View Full Version : Glock 19 and Trijicon Red Dot
Ive been thinking about setting up one of my G19's with a red dot for about a year now. After listening to Kelly McCann discuss the benefits(as he sees them) and seeing some of the guys from GlockWorx running similar setups in competition Ive been jonesin to give it a shot. Does anyone here have any experience with running a red dot optic on their Glock? I honestly believe this is going to be the future of pistol sights, and If I recall FN has already made the leap by offering it on the FN 45?
My plan is to purchase either a Caspian or Lone Wolf slide and have them mill the rear so that the red dot is recessed and cowitnesses with the iron sights. Im leaning torward a standard tijicon red dot insead of a docter simply because the trijicon has a rear sight notch built into it, so it the the dot fails then the irons are still there and fully functional. Id like to hear what you guys think about this idea in general, but id also like to know what you think/prefer in regards to which slide to purchase and whether to go with a 4moa or an 8 moa trijicon. As always, criticism is also welcome.
Edit: hopefully this doesnt violate terms of use, but for those not familiar here is a website showing the difference between a 4 and 8moa dot
http://www.opticsplanet.net/trijicon-reddot-sights.html
Bowie Tactical
12-19-09, 14:03
Sproggy i have been running M&P's and glocks milled for the J-Point which is the same as the trijicon red dot for many years. It is my daily cary and training set up and also my call out SWAT handgun is a M&P with that set up. Works great. I would only use the 8 min. dot though. The 4 is too small for real fast sight aquisition, and at the distances you use a handgun for plenty small for extreme precision.
David Bowie
montanadave
12-19-09, 15:59
I've had my eye on the new FNP-45 Tactical which is supposed to be hitting the market in 2010. It reportedly will be equipped with high profile night sights which will co-witness with an optional Doctor red dot sight. The only question is how much FN is going to charge for this item.
The idea of milling a Glock or M&P slide to mount a RDS which would still co-witness with the front sight sounds like an affordable alternative. Who does this kind of custom work and what kind of costs are we talking about? Any concerns with the additional weight of the RDS affecting the action of the pistol?
I have several questions about this.
How are the micro red dots on battery life?
Can the batteries be changed without dismounting the sight and/or re-zeroing?
Are they left on or turned off?
Is there any issue with holster compatibility?
How durable are they?
I can see these for game guns for sure, but I'm not sold on them for any other applications, yet.
Not lookin to whizz on anyones parade but I've had nothing but bad luck with slide mounted red dots ala Doktor, the J Point under various names etc.
they are NOT the hot ticket for competition .....You don't see any at the Steel Challenge, or the various major IPSC matches. Robbie was using them for a while not sure if he still is.
I had them on a tricked G34 at the Challenge 3 years ago. practiced with them a bunch went to the match they died, or I should say flickered on and off thru out the match. Several competitors and RO's said don't you know those things don't hold up ?
For tactical work?????? If they won't hold up playing games why would you stake your life or worse yet someone else's??
there was a thread here a couple months back about a guy who had them at a tactical training school....didn't go well either as I recall.
Your mileage may vary...............
I have several questions about this.
How are the micro red dots on battery life?
Can the batteries be changed without dismounting the sight and/or re-zeroing?
Are they left on or turned off?
Is there any issue with holster compatibility?
How durable are they?
I can see these for game guns for sure, but I'm not sold on them for any other applications, yet.
my questions exactly.
I think I saw one guy at a steel challenge match shooting a G34 with a RDS that was tiny and replaced the rear sight. No front sight.
Its interesting to hear that two of you have had such different experiences. Mr Bowie's post was reassuring and had me stoked to give the trijicon a try. But 1oldgrunt's experience has apparently been the complete opposite.
1oldgrunt, did you try a trijicon optic(other than the Docter)? What do you think was causing the failure?
Mr. Bowie, have you had ANY problems at all with the setup? Do you have any insight on what could have caused 1oldgrunt's optics to fail? Have you heard of any problems with this setup on a glock?
someone here I think it was did some work with them and found out it was actually slower at times. I will look for the info on it. I shoot with a guy who has done it he loves it but there was an issue with his also I will talk to him and find out and update this.
welchtactical
12-20-09, 07:18
I have though about doing this also. Have a extra G19 slide set up with RDS. I have heard no so great things about some on the small RDSs. With technology getting better everyday some of these new small RDS like Trijicon's or Insight's may hold up. Years ago if you said you were going to put a Red Dot on your rifle people would say the same things, "They dont hold up!" I like the idea of it being in the slide low enough to have irons that co-witness. I like the looks of the FN 45with the RDS. I've handled the gun and like it. It's a big gun, but I have huge paws. 15 rounds of 45 and a RDS could be fun.
I can see these for game guns for sure, but I'm not sold on them for any other applications, yet.
I would take note of the fact that even the gamers aren't using this setup and take that as a clue. Those that I've talked to that have tried it have all gone away from it for various reasons. I think a large part of the problem is the fact that the dot sight is now reciprocating, which accounts for the reduced life of the optic as well as the reduce speed of engagement.
I would like to try one to make up my own mind, and was well down the path of doing so at one time, but the expense makes it prohibitive if it turns out to be a no-go.
rob_s is correct. The fact that the MRDS is on the reciprocating mass (slide) during recoil not only batters the optic but also means your single-plane sighting dot is moving around far more than the red dot on a carbine (or the typical red dot pistol sight which is attached to the frame) which affects speed.
I can answer this with confidence as I've been around the block a few times.
Frame mounted works great with light loads or heavy loads with compensators. You have to keep the gun frome "MOVING" or there is no speed advantage.
In the early days of dots in IPSC, when the guys with open guns went to dots a few of the shooters tried them on non comped guns and found them to be of no real advantage.
I have tried this somewhat recently ( The Doktor and a J-POINT), 3 yrs ago and found that with light steel loads they were OK, not as good as a frame mounted C-More but OK. With heavy loads the pistol slide between moving rearward and flipping around made dot acquisition problematic.
I tried them on my steel gun one year because I too thought about putting them on a carry gun....I'm an old fart and my eyesight has gone down....wanted to see if they would hold up.......NOT !
IF the gun or the slide is moving.........
It is actually harder to re-aquire the dot than it is to reaquire irons....don't know why it just IS!
IF the gun or the slide is moving.........
It is actually harder to re-aquire the dot than it is to reaquire irons....don't know why it just IS!
Because the dot is only visible from certain angles, while you can track the iron sight throughout its entire range of movement.
the_fallguy
12-20-09, 12:05
I don't have a pistol mounted red dot, but I have been considering one after seeing Bowie Tactical's work on an M&P and hearing what Kelly McCann had to say about them.
It seems to me that one of the greatest advantages to the MRDS is one of those shared with using a RDS on your carbine; you don't have to focus on the front sight, but you can follow your natural tendency to keep both eyes open and focus on the threat.
Is it not also the case that if you have anything close to an acceptable sight picture with iron sights you will still be able to see the red dot on the target? It seems like you would have an advantage by not having to align the sights to the same degree or identify a flash sight picture while shooting at a blurry object.
As far as the reciprocating slide issue goes, isn't the point of learning to shoot a pistol so you can consistently let the slide fall into the same point of aim, using timing to make your shots? It just seems like you should be able to see the dot imposed on the threat if you are doing what you are supposed to...
I'm not trying to be an argumentative jerk here - I am considering this sight option just like the OP is. I can see where having a reciprocating RDS on a pistol could hold no real advantage in a game, or where you know the course of fire that will be taking place (ie training), but I thought it would still be a huge advantage when you are trying to watch somebody's hands and you don't know exactly what's going to happen next...
As I said, I have no experience with this set up. Any of you that have some time on this or a similar set up, please school me on the matter if my assumptions are totally wrong.
fallguy I'm not trying to be jerk either but think about what you wrote;
"hold no real advantage in a game, or where you know the course of fire that will be taking place (ie training), but I thought it would still be a huge advantage when you are trying to watch somebody's hands and you don't know exactly what's going to happen next"
In a game the targets don't move, they don't lean, they don't have "furtive movements", etc.
this is where they should have an advantage.
I've been in combat, been an LE and played lots of games .....real life sucks compared to games.
In a game as I said targets don't move so all you need to focus on is front sight in middle of target paper/steel and press....boom
in real life you have the above but also where are his hands, what is he doing, is there anybody else, what are they doing, bystanders, any shoot thrus as in if I have to shoot this jerk off is there anybody behind him ....your brain is on OVERLOAD then factor in ADRENAL DUMP and oh boy things get fun real quick
you other statement
As far as the reciprocating slide issue goes, isn't the point of learning to shoot a pistol so you can consistently let the slide fall into the same point of aim, using timing to make your shots? It just seems like you should be able to see the dot imposed on the threat if you are doing what you are supposed to...
I trained under Col Cooper and by the third day we could be blindfolded and at the beep draw and dbl tap a sil and about 90%+ could have both hits center of mass....but that is just a game / training , call it what you will.....the target didn't move, there was nobody behind it, there was no adrenalin dump, this was just to emphasize muscle memory and proper stance, etc. In real life I've NEVER had anybody stand straight up to me and not move once they realized I was going "guns up" on them...they moved, I also had to scan for second or third bad guy, I was moving, they were moving, everything was going to H in a hand basket.
I BELIEVE in training .....just don't think you will "fight as you train" ....most who have said that have never been in combat or a real world shootout. Things fall apart real fast....some things ( from your training), will apply most won't.
in real life your brain becomes a Windows PC with multiple screens being opened at once , now try and keep the right screen up front while pop-ups are occurring faster than you can delete them........
I've been there done that a couple times and it still haunts........ If you are lucky things will happen so quick all you can do is react and hope things go right......It's the ones you have time to process that always linger.
the_fallguy
12-20-09, 15:28
..... In a game as I said targets don't move so all you need to focus on is front sight in middle of target paper/steel and press....boom
in real life you have the above but also where are his hands, what is he doing, is there anybody else, what are they doing, bystanders, any shoot thrus as in if I have to shoot this jerk off is there anybody behind him ....your brain is on OVERLOAD then factor in ADRENAL DUMP and oh boy things get fun real quick.....
This is why I thought the RDS would be an advantage; your eyes are focused on the threat and what is happening instead of on the front sight. It sounds to me like you are reinforcing my point unless I am misunderstanding you.
you other statement
As far as the reciprocating slide issue goes, isn't the point of learning to shoot a pistol so you can consistently let the slide fall into the same point of aim, using timing to make your shots? It just seems like you should be able to see the dot imposed on the threat if you are doing what you are supposed to...
..... In real life I've NEVER had anybody stand straight up to me and not move once they realized I was going "guns up" on them...they moved, I also had to scan for second or third bad guy, I was moving, they were moving, everything was going to H in a hand basket.
I BELIEVE in training .....just don't think you will "fight as you train" ....most who have said that have never been in combat or a real world shootout. Things fall apart real fast....some things ( from your training), will apply most won't. .....
I made that statement in reference to your comment about the slide moving the RDS and affecting the speed of target engagement. I don't try to control the recoil (like Cooper's classic Weaver stance shooting), but I try to hold the pistol so the recoil recovery is repeatable and brings the pistol [and its basic sight alignment] back to the the same place every time in (relation to my eyes, not in relation to a stationary target). This should mean that the alignment is at least good enough to see the red dot again (I am assuming as I don't know how much deviation you can get before you don't see the dot anymore). I just figured that if you are focusing on the threat, it would be easier to place dot on it once the pistol has recovered from recoil than to identify an acceptable sight picture with iron sights.
Do you get where I'm coming from, or are we completely missing eachother's point?
My comments in red.
I would take note of the fact that even the gamers aren't using this setup and take that as a clue. Those that I've talked to that have tried it have all gone away from it for various reasons. I think a large part of the problem is the fact that the dot sight is now reciprocating, which accounts for the reduced life of the optic as well as the reduce speed of engagement.
I would like to try one to make up my own mind, and was well down the path of doing so at one time, but the expense makes it prohibitive if it turns out to be a no-go.
Seems I remember the guys over on enosforums getting their MRDS "hardened". If my terrible memory serves me correctly, the MRDS aren't waterproofed and the components are basically just laying around in there, but someone was taking them apart and sealing the components in resin or some such thing.
One of my biggest complaints about them is the lack of positive click windage and elevation adjustments. They can loose zero and that's a no-go on any gun. I have a Burris Fastfire on a suppressed Buckmark and it lost zero once. This is obviously a non-critical gun for me, but if it does it again, it's gone. It's also not very quick to find the dot if you aren't used to it. I've handed the Buckmark to other shooters and then had to explain to them how to find the dot.
None of these things would be good on a serious use gun IMO.
fallguy -- The issue is that you're relying on the sight to come back down as expected, and even then you need to wait to verify that the dot is on target. Otherwise, you're just point shooting. With irons, you follow the front sight's movement all the way through its arc of recoil. This allows you to break the next shot faster without any question about where the gun is aimed.
I'm the first to admit, though, that I've got just a little time behind one of these slide-mounted MRDS. There could be a magic secret that I'm just missing...
I'm the first to admit, though, that I've got just a little time behind one of these slide-mounted MRDS. There could be a magic secret that I'm just missing...
I'd love to try one, and spend three days and 1k rounds + with one, but it's damn expensive to try out only to find that it sucks.
On the tangent above re: competition not having moving targets, if that's the case then you need to find a new club/match/competition. We do movers whenever we can and have several platforms that move and are working on even more. Shooting moving targets on the move is a real eye-opener for a lot of people.
A company actually offered to send me one for T&E, but the trick is getting it on a gun. I don't think anyone makes a P30 mount for their MRDS yet. :cool:
The whole "competition doesn't have moving targets" thing isn't just stupid because it's untrue, it's also stupid because at nominal handgun fight distances and normal human movement speeds, it's practically a non-issue anyway. Unless you're worried about hitting a tiny x-ring on a paper target, things like leading a target just don't come into play. It's still a simple matter of putting your front sight on the target and pressing the trigger without the front sight moving away.
sorry.... let me clarify YES in games they are moving but you know how they are going to move. you know the speed at which they will move. You can watch and if you know yourself and what you can do, you can time how you will shoot the stage in advance.
I have been to local club matches, regionals, sectionals , state matches and won slots to 3 IPSC NATIONALS....SO yes I know how to shoot....and I also know how to "prepare" to shoot a stage.
In real life there is no pre-staging what will happen and how you will react.
sorry I wasn't clearer. I meant they don't move in any relation to real world movement.
as to "at handgun distance.... movement isn't an issue"....won't even comment
I think very few people see their sights in truly stressful FOF. I'm not saying it's impossible -- I've done it -- but I'm generally skeptical when people claim they always get a 100% hard front sight focus under those circumstances. But the more you practice, the more awareness you have of the sights and the faster, more accurate you'll be.
It's sort of the same issue that we see from XS sight fans: Do they work when you're not really looking at your front sight? Sure. One set of sights is pretty much as good as another when you're not using them. :cool: It's all the other circumstances, where the iron sights have an edge, that matter.
But you've also hit on one of the great problems with using FOF as an assessment of these things. The guns, be it Sims or Airsoft, simply don't recoil enough to matter. So how well someone "controls recoil" or how fast someone shoots in FOF is not really much of an indication.
The benefit of learning how to track your sights is that, as with anything else, you'll be more aware and more capable under stress than if you were just blindly yanking the trigger. Furthermore, watching your sight in training teaches your brain how fast you can get hits against various targets at various distances.
John_Wayne777
12-20-09, 19:07
as to "at handgun distance.... movement isn't an issue"....won't even comment
I believe he's speaking specifically of the fact that at most handgun distances you generally do not have to lead a target very much to hit it...in other words, if you break the shot while the dot or front sight is somewhere around center mass, you're still likely to make a hit.
In a close range gunfight people move in unpredictable ways that anyone would be hard pressed to predict and accurately account for in their aim.
Right. The point is that viz-a-vis sight options there isn't a lot that sight choice will affect.
John_Wayne777
12-20-09, 21:58
When it comes to red dots I think the jury is still out.
All we are looking for here is an aiming reference that will tell us where the bullet is going to go when we press the trigger whether the intended destination of that round is an IDPA silhouette or a dude who wants to cram a knife into our guts.
The question, then, is what aiming reference offers the most efficient means of accomplishing that task...but the conditions we are facing when trying to break that shot make a difference. In a fight for life or death we know that people have a tendency to focus on the threat and not their sights. Jim Cirillo famously wrote that in his first gunfight he saw his front sight with absolute clarity. I discussed that with Ken Hackathorn some time ago and Ken told all of us who were there that he asked Jim if he remembered seeing his sights in any of his other gunfights.
Jim thought for a minute and answered "No."
...so if we recognize that we are likely to encounter this phenomenon in a life or death situation, what sighting system offers us the greatest advantage? If we take a hard look at lasers there's enough data and experience out there that demonstrates a considerable advantage over iron sights, especially under low-light conditions. On the range the laser has demonstrated that it's faster and easier to use. In real life the laser has been used successfully. At this point I don't know of anyone of significant reputation who doesn't regard the laser highly.
Right now there is no such widespread consensus on the RDS for the handgun. The advantages of the RDS on long guns are well known at this point and it's tempting to assume that the RDS would bring the same advantages to the handgun...
...advantages all of us would like to have, especially if we carry a gun for serious social purposes.
Unfortunately it doesn't appear to be that simple.
My trigger time with the various RDS setups is fairly limited so I have to rely heavily on what I've gleaned from others. In my experience concerns about losing the dot are justified. I've personally seen how easy it is to lose the dot and I've heard instructors (Larry Vickers, as an example) warn that sometimes it's hard to find the dot when you are trying to index on target. It can also be easy to lose the dot from shot to shot. Lasers don't seem to have these issues, but they have issues all their own like the tendency to wash out in bright light.
My issue with the RDS on the handgun is that you essentially have to give up iron sights on the pistol, which I'm not thrilled about. While irons have their drawbacks, we do know that people have been using them effectively on handguns for a very long time. I'm not ready to trade in a system I know works for one I'm not sure about. I'd much rather augment the irons with a set of CT grips until I'm reasonably certain that the RDS gives me something I don't already have with the other more conventional options.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.