View Full Version : Red Dot Study – Key Points
Red Dot Study – Key Points (http://blog.krtraining.com/red-dot-study-key-points/)
In 2015 & 2016 KR Training partnered with the Texas A&M Huffines Institute to jointly fund and conduct an academic study comparing shooter performance using iron sights, green lasers, and slide mounted red dot sights (with and without backup iron sights). This blog post summarizes the key findings from that work.
~
RESULTS
Did shooters using the slide mounted red dots shoot better than those using irons or lasers? No.
Much more info at the link.
frostfire
06-03-2017, 08:49
FWIW, the highest record for bullseye is still held by iron sights, despite advancement in and variety of red dot options.
IMHOO, red dot is a crutch. As Master Rick used to say, optic makes bad shooter worse. Applies to both long range and pistol.
However, I also submit there's a placebo effect from the perceived advantage. One coworker with RMR on his G19 has a hard time hitting beyond 50 yards with irons, but with the RMR, he is consistent at the 100yards silhouette. Not relevant to the study obviously since there was no time as variable.
Concur with the article's recommendation on laser. Perhaps a parallel with no/low light shooting. Don't you HSLD guys just see the IR illuminator on the target when shooting with NOD?
CDRODA396
06-03-2017, 12:59
The one area irons fail is when the eyes age. You can buy glasses to compensate, your reading script in the upper portion of the glass is all the rage right now, but at the end of the day, if you wake up a zero dark thirty hearing a bump in the night, you reach to the nightstand and grab your handy iron slinger, you don't want to have to grab your shooting only glasses, because they were custom made to let you see iron sights in focus with your 50+ year old eyes.
The red dot lets you grab just the gun and head downstairs...at least for me and my old age eyes:cool:
ETA: DISREGARD, my eyes failed me while reading. I read "slide mounted" as "side mounted" on MR2's post.
Pat
Trapper John
06-04-2017, 07:40
The one area irons fail is when the eyes age. You can buy glasses to compensate, your reading script in the upper portion of the glass is all the rage right now, but at the end of the day, if you wake up a zero dark thirty hearing a bump in the night, you reach to the nightstand and grab your handy iron slinger, you don't want to have to grab your shooting only glasses, because they were custom made to let you see iron sights in focus with your 50+ year old eyes.
The red dot lets you grab just the gun and head downstairs...at least for me and my old age eyes:cool:
Very good point Sir! I prefer iron sights but the presbyopia (tired eyes) problem is a reality for us FOGs. I've been debating the red dot crutch, you just convinced me to give it a try. Thanks.
CDRODA396
06-04-2017, 15:05
Very good point Sir! I prefer iron sights but the presbyopia (tired eyes) problem is a reality for us FOGs. I've been debating the red dot crutch, you just convinced me to give it a try. Thanks.
It takes a little getting used to/dry fire to get to the point where the dot is in the glass every time you present, but once you get there, IMO it is much faster, and nothing has to be in focus! :cool:
In fact, I don't know how long they gave the test subject to get used to the dot, but most everyone is familiar with irons, if the test subjects were not previously familiar with a RDS on a pistol, then the test is way skewed.
Many, regardless of experience level, had a hard time finding the dot on initial presentation of the pistol from ready, with the most difficulty occurring when no backup iron sights were available.From the article.
It took me several days of applied dry fire to get to where the dot was in place when I reached full presentation...you simply can not pick up a G17 MOS and be proficient because you are rated as an A Class USPSA Production Shooter with a G17. It was surprising how much time it took, not overly so, but definitely more than they could have given them in the class the article mentions. This is a common finding on forums like benos.com (a USPSA/IPSC, IDPA forum).
But one you get used to it, IMO it is fast and accurate. Definitely let us know what you think when you give it a try.
Trapper John
06-05-2017, 06:36
It takes a little getting used to/dry fire to get to the point where the dot is in the glass every time you present, but once you get there, IMO it is much faster, and nothing has to be in focus! :cool:
In fact, I don't know how long they gave the test subject to get used to the dot, but most everyone is familiar with irons, if the test subjects were not previously familiar with a RDS on a pistol, then the test is way skewed.
Many, regardless of experience level, had a hard time finding the dot on initial presentation of the pistol from ready, with the most difficulty occurring when no backup iron sights were available.From the article.
It took me several days of applied dry fire to get to where the dot was in place when I reached full presentation...you simply can not pick up a G17 MOS and be proficient because you are rated as an A Class USPSA Production Shooter with a G17. It was surprising how much time it took, not overly so, but definitely more than they could have given them in the class the article mentions. This is a common finding on forums like benos.com (a USPSA/IPSC, IDPA forum).
But one you get used to it, IMO it is fast and accurate. Definitely let us know what you think when you give it a try.
Good perspective and advice Sir! Not surprising though, EVERYTHING requires practice, practice, practice. I am traveling a lot for the next couple of months but I will give it a good workout and report back. Thanks again. :)
I've put RMR w green triangle on my scatterguns and ARs.
An argument I've seen made for a red dot is NVGs. I've not quickly been able to figure out how to use irons on a pistol with NVGs.
I watched one shooter that smoked me on a course running a Docter 2moa dot on his glock, making 30-40 yard head shots on half and full sized targets. He still had irons, as his belief is their faster for closer engagements.
I have seen pictures of an aftermarket glock front sight being broken, my thought is they're weaker than dovetailed sights.
Interesting study, thanks for posting. Though to be fair, I don't know of anyone who argues that it doesn't take a ton of practice to become proficient with, and only then can one start to see benefits.