Optics speed vs Irons

[Chuck Anderson]

I don't think the point of testing would be to determine which is better for each person, and at what range. There are some folks that are very proficient with iron sights. And others, not so much. I don't think match directors should be basing decisions about what divisions to allow based on what gun is easier to shoot. If that was the case the only division allowed for pistol would be open. I think everyone will agree that Open shooters, have lower overall times and better hits, than the average Limited, L-10 and Production shooters. (And note I left it limited to pistol matches, I don't need anyone to tell me that Taran won Ft. Benning with Tactical gear.) I don't mind if they want to have Limited, Tactical, Open, Heavy Metal or whatever at any three gun match, if there is interest to support it.

[kellyn]

I have done some tests on this but I can only speak to my personal experience, your results may vary.

Inside of 25 yards, I shoot equally fast with iron sights and non-magnified optics (usually an Eotech or Leupold Prismatic) and slightly slower with low end magnification (1.1 to 1.5 X optics). When I say slightly, I mean about 5 %. The difference becomes more pronounced on short range fast moving hoser courses. I find it easier to negotiate short range courses with iron sights as you don't get "sucked into the tube" and are able to see more as you move through the course and transition between targets.

25-100 yards, it's all about the same.

100+ yards I get about a 10% advantage shooting optics. That can go upwards if the targets become more indistinct.

In theory, the red dot should be the fastest up close as the eye has less to do (only focus on the target) but that has not been my experience. It is certainly true with handguns, regardless of distance. Rifles however are a little different. Maybe, it's the effect of sight radius.

Iron sights are trickier, take more more practice, and are much more subject to environmental and range conditions than magnified optics. I have been to several matches (SMM3G comes to mind) where one day the rifle targets are plain as day and the next day, you can't even see them when looking through your apeture. I have been to matches where the shooting conditions radically changed during the course of fire! Iron sights will always be more vulnerable to this.

[Scout454]

In theory, the red dot should be the fastest up close as the eye has less to do (only focus on the target) but that has not been my experience. It is certainly true with handguns, regardless of distance. Rifles however are a little different. Maybe, it's the effect of sight radius.

Kelly,

Have you tried putting the dot on your rifle out on the handguard so it approximates the distance it would be on an open handgun?

[kellyn]

In theory, the red dot should be the fastest up close as the eye has less to do (only focus on the target) but that has not been my experience. It is certainly true with handguns, regardless of distance. Rifles however are a little different. Maybe, it's the effect of sight radius.

Kelly,

Have you tried putting the dot on your rifle out on the handguard so it approximates the distance it would be on an open handgun?

When I shoot an Open rifle, I do use a red dot mounted on the handguard, it's about 2 inches farther back than the distance of that the sight would be on an open pistol.

[Scout454]

I've done that too. Makes sight aquisition a little faster than having it in my face. I like glass close but I want a dot out.

[kurtm]

I have found the exact same thing as Kelly...except I never loose a target, My ranges are extended about 50 yards farther than his, and of course I am usually about 1/2 - 1 second faster for all the drills

[Scout454]

Kurt!

You shot an OPEN rifle??

I'm shocked!!!

[ken hebert]

No.... Not exactly. He still shoots the irons rifle, just registers in open to embarass the optics guys.