match that was pretty enlightening.

The stage was set up using about 9 steel targets on each side (mix of USPSA mini-poppers and 6” plates at about 20 yards) and the rules were to clear all but the last pooper on your side, reload, then engage the final target on your side. 2 shooters at a time, each shooter had their own target array, and both shooters started on the same “go” signal.

I’m technically unclassified, but I’m shooting around a B level. I haven’t shot enough classifiers yet (I’ve only shot USPSA for a year and changed to Carry Optics about mid-way through the year), but my last few matches I’ve finished with the B group.

Anyway, I (effectively a B class shooter shooting a normal gun with an optic) was able to clear the stage (with a reload) a fraction of a second faster than a shooter in Limited (highly tuned 2011 race gun with improved single action trigger, flared mag well for easier reloads, but irons) who has a Master rating.

So lots of caveats of course. It was one stage, shot once. The other shooter had a good day (they won Limited) and I had a decent day, but they could have just had a bad stage or something like that.

I’m aware this is not definitive proof by any means, but having an optic let me (B Class) be competitive against a more experienced and more skilled opponent (M Class) who had a much more purpose-built gun. I’d say that’s more than a difference of fractions of a second over multiple stages.



Another anecdote, I am far from an inexperienced shooter but both my speed and accuracy increased significantly when I switched to using an optic. There was definitely a learning curve involved, but once I got past it there was a marked improvement. Just like with rifles, I can put the same groups together regardless of if I’m using irons or a dot, but start shooting quickly, moving, and transitioning between targets, it all becomes much easier when using a dot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

USBP379
  • Locked
Shadow Systems with Steiner or Aimpoint
Replies
0
Views
228
USBP379
USBP379
B
  • Locked
Integrated Threat Focused Training - Starke, Fla
Replies
4
Views
393
JMusic
J
Matthew Temkin
  • Locked
Carbine Point Shooting AAR
2 3
Replies
50
Views
2K
7677
7
Matthew Temkin
  • Locked
Seecamps Advice on Point Shooting.
Replies
2
Views
455
1 old 0311
1
Matthew Temkin
  • Locked
Modern Point Shooting
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Replies
217
Views
11K
Matthew Temkin
Matthew Temkin
Back
Top