Irons vs. Reddots

[Ratfink]

on a shot timer at my 3 gun comps i am way way faster with irons then with a aimpoint or eotech so on my home gun i run a tritium front post on my go to rifle

i have shot a lot in the military and non military i shoot all the time actually like 3-6 times week i place very well in my shooting comps and i always use my troy flip ups now and got much faster since i took off my comp m4s now it just gathers dust in the safe

[rob_s]

From your description, the instruction you're offering is more of a recreational introduction rather than the teaching of a life-long skill. Using an Red Dot to keep it interesting and fun fulfills the mission nicely

Newsflash, this is the REALITY for the vast majority of AR buyers, owners, and even students. Look at the ratio of membership here vs. barfcom, and then weed out everyone here that really shoots much. Staggering how few that leaves you with. Those few are your "life-long skill" crowd, and they are few and far between.

The goal, at least for me, is to take that barfcommer, get him hooked, turn him into an M4c-er and get him straightened out. Making it easier for him to hit and giving him less to focus on is, in my experience, a better methodology than making things hard and have him go back to being not much more than a picture-poster.

[kwelz]

much faster since i took off my comp m4s now it just gathers dust in the safe

There is no reason for this. Please send that poor neglected Aimpoint to me so I don't have to call RDS (Reddot Protective Services)

[hatt]

I understand what you are saying and don't completely disagree, but my point is that someone who is going to entrust their lives to a firearm should have it within their means to be a good master of basic marksmanship fundamentals, which irons play heavily into much of the learning.

This is flawed logic for many people. Sure, if you kick in doors for a living it's relevant. But many people just want the added defensive capability in certain situations of a carbine and don't have the time or money to attend several classes a year and/or fire thousands of rounds a month to "master" all aspects of their weapon. Being competent is better than depending on 911 for your security. Anything that makes this shooter perform better is going to be a plus.

Edit: The same could be applied to LEO who are issued carbines along with little training.

[CarlosDJackal]

Poor lighting is the main reason I have a red dot...

Back in the mid-1980s I was involved with testing optical sights for the US Army Infantry Center, Fort Benning, GA. I wasn't anyone important in that test - just one of the "Acquisition Targets" they used for part of the test.

My role was to get "shot at" at different ranges (25 to 500-meters) at different times of the day (morning, noon, afternoon, dusk, evening, dawn, etc)) different conditions (clear, overcast, full moon, half moon, quarter moon, no moon, etc), and in varying terrain (edge of the woodline, in the open, deep inside the woodline, etc.)

As I recall, the test involved 5 different types of optics and the plain old iron sights. The test used M-16A2s and the optics included (as I can best remember): Aimpoint SL2000(?), Aimpoint with 4-power screw-in magnifier, British SUSAT, Canadian Leitz, and Leupold 4-power. us targets were armed with rifles loaded with blanks but no blank adaptor.

At the different ranges they would have a "shooter" and a timer for each rifle. At the command, the timer would start their stopwatches and the shooter would try to locate us "targets". If they located us, they would pull the trigger and the timer would note the time. If not everyone had found us yet they would send out a warning announcement at a pre-set time (I think 30-seconds) and we would fire a single shot towards the shooters to give them a chance to locate us via sound and muzzle flash.

At the end of the test, the unmagnified Aimpoint came out ahead overall. But the optic was not adopted because of the battery life.

Fast-forward to just before 9-11-2001. I was still a big iron sight person because all the RDSs I could afford failed even with light use. I shot an indoor 3-gun match at the NRA Range in Fairfax. A couple of the rifle targets were black Pepper poppers that were placed at 50-yards in front of a black background and in the shade. Needless to say I missed a lot because I could not see the outline of either targets or iron sights in that condition.

I bought my first Aimpoint not long after that and have not looked back since. I still believe in having a BUIS - they are akin to having a spare tire in your vehicle. But IMHO, not using an Aimpoint is akin to driving at night without headlights. You might be able to safely do it most of the time, but it's only a matter of time before you drive off the road. JM2CW.

[orionz06]

I shoot both. I may need to depend on one or the other, so I shoot both. I like the RDS faster, but there is something to be said for comparing what I can do when I set up two targets and shoot each one with different sights.

[rychencop]

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

it's not, but your irons are more reliable and allows you to learn the finer points of marksmanship. IMO.

[Surf]

This is flawed logic for many people. Sure, if you kick in doors for a living it's relevant. But many people just want the added defensive capability in certain situations of a carbine and don't have the time or money to attend several classes a year and/or fire thousands of rounds a month to "master" all aspects of their weapon. Being competent is better than depending on 911 for your security. Anything that makes this shooter perform better is going to be a plus.

Edit: The same could be applied to LEO who are issued carbines along with little training.

While it is ideal, I did not say that people need to master all aspects of their weapon. I did say that they should have a mastery of basic marksmanship fundamentals. These concepts do not require countless hours of classes and thousands of rounds. Of course the more the better and every person is different, but not necessary and quality of instruction is important.

I understand reality of what people do and don't do and if we place the LE thing on the side, IMO any person who finds the need great enough to have a weapon readily available and the willingness to deploy it in a defensive situation to save their own life or the life of a loved one, should be able to make the effort and invest the time to master the basic fundamentals and again IMO, irons is the better way to achieve the mastery of these fundamentals. It forces you to focus on each skill and how one so greatly relies on the other and when applied properly in combination with one another, we truly get great results and a life long foundation to build upon.

If they want to only be a recreational paper puncher, no harm in that. But I have been talking about defensive shooting at a minimum, which I stated in my very first post on this topic.

[Surf]

Let me offer this analogy. Not asking anyone to agree, just something to think about.

We don't teach our little leaguer's a back hand toss to get someone out. Nor do we teach them to make a throw to first base from a seated position or flat on their back, but instead we teach them optimum positions and body mechanics. They learn optimum foot placement, body position, foot movements and glove positioning when they are about to receive the ball in their glove. We teach them how to properly grip the ball to get it out of their glove to prepare for the throw. We teach them correct or optimal throwing mechanics. Where their arm needs to be, body position, when and where to release the ball and follow through.

All of this attention to detail at the start of their career and learning process ingrains the fundamentals so that they can perform them without thinking. They then go on to apply these fundamentals in practice games, which we call training and learn to recognize their own individual abilities which they then go on to adapt to the basic fundamentals which they learned. The kids that excel are those who learn to adapt their own skills around the base fundamentals and not those who attempt to reinvent or circumvent the proven fundamentals. As I mentioned earlier, even the accomplished players find themselves in a slump and it is often good to revisit the basics.

So yes, when teaching we need to take into account each persons individuality, how they learn, etc and adapt our styles as persons giving instruction, however we need to keep it in our minds that the teaching of the proper fundamentals and their application from the start is a critical piece of the puzzle.

I am not here to tell anyone what they should or shouldn't do, but this is the basis of my own personal opinion. Doesn't matter if it is shooting or T-ball learning the fundamentals in the most correct manner is key to true success.

[MistWolf]

Newsflash, this is the REALITY for the vast majority of AR buyers, owners, and even students. Look at the ratio of membership here vs. barfcom, and then weed out everyone here that really shoots much. Staggering how few that leaves you with. Those few are your "life-long skill" crowd, and they are few and far between.

The goal, at least for me, is to take that barfcommer, get him hooked, turn him into an M4c-er and get him straightened out. Making it easier for him to hit and giving him less to focus on is, in my experience, a better methodology than making things hard and have him go back to being not much more than a picture-poster.

I didn't deny it was the reality. I was looking at things from what I felt was your point of view. From there, I see teaching with the RDS fulfills your goals.

My point of view is from learning over the course of years from my father to ingrain a life-long skill and to pass that on to my sons; and when they come, my sons children. I share with interested newcomers as well. I don't have an RDS but in my circumstances I don't feel that is a shortcoming. It also does not take long for a beginner shooter to master the basic use of iron sights and the Peep & Post is the easiest to learn of all.

Keep in mind that I am not of the "Irons or Go Home" camp. It's my experience that learning to shoot irons takes more dedication but doing so produces a better marksman. That isn't to say there is nothing to learn from shooting other types of sights, that would be a foolish claim. I want our troops and LE officers to have RDS, EOTechs, night sights and ACOGs mounted to their weapons. I want them to have blindingly bright flashlights and lasers to paint targets. I want our enemies to be denied those advantages.

I like the quiet pride my sons display when they can shoot as well with their iron sights as others can with an RDS