Reflex sight on CCW pistol

[Cop Bob]

Interesting thread...

Initially I would have been opposed to even the thought of a reflex sight on a CCW pistol..

Now, I'm not so sure... one of the reasons I love this forum, I'm learning new stuff everyday..

My question is on semi autos mounted in the rear sight dovetail.. How do they hold up to the battering they get? I know that the slide on a 1911 45 with full house loads can be subjected to up to 2000 G's... that is really hard on ANYTHING...

I also have seen some pretty expensive and well manufactured scopes built for .30 cal and similar centerfires, that folks have attempted to use on something as demure as a spring powered BB or Pellet Rifle have the internals torn to shreds.. (yeah I know it is a different set of physics.. but still , it is the battering of the gun that does it)

Just wondering...

The rigs shown by valorius, Japle, and BadgerW have me thinking that this just might be worth looking at.. Nice..

BBob..

 

[Japle]

My question is on semi autos mounted in the rear sight dovetail.. How do they hold up to the battering they get? I know that the slide on a 1911 45 with full house loads can be subjected to up to 2000 G's... that is really hard on ANYTHING...

The JPoint is rated for 5,000 g.

 

[smince]

How do they hold up to the battering they get? I know that the slide on a 1911 45 with full house loads can be subjected to up to 2000 G's... that is really hard on ANYTHING...

My lowly G19 9MM has had around 1000 rounds through it with the JPoint, and has either been holster (90%) or bag carried every day for over a year.

No problems or loss of zero.

 

[Manco]

I swear if we had had this group in the 1850s we would have posts saying those new fancy brass cartridges will never last and the only reliable way to keep guns working is to hand load the chambers.
There is nothing experimental with red dots or holographic sights. They are superior when in use to iron sights,

Some resistance to change can always be expected, however it should be noted that reflex sights are only an incremental improvement over iron sights for some people, and have some trade-offs as well.

watch a pistol competition and see what the competitors are using and they did not put them on there because they are inferior. The military has shifted to them in a big way.

We can't directly compare the use of reflex sights on rifles/carbines with their use on pistols because the former inherently allow for consistent and reliable indexing with the limited aperture of the sights, while the latter do not (unless we hold pistols close our faces). For advanced shooters this should not be an issue, but for those who are less experienced and skilled, I've found that it can be a problem with regard to defensive shooting (can't use the dot if you don't see it), and that a laser sight, for all of its disadvantages, can be far more useful for beginners.

While I favor reflex sights on pistols on a personal level, none of my defensive pistols will have one because they could potentially be used by other members of my family. I'm still debating whether to install laser sights because they have issues, too, although some people do seem to be better shooters with them. In my opinion, simple iron sights (including night sights) are still the most universally practical for use on defensive pistols.

Its not a question if they will be on CCW pistols its a question of when.

They're already here, although in limited use, but unless they will eventually cost the same as iron sights (or close enough), they'll always be an option rather than the default (even tritium sights are still just an option because iron sights still work well enough).

They already own the military carbine.

Unless we significantly increase the size of reflex sight apertures (not going to happen for obvious reasons) or bring our pistols close to our eyes, reflex sights on pistols will always be a different consideration from shoulder-fired weapons--advantageous for many people and situations, but not necessarily all.

 

[smince]

A video of interest concerning RDS-equipped handguns:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhTtn1nf8E0

 

[Ankeny]

...watch a pistol competition and see what the competitors are using and they did not put them on there because they are inferior.

True enough...to a point. I have aging eyes so I shoot IPSC Open Division (optical sights) and I do pretty well. Still, the switch to an optic from irons introduces a new set of problems, such as developing a very well defined index in order to be quick to the first shot, and it takes a lot of work learning to acquire the dot in awkward positions, especially weak handed.

 

[smince]

Still, the switch to an optic from irons introduces a new set of problems, such as developing a very well defined index in order to be quick to the first shot, and it takes a lot of work learning to acquire the dot in awkward positions, especially weak handed.

And there is the beauty of the milled slides: The dot is in line with the irons, so there is very little in the way of a new skill-set to learn.

 

[tkopp]

My Burris Fastfire is not waterproof. The emitter is open to dust/debris/water/etc. The gen II addressed this, but the way the RDS is set up water or mud can still get on the lens. I imagine in the near future a manufacturer will set up a combo pistol/red dot where the slide is set up in such a way that a shrouded, low-profile red dot is integrally mounted.

Because of the parallax-free nature of a red dot, it could even be set up so that your right eye sees the dot (but the vision of your target would otherwise be occluded by the slide) while your left eye is on target. Could make the lens quite a bit smaller that way and make it less vulnerable to fouling. Some solution will happen and change how we use pistol sights, but for now I'll stick with tritium-enhanced irons.

 

[smince]

My G26, milled by One Source Tactical/TSD: