quote:

Originally posted by Parrishghost:

quote:

Originally posted by SgtGold:
So in the vein of of this topic, let me offer the following personal observation. I've been using the Trijicon RMR on several pistols, so when the SRO came out I got one. The SRO sits slightly higher than the RMR, so instead of a 1\3, I how have a 1\5 cowitness. Not unusable, bit it took some getting used to. The end result is I'm more dependant on the optic because BUIS is a little more difficult to use. I e-mailed several sight manufacturers about this, and their unified response was if they made their BUIS sets any taller they would start running into equipment compatability issues. As always, I end up quoting Musashi, 'the way is in training'.

quote:

Originally posted by jljones
Or here’s a novel idea.

Actually train with a defensive pistol, with a dot made for defensive purposes, and learn what to do if you have an occluded/obstructed dot.

How high is your current sight? The cowitness doesn't have to be the exact same height. As long as you see it when you are using the dot then you learn what hold over you need. With that said there are.planty of front sights around .4" that should work with any optic.

I just Googled suppressor sights for the P320 and most of the brands were all .35" to .4" in height. Mine are trijicon. Dawson say they make a .455", but they don't say if that's blade or total sight height. Bottom line is I got luckey and what I ordered worked, but you need to take some measurements to be sure.

The SRO is more a competition optic than a defensive optic. Trijicon probably didn't think BUIS was a necessity for guns using it.

quote:

Originally posted by SgtGold:
So in the vein of of this topic, let me offer the following personal observation. I've been using the Trijicon RMR on several pistols, so when the SRO came out I got one. The SRO sits slightly higher than the RMR, so instead of a 1\3, I how have a 1\5 cowitness. Not unusable, bit it took some getting used to. The end result is I'm more dependant on the optic because BUIS is a little more difficult to use. I e-mailed several sight manufacturers about this, and their unified response was if they made their BUIS sets any taller they would start running into equipment compatability issues. As always, I end up quoting Musashi, 'the way is in training'.

quote:

Originally posted by jljones
Or here’s a novel idea.

Actually train with a defensive pistol, with a dot made for defensive purposes, and learn what to do if you have an occluded/obstructed dot.

I’d say you are correct. Trijicon swore the SRO not to be “duty rated” for the first part of its life. After becoming immensely popular with the tactical crowd because “bigger window” they relented and claimed that it is duty rated.

I still run only RMRs. To each their own.

I do love my SRO.

[/QUOTE]

I just Googled suppressor sights for the P320 and most of the brands were all .35" to .4" in height. Mine are trijicon. Dawson say they make a .455", but they don't say if that's blade or total sight height. Bottom line is I got luckey and what I ordered worked, but you need to take some measurements to be sure.[/QUOTE]

One manufacturer lists total and blade height. They show 0.05" diffrence between top of slide to total. (.339 vs .389) Based on that I believe the .455 is total.

Have you tried any of the Holosuns? They seem sturdy enough, and they're innovating where Trijicon is same ole' same ole'.

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:
I’d say you are correct. Trijicon swore the SRO not to be “duty rated” for the first part of its life. After becoming immensely popular with the tactical crowd because “bigger window” they relented and claimed that it is duty rated.

I still run only RMRs. To each their own.

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:

quote:

Originally posted by barndg00:
For home defense or open/OWB holster carry, I can see an optic being ok, however, I have yet to see an optic that wouldn't completely obstruct the irons. (there may exist something, its not something I'm looking into) I love my Buckmark with a Vortex Venom, but we're talking defensive pistols here. On a rifle, you generally have an optic co-witnessed to iron sites or some type of backup iron sites. I would want that capability in an optic for any type of defensive pistol. I would also want something much smaller for a concealed pistol. I imagine in time, this will be worked out.

Or here’s a novel idea.

Actually train with a defensive pistol, with a dot made for defensive purposes, and learn what to do if you have an occluded/obstructed dot.

Please, O Great One, will you lend your knowledge to me so I shall be learned in ways of the defensive pistol that has a dead red-dot site that occludes the primaries? Or are we now to put suppressor height sights on pistols for concealed carry? Snag much?

quote:

Originally posted by barndg00:

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:

quote:

Originally posted by barndg00:
For home defense or open/OWB holster carry, I can see an optic being ok, however, I have yet to see an optic that wouldn't completely obstruct the irons. (there may exist something, its not something I'm looking into) I love my Buckmark with a Vortex Venom, but we're talking defensive pistols here. On a rifle, you generally have an optic co-witnessed to iron sites or some type of backup iron sites. I would want that capability in an optic for any type of defensive pistol. I would also want something much smaller for a concealed pistol. I imagine in time, this will be worked out.

Or here’s a novel idea.

Actually train with a defensive pistol, with a dot made for defensive purposes, and learn what to do if you have an occluded/obstructed dot.

Please, O Great One, will you lend your knowledge to me so I shall be learned in ways of the defensive pistol that has a dead red-dot site that occludes the primaries? Or are we now to put suppressor height sights on pistols for concealed carry? Snag much?

I am just a schmuck on the internet but here are a couple things I have gleaned.

-there are gun dot combos that allow for stock sight height. SCS and Glock for example.

-Suppressor height sights are not all that obtrusive to be honest.

-If the dot and window totally goes down as in window is completely occluded I have found you can use the housing as a reference point out to “statistical SD distances” 5-7 yards.

-One thing I have found in my VERY MINIMAL time shooting a dot on a defensive pistol is it seems to sort of teach point shooting as an ancillary benefit since you are target focused and sort of just see the dot in your peripheral. It seems to help wire you to point shoot better. (At least for me)

There are plenty of reasons I have trepidations about using an electronic sight on a pistol outside of a HD gun but there seems to be various techniques to overcome issues that may arise and the current dots do seem fairly robust across the board.

Again I am just an idjit experimenting with these things. I am NOT a LEO, soldier, gunfighter, etc. I am just a hobbiest.

Take care, shoot safe,
Chris

While young people might make up a significant percentage of the defensive pistol carrying community, I know that many carriers are over 40 years of age, including those in law enforcement. At 40, my vision started to deteriorate and while finding that front sight was still ingrained in my muscle memory, it became increasingly difficult, especially at night. Electronic optical sights weren't generally approved for use on handguns in most departments when I retired in 2008, but patrol rifles were augmenting or outright replacing shotguns in radio cars. The presence of sturdy optics available from companies such as Trijicon, Aimpoint, Leupold, and Eotech were certainly seen regularly on department provided ARs and department approved/personally owned long-guns.

During my last year or so with my agency, I worked nights and equipped my duty pistol with a Crimson Trace laser sight to augment my tritium equipped "iron" sights. It made a big difference to a guy in his mid-50's! Now that I'm in my late 60's, the ruggedness of RDO equipped handgun sights has improved significantly as has their acceptance in law enforcement. I regularly carry a green-dot optic for personal defense now and even after two cataract surgeries, while I can shoot iron sights better than most of those around me, optical sights provide a huge benefit.

quote:

Snag much?

Uh NO. And if you run a defensive pistol just put usable irons on it. What's so hard about that? Yea its an extra cost, but the optic improves your performance dramatically and rarely goes down. So what's the downside?

Two weekends ago I held my first pistol with an optic on it. I couldn’t stand it. I’ll keep my night sights.

I am willing to go to optics on carry and HD guns. I learned to shoot rifles on iron sights, but had to agree a red dot/holographic is much faster to get on target. Now I wouldn’t think of taking them off my MSRs. I assume there would be some improvement in the speed on target on handguns as well. I’ll probably order a couple of cut slides to update a couple of pistols.

+

quote:

Originally posted by hrcjon:

quote:

Snag much?

Uh NO. And if you run a defensive pistol just put usable irons on it. What's so hard about that? Yea its an extra cost, but the optic improves your performance dramatically and rarely goes down. So what's the downside?

The downside is an opinion without actual experience is wishful thinking. And most of the handwringing is based upon “I heard” or “I read” or “well, the pistol I squirrel hunt with…….” Instead of actually putting in the work from an objective standpoint for themselves.

Dots are here to stay. No matter what I say, or what I do. Whether I am for them or against them. 20 years from now, the next piece of technology will have luddites screaming “burn her, she’s a witch”

About a month ago I shot gun with a dot for the first time. I was expecting to have to play "find the dot" much more that I actually had to (although there was a little bit of that.) I was shooting a bit low left with that. But with the dot, that can be dialed out.

I want to try the Holosun sights with the Primary Arms ACSS reticle. That would seem to be the ultimate cure for find the dot syndrome.

quote:

Originally posted by 400m:
Two weekends ago I held my first pistol with an optic on it. I couldn’t stand it. I’ll keep my night sights.

quote:

Originally posted by Rodfac:

quote:

On a rifle optics / dots add so little relative bulk and add so much extra capability it was a fairly fast adoption.
On a handgun an optic adds a fair bit of bulk relative to the gun and you are still largely using handguns at common handgun ranges where iron sights are not likely as much of a detriment vs a rifle and rifle ranges.

Pretty good synopsis of current offerings in sighting equipment. I'd be interested in police issued/use of optics and weapon mounted lights too, for that matter. My bedside gun, a P226 has a light attached that I find useful, but wonder if LEO's are so equipped. Rod

More and more agencies are allowing red dots. I have them on my duty weapon and all my off duty guns.

My BIL needed a new carry gun when he moved to Texas. He basically took my input word for word. Get a 365. Get a Wilson Combat grip module. Get a Holosun 507k. Shoot it a bunch. He loves it all.

Dots are here to stay. They are getter better, cheaper, and easier to mount. I read stuff like the above and I cringe a little bit. I held a gun with a dot and I hated it. So the fuck what? Go shoot it. A bunch. And then come back and tell us that after giving it an HONEST shot you shoot slower and less accurately.

Most of us will always have guns without dots. It is a money thing it is an aesthetics thing it is an inertia thing. Most of us will also probably end up with a gun that has a dot. If I absolutely had to make a shot, all the above aside, I want a dot on my handgun. For everything else I don’t NEED a dot. I shoot fine without one. There is zero doubt I shoot better in every measurable way with a dot.

Not a fad. Not going away. Makes you shoot better. (It takes an honest effort though, it’s not pixie dust) Adds an imperceptible size and weight to your gun, carry or otherwise.

quote:

About a month ago I shot gun with a dot for the first time. I was expecting to have to play "find the dot" much more that I actually had to

I feel like if you had decent fundamentals to start with picking up a dot is no different then learning a new platform. I mean you don’t just go from say a 1911 to a Ruger GP100 and shoot it the same from round one, it takes a bit of familiarization and learning of the new system. Yet if you have good fundamentals it’s no big deal.

I have found dots to be the same. The folks I have run into on the range who are having issues or complaints about them seem to have very little basic grip, presentation or just overall experience. (This is not a snide remark, we’ve all been there). Folks with some experience and basic skills seem to take to them fine.

Now I personally still have a litany of reservations with them and I still don’t feel they are the same paradigm shift optics on rifles were but there is no denying they bring extra capability and absolutely shine at longer distances for a crappy shooter like myself.

They are absolutely here to stay but just like on a rifle I will not give up my MK1 basic, troglodyte irons because while ANYTHING CAN BREAK even iron sights, you do however generally have to put some “skill and effort” into breaking irons.

quote:

The downside is an opinion without actual experience is wishful thinking. And most of the handwringing is based upon “I heard” or “I read” or “well, the pistol I squirrel hunt with…….” Instead of actually putting in the work from an objective standpoint for themselves.

Dots are here to stay. No matter what I say, or what I do. Whether I am for them or against them. 20 years from now, the next piece of technology will have luddites screaming “burn her, she’s a witch”

I think this is the nature of the human beast, especially as we get older. I’ve always tried to have practical experience with as many things as possible (cars, guns, knives, lights, tools, tech etc.) so while I certainly cannot give anything remotely close to an expert opinion I can at least provide an educated one. The reality is the vast amount of folks hold on to preconceived notions about everything and even if asking for your opinion will disregard it without any factual or practical experience.

I would venture to say we have all done this or will but I have tried all my life to be able to have educated, practical opinions. I may not agree with you on something, hell I might even ultimately be wrong but at least I will try to come at it with real experience instead of “MAFORDCHEVYDODGE IS THE BESTEST EVER CUZ THATS WHAT EVERYBODY SAYS”.

quote:

Originally posted by cslinger:
They are absolutely here to stay but just like on a rifle I will not give up my MK1 basic, troglodyte irons because while ANYTHING CAN BREAK even iron sights, you do however generally have to put some “skill and effort” into breaking irons.

It seems like many shooters are (perhaps) too concerned about the optic being out of commission. While it certainly could happen, it's probably not as likely as eyeglasses being full of rain, knocked off, etc., contact lens being out of place from a fight, being shot, stabbed or otherwise injured at the point of firing, ...

There are probably dozens of ways your shooting performance could be degraded more easily or more severely than losing your optic, with or without iron back ups.

Fair enough. It’s like the “Hillary hole” on the Smith revolvers. I’ve never seen one “personally” go down but have seen firing pins break, cylinders lock up etc.

It’s just natural for us to gravitate towards the extra complexity will bring extra problems.

Funnily enough I’ve had tons of cars. Most with power windows and the only window mechanism that ever broke……was one of the ones with MANUAL window cranks.