- Thread starter SanPatHogger
- Start date
Hey if someone wants to try it and they like it, then all the power to them. I'll never recommend it as a first pistol RDS though, or really for anything other than fun. Obviously you can use it for EDC, and I don't think you're gonna get "kilt in da streets" with it. I think you having a dot is more important than sticking with irons, cause it will make you a better shooter.
To summarize my thoughts:
I think if you took 100 shooters and put them through a few top level pistol red dot courses, had them shoot 10 USPSA or IDPA pistol matches, and had them shoot 5000 rounds of SERIOUS pistol work, 99 of them would have a simple 3-8moa dot and thats it.
This is absolutely wishful thinking with a pistol and that reticle
And if it was so much better it would have seen almost immediate adoption by the majority of USPSA carry optics competitors.
The fact that 2 years on, the only people who use it are random noobs that don't know any better is pretty telling.
Different strokes, as they say.
I will admit finding it QUITE amusing how much rancorous "debate" is precipitated by this particular topic. It's right up there with the "caliber wars" at this point.
I've got dots. I've got red ones. I've got green dots. I've got a 6.5 MOA dot (RM07) on a home defense gun. I've got a 2 MOA dot on a range toy. And now I've got a green chevron optic on a carry defensive pistol. For that purpose, I absolutely prefer the chevron.
I do not play gun games, so I cannot opine on what works best in that environment. Don't know. Don't care. At least not yet... unless I decide to get into the gun games thing. Maybe some day I'll try it. I've done some rifle competition - NRA High Power. Didn't like it, mostly because of the people participating. They were generally NOT nice to newcomers. So, I'm a bit turned off by the games / competition stuff... because of the people. And I like people!
I have nothing to sell here. I have no doggy in the fight, so to speak. Just relating my own experience, knowing that everyone is different. It's like asking "which gun should I get?" The real answer is: "It depends."
I'm not here to convince anyone of anything. It ALL works. What REALLY matters is a mastery of the fundamentals. If you've got that down or almost down... the type of sights you use matter little. Grip. Trigger control. Sight picture. Recoil control. And so on. If a shooter doesn't have those, they will miss the paper target entirely, even with a LASER. I see it almost every time I go to the range, including this past weekend. Dude with a laser flinched so much, he couldn't hit the paper at 7 yards.
But, yes... the reflexive naysayers amuse me.
I did not mean to start anything rancorous.
I am the random noob referred to above - not new to pistol shooting, but my whole life has been iron sights, from duty gun to personal carry gun (starting back with revolvers and had to "learn" auto pistols). And now I am thinking about (actually decided I will) transition to a red dot sight.
So there were two arguments against -
As for the "nobody uses it" argument, have they tried it? Have either of you tried it? Do you know other competitors who tried it? There is a big difference between "nobody uses it" and "lots of guys tried it and found it to be a disadvantage over a standard dot." If it was just that "nobody uses it," then, if the chevron had been introduced first, and the dot introduced in 2021, folks might be saying "Nobody uses the dot. Everybody uses the chevron because that is what everybody uses."
The other argument is that it might cause one to focus on the chevron instead of the target. Now that is an argument I can understand, but is that more likely with the 10moa chevron than with the standard 3-6 MOA dots I see out there? I mean, I am going to have to train with the dot or chevron to look at the target, right? Is that an argument that matters if I train to look at the target instead of the chevron or dot (as I am likely to do from a lifetime habit of looking at the front sight)? I mean, I am going to have to train and learn differently no matter which one I select, right?
PS - I am not arguing for or against. I am just trying to understand the arguments being made so I can evaluate them better.
I am the random noob referred to above - not new to pistol shooting, but my whole life has been iron sights, from duty gun to personal carry gun (starting back with revolvers and had to "learn" auto pistols). And now I am thinking about (actually decided I will) transition to a red dot sight.
So there were two arguments against -
As for the "nobody uses it" argument, have they tried it? Have either of you tried it? Do you know other competitors who tried it? There is a big difference between "nobody uses it" and "lots of guys tried it and found it to be a disadvantage over a standard dot." If it was just that "nobody uses it," then, if the chevron had been introduced first, and the dot introduced in 2021, folks might be saying "Nobody uses the dot. Everybody uses the chevron because that is what everybody uses."
The other argument is that it might cause one to focus on the chevron instead of the target. Now that is an argument I can understand, but is that more likely with the 10moa chevron than with the standard 3-6 MOA dots I see out there? I mean, I am going to have to train with the dot or chevron to look at the target, right? Is that an argument that matters if I train to look at the target instead of the chevron or dot (as I am likely to do from a lifetime habit of looking at the front sight)? I mean, I am going to have to train and learn differently no matter which one I select, right?
PS - I am not arguing for or against. I am just trying to understand the arguments being made so I can evaluate them better.
Last edited:
LOL!
OK... to the OP... if you're going to do USPSA competitions and want to avoid ridicule by your "peers," do NOT get this optic! They will laugh at you.
I do not "focus" on the chevron or the dot in either case.
Personally... my own experience.... was that target focus came to me intuitively. And of course... both eyes open is even easier. If you get your presentation consistent, the pistol optic reticle just appears, superimposed over the target. There is no shifting of focus at all. And with good presentation, it's lightning fast.
Training and practice... just like with irons. But as I said before, the most important part of marksmanship is the fundamentals. I dare submit that if I put a chevron reticle in the hands of any of the "masters" of the gun games, they would perform very very well.... because it ain't the reticle. It's the shooter and his mastery of the fundamentals.
Similarly, if we put ANY set of golf clubs in the hands of Tiger Woods, he would outperform any of us on the course. Hell, I bet if he used a baseball bat to hit the golf ball, he would drive it farther than any of us with a set of Pings or Taylor Mades. If we put Michael Schumacher (when he wasn't brain damaged) or Lewis Hamilton in a Mazda Miata, he would run circles around an amateur track junkie in a Ferrari.
It's mastery, or at least competence, with the fundamentals.
I guess that is what I am trying to figure out - is the dot and chevron thing Miata and Ferrari? I mean, I doubt it, but that is why I want to hear from folks who have experience with both.
Actually, I'd say the dot vs chevron is a Miata vs Miata. In other words, it doesn't really matter. With a good grasp of the fundamentals, it becomes a matter of preference. Neither will make you better. Neither will make you worse. If you have mastered the fundamentals... or at least have a decent grasp on them... It's a matter of what you like looking at better.
My point was that a MASTER in a Miata will drive faster around the track than an amateur or novice in a Ferrari. A LOT faster.... even though the Ferrari is an inherently faster car. Skills matter more than equipment.
If you're a novice track driver, putting you in a Ferrari won't help you. It might even hurt you, actually. "To go fast, first you must go slow."
I personally LIKE the chevron better than a dot for defensive use. But I will shoot pretty much the same with either.
Last edited:
Bunny trail….. This is why I have an Athlon G2 2-12 on seven rifles. Lotta bang for little bucks, and no American firm is manufacturing competing features with competing quality.
I used to do quite a bit of USPSA. You do not want an RXC-200 for USPSA. At all. The Bushnell dot to be in consideration for USPSA is the RXM-300 because it has a huge window @ 28x24mm.
RXM-300 Reflex Sight, 4-MOA Red Dot | Bushnell
Get unmatched accuracy for your shotgun or AR with the TRS-25 HIRise Red Dot Sight, with a clear 3-MOA dot. Shop today.
www.bushnell.com Something that you do not need to worry about with a Trijicon product
OH SHIT! That sucks.
I show up with a Taurus 92 in a camoflage nylon holster now. If they don't laugh at that they won't laugh at much.
You know people like you when they bust your balls
As long as you're safe nobody really gives a shit about the rest.
I used to do quite a bit of USPSA. You do not want an RXC-200 for USPSA. At all. The Bushnell dot to be in consideration for USPSA is the RXM-300 because it has a huge window @ 28x24mm.
RXM-300 Reflex Sight, 4-MOA Red Dot | Bushnell
Get unmatched accuracy for your shotgun or AR with the TRS-25 HIRise Red Dot Sight, with a clear 3-MOA dot. Shop today.
View attachment 8235237
Who makes that thing for you?
How about bigger dot options, somewhere between 6 and 12 moa?
They won't let me put that out there.
I preferred 8, but I think they're going to be holding on the 4 until they can get more market feedback. It'd be cool to see a green version as well as a bigger dot in the future if they'll go for it, but I'm not holding my breath.
Talk to Jake Martens at USPSA and see if they can include dot size in their gear survey they do every year
I'm here to tell you the majority of competition shooters favor larger dots. 5 moa is my personal minimum for anything and once I tried a C-More RTS2 with a 10 moa dot for USPSA I was hooked.
If the RTS2 was designed for defensive use (it isn't), it with a 10 dot would be on every pistol I own.
I can try to hit him up. I asked for a bigger dot but yeah. Initial feedback on it does seem to be quite good. It's only been actively selling on the market about a month now.
LOL no thread goes without some scuttle buttin and hee-hawwin on here.
Yes some have, but I also don't ask everyone. A more common question is the Holosun large ring and 2.5moa dot, which does get discussed and most shooters do not prefer it after some time. This is not something that the "game" is responsible for. The game aspect of USPSA has almost nothing to do with the actual shooting; it's the fault lines, pseudo walls, shots per target, etc... shooting is shooting and most people do best with a single dot long term. It's the most consistent, finite, and least cumbersome or intrusive visual object you can possibly have without being too small or unnoticeable.
Yes, but your eyes and brain are still seeing it, you're just not allowing the FOCUS to go to the dot. Remember, our brain is doing a million subconscious things while you are trying to do 1 conscious thing. In my opinion, it would make the most sense that our brain can focus more easily on the target when the object in the middle is the least intrusive, but still noticeable. The brain also naturally centers things like circles since the distance to the center is equal to all sides. This can be obviously noticed when you go to shoot peep sights on rifle. The post gets centered subconsciously and with pretty good consistency.
So what happens when you use a Chevron that is wider than it is tall, and has a top and bottom that are polar opposites? I think when someone AIMs a rifle it makes sense. But when you shoot a pistol you don't aim that same way. Now thats just the aiming portion. Then you get into shot calling and shot diagnosis at speed. Meaning shoot a doubles with 0.30-0.40s splits from 15-20yds and tell me where the shots went based on what your dot is doing and how the gun/recoil felt at speed. In my opinion, I think that would be MUCH harder to do with an oblong chevron than a simple dot. Just my $0.02
Again, I don't do the competition / game thing, so I cannot speak on that.
But I will say that I'm not aiming the pistol optic chevron the way you might be thinking as I would with a rifle.
When I'm shooting at speed, I focus entirely on the target (at defensive distances), and the appearance of the chevron... might as well be a big dot.... is a "flash" and the shot is broken. It's very very fast. So, I'm not trying to put the target on the tippy tip of the chevron. The chevron is effectively a big dot.
Last edited:
The part that you don't seem to grasp is that it is much easier for the brain to center a symmetrical dot on the place you're looking at than to center an asymmetrical chevron.
That's why there is zero loss of precision with big (> 6 moa) dots compared to smaller ones as long as the target is bigger than the dot.
People like you don't think it be like it is, but it do.
Me and J.E. are working doubles in the high teens at 15 yd and mid 20s at 25 yd with 100% alpha at 15 and 85-90% at 25.
I could not imagine trying to call shots at that speed (which I can do easily with a big dot) with some chevron shaped reticle. Do I call it at the apex, or somewhere between the arms? Or where?
With the dot I know the shot will be at the center of the dot no matter what.
I know, I'm not really talking about you specifically, I'm applying what we're talking about to all shooters. I don't doubt what you're saying, but I also believe it would not transfer to most shooters like it may do with you.
The game/competition thing has no relevance here though. Shooting is shooting. Nothing in USPSA makes me aim or pull the trigger any different than any other pistol shooting, its just a very good medium to learn how to do it well.
Haha... Listen... I've been doing this a LONG time and have had a lot of training and practice. I can only speak of MY experience. My brain has ZERO problems centering the chevron. Really... it doesn't. I'm pretty sure I know my own neuromuscular system, it's performance and capabilities better than you. I also believe you are WAY over-thinking this. You like what you like, and that's cool. As for competitive gun games, I'll defer to you and those with experience in that particular area. I know my speed, in the context of defensive gun training and practice, is the same with either a big dot or the chevron, because I've done it thousands and thousands of times.
As I mentioned before... for me there is no functional difference between the 6.5 MOA dot on one gun and the 10-MOA chevron on the other. But yes... I simply like the chevron better. I do agree that especially for defensive non-bullseye shooting a bigger dot is better. The chevron is even bigger than my 6.5-MOA dot.
I would not have responded except for your baseless accusation of me not "grasping" it. LOL! In any case... I'm done here. To the OP... you'll figure out what works for you. None of us is going to sort that out for you. We can only talk about our own experiences. And your mileage may vary.
Personally, I think that's part of the fun... figuring out what works best in your hands.PS... I just looked and surprisingly, there are ZERO USPSA clubs in my area. The nearest is a couple hours away. The nearest USPSA event is 4 hours away. And I'm in a big gun state. Go figure.
Last edited:
Well, I cannot imagine doing that with iron sights (how I shoot now), so I doubt I will be doing it with an optic.
Take a class with Ben Stoeger, Joel Park, or Hwansik Kim.
It's very doable with irons but you have to let go of everything you know about iron sights shooting. Most of all you should let go of the mindset that you can never do something because you think you can't.
If you try (i mean a serious try not just once and done) and fail at least now you know. But you never fail until you quit.
Last edited:
LOL you do realize I don't care about such claims right?
You're the one casting aspersions based on assumptions. But whatever, dude. Carry on.
Alright, thanks. I will seriously consider doing just that.
Going back and forth and trying to decide. The slide I have now is not worth milling. And to put a Trijicon or something really high end on this would be like hanging a chandelier in a haunted house.... So based on the advice here I am going to go with a 6 moa dot and mount it on a plate that goes in the rear sight channel. $99 optic and $15 mount. Optic comes with a moint to put it on a pic rail too, so I can try it out on the AR 9 also. If I decide I actually like a dot, I'll get a nicer slide that already has an optic cut and then get a badass sight.
Just in case you want to see the haunted house. It's put together with "stock" parts, no fancy trigger or connector or anything like that yet. After a little tinkering it seems to function well. Fairly accurate too.
The dot for a haunted house.
Just in case you want to see the haunted house. It's put together with "stock" parts, no fancy trigger or connector or anything like that yet. After a little tinkering it seems to function well. Fairly accurate too.
The dot for a haunted house.
I'll disagree that it's a "haunted house." And I think you'll find that besides the general consensus against the cheap optic, you'll also find a consensus that eschews the rear sight / dovetail type mounts. They are not as stable, and they place the optic fairly high up off the slide (compared to an optic mounted into a milled slide).
You find decent milled slides for as low as $145:
17 Slides – 80P Builder
80pbuilder.com Looks like a nice clean build. Your first? Good job in any case. I find my P80 builds to be as reliable and accurate as factory.
I think you'd be amazed how much the pistol shooting/fundamentals has advanced in the last 5 years. There's nothing "wrong" with some of the older methods but the newer techniques and teaching approaches are so efficient and practical.
I would also look into:
Velox Training (Nick)
SpecTrain (Billy Barton)
Practical Shooting Training Group(Ben Stoeger and Joel Park - listed above)
Mason Lane
I hate to crush your budget but I agree with the above.... please do not get a dovetail mount.
And your statement about a slide not worth putting an optic on is the wrong mindset in my opinion. If the slide is worth shooting, it's worth milling lol. If you really don't believe that, then I would buy a nicer slide that is already milled, for which there are a million options for glocks.
Milling is about $125ish for glock slide. If budget is concern, direct mount mill for a Holosun or one of the Sig/C-more non-chinese options. Buying pistol optics is like buying nice rifle scopes. A $2000 scope will make a Savage a better rifle, but its still a $500 savage. If you take the same scope and put it on a PRS custom rig, it does the same thing. The optic can be a forever purchase and used on the "haunted house" or the custom race gun. THAT's the mindset you should have.
I was going to explain why this is a terrible idea then I remembered that not everyone takes pistol shooting seriously
Do carry on.
If the $99 optic and dovetail mount were for an airsoft pistol, that would be one thing. But even if this "haunted house" firearm was just a range toy, a decent optic and mounting system are in order. I'd bet that "Ade" optic on a dovetail mount may not even endure a single range session before breaking. Then you'll be out that money and back to square one.
Just to be clear... I would never argue against going "top shelf" with a Trijicon. It's the gold standard. 100%.
But if budget is a concern, and you can stomach the China connection, Holosun makes a solid product priced a fair bit lower than Trijicon. But it's also a fair bit higher than the $100 optics on Amazon - and rightfully so. The quality is FAR better than the $100 optics. Holosun optics are priced right in the middle, price-wise, and fill the void with a good value proposition.
I'm usually a "top shelf" oriented guy most of the time. I thought I'd try one Holosun on my first P80 build, and I was very pleasantly surprised. Now I have two. I'll likely buy more in the future. But I'll also consider Trijicon again if they make a model that suits my preferences.
But if budget is a concern, and you can stomach the China connection, Holosun makes a solid product priced a fair bit lower than Trijicon. But it's also a fair bit higher than the $100 optics on Amazon - and rightfully so. The quality is FAR better than the $100 optics. Holosun optics are priced right in the middle, price-wise, and fill the void with a good value proposition.
I'm usually a "top shelf" oriented guy most of the time. I thought I'd try one Holosun on my first P80 build, and I was very pleasantly surprised. Now I have two. I'll likely buy more in the future. But I'll also consider Trijicon again if they make a model that suits my preferences.
Last edited:
Years ago, an LEO was getting in his car to go to work. He'd placed one of his holstered weapons on the passenger side seat, got situated and started his engine. Right at that moment he noticed a guy several feet away moving toward his side of the car very fast.
The guy had a big smile on his face and was reaching in his pocket, pulling out a semi-auto. The LEO instinctively reached for his weapon which was still holstered. He was "behind", the guy who'd approached the car already had his gun out, but the LEO was able to fire his weapon which was still holstered from inside the car and he killed his assailant.
After the incident, investigators and the LEO were able to piece together just what the LEO did to save his life without actually thinking about it.
After grabbing his holstered weapon, he'd pointed it, pulled the weapon about an inch back out of the holster (freeing the trigger) and firing at the same time, an action the LEO doesn't remember doing.
If he'd taken the time to pull the gun all the way out of the holster, he'd probably been shot in the face, and the investigators were amazed at how without thinking about it, he'd done the exact/right/quickest thing that was possible to get himself out of a jam.
Reading about this, I was amazed at what the brain is capable of when put to the test.
So, he fired through the holster?
That was my understanding from what I read about it. That the guy carried a semi-auto on duty, he also had a revolver in a holster he kept in his car and that when this went down, he'd fired through the holster.
Again, what was amazing to me was his pulling the gun back to free the trigger and firing at the same time, that choice, as opposed to pulling the gun all the way out of the holster, and his brain making that choice in that moment.
Also from what I remember, it was a one shot deal, and he shot the other guy in the face.
Again, what was amazing to me was his pulling the gun back to free the trigger and firing at the same time, that choice, as opposed to pulling the gun all the way out of the holster, and his brain making that choice in that moment.
Also from what I remember, it was a one shot deal, and he shot the other guy in the face.
Last edited:
I kept thinking how many people would've just froze and got shot.
So there may be a realistic explanation based off of subconscious training.
Most police holsters are locking holsters (level 2 and 3 retention). When you draw from that you push the retention lock on the side and draw the pistol. I’m assuming that since the holster was not attached as he subconsciously hit the locking lever it pushed the holster off a little as well, and he subconsciously fired like he had trained to.
That’s just a guess.
I was in a firefight overseas and as I got to some cover, I was sitting there and looked down and realized I had closed my dust cover at some point. Never remembered doing it but it was just so ingrained through training.
It’s why training is so important I suppose lol
Interestingly enough USPSA pistol competitions force you to shoot from multiple and unpredictable positions. I've had to deal with hard leans both ways, deep kneels, deep squats, strong hand only shooting through narrow ports while pulling a rope to open the port, prone, and any number of other weird positions.
You don't need the gimmick big circle if you train.
You don't even need to pay someone. Dry fire reps are free, costing only time. When you get your first pistol with a dot start doing draws slowly and observe how you have to move the pistol to get the dot in view. Then deconstruct that draw back to the holster. Then reconstruct it out ofvthe holster.
Once you build a solid repeatable index (gun shown up in your face with dot on target without last minute adjustments) start speeding up.
You'll then start seeing minor deficient in your draw as you go faster. So you address those and keep on pushing speed.
Pro tip if you're one of those who hunches your shoulders and tilts your head down to the gun you will have major problems with a dot particularly at speed.
Keep the head erect shoulders relaxed elbows down a d bring the pistol up to your face.
Last edited:
Totally off topic, but can you explain “elbows down”? I was always taught to keep my elbows rotated outward to assist in recoil control with a two handed grip.
Grip the gun and watch what happens to the interface between the lower part of your palms (both of them) as you rotate your shoulders to point your elbows from almost horizontal to almost vertical.
Then repeat while gripping the pistol with your support hand as hard as you can. Pay attention to how your left hand feels on the grip as you lift then lower the elbows.
Then do it in live fire.
You'll see....
Somewhere between the extremes of elbows out and all the way down you'll find your optimum but it will be with the elbows much closer to straight down than straight out.
The practical pistol competition world has made technique evolve over the last 8 - 10 years in ways that most trainers and casual shooters don't realize.
There's a reason why Ben Stoeger, JJ Racaza, and Matt Pranka (all USPSA Grand Masters) are in such high demand for training tier 1 units.
I’ll check it out. Thanks.
I plan on switching to dots on all my handguns soon after being hesitant to move from irons, however for me, my glasses make using irons frustrating.
Tried a dot on a handgun a few months ago, for the first time, on a buddy's Walther PDP. What struck me was not only how fast and easy to use the dot is, but how low effort it was to make hits at 7+ yards. I didn't even always take time to properly line up or grip the pistol and would STILL make accurate COM shots.
After trying that I was convinced it's superior to irons for a defensive weapon full stop.
Tried a dot on a handgun a few months ago, for the first time, on a buddy's Walther PDP. What struck me was not only how fast and easy to use the dot is, but how low effort it was to make hits at 7+ yards. I didn't even always take time to properly line up or grip the pistol and would STILL make accurate COM shots.
After trying that I was convinced it's superior to irons for a defensive weapon full stop.
There's really no contest, similar to red dots or scope on rifles vs open sights. Can someone master open sights? yes of course. I spend 1000's of .22 rounds master a CZ 452 with open sights based on Jeff Cooper's drills for "field shooting". But you slap a red dot on something and boom, it comes so much faster.
Red dots on pistol DO take a little more practice time to get super consistent, but remember you are now allowing your brain more fine detailed information to process and make very minor changes to where you become more consistent and fine tuned.
If you'd like to see a dude who has mastered open sights, go watch Joey Sauerland on IG or YouTube. He's a Limited Grand Master in USPSA that shot his open sighted gun at the USPSA Open gun(race gun) Nationals and on his best stage, placed 3rd.....with iron sights.
Similar threads
