Red Dot VS. Scope - choice for AR-15

Gun, shooting and equipment discussions unrelated to CHL issues

Moderator: carlson1


jason812
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 4
Posts: 1137
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:41 pm
Location: Central Texas

Re: Red Dot VS. Scope - choice for AR-15

#31

Post by jason812 » Tue Jan 08, 2019 6:00 pm

montgomery wrote:
Tue Jan 08, 2019 5:06 pm
Given the overall optic ruggedness and long battery life with modern red dots, holographic, and scopes, what is the opinion on running no iron sights versus folding sights versus fixed front / folding rear for a fighting / training carbine?
You can't co-witness iron sights with a scope. Not even 1x so irons do no good with a scope unless you take the scope off or mount them 45 deg offset.

You can co-witness thru a red dot. I run MagPul BUIS (backup iron sights) on my backpack AR pistol with a AimPoint Pro red dot.

Fixed front sight with above 1 or 2 power you wont see it in the scope. At least on mine at 4x (lowest power) you don't. It looks like it should block your view but it doesn't.

You just need to decide if you think you need the backup sights or not. If it's for self defense, I think it would be wise.

User avatar

Bitter Clinger
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 5
Posts: 2578
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2014 5:16 pm
Location: North Dallas

Re: Red Dot VS. Scope - choice for AR-15

#32

Post by Bitter Clinger » Tue Jan 08, 2019 6:31 pm

montgomery wrote:
Tue Jan 08, 2019 5:06 pm
Given the overall optic ruggedness and long battery life with modern red dots, holographic, and scopes, what is the opinion on running no iron sights versus folding sights versus fixed front / folding rear for a fighting / training carbine?
Funny, but I was having this same discussion at the DFW Gun Show this past weekend. If running military grade optics (e.g., Trijicon) BUIS just seem like a useless addition. I have never had an optic fail yet (Aimpoint, EoTech, Trijicon, etc.) and don't expect to see combat, so as I acquire new platforms, I am just going to run the optic and forget about the BUIS. As I age, I find the BUIS become less and less useful anyway.
"You may all go to H3ll, and I will go to Texas." - Davy Crockett
"Fast is fine, but accuracy is everything." - Wyatt Earp
NRA Life Member
לעולם לא תשכח

User avatar

Liberty
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 6048
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 8:49 pm
Location: Galveston
Contact:

Re: Red Dot VS. Scope - choice for AR-15

#33

Post by Liberty » Tue Jan 08, 2019 7:12 pm

I have scopes my Ruger Scout with an extended 2.5 scope. Co witnessing using see_thru mounts. I shoot consistently groups at about softball size at 100 yds. My AR556 has a cheap 4moa red dot. Co-Witnessed with the flip up irons. Groups a little more than golf ball at 50yds I haven't taken it out to 100 yet. It's the first time I've ever used a red dot but I'm liking it. So far it seems as though I can shoot as good with the $40 two-day as I can with the $300 scope. Time will tell.
Last edited by Liberty on Wed Jan 09, 2019 5:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Liberty''s Blog
"Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom." John F. Kennedy

User avatar

The Annoyed Man
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 9
Posts: 24724
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 12:59 pm
Location: North Richland Hills, Texas
Contact:

Re: Red Dot VS. Scope - choice for AR-15

#34

Post by The Annoyed Man » Tue Jan 08, 2019 8:56 pm

Bitter Clinger wrote:
Tue Jan 08, 2019 6:31 pm
montgomery wrote:
Tue Jan 08, 2019 5:06 pm
Given the overall optic ruggedness and long battery life with modern red dots, holographic, and scopes, what is the opinion on running no iron sights versus folding sights versus fixed front / folding rear for a fighting / training carbine?
Funny, but I was having this same discussion at the DFW Gun Show this past weekend. If running military grade optics (e.g., Trijicon) BUIS just seem like a useless addition. I have never had an optic fail yet (Aimpoint, EoTech, Trijicon, etc.) and don't expect to see combat, so as I acquire new platforms, I am just going to run the optic and forget about the BUIS. As I age, I find the BUIS become less and less useful anyway.
Yeah, as a general thing, I don’t use iron sights either because my eyesight was degrading for a long time until I had my cataract surgery. But as a matter of policy, I always put irons on my rifles if they didn’t come with them. I have one rifle that doesn’t have iron sights, and that is my Remington 700. Most of the rest have an optic too, but having iron sights is just part of prepping for me. An RDS without a battery is just a piece of glass to look through. As much as I like my T2 Micro as an RDS, it’s useless if the battery goes down. That’s why the T2 is the only optic I own that doesn’t have an etched reticle. That’s why I love ACOG type optics over an RDS.
Give me Liberty, or I'll get up and get it myself.—Hookalakah Meshobbab
I don't carry because of the odds, I carry because of the stakes.—The Annoyed Boy

User avatar

C-dub
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 12545
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 7:18 pm
Location: DFW

Re: Red Dot VS. Scope - choice for AR-15

#35

Post by C-dub » Tue Jan 08, 2019 9:57 pm

On my M4, when I had a 1x EoTech I had the rear iron sight on. I’m not sure why other than I light forget to turn on the dot or the battery could go dead. However, after switching the EoTech out for an ACOG I ditched the iron sight.
I am not and have never been a LEO. My avatar is in honor of my friend, Dallas Police Sargent Michael Smith, who was murdered along with four other officers in Dallas on 7.7.2016.
NRA Patriot-Endowment Lifetime Member---------------------------------------------Si vis pacem, para bellum.................................................Patriot Guard Rider


jason812
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 4
Posts: 1137
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:41 pm
Location: Central Texas

Re: Red Dot VS. Scope - choice for AR-15

#36

Post by jason812 » Tue Jan 08, 2019 10:04 pm

The Annoyed Man wrote:
Tue Jan 08, 2019 8:56 pm
An RDS without a battery is just a piece of glass to look through.
Yep. I'm not worried about the sight failing. The battery being drained is another question.

User avatar

The Annoyed Man
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 9
Posts: 24724
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 12:59 pm
Location: North Richland Hills, Texas
Contact:

Re: Red Dot VS. Scope - choice for AR-15

#37

Post by The Annoyed Man » Tue Jan 08, 2019 11:20 pm

jason812 wrote:
Tue Jan 08, 2019 10:04 pm
The Annoyed Man wrote:
Tue Jan 08, 2019 8:56 pm
An RDS without a battery is just a piece of glass to look through.
Yep. I'm not worried about the sight failing. The battery being drained is another question.
The flip side of that with the T1/T2, H1/H2, and I think the Primary Arms Micro RDS, is that the battery is good for 50,000 hours, or 5.7 years. If you keep a stock of CR2032 batteries on hand, you’ll have a usable RDS for many years, so long as you can replace the battery. I always have 5 or 6 of those on hand in my safe anyway, because I’ve got 7 different optics that use that battery. But, if everything ever goes to heck, those batteries may no longer be available. If you have an etched reticle, you still have a functioning optic. In fact, it’s one of the things I really like about my 4x32 BAC ACOG - it has an etched reticle AND dual source illumination. If everything goes to heck, and I can no longer have Trijicon replace the tritium, I still have an fiber-optic illuminated reticle as long as there is a trace of ambient light, and I still have an etched reticle even if there is no illumination at all.

RDS’s work great, but only if you have access to replacement batteries when yours eventually runs down ... as they all do.
Give me Liberty, or I'll get up and get it myself.—Hookalakah Meshobbab
I don't carry because of the odds, I carry because of the stakes.—The Annoyed Boy


BSHII
Junior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 39
Joined: Thu May 17, 2018 3:33 pm

Re: Red Dot VS. Scope - choice for AR-15

#38

Post by BSHII » Tue Jan 08, 2019 11:41 pm

My el Cheapo PSA rifle has “fixed” iron sights (regular gas block front sight, rail-mounted A2 style rear sight without carry handle) 1/3 co-witnessed through a Sig Romeo5 red dot. I was a die hard iron sight guy—I did BRM back when men were men, before the Army stopped teaching recruits how to shoot and started letting them qualify with Aimpoints and ACOGs. Sure, I shot other guys red dots, but for years wouldn’t be caught dead spending my own hard earned money on such an unnecessary extravagance as an Aimpoint or EOTech.

Then, not long ago, I saw the Romeo5 on sale, and decided to give it a try on el Cheapo. It’s great for the price: 2 MOA dot and it holds its zero like a champ. Boringly easy at 100 yards, though I prefer irons a bit at 200 or 300.

It’s all personal choice. Scopes are great for some, but I can’t stand them on an AR. I shoot better with a red dot or irons than with a scope out to 300 yards, and 5.56 from a 16” barrel is of little use beyond that. Others probably prefer scopes at a much closer range. I think part of it is I didn’t hunt as a kid and grew up shooting with iron sights.


montgomery
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 6
Posts: 343
Joined: Sun May 31, 2015 8:13 am
Location: Montgomery, Texas

Re: Red Dot VS. Scope - choice for AR-15

#39

Post by montgomery » Wed Jan 09, 2019 10:25 am

Bitter Clinger wrote:
Tue Jan 08, 2019 6:31 pm
montgomery wrote:
Tue Jan 08, 2019 5:06 pm
Given the overall optic ruggedness and long battery life with modern red dots, holographic, and scopes, what is the opinion on running no iron sights versus folding sights versus fixed front / folding rear for a fighting / training carbine?
Funny, but I was having this same discussion at the DFW Gun Show this past weekend. If running military grade optics (e.g., Trijicon) BUIS just seem like a useless addition. I have never had an optic fail yet (Aimpoint, EoTech, Trijicon, etc.) and don't expect to see combat, so as I acquire new platforms, I am just going to run the optic and forget about the BUIS. As I age, I find the BUIS become less and less useful anyway.
Thank you for your insights and taking the time to respond.

Military SF acquaintances tell me they have not used BUIS ever in the past 15 years of direct action experience. I am old school - and that may be part of the problem - but am beginning to equate iron sights and modern optics with engineering tools: when 3D CAD was in its infancy, engineering was still 2D. For the past 20 years, 3D CAD stands alone. Nobody keeps a T-square and drafting board as a backup anymore for if the software fails.


montgomery
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 6
Posts: 343
Joined: Sun May 31, 2015 8:13 am
Location: Montgomery, Texas

Re: Red Dot VS. Scope - choice for AR-15

#40

Post by montgomery » Wed Jan 09, 2019 10:26 am

jason812 wrote:
Tue Jan 08, 2019 6:00 pm
montgomery wrote:
Tue Jan 08, 2019 5:06 pm
Given the overall optic ruggedness and long battery life with modern red dots, holographic, and scopes, what is the opinion on running no iron sights versus folding sights versus fixed front / folding rear for a fighting / training carbine?
You can't co-witness iron sights with a scope. Not even 1x so irons do no good with a scope unless you take the scope off or mount them 45 deg offset.

You can co-witness thru a red dot. I run MagPul BUIS (backup iron sights) on my backpack AR pistol with a AimPoint Pro red dot.

Fixed front sight with above 1 or 2 power you wont see it in the scope. At least on mine at 4x (lowest power) you don't. It looks like it should block your view but it doesn't.

You just need to decide if you think you need the backup sights or not. If it's for self defense, I think it would be wise.
All good points - thank you for taking the time to respond.


montgomery
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 6
Posts: 343
Joined: Sun May 31, 2015 8:13 am
Location: Montgomery, Texas

Re: Red Dot VS. Scope - choice for AR-15

#41

Post by montgomery » Wed Jan 09, 2019 10:28 am

C-dub wrote:
Tue Jan 08, 2019 9:57 pm
On my M4, when I had a 1x EoTech I had the rear iron sight on. I’m not sure why other than I light forget to turn on the dot or the battery could go dead. However, after switching the EoTech out for an ACOG I ditched the iron sight.
Makes sense. USMC made the decision recently to dump fixed iron sights due to ACOG reliability, but still kept folding BUIS - presumably for old school marksmanship training and not necessarily to backup an optic that is 99.99%+ reliable.

Thank you for taking the time to respond to my question.


montgomery
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 6
Posts: 343
Joined: Sun May 31, 2015 8:13 am
Location: Montgomery, Texas

Re: Red Dot VS. Scope - choice for AR-15

#42

Post by montgomery » Wed Jan 09, 2019 10:30 am

BSHII wrote:
Tue Jan 08, 2019 11:41 pm
My el Cheapo PSA rifle has “fixed” iron sights (regular gas block front sight, rail-mounted A2 style rear sight without carry handle) 1/3 co-witnessed through a Sig Romeo5 red dot. I was a die hard iron sight guy—I did BRM back when men were men, before the Army stopped teaching recruits how to shoot and started letting them qualify with Aimpoints and ACOGs. Sure, I shot other guys red dots, but for years wouldn’t be caught dead spending my own hard earned money on such an unnecessary extravagance as an Aimpoint or EOTech.

Then, not long ago, I saw the Romeo5 on sale, and decided to give it a try on el Cheapo. It’s great for the price: 2 MOA dot and it holds its zero like a champ. Boringly easy at 100 yards, though I prefer irons a bit at 200 or 300.

It’s all personal choice. Scopes are great for some, but I can’t stand them on an AR. I shoot better with a red dot or irons than with a scope out to 300 yards, and 5.56 from a 16” barrel is of little use beyond that. Others probably prefer scopes at a much closer range. I think part of it is I didn’t hunt as a kid and grew up shooting with iron sights.

We have similar experiences ... and I am rethinking the iron sight ideology given modern optics advancements, coupled with my failing eyesight due to aging. Thank you for sharing your insights - very much appreciated.


montgomery
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 6
Posts: 343
Joined: Sun May 31, 2015 8:13 am
Location: Montgomery, Texas

Re: Red Dot VS. Scope - choice for AR-15

#43

Post by montgomery » Wed Jan 09, 2019 10:32 am

The Annoyed Man wrote:
Tue Jan 08, 2019 8:56 pm
Bitter Clinger wrote:
Tue Jan 08, 2019 6:31 pm
montgomery wrote:
Tue Jan 08, 2019 5:06 pm
Given the overall optic ruggedness and long battery life with modern red dots, holographic, and scopes, what is the opinion on running no iron sights versus folding sights versus fixed front / folding rear for a fighting / training carbine?
Funny, but I was having this same discussion at the DFW Gun Show this past weekend. If running military grade optics (e.g., Trijicon) BUIS just seem like a useless addition. I have never had an optic fail yet (Aimpoint, EoTech, Trijicon, etc.) and don't expect to see combat, so as I acquire new platforms, I am just going to run the optic and forget about the BUIS. As I age, I find the BUIS become less and less useful anyway.
Yeah, as a general thing, I don’t use iron sights either because my eyesight was degrading for a long time until I had my cataract surgery. But as a matter of policy, I always put irons on my rifles if they didn’t come with them. I have one rifle that doesn’t have iron sights, and that is my Remington 700. Most of the rest have an optic too, but having iron sights is just part of prepping for me. An RDS without a battery is just a piece of glass to look through. As much as I like my T2 Micro as an RDS, it’s useless if the battery goes down. That’s why the T2 is the only optic I own that doesn’t have an etched reticle. That’s why I love ACOG type optics over an RDS.
Makes sense - agreed it is hard to beat ACOG if money is not a factor. Thank you for your thoughtful response.

User avatar

Bitter Clinger
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 5
Posts: 2578
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2014 5:16 pm
Location: North Dallas

Re: Red Dot VS. Scope - choice for AR-15

#44

Post by Bitter Clinger » Wed Jan 09, 2019 2:58 pm

Here is my most recent. CAA (Israeli) Micro Roni brace for G19 with Vortex SPARC RDS. of course, if RDS fails can always just pull G19 out I reckon :eek6

Image
"You may all go to H3ll, and I will go to Texas." - Davy Crockett
"Fast is fine, but accuracy is everything." - Wyatt Earp
NRA Life Member
לעולם לא תשכח

User avatar

The Annoyed Man
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 9
Posts: 24724
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 12:59 pm
Location: North Richland Hills, Texas
Contact:

Re: Red Dot VS. Scope - choice for AR-15

#45

Post by The Annoyed Man » Thu Jan 10, 2019 1:57 pm

montgomery wrote:
Wed Jan 09, 2019 10:32 am
Makes sense - agreed it is hard to beat ACOG if money is not a factor. Thank you for your thoughtful response.
You’re certainly welcome. But don’t overlook options like the Primary Arms or Burris fixed or variable magnification optics for ARs as a viable alternative to the Trijicon. They may run on batteries for illumination, but they do have etched reticles with a valid bullet drop compensator regulated for the .223/5.56 cartridge. I have owned both companies’ options now (a fixed 5x powered Burris Prism sight, and a 1-6x PA scope, and I have to say that I prefer the PA reticle. But my ACOG is better than either. It’s notable that Trijicon now offers an ACOG using Primary Arms’ ACSS reticle, so there is something to it, and if I were able to buy the same ACOG today but with the ACSS reticle, I’d choose that one even over the TA31F reticle I currently have.
Image
Bitter Clinger wrote:
Wed Jan 09, 2019 2:58 pm
Here is my most recent. CAA (Israeli) Micro Roni brace for G19 with Vortex SPARC RDS. of course, if RDS fails can always just pull G19 out I reckon :eek6

Image
I was happy when they brought out the pistol version of that chassis, because I had no desire to permanently convert my Glock pistol into a registered SBR. I guess that now you can get a “folding” Glock 19 that makes it even easier to fold the whole thing up. I am kicking around the idea of a building a 9mm AR pistol that will take Glock magazines. Alternatively, I might build a 9mm upper and add a mag-well adapter for my already registered SBR. I kind of like the idea of a multiple caliber platform on a single lower. BUT ... and this is the main reason I haven’t sprung for the Micro Roni brace ... I don’t see a practical benefit to a long gun / hand gun fusion unless one takes advantage of the ability to have a longer barrel for better ballistics - and the Roni doesn’t provide that. Whether I build or buy, I want at least an 8” barrel, if not longer, AND I want to be able to mount my pistol suppressor on it.

LONG before the ATF or the NFA existed, people who carried a pistol and a rifle in the same caliber didn’t buy rifles with the same barrel length as their pistols, and for a good reason. It wasn’t enough to just get a more stable shooting position, but a longer barrel gave improved terminal ballistics (and range), and a longer sight radius improved accuracy. Hence the development for example of lever action rifles and pistols chambered in .45 Long Colt. Of course there were compromises, like the mounting of a carbine stock onto a Mauser pistol.

So it seems to me that, at any range at which I am likely to deploy a firearm chambered in a pistol caliber which I already carry, it makes more sense to have either an SBR or carbine which takes my pistol’s magazines. I already own a Keltec Sub-2000, but I’m a little frustrated with a couple of its “features” like unacceptable accuracy. I can actually shoot my G17 more accurately than I can the Sub-2K with the G17 magazines in it, and that’s just ridiculous. So the only benefit it has is greater velocity, but that velocity is meaningless if it doesn’t hit where you want it to. If I regulary carried my .357 revolver, I’d just go get myself a .357 lever action and be done with it. Likewise my .44 magnum revolver (which I never carry). I made the decision for a number of reasons a while back to carry 9mm Glock pistols. So, a long gun chambered in 9mm that accepts my Glock mags is what I’ve settled on, and my principle inner debate is over whether to buy/build a dedicated 9mm AR pistol that takes Glock mags, or to buy/build a 9mm upper + mag-well adapter to fit my existing SBR.
Give me Liberty, or I'll get up and get it myself.—Hookalakah Meshobbab
I don't carry because of the odds, I carry because of the stakes.—The Annoyed Boy

Post Reply

Return to “General Gun, Shooting & Equipment Discussion”