https://www.agmglobalvision.com/wlad-1b

Smudge, do you know anything about the AGM WLAD? It seems to be reasonably-priced and available.

It's a rebranded Laserspeed FL5, and there's some disagreement over with this particular offering from AGM is full power or not. Offhand, I recall some issues with the turrets, and the Picatinny mount holding up, but I could be remembering wrong and conflating it with their M3. They make decent stuff.

Honestly, a year ago, I would've said it's a fine choice for the money. Currently, they have the M6TR, which has a better form factor and a much cleaner, more powerful illuminator for around a grand from Cold Harbour Supply. They also have a VCSEL version that's even brighter for $100 more. Hit up DaBigBR and you can get an Iris 3 for less than what CHS is charging for an LE221G.

SHOT Show week is a bad time to order stuff like this. New things coming out, old things getting discontinued, and all the people who handle this stuff are in Vegas playing with new toys instead of processing orders and shipments.

What are you guys using for dot optics on pistols?

A few weeks ago, I shot an NV match with a loaner that had an RMR on it. It was fine. Last night I shot and NV match with a loaner that had an EFLX on it. It was also fine.

Swung by Glockmeister today and talked with the guy there and looked at the current MOS options and he suggested a G49 MOS. Since I have a G45, it would give me all the swap-aroo options and I could use it as a G17/47 with a dot. His suggestion after talking over my use case was a Holosun SCS if I wanted to carry it since those cowitness with factory height irons, or else just a 407 and then be into taller irons. His input on optics, while helpful, doesn't strike me as coming at it from experience with shooting under NODs, however.

This is my next move. Need to figure this one out pretty soon. I would prefer to stick with a factory Glock on this rather than all the aftermarket shit.

First I don't do Holosun due to COO.
But I have tens and tens of thousands of rounds down a glock MOS with an RMR without any issues since the Type 2 appeared. So no hesitation on recommending that. I have like a dozen of them no issues mounted on lots of different pistols shot all the time. Really only RMR downside is the battery location. That's really been for competition use not sure your use.
My second choice and my first when I care about ultimate reliability is to run an ACRO. Its probably the toughest of these designs that can run on a pistol.
Both will serve you well but if I was just buying one I'd get an acro. In terms of the gun when you run a red dot I see no reason for any additional barrel length since you don't need sight radius and you don't need velocity, so not sure why the 47 seems attractive?

quote:

Originally posted by hrcjon:
That's really been for competition use not sure your use.

My primary consideration will be NV use, and everything else after that since I haven't felt a need for a red dot on a handgun until shooting two gun drills and matches under NODs. I carry a plain Jane G45 with Ameriglos and do well with it, so while I'm not ruling out carry, I'm not going to chase that dragon.

I am thinking that whatever I end up putting together will be my starter USPA gun, and I fully intend to keep it factory Glock with a Glock performance trigger. So, it'll be a daylight competition gun as well, but that is an afterthought.

In looking into the EFLX, I did find this about light transmission, glass clarity, and performance under NODs, which was interesting.


All-in-all, my experience with the EFLX was really positive, and I could see myself being pretty happy with it. The stuff about the DPP footprint and that whole can of worms is stuff I need to learn about. All the various footprints and cuts and whatnot is a topic I've skipped over entirely thus far.

quote:

Originally posted by hrcjon:
My second choice and my first when I care about ultimate reliability is to run an ACRO. Its probably the toughest of these designs that can run on a pistol.
Both will serve you well but if I was just buying one I'd get an acro.

That definitely brings up a consideration with closed vs open emitter. The stuff we do is out in the desert. Here in the Sonoran, we have some pretty fine dust that kicks up and gets into everything. Keeping my EXPS3 clean vs keeping my AEMS clean is a different experience. I'll have to think about that.

quote:

Originally posted by hrcjon:
In terms of the gun when you run a red dot I see no reason for any additional barrel length since you don't need sight radius and you don't need velocity, so not sure why the 47 seems attractive?

To be fair, I didn't say it was attractive, I just said I got loaned one, and the guy at Glockmeister recommended a 49 to complement my G45. I really like the G45, and after thinking about it and handling the G49, I no longer like the 19 length frame. It's too cramped for my hand. I'm not going to get rid of the 19's I have, but I'm also not going to add any more. 17 length frames only going forward. As for barrel length, I don't need any more velocity, but I also don't mind the longer slide. I've seen plenty of debate about this, and I know JlJones is pretty outspoken in his advocacy for just using a G17 instead of a 19X/45, and that once you add a pistol light, the whole balance thing gets thrown out of whack anyways. In truth, I'm not overly tied to any one barrel length, and kind of wouldn't mind owning and trying a G17L and G34, just to do it. I could end up with a full size frame and anything on top, honestly. I feel no need to be incredibly practical and purposeful about this one aspect. No strong feelings either way.

I got out there in the dark for a few hours on Tuesday night. A new friend is heavily invested in the gear, but lacks access to a good place to use it. So us two plus my most regular fellow nighttime shooter went out, to get him some valuable time with his stuff.

Some notes from observation of the new guy and his equipment:

He has the Holosun Iris. The rapidly scalable illuminator is slick, and the illumination is crystal clear. However, as far as I can tell, the illuminator doesn't really go so wide as to be super advantageous in close quarters. It gets wider, but not in a "flood" or diffused sort of way, and it's so stinking bright that I think it'd be overwhelming indoors.

He has a Vortex Huey. It's not good for passive aiming. All sorts of optics have NVG settings nowadays. Only the Eotech (and MRDS, though I don't have personal experience) is truly usable. Even with his "Supergain" high-speed NVG tube, he was unable to see the targets through his Huey. My trusty ol' green, likely ten-year-old tube could see just fine through the Eotech.

And a note about something of mine:

I never bring my pistol out. I knew he had a pistol to shoot, so I figured that was a good reason to shoot mine. I enjoyed it. It's not going to find a new home in my "system", but it might get more recreational use moving forward. The MK25 ran flawlessly with 147gr flat point subs, with the AAC Ti-Rant 9mm silencer and PEQ-14. The flood diffuser on the PEQ-14 is awesome. The illumination it provides is very pleasant, and not overly bright in close quarters.

quote:

Originally posted by KSGM:
He has the Holosun Iris. The rapidly scalable illuminator is slick, and the illumination is crystal clear. However, as far as I can tell, the illuminator doesn't really go so wide as to be super advantageous in close quarters. It gets wider, but not in a "flood" or diffused sort of way, and it's so stinking bright that I think it'd be overwhelming indoors.

Yeah, according to their US media guy, that was an intentional decision. They've decided to let the aftermarket tackle the diffuser game, and they have apparently given Villain Weapon Systems a few early samples to work with to do just that. I guess the thinking is that a PEQ 15 is in a somewhat similar situation in terms of how it functions and since an FP PEQ has been kind of the benchmark for what kind of illumination end users want, that they decided to shoot for something that would yield a tight beam at three hundred yards. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, just that this is what the company has been saying via their media and US public relations guy on Reddit and Instagram.

Now that it's been out for a bit and into some hands and feedback is coming out, I'm not sure this is the one for my needs. I'm not doing anything at night at ranges past a hundred yards or so at this point, I don't own any clip-on units that require a tight illuminator out to five hundred yards, and even if I were, apparently the Iris kind of falls short in that role. As you say, it doesn't natively handle closer ranges. So what is it good for? Without getting my hands on one in person, it's hard to say. I got to handle one at the suppressor range day a few weeks ago, and I really like the form factor. But without getting to use one at night, I just can't say.

A friend of mine who has a full power PEQ 15 ordered one, and an HFXC, and after getting to mess with all three at once and compare them, he has stated that he's selling all of them and buying a MAWL, because only the MAWL does everything he wants an IR illuminator to do. I think that's hard to argue with, and the only problem there is paying MAWL prices.

quote:

Originally posted by KSGM:
He has a Vortex Huey. It's not good for passive aiming. All sorts of optics have NVG settings nowadays. Only the Eotech (and MRDS, though I don't have personal experience) is truly usable. Even with his "Supergain" high-speed NVG tube, he was unable to see the targets through his Huey. My trusty ol' green, likely ten-year-old tube could see just fine through the Eotech.

I read this when you posted it and wanted to kind of let this percolate before I replied, because I have some thoughts about this. I disagree, but it's one of those "it depends" kind of things. I think the NV game entirely is a balance of expectations and compromises. When you say an optic is "not good" and then immediately follow it by stating that only the EXPS3 is "truly usable," I have to say those are two very different metrics.

I've used everything from a 2015 era Primary Arms red dot that has no NV settings whatsoever to an EXPS3 to shoot passively in the dark, and so far, I'd have to say all of them have been usable. It can be written off by saying I'm shooting with duals, but I went out in the back yard with every illuminated optic I have over the last few weeks and looked through them with the pod for my off eye articulated up and found that most of them were what I would call "usable," and a few being "good." I would put the Holosun AEMS right up there with the EXPS3, honestly. I don't think it gives up much, if anything to the EXPS3. Glass clarity is about the same to my eyes, and you get the added benefit of however many thousands of hours of battery life plus built-in clear lens covers. I like the AEMS a lot. The Primary Arms 1X Microprism, once fully dialed in, is also really good with a few added quirks: It can be set so that the illuminated reticle is both of a brightness that is clean and crisp under NV and also perfectly visible and usable in the dark with NODs flipped up. How this is possible, I don't know, but no other dot optic I've looked through manages to pull that off. My issue with the PA is that the diopter needs to be set first so that the optic is clearly visible through NV, and then to my eyes, the reticle is less crisp to when not looking through NODs, plus you have the fact that it's still not a true 1x. I've also shot through a variety of dot optics on guns friends have handed off to me at night shoots and I think they've all been "usable" though still varying degrees of "good." Those are different metrics to me.

The other thing here is a fallacy I've seen proliferated in the NV community that one is looking to get into NV, they should buy a PVS14 with the absolute highest specs and cleanest tube they can get. I think that's nonsense, and it comes directly from the builders and distributors. I have looked through everything from Jerry 31's to L3 24UM's and all points in between and my suspicion early on has only been strongly reinforced, and can be condensed thusly into the following:

1) If you have two eyes, then two tubes of lower specs are going to be better than any one tube of the highest spec. Duals are just better, period.

2) Any night vision is better than no night vision.

If you're starting off and really want to get the most use out of NV for the least money, then my advice is to skip entirely over the white phosphor marketing and buy a set of surplused ANVIS 6 or 9's and re-house them in any articulating dual tube housing. I see this routinely done for under four grand, and regularly see this exact setup show up on the market in newer housing for as little as three grand. You'll be into OMNI V-VII tubes with ANVIS specs, meaning minimal or no blems in zone 1, and low EBI and halo numbers. Your average user isn't going to be able to tell you the difference between an OMNI V tube and an OMNI VII, and the way government contracts and minim specs work, a given OMNI V tube may not actually spec any worse than a given OMNI VII tube. By the time you can actually tell the difference, you'll have spent hundreds of hours looking through them hiking, shooting, and stargazing in true steroscopic vision.


As for pistols, I wound up buying a basically brand new non-MOS Gen 5 Glock 17 for $450. I've decided I'm just going to choose from between a handful of dots I'm considering and get the sucker milled for whatever footprint that takes. I would just have it done in RMR, but the fact that the EFLX has such crazy clear glass and I liked it so much is the only reason I haven't just had that done already because it uses the DPP footprint.

A few months back, I emailed Holosun asking about repairs on a 407 that hit my concrete garage floor and cracked the front lens. It's one of their "Elite" models with an ostensibly titanium housing, but it cracked all the same. They told me that was not a workmanship problem and thus wasn't covered under warranty. I said I was merely asking if they could repair it. They said no, but offered me 15% off an open box unit. I asked if they'd apply that discount towards an AEMS, and they said they could only do a 1:1 replacement. I kind of understand their position, but if this were an Eotech, they'd have just fixed it. I'm really reconsidering buying any more Holosun optics going forward. Apparently this is an atypical experience, and most people say they just emailed them and Holosun replaces stuff that gets damaged and broken, so I don't know if this is a newer policy or what, but there it is. Despite how much I like the AEMS, I don't think I'm going to be buying another Holosun optic because if it breaks, you're basically shit out of luck.

quote:

When you say an optic is "not good" and then immediately follow it by stating that only the EXPS3 is "truly usable," I have to say those are two very different metrics.

Indeed. On that night, the bottom line was I could see the target to engage it passively with my green surplus PVS-14 and Eotech, and he couldn't. So, assuming my night vision isn't better than his, I can come to the conclusion that the Eotech is the superior passive performer (Though I didn't try his setup. His eyes might see different than mine). In exceptionally dark conditions is where these determinations are made. I have shot passively with dot optics other than the Eotech in the past. I have even shot passively with a dot optic that doesn't have NV settings. If the conditions are bright enough, the differences in performance are less noticeable. Where the lack of NV settings is concerned: if there's enough light pollution, a normal dot on it's lowest setting won't contrast enough against the target area to even seem inappropriately bright, and it'll be "usable"; but in dark conditions, it'll wash everything out.

I agree with your assessment of tube quality and duals vs mono.

On illuminator diffusing: I have wanted a diffuser cap for my PEQ15 for a long while. I just can't be made to part with the cash for such a tiny little thingy.