Limited Optics

[ampleworks]

1 hour ago, twodownzero said:

 

I shot (and staffed) many USPSA matches over the last 15 years.  Given what is going on in the sport with the rules changes, I have no immediate plans to return to the sport unless the arms race stops and there are some other changes that Brian doesn't want us talking about on the board. 

 

I never had a whole lot of interest in shooting the high cap divisions and I still don't.  I thought there was room for me in USPSA, and there was, for a long time.  Carry Optics and PCC have changed that.  Nobody cares about us anymore.

 

I shot my first USPSA match in 2004.  I shot Single Stack when it was a provisional division in 2005.

 

SS wasn't provisional until 2006 and turned official in 2008. 

[fireman1776]

If the provisional division passes when will people be able to shoot matches in LO? Do they hold nats for provisional divisions? 

[BritinUSA]

Yes, and sometimes

once they announce it (and it's added to Practiscore) then its open season.

[Johnny_Chimpo]

4 hours ago, ltdmstr said:

 

What about the trade-offs?  Many have issues with reliability, durability, size, weight, use in low light situations.   Plus, the added cost.  I understand most of those aren't a major factor for competitive shooters.  But for LEOs and carry they certainly are. 

 

I've been carrying, training with, and competing with optics equipped pistols for the last 18 months.  That includes matches in the rain, dropped pistols, dust, going from hot to cold and back, etc etc etc.

 

An optic weighs virtually nothing compared to the handgun its on.  Lots of cheapo chinese optics have crappy auto brightness adjustments.  That's why I rely strictly on American-made Trijicon products.  I've experienced none of the problems you are imagining.

 

I'm curious to hear about your first hand experience.

 

https://www.tactical-life.com/firearm-news/delaware-state-police-sig-p320-rxp/

 

https://www.williamsonhomepage.com/brentwood/brentwood-police-adopting-red-dot-sights-for-service-pistols/article_1272e34c-05da-11ec-a154-4799ddf80b85.html

 

https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2018/07/05/houston-red-dot-sights/

 

https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2019/07/08/u-s-marshals-adopt-leupold-delta-point-pro-and-dawson-precision-sights/

Edited December 30, 2022 by Johnny_Chimpo

[SV650Squid]

On 12/28/2022 at 10:16 AM, mikeg1005 said:

 

The real issue though with SAOs is 2011s have a higher capacity than other double stacks.  Its why they're more common than Glocks, CZs, and Tanfos, in limited and open.  There is something to be said about that.  Trigger won't matter... extra round or 2 will. 

My CO gun gets 23+1.

 

Rune Tactical spring/followers get 24+1 with henning basepads, supposedly. 

 

Atlas states 23+1 in their competition mags. 

 

So...there's no difference. 

[ltdmstr]

55 minutes ago, Johnny_Chimpo said:

I'm curious to hear about your first hand experience.

 

 

I'm quite familiar with Trijicon's products.  I currently have four rifles with MROs on them.  Also had a couple RMRs.  One failed.  The other was the same one the military uses, whatever model that is.  I put it on a G17/5 for the nightstand.  Did a trial where I set it as low as it would go.  Then set my alarm for middle of the night.  Woke up grabbed the gun to check it, and the dot was so bright I couldn't even look at it.   Thought I screwed up the setting so tried again the next night.  Same problem.  Turns out it was reverting to the default setting which was like midpoint on the brightness scale.  Sent it back to Trijicon to get it fixed and they called to tell me it was fine and that's how it's supposed to work.  So, basically it was useless for the intended purpose.  What a joke.  In addition to the failed RMR, I've also had Holosun and Shield sights that failed.  As for your experience, that's fine and dandy.  What exactly is the advantage you get from having a dot on a carry gun?  Aside from the tacticool factor?  And if you don't think it adds size, weight and complexity, then you're living a different reality, I guess.  Bottom line is, I don't need a dot for EDC and don't see any advantage to having one.

[RangerTrace]

2 hours ago, Johnny_Chimpo said:

 

I've been carrying, training with, and competing with optics equipped pistols for the last 18 months.  That includes matches in the rain, dropped pistols, dust, going from hot to cold and back, etc etc etc.

 

An optic weighs virtually nothing compared to the handgun its on.  Lots of cheapo chinese optics have crappy auto brightness adjustments.  That's why I rely strictly on American-made Trijicon products.  I've experienced none of the problems you are imagining.

 

I'm curious to hear about your first hand experience.

 

https://www.tactical-life.com/firearm-news/delaware-state-police-sig-p320-rxp/

 

https://www.williamsonhomepage.com/brentwood/brentwood-police-adopting-red-dot-sights-for-service-pistols/article_1272e34c-05da-11ec-a154-4799ddf80b85.html

 

https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2018/07/05/houston-red-dot-sights/

 

https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2019/07/08/u-s-marshals-adopt-leupold-delta-point-pro-and-dawson-precision-sights/

I am a fan of Trijicon products and have been for a long time.  With that said, in the last several months, Sig optics have been a more favorable choice for me.   The glass is absolutely clear.  Time will tell if they are as reliable......

[Johnny_Chimpo]

Just now, RangerTrace said:

I am a fan of Trijicon products and have been for a long time.  With that said, in the last several months, Sig optics have been a more favorable choice for me.   The glass is absolutely clear.  Time will tell if they are as reliable......

 

More high quality options are a good thing.  Holosun was a dead end for me.

[Johnny_Chimpo]

1 hour ago, ltdmstr said:

 What exactly is the advantage you get from having a dot on a carry gun?  Aside from the tacticool factor? 

I can make any shot faster than you can with irons.

 

 

1 hour ago, ltdmstr said:

And if you don't think it adds size, weight and complexity, then you're living a different reality, I guess. 

The size and weight increases are so small they are irrelevant.  How much complexity they add depends on how inept you are at dealing with it, I guess.

[71Commander]

8 hours ago, ampleworks said:

 

SS wasn't provisional until 2006 and turned official in 2008. 

Prior to that it was ran under the 'Single Stack Society' and Richard Heinie.

[deerslayer]

10 hours ago, ltdmstr said:

What exactly is the advantage you get from having a dot on a carry gun? 

I’ve played with dots on and off for five years.  Based on my experience, I see two advantages, both of debatable worth.  

1.  They are easier to shoot accurately at distance (in a hurry).  I’m no better with a dot at 8-10 yards than I am with irons.  Past 15 or so, there is an apparent difference when trying to get good hits at speed.  On a carry gun, this could be useful if engaging an active shooter at 50 yards, but has little value at typical self-defense shooting distances. 

2.  Your nightstand experience notwithstanding, they can offer an advantage in low light situations.  I have no experience with Trijicon, but have quite a bit with Leupold and Holosun and both are pretty handy when it’s dark. 

Dots are the future and all that.  I’m not convinced they are necessary, but they are probably here to stay.  Some claim they allow the user to maintain focus on the target while irons can’t, but that reasoning assumes the iron shooter has to maintain front sight focus.  This is rarely the case.  Also, a fogged up dot is never mentioned.  Sure, you don’t have to see through the glass to use the dot (assuming both eyes are open), but the dot is useless if it’s a big faded blob or even worse, not visible.  

Edited December 30, 2022 by deerslayer

[RangerTrace]

There is no question that a dot is more precise than irons.  Consider this, a typical front sight is approximately 30 MOA, while most folks are running 3.25 to 7 MOA dots.  I know for me, especially at indoor matches with lower artificial lighting, the dot is far superior to any kind of front sight post.  

 

I have been a very slow hold out to the dot.  But since I've committed to the P320 platform and have actually started dry firing again, I'm a believer.   And just my luck, I get a GGI P320 I can shoot legally in both sports and USPSA changes the rules.....again.

[deerslayer]

15 minutes ago, RangerTrace said:

There is no question that a dot is more precise than irons.  Consider this, a typical front sight is approximately 30 MOA, while most folks are running 3.25 to 7 MOA dots.  I know for me, especially at indoor matches with lower artificial lighting, the dot is far superior to any kind of front sight post.  

 

I have been a very slow hold out to the dot.  But since I've committed to the P320 platform and have actually started dry firing again, I'm a believer.   And just my luck, I get a GGI P320 I can shoot legally in both sports and USPSA changes the rules.....again.

I think your 30 moa figure is a bit exaggerated. 

[RangerTrace]

8 minutes ago, deerslayer said:

I think your 30 moa figure is a bit exaggerated. 

Tell that to BJ Norris.  Thats who told me and suggested I get the larger dot.

[deerslayer]

14 minutes ago, RangerTrace said:

Tell that to BJ Norris.  Thats who told me and suggested I get the larger dot.

1 MOA at 100 yards subtends or covers 1.047”.  A 30 MOA front sight would cover a 31” target at 100 yards.  I don’t have any front sights nearly this wide.  

[euxx]

12 hours ago, BritinUSA said:

Yes, and sometimes

once they announce it (and it's added to Practiscore) then its open season.

For results purposes PractiScore does NOT need to do any work.

 

Anyone can add any "toy" or "provisional" divisions they like at any match.
Just convert your "toy" divisions to Open before posting your USPSA activity...

Another option is to tag such divisions as custom categories.

[RJH]

25 minutes ago, RangerTrace said:

Tell that to BJ Norris.  Thats who told me and suggested I get the larger dot.

 

8 minutes ago, deerslayer said:

1 MOA at 100 yards subtends or covers 1.047”.  A 30 MOA front sight would cover a 31” target at 100 yards.  I don’t have any front sights nearly this wide.  

 

This was an interesting question that I haven't really thought of, although I knew a distance the front sight of a pistol covers quite a bit. So I did a quick test, at about 25 yards my front sight is basically the same width  as a 6 in wide pickit on my fence. So that would math out to about 24 in at 100 yards. That's a standard front sight, not a narrow one that we use many times on racy type guns 

 

YMMV

[shred]

MOA of a front sight depends how long your arms are and how close you hold it.  BJ and Nils are going to subtend different amounts 

 

 

[deerslayer]

A 30 MOA front sight would be approximately .310” wide.  I’ve never seen one of those.  

[RJH]

2 minutes ago, shred said:

MOA of a front sight depends how long your arms are and how close you hold it.  BJ and Nils are going to subtend different amounts 

 

 

 

Definitely true. I have pretty average arms for a guy about 6'. 

[deerslayer]

7 minutes ago, shred said:

MOA of a front sight depends how long your arms are and how close you hold it.  BJ and Nils are going to subtend different amounts 

 

 

The width of the sight is constant.  BJ and Nils may see a slightly different sight picture with the same gun, but it wouldn’t matter if the gun had irons or a dot. 

[RJH]

8 minutes ago, deerslayer said:

The width of the sight is constant.  BJ and Nils may see a slightly different sight picture with the same gun, but it wouldn’t matter if the gun had irons or a dot. 

 

The width is constant, but the subtension definitely depends on the distance from the eye. It doesn't make a huge difference but there is a difference there.

 

Oddly enough I could discern no difference with a DOT no matter how close or far I moved it from my eye. Must be some sort of magic going on there LOL

Edited December 30, 2022 by RJH

[motosapiens]

11 hours ago, ltdmstr said:

 

I'm quite familiar with Trijicon's products.  I currently have four rifles with MROs on them.  Also had a couple RMRs.  One failed.  The other was the same one the military uses, whatever model that is.  I put it on a G17/5 for the nightstand.  Did a trial where I set it as low as it would go.  Then set my alarm for middle of the night.  Woke up grabbed the gun to check it, and the dot was so bright I couldn't even look at it.   Thought I screwed up the setting so tried again the next night.  Same problem.  Turns out it was reverting to the default setting which was like midpoint on the brightness scale.  Sent it back to Trijicon to get it fixed and they called to tell me it was fine and that's how it's supposed to work.  So, basically it was useless for the intended purpose.  What a joke.  In addition to the failed RMR, I've also had Holosun and Shield sights that failed.  As for your experience, that's fine and dandy.  What exactly is the advantage you get from having a dot on a carry gun?  Aside from the tacticool factor?  And if you don't think it adds size, weight and complexity, then you're living a different reality, I guess.  Bottom line is, I don't need a dot for EDC and don't see any advantage to having one.

For sure, dots aren't perfect. I had one fail on me during a stage because the battery compartment wasn't screwed down tight enough. OTOH, I've had 2 rear sights break during stages at nationals, and mrs moto broke a front sight at a state match. stuff happens.

[deerslayer]

24 minutes ago, RJH said:

 

The width is constant, but the subtension definitely depends on the distance from the eye

This is true whether talking about irons or dots.  I’m 5’10 and have average length arms for 5’10 dudes and have never seen a sight picture with anything approaching what a 30 MOA front sight would present.  Perhaps BJ’s arms are a lot shorter than I thought and maybe he uses REALLY wide front sights, but the 30 MOA theory is unrealistic in my experience.  10 MOA I might buy, and that’s pretty close to some of the bigger dots.  

Edited December 30, 2022 by deerslayer

[Boomstick303]

The argument between which system is better is pointless.  It is a tool used to aim a gun.  It all comes down to the proficiency of the user with that specific system.  I think that has become all to obvious in watching any shooter not proficient with their particular sighting system in competition.  For iron shooters not just blazing away and actually aiming I have watched them take too much time in lining up the sights for longer shots, or shots at weird angles just as I have seen dot shooters loose the dot.  It is obvious they need to work on whichever system they are currently using.  

 

In most self protection situations (obviously not all), most people for close encounters will never use the sighting system on the their gun, irons or the dot, in that they will be using indexing of the gun to fire the shot to protect themselves.  Everything will be happening WAY to fast for any aiming to take place.   

 

 

Edited December 30, 2022 by Boomstick303