SIGforum.com Main Page SIG Pistols Anyone with both a Trijicon RMR and SRO? - (Update with pics and some observations)
Main Page SIG Pistols Anyone with both a Trijicon RMR and SRO? - (Update with pics and some observations)Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
98.SiG and Rising |
These days, being in Petersburg at 11pm is a risky move on its own. As long as I am "Threat Focused", the dot just appears in the window. I purposely had regular height sights put on so that I would not use them as a crutch. As stated, dry fire for 15-20 minutes a night and put a piece of black electrical tape on the front sight if you can see the tritium. RDS are not for everyone, but they are worth the journey. Now if ammo prices weren't insane, practice would make perfect. So for now, dry fire is a workable alternative. ************************* Warning...SiGs are addictive, keep out of the reach of adults! Blue Lives Matter: Thank a Police Officer for their Service! | |||
|
| Music's over turn out the lights  |
Winner winner David W. Rather fail with honor than succeed by fraud. -Sophocles | |||
|
Truth Wins |
Your analysis is wanting. He's not saying, "oh look, you'll do 10% better with a slide mounted red dot." He's saying a slide mounted red dot effectiveness is such that even a top level shooter is only getting a 5-10% improvement. Most people aren't top level shooters. The problems many people have and its effects are summed up in that study.
Again, did you read the study? If so, it appears you didn't understand it. That's exactly what the study says didn't happen. Most people ARE NOT going to be 5-10% better. If you are a top level shooter, the study results suggest you may see some improvement. If not, you will likely see much less, if any at all. It's right there in black and white.
And yet you aren't just arguing with me, you are arguing against the guy that quite literally wrote the books on force on force gun fighting, and a Grand Master at shooting with carry optics. My own conclusion is that the the RDS is probably not going to give most people an advantage in most situations. That conclusion comports with Masaad Ayoob's article and Karl Rehm's study conclusions. If you want to carry an optic, fine. But suggesting it is going to benefit the average shooter is most defensive situations is not supported. _____________ "I enter a swamp as a sacred place—a sanctum sanctorum. There is the strength—the marrow of Nature." - Henry David Thoreau | |||
|
| Truth Wins |
The test subjects are clearly identified: 118 participants, Ages from 19 to 76 years old, male and female. four categories of experience: (1) Novice, with no significant training or experience; (2) Had passed Texas Concealed Handgun License (CHL) shooting test at 90% or better; (3) Anyone with anything beyond CHL level, which according to a separate body of Karl’s research encompasses about 1% of those with carry permits; and (4) Instructors/high level shooters/those with at least 40 hours of training/B-class or higher competition shooters. So in that, you concluded that none of the participants had any experience with red dots? Or maybe it was the statement, "A weakness of the test was that no one did a 200-round familiarization with the dot."? Nevermind the following statement, "Last summer, USPSA had Production and Carry Optics National Championships, many competitors using the same gun for both. This provided a fair amount of data since many stages were exactly the same. There were no dramatic changes in hit factors. Even at top shooter level, we didn’t see the 10-20% improvement we saw with frame mounted optics. At best, scores were 5-10% higher with carry optics." No dramatic changes between a gun with or without a carry optic. He doesn't even tell us what the "at worst" changes might have been. So where is this admission that none of the participants had experience with red dots? There isn't one. Listen, if you just want to make shit up to support your position, if you can't be intellectually honest in your arguments, say so now and I won't waste anymore time reading what you have to write. _____________ "I enter a swamp as a sacred place—a sanctum sanctorum. There is the strength—the marrow of Nature." - Henry David Thoreau | |||
|
Member |
Geez, I thought I liked to argue. As you said, for you it's slower. Cool. Great. That's fine. In all fairness you stated you haven't got much time with it but it's your gun and your decision. For many of us it's improved our speed and proficiency. There really isn't much if any reason for you to have a problem with that. | |||
|
| Truth Wins |
I'm glad it's helped you. But if the participants in this thread care about fairness, then they ought to consider characterizing what I said honestly. "I can't imagine this RMR set up is a very useful self defense set up under most circumstances where one would use it for self defense." It's not sacrilege to conclude that, but people act like it is. And I am not the only person who thinks that. And as far as being argumentative, anytime people want to set up strawman argument so they can knock it down, or when people want to be intellectually dishonest in their arguments in hopes of scoring points, then I call bullshit, especially in a thread I started. I don't have a lot of time with THIS gun and THIS RDS. Ergo, a few of the participants in this thread have concluded I have no experience at all, that I don't know what I'm doing or talking about. I read that and think, whatever. I run into that presumptive logic at work all time arguing with attorneys. "Have you been to law school?" No. "Well, I went to Villanova." Great, all that tells me is any dumbass can get into Villanova. I shot my first red dots, Tasco Pro Points (made in Japan), on handguns back in the late 1980s. I was watching, and sometimes shooting, IPSC style events in the 80s with a handgun my dad owned. I watched, in person, when Rob Leatham won the IPSC World Shoot in the early 80s at my gun club. Master Gunsmith Mario Ruffino, who spent some time teaching Bill Wilson a little of his craft, built the best race gun I could afford in the 80s. I went through a lot of handguns back then because I usually had to sell one to buy one. And I put thousands upon thousands of round through them. So when I read someone write that I don't know anything or that I have no experience, it immediately tells me I am dealing with a presumptive twerp who has to resort to that presumption instead of arguing meaningfully. It's the internet-gun-forum equivalent of calling someone a racist. It's intended to disingenuously end a debate. I've got no use for that. _____________ "I enter a swamp as a sacred place—a sanctum sanctorum. There is the strength—the marrow of Nature." - Henry David Thoreau | |||
|
| Freethinker |
Hear him, hear him. Well said, Micropterus. ► 6.4/93.6 “Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something.” — Plato | |||
|
| Not One of the Cool Kids  |
^^^^^ The Death of Expertise is upon us. | |||
|
| Truth Wins |
Well, that could be. I'll concede: I may be completely wrong. My experience may amount to nothing compared to some others. My conclusions may be underqualified. My concluding that a RDS "is [probably not] very useful self defense set up under most circumstances where one would use it for self defense" could be nonsense. My feeling that I can pick up the iron sights on my handgun faster than the RDS dot, that finding the dot takes longer than finding the front sight and that this is a disadvantage, and that the RDS's biggest advantage is at longer ranges ["trading shots with someone across the street"] could just be born of my know-nothing inexperience. So in deference to expertise, I did see another article that doesn't seem entirely different in its observations than my own. http://modernserviceweapons.com/?p=16978 A YEAR LONG EXPERIMENT WITH A PISTOL OPTIC BY WARREN WILSON A portion of which says:
I suspect that most people involved in a self defense shooting are going to be shaking like a dog with the shits. Another disadvantage of a small RDS is that a few degrees shift in aiming in the horizontal will sweep the dot off the glass, and even fewer degrees in the vertical. I suspect that if one is able to keep the dot in the glass, it will likely appear to be a bouncing, vibrating blur. Another issue is even trying to find your target (not your dot) in the dark. Without a weapon mounted light, the darker glass in the RDS makes it harder. In a dim hallway lit only with ambient light at 25 feet I can read titles on the bookshelf at the end of the hall. Through the RMR, I can barely see where one book ends and another begins. And I can hardly see my front iron sight through the glass at all. And using a weapons mounted light can seriously effect that washout effect. Your article above stated, "I’d experimented with the RMR after dark and hadn’t found that to be the case." I did, and on a light brown wall using a the same RMR as in your article (dual-illuminated green dot 9 moa) there is virtually complete washout using a Streamlight TLR-1HL. The upside is is that the target is now visible and the iron sights are highly visible. And, I've never had my iron sights fog over when I got out of an air conditioned car and out into a hot, humid, Virginia day or evening. So, I maintain my position that the RDS is not going to be a particularly useful device on a self defense pistol in most self defense situations. In fact, in some instances it will be detrimental. This does not apply the police using it, for instance, in entry situations where the gun is already drawn. It's advantages increase at longer ranges. _____________ "I enter a swamp as a sacred place—a sanctum sanctorum. There is the strength—the marrow of Nature." - Henry David Thoreau | |||
|
| Not One of the Cool Kids |
First: That statement was was aimed at a comment you made toward JLJ earlier in the post. It's not my place to point out why it was unwise. Second: Thanks for reading the article. Four years ago, I had spent my first year experimenting with pistol dots. At this point after having much more time on the MRDS, I have found: It is a different skill set and does require some work. MRDS is just as fast up close after that work is put in and faster on follow-up shots at greater than contact distance. I carry a MRDS every day at work and will soon be doing so on my off-duty pistol as well. I just finished a shooting/moving course and did very well with it. All the problems you pointed out are easily fixed by changing equipment or simply myelinating better. As I pointed out, that was four years ago. I've since learned that Dual-Illuminated RMR's should not be used for SD. The battery units don't wash out with white light. Also, I suggest you try Holosun. The window is bigger and the 32 MOA halo works wonderfully. Also, you left something out of the article quotes: "Canis Veteris" "Much like youth, middle-age is quickly passing some of us by. In the last few years, I’ve noticed a tendency across all pistol manufacturers to produce blurry front sights. I’m not sure what is causing this failure in quality control, but it’s happening to every pistol I shoot. In seriousness, this premature glimpse into decrepitude makes the idea of a MRDS on pistols very interesting." That glimpse into decrepitude is much closer now and I can barely use iron sights at 50 years old. That said, if you don't think dots will be useful to you, you shouldn't carry one. Problem solved. | |||
|
| Truth Wins |
Thanks, I enjoyed your article, as well as others on your page. And especially the reading recommendations. Masaad Ayoob was my first go-to guy in terms if instructional reading. It's nice to see he is still recommended. A lot of shooting folks don't know who he is. With respect to your other comments, I wouldn't disagree with you. Especially the comment on follow up shots at greater than contact distances. Once acquired, it probably is a faster follow up solution. It's the initial acquisition of the dot that's the issue. I think there is such a trend in RDSs on pistols these days that without the practice necessary to pick that dot up as quickly as possible, an RDS would be a detrimental solution for a whole lot of people. I think a lot of people put that device on their gun thinking it will make them faster and things easier right off the bat, and under certain situations maybe it does, but a lot of experienced person say it's slower initially, and that shouldn't be ignored. Trendiness has no place on a self-defense pistol if there is no effort to learn that trendy device. Regarding washout: my experience with true red dots and dual illuminated is the same. I've owned a few Meprolight M21s and found the washout to be annoying at times, and potentially downright dangerous at others, if I were exposed to danger under certain situations. I liked the sights for their simplicity and lack of fragile electronics. But in terms of potential washout, they are inferior to true red dots. My experience with red dots, both holographic like Eotechs, tubes like my old Pro Points and new Aimpoints, and mini reflexes, like Fast Fires, is that they are far less prone to wash out. It's not impossible, but they simply are not as susceptible. My problem with them now is not seeing a dot, but a red blob. That brings me to the next issue you and I agree on. The decrepitude issue. I'm 54 and as I get older, even red dots are starting to blur a bit on me. This particular RMR with the green 9 moa dot is one of the few I've used that looks like a clear, crisp round dot. So it is a preferable solution for me than a true red dot. I can live with the washout. I don't plan on this being my main carry gun. I already have that and my degrading eyesight has led me to a big dot sight on that gun that I can clearly pick up when I am focused on my target. Because, frankly, right now, I can't focus my eyes on the front sight like I used to. My carry gun, a G19 Gen 4, has XS DXT2 sights. The front sight is a big dot and that tritium vial in the middle keeps the glowing dot surrounding it charged, so if I pick it up at night, it still has a large glowing green dot on the front sight that I can immediately see the moment I touch my gun. I don't have to hunt for it. It's there and I see it all the way up to my sight line. If you haven't tried that particularly sight, especially at night, it's worth a try. I'm not a cop. I don't intend on getting into gun battles with anyone if I don't have to. I'm not going to do any police entries. I'm going to use my handgun should the need arise to either eliminate a threat or give me a path to retreat. I don't think a RDS will give me much advantage under those circumstances. People want to carry them - fine. But they have limitations, some serious, under certain circumstances and I think folks that simply follow the RDS trend should understand them. _____________ "I enter a swamp as a sacred place—a sanctum sanctorum. There is the strength—the marrow of Nature." - Henry David Thoreau | |||
|
| Truth Wins |
Here is a reason I prefer my big dot sight to the RMR on my self defense gun. My G17 with RMR  My G19 with XS DXT2 sights:   RMR washes out the front tritium dot. In dim light it makes it harder to see the front sight at all. But I never lose sight of that big front DXT2 dot. It's big, and even if I can't focus on it like I used to, I can't miss it. The DXT2 sights won't win you any bullseye competitions. But up close, it's a fabulous sight. YMMV _____________ "I enter a swamp as a sacred place—a sanctum sanctorum. There is the strength—the marrow of Nature." - Henry David Thoreau | |||
|
| Laugh or Die |
I recently got a P320 RXP and I'm having the same issues as you. I'm constantly searching for the dot. I'm much more proficient with my irons than with my red dot. I don't have the money, especially right now with ammo prices, to get proficient with it, especially to get more proficient with it than I already am with irons. On top of this, I only have the one pistol with the red dot(Actually I took it off already and am planning on selling it), vs all my other pistols without. While training on proficiency for the red dot, I'm foregoing training on proficiency with my irons, instead of reinforcing. The ultimate lightbulb was when I turned the red dot off and just used my "back up irons" and was shooting so much faster and more accurately. If I had unlimited amounts of money and ammo, sure I'd go all in on the red dot and maintain proficiency in both. But since I don't, I can't. Stinks too because I was super excited for my first pistol red dot because of how much I love my red dots on my rifles. The tubular nature of the red dots on my rifles means that if you're looking through the tube, you can almost always see the dot, though, so it's a much, MUCH more natural feeling for shooting and getting used to/proficient with the thing. So ultimately yes, I only have about 200-300 rounds downrange with my pistol mounted red dot, but it was not an instant pick up and shoot like they were when I first got one for my rifle. The question becomes where and how long will it take to become as much or more proficient with the red dot than I already am with irons? Especially considering I only have the one pistol mounted red dot. ________________________________________________ | |||
|
Member |
Sir, does your vision challenge involve astigmatism? ____________________ | |||
|
| Not One of the Cool Kids |
Yes, sir. That's one reason I like the halo. It is more clear to me than a dot. | |||
|
| Not One of the Cool Kids |
Thank you. He's a magnificent presenter. I haven't taken a live-fire class from him yet but I always catch at least one block with him at TacCon. | |||
|
| Member |
And of course the dual illuminated RMR is simply a bad decision, so any conclusions based on using it are really not based on the best possible options for low/limited light. “So in war, the way is to avoid what is strong, and strike at what is weak.” | |||
|
Diablo Blanco |
Jester, my experience started out exactly like yours did. Frustrated, I chose not to shoot with it in a class even as my instructors told me they could change my mind. I left the class regretting not shooting with the RMR. After the class I asked for help in figuring out the RDS. I spent hours and hours presenting the RDS and dry firing. I began to notice that my presentation, which I believed was pretty damn good, had slight inconsistencies that couldn’t be hidden on the dot like it could on irons. Tiny little things made a huge difference in the speed of the dot, so I set out to clean those up. If you’re hunting for the dot there is something going on with your presentation. Almost all of that time was spent dry firing. My range session today with the RMR was absolutely on task. Tight groups at speed! The funny thing about cleaning up little things for the dot is that it sped up my times on my open sights too. Not making a commitment to carry the RMR pistols yet, but it took me up a notch in total skill level and my timer and groups at speed are my proof. Also, with ammo being scarce and not being able to travel I have been dry firing approximately an hour a day throughout my day. I may be getting more out of that than slinging lead down range. Also, I have seen shooters/cops that have shooting 20+ years that while somewhat proficient I would hardly call them great. I was lucky to compete with a bunch of the top world shooters up in Springfield MA in the early 2000s, which made me realize just how good great can be. I shot a class in June with a gentleman that had recently moved to this country from Brazil and had only been shooting for 4 months who put almost 400 rounds through a group no bigger than a half dollar using a RDS from holster at speed. It was very humbling. _________________________ "An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile - hoping it will eat him last” - Winston Churchil | |||
|
Sigforum K9 handler |
And there is the key, my friend. People claim they are "faster" with irons because that level of skill and speed doesn't hold them accountable. They have been able to get away with sloppiness in the presentation, and in trigger control with irons. It's a "good enough" attitude, that actually isn't even good. It's the same thing that everyone goes through. Some people's ego get in the way of getting any better, and frankly, it is hilarious the amount of dot rage that goes on the internet. When I transitioned to the dot, I thought I was good. I thought I had a clean presentation, and great trigger control. I was wrong. So, I used the dot as a training tool. Now, I have a very clean presentation, and my trigger control is cleaner than ever. You can learn from the dot. Or you can blame the dot. | |||
|
| Truth Wins |
It has its advantages and disadvantages compared to an RMR red dot. It's a little more prone to washout under some conditions, but I knew that when I bought it. Washout isn't a major concern for me. The size of the dot, the fact that I can see it well, that fact that it's not electronic, and I don't have to remove it to change a battery, and the 15 year warranty on the tritium were all considerations. There is only one thing about it that I didn't anticipate but should have: the green coating on the front of the glass virtually eliminates the tritium glow from the front sight. Only in the darkest condition can you see a faint glow from the front sight through the glass. I'm not sure how much of a disadvantage that really is. But I had hoped to be able to see that dot through the glass. A red coated RMR lense would not have that extent of an effect. But all in all, I'm very pleased with the sight. It does exactly what I wanted it to do. But I do think it will eventually end up on one of my 10mms. I carry a G20 when I'm with my camera out in the "bear woods" and think it would be ideal on my companion gun. Like I said earlier, small reflex red dots are starting look a bit blurry to me. Nonetheless, I may still try the SRO. Even if it's less rugged than the RMR, I think Trijicon is on the right path in enlarging the glass. So the RMR will likely go to a 10mm, and I'll pick up an SRO for this G17. _____________ "I enter a swamp as a sacred place—a sanctum sanctorum. There is the strength—the marrow of Nature." - Henry David Thoreau | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
SIGforum.com Main Page SIG Pistols Anyone with both a Trijicon RMR and SRO? - (Update with pics and some observations)
Main Page SIG Pistols Anyone with both a Trijicon RMR and SRO? - (Update with pics and some observations)© SIGforum 2024