View Full Version : Why do some prefer a larger pistol optic window?
Question in subject heading.
Presentation is stressed that it must be perfect every time if you want to see a dot over your target instantly.
Why then does it matter what size the window is?
I have two pistols with optics currently. A Holosun 507c & a Leopold Microdot. The Microdot is level with regular height irons, enclosed, and likely more durable because the glass is smaller. Mounts to the factory dovetail, too.
Why aren't we seeing more of this style? Why are larger windows being pushed instead?
Why then does it matter what size the window is?
The RDS with that concave top that dips down into the glass is mental torture for me. But to your point... an RDS on a pistol is a Gargantuan object.
The holosuns work good for me, and the SRO is really nice, but the SRO does seem a little tall.
titsonritz
12-30-22, 13:35
A little forgiveness goes a long way when moving and shooting, same reason to put the rear sight in front of the optic.
LowSpeed_HighDrag
12-30-22, 13:37
Larger windows are more forgiving to shooting positions that are not static standing, poor presentation due to any number of factors, moving and shooting, etc.
That said, I really like my P2, which has a small window, and I see no major difference yet between it and some of my larger optics.
Larger windows are more forgiving to shooting positions that are not static standing, poor presentation due to any number of factors, moving and shooting, etc.
That said, I really like my P2, which has a small window, and I see no major difference yet between it and some of my larger optics.
I think I've noticed the same between my larger & smaller optic. The difference in "forgiveness" is very little because even with my "larger" 507c I don't have to be "off" much at all to have to have no circle-dot over the target.
I not sure that little bit of "forgiveness" is worth having a large, tall optic that requires a plate or machining to install.
I hope to see more offerings like the MicroDot.
I not sure that little bit of "forgiveness" is worth having a large, tall optic that requires a plate or machining to install.
There are certain guns I pick up an just struggle to find the dot. It's really varying grip angles, and not so much the optic size. If I ever get my own RDS pistol, I would be extremely compelled to practice more.
There are certain guns I pick up an just struggle to find the dot. It's really varying grip angles, and not so much the optic size. If I ever get my own RDS pistol, I would be extremely compelled to practice more.
I found this, too.
Going from one optic pistol to another is a mess. Takes several minutes of practice before even shooting or it would be incredibly slow.
Going from one pistol with irons to another with irons is easier. However I'm very familiar with them.
Perhaps practicing/training alot with ones different optic-mounted pistols can work the same way?
Larger windows are more forgiving to shooting positions that are not static standing, poor presentation due to any number of factors, moving and shooting, etc.
That said, I really like my P2, which has a small window, and I see no major difference yet between it and some of my larger optics.
Thinking about this...perhaps this is part of the reason many (and me) aren't 100% pro-optic for every need.
Moving and shooting at the range and / or practicing draws from non-perfect stances they find isn't in view and collecting it is slow & frustrating.
But with irons it's easier to correct and get on / back on target when the same less than perfect presentation occurs. A grosser aim, but a faster one.
Unless there is a procedure for "what to do when circumstances result in a bad draw / presentation with the optic equipped pistol?"
Perhaps a corse, flash sight picture with irons is faster and more accurate than a "got no dot and no time pull trigger anyway" solution?
Just thinking out loud here.
Renegade04
12-30-22, 14:34
There are certain guns I pick up an just struggle to find the dot. It's really varying grip angles, and not so much the optic size. If I ever get my own RDS pistol, I would be extremely compelled to practice more.
I have found this since recently getting a few handguns with RDOs (a few Leupold Delta Points, a VORTEX VIPER, a few SIG ROMEO1PROs, a SIG ROMEO2, and a HOLOSUN HS407C). It does take practice to have the weapon placed in proper alignment to be able to view the red dot, but it is not hard to do when you pay attention to what you are doing. I have practiced from the low ready position with some success. Doing this enough will certainly create muscle memory to where it becomes second nature.
I did look at a Leupold Microdot that was mounted on a Glock. Not something I really want on my pistols.
Yeah. If I'm forced to shoot a gun that has a Dot I struggle to find, I'll do a handful of draws until I build a short term muscle memory for that particular set up.
Question in subject heading.
Presentation is stressed that it must be perfect every time if you want to see a dot over your target instantly.
Why then does it matter what size the window is?
I have two pistols with optics currently. A Holosun 507c & a Leopold Microdot. The Microdot is level with regular height irons, enclosed, and likely more durable because the glass is smaller. Mounts to the factory dovetail, too.
Why aren't we seeing more of this style? Why are larger windows being pushed instead?
Bacause when you're moving, and the gun is moving, and you want the fastest hit, the sooner you see the dot, the faster and more accurate you will be.
Also, it provides more info to see how the dot tracks in recoil
A frame mounted eotech would be optimal, mini rds on the slide is all compromise to cc the gun.
Out of curiosity, do any you have co-witnessing iron sights?
BrigandTwoFour
12-31-22, 08:15
The RDS with that concave top that dips down into the glass is mental torture for me. But to your point... an RDS on a pistol is a Gargantuan object.
The holosuns work good for me, and the SRO is really nice, but the SRO does seem a little tall.
I've been running into this issue a lot. I have one pistol equipped with an optic, and I've been back and forth with a 507c and an SRO. Technically, I like the SRO more because of the larger window but I've had a hell of a time finding retention holsters for it. I want to use the thing in a run & gun match, which usually involves obstacles, and the SRO pretty much nixes any holsters with a hood. I'm probably going to go back to the 507c because of it. Pistol is a CZ P10F, FWIW, which doesn't help the holster search.
I have 2 weapons with RD's. A Shadow systems MR920 with a Holosun 508t and a Sig P365XL with a Trijicon RMRCC. The 365XL was the 1st pistol I've ran with a RD. I have a hard time finding this dot quickly and consistantly. The 508t is a different story altogether. I'm a million times faster with it and have no issues finding the dot while drawing and returning to the dot after firing. So at least in my instance the larger optic is much easier to obtain while drawing and quickly obtain after firing.
https://youtu.be/wmYtgJHZC9o
Video has some golden points.
Grip/Presentation, I believe are KEY to mastering RDS visualization.
I use RMR's and have found this to solve many issues.
Inkslinger
12-31-22, 08:59
The larger window will be more forgiving to people learning to shoot a RDS pistol. Obviously the larger the window, the larger the area is to have the dot appear. If you’re presentation is less than optimal, you’ll still have a better chance of seeing the dot. This is also true if shooting in compromising positions. It also gives you a larger less obstructed view of the target/threat. There obviously is a point of diminishing returns. You can’t really have an optic the size of a computer monitor. While I have no firsthand experience with the Leupold Micro dot, I would imagine it would be the opposite end of the spectrum compared to other RDS. It’s small window would be much less forgiving if your presentation or position is compromised. I think the current sizes on the market are the best offerings at the moment. That is at least until we develop some technology that doesn’t require the dot to be framed in a window of glass.
P2Vaircrewman
12-31-22, 10:14
Thinking about this...perhaps this is part of the reason many (and me) aren't 100% pro-optic for every need.
Moving and shooting at the range and / or practicing draws from non-perfect stances they find isn't in view and collecting it is slow & frustrating.
But with irons it's easier to correct and get on / back on target when the same less than perfect presentation occurs. A grosser aim, but a faster one.
Unless there is a procedure for "what to do when circumstances result in a bad draw / presentation with the optic equipped pistol?"
Perhaps a corse, flash sight picture with irons is faster and more accurate than a "got no dot and no time pull trigger anyway" solution?
Just thinking out loud here.
I have the Delta Micro. I treat it the same as I would irons in off position, if I need to find the irons how is that any different than needing to find the dot. In the case of the micro I find both at the same time. Does it make me slower, maybe, but by how much, is it enough to matter. I have never seen anything addressing this. You may feel you are faster, more accurate but does anyone have actual proof on a timer between the two.
I have 2 weapons with RD's. A Shadow systems MR920 with a Holosun 508t and a Sig P365XL with a Trijicon RMRCC. The 365XL was the 1st pistol I've ran with a RD. I have a hard time finding this dot quickly and consistantly. The 508t is a different story altogether. I'm a million times faster with it and have no issues finding the dot while drawing and returning to the dot after firing. So at least in my instance the larger optic is much easier to obtain while drawing and quickly obtain after firing.I have a similar experience. I have a G45 mos, and a G19 with 507c on them. I also have a p226 with a holosun. I have almost no trouble at all with these.
However, I have a p365x, and an xl with a macro frame. I put the k series on these, and it seems no matter how much I practice, every now and then I just find myself struggling to find the dot (and I have been running dots on full size guns for about a decade). I think for me, the combination of the small grip and small window make it extremely easy to not get a perfect grip and loose the dot. Therefore I have since stripped the dots off these.
I have actually been considering going back to just irons. I like dots, but I am also good with irons.
Soli Deo Gloria
Out of curiosity, do any you have co-witnessing iron sights?
I do on the M&P .45 2.0 w/Leopold Microdot
diving dave
12-31-22, 10:37
I did Scott Jedlinski's 2 day red dot class last year, it was a game changer for me. The way he puts it, you can do the same things with a smaller window, but the bigger glass is "just nicer". I run RMR's on all my red dot pistols, and with proper technique (and ALOT of dry fire) not finding the dot isnt an issue anymore. Within 5 yards you don't need the dot anyway.
I have the Delta Micro. I treat it the same as I would irons in off position, if I need to find the irons how is that any different than needing to find the dot. In the case of the micro I find both at the same time. Does it make me slower, maybe, but by how much, is it enough to matter. I have never seen anything addressing this. You may feel you are faster, more accurate but does anyone have actual proof on a timer between the two.
The winners I've found so far in regards to shooting:
Accuracy: RDS
Time to first accurate shot: Tie
Time to first accurate shot if your draw isn't perfect or nearly so: Irons
Split times at 7 yds and under: Tie
Split times further out: Irons are faster, RDS more accurate
Are the results the same RDS vs night irons in low light? I'm not sure yet, but probably.
P2Vaircrewman
12-31-22, 13:05
The winners I've found so far in regards to shooting:
Accuracy: RDS
Time to first accurate shot: Tie
Time to first accurate shot if your draw isn't perfect or nearly so: Irons
Split times at 7 yds and under: Tie
Split times further out: Irons are faster, RDS more accurate
Are the results the same RDS vs night irons in low light? I'm not sure yet, but probably.
Thanks, Your results are pretty much what I expected. With the micro I can use it as a ghost ring iron sight at close range and get better accuracy with the dot at longer range. I imagine someone using a large window with no co-witness might have a problem with the micro as would someone using the micro with no front sight. I view the micro as an enhancement to irons not a replacement.
The winners I've found so far in regards to shooting:
Accuracy: RDS
Time to first accurate shot: Tie
Time to first accurate shot if your draw isn't perfect or nearly so: Irons
Split times at 7 yds and under: Tie
Split times further out: Irons are faster, RDS more accurate
Are the results the same RDS vs night irons in low light? I'm not sure yet, but probably.
How many ipsc/uspsa open competitors are winning with irons?
How many are winning with a Delta Micro?
Inkslinger
12-31-22, 15:24
How many ipsc/uspsa open competitors are winning with irons?
How many are winning with a Delta Micro?
I think many who have results/experiences like posted above don’t realize it’s because of their time with one sighting system vs another, not the sighting system itself. It also seems to me when some post their hypothetical scenarios, they word them in a way that would make you think there are no iron sights on their RDS pistol. You literally have the best of both worlds on a pistols with irons and a RDS, yet people still struggle and act if it’s one or the other. I guess some people need to fire as many rounds with a RDS as they have with irons to see the light. Some others come to that realization before their first mag runs dry.
P2Vaircrewman
12-31-22, 15:33
How many ipsc/uspsa open competitors are winning with irons?
How many are winning with a Delta Micro?
Which is irrelevant without knowing how many open competitors are using irons. How many racecar drivers are winning the Indy 500 in a Toyota Corolla, none.
I think many who have results/experiences like posted above don’t realize it’s because of their time with one sighting system vs another, not the sighting system itself. It also seems to me when some post their hypothetical scenarios, they word them in a way that would make you think there are no iron sights on their RDS pistol. You literally have the best of both worlds on a pistols with irons and a RDS, yet people still struggle and act if it’s one or the other. I guess some people need to fire as many rounds with a RDS as they have with irons to see the light. Some others come to that realization before their first mag runs dry.
Upon a draw or during movement or recoil not seeing the reticle, switching sight systems (do I wait for my dot to come back or front sight focus now?) Is going to take time.
Inkslinger
12-31-22, 17:12
I’m not saying you switch back and forth between the two. I’m saying use the one you see first. And if you’re losing your dot under recoil I suggest more practice. Also if you are losing it under recoil, a single point (the dot) is going to be faster to reacquire than a front and rear sight which both need to be aligned. The dot just needs to be somewhere in the window to make the hits where you want. These pistol RDS threads remind me of Chevy Chase in European Vacation. Big Ben, Parliament…
I’m not saying you switch back and forth between the two. I’m saying use the one you see first. And if you’re losing your dot under recoil I suggest more practice. Also if you are losing it under recoil, a single point (the dot) is going to be faster to reacquire than a front and rear sight which both need to be aligned. The dot just needs to be somewhere in the window to make the hits where you want. These pistol RDS threads remind me of Chevy Chase in European Vacation. Big Ben, Parliament…
Hehe..."we're looking for sechs".
The answer to RDS challenges is always, "the product works great if you live, eat, sleep & breathe it so you use it perfectly everytime, including under duress."
What I don't have is a role model. A fellow shooter who is not an instructor, or an avid competitor, but shoots similar to my schedule to show and tell why they shoot better than me.
In my circle I'm the one who shoots and trains the most. That includes lots of cops, too, unfortunately.
I'm sold on RDS for the police. For the average person, whatever they like can work. Probably.
Inkslinger
12-31-22, 20:15
Hehe..."we're looking for sechs".
The answer to RDS challenges is always, "the product works great if you live, eat, sleep & breathe it so you use it perfectly everytime, including under duress."
What I don't have is a role model. A fellow shooter who is not an instructor, or an avid competitor, but shoots similar to my schedule to show and tell why they shoot better than me.
In my circle I'm the one who shoots and trains the most. That includes lots of cops, too, unfortunately.
I'm sold on RDS for the police. For the average person, whatever they like can work. Probably.
You don’t need a role model. Log your drills and times, and you’ll eventually see what you shoot better with. Do it for a while with only your irons since they’re what you’ve been shooting the longest. Then just shoot with the dot for a long time. I bet when you compare them the clear winner will be the dot. Maybe I was super lucky, I saw the dot was the clear winner the first time going live with it. I don’t shoot as much as I should anymore, but I’m pretty confident that I’m better then the “average” shooter. I did a lot of dry firing and using my laser target before I hit the range, but I was getting times that I had never gotten before. I thought my timer was malfunctioning.
Which is irrelevant without knowing how many open competitors are using irons. How many racecar drivers are winning the Indy 500 in a Toyota Corolla, none.
Its not irrelevent. They are not used in either case because they are not competitive.
At local matches the best shooter will win regardless of equipment. At the upper levels, no one is winning or even competing with irons bacause rds are better. Most open guns dont have irons at all.
I think there are so many factors, most already posed. But your history of what gun and grip angles you have shot. I grab my 1911 9mm with optic cut and RMR ( my least favorite optic for finding the dot) that dot may as well be 10 feet around, can't miss it. On my P226/RMR, I find it slightly more difficult to find than P226/Holosun.
Then I have a P365XL with micro Holosun that I find with ease.
The larger SRO window allows new shooters to find dot because I believe they have more of a chance to have the dot in the window when scanning. The may need to center it, but at least they find it to center it.
SRO largest window
Holosun 507 2nd
RMR 3rd.
Never shot a Delta point
I much prefer the Holosun micro to the SHITTY SIG micro dot.
My HK guns I find the dot to be very easible accessible, regardless of dot. Which takes me back to grip angle and muscle memory.
PB
I'm thinking about replacing the RMCcc on my 365XL with a Holosun micro. I'm thinking that one reason I find the dot quicker with my Holosun's is the reticle, Circle-dot. When I draw and bring the gun to bear on a target I can pick up the reticle/dot quicker because the circle takes up more real estate that just a plain dot does. So if I'm off just a bit I can quickly recover. With just the plain dot it takes more time for me. Sure more time with the RMR will help. However, at this point I much prefer the circle-dot reticle. On a side note the Holosuns reticle are much clearer and not distorted like the RMR dot is for me. With the RMR the dot is distorted. Imagine holding your left hand out in front of you pointing in the 4 o'clock direction. That is what the dot looks like to me. The Holosun is a clear circle with a dot in the middle.
The more I think about this it may not be the size of the optic window and more of a reticle issue in my case. I'd have to compare a Holosun micro with the RMRcc to make a definite determination.
Wdawg, I think your on to sumpin. My 365 is the only gun I run dot circle combo. I like that extra for my small window.
PB
The RDS with that concave top that dips down into the glass is mental torture for me. But to your point... an RDS on a pistol is a Gargantuan object.
The holosuns work good for me, and the SRO is really nice, but the SRO does seem a little tall.
I was originally an RMR user. Then I bought my 1st Holosun and 2nd then 3rd. Then I bought 2 RMR's and as markm stated, the dip in the top is for durability, not for more field of view. My Holosun 407K-X2 6moa, mounted on G48 MOS and G43x MOS, I got spoiled. My aging eyes like the larger dot size. I'm not looking to snap off at anyone very far away, only if I need to. G43x with the Holosun is a perfect close and personal pistol. It covers what my Shield 9, 1.0 used to do for me.
But what do you do when your hand is asleep and it feels like someone else's hand touching your shooter?
I guess some people need to fire as many rounds with a RDS as they have with irons to see the light. Some others come to that realization before their first mag runs dry.
Put a decent or better pistol shooter on a range with targets from 7-50 yards in various sized, and let them rip with an RDS, and it should become very apparent that the RDS has great potential.
Perfect the mounting and reliability, and it's a done deal.
I'm learning larger optics & reticles are more forgiving when drawing from an undesirable position.
Thinking one will always have planted feet and otherwise perfect circumstances for a clean draw would be foolish. That's why when I read, "optics are great! You just need a perfect draw every time" I get discouraged because that cannot be counted on.
So, reducing bad or sloppy presentation and mitigating it when it happens is a good idea. A larger optic and reticle can help.
I've also learned that at about 7 yds in, the sights / optic don't matter if you're competent. (I mean I basically knew, but now I've ran the numbers for myself) Outside 20 yds an optic really tightens up groups. An A-zone hit is "good", but really want a 4-inch group capability. An optic makes that easier.
Irons can be faster at these longer ranges, but the result is often a less-good hit or a miss. The optic will help one get a good hit and not waste the time & bullet on a miss. That's the last thing we want to do.
So for me the zone to really work on now is that 8-19 yd area. If I can shoot that with an optic at least as well as irons, that'd be cool.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.