The height isn't an issue. You will get used to it. Jumping between irons and optic is a bit off but no optic really is at irons height.
The issue is how good the mount is, and that of optic support. I had two of those, one for small Glock, another for CZ. Dont remember the brands. The Glock one would not stay on a gun, the CZ one was near impossible to take off because of loctited set screws. Both only held optic by screws, no support from a pocket, so not ideal.
I think dovetail mounts are fine for experimenting with optic or for very casual use. Probably ok for rimfire. Anything beyond that, dedicated milling is better.

 

The issue is how good the mount is, and that of optic support. I had two of those, one for small Glock, another for CZ. Dont remember the brands. The Glock one would not stay on a gun, the CZ one was near impossible to take off because of loctited set screws. Both only held optic by screws, no support from a pocket, so not ideal.
I think dovetail mounts are fine for experimenting with optic or for very casual use. Probably ok for rimfire. Anything beyond that, dedicated milling is better.

Thank you YVK. That all makes sense. The screws alone aren't enough for heavy usage or heavy recoil. Maybe try a dovetail mount on a .22LR to see how I feel about making the changeover to optics.

There are fewer iron sight shooters every month at the local USPSA matches. Seems like everyone is going to Carry Optics. I have a couple pretty good pistols but getting both the slides milled and purchasing the optics is a significant investment. The times are rapidly changing.

 

This has come up a lot lately and there does not seem to be a lot of good info out there,except from the folks who want to sell you a $500 optic, $150 of machine work and a $125 holster that will let your optic hang out the front without any protection, so the glass gets scratched and dirty.

There is however, a cheap way to give it a try without a big investment. That is a cheap dovetail mount and a cheap, $40 optic. The $700 outfit can come later if you feel you need an optic on your pocket gun. They are fun for the range.


Dovetail mounts hold up to recoil just fine if they are the type that has a screw to keep them from slipping. For example, the Rossi Model 92 in 454 Casull, a lever action, along with the smaller 44 mag, 45 Colt, and 357 lever --all of those have been using the dovetail to mount optics for years.. My 454 is loaded up to 65,000 psi. My everyday loads are above 55,000 PSI. They recoil about like a 3.5 inch 12 gauge or my 300 Weatherby. The dovetail holds the optic. Now if you put the optic on a slide like a 1911 in 10mm, it is going to slam back and forth. Going to be hard on the optic, but it is not likely to break off.

""""""
Bring your 1892 levergun in to the 21st century. For really fast sight acquisition in low light conditions this Mini red dot reflex sight sits on the single slot picatinny rail that mounts in the existing rear sight dovetail. This red dot reflex sight is designed for pistol mounting so it’s small and sets low for a good cheek weld. It'll surely help ya hit what you're aimin at.'''''''


So, the dovetail strength is not the issue. Your 10mm is only about half that power and your 9mm even less and the 45 Plus P is still in the 21,000 PSI range, a third of what the Rossis will take. You biggest risk might be breaking the actual optic if you dropped it or fell on it.

On a 1911 or most plastic semi autos, the dovetail mount puts the optic about 1/4 to 1/3 inch higher than the fixed sight. To me it is just that you get used to. My background is military and law enforcement, with a handgun I am shooting both eyes open and moving.

I normally do not want an optic on any handgun, on a long gun sure. And on a gun for shooting games, sure, lots of fun, but never on a fighting gun for me. For my civilian EDC I do not expect ever to shoot in defense more than 30-40 feet and then only the front sight matters to me.

Now for just plinking and shooting fun and teaching kids to shoot, they are great and the height does not seem to matter. I have them on the Ruger Charger , Kel Tec Sub 2000, an AR and some other 22s that we shoot for fun. I do not notice the height at all. I think the only people who worry about that are folks who need optical sights to shoot the smaller carry guns, like the cute little Hellcat and those smaller type guns.

I was a CCW instructor starting in 1996. What I learned early on is that the best 2 tools for shooting newbies to shoot is a (1) suppressor and a (2) laser. The suppressor does away with all the noise and flash so you can concentrate on the mechanics of employing the gun. The laser then took out all the required aiming and lining up the sights and holding that gun on target. Today the little optic has replaced the laser and works very well for entry level shooters. The laser will always be better because it allows you to shoot around corners, but with the dot, you have to get just enough eye behind the gun to see the dot on the place you want the bullet to go. The laser does not require you to even see the gun, only the dot.

. SO the current optic fad is fine by me, makes it easy for everyone to put rounds on target, and that is what matters.

Last the little dove tail mounts are cheap. I have seen them for $20 or so and have a couple. So just buy the kind of optic that has the standard mount so it is adaptable to either the dovetail mount or milled into the gun mount and give it a try. If you have a gun like the 1911-22, or the Sig Mosquito of any of those, the dovetail optic is a cheap and ez way to get into optics. I bought 2 or 3 of the little cheap optics like this one below about 7-8 years ago. They all work fine, all these years later. Recently I bought some of the newer micro dots and they are fine as well and much smaller which is needed for the handguns. I doubt I will ever put on on a carry gun, but that is just me. Food for thought. Let us know what you do.

Oh yea. I like the new green dots like the one on the right, and the cheap ones give you options of aiming reticles. I have one on a 22 that is a smiley face. It has been known to shoot skunks more than once. Enjoy.

Not everyone is going to "carry" optics, it is a fad, people with poor shooting skills will find them very helpfull and that is all that matters, when it matters. So, if it works for you, go for it. I have only used them on Glocks for fast shooting and I prefer to stay with might sights, YMMV.

 

Not everyone is going to "carry" optics, it is a fad, people with poor shooting skills will find them very helpfull

Around here there are more Masters and A class shooters in CO than any other division. Poor shooting skills?

As far as role on a defensive weapon, probably best to leave it to outside of competition shooting subforum.

 

I still shoot with iron sights for carry and competition. If you think the only people using optics on handguns are "people with poor shooting skills" you couldn't be more wrong. Shooters of all abilities are using them more. The optics don't turn everyone into a great shooter but very good shooters are putting hits on targets faster and with increasing accuracy (especially on more difficult targets) then they were able to do previously. There is an adjustment period figuring out how to best use them on the different target presentations.

The optics themselves are much more durable now too.

 

Perhaps, I stated it poorly. My gun club has about 1,500 members. Like any club, shooters come at all skill levels and everyone carries. Our state no longer even requires a permit. The fad lately is for the less experienced folks to have optics on carry guns. We have a large contingent of retired military and retired law enforcement, in my club, I am both. Very few, if any, who carried guns daily for decades have optics on their carry guns. It is more the tacti-cool crowd who dresses in 511 clothing and have multiple gun related bumper stickers on their elevated trucks. That is a far different group from those who compete and have optics on their range guns. It may be different where you live.

Trijicon and Sightmark have been pushing for dots on law enforcement guns for years and pushing hard. We were told even before that that there would probably be a Crimson Trace on every duty gun, that has not happened, although they have a definite role in police applications and in my view are far superior to the dots for night shooting. I also pushed them in my CCW courses, they work.I can take a new shooter and put them on the range in the dark with a J frame or a SW shield, each equipped with a Crimson Trace and that poor shooter can make hits. Probably the same with the dot sights, except the laser is simply easier. So, I would support dot sights on carry guns for new shooters, just improves their odds.


Where I live optics on the handgun are pretty much for shooting games or competition. A few of us put them on guns just for fun and ease of shooting. Even the old eyes can easily make hits, that is a good thing.


But, I do not know a soul that carried for a living that has an optic on a carry gun. However, my comment is simply, whether you call it a crutch or a tool, if it helps somebody stop a rape in progress, or a home invasion, then fine, go for it. I have investigated lots of criminal events over many decades, I just cannot think of one where optics on a handgun would have prevented the rape or beating or other brutal attack. Most attacks are at dark, very close and very fast. Just my experience, your may be different. The more the market sells handguns like the little Hellcat with optics in place, the more people will buy them. I just do not see those actually experienced with using guns, carrying them with the optics, same as with an actual light mounted under the gun. People do carry like that, just no cops that I know. I do not need them, others may find them critical to carrying a handgun. Different opinions is what makes the world go around. FWIW

 

Up to a certain point you didn't see law enforcement officers who carry for a living use anything but revolvers. How many still use them as a primary duty gun? Backup gun yes.
Optics are getting sturdier and more reliable every day. Batteries last years in some of them. Things change. Sometimes very slowly, other times faster then you would have imagined.
As I said, I haven't made the change to optics but a surprising number, including top shooters have. I'll eventually get one set up to try. A lot of gear is initially tested in competition then if it's successful is used by others.

 

I tried the EGW dovetail adapter on a Glock long enough to know I liked the dot, but hated the mounting system. I now have two red dot sighted Glock MOS models, a G34 with a Trijicon Dual Ilum and a G19 with a Noblex. The Noblex (made by the Dokter company in Germany) is a sealed optic, and extremely small.

(Note to anyone considering the no battery Dual Illuminated Trijicon RMR. If you use an indoor range there may not be enough light at the firing point, and too much light downrange, for the dot to show up. It works fine outdoors in daylight, and fine in the dark, but combine a bright target with no light falling on the fiberoptic band on the sight body and it can be a problem.)

I would no longer bother with an open optic, or one that blocks the standard sights, as far as I am concerned the Noblex MOS model sight showed what can be done and is now the minimum that I want. It co witnesses with stock Glock plastic sights, is sealed so no dust bunnies or rain drops can cover the emitter, it is super compact. Can't testify on longevity with ammo so scarce but it seems solid so far.

I wear prescription glasses. With my glasses on the front sight is blurred but targets downrange are sharp. With my glasses off, the front sight is sharp but targets are fuzzy. Add a red dot and now with my glasses on the dot AND the target are sharp, with glasses off the front sight is sharp.

*edited to add the photo and clean up some stuff.

 

I tried the EGW dovetail adapter on a Glock long enough to know I liked the dot, but hated the mounting system. I now have two red dot sighted Glock MOS models, a G34 with a Trijicon Dual Ilum and a G19 with a Noblex. The Noblex (made by the Dokter company in Germany) is a sealed optic, and extremely small

I would no longer bother with an open optic, or one that blocks the standard sights, as far as I am concerned the Noblex MOS model sight showed what can be done and is now what I want. Co witnesses with stock Glock plastic sights, sealed so no dust bunnies can cover the emitter, super compact. Can't testify on longevity with ammo so scarce but it seems solid so far.

Something that you don't notice until you shoot a red dot with usable iron sights as well is, if you wear glasses one or the other is always in focus. I have had to wear glasses to drive for years, but had to wear plain eye protection to focus on the front sight. With a dot and irons, with my prescription, the dot is sharp, without glasses the front sight is sharp. I consider that a real bonus.

The absolute fastest gun I have ever fired were actually 2 identical Glocks, caliber was 45 GAP, springs were very precise, the owner a master gunsmith and his son. One gun had a 1 pound trigger the other a 1.5 pound trigger. The slightly shorter case took milliseconds off the time of each round, the light triggers did the same. At the higher end of competition, milliseconds win matches. The dots were red on both guns and set for 25 yards. Firing the gun was almost a spiritual experience. That said, I have crawled around the boonies searching for people with 45s and I have poked around buildings in the dark looking for bad guys, and the downside was bad guys were looking for me too. Despite the precision of the 2 Glocks, I would not carry them for either application. The trigger an issue for sure and for night time application I prefer traditional night sights, which required 2 or 3 points of light, but I just shoot them better, off the range.

Dual sights on a gun are great for the range but when chasing some fool in the dark, or perhaps running from some fool in the dark, I want the simplest system I can have. I am not the biggest fan of the big dot front sites but they work for most folks and I do shoot them well. I do like them on the short shotgun for night work. You always can tell where the front of the shotgun is at as you open doors and move around corners. We have tried some "presicion" shooting with handguns in the dark. The targets were illuminated only enough to show the outline. The 3 dot tritium sites were the most accurate in single action fire. the dots and lazers not so much. I think because the dots are just too big on the target. If you needed to shoot a bad guy in the dark and only could see a portion of him, it would matter a lot. If you have a whole shoulder or part of the torso visible, it probably would not matter, just swing the dot and shoot.

If you really want a fun gun for the range, put a 1 pound trigger on a 1911 or Glock. Not much more fun. I have a 12 ounce trigger on a Uberti Cattleman in 45 Colt for fast action shooting. Light triggers are not for new shooters and even on the range, the owner of the gun needs to remain close as anything will set them off. Lots of new ways to fire guns and make them go faster and more accurate. That is why gun nuts have gun forums I suppose.

 

Wow.

 

Ranger4 -- Very informative presentation on where we are with optics on pistols today. Personal defense and competition pistols appear to be diverging. Optics work well for competition and are becoming a necessity to win. Personal defense does not enjoy much advantage from optics, and, in some aspects, may be a distinct disadvantage. Thanks for sharing.

 

You're definitely wrong there. More and more guns come with optic mounts available and the people that use an RDS equipped gun experience very little disadvantage to go with their obvious advantages.

For competition, guns with optics are classed differently from guns without so saying they are a requirement to win just shows utter lack of knowledge.

 

The optics companies have been pushing optics on everything for about a decade. And of course different competitions require different type of guns and limitations on attachments.

In police work from where I learned handgun use, working for 4 different agencies, local, state, federal and military, it is common for officers to shoot at suspects at long distances. I have had situations where the BG was 60-70 feet away, but I had a rifle in those events. I recall only 3 times where I almost died at the hands of bad guys, all three were less than 10 feet, one involved a boot knife he tried to jab into my chest. The second involved an armed robbery suspect who reached under his jean jacket and grabbed a 44 Ruger Blackhawk, he was so close I pushed my model 19, into his ear cocked, as I laid my other hand on his arm, we both had a moment of panic. A third one tried to beat me to death and drag me into a lake, until I was able to place my Glock pressed into his ear. I can think of others but those three I recall because I could easily have not come home those nights. In all three of those cases I recall both supervisors and the prosecutor asking me why I just did not shoot them early in the encounter where deadly force is justified. You all know that answer, it happened too quick to know it was a deadly force encounter.


So, now retired do I want a carry optic on my carry gun? We know they are marketed heavily and the companies are pushing optics only matches, so they will sell lots more. But matches are a long way away, and the targets do not move nor do they shoot at you, so competition distance is not the same as self defense. To sell them they have even created a cool new name, "carry optic".

Think about cases in which a prosecutor would justify you shooting another person to death. Home invasion would be one, and usually at night. The encounter would be some bad guy inside your house. the absolute longest distance would be the longest straight line distance in your home. He is not likely to be pressed against the far wall and you are not likely to be pressed against the wall at the opposite end of the house, people are going to be in the middle of rooms or hallways. The distance will be 10-20 feet maybe, inside the house and probably in the dark. Do you really need and optical sight to defend yourself inside your home: if you are only shooting 20 feet?

Second, what distance will a mugger, car jacker,robber or rapist be that would justify killing in self defense? To be justified, all of those events take place inside 10 feet, some closer, do you need a lit up sight and do you actually have time to look for the dot? Police shootings and private person self defense shootings are very different.

What about the experts? What do the true self defense gurus say about optics on actual carry guns? I came into law enforcement when Mas Ayoob was a reserve cop trying to be a gun writer. Since that time he has won hundreds of major shooting competitions mostly in police related events. So, I am biased to his views.

. If you read the monthly articles by Mas Ayoob as to police shootings, none are at distance and most are at night you will see that even though he travels the competition circuit all year long, he is still not sold the optics for an actual carry gun. Here is what he said last month:
-------""".I’m kinda like a cat chasing a laser beam: I have trouble catching the red dot. Thus, while I appreciate the advantages of a red dot, I’m still not as fast with it as I am with the iron sights to which I’ve been so long habituated.""""
This guy has won as many police type shooting games as anyone and still does not buy into them, wonder why?

If you read Jim Cirillo the cop with the most gunfights in history, he uses the whole gun as the aiming point for what he calls instinctive shooting. He says that when you have time, distance and cover you should consider using the sights on the gun, but most times you just have to shoot. Otherwise you just throw you fist at them as an aiming point and empty the gun.

Sure, a full size gun with an optic gives one what Mas calls a a range advantage, but when people like Mas Ayoob, a guru of defensive handguns still does not want one on his actual carry gun, that tells us something.

So while I have some on guns going back 10 years, I do not want one on a true carry gun. .Any threat close enough to justify killing a person in self defense is not going to need me looking through a red dot to make those shots. So, I will just keep the ones I have on guns used for playing games and just for fun shooting. I think we all want our carry gun to do what the big competition guns do, but different tools work better for different chores, or so I read just today.

Since the risk of actually using one is so low, I do not think it really matters for personal carry but that is just my thought. Smaller is better for me.
YMMV

 

You're in the competition sub forum, so almost nothing you say applies here

In up close situations the optic makes no difference, as you likely wouldn't be using it, but it will be much easier to make accurate shots at range. Think active shooter at the mall/church/etc.

Ayoob might be a use of force expert, but he is not an expert shooter. I would take legal advice from him, not pistol shooting instruction.

 

You're in the competition sub forum, so almost nothing you say applies here

In up close situations the optic makes no difference, as you likely wouldn't be using it, but it will be much easier to make accurate shots at range. Think active shooter at the mall/church/etc.

Ayoob might be a use of force expert, but he is not an expert shooter. I would take legal advice from him, not pistol shooting instruction.

He is not an expert shooter? And you know that how? Illinois State Rifle Association > Education > Affiliate Training > Massad Ayoob (isra.org)
-----Outstanding American Handgunner of the Year Award in 1998,
------ Mas has won several state and regional handgun shooting championships.
-------Mas is one of approximately ten Five Gun Masters among the 10,000-member International Defensive Pistol
Association, and was the first to earn that title.
-------19 years as chair of the Firearms Committee of the American Society of Law Enforcement Trainers,
------- and several years as a member of the Advisory Board of the International Law Enforcement Educators and Trainers Association.
-------- taught for the International Association of Law Enforcement Firearms Instructors
--------recently elected as the president of the Second Amendment Foundation Second Amendment Foundation Names Massad Ayoob President – American Gun Alliance
---------this is a list of the top handgunners in the nation, Mas is #2.
---------winner of the 2010 and maybe 2011 Regional champ in shooting in Phoenix, forgot the tournement name..
Here is a picture of the top living handgunners in the nation today. Mas is in the front row, second from left.

While you may not recognize the name Mas Ayoob as a firearms trainer, those of us who have been in law enforcement for decades certainly do. Notice this blog over on AR 15.com.Who are the top 5 instructors you wish to train under? - AR15.COM And who did they conclude were the top trainers ? A couple groups listed these"
Jerry Miculek
Paul Howe
Norm Chandler
Mas Ayoob
Sensei Ray Williams

And last, I remember Ayoobs credentials being called into question on the Smith and Wesson Forum that I frequented. Found it and below is the link. It was 2009, apparently a few folks thought he was not genuine because he was a "part time cop". instead of a 40 hour cop. That is a bit funny to me, because when we use the reserves it is often when there is a holiday or a big crime event or we just need extra manpower. Kind of like the National Guard these days, lot of people are just ignorant about what the Guard does on deployments? They go to the front line, and many are so uniformed they do not know that starting in 2006, over 2,000 of the Us Army Special Forces guys are in the Guard, not active duty. Anyway, most of us who carried guns as a tool of the job respect him both as a trainer as well as one of the foremost experts on the legal use of force.

Mas Ayoob cop or gun expert or both? (smith-wessonforum.com)

If you do not think he is a trainer that is one opinion, mine differs.

 

I absolutely recognize the name and his background. He is not an elite competitor is what I should have said, and as a trainer he is much more of a tactical guy than a gamer guy, which I'm sure you would admit.

 

Andrew Branca, who is another national use of force expert and an IDPA master himself, carries a SIG with RDS. Now what? What does the individual position of one person, whoever he is, has to do with an objective assessment of a tool?

Who said that low probability shots are the only advantage of an RDS?
Who said that defensive shots will only be high probability?

And, for the fifth time, this is competition subforum. Defensive use forum is three mouse clicks away.

 

Andrew Branca, who is another national use of force expert and an IDPA master himself, carries a SIG with RDS. Now what? What does the individual position of one person, whoever he is, has to do with an objective assessment of a tool?

Who said that low probability shots are the only advantage of an RDS?
Who said that defensive shots will only be high probability?

And, for the fifth time, this is competition subforum. Defensive use forum is three mouse clicks away.

OK, you win. I know who he is. He is the lawyer that sells CCW insurance, videos and T shirts. Does he have any video where he recommends a particular hand gun and optical sights? That would be helpful information. The "carry optic" is the issue in the competition thread, not the use of the optic in competition. I would like to hear his recommendation on that specific issue. As an attorney, I would assume he mostly wears suits, so he always has a cover garment. And I assume the places he goes with his type of travel, he can conceal a larger gun easily. You win.

 

I wasn't competing to win this thread, just to keep it on track.
I listened to an interview with him a year or two ago. He wasn't making any recommendations, what to carry is an individual choice. He talked about aftermarket trigger work etc and he said that he carried a sig with a dot. I think he may have alluded to a declining vision.

 

This is the competition subforum.

Please keep discussions related to personal protection carry guns with optics in the personal defense subforum.

 

K