turkeestalker
New member
Don't take that wrong, I like pretty targets too.
The very economical Bushnell TRS-25 works great on the Victory. I have the carbon fiber reinforced lightweight barrel from Volquartsen for mine, and damn, that thing shoots! I like the closed tube red dot for the target .22. It just seems to belong on it. And I really like the 11-position power knob.In response to the original question, "Why are red dot optics not standard from the OEM?" I believe the answer is simply cost plus anticipated customer preferences. For example, say I buy a S&W M&P9 and S&W decides to offer all these guns with a red dot from company X for an extra $50 or whatever. Well, what if the customer for whatever reason doesn't want a red dot but something else? Or what if he likes red dots but doesn't like the red dot from company X? At that point, the extra $50 is a waste of money in the eyes of the customer. He/she may at that point decide to buy a gun from another company simply to avoid paying for something they don't want.
Personally, I like red dots enough that I have them on a couple rifles and a shotgun, and for the purposes of those arms I find that they work very well.
I have never considered a red dot on one of my defensive handguns, mostly because of their generally much taller aspect and how that limits my options as holsters are concerned. I have a couple lasers on two of my SD/HD handguns because they are down the side of the gun and so do not require special holsters. And I already have a considerable sum of money invested in the holsters I already have. I'm not terribly excited to research and purchase yet more holsters just to fit a red dot or two. Or three.
I have thought about putting a reflex red dot on my S&W .22 Victory because I do like how much easier it is to aim and shoot over traditional irons, but it's not a defensive gun and I don't even have a holster for it.
Anyway, just my two cents.
Fret not. I understood you perfectly.Don't take that wrong, I like pretty targets too.
Sheesh! What a killjoy.....and those are why I'll stick to irons.
What is it about “iron” sights that justifies their popularity long after they have lost the battle to red dots? I’m converting my new pistols even before shooting them for the first time. I shoot so much better with a red dot than iron sights it is amazing. Never going back.
The whole point of red dots is the superior speed of acquisition. That is why they are favored by special forces.I'm typically a handgun irons type guy. About 8 months ago I decided to try a Vortex Venom dot on my FNX45T. I'm still on the fence if I truly like the dot better than irons. The advantage of a dot in my observations seems to be at 25-50 yds. I seem to have more consistent accuracy at longer handgun distances. The problem with a dot is the difficulty in obtaining very quick target acquisition. It takes me longer with a dot. Target acquisition with irons is very quick. Adding a dot to a new mfg firearm would dramatically increase the cost. In this day and age of everyone wanting "cheap" that type of added cost won't fly for boosting new gun sales. YMMV
Perhaps on rifles. Do any special forces, from any nation's military, use red dots on their handguns? Personally, I find red dots [actually, green in my case, since I can't see red dots in many lighting conditions] much slower to acquire than open sights on handguns.rpenmanparker said:The whole point of red dots is the superior speed of acquisition. That is why they are favored by special forces.