New Shooters: Start with red dot or irons?

[jkcerda]

since this conversation started last week or the week before I did actually find a slide I had with irons to go test it since I haven't shot irons in years and it was very anticlimactic. It wasn't hard it just felt really outdated and obsolete. I feel like the real difference is that if you are shooting fast you are relying much more on the feel of your index because you really just can't see your aiming system while staying target focused very well. Shooting slow it's just whatever, if you can't figure it out you can't shoot in the first place. But I think it would be no different than just taking the battery out of my dot and practicing that way. I don't think there is anything special about irons that makes it necessary to learn on them for a period of time, shooting is shooting.

thread is about "new" shooters.

you my friend have muscle memory............

Irons just like a standard car are a great thing to learn shall you ever find yourself with only that option.

 

[ikeo1]

I think if I was just starting, I’d probably get a pistol with a dot and just train that. I would get proficient faster because of that. But I also think there’s benefit to knowing irons just for purposes of being able to pick up any gun and shoot it well.

Save this question for Mason . He’s a nationals and world champ in both Limited & Production. It’ll be a fun Q

 

[Deleted member 16735]

thread is about "new" shooters.

you my friend have muscle memory............

Irons just like a standard car are a great thing to learn shall you ever find yourself with only that option.

I get what you mean but I've been shooting a dot for ten years and I'm not sure I ever even actually "learned" how to shoot with irons because once I got a dot I never really used irons again in any serious way, only when I got a new gun and needed to get it cut for an optic. I'm just saying I don't think its honestly that different and it's certainly not required or better for a new shooter to spend months on irons before getting a dot

 

[Negol]

My advice is run what you're gonna use. I always co-witness my sights though so... just sayin

 

[weaverftw]

Save this question for Mason . He’s a nationals and world champ in both Limited & Production. It’ll be a fun Q

I will! I’m also shooting production right now so would love to get his perspective and advice on whether to stick with that or switch to CO or LO. I will definitely bring it up.

 

[Smittty]

New shooters definitely iron sights.

I'm 56 and only recently got a dot sight for one of my rifles, everything else still irons.

Years ago, I won a competition with irons while every other shooter had already switched to optics. After I ran the course, I realized my dual aperture rear sight had flipped to the halfway mark making it all but useless so somehow, I ran that without a rear sight. I must have held my cheek weld so consistently that only the front sight mattered.

 

[Gawernator]

Glad I learned with iron sights. It's like learning a stick shift manual

 

[john_marsten_1873]

Maybe. I think a lot of new gun owners are pushed towards using a dot on their first gun. Couple that with the fact that so many new pistols come optic ready, and tons of people want “the best” right out of the gate, there are clearly more people nowadays who will start and stay with dots than in the

Most people are buying their first pistols at local FFL’s and big box stores. They look at what’s on display/in-stock, asking the clerk’s what the best options are. They’re coming onto the range with their brand new pistol still with the factory grease. By the time they get there, many have forgotten how to lock the slide back.

Those stores don’t often carry pistols with dot packages and most store employees aren’t telling them to buy a red dot along with it. They don’t want to wait another week(s) to get it mounted anyway.

Even if it comes with a dot attached, they still wouldn’t know to pull the screws, Loctite and torque them, then going to the range to at least confirm zero (or how to do so).

When they do get a dot - often, earlier than they should’ve - they’re still just throwing rounds down range and wondering why they’re shooting low-left. All of a sudden those groups are opening up past 10yds and then “I think the dot is off, can you check for me?”

I’ll see them a month(s) later, shooting the same, still no plan for improvement. Not training presentation, 1-reload-1…or anything, still don’t know how to prep the trigger or even grip the gun properly.

While a dot is easier shoot - especially if you just leave it at aim and dump rounds - it’s certainly a more complex system with an additional level of understanding and maintenance.

If you’re just shooting a pistol for your first time or have minimal experience, there’s a an added level of complexity that’s just unnecessary and could even slow progress.

Unless a new shooter has someone to guide or support them they should hold off on the dot. They should spend that time on learning how to clean and maintain their firearm, developing fundamentals with consistent presentation, and at least how to diagnose some if the basic issues, common with new shooters.

Also, a lot of them are “upgrading” parts too soon and don’t know how to diagnose malfunctions.

If you’re just a hobby shooter then go ahead and waste ammo. But if folks are planning to use it for defense especially, they should build those fundamentals before adding complexity of a dot system.

 

[Least Deranged Nowi Fan]

My opinion is red dot. at least for longarms. You can watch your dot jerk to the side if you jerk the trigger, it gives you instant feedback that you're doing something wrong. Since they're parallax-free, new shooters can factor out needing a perfect cheekweld. The floating dot also means you don't need to figure out all the different styles of irons like Buckhorn, 3 dot, heinie straight 8, AK notch, HK drum, 6 o'clock vs center vs combat holds etc. Just put that dot on the middle and pull the trigger.

 

[peahi2]

you gotta learn fundamentals—-> irons.
What if you never learn to use irons and then your optic craps out and you don’t know how to use the backup iron sights?

One should have least have a basic idea of how things work.
Me, I love irons but my eyes are degrading normally with age so now my guns are mostly with optics.

Funny fact, when shooting 45 acp 1911s, I shoot more accurately at 25 yards with iron sights. Way better than any of my 9mm 1911s or striker guns; all having optics. And it’s important to confess it’s all a blur, but I give it 110% intense focus on front sight. Of course a big part of this is the gun (high end 45 acp 1911s).

 

[john_marsten_1873]

Another variable to this is what constitutes a “new shooter”.

Perhaps the lowest bar I’ve seen (regularly as an RSO) is someone who just purchased sprung their very first pistol from jail and headed to the range, by themselves, never having shot a pistol before.

For myself, I hadn’t shot in more than a decade (before last February), never faster than 1rd/3s, under 500rds lifetime, never any real training. Luckily, I had some of the RSO’s help me and started training soon after. While I was doing a lot of training I was also adding a lot of complexity too soon like a dot, and upgraded parts. I wasn’t able to self-diagnose when I wasn’t shooting well so I just got rid of all the extra stuff until I built a stronger foundation.

There’s also a cohort of folks who have been shooting for at least a year but have never shot rapid fire or very few times. So they’ve never really worked on stance and a grip that can manage recoil. They probably wouldn’t call themselves a new shooter. They even bring others to the range and “teach” them how to shoot. But I’d certainly be concerned for innocent bystanders if they’re using their firearms for defense.

 

[Makoman]

Ok so many gun owners now will NEVER have a pistol with iron sights. Do you agree they should start with a dot? In think dots are inherently easier and better, so if that’s all you’re going to own, just start there. You get faster feedback and can train on what you’ll use from the start.

If you intended to also have iron sights on your guns, start with irons.

I learned with irons and am glad I did, as it taught me good trigger control, presentation, etc. any now I can pick up anything and be proficient. But I get the argument to just start with a dot if you are planning on having a dot on all your HD/CCW/range guns.

I don't disagree with you that they are fundamentally better. I shot with an optic for the first time last year and it was a game changer for my middle aged eyes. I just feel that having irons that can co-witness through your optic are still the standard, as @john_marsten_1873 stated. If the optic fails for whatever reason in a SD situation and a person is unable to shoot with their co-witnessing irons, a bad situation is highly likely to turn worse, especially if panic sets in when they realize they are now unable to aim. I certainly wouldn't want them shooting wildly in a "spray and pray" fashion in that type of situation in the hopes that they'll hit their assailant if they are out in public.

Will the optic fail? Probably not. I don't buy into the arguments that optics frequently fail, not the ones from reputable manufacturers anyway. Fixed sights can fail too. I've had front sights come loose on me a few times in my life. I want to say I've had a rear sight drift on me once as well. If there's, say, a less than 2% chance of iron sights failing, I'd say that optics, even being more complicated with their lenses and electronics etc. probably have a less than 5% chance of failing, probably even less. But, speaking for myself, I always like to think in terms of worst case scenarios. That way of thinking might not be for everyone, but it's my way of thinking and makes sense to me. Everyone needs to make that decision for themselves. I've simply stated my reasoning for why I feel the way that I do.

As for being easier to use, I also agree with a caveat. For me ease of use also means being able to properly mount and zero the optic myself. Anytime you remove the optic, you should be testing it after remounting to confirm zero, and re-zero if necessary. I could never put something on my SD firearm that would require me to go to a gunsmith anytime I might have to remove and reinstall it.

My 2¢ and this is what works and makes sense to me. It may not for you and that's fine. Everyone is different. It would be a pretty boring world if we all thought the same way.

Like you, I also started with irons. Kind of had to since as a Gen X'r I didn't have much choice lol.

 

[Makoman]

Young people = red dot | irons
Gen X = both
Older = iron | red dot
Old eyes = red dot

When everyone buys their next firearm it’s always irons first. A lot of people buy dots and don’t sight them in.

If you’re in long enough both.

I agree with this assessment. I feel it's pretty spot on.

 

[Deleted member 16735]

I don't disagree with you that they are fundamentally better. I shot with an optic for the first time last year and it was a game changer for my middle aged eyes. I just feel that having irons that can co-witness through your optic are still the standard, as @john_marsten_1873 stated. If the optic fails for whatever reason in a SD situation and a person is unable to shoot with their co-witnessing irons, a bad situation is highly likely to turn worse, especially if panic sets in when they realize they are now unable to aim. I certainly wouldn't want them shooting wildly in a "spray and pray" fashion in that type of situation in the hopes that they'll hit their assailant if they are out in public.

Will the optic fail? Probably not. I don't buy into the arguments that optics frequently fail, not the ones from reputable manufacturers anyway. Fixed sights can fail too. I've had front sights come loose on me a few times in my life. I want to say I've had a rear sight drift on me once as well. If there's, say, a less than 2% chance of iron sights failing, I'd say that optics, even being more complicated with their lenses and electronics etc. probably have a less than 5% chance of failing, probably even less. But, speaking for myself, I always like to think in terms of worst case scenarios. That way of thinking might not be for everyone, but it's my way of thinking and makes sense to me. Everyone needs to make that decision for themselves. I've simply stated my reasoning for why I feel the way that I do.

As for being easier to use, I also agree with a caveat. For me ease of use also means being able to properly mount and zero the optic myself. Anytime you remove the optic, you should be testing it after remounting to confirm zero, and re-zero if necessary. I could never put something on my SD firearm that would require me to go to a gunsmith anytime I might have to remove and reinstall it.

My 2¢ and this is what works and makes sense to me. It may not for you and that's fine. Everyone is different. It would be a pretty boring world if we all thought the same way.

Just for fun, try turning off or taking the battery out of your dot and use the base as an index to sight with. Some dots actually have an actual sight mark on the base but even without, it's perfectly easy to index off of just the red dot housing, the housing base, the housing base and the front of the gun, or even if the dot flies off and you have no sights to use just the top of the slide. I had my dot die during a match stage once and I didn't even index anything I just did it by "feel" because it just happened in the moment and I was already half done, and I got a few extra mikes but I certainly didn't end up in a situation where I couldn't aim at all.

 

[weaverftw]

I don't disagree with you that they are fundamentally better. I shot with an optic for the first time last year and it was a game changer for my middle aged eyes. I just feel that having irons that can co-witness through your optic are still the standard, as @john_marsten_1873 stated. If the optic fails for whatever reason in a SD situation and a person is unable to shoot with their co-witnessing irons, a bad situation is highly likely to turn worse, especially if panic sets in when they realize they are now unable to aim. I certainly wouldn't want them shooting wildly in a "spray and pray" fashion in that type of situation in the hopes that they'll hit their assailant if they are out in public.

Will the optic fail? Probably not. I don't buy into the arguments that optics frequently fail, not the ones from reputable manufacturers anyway. Fixed sights can fail too. I've had front sights come loose on me a few times in my life. I want to say I've had a rear sight drift on me once as well. If there's, say, a less than 2% chance of iron sights failing, I'd say that optics, even being more complicated with their lenses and electronics etc. probably have a less than 5% chance of failing, probably even less. But, speaking for myself, I always like to think in terms of worst case scenarios. That way of thinking might not be for everyone, but it's my way of thinking and makes sense to me. Everyone needs to make that decision for themselves. I've simply stated my reasoning for why I feel the way that I do.

As for being easier to use, I also agree with a caveat. For me ease of use also means being able to properly mount and zero the optic myself. Anytime you remove the optic, you should be testing it after remounting to confirm zero, and re-zero if necessary. I could never put something on my SD firearm that would require me to go to a gunsmith anytime I might have to remove and reinstall it.

My 2¢ and this is what works and makes sense to me. It may not for you and that's fine. Everyone is different. It would be a pretty boring world if we all thought the same way.

Like you, I also started with irons. Kind of had to since as a Gen X'r I didn't have much choice lol.

I don’t think I would ever take a gun to a gunsmith to mount or zero a red dot, or I would turn in my man card.

I also like to prepare for the worst case, and used to worry about a dot failing and needing to use backup irons, but what I’ve discovered is that with a little practice you can get accurate shots in a small area up to 15 yards with just point shooting or using the front sight, no cowitness needed. I am about to get 2 slides milled and am not even getting BUIs in them because I am confident that any legit self defense scenario will be within the range that I can still shoot accurately even in rapid fire without the dot or irons. I get the hesitancy and the desire for redundancy, though.

 

[Sheepdog1968]

Early GenXer. I grew up on iron sights and started shooting at an early age. By the time red dots on pistols came about, I had been shooting for over 30 years. Tried them and did not like it required to change well established changes in pistol presentation to pick up them up. I have XS big dot front sight and v notch rear and am as happy as a clam with these. As such no want or need for red dots. I don’t mind those who have them or love them. Just not for me. HOWEVER, if I were starting over, or teaching a new shooter, I would absolutely start on red dots. There is plenty to learn when shooting at first and if I can remove the added burden of iron sights onto a new shooter that is a good thing. After they got comfortable, I would then introduce iron sights. Most distances and situations for self defense outside or inside the home could likely be done by some sort of form of point shooting if needed so I’m not overly worried about red dots failing when needed. If you haven’t tried point shooting you should just to see what you are capable of and then decide.

 

[MunnyShot]

Shooting in general is a diminishing skill and a RDS just adds to that equation. If you have the time to put in the dry/live fire practice you'll be GTG. Just know doing steps 3-5 in a 5 point draw will be more beneficial than trying to shot 1 tiny group just staring through your RDS. Most of your knowledge will be gained through 90% dryfire and then verified with live fire

 

[rodralig]

Haven’t visited this forum in about a week. Yeah, life gets in the way. Anyway... Something to stir the pot...

Going back to red dots and irons - how many people here are actually proficient with BOTH to the point where they can meaningfully speak to the differences?

Because sometimes these discussions sound like someone who’s never raced a car giving strong opinions on race cars. I mean, I once had a colleague talking about knee-dragging in motorcycle racing when he’d never even dragged a knee himself, much have an M1 license.

You can read specs, watch videos, and repeat what others say, but until you’ve actually driven both hard enough to feel the difference, the opinion is mostly theory.

Just a thought....

 

[Gawernator]

Haven’t visited this forum in about a week. Yeah, life gets in the way. Anyway... Something to stir the pot...

Going back to red dots and irons - how many people here are actually proficient with BOTH to the point where they can meaningfully speak to the differences?

Because sometimes these discussions sound like someone who’s never raced a car giving strong opinions on race cars. I mean, I once had a colleague talking about knee-dragging in motorcycle racing when he’d never even dragged a knee himself, much have an M1 license.

You can read specs, watch videos, and repeat what others say, but until you’ve actually driven both hard enough to feel the difference, the opinion is mostly theory.

Just a thought....

Hah... and then eventually you learn dragging knee is extremely easy, going fast is 100x more than that

 

[rodralig]

Hah... and then eventually you learn dragging knee is extremely easy, going fast is 100x more than that

True that!!! #KeithCode