Help with Red Dot Sight Selection

[Timberline]

I have no experience with RED DOT sights on firearms, but would like to try a red dot of some sort on a number my handguns, from .22 LR to .45 ACP.

But oh my - where to start? There seems to be a mind boggling array of red dot-type sights available today, of various types. There are the lots of short, fat TUBE types. Many are relatively inexpensive. Then there is a growing selection of TUBELESS holo-type sights (Eotech, Bushnell, Docter, TruGlo, etc).

Have you tried any of these? What works best?

I’m borrowing a Zeiss Z-Point sight from a friend this weekend, and will give that a try. It seems like a great unit – compact, easy to operate and I’m told the dot is self-regulating for brightness based on conditions. Is the Zeiss Z-Point better than the various tubeless holo-type sights available today? How does it rank when compared to other tubed red dot sights?

I imagine that both tubed and tubeless sights possess advantages and disadvantages. What are they?

What about brands? What’s best in both tubed and tubeless?

Any assistance, comments or experiences you’d care to share that would help me better understand this unique category of sights would be much appreciated.

[imported_rooster]

I have the Eotech or Busnell Holosight on a 30-30 TC contender. I also have the holosight on my Mathews Switch back bow. I love these sights much better than the various red dots. YMMV. It would be worth your time to try them.

[Doc]

I have both the Docter Optics reflex sight (3.5 moa dot) and the Trijicon Reflex sight (?6.5 moa dot). Both work fine, the Trijicon has the advantage of no batteries, but the Docter is far smaller and lighter.
The only other one I have used is the Armson OEG, very rugged, but heavy.
Best of luck with your choice.

Cheers, Dave.

[Timberline]

Elmbow - I recall you've some experience with the Zeiss Z-Point. Have you also tried the various holo sights? Can you shed any light on tubed red dots sights versus the tubeless holo-type sights for handgun use, particularly on .22 handguns?

Ozarkrambler - Do you still swear by a tubeless Docter red dot on your Small Game Getter(Tactical Solutions) Deluxe?

[ozarkrambler]

Timberline, I still swear by the Dr. sight. If I could change anything about it it would be the size of the dot. I think the sight Patrick has on his Walther was a 2 min dot, which I thought gave me a little better sight picture, but I doubt that it would effect field shooting with a 22 pistol. I am trying to figure out a quick release attachement for the DR. sight so I can remove it if I want to, but I really don't know why. I guess it is the continual urge to tinker with things. I still think the ruger/tactical solutions combo is unbeatable. If I was to do it again I would go with the poly framed version due to its lighter weight, but this wasn't an option when I bought the steel frame. I liked the 8"bbl Elmbow had, but for field carry and such, I like my 6" the best. Good compromise between the 4 and 8.

I got a set of the CT laser grips today. I haven't shot with them yet but I put them on the 5" S&W mod 60 I got the other day and played with it out in the yard and first impressions are WOW! Dot is easily seen at 25-30 yds or in the top of a tree. Cool factor is way up there. Will shoot it later tonight. Waiting for the temps to drop below 102. Will report later.

Ozark

[ozarkrambler]

CT grip update. Just finished putting around 50 38s and 357s through the mod 60. Everyone needs a set of the Crimson Trace grips. After sighting in, I was easily hitting pop cans at 20 yds from the hip. Then shot a few at a milk jug at 80 yds, need to do a little more of this long range stuff but I did hit it 2 of 5 leaning against the picnic table. I think this holds a lot of promise. Not sure if I will put the Red dot on this gun if I can hit at 50-60 most of the time.

Only drawback, I got the small grips because this is my wifes set up, but I thnk I need the bigger set. Small set for concealed carry, large set for field use.

Ozark

[Patrick]

Hi guys--

I received an email prompt from Cleve about this thread, along with some Q's re my little P22. I'll answer here. Been very hectic lately; sorry about the paucity of my posts.

I own two Dokter and two JP Enterprises red dots. Had 'em on various pistols and rifles for quite a while, actually. They are both excellent sites. For me, far better than irons, even adjustable irons. Yes, even in broad daylite. And especially in low light. The JP is a bit tighter, minute-wise, tho the difference isn't that mattersome.

These flat plane sites, as compared to the tube type, are very, very much lighter, and more compact by far. Which is why I chose them...and will frankly continue to do so. I suppose my reasoning is that if a site weighs almost as much as a compact Leupold, I'll just go with the luepold. Curmudgeonly? Maybe so.

The little Walther needs an elevated ramp-like doo-hicky in order to use the JP red dot that's on there now. The slide is too short I suppose. Walther makes the adapter, and it was readily availble when I aquired my pistol. The "problem" with the adapter is that it elevates the site some two inches above bore line. Which means one has to guage distance to target quite accurately if the bullet is to arrive where wanted. I'm sited in at 18 yards--a good all-around small game distance. If the incipient supper is inside or outside that distance you must do some holding under or over. More so than with a "normal" site system. I've learned to do that.

The Walther is very accurate with ammo it likes. Currently that is CCI Stingers. Which is a good find, as standard velocity ammo lacks the velocity for clean kills from the stubby barrel of this little gun...I suppose about two inches. Even with the Stingers I'll ocassionally have to put two slugs into a critter to get the job done. Oftener than with other .22's, in other words. I'm getting about 1050 fps with the Stingers. Would like 1150. I'm considering trying some Aguilla (sp?) heavy stuff. Haven't got to it. Not sure why...I haven't lost any suppers yet.

The little Walther is very light weight. Twenty ounces complete with JP site. BTW, the JP is even lighter than the Dokter, tho only by less than an ounce (which still counts by my stern standards). With 11 rounds aboard the gun comes in at 21 1/2 oz. With the extra 10 shot magazine the 21 shot combo is 24 ounces. With enough extra loose ammo thrown in to comprise fifty shots the entire combo weighs 28 ounces. The whole lot fits very nicely in one of our standard Possibles Pouches. Which is where it rides. Not bad for fifty shots for the pot. Not bad at all.

I may still put together Ed T's lighter version of the Ruger set-up Ozark Rambler pioneered. Lower sites and a bit more velocity for those bull grouse around here. But heavier. Ah well, there always seem to be trade-offs, friends.

OK Cleve, there's my combined Report on both red dot sites and my sweet little Walther.

[Kokamo]

I have long thought about the use of red dot sights. I am curious about this Ruger set-up pioneered by Ozark Rambler. Would someone be kind enough to explain this setup to me? Any help would be appreciated.

[Timberline]

The Ruger setup referred to by Ozarkrambler is a Ruger semi-auto .22 LR pistol outfitted with an aftermarket, lightweight Tactical Solution Pac-Lite receiver and barrel. See http://www.tacticalsol.com/ .

The result is a relatively lightweight, highly accurate .22 pistol that is the devil on targets and small game. The Pac-Lite modification can also be had with optical-sight mounting rail, making the finished weapon especially suitable for red-dot sights.

Ozarkrambler built his Ruger/Tactical Solutions with a 6-inch Pac-Lite barrel on top of a Ruger Mark II 22 metal frame and topped it with a Docter tube-less red dot sight. He’s reported its weight, with a loaded magazine, at 33 ounces.

Elmbow has a very similar setup. His Ruger/Tactical Solutions sports an 8.5-inch Pac-Lite barrel on top of a Ruger Mark II 22 metal frame and when last seen it was topped with a lightweight Zeiss Z-Point tubed red-dot sight. I don’t recall him posting its loaded weight. Elmbow?

EdT built his Ruger/Tactical Solutions with a 4.5-inch Pac-Lite barrel on top of the newer Ruger Mark III 22/45 composite frame and equipped it with Docter tube-less red-dot sight. By the way, the newer Ruger Mark III 22/45 composite frame EdT chose is designed to feel more like a 911 pistol than the classic Ruger Mark II 22 metal frames. It is also in the neighborhood of 7 ounces lighter than the older metal frame models. I’m not sure EdT ever posted the loaded weight of his gun. EdT?

The idea, as I understand it, is to create a .22 LR weapon that is reasonably compact, lightweight and accurate. Many .22 handguns are compact. Some are surprisingly light in weight. But damn few are overly accurate in field situations – especially when used with iron sights and shot offhand at 20 yards or more. Even inexpensive .22 rifles can usually trounce most .22 handguns when it comes to practical, in-the-field accuracy at that sort of distance. But, of course, the rifles are much bigger and heavier. The Ruger/Tactical Solutions/Red-Dot Sight pistol route attempts to create a handy, light weapon that’s capable of delivering .22 rifle-like accuracy out to 20 yards and beyond.

It's a very cool concept.

[Huntsman22]

Hey Timberline. Just returned from a visit to my local wishlist emporium. They now have a red-dot sight made by surefire. It is surely surefire- like in the price dept.($230), but I was tendered a glowing review, of said sight on a glock. Don't know any of the particulars yet, other than it can rail mount. What keeno-beeno new .22 are ya comin' up with? Don

[panzertroop]

where is a good spot on the web to pick up doc optic reflex sights? Also looking for the mounting option for the Walther that Patrick mentioned. I have a P22 just laying around that could be a great game getter. Thanks!

[Patrick]

panzertroop, I have an FFL and so bought my rig and mount from Jerry's, a distributor. I'm not sure where you can get that little mount in the non-FFL world. I do think you'll like it. If your Walther is as inherently accurate as mine you'll be amazed at the difference as compared to iron sites.

[panzertroop]

I will check with my dealer and see if I can find one. Thanks

[Timberline]

Panzertroop - Apparently, the Walther P22 mount and various other P22 accessories can be ordered directly from Walther. See:
http://www.waltheramerica.com/WA_catalog...&highrange= (http://www.waltheramerica.com/WA_catalog.cfm?start=13&page=2&ctgr=4&keywords=&se archtype=&lowrange=&highrange=)
Click on the desired item to order.

[John Havard]

Does anyone have any first-hand experience with the Walther-brand rail-mounted laser sight for the P-22? It looks like a good system for putting grouse in the pot.

Also, does anyone have any first-hand experience with the Tactical Solutions compensators vis-a-vis their sound mitigation?

Thanks, John

[Countryboy]

John, the Walther laser is a peice of junk, in my experience. I had one on one of the early P22's(also less than appealing to me, as it was an ammo diva). I did not get good results with it, as it had a less-than-solid mounting assembly. I sold it to a guy I knew who just had to have one, and he got two weeks' use out of it before it gave out completely. I don't know what he ended up doing with it. I realize this thread is ancient, and you probably know by now, but I was doing research on sights for the Paclite, and Google puked this up! Figured I'd post about it for anybody's benefit who might be looking.

[William Clunie]

The ultimate in reliability is Trijicon (no batteries needed). On the other hand, I've got a CT lazer system (installed on the side of the grip) on a Glock 29 that works fine. I trust the long life batteries they use, and if they fail I still have my regular iron sights.

I've never used the "red dot" scopes in the dark of dawn or dusk. How well do they work in failing light?

[Countryboy]

I only have one Aimpoint, on an AR, and it is a phenomenal red dot sight. Varied intensity from bright enough for direct sunlight, to the almost undetectable at twilight, and a couple of NV settings, too. Can't speak to the rest.

[Take-a-knee]

I only have one Aimpoint, on an AR, and it is a phenomenal red dot sight. Varied intensity from bright enough for direct sunlight, to the almost undetectable at twilight, and a couple of NV settings, too. Can't speak to the rest.

An Aimpoint is the only dot sight that I have a lot of experience with, and it is all positive. When we first got issued ML2's and I saw how other GI's tossed their M4's around same as always, I said, "Well, these won't last very long". I never saw one go down. Fast roping, parachuting, banging them into door jambs on entrys. As long as you had a good battery, they worked. I worked north of Tikrit in Iraq, those who've been there know that's a moonscape, I was there in the summer, the Aimpoint was bright enough. I own an ML3 for my AR. I would look hard at that new "mini" aimpoint if reliability was an issue and I wanted something smaller for a handgun.

Firearms trainer Pat Rogers stated that he's seen a lot more Eotechs go down in his carbine classes than Aimpoints. Also, and this is huge in my mind, you can't put scope caps on eotech/holosights.

A friend of mine is wringing out Insight Technologies' new red dot, too soon to tell.

[Countryboy]

The reason I think the Eotechs dump before the Aimpoints is this: The Eotech uses microprocessor circuitry to operate, whereas the Aimpoint is simple electrical circuitry. Would one expect a laptop computer(except a Toughbook) to take the licking a military sight system does and survive? Not me. Which is why I do not, and will not, own a sight that uses a 'computer' to function.

[SLG]

The optics that have been mentioned here may be fine for light duty use, like most hunting and rambling. The aimpoint is really the only one of its kind that can withstand really rugged use. That goes for the micro T-1 as well, which is an incredible tool.

I am currently issued an eotech, and though it is performing well so far, I ran aimpoints for the last ten years, and in every country and under every condition I've been in with them, they have performed flawlessly. I've seen eotechs go down, both in training and in operations. Never saw or even heard of an aimpoint failing.

As far as laser grips go, though they are an awesome tool, I've been through half a dozen sets in the last 8 years or so, and none have held up long term. And that is with 9mm, not a more powerful round. I'm told that crimson trace is working on an improved system, but as of now, all they use is a tension adjustment, and it WILL lose zero at some point.

[Ron_A]

I have been using red dot sights since 1992 and have seen about every variety you can imagine. I have also had the opportunity to test them extensively in a wide variety of conditions.

For carbines etc. the Aimpoints seem to work the best in terms of ruggedness and reliability. Long battery life and the ability to leave it on for extended periods is probably the biggest reason to go to it. Downside of all tube sights is trying to look down the toilet paper tube when the charging bear or bad man with gun at very close yardages is shooting at you. Training and faith in your system of operating go a long way here.

For handgun, several manufacturers are showing their new micro sights mounted on handgun slides. Trijicon sent me a new one for testing that I will try out this year and see how it goes. I have seen some of the new micro sights crap out after limited use and had some do it to me. That being said, they are improving them and they may be viable at some point for rapid self defense. Downside to the minis is you have to take the cover off before use. If you leave it off, you drain the battery too fast.

Some of them now have auto-adjustable intensity via a photocell for changing light conditions. I am not satisfied with the brightness settings when going from one condition to another.

I have used a C-More sight on carbine and handgun. It is rugged and reliable and offers a super fast window for close quarter shooting. Downside is battery life compared to Aimpoint.

As for the no battery sights. Your mileage will vary. I find many have a filter in them that doesn't allow for good viewing when looking from bright sunlight into brushy shadows, darkened areas and shadows in general. They are not bright enough in fading light such as first hour or last light conditions when compared to a standard Aimpoint.


Eotechs don't work as well for rugged conditions but many in LE favor them and they do work. I would still take the Aimpoints for ruggedness and battery life.

Micro Hunter is good but window can be small if used on a handgun. For the M-4 or similar, mounting them a bit further out on the receiver or even an appropriate handguard allows wider use of the peripheral vision field, particularly on close up targets.

Hope this helps,

Ron_A