TexasCHLforum.com

One of my 1911's started life as a Springfield 9X23 and now has a 9mm barrel and a 38Super barrel fitted. After shooting a friend's 1911 45ACP with a Deltapoint Pro, I decided to have one milled into the slide of my every-changing Springfield 1911. I got it back about 10 days ago and I've put about 500 rds though it. I love it, but there were some surprises. Here are my observations:

Proper and consistent presentation of the gun is critical:
The biggest problem people have when learning to use a red dot sight is "hunting for the dot." The key is presenting the gun properly every time. If you do, then the dot will be there. If you don't you'll be hunting for the dot and you'll probably give up thinking it's too slow. You don't have to learn a different presentation, unless the dot sight is mounted significantly higher than the iron sights.

Focus on the target, not the screen or dot:
I have been shooting handguns for so long, I thought it was going to be very difficult to transition to focusing on the target/threat, rather than the dot. It wasn't difficult at all. I got the 7.5MOA triangle (delta) and I did catch myself focusing on the top tip of the triangle when zeroing the sight at 25 yds. However, once I had a zero, it came natural to focus on the target and visualize the dot superimposed on my focus point. A common problem for people trying to transition to a red dot is to focus on the dot and try to move it to the desired point of impact on the target. This habit must be broken if a red dot is to live up to its potential.

Sight in at 25 yds, then test it at various distances, including CQB:
I made the mistake of first zeroing at 15 yds. My thought process was to sight in at that relatively close range to make it appropriate for CQB engagements and IDPA matches. The results were not good and the variation in POA/POI was far too broad. My SWAT buddy told me to zero at 25 yds, using the tip of the triangle, then test at closer ranges, We shoot a lot of head shots in IDPA matches, so it's especially important to see where it hits in view of the new 4" circle in the head.

Sights fool you into thinking you can hold the gun still; the dot tells you the truth:
A big surprise was seeing the red triangle moving significantly more than my fiber optic front sight. Did I say moving? No, it was running all over!! To say that was distracting would be a gross understatement. However, it was a blessing disguise. Once you realize that you aren't as stable as you believed, you get back to basics. It truly is a training aid. (I'm shooting my "regular" handguns better because I'm paying more attention to the trigger.) I forced myself to slow down (that wasn't easy), get the hits, then speed up again with the triangle arc much smaller. Calling your shots are much easier, which can be a benefit in IDPA matches. With my regular sights, it may be hard if not impossible to determine if I need to take a make-up shot. With the dot/triangle, I know as soon as I break the shot.

Don't need special shooting glasses with magnification:
When practicing and during matches, I use different types of shooting glasses with magnification on my dominant eye. This makes the front sight crisp, while not making the target any more blurry. (That's the benefit of having magnification only on the dominant eye.) The obvious downside is that I won't be wearing these special glasses if I'm forced to shoot in self-defense whether at home or elsewhere. Using a red dot/triangle means I don't need any special glasses. In fact, using magnification makes the triangle blurry. I'm either going to have a Deltapoint Pro milled into one of my Commanders, or I'm going to try a SIG P320 RX.

Why a Commander or P320 you may ask? I have always thought that a Commander length 1911 is the best balanced handgun. However, I've always carried a Gov't Model (5" barrel) because the extra 3/4" to 1" additional sight radius helped. Since that's not an issue when using a red dot sight, I'm going to start carrying a shorter, better balanced handgun. The SIG P320 Compact has a 3.9" barrel, so it's very close to a Kimber Pro Carry and only slightly shorter than a Commander. The obvious downside to the P320 is the trigger compared to the gold-standard 1911 trigger.

Red dot sights are not an instant cure for bad habits:
I've talked to people who tried a red dot sight and expected it to make them an excellent shot after the first shooting session. It can be a near instant success, but only if you are an experienced shooter who presents the handgun properly and consistently every time. "Hunting for the dot" is what drives most people away without really trying to hone the skills necessary to shoot regular sights or a red dot well.

I will not introduce my basic students to red dot sights until they have master proper and consistent presentation of the gun. There's simply no reason to do so that early. Doing so would also deprive them of the opportunity and incentive to master the use of regular sights. Once they do reach a skill level I believe is appropriate, I plan to have every student at least try a red dot sight. As many experienced instructors are saying, I believe red dot sights are the way of the future. While the SIG P320 RX is pioneering the factory equipped red dot handgun, I suspect other manufacturers will follow suit. In just a few years, I suspect red dot sights will be the norm for concealed-carry.

In summary, I believe red dot sights on a handgun are an excellent option, especially for old eyes or younger folks with less than perfect vision. Just be sure to take the time to learn how to use it. If possible, get training from an instructor who can help you make the transition faster.

Chas.

Interesting thoughts about stability and presentation. I've been working on a drill that may well sound quite dumb, but I think I'm getting some good out of it with my old-timey iron sights.

For the past year or so I've been working to acquire the front sight quicker. Every time I disarm I draw as if to fire, at somewhat less than flank speed, and practice getting the front sight on target. Naturally, this is done with the trigger finger straight and outside the trigger guard. In addition to respect for sheetrock and the clock I usually aim at, I want the decision to place my finger on the trigger a separate thought process from anything else.

About half the time I'd do this draw-and-acquire drill with my eyes shut, working to cause the front sight to be bracketed by the rear sight when I open my eyes. I can do that, some. Not reliably.

A month or so ago I got to thinking I was really practicing point shooting, which isn't my cup of tea. It's a great thing if you can do it, but I can't. In my draw drill I wasn't thinking about where my index finger or hand was pointing as much as I was trying to get my wrist to come full stop at the right place, at the right angle to place the front sight where needed.

An alternative approach that seems to be working in dry-fire practice is to get a fix on where the front sight is at the moment I secure my grip. I look at the target, my mind's eye gets a lock on where the front sight is even though it is outside my field of view. I know what the gun looks like and the spatial relationship between my hand and the front sight. Sort of like acquiring the front sight when the gun is still holstered.

Instead of aiming my hand at the target, expecting the front sight to be on target by default, I pilot the front sight as I perceive it to be without yet seeing it, to my line of eyeball sight to the target. It seems to work. I don't hunt to find the sight because I've been watching it, metaphorically, since it was still in the holster.

We do this sort of thing all the time. You approach the door, you have a fix on where the doorknob is, but maybe you look away before you reach out to grab the knob. You can't see the front sight when it's still in the leather, but you can know where it is, nonetheless.

'Course, doorknobs don't shoot back but I think there is some validity to leveraging spatial recognition without actual visual cues.

At least I hope so. Can't wait to get to the range and punch a few holes in a target. And, yes, I do enjoy overthinking things!

Charles L. Cotton wrote: Sights fool you into thinking you can hold the gun still; the dot tells you the truth:

Yeah it does. I tried a relatively inexpensive laser a few years ago and did not like it at all for several of the same reasons you listed in this category.

I may revisit this technology again sometime and if I do I'll give it more time and see if I can't work through my issues.

Glad to hear it worked out. I myself have been on the fence about trying a red dot. They only problem I have on a defense pistol and one I may carry is that the majority are battery powered. I don't like trusting a battery. I know the trijicons don't need one and you can get some that turn on when they are brought into light but what if it's dark and bad what if it needs light to charge it? That is also my speculation with lights and lasers. Idk I've also been an iron sights only kind of guy pistol wise. I love red dots on my AR for shooting but prefer a scope or etched reticle in case of a battery goes dead. I know there are a lot of great companies that make lights and lasers I just am not willing to make the jump. But I'm glad you are enjoying it!

Charles L. Cotton wrote:
Proper and consistent presentation of the gun is critical:
The biggest problem people have when learning to use a red dot sight is "hunting for the dot." The key is presenting the gun properly every time. If you do, then the dot will be there. If you don't you'll be hunting for the dot and you'll probably give up thinking it's too slow. You don't have to learn a different presentation, unless the dot sight is mounted significantly higher than the iron sights.

Great post. The above has been my problem. I have a Trijicon on a Glock 19 and I couldn't get the hang of it. Now back to the range.

Thank you for the informative post. Your insight on the Delta Point has answered many of my questions and will be a great help when I try another sight such as this.

Any reason you chose Deltapoint over the Trijicon RMR or Vortex red dots?

cmgee67 wrote:I love red dots on my AR for shooting but prefer a scope or etched reticle in case of a battery goes dead. I know there are a lot of great companies that make lights and lasers I just am not willing to make the jump.

I agree completely for a rifle. That or backup iron sights.

For a pistol, it depends on several things, not least the intended use. If the battery dies, one can use Ayoob's stress fire index or similar techniques, with some loss of precision. The big question is whether the benefits when the dot works outweigh the downside when it doesn't.

mrvmax wrote:Any reason you chose Deltapoint over the Trijicon RMR or Vortex red dots?

There are three reasons for my decision. First, it was the recommendation of my retired SWAT friend who has had extensive experience with red dot sights. Secondly, the battery location. The Deltapoint Pro battery case is accessed from the top and the RMR from the bottom. That means the RMR must be removed to change the battery. (I plan to change the battery monthly, although that is clearly overkill.) The final factor was cost. I found the Deltapoint for $326 v. about $500 for the RMR.

Chas.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:There are three reasons for my decision. First, it was the recommendation of my retired SWAT friend who has had extensive experience with red dot sights. Secondly, was battery location. The Deltapoint Pro battery case is accessed from the top and the RMR from the bottom. That means the RMR must be removed to change the battery. (I plan to change the battery monthly, although that is clearly overkill.) The final factor was cost. I found the Deltapoint for $326 v. about $500 for the RMR.

Chas.

That is good information. I would almost certainly go right to Trijicon for a pistol mounted red dot as I have not heard much about Deltapoint. I will definitely give them a good hard look after hearing about your experience. Thanks!

karder wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:There are three reasons for my decision. First, it was the recommendation of my retired SWAT friend who has had extensive experience with red dot sights. Secondly, was battery location. The Deltapoint Pro battery case is accessed from the top and the RMR from the bottom. That means the RMR must be removed to change the battery. (I plan to change the battery monthly, although that is clearly overkill.) The final factor was cost. I found the Deltapoint for $326 v. about $500 for the RMR.

Chas.

That is good information. I would almost certainly go right to Trijicon for a pistol mounted red dot as I have not heard much about Deltapoint. I will definitely give them a good hard look after hearing about your experience. Thanks!

Be sure to research the Deltapoint Pro, not the earlier Deltapoint. Several improvements were made in the Pro version.

Chas.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

mrvmax wrote:Any reason you chose Deltapoint over the Trijicon RMR or Vortex red dots?

There are three reasons for my decision. First, it was the recommendation of my retired SWAT friend who has had extensive experience with red dot sights. Secondly, the battery location. The Deltapoint Pro battery case is accessed from the top and the RMR from the bottom. That means the RMR must be removed to change the battery. (I plan to change the battery monthly, although that is clearly overkill.) The final factor was cost. I found the Deltapoint for $326 v. about $500 for the RMR.

Chas.

Thanks, eventually I'm going to have my G29 slide milled for a red dot but I haven't made it far enough to research what red dot to use. I'll keep those things in mind.

From what Charles said about the dot running all over the place I thought he was talking about a laser.

I don't understand how the dot on an RDS will run or dance around. Is it different on a handgun than on a rifle or carbine?

mrvmax wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

mrvmax wrote:Any reason you chose Deltapoint over the Trijicon RMR or Vortex red dots?

There are three reasons for my decision. First, it was the recommendation of my retired SWAT friend who has had extensive experience with red dot sights. Secondly, the battery location. The Deltapoint Pro battery case is accessed from the top and the RMR from the bottom. That means the RMR must be removed to change the battery. (I plan to change the battery monthly, although that is clearly overkill.) The final factor was cost. I found the Deltapoint for $326 v. about $500 for the RMR.

Chas.

Thanks, eventually I'm going to have my G29 slide milled for a red dot but I haven't made it far enough to research what red dot to use. I'll keep those things in mind.

You're welcome to shoot mine before buying if you like.

Chas.

C-dub wrote:
From what Charles said about the dot running all over the place I thought he was talking about a laser.

I don't understand how the dot on an RDS will run or dance around. Is it different on a handgun than on a rifle or carbine?

The dot cannot actually be moving more than the front sight on a handgun, so it's a matter of perception. I'm speculating, but I think it's a matter of focusing on the target rather than the front sight. When we focus on the front sight through the rear sight, I don't think we can appreciate the amount of movement of the muzzle. Focusing on the target while superimposing the red dot (triangle in my case) on the target makes it possible to better appreciate muzzle movement. Then again, my theory might be totally wrong!

The only difference between a red dot on a rifle v. pistol in terms of movement is the fact that a shoulder-fired weapon can be held with greater stability. I have red dots on a couple of my AR-15s and the movement of the dot on the target doesn't compare to my 1911. I fired another 200 rds today and I'm greatly reducing the arc of the dot/triangle on the target. The dot is not only faster, it's a great training aid.

Sorry if my post was confusing on this issue.

Chas.