Why are red dot optics not standard from the OEM?

[rpenmanparker]

What is it about “iron” sights that justifies their popularity long after they have lost the battle to red dots? I’m converting my new pistols even before shooting them for the first time. I shoot so much better with a red dot than iron sights it is amazing. Never going back.

Okay, discuss.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Old people. Grumpy + astigmatism + paying extra for a reddot you don't want = bad combo.

 

[rpenmanparker]

Well said!

 

[imp]

Sig, Walther, Springfield Armory, and Kimber all have red dot equipped models from the factory. It may take the other makers a few more years, but it's obviously the next leap ahead in handgun effectiveness.

 

[rpenmanparker]

Agreed. It is just that there is such a variety of iron sight offerings as if the upgraded features actually deal with the fundamental problem in these simple optics. all of the fancy iron sight offerings like night sights, tritium sights, three dot sights, fiber optic sights just don't get to the real issue, the apparent fit of the front blade in the rear notch. Depending upon the length of your arms you will see the front blade as a loose or tight fit in the rear notch. And that makes all the difference in how precisely you can aim your pistol. Red dots eliminate that problem completely. Why are such a preponderance of range tests performed with pistols equipped with some fancy version of iron sights instead of the far superior red dot?

 

[TXAZ]

I don’t like red dots. Give me iron or glass that is much better than a 1-3 MOA dot.

 

[rpenmanparker]

Red dots cut my group diameters in half.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

A large percentage of males suffer from red-green color vision deficiency. If you have it (which I do), red dots are useless in anything other than almost pitch darkness. Green dots are visible, but they cost a lot more than red dots for some reason.

I don’t like red dots. Give me iron or glass that is much better than a 1-3 MOA dot.

Agreed. I guess I'm one o' them cussed, grumpy olde phartes.

 

[Cheapshooter]

Because those "old people" have the wisdom of age, and learned long ago to not trust their life to circuits, and batteries if they don't have to.

 

[TXAZ]

A large percentage of males suffer from red-green color vision deficiency. If you have it (which I do), red dots are useless in anything other than almost pitch darkness. Green dots are visible, but they cost a lot more than red dots for some reason.


Agreed. I guess I'm one o' them cussed, grumpy olde phartes.

I’m red-green and a little blue-yellow.
For some targets the red or green dot blends in and makes more difficult to get a precise shot. That’s not a problem with glass or some iron sights.

 

[turkeestalker]

Nothing wrong with using a red dot or any other optic on a firearm.
I've got a bunch set up with optics and my aging eyesight appreciates them, even sometimes needs them.

Many years ago I used to compete in archery shooting leagues, a bunch of tournaments here in Missouri and across the river in Illinois, even state.
I've still got a box of trophies packed away, but none were ever better than 2nd place competing in the 'limited class' using my fingers.

I insisted on not using a mechanical release aid like everyone I knew tried to convince me to do, (and seemed to be doing themselves), in order to 'solve all my problems' in using my fingers.

The way I see it, (though others may disagree as it is oversimplified), 40% of an archer's skill comes from the hand that the bow is in, and 60% from the hand releasing the bow string.

Shooting a score of 300 meant quite a bit more to me using my fingers than it would've if I had shot it using a mechanical release aid, which I believe would require considerably less skill.
That would have been bypassing the fundamentals and more or less like cheating in my mind.

IF there were ever actually a battle between iron sights and red dots, I know where I'd put my money.

 

[darkgael]

If you want to earn a Distinguished shooter badge, you gotta shoot irons.
No dots in a leg match.
Pete.

 

[couldbeanyone]

Because I don't want to have to pay for an electronic doodad that I would just take off of the gun anyway. I can easily beat 95% of the competitors in my state in a steel challenge using my iron sights, and my irons are always "on" and have never had a dead battery.

 

[Salmoneye]

Because those "old people" have the wisdom of age, and learned long ago to not trust their life to circuits, and batteries if they don't have to.

This.

 

[rpenmanparker]

The idea that results obtained with a red dot aren't "real" or as praise-worthy as with iron sights is BS. Can you say luddite?

As for where to put your money in a match between red dots and irons, what do you think is happening every day in Afghanistan, etc.? And the money is on red dots. Who do you think proved out red dots in the first place? Special ops folks. You gonna argue with them?

The battery life is so long on modern red dots that power failure is a non issue. If you left the optic always on and changed the battery every month, you would spend almost nothing and still have essentially no risk of failure. Besides there are very good co-witnessing mount options available to make battery failure of no consequence.

 

[CDW4ME]

My 1911 is carried IWB, rides deep, canted forward, no room for electronic on top.
Glock 43 in weak hand front pocket (2nd option to the 1911) definitely no room in pocket for electronic on top of G 43.
That is why.

 

[rpenmanparker]

As for what competitions allow, seriously? Like I care. I compete against myself, and I allow red dots. My red dot self beats my iron sights self every single time. Folks who don't allow new technology in competition just don't want to be embarrassed by it. I want to shoot as well as you possibly can; I use a red dot.

 

[rpenmanparker]

It might be interesting to know how many red dot nay sayers have actually tried them.

 

[Lohman446]

Because those "old people" have the wisdom of age, and learned long ago to not trust their life to circuits, and batteries if they don't have to.

As evidenced by others quoting this in agreement I am far from the only one to agree

 

[springer99]

I've used iron sights for many years on pistols and revolvers. I've also used red-dots on them for about the same amount of time.

My preference depends entirely on what the purpose is.

At the range or hunting, I can definitely shoot better with red-dot sights than with irons(at least now that age is gaining on me). A red-dot just makes maintaining a good sight picture so much easier.

For defensive purposed, it's a completely different story. In that case, I find red-dots much too bulky for my normal carry(either IWB or pocket). In those cases, I'll stick with iron sights alone or, to be honest, I've added laser grips to my defensive pistols/revolvers, as I've aged.