Red dot or irons

[trackskippy]

There seems to be some misconception here that you cant point shoot with a red dot on the gun. Thats totally not the case, and if anything, shooting the dot, is basically point shooting, at any distance, as its a "target focus" type of shooting.

And as I said earlier, if you're already a point shooter and comfortable shooting that way, the transition here is likely going to be a bit easier than if you aren't. When I point shoot, the majority of the time, Im shooting just "over top of the gun", and a lot of the time, that is pretty much exactly where the dot is when I shoot like that, so now Im getting that visual reference/verification more without even trying or thinking about it. Either way, my focus is still on the target, and not the sights.

No matter what, if you already point shoot, you're still going to do it as needed, and without thinking about it. Nothing changes there. What does change is, you're going to find you're now basically point shooting all the time, and at all distances, and its going to carry over to your iron sight guns as well. Im already seeing a change in the way Im presenting my guns with iron sights and Im getting better results there as well. Making that slight change in how I bring the gun up to get the dot, gives me my irons pretty much perfectly lined up and on target as well. Seems like one is fine tuning the other as I go.

I think going forward, youre going to see more and more guns, smaller guns too, coming out and with the dots already mounted (we already are) and they are already getting smaller and less obtrusive. Holosun is now out with the SCS-MOS version that is low profile and mounts directly to the slide without the need for a plate. From what Ive read, it supposedly allows cowitnessing of the factory irons to the dot as well and you don't have to put suppressor sights on the gun if you want the back up.

 

[Spats McGee]

I started with irons (you know, back when dinosaurs roamed the earth...), but I must admit that red dots have piqued my curiosity. I have one on my 10/22, and it sure does seem easy to use.

 

[Tallball]

I'm not interested in RDS, though I've shot with them.

I want a small simple handgun to use at close range.

The RDS unchecks those boxes.

"You don't get to choose what crazy thing might happen..." I might get mugged by some low-life. That's pretty much it, where I live. Anything that makes my handgun larger, slower, and more complicated is a bad thing. I don't need an RDS to get snagged while I'm trying to draw. Being ready for a "25 yard gunfight" that's not going to happen makes me less safe from the kinds of crimes that do happen around here regularly.

 

[trackskippy]

"You don't get to choose what crazy thing might happen..." I might get mugged by some low-life. That's pretty much it, where I live. Anything that makes my handgun larger, slower, and more complicated is a bad thing. I don't need an RDS to get snagged while I'm trying to draw. Being ready for a "25 yard gunfight" that's not going to happen makes me less safe from the kinds of crimes that do happen around here regularly.

Youre absolutely right, we dont normally get to choose what we get. All you can do is try and be at least reasonably and realistically prepared for as much as you can and hope for the best. Just having "a gun", is only one small part of this.

And I don't think a lot of people really understand what realistic "distances" in the wild really are. A 25 yard shot isn't really a long shot, its halfway down a typical supermarket aisle, or across a double bay parking aisle out in the parking lot. And just an FYI, the last shooting around here in rural nowhere a couple of years back, was in the parking lot of a restaurant and the shot fired by someone in line outside the restaurant that hit and stopped the "shooter" who was in the process of killing his ex-wife and her date, was well over 25 yards. Unfortunately for them, he was a tad late with that shot. They didn't make it, he did.

As far as larger, slower, and more complicated gun wise, I haven't seen any of that. I put a red dot on a gun that is the same size as the rest of the guns Ive been carrying daily for the past almost 5 decades now, and it fits in the exact same holster that I was using with the Glock 17 I was carrying prior to it. Nothing about it makes it slower or more complicated to draw and shoot with, and if for some reason the dot were not to be there, there are iron sights right there as well, so Ive given up nothing and gained a LOT more.

There is absolutely no difference in how I carry the gun or draw and shoot from the holster, and I shoot guns that are iron sighted and red dot sighted from the same holster every week.

The biggest and most noticeable difference for me between the iron sighted guns and the guns with a red dot is, my hits on target with the guns with the red dots on them are quicker and more accurate, especially as the distance increases, and especially if Im not wearing glasses needed that allow me to get a clear sight picture with the iron sights. No glasses necessary with the red dots, which is a MAJOR plus, especially in the real world when you're off the range and very well may not have that when you might need it.


If you're thinking about it, I highly recommend getting one and giving it a good try, and take the time to figure things out. 90% of getting there can be done in dry fire and I think you'll be amazed at the results once you start shooting with it.

Youre wallet will likely hate you after that, but you'll get over it. We always do.

 

[Ethan Verity]

I'm relatively young, so you would think I'd be into red dots like all the other hip youngins of my generation... but nope! I'm a stickler for good'ol fashion iron sights. I like the increased reliability, simplicity, and slimmer profile of iron sights on a handgun. I have a general, somewhat illogical aversion to strapping electronic devices to my guns anyway... The only exception to that is a simple white lite on my home defense rifle.

 

[.38 Special]

I started out with irons and still use them almost exclusively. I did compete with a dot back when they were new and it was looking like it might become impossible to win without one.

My experience is that for a competent man, dots are slightly faster. It's not a huge difference, but it does exist. Whether a few fractions of a second are generally important in a gunfight is a good point to ponder. I will note that people who don't know how to use irons tend to be much faster with a dot, and that dots are much easier to learn for most people.

I also find dots slightly more accurate at extended ranges - say 50 yards and beyond. Again, whether that is a legitimate consideration for self-defense is a debate worth having, at least internally. And again, the less experience a man has with irons, the more the difference is going to be.

I will note that sight radius has a huge impact when it comes to accuracy. By the time we're into 6+ inch barrels, I find very little difference in accuracy between irons and dots. I'm not going to try concealing a 6+ inch barrel, though, and the shorter the barrel, the more the dot starts to make sense, at least if pinpoint accuracy is a concern.

Short version: for the experienced gun man contemplating the most common defensive scenarios, I don't think there's enough difference between dots and irons to merit serious argument either way. For the inexperienced fellow, who doesn't want to put in the considerable effort to learn irons, the dot may be a good answer. And for folks with very specific considerations - like my desire to conceal a compact gun and yet still be able to make a head shot on a rifleman from across the food court - a dot may be the only realistic solution.

 

[Pudge]

I shot with iron sights my whole time in the mil, and attended some very difficult training using them. I have no desire for a red dot because:
1- $ I don't need or want to spend
2- a RDS will not help you see the target better
3- another electronic device to fail
4- adding mass and weight to something that is supposed to be light, compact, and convenient is counter-productive

#1, we all have budgets, I enjoy my firearms and their accoutrements, spending for something that improves my performance is worthwhile to me.
#2, iron sights don't help me see the target better, but that isn't really an argument to look for a firearm without them.
#3, I have not found them to be unreliable, but that "too complicated to be reliable" charge has been levied at semiautomatics, and probably shouldn't be dismissed out of hand.
#4, a good argument against high capacity weapons (all that ammo weight), but in reality, my P365 with Romeo is a good deal lighter than all but one of my handguns. And if you think additional mass is only counter-productive, compare shooting .357 magnums in a steel K frame to shooting them in an LCR. Productive mass can be a welcome addition.

If they can't improve your performance, they shouldn't be on your firearms, but if an RDS could improve your performance, it's worth learning. When my eyes were good, I didn't want or need one, but as my eyesight has degraded they have made shooting much more satisfying, and me a better shot than I would be without them. I would prefer better eyes and irons, but you play the cards you're dealt.

 

[valnar]

I'd rather use irons, but my eyes won't let me.

 

[Tallball]

@trackskippy "And I don't think a lot of people really understand what realistic 'distances' in the wild really are. A 25 yard shot isn't really a long shot, its halfway down a typical supermarket aisle, or across a double bay parking aisle out in the parking lot. And just an FYI, the last shooting around here in rural nowhere a couple of years back, was in the parking lot of a restaurant and the shot fired by someone in line outside the restaurant that hit and stopped the "shooter" who was in the process of killing his ex-wife and her date, was well over 25 yards. Unfortunately for them, he was a tad late with that shot. They didn't make it, he did."

That's not SD. I'm not a LEO. I'm not trained or equipped to respond to those kind of situations. I'm just trying not to get mugged or carjacked. A RDS is not useful in what I consider to be realistic SD circumstances.

"As far as larger, slower, and more complicated gun wise, I haven't seen any of that."

I pocket carry a snub revolver.

 

[wetr78]

I use a red dot on my pistols for 2 reasons:
1. My old eyes have trouble focusing the front sight on iron sights.
2. If ever in a defense situation I assume I'll be panicked to the point that lining up front and rear sights may be a challenge whereas the red dot allows immediate aim on target.

 

[DustyGmt]

Alot of points being discussed about nobody knowing what potential criminal may come to do them harm, you'll do best with whatever you've trained the most with. I think if I were just starting out it may be wise to go with a RDS but the 30K+ rounds (could be double that for all I know) I've shot with irons the last two decades I'm starting to think of the point of an RDS for me. Having recoil control and good grip and presentation doesn't just vanish though.

I'm confident with irons, maybe I don't need to switch. When I was a young man in my early twenties and was an idiot I used to think "let it happen, let someone try, I can take care of it". Now I'm nearing 40 and I'm thinking "please don't let it happen, I think I can deal with it but I don't want to find out". It looks easy, just like fighting does in a movie but then you get into it and you find that you've got about 2 minutes of stamina if you arent trained and you'd better have your situation handled before you run out of gas. I imagine it like that, you can be really good at working the bag at home, but when the real thing happens you have to be able to breathe and deal with the stress of it. I think being aware of that puts me a lil ways ahead.

Not sure why I trailed off into that, but yeah. Maybe a dot would be nice to try but if you've been shooting irons for decades, maybe it's best to stick to them. Trying a red dot is still on my list of things to do though.

 

[Pat Riot]

I have a couple of long guns with red dots. Sig Sauer Romeo 5s. On a long gun it’s almost second nature for me to use the red dots well. Not so much on handguns.

I have tried other people’s handguns with red dots and it would take some getting used to,
I have over 20 handguns. They all have iron sights. There is no way I am going to convert all my guns to RDS. Especially not my revolvers.

I have a Glock 48 MOS that I may put a red dot on at some point…or I may not. I haven’t decided.
Unfortunately, at 63 my eyes get worse every year.
I may have to get serious and try a red dot at some point. Except for 2 that have night sights, I have converted all my Glocks to Hi-Viz fiber optic front sights with the red light pipe and the factory rear sights with the white box.
Lots of people complain about their having their “holster box” full of failed holster try outs. Well, I have a much smaller “sight box” from my Glock sight tests and a couple from revolvers.

 

[TonyAngel]

I run red dots on general purpose handguns. The advantages of a red dot become more and more apparent as distance increases, but at close, point and shoot distances, I find no advantage to using a dot. Out to about 5 yards, it doesn't matter. At 7 yards or so is when I start to see a difference.

I still run irons on my carry gun just because they are more robust and less likely to be rendered inoperable and you just have 1 less thing to worry about.

If I could have only 1 handgun for everything, it would likely have a red dot on it.

 

[entropy]

I have an RDS on my main carry gun (Taurus Gx4), and my "trainer". (TX-22 Compact)
I deliberately let the battery run out on the one on the 9mm, to see what kind of battery life I could expect. I got 2 & a half years. So I will change it every year to be sure. The irons are still usable on it, and I can shoot close in (3yds and under) well enough without using either. Where the red dot shines is putting rounds where I want repeatedly faster than using the irons, particularly the further out you shoot. Yes, it took @ 500 rounds and a lot more dry firing before that to be comfortable with the red dot, but overall, worth it.

As for "extra weight or bulk" mine is a Holosun 507k x2, weight is not noticed, the "big" lump on top of the gun took some getting used to, but the biggest inconvenience was having to cut some of the holsters to accommodate it, and some other holsters from other guns that fit it without the RDS now don't. It takes 3 minutes to switch it and put the plate back on if I really want to use those holsters.

I look at it this way; it helps, it's not much of a hindrance as to weight or bulk, and if it stops working for whatever reason, the irons are still there, and lined up when I'm presenting for the dot. I found that one out when I noticed the dot wasn't there one morning.

I hit the big 6-0 this winter and have noticed for a few years now that finding the target and the sighting system in the same focal plane is much easier than irons, definitely the further away the target is.

 

[Styx]

This topic comes up A LOT. Seems it's always the older generation who lean heavier to not preferring red dots or even agreeing with their use on handguns. The further down in age you go, the more you'll start to gradually see the favorability level increase. IMHO, if all the people who started on irons started with red dots instead decades ago, they'd prefer red dot over irons today. They'd also would be much slower and clumsy with irons when initially trying them for the first or seventh time.

There's no doubt or argument that red dots are faster and better the further out you're shooting. They also allow you to focus on your target rather than your front sight. There's a reason why, in general, those who use optics is competition are faster, more accurate, and score higher higher than those who only use irons.

The argument that red dots aren't useful because the assumption is that all self-defense situations will be point and shoot is ridiculous, IMHO. If that's the case, why have irons or any sights on your handguns at all? Why did you purchase night or fiber optic sights? Try completing in IDPA or take another defensive training class, and see how well you fare in realistic scenarios with all sighting systems removed against other competitors. Heck, compete in competition with irons against similarly skilled competitors who are using red dots, and see how well you do.

Lastly, in many cases, you can set up a handgun that has the option to utilize optics and irons. I can still use and fully see the two rear and the front dots on all my carry guns that have red dots installed. I typically have night sights and the red dot optic. It's the best of both worlds, and it gives me more options to utilize for different defensive scenarios. If I'm in a bad breath distance defensive situation, I can point and shoot. If I have to take shots while behind cover, while moving to cover, or while 7 or so +/- yards out, I can utilize the optics. If the optics is damaged or malfunctions (which is possible but not probable), then I can utilize my irons. IMHO, getting training and being skilled with the use of irons AND red dots instead of seeing it as a binary decision is most beneficial and makes the most sense.

 

[Mercy Me]

I don't have a problem switching between a dot and irons, as long as I practice both. It's not that difficult to keep both sets of visual cues fresh.

 

[Styx]

As for "extra weight or bulk" mine is a Holosun 507k x2, weight is not noticed, the "big" lump on top of the gun took some getting used to, but the biggest inconvenience was having to cut some of the holsters to accommodate it, and some other holsters from other guns that fit it without the RDS now don't. It takes 3 minutes to switch it and put the plate back on if I really want to use those holsters.

All of the popular micro red dots optics on the market that I know of are an ounce or less in weight. Most of the others that are used on double stacks are only 1 ounce or a tad over. Despite what some naysayers claim, I highly doubt any of them would be able to the the freaking difference on the belt and maybe even in hand during a blind folded test. I know the Holosun 507k x2 is an once, and my the red dot I use on my Shield Plus and Hellcat are .96oz.

Personally, I've never had an issue concealing my micro red dots or the Trijicon RMR. What has always been the issue for me is the length and thickness of the grip. My optics have been the same thickness of the slide, so if the rear of the slide is concealed and not printing, neither is the optic. I don't use or have any experience with the Holosun 507k x2, so I can't speak on carrying those.

I agree, the main PITA and, IMHO, the only worthwhile con with EDCing red dots is finding a good holster. I personally am not a fan of kydex holsters, but I'm stuck using them as most leather holsters available do not accommodate optics. If your EDC isn't a P320, Glock 9mm, Sig P320 or P365, or S&W 9mm, you'll have it 10x worse when trying to find an RDS holster.

 

[shafter]

The fundamental flaw of iron sights for defensive shooting is that they require intense front sight focus. This is bad because the focus should be on the threat. Imagine being on camera shooting someone who in a split second went from being a threat to dropping their weapon but you didn't see it because your eyes were on the wrong focal plane.

Red dots mitigate this by allowing complete target focus and no fuzzy blurry suspect in the background.

 

[W.E.G.]

If I have the time to develop a sight picture on a moving target, I probably have time to sprint the 10 yards, and make it a contact shot. Although I may be pointing, and flinging lead wildly for harrassment purposes, as I close the distance. Who knows, maybe the guy I'm shooting at during the sprint gets unlucky. Always get closer if its an option.

You notice how all these run-and-gun shooting games require you to "remain in the box" or remain behind the firing line for the full string of fire? Not like that in the real world. Run up BEFORE you get done up.

 

[entropy]

Great advice if your target isn't shooting at you, or is, and it's a military style ambush. It does assume you have plenty of rounds for "harassment" (I always thought H&I was mostly an artillery thing) and no non combatants in the engagement zone. Of course, your opponent won't care about that.

Street criminals usually either confront first, (they generally want something of value) or attempt a knockout or shoot from behind.

There is no "developing a sight picture" on a moving target. Either you've practiced shooting at moving targets, or you haven't.

Then there is the aftermath to consider. "Running up" on your opponent (unless to get behind cover) in a defensive shooting situation is going to be considered going on the offense, and will negate self defense as a legal defense.

If you are referring to LE or military situations, we would be in agreement, though LE generally are taught to back up and repeat commands.

 

[Styx]

This is why innocent people are shot by thugs and law enforcement. It's why dozens of rounds are fired, but only 1 or 3, if any at all, hit the threat. The pray and spray method of self-defense. A LOT of the cases I see on Active Self Defense and in the news do not show threats standing stationary at "bad breath distance" during a gun fight. Both the victim and the threat are typically on the move, going for cover, and/or are creating distance. I can't tell you how many times I've seen thugs fleeing while STILL firing at lawful gun owner who pulled their firearm.

Whether you're using irons or red dots, you typically train to where the sights or dot is on target when the firearm is presented. If you're have to present the firearm and take a second or two to get a for first round on target whether point shooting, using irons, or a RDS, then you need more training IMHO.

With an RDS, you are focused on the target as he/she moves and simply have to put the dot on them and fire. Unlike with irons, this can be done without having to focus on or worry about visual sight alignment with the rear and front sight for a more accurate shot. All that matters is if the dot is on the target.

 

[Pudge]

An RDS is not necessary to shoot well, even at distance. There is a discipline that irons foster that you can miss if you only shoot a dot. I'm glad I learned on irons.

But I typically shoot 25-40 yards with a handgun, and while my eyesight was excellent, it has degraded, and shooting quit being fun. Until I got a RDS. Love it on my Ruger Mk III. I prefer revolvers, and I doubt I'll mount a RDS on a revolver. But put one on a carry gun? I would, and I have. It allows me to shoot with or without corrective lenses, with better speed and accuracy than I could without a dot. I don't doubt that there are many on this board who can do better with irons than I can with a dot. But I've found it to be easy to learn, and an effective hedge against what age has done to my eyes.

 

[JEBruns]

I still run irons on my carry gun just because they are more robust and less likely to be rendered inoperable and you just have 1 less thing to worry about.

Does not have to be either or. Tritium suppressor height sights gives you both. Here is my EDC sight picture. I know the sights aren't lined up in the picture, but when they are, you can still see the iron sights trough the window.

 

[JDeere]

Yeah I was one of those don't need no stinkin dot on my edc guys until I tried one and ran with it. Groups shrank tremendously, irons are still there if needed and they weigh close to nothing these days. I can see that dot and lining up sights under duress is not needed. Not all encounters are going to be that 7yds they teach. I will not put one on a revolver or any pistol not cut for one. That thing you despise because you don't like change just may be your friend. To each his own though...

 

[Derek Zeanah]

But I've found it to be easy to learn, and an effective hedge against what age has done to my eyes

About how long did it take to switch your brain over from looking for the front sight, to just focusing on the target?