Irons vs. Reddots

[Jay Cunningham]

My hunting rifle in the woods out here is a 30.30 with irons that I am capable of hitting 6inch dots at 140 yards. I ran my MP15 for the last year with irons and make very similar if not more accurate hits with this gun.

Careful comparing the kind of shooting that we're talking about to hunting. A deer is not threatening you.

[rob_s]

Careful comparing the kind of shooting that we're talking about to hunting. A deer is not threatening you.

but reading the OP, he's not even talking about something as dynamic as hunting but appears to be shooting off a bench.

[Jay Cunningham]

but reading the OP, he's not even talking about something as dynamic as hunting but appears to be shooting off a bench.

Agree, and I think some confusion lies here.

To the OP: shooting off of a bench is a different environment than so-called "tactical" shooting. So direct comparisons are problematic.

[kwelz]

I should have clarified. I was not shooting off of a bench, however I was not doing anything really dynamic either. My shooting consisted of simply bringing the gun up from rest or low ready, finding the target and getting off a couple round, bringing the gun back down then repeating for the next target. I did this for 3 magazines. It wasn't my gun so I wasn't going to run it hard.

My main surprises comes from the fact that I seem to be more accurate and can acquire targets (In this scenario) as fast as I can with my Aimpoint. It has gotten my attention enough where I plan on testing it further to see either where I am deficient with a RDS or why I seem to do better with the Irons.

I lack the training of many of you. So I am constantly trying to find what works best for me and what I need to improve on. This is telling me that something is up. I am just not sure what yet.

[rob_s]

By "accuracy" are you referring to the distance your shot is from the intended location or the overall grouping of a series of shots?

Not knowing your training background it's hard to diagnose over the internet what you might be doing right or wrong. I can tell you that I see shooters every month that cling to the iron sights to their detriment in a competitive environment. Even in a training environment at our practice nights iron sight shooters are typically the last to finish any given drill on the line.

What the RDS brings to the table is speed; speed of target acquisition but also speed of initial introduction. To paraphrase from someone else, the RDS allows us to simply "see the mother****er, shoot the mother****er". This really comes into play when engaging multiple, dynamic, reactionary, self-aware targets. While TK is right that hunting is not fighting, hunting has many similarities when looking at these target attributes.

What you *may* be doing wrong is over-thinking things. While I am a fan of fixed iron sights that are visible in the optic, I think that starting out with a totally uncluttered view is beneficial for many. I had a shooter at drills last month that had his MBUS deployed and did a LOT better when I folded them down. Removing that clutter from the field of view helped him to simply focus on the target and superimpose the dot over it.

[rychencop]

you must first learn to shoot well with irons. red dots are very well suited for close quarters work and low light, but i have also found that irons work much better at ranges of 100 yards and beyond.

[Jay Cunningham]

you must first learn to shoot well with irons.

Unsure if I agree. You must eventually learn irons, but is it really detrimental to learn with an optic first? Just thinking out loud.

[Jay Cunningham]

While TK is right that hunting is not fighting, hunting has many similarities when looking at these target attributes.

*Some* hunting, I'd humbly submit. Hunting dangerous game I think would be bit closer than hunting prey animals. There is a difference between a "target" and a "threat".

Point being - while a deer may be moving (in low light), aware, and have good camouflage, you are not shooting to stop a deer. You are hopefully placing one precision round that will kill the animal. The animal is pretty much always going to be at a range where some type of magnified optic is preferable than a red dot.

Rifles are sometimes set up differently when dangerous (potentially charging) game is involved... in fact they tend to be set up a bit more like "tactical" rifles.

Anyway, this is probably getting weirdly off-topic. Your mission dictates your gear.

[rob_s]

you are not shooting to stop a deer.

I've shot to stop every hog I've killed. The first one took one round, the second took..... more.

[OTO27]

Unsure if I agree. You must eventually learn irons, but is it really detrimental to learn with an optic first? Just thinking out loud.

I think I am leaning towards needing to learn irons first, not sure if its something instilled in me from the military or what. I guess any one can pick up a red dot and paint a target with it and hit just fine. It takes a bit more learning and muscle memmory to aquire proper sight picture and sight alignment when using irons. In simpler terms, it takes more skill to use irons than it does to use a red dot. I am not bashing them at all, I am a big fan, its a "big tactical" advantage. But when the equipment fails, you need to be confident enough that you will do just fine with irons. So, I think every good rifleman should always build their roots on irons then grow into the optics world.