Red Dot vs Open Sights

[russ69]

I'm not really into tactical shooting and I know nothing about "carbine courses" and close range defensive shooting. I was looking the guns the SB creeps were using and they have what looks like red dot scopes mounted on the rifles. Wouldn't open sights be the better choice for indoor shooting?

[MXRider]

No. Red dots are faster and easier to use. That's why they're so popular.

[russ69]

No. Red dots are faster and easier to use. That's why they're so popular.

I have a red dot on my 300blkout but I shoot at 100 yards mostly. When I'm looking down the tube, the field of view is really small (1X), it seems like you would have better situational awareness if you weren't looking through a tube?

[Bansh88]

They're not scopes. Also, you are supposed to shoot them with both eyes open for full field of view.

More than 7,000 posts and you've never read about a red dot?

[starsnuffer]

I have a red dot on my 300blkout but I shoot at 100 yards mostly. When I'm looking down the tube, the field of view is really small (1X), it seems like you would have better situational awareness if you weren't looking through a tube?

You're doing it wrong then. Keep both eyes open, don't look at the dot, look at your target. A lot of people that complain about the dot or red dot reticle being blurry are focusing on the wrong thing.

With iron sights, you need to focus on the front sight post. With red dot sights, you focus on your target. It's still smart to learn to do both.

-W

[teflondog]

Red dots are a lot more forgiving and easier to use in my experience. You can have a crappy cheek weld and still be able to put the dot on the target.

[russ69]

...More than 7,000 posts and you've never read about a red dot?

I've owned red dots since they came onto the market but I'm a target shooter so I don't know anything about tactical use and that was my question.

[LeadFarmer74]

I've own red dots since they came onto the market but I'm a target shooter so I don't know anything about tactical use and that was my question.

Next time you go shoot use the dot at 100 yds and irons at 100 yards. The dot should be significantly faster and if not, you're doing something wrong.

[russ69]

Next time you go shoot use the dot at 100 yds and irons at 100 yards. The dot should be significantly faster and if not, you're doing something wrong.

Well, I've shot both and target acquisition is not an issue. The thing of it is...the targets I shoot at aren't moving and I have a pretty decent position so when I open my eyes, the target is already lined up. I'm not a high-master yet so I guess you could say I'm doing something wrong but it's not related to looking at the sights....plus I get 22 minutes to shoot 22 rounds so time is really not a factor.

[hermosabeach]

AGE & EYESIGHT


As one ages, you might find that the dot is easier to use
without glasses
with glasses
in lower light settings
etc


The dot does not correct any poor marksmanship issues... it just eliminates sight alignment....

For max accuracy, I focus on the dot, not the target & close one eye...

[Bansh88]

I've owned red dots since they came onto the market but I'm a target shooter so I don't know anything about tactical use and that was my question.

The first Aimpoint was introduced in 1975 so I'd love to hear your history with them and how their practical & tactical use has slipped through your research.

No offense but many gun threads have been driving me nuts the last several days.

[LeadFarmer74]

Well, I've shot both and target acquisition is not an issue. The thing of it is...the targets I shoot at aren't moving and I have a pretty decent position so when I open my eyes, the target is already lined up. I'm not a high-master yet so I guess you could say I'm doing something wrong but it's not related to looking at the sights....plus I get 22 minutes to shoot 22 rounds so time is really not a factor.

Targets don't have to move for you to have a fast acquisition time. Since AR's co witness you get used to both at the same time. Maybe you can acquire the targets quick but if you took a newbie and have them irons and a dot. 95% would choose the dot because "it's easier".

[Standard]

For target use, I prefer a traditional scope or irons. Red dots are better at fast target acquisition. If you aren't worried about shooting fast, just stick with irons.

[russ69]

The first Aimpoint was introduced in 1975 so I'd love to hear your history with them and how their practical & tactical use has slipped through your research. No offense but many gun threads have been driving me nuts the last several days.

Well I started shooting NRA smallbore around 1966. Red dots became popular for use on Bulls eye and practical pistol shooting before anybody was using them on an AR15, there was no good place to mount them on an A1 and nobody was using rifles for short range target practice. Although I think I put my first one on a 10/22, I can't remember the year. Now that I answered, you can participate in my question or not post in the thread. I said I didn't know anything about tactical shooting, I didn't say I did know how to shoot or use a red dot sight, it was a simple question for those that do that kind of shooting; Would open sights be better indoors?

[Bansh88]

Would open sights be better indoors?

I appreciate your history. I wish I have been shooting that long, much less living.

However, just a mild glance at file footage over the last decade of military using red dots, would secure my opinion that red dots work for "tactical use".