XS Big Dot Sights?

[Alpha Sierra]

Why do some people insist on evaluating how Big Dots perform on square range drills skewed towards precision????? It's like trying to evaluate a Jeep Wrangler at the 12 Hours of Sebring.

Why can some people not help but project their negative experience with these sights onto others? Some of us KNOW they work for us, do not need objective evidence to know so, and simply do not care what the "experts" have to say about it.

Let it go.

[Jay Cunningham]

Why do some people insist on evaluating how Big Dots perform on square range drills skewed towards precision????? It's like trying to evaluate a Jeep Wrangler at the 12 Hours of Sebring.

Why can some people not help but project their negative experience with these sights onto others? Some of us KNOW they work for us, do not need objective evidence to know so, and simply do not care what the "experts" have to say about it.

Let it go.

Last time I checked this was a discussion board, and individuals were free to express their opinions in a respectful manner. Most opinions here are from first or very close second hand experience, which is better than most other gun forums.

So I'm thinking everything looks cool...

[ToddG]

Why do some people insist on evaluating how Big Dots perform on square range drills skewed towards precision????? It's like trying to evaluate a Jeep Wrangler at the 12 Hours of Sebring.

Rather than argue that I (and I believe others) have not been doing that, instead let me ask you two simple questions:

1. Under what circumstances do you think the Big Dot works better?
2. What is your definition of acceptable accuracy/precision?

[Alpha Sierra]

Under what circumstances do you think the Big Dot works better?

When the need to make hits to a vital area under self defense (actual or simulated) conditions presents itself.

What is your definition of acceptable accuracy/precision?[/list]

Hits to a vital area under self defense (actual or simulated) conditions.

[ToddG]

When the need to make hits to a vital area under self defense (actual or simulated) conditions presents itself.

How do the XS sights work in a way that makes them better at hitting a "vital area under self defense ... conditions" without making them better at hitting "on square range drills," then?

Fast & accurate hits are fast & accurate hits.

Hits to a vital area under self defense (actual or simulated) conditions.

Can you please give me some dimensions to work with? Are we talking a 3x5 card, 5x8 card, 8" plate, IDPA target, IPSC target? I ask because I don't want to jump to conclusions based on your "skewed towards precision" statement earlier.

[Alpha Sierra]

How do the XS sights work in a way that makes them better at hitting a "vital area under self defense ... conditions" without making them better at hitting "on square range drills," then?

Fast & accurate hits are fast & accurate hits.

You've been told several times here why. It has to do with how each individual's eyes work. I will not repeat what has been said.

Can you please give me some dimensions to work with? Are we talking a 3x5 card, 5x8 card, 8" plate, IDPA target, IPSC target? I ask because I don't want to jump to conclusions based on your "skewed towards precision" statement earlier.

Quit framing the discussion in competition/square range terms and maybe you'll understand. An anatomy book might help.

I'm honestly done here.

[ToddG]

You've been told several times here why. It has to do with how each individual's eyes work. I will not repeat what has been said.

I have a fair knowledge of how the human eye works anatomically as well as how vision works. I haven't seen anything in this thread demonstrating that there is something about the XS sight that suddenly starts working better "in a fight." You obviously feel there is some kind of demonstrable difference, I'm just asking for an explanation.

How does the human eye perceive differently "in a fight" than, say, under the stress of competition or during force-on-force training?

To the extent that our perception is different "in a fight" than during calm range practice (and I certainly concede there is a difference), how does the XS sight work better "in a fight" than the more mundane sighting systems which outperform it during the calm range practice?

Quit framing the discussion in competition/square range terms and maybe you'll understand. An anatomy book might help.

How is asking for a target dimension somehow "competition/square range terms?" I know what I think are good anatomical analogues for training, but rather than assume that we agree on that I'm asking for your standard so I can discuss your original statement from a common starting point.

[Hellfire]

I respect everyone's opinion in this thread, and I noted in my first post that there were polar opinions where these sights are concerned. I can't speak for everyone but maybe when someone uses the word "better", it means better for them, and them only. We all vary greatly in our sensory make-up....people see things and learn things differently, there is no "one way". If someone shoots "better" with these sights then fine..if they shoot worse with them don't use them. I mentioned that I like the front and am working to get comfortable with the rear. "Better" doesn't have to mean across the board...maybe just better for that individual. It doesn't boil down to just those with decreased visual acuity....the information that our eyes take in is passed to the brain, when it is processed and there is a vast difference in how information is processed between individuals. If these sights help someone shoot better, then aren't they "better" for that individual? I know I'm brand new here, and I mean no disrespect to anyone, but things are not always black and white.

[Alpha Sierra]

I respect everyone's opinion in this thread, and I noted in my first post that there were polar opinions where these sights are concerned. I can't speak for everyone but maybe when someone uses the word "better", it means better for them, and them only. We all vary greatly in our sensory make-up....people see things and learn things differently, there is no "one way". If someone shoots "better" with these sights then fine..if they shoot worse with them don't use them. I mentioned that I like the front and am working to get comfortable with the rear. "Better" doesn't have to mean across the board...maybe just better for that individual. It doesn't boil down to just those with decreased visual acuity....the information that our eyes take in is passed to the brain, when it is processed and there is a vast difference in how information is processed between individuals. If these sights help someone shoot better, then aren't they "better" for that individual? I know I'm brand new here, and I mean no disrespect to anyone, but things are not always black and white.

You are quite right, but some people just can't let it go.

[NCPatrolAR]

Why do some people insist on evaluating how Big Dots perform on square range drills skewed towards precision?????

We arent talking about shooting a slow-fire course at 100 meters here. If your sights cant produce an acceptable (whatever this means to the user) level of accuracy on a square range under ideal circumstances how are they going to do it when things are going sideways?

Why can some people not help but project their negative experience with these sights onto others?

Why can't some people understand that people are stating their experiences with certain pieces of equipment in order to counter the vocal minority that loudly proclaim that select pieces of gear can make up for deficiencies in skill, cure cancer, etc. We aren’t projecting anything. We are stating our issues with the sights. Sorry if our personal experiences ran contrary to yours.