Reflex vs. Laser

[JohnBiltz]

After reading this I'm puzzled. Why do people think combat experience with red dots is theoretical? We have been fighting with red dots for eight years in Iraq and Afghanistan. My prediction is in 30 years there will be no iron sights except for cowboy shooters. They are already back up systems only for serious military forces. Writings on the wall.

 

[Skribs]

John, I think we'll still have irons as BUIS, and a lot of smaller pistols will only have irons even in the future.

People seem to be saying that red dot on rifle = pro military, red dot on pistol = theory. I don't understand that...if it works on the rifle, it should work on a pistol.

 

[DefiantDad]

I reckon the stock and cheek weld on the rifle makes it much faster to have the red dot in the ballpark, compared to a pistol, as you raise the arms. Unless of course you are already moving and acquiring targets while holding the pistol up so you are looking through the red dot already.

 

[skt239]

I use a crimson trace on my carry gun. It's a model LG105 Defender and I love it. It has no on/off switch, you simply apply pressure and it comes on. If you want it off, it takes very little letting up so that's not an issue. When I practice, I do half my shooting with the CT and half with the stock grips; no matter which I use, my shots end up in the same place.

Drying firing with the crimson trace not only helps you with trigger control, it also hones your point shooting skills. After about a year of using one, when I do draw and fire drills, I don't even pay attention to the dot, I just natural point where I'm supposed to. I attribute that to practicing with the CT. I can't say that it's better than a reflex because I have no experience with them. However, I can say that the pros of the CT far out way any of the commonly stated cons. The only downside I can find about the CT's is the cost.

 

[ku4hx]

Based on a real world wife-home-alone-front-door-broken-down-and-perp-in-the-house experience, wife and I settled on lasers and lots of practice with them. We have five CTC lasers on various guns in the SD rotation. Wife raked the slide on her Glock 23 and the guy she faced down turned and ran. The G23 is one of the five with CTC devices.

In low light situations, they're pretty much "point and click". Not perfect; nothing is, but based on her experience she feels they give us the advantage and she should know in my opinion. Coupled with an active and monitored alarm system, intrusion hardened door frames and other anti intrusion measures we feel we've done pretty much all we can do without building a fort.

And, just as a side note, we live in a gated "secure and safe" subdivision. As if there really are any of those.

 

[basicblur]

We have been fighting with red dots for eight years in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Mebbe I missed it, but I have yet to see a Reflex style sight on a military sidearm.

 

[Comedian]

Mebbe I missed it, but I have yet to see a Reflex style sight on a military sidearm.

Irrelevant, the benefits of having a reflex sight on a pistol are the same as they are for a rifle.

 

[basicblur]

Irrelevant, the benefits of having a reflex sight on a pistol are the same as they are for a rifle.

And I'm sure the downsides are the same also - must be some reason the miltary doesn't use 'em on their sidearms if they were the end all / be all that some folks seem to think.

 

[Comedian]

And I'm sure the downsides are the same also

What are the downsides of getting a proper sight picture faster? Given the state of current mini-reflex sights the only thing I can think of is a minor amount of additional bulk and the cost of having a pistol slide milled.

- must be some reason the miltary doesn't use 'em on their sidearms if they were the end all / be all that some folks seem to think.

Why spend the time/money/resources to mount red dots on a weapon that is rarely, if ever, going to be used? There's a reason most modern military small arms are equipped with optics. They're better than iron sights.

 

[basicblur]

What are the downsides of getting a proper sight picture faster?

You may or may not get a sight picture faster - there are numerous scenarios where you would probably be better served with a laser (like any time you may be forced to shoot without being able to use your gun as scripted).

Given the state of current mini-reflex sights the only thing I can think of is a minor amount of additional bulk and the cost of having a pistol slide milled.

I guess one has to define minor - somebody (in this thread earlier?) was investigating putting an RMR on a S&W SHIELD...aren't we getting just a wee bit silly here? I also seem to recall some saying they'd lose their rear site by installling the RMR - extremely bad idea. As a retired industrial troubleshooter, it always amazes me how trusting in technology some folks can be.

Why spend the time/money/resources to mount red dots on a weapon that is rarely, if ever, going to be used?

And exactly how often does one plan to use his HD weapon?
I don't know if that's such a good argument for not putting one on a gun, but as others have stated, it's money probably better spent on ammo / practice / training.

There's a reason most modern military small arms are equipped with optics. They're better than iron sights.

They also have lasers, so now we're back to which is better?

I have lasers, no optics on my handguns, and in a SD scenario, would not be surprised at all if I would resort to point shooting, at least for the initial shots.

 

[Greg528iT]

As for the Army having sights on pistols or not.. I think that is more a case of, The preferred tactical weapon is a RIFLE. The pistols are just back ups. Once a pistol becomes the preferred tactical weapon, you'll see them retrofitting M9s with halo sights.

 

[Comedian]

You may or may not get a sight picture faster - there are numerous scenarios where you would probably be better served with a laser (like any time you may be forced to shoot without being able to use your gun as scripted).

Do list them, because I'm not coming up with any (let alone "numerous") instances in which one has time to acquire a dot, fractions of inch in size (and possibly several yards away), and put it on the target but lacks the time to use sights.

I guess one has to define minor - somebody (in this thread earlier?) was investigating putting an RMR on a S&W SHIELD...aren't we getting just a wee bit silly here?

Obviously there are practical limits to what you can mount an optic on, that wasn't the point.

I also seem to recall some saying they'd lose their rear site by installling the RMR - extremely bad idea. As a retired industrial troubleshooter, it always amazes me how trusting in technology some folks can be.

Most people currently milling pistol slides for reflex sights (Suarez International TSD, Bowie, Lone Wolf, etc) manage to keep the rear sight. FN has even released a pistol that is pre-milled to accept a reflex sight.

And exactly how often does one plan to use his HD weapon?

Irrelevant to the point I was making, which was that the military issues optics because there is a corresponding increase in performance. It's not theoretical, it's a demonstrable fact. That said, I hope I never have to use any weapon I own, but that doesn't change the fact that having an optic on any firearm makes it easier to quickly engage a target with sighted shots.

I don't know if that's such a good argument for not putting one on a gun, but as others have stated, it's money probably better spent on ammo / practice / training.

The two aren't mutually exclusive.

They also have lasers, so now we're back to which is better?

Unless I'm mistaken, military laser sights aren't visible light lasers and are intended for use with NVGs. They aren't equivalent to what you have on a handgun. As to which is better, I think red dots are more applicable across a wider variety of situations.

 

[Skribs]

And exactly how often does one plan to use his HD weapon?

The comment was regarding why the M9 doesn't have optics placed on it, and the answer is because the M9 is not used nearly as much as the M16/M4 in combat. The military puts those expensive optics on the weapons that are actually going to be used. Since I don't carry an M16 with me, a pistol is an option.

Do list them, because I'm not coming up with any (let alone "numerous") instances in which one has time to acquire a dot, fractions of inch in size (and possibly several yards away), and put it on the target but lacks the time to use sights.

I'm with Comedian. Compared with a red dot, I do not see irons as faster. The advantage of strictly irons is easier concealment, lower profile weapon (honestly doesn't matter much with a pistol), and convenience/cost.

Most people currently milling pistol slides for reflex sights (Suarez International TSD, Bowie, Lone Wolf, etc) manage to keep the rear sight. FN has even released a pistol that is pre-milled to accept a reflex sight.

Others use the reflex as the rear sight. I was looking at the Bowie Tactical custom work, and he'll make it so you effectively have an I-Dot sight with a line on the back of an RMR and the front dot. If the RMR doesn't work, the line will still be there and work as a rear iron.

Some people may just put on the reflex and then ignore the need for backup irons. That doesn't mean that the reflex sight is bad because people use it in this configuration. It means this configuration doesn't have a failsafe option. It's a user problem, not a reflex sight problem.

---

As to point-shooting, that is where I was thinking the only advantage for a laser was, but if I am point shooting it's probably going to be at a distance where I'm shooting before I register the laser on target. After reading some of the responses and thinking about it, I think that whoever said reflex > night sights > ironsights > laser was pretty much right, as far as sighting goes. Exclude laser and reverse the list, and you have a convenience/cost scale.

 

[labhound]

All the talk about using a laser and "trying to find the dot". If you point your gun at your target like you normally would with iron sights, the "dot" will fall on the target. There is no "chasing the dot". Just because you have a laser on your gun doesn't mean you've forgotten how to shoot. :banghead:

 

[Certaindeaf]

I put a reflex sight and a laser on my pocketknife.. when I cut potatoes, they call me "the opertater"! That's just the way I roll.

 

[X-Rap]

Using any gadget including iron sights when you don't give yourself enough time to learn to properly use them will lead to poor performance.
You do yourself an injustice by not learning to shoot and handle your weapons properly just as you do yourself an injustice by sticking your head in the sand and denying advances in technology that can make you better and more lethal, that is the objective in this whole discussion isn't it?

 

[basicblur]

Do list them, because I'm not coming up with any (let alone "numerous") instances in which one has time to acquire a dot, fractions of inch in size (and possibly several yards away), and put it on the target but lacks the time to use sights.

It’s not so much a question of time, but of position, possible injuries (can you even raise your gun for a ‘proper’ sight picture), etc. If you’re behind the sofa, how ya gonna check out the view – look over the top of the sofa, or peer around it closer to the floor (I know which option I’d choose). If I’m trying to present as small a target as possible, am I going to be able to use a red dot in that position?
‘Spose your home invader has struck the first blow – mebbe your arm is injured to the point you can’t raise it?
I’m sure you’ve heard the quote I did not see that coming…you can continue to train for the perfect world scenario, but chances are, when it happens, it will be like nothing you envisioned (then you too can say I did not see that coming!).

The advantage of strictly irons is easier concealment, lower profile weapon (honestly doesn't matter much with a pistol), and convenience/cost.

Lower profile doesn’t matter much with a pistol, eh…CC much?

After reading some of the responses and thinking about it, I think that whoever said reflex > night sights > ironsights > laser was pretty much right, as far as sighting goes.

Fer myself, I’m figuring point shooting > night sights > laser, depending on how much time I have. If time presents itself, I’d skip the point shooting and go directly to night sights. If I find myself trying to present the smallest target possible, the laser might well jump to the top of the list.

Ya'll can carry on the theoretical arguments and perfect world scenarios...I'm still trying to wrap my head around a Reflex sight on a SHIELD...

 

[basicblur]

I put a reflex sight and a laser on my pocketknife.. when I cut potatoes, they call me "the opertater"! That's just the way I roll.

I'll allow it...but only if you carry it in a drop-leg holster...

 

[GRIZ22]

Lasers and reflex sights have some uses. Not as something to rely on on a SD/HD gun.

Instead of spending your money on such things, buy night sights and a good flashlight. Spend whatever you have left on ammo working on your basics.

 

[basicblur]

you do yourself an injustice by sticking your head in the sand and denying advances in technology that can make you better and more lethal, that is the objective in this whole discussion isn't it?

To that end, I assume the discussion would also be to determine what's practical / feasible / desirable, and what is bling.

I still remember four wheel steering and all the theoretical chatter / sales pitches 'bout how much better the technology was (I just laughed when I heard about it)...where is it now?

Just because one doesn't automatically gravitate towards new technology doesn't automatically make one a luddite.

 

[Skribs]

Lasers and reflex sights have some uses. Not as something to rely on on a SD/HD gun.

Why is something that allows for faster target aquisition not something to rely on for a SD/HD gun? I understand that RDS can fail and that's why you have BUIS, but why is something that the Army trusts to work something that I shouldn't trust?

It’s not so much a question of time, but of position, possible injuries (can you even raise your gun for a ‘proper’ sight picture), etc. If you’re behind the sofa, how ya gonna check out the view – look over the top of the sofa, or peer around it closer to the floor (I know which option I’d choose). If I’m trying to present as small a target as possible, am I going to be able to use a red dot in that position?

You expose maybe a half inch more using a RDS over irons. If you want to use the BUIS as your sight plane to lower your profile, the difference is even less.

‘Spose your home invader has struck the first blow – mebbe your arm is injured to the point you can’t raise it?

In this case, irons vs. RDS doesn't matter, it becomes Iron/RDS vs. Laser. If you can't use the RDS, then you wouldn't be able to use irons either.

Lower profile doesn’t matter much with a pistol, eh…CC much?

I listed concealed carry and lower profile separately. Easier to conceal is the bigger issue. The low profile I was referring to is low profile while sighted, which doesn't make much difference when using a pistol RDS on a milled slide. Take a cheapo reflex and put it on top of an aftermarket rail on a shotgun and you'll change the profile a lot - enough that I had to adjust shims and buy a higher cheek rest. On a pistol, the difference isn't nearly that big.

Concealed carry I do agree is an issue, depending on how you carry. IWB might be a tad tougher. OWB you probably wouldn't even notice. Pocket carry a RDS would be terrible (I can pocket carry many compact autos in my cargo shorts hip pocket, but they barely clear the pocket with an easy draw).

Ya'll can carry on the theoretical arguments and perfect world scenarios...I'm still trying to wrap my head around a Reflex sight on a SHIELD

I don't see how the RDS being faster than irons is "theory". It's been proven to work by pretty much every review I've read that started with "I thought it was just a marketing gimmick until I started using it." Even still, I think you're getting wrapped up in someone putting it on a Shield. If it fits and works, why not? Personally, I wouldn't put it on something I'd pocket/ankle carry, and that's the only reason I'd get a small single-stack.

ETA:

To that end, I assume the discussion would also be to determine what's practical / feasible / desirable, and what is bling.

This is true. However, one cannot deny the advantage that a RDS provides in terms of speed compared to irons. You have to start there before asking yourself if it is practical or not. I would not consider the RDS "bling", as bling is something shiny with no real use. The RDS has a real use. It also adds to the profile of the pistol and incurs cost and time invested (which is not mutually exclusive with training). The questions that should be asked to determine if it's practical or not aren't the speed comparison with irons, but: 1) whether or not you can carry it with the added size, and 2) whether or not you find the cost and time investment to be worth it.

 

[X-Rap]

The point is there have been some advances made in sighting systems beyond the cut in channel on the DA revolver. Are we at the apex with the Reflex? Who knows but those who have moved from iron sights in the military have no doubts about the benefits that more modern designs offer and some who are presently working with the same technology on handguns are so far impressed as well.
I don't have one on a handgun myself but I do on a few rifles and it makes a difference IMO. I would love to get the chance to try one of the RMR's and run a few hundred rounds with it. I feel the same about lasers, I got one cause it came on the gun and was basically free, do I like it? well I haven't had the chance to shoot anyone with it yet but on the range late in the afternoon it works perfectly, at home inside it is clearly visible all the time and when the gun is held in the ready position it is right were it should be to make an effective shot, can't ask for more than that. It is also a good training tool.
Remember when people said lights were useless? night sights? There are still those who would say that just as there are those who say 5,6,8 is enough, if it doesn't penetrate to FBI specs your load is worthless, empty chamber vs loaded.
Bottom line do what works for you, if it doesn't it's doubtful the rest of us will ever know.

 

[TimboKhan]

Combat red dots on rifles are a different breed of cat than combat red dots on pistols.



Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

 

[Certaindeaf]

Since every copper on the planet has one a those gewgaws on his gat, nevermind

 

[Skribs]

Combat red dots on rifles are a different breed of cat than combat red dots on pistols.

Aside from the size, and the fact that on a pistol it will recoil with the slide (which the irons do, anyway, so it's not really changing the fact that the sights recoil), how is it different?