Pistol Optics

>>33856818
>What does /k/ think about red dots on pistols?
Good for competition, screwing around on the range and home defense. Acceptable for hunting. I generally wouldn't advise it for carrying.

Generally useful in every situation where rapid target acquisition is important and size/dimensions/weight of the handgun is not an issue.

>Is it that much better than irons?
Well that depends. It's faster by a fraction of a second, maybe even a whole second or more if you suck with irons. Definetly a big deal in competition or home defense. Not so much for hunting or screwing around.

>If you use a pistol dot, do you use it for competition
Yes.

>hunting
I guess you could, never hunted with a handgun myself.

>range
Whatever floats your boat.

Depends on your gun. Tried out my dad's G17 at the range and those sights are so horrendous that a red dot sounds like a worthwhile investment, since he just keeps it by his bed.

>>33857333
To be fair, you can replace the glock sights without putting a red dot on it.

>>33856818
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zcKD209-BRU

Slow day on /k/. Do all you normies have jobs or something?

I'm thinking about the Vortex Venom for my G17 MOS. I don't like the idea of having to take the dot off to replace a battery, which rules out most dots on the market.

>>33856818

I just took a two day pistol class, and few guys had them (glock 19 with aimpoint h-1, glock 17 with some rmr, and a sphinx with an rmr).

Sphinx guy wasn't great, but the glock shooters were pretty skilled and their targets and times reflected that.

Optics on handguns really make a differance at range. At 25 yards, the red dot is simply better.

At close range, it's still pretty good, but you have to really get your draw squared away so the dot is in your eye line naturally, and that takes some practice.

>>33859649

further thought

I put a burris fastfire on my father in laws gun (Glock 23), and he hates it, but he won't practice with it. He simply thought he could get one and become faster/more accurate, but since he has to "look" for the dot, it is a complete backfire.

The instructor at the class (pretty top tier guy) openly believes that pistol RMR's are the future, and before long they will be on most serious shooters guns.

>>33856818
Has pros and cons. Surprisingly hard to quickly get on target at close ranges for some. supposedly slower than irons until you acclimate. OTOH is visible regardless of lighting and makes hits at longer range much easier.

>>33859649
>At close range, it's still pretty good, but you have to really get your draw squared away so the dot is in your eye line naturally, and that takes some practice.
I always hear this, but how can it be slower than idexing iron sights? If you're gonna have trouble lining up that dot, wouldn't you have just as much or even more lining up irons?

>>33858583
My dad had a venom for his G19 and the circuit board broke because its a poorly designed piece of shit
Have a Burris Fastfire 3 now
No problems

>>33859731
I would also think with the added height over the bore you'd have to make some quick adjustments based on distance that are far more significant than normal height sights.

>>33859815
You know Vortex has an unconditional lifetime warranty right?

>>33858583
Realisticly anon if you had to replace the battery once in your life, that might not be the end of the world. These batteries last Damn long

>>33859829
It warped and broke when he was securing the screws
He was worried about it happening again so he got another sight he thought wouldnt break
No problems with the Burris whatsoever

File: 00N0N_j6wiArpEd2j_600x450.jpg (25KB, 461x450px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 461x450px

>>33857444
glock perfection

>>33859887
So he cross-threaded it, forced it, and it broke... so therefore Vortex sucks. Great logic.

>>33860003
I dont know what he did
It worked for a little while, but then died at the range