Who here has a red dot mounted on your carry gun?

[DMK]

I've searched the web and found good info from Aaron Cowan of Sage Dynamics, and others. I've seen some posts here, but most are a few years old and this is a rapidly evolving area right now since MRDS are still new technology for handguns.

I'm considering carrying a Holosun 507C on a CZ P10C for my EDC. I'm still putting the gun together and then will do some practice and testing before I get comfortable to depend on it.

So who here are using a red dot mounted on your concealed carry or duty gun? Do you have any tips, experiences to share? What is working for you? What is not working? What gun are you using, what RDS, etc?

 

[HiBC]

I have only minimal experience with a mini red dot on a handgun.I don't own one,just tried at the range a few times.
I'm old,and my eyes have gone pretty bad,so I find them interesting.

Also,the S+W Custom shop CORE guns allow clean,low mounting for a reasonable price.I'm not absolutely sure on this,but I think a 4 in bbl Shield 2.0 is even offered.

What seems to work is silencer height iron sights along with the red dot.

On a gun I don't own,I don't have the muscle memory down to just aquire the dot when I bring the gun up. I don't like looking for the dot. I can easily aquire the iron sights,and the dot floats above the irons. That works fine. CoWitness.

Its been I while since I did my research,but IIRC,some units can run maybe 3 yrs with the dot on full time on one battery. That may be inaccurate,but if you change your battery annually,it can be a no problem thing.

Some holsters are available.

IMO,there are enough positives I may get one in the future.

What I suggest you consider is those sights live in an absolutely brutal environment.Its similar to being mounted to a hammer head. They receive tremendous shock and G-forces. That's tough on optics and electronics.

I see you have selected "Holosun" I don't know the Holosun product,but I assume it is an "Affordable Asian Line". I do not predict reliability. One requirement of a CCW is reliability.

I would expect an appropriate CCW optic for a S+W CORE to cost me near what the pistol costs.

A few years back,the reliable choice was a "hardened" version of the Docter Optic sight. Docter USA would take the unit apart,hand solder all connections,then epoxy pot the unit. Those had a good reputation. These days,Trijicon and Leupold seem to be making good units. I'd give a "maybe" to the Burris units. I say that not as an expert,and not from experience. Its just an opnion I have formed from my personal research.

Springfield is offering a smaller carry pistol with integral low mount optic option now,too.

IMO,its a viable option,and it may be the trend of the future. The integrated package akes sense. I'll likely try t.

I'd expect to pay $500 + for the sight. I'd do more research before I bought.
For myself,"Bargain Asian" optics would not be an option,though I realize the name brand optics I mentioned might be made anywhere.

I would expect "Carry Optic" class competition will sort out what optics can hack it,what the winners use,etc to help make the choices.

 

[MTT TL]

I've toyed with them but I have found they are just too bulky and oddly shaped for a CCW.

In open carry many of these problems are easier to deal with but I don't really open carry enough to make it worth my while for any marginal gain I might get out of it.

Very few police agencies approve of their use. Most require special holsters, extra training, and the sight is not issued and must be purchased by the officer. These are common sense measures for police agencies but discourage their use among officers. Again, all for marginal gain.

 

[Gary Gill]

I have a Glock 17 with a Holosun 507c-GR. The 32 moa is fairly easy to pick up on. I am still practising on the range and I suspect I will carry it soon.

 

[stagpanther]

I bought a fast fire with new sights matched to the extra height needed to put on my Glock 20--total flop for me as I found it nearly impossible to get the dot into the field of view quickly--even with the added height sights. I'm not sure--but red dots calling themselves red dots but are actually reflex/HUD type sights are not the same as a "true" red dot--in other words cowitnessing is mandatory.

 

[labhound]

I have two Glock 19 MOS with Burris Fastfire 3 red dots on them that I shoot IDPA matches with. While red dots are great for competition shooting, I have reservations about using them on a self defense gun. Co-witness sights aren't necessary as practice presenting the gun will put the dot consistently on the target. There are three main problems with using a red dot. One being the batteries will eventually become weak causing the sight to fail at the most inconvenient time. The second is the battery cap can become loose again causing failures. The last problem is the screws holding the sight onto the slide, even when loctite is used, can become loose and the sight will wobble or even fall off. Given the pounding the sights take, they are remarkedly reliable, but can fail from the shock of the pounding slide
. Regular changing of the batteries, checking the battery cap to see if it is on tight, and making sure the mounting screws are not loose will prevent most problems. A good red dot made by Burris or Vortex can be had for around $200. Given all this, I prefer to have Trijicon HD night sights on my carry guns and leave the red dots for my competition guns.

 

[DMK]

What I suggest you consider is those sights live in an absolutely brutal environment.Its similar to being mounted to a hammer head. They receive tremendous shock and G-forces. That's tough on optics and electronics.

I see you have selected "Holosun" I don't know the Holosun product,but I assume it is an "Affordable Asian Line". I do not predict reliability. One requirement of a CCW is reliability.

I would expect an appropriate CCW optic for a S+W CORE to cost me near what the pistol costs.

A few years back,the reliable choice was a "hardened" version of the Docter Optic sight. Docter USA would take the unit apart,hand solder all connections,then epoxy pot the unit. Those had a good reputation. These days,Trijicon and Leupold seem to be making good units. I'd give a "maybe" to the Burris units. I say that not as an expert,and not from experience. Its just an opnion I have formed from my personal research.

OK, so we're talking about concealed carry or duty use here, not range toys and you are absolutely right that the optic needs to be able to take a lot of abuse.

Keep in mind that there are two factors to consider: reliability and durability. Some optics are durable but not reliable and some are reliable but not durable.

Reliability is will the dot function every single time you need it? Will the buttons fail? Also, what is the battery life in real use?

Durability is will the optic be destroyed by the beating it takes from the slide reciprocating? Will it hold a zero from being banged around? Will it take a fall and not shatter?

I highly recommend that anyone taking this topic seriously read Aaron Cowan's white paper linked in my original post. Then watch his Youtube videos on the subject. Research who he is so you have an idea of his background and why you should be taking his advice. There are other good instructors out there as well who corroborate a lot of his data.

As far as I've learned from multiple sources, there is one optic suitable for LEO duty use and that is the type 2 Trijicon RMR with manual brightness adjustment (not the automatic or dual illumination) and definitely not the earlier gens which had reliability issues.

The second tier optics are the Holosun 407c/507C (same optic except the 507 has a selectable Eotech type reticle or dot, the 407 has dot only), or the Leopold Deltapoint Pro. There is some debate about which is better. Both have advantages and disadvantages over the other. Either is probably fine for CCW use. Both have a lifetime warranty.

The Aimpoint Acro is also probably a first tier optic, but is it still too new for any of the pros to have come out with a definitive opinion on that.

That's a very short list. Most definitely don't take my word for it. Do your own research and try not to have any brand bias.

 

[DMK]

Also,the S+W Custom shop CORE guns allow clean,low mounting for a reasonable price.I'm not absolutely sure on this,but I think a 4 in bbl Shield 2.0 is even offered.

What seems to work is silencer height iron sights along with the red dot.

An S&W Performance Center 4" barreled Optics Ready Shield 2.0 is actually the gun that got me started down that rabbit hole. It is available with or without a Shield RMS (aka Jpoint) optic included, but has the optic cut milled in the slide either way. Shield is an optics company in England BTW. Supposedly they sell red dots to the British army. A Shield optic is also included on the new Springfield Hellcat.

I bought that gun on impulse and I love the little S&W gun with a 4" barrel and Performance Center trigger, but I've since removed the optic from it. The RMS (a $400 optic BTW) is now on a dedicated range toy. I'm still happy with the purchase of the gun itself but post purchase research taught me a few things.

For one thing, the single stack micro guns such as the Glock 43, S&W Shield, Springfield XDS, etc are two narrow to mount the top or second tier optics that have a proven reputation.

The Shield RMS/Jpoint is very small and very low, which allows you to mount on a thin slide and also us standard height sights. Very convenient. A Trijicon RMS or similar will not allow you to do that on any gun. The bad news, according to my research, is the Shield/Jpoint is not a very durable or reliable optic. It is fine for range use and maybe even light competition, but not an optic that you want to trust your life to.

Another problem with it is it has no brightness adjustment capability (or even any controls except for zeroing). It uses a sensor to determine dot brightness. In my testing around my property at night, I found that you easily lose the dot when in the dark and aiming to a brighter lit target or when using a weapon mounted or handheld light. That's not acceptable for CCW or duty use. This is not the only sight that has that limitation. Some Trijicon models are also auto brightness.

Shield does have a new model coming out called the RMSw which will be waterproof and according to them, more durable. Sig also has a new Romeo Zero that they also are promising will be durable. Hopefully these will be acceptable for duty/ccw use on these small guns. Only time and testing will tell. Right now there appear to be no good solutions for the micro single stack guns.

 

[DMK]

Very few police agencies approve of their use. Most require special holsters, extra training, and the sight is not issued and must be purchased by the officer. These are common sense measures for police agencies but discourage their use among officers. Again, all for marginal gain.

Here is a list of points of contact for agencies already using MRDS duty guns in full, part, or optional
to the officer. This list is not total.

Lisle, IL Police Department.
Leander, TX Police Department.
Billings, MT Police Department.
Deephaven, MN Police Department.
Naperville, IL Police Department.
Rockwood, MI Police Department.
Surgarland, TX Police Department,
Saint Albans, WV Police Department
George Mason Police Department VA
Charleston, IL Police Department
Port of Seattle, WA Police Department
Oakbrook Terrace, IL Police Department
Calgary Police Service, Calgary, Alberta Canada
Bloomington, IN Police Department
Chamblee, GA Police Department
Walla Walla County Sheriffs Office
Ames, IA Police Department
Greenbrier County Sheriffs’s Department
Waukesha, WI Police Department
Santa Rosa, CA Police Department
Tracy, CA Police Department
Santa Cruz, CA Police Department
Orange County Sheriffs Department
Abilene, TX Police Department
Munster, IN Police Department
Australian Federal Police, Australia

 

[DMK]

I bought a fast fire with new sights matched to the extra height needed to put on my Glock 20--total flop for me as I found it nearly impossible to get the dot into the field of view quickly--even with the added height sights. I'm not sure--but red dots calling themselves red dots but are actually reflex/HUD type sights are not the same as a "true" red dot--in other words cowitnessing is mandatory.

Yes, cowitnessing is mandatory for backup purposes.

However, using the irons for referencing the dot is defeating a primary advantage the dot has; referencing your sighting system quickly in the same plane as your target.

With iron sights you have three planes of focus; rear sight, front sight and target. You want/need to focus on the front sight, but thousands of years of evolution tells us to focus on the threat. The dot solves that problem. Focus on the target/threat and the dot is there.

Using the irons to orient the dot makes convenient training wheels, but it slows us down. We need to focus on the target and only the target.

Getting the dot in line requires a very consistent presentation. Try this with an iron sight gun. Look at a target, then close your eyes. Draw or present from ready and push out to the target. Open your eyes without cheating and moving the gun in any way, do you have an acceptable sight alignment and sight picture? Keep practicing until you do. You should be able to use kinesthetics to orient your gun to the target. Now once you can do that, you won't lose the dot and you won't need irons to help you do it.

The red dot, like a laser sighting system reveals our flaws. This can be frustrating but you can use that to make yourself a better shooter.

 

[DMK]

I have two Glock 19 MOS with Burris Fastfire 3 red dots on them that I shoot IDPA matches with. While red dots are great for competition shooting, I have reservations about using them on a self defense gun. Co-witness sights aren't necessary as practice presenting the gun will put the dot consistently on the target. There are three main problems with using a red dot. One being the batteries will eventually become weak causing the sight to fail at the most inconvenient time. The second is the battery cap can become loose again causing failures. The last problem is the screws holding the sight onto the slide, even when loctite is used, can become loose and the sight will wobble or even fall off. Given the pounding the sights take, they are remarkedly reliable, but can fail from the shock of the pounding slide
. Regular changing of the batteries, checking the battery cap to see if it is on tight, and making sure the mounting screws are not loose will prevent most problems. A good red dot made by Burris or Vortex can be had for around $200. Given all this, I prefer to have Trijicon HD night sights on my carry guns and leave the red dots for my competition guns.

Great post! Thanks for sharing your experience.

These are things I have concerns about as well. I'm hoping that I can find solutions to these problems.

 

[labnoti]

RDS or more accurately, minature reflex sights for carry or duty handguns is a big topic that has been and continues to get serious attention. I've been educated in this topic, not just by reading something on the Internet, but by discussing it in-person with people responsible for training within agencies, with people from manufacturers, with people that run training academies that offer red-dot specific courses, with researchers that publish peer-reviewed articles, and with veteran widely-recognized experts that remain curmudgeons about it. My personal assessments and the choices I've made as a result of my education aren't a substitute for the collective effort of the many more people that are working on this technology.

My opinion is that carry optic technology is currently at the state where a RDS is a viable option with trade-offs that a large portion of decision-makers will find acceptable if they look into it. The technology is not yet at the point where it offers such a substantial advantage that people opting to stay with open sights are behind the curve, but there is a widespread expectation that it will soon get there. Unlike lasers, I think most people involved with carry/duty handguns professionally expect red-dot optics to become near-universally adopted in the years to come. That near-universal adoption is not likely to happen with the current technology, but possibly with the very next generation of optics and guns which could be as little as 5 years away.

For early adopters with the current technology, there are a number of concerns to be addressed in training or working with a RDS equipped carry or duty gun. Batteries and durability are generally not a concern with some state-of-the-art models, but there are even top products on the market today where those concerns are still valid.

All red dot sights use a see-through optical plane that can be obscured in the front or back. Both types will also obscure cowitnessed iron sights. It could be from condensation, snow, mud, rain, blood or heavy dust. Training can be accomplished with tape. Front obstructions block the view through the screen but the dot remains visible and can be superimposed over the target. Rear obstructions block the reflection of the dot. A point of reference on the back of the slide or along the side of the barrel can be used to aim. A backup "dot" can be painted on the gun. I have a gun where the RDS mount plate happens to create a channel parallel with the barrel that I can improvise with.

Not seeing the dot can be a result of failing to align the sight with your vision, or because the dot is off for any reason. Gun grip-angle, grip technique (particularly your wrist angle), and the consistency of your presentation can affect how reliably you will find the dot. If you are not finding the dot consistently in practice from a variety of shooting positions, you may need to adjust or train one or more of those things. One solution for a dot that's off is to have backup cowitnessed iron sights, but I agree with the concern DMK expressed about cluttering up the shooter's focus. Dots can be off as a result of battery or electronic failure, but the more likely cause would be the obstruction of the projector diode. Most sights today have an open body where dirt, snow or water could block the LED from shining on the screen. The Aimpoint ACRO is the notable exception with its own trade-offs.

Carry optics often have substantially more offset than standard sights. This is even more the case with optics that have larger windows that make finding the dot easier and more consistent. That larger offset is something that needs to be practiced with. There is a significant difference in POI from POA at short range.

The mount screw on one side of a Glock is very short. I think it's so short to accommodate the plunger underneath that area on the slide. I have seen it fail. It will predictably fail. It needs red not blue loctite.

I also recommend Cross Check torque seal to indicate threaded fasteners that have loosened. Use it on adjustable iron sights too to indicate when they've been knocked out of alignment. It is the proper thing instead of nail polish. It would also work for a battery cap.

 

[TunnelRat]

RDS or more accurately, minature reflex sights for carry or duty handguns is a big topic that has been and continues to get serious attention. I've been educated in this topic, not just by reading something on the Internet, but by discussing it in-person with people responsible for training within agencies, with people from manufacturers, with people that run training academies that offer red-dot specific courses, with researchers that publish peer-reviewed articles, and with veteran widely-recognized experts that remain curmudgeons about it. My personal assessments and the choices I've made as a result of my education aren't a substitute for the collective effort of the many more people that are working on this technology.



My opinion is that carry optic technology is currently at the state where a RDS is a viable option with trade-offs that a large portion of decision-makers will find acceptable if they look into it. The technology is not yet at the point where it offers such a substantial advantage that people opting to stay with open sights are behind the curve, but there is a widespread expectation that it will soon get there. Unlike lasers, I think most people involved with carry/duty handguns professionally expect red-dot optics to become near-universally adopted in the years to come. That near-universal adoption is not likely to happen with the current technology, but possibly with the very next generation of optics and guns which could be as little as 5 years away.



For early adopters with the current technology, there are a number of concerns to be addressed in training or working with a RDS equipped carry or duty gun. Batteries and durability are generally not a concern with some state-of-the-art models, but there are even top products on the market today where those concerns are still valid.



All red dot sights use a see-through optical plane that can be obscured in the front or back. Both types will also obscure cowitnessed iron sights. It could be from condensation, snow, mud, rain, blood or heavy dust. Training can be accomplished with tape. Front obstructions block the view through the screen but the dot remains visible and can be superimposed over the target. Rear obstructions block the reflection of the dot. A point of reference on the back of the slide or along the side of the barrel can be used to aim. A backup "dot" can be painted on the gun. I have a gun where the RDS mount plate happens to create a channel parallel with the barrel that I can improvise with.



Not seeing the dot can be a result of failing to align the sight with your vision, or because the dot is off for any reason. Gun grip-angle, grip technique (particularly your wrist angle), and the consistency of your presentation can affect how reliably you will find the dot. If you are not finding the dot consistently in practice from a variety of shooting positions, you may need to adjust or train one or more of those things. One solution for a dot that's off is to have backup cowitnessed iron sights, but I agree with the concern DMK expressed about cluttering up the shooter's focus. Dots can be off as a result of battery or electronic failure, but the more likely cause would be the obstruction of the projector diode. Most sights today have an open body where dirt, snow or water could block the LED from shining on the screen. The Aimpoint ACRO is the notable exception with its own trade-offs.



Carry optics often have substantially more offset than standard sights. This is even more the case with optics that have larger windows that make finding the dot easier and more consistent. That larger offset is something that needs to be practiced with. There is a significant difference in POI from POA at short range.



The mount screw on one side of a Glock is very short. I think it's so short to accommodate the plunger underneath that area on the slide. I have seen it fail. It will predictably fail. It needs red not blue loctite.



I also recommend Cross Check torque seal to indicate threaded fasteners that have loosened. Use it on adjustable iron sights too to indicate when they've been knocked out of alignment. It is the proper thing instead of nail polish. It would also work for a battery cap.

Excellent summary, though to be fair while I completely believe the background research you describe almost all of these points are covered simultaneously in a number of YouTube videos (though the mention of POI vs. POA at close distances doesn't seem to get mentioned much). Obviously it's better to have all the details than the bullet points as your research no doubt gave you, my point is simply I'm not sure someone needs to go to quite that extreme to understand the basics of the topic (from the OP's posts he's gone well beyond the basics as well).

Have you seen the same screw failure on Glocks using the Trijicon screws that come with the mounting kit from Trijicon? I've not heard of those failing to that degree.

I'd almost never recommend people use red loctite, personally. Red can be practically permanent and used in even slight excess can result in a trip to a gunsmith. I'd almost rather chance a screw coming loose and having to deal with backup sights, at least on my own equipment.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

 

[DMK]

Thank you Labnoti for that excellent post. Great info in there.

though the mention of POI vs. POA at close distances doesn't seem to get mentioned much

I've seen it mentioned by either Aaron Cowan or one of the other instructors blazing the red dot education trail, but you're right it isn't something that comes up a lot. It is an excellent point, though it should be familiar to anyone who trains with an AR15 for self/home defense or duty use.

Hold overs and hold under need to be practiced so they become intuitive. Not only at distance but at very close range as well. I've been jokingly ridiculed by the ignorant for shooting an AR15 at 5 to 15 yards (This situation is one of the reasons I really like the Eotech dot in circle reticle). It is something that needs to be practiced and may be even more important than long range shooting. It doesn't take a lot of practice, but it does need to be refreshed periodically.

That said, center of mass on a human size target won't be a problem. Red dot sight over bore on a handgun is less than half the 2.5" of an AR15.

 

[DMK]

Speaking of which., Labnoti have you discussed the benefits of zero ranges with any of your resources?

Aaron Cowan recommends 25yds for the dot and not cowitnessing with the irons (so they may have a different zero, irons seem to usually be zero'd at 8, 10 or 15yds).

Though not cowitnessing the two sight systems makes sense, I'm not sure I follow the Sage Dynamics reasoning for that 25yd zero after running it through a ballistic calculator with Federal 124gr HSTs. Some other instructors recommend a 10yd zero which coincides with 50y zero.

However, there is the argument that a lot of people can't hold a tight enough offhand group at 50y to validate that (and shooting off a rest can give you a zero inconsistent to the way you will shoot offhand).

I need to do more testing so I don't have an opinion yet, but I wonder what the thinking is with those in the know.

 

[TunnelRat]

Thank you Labnoti for that excellent post. Great info in there.



I've seen it mentioned by either Aaron Cowan or one of the other instructors blazing the red dot education trail, but you're right it isn't something that comes up a lot. It is an excellent point, though it should be familiar to anyone who trains with an AR15 for self/home defense or duty use.



Hold overs and hold under need to be practiced so they become intuitive. Not only at distance but at very close range as well. I've been jokingly ridiculed by the ignorant for shooting an AR15 at 5 to 15 yards (This situation is one of the reasons I really like the Eotech dot in circle reticle). It is something that needs to be practiced and may be even more important than long range shooting. It doesn't take a lot of practice, but it does need to be refreshed periodically.



That said, center of mass on a human size target won't be a problem. Red dot sight over bore on a handgun is less than half the 2.5" of an AR15.

For me the height over bore isn't just about effect on target. It's something to be mindful of when working corners and cover. I've seen people in force on force shoot up corners because their sights were clear but the bore wasn't. I've seen the same with live rounds for barricades and vehicles. While you're right that it isn't nearly as big of an issue as on a rifle, the fact that I see it with irons makes me think it's something to be mindful of.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

 

[TunnelRat]

Speaking of which., Labnoti have you discussed the benefits of zero ranges with any of your resources?

Aaron Cowan recommends 25yds for the dot and not cowitnessing with the irons (so they may have a different zero, irons seem to usually be zero'd at 8, 10 or 15yds).

Though not cowitnessing the two sight systems makes sense, I'm not sure I follow the Sage Dynamics reasoning for that 25yd zero after running it through a ballistic calculator with Federal 124gr HSTs. Some other instructors recommend a 10yd zero which coincides with 50y zero.

However, there is the argument that a lot of people can't hold a tight enough offhand group at 50y to validate that (and shooting off a rest can give you a zero inconsistent to the way you will shoot offhand).

I need to do more testing so I don't have an opinion yet, but I wonder what the thinking is with those in the know.

It's been my experience that for a number of topics trainers often have differing opinions. They're not always radical differences, usually it's more subtle such as zeroing distance for the dot. For myself I evaluate their reasons and then choose what works best for me in my own practice. I get that's absolutely part of what you're doing, I'm just emphasizing the point that there isn't always one solution.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

 

[American Man]

I have a Vortex Venom on my Gen4 G19. I carry it in the cooler months in an OWB light mounted holster from Blackpoint. I just throw the belt over my running shorts and/or sweatpants... no belt loops. It's very comfortable in the 3 o clock position with a zippered hoodie at a minimum. If I could justify it with just a t shirt I would wear it all the time but it just doesn't work for me unless I wear more than a t shirt... it's mostly the G26 in the warmer/ deathly hot months.

The sights are Night Fision suppressor height sights with a white front sight post. I prefer the bright yellow or the orange but supposedly the white is the best looking through any glass... it does work well.

While I don't think I would be at a disadvantage without the red dot, I do feel the red dot provides more of an edge. None of my friends in LE are allowed to have them on their pistols yet... and they all want them.

 

[Cheapshooter]

I never trust self defense to something with circuits and batteries. I also don't want something that needs to be "activated". Or spend (waste) time looking for a dot I may, or may not find.
At the short distance of self defence encounters, I don't want to be fiddling with devices, and looking for dots while my attacker s stabber ng, cutting, kicking, punching, or pulling a trigger.

 

[TunnelRat]

I never trust self defense to something with circuits and batteries. I also don't want something that needs to be "activated". Or spend (waste) time looking for a dot I may, or may not find.
At the short distance of self defence encounters, I don't want to be fiddling with devices, and looking for dots while my attacker s stabber ng, cutting, kicking, punching, or pulling a trigger.

As for the dot failing you can run backup irons, similar to a rifle. For close engagements having a dot doesn't prevent you from shooting reflexively. The notion that you would waste time looking for a dot while someone is delivering blows is silly to the extreme. You could apply the same silliness to sights in general and argue against sights entirely.

I don't think a red dot is mandatory and my guess is, as others have mentioned, the technology will continue to improve (as red dots on rifles have improved). It will be interesting to see how the Acro fares.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk