It's pure marketing bullshit that iron sights need to be co-witnessed to a Dot Optic. It's a lie meant to sell more iron sights. Some run a Dot Optic with NO BUIS.
That is all.
That is all.
NO - - iron sights don't NEED to be co-witnessed to a Dot Optic
- Thread starter Milf Dots
- Start date
The last time I drew my pistol with non-range use intent iit was a mountain lion. It ran and didn't attack and its not wanted for any people harm, and it ran to a no-shoot area so it didn't get blasted.
The first thing I noted was my fucking red dot was dead and I was glad I had co-witnessed irons. Goddamn RMR. Its a trash can liner now and is replaced with a Holosun.
The first thing I noted was my fucking red dot was dead and I was glad I had co-witnessed irons. Goddamn RMR. Its a trash can liner now and is replaced with a Holosun.
Late night drunk thoughts? I’ll give this one a D.
BUIS are nice to have, especially on something electronic. No that window with a dead dot isn’t enough to aim with (despite what a lot of people think) beyond the distance that you can point shoot with nothing at all which is essentially what you’re doing… so in regards to that arguement, who needs sights or a dot at all?
I’ll keep running red dots on my pistols, with usable backup irons.
BUIS are nice to have, especially on something electronic. No that window with a dead dot isn’t enough to aim with (despite what a lot of people think) beyond the distance that you can point shoot with nothing at all which is essentially what you’re doing… so in regards to that arguement, who needs sights or a dot at all?
I’ll keep running red dots on my pistols, with usable backup irons.
You could still see thru the lens for shot making so you didn't NEED co-witnessed BUIS. Meow.
And FUCK that CCP company HS.
Don't hold back - let us know how you feel.
But sometimes, I just wanna shoot the irons..so I turn the holosun off..the older ya get,the harder it is to focus with the irons....just old school, I guess..
I give no fucks. Retards will retard.
- Nov 3, 2010
- 10,519
- 23,041
Yeah, take your red dot optic out of your air conditioned vehicle and look through your red dot trying to get on target for an emergency shot quickly... HAHAHA
Batteries die, glass breaks. Stuff happens.
Run what works for you, but BUIS work pretty much all the time unless you subjected them to some serious impact or didn't install them correctly.
They are like the wired option for Bluetooth or wireless connections. You don't have to run it wired, just have the wire handy.
Do most people NEED BUIS? That is for them to decide.
For serious use, I think they're cheap insurance. eBUIS are lightweight, not expensive, and last forever if not abused.
Do you NEED to have them running a red dot optic? No.
Batteries die, glass breaks. Stuff happens.
Run what works for you, but BUIS work pretty much all the time unless you subjected them to some serious impact or didn't install them correctly.
They are like the wired option for Bluetooth or wireless connections. You don't have to run it wired, just have the wire handy.
Do most people NEED BUIS? That is for them to decide.
For serious use, I think they're cheap insurance. eBUIS are lightweight, not expensive, and last forever if not abused.
Do you NEED to have them running a red dot optic? No.
I spent more time behind iron sights on my handguns training and competing so there's a lot of muscle memory built in using irons. But I am at that age where it's getting more difficult to see them so I'd like some type of optic. I'd still co witness it with irons.
Not that the OP's statement isn't true, but give us an example of a pistol with no iron sights. Said irons should be "on", ergo they're co-witnessed.
Am I missing something? I have several RMRs on pistols, and they're all co-witnessed because it would be a much bigger hassle to take the rions off, rather than just leave them on...
If a pistol doesn't have an RMR I don't use the irons anyway unless I'm really pushing the distance. That's the beauty of the RMR. It's like point shooting with a sight.
I’m not sure why you expect anything less out of him. He has one speed and it’s full retard.
The muscle memory isn't wasted, the dots make it much faster easier than trying to deal with 3 visual planes semi-simultaneously.
Just look "through" directly at the target and move the dot to cover your target.
Take the distance out further and that's where you will find the dots REALLY shine.
For serious duty use, a dot makes a huge difference at distance.
If the glass is fogged, how can you see the front sight?
That's how I know you don't know shit.
Wait...
You guys don't just mag dump into tv's and shit??
You guys don't just mag dump into tv's and shit??
The Sig P320MAX has no iron sights as shipped. Optic only. I think this will be more common for dedicated competition guns—it’s not like you’re going to shoot the match with irons if the optic goes down.
Isn't that essentially what he is saying in jest ... and laughing afterwards? That's how I interpreted it.
I've used them before. I'm simply saying I'd have irons cowitnessed. I've competed in PPC, IDPA, Bianchi Cup, ICORE, 3 Gun. I've even used my EDC's in Handgun Silhouette matches.
Cowitnessing is for idiots. They are two independent sighting systems and they are zeroed with no reference to the other.
It doesn't fucking matter if the dot is right on top of the FSP or somewhere else.
It doesn't fucking matter if the dot is right on top of the FSP or somewhere else.
I know exactly what it means in the context most people use it since there is no official definition.
IDGAF what you call it, slaving one to the other is what idiots do.
Is this a troll post?
If the irons and dot are both zeroed for the same distance, the dot will be right on the front sight when irons are aligned, if they’re tall enough to see through the window. That’s just how it works.
If you prefer to have your irons zeroed at a different distance than the dot, I guess they’re not co-zeroed but as long as you can see them at the same time they’re still co-witnessed.
Are we idiots for being able to see (witness) dot and irons at the same time?
Or depending on your incorrect use of the word, why are we idiots for having both zeroed to the same distance?
I ran some of the first optics mounted for handguns when I shot Bianchi Cup thirty or more years ago. They didn't co witness at that time. I prefer cowitness since it's natural for me to line up the sights while presenting my handgun. I ran my AR the sameway, again over thirty years ago. KISS. YMMV.
I sighted in a 1911 for a deputy last year with no front sight. It was more difficult for me to get the dot on target because there was no front sight to reference off of. It probably would have gotten easier with practice, but was strange for me to shoot.
No that's not how it works for a host of reasons, starting with the fact that height over bore is not the same for the irons and the optic. The second reason is that different optics have different height over bore to the optical center.
I bet you're one of those who has to line up the dot with the front sight post before letting one go...........
But hey you do you......
Last edited:
I prefer a front and rear mounted RDS with the dots co-witnessed.
The best setup is two holosuns. The front one with the dot and the rear with the 32 moa circle. You line them up just like irons!
Some would argue optics is a crutch. For me it's just another tool for the toolbox. Those who are inflexible tend to break.
Taurus Judge .410 or GTFO
Who needs sights and optics. Just setting yourself up for failure.
Point and shoot is what I’ve always said
Who needs sights and optics. Just setting yourself up for failure.
Point and shoot is what I’ve always said
The only firearm you can point and shoot with any consistency is a 6.5 Creedmoor. Doesn't matter what it's chambered in. it's incredibly efficient.Taurus Judge .410 or GTFO
Who needs sights and optics. Just setting yourself up for failure.
Point and shoot is what I’ve always said
What he's saying is optics generally sit higher than irons sight so they don't operate on the same plane as irons. On some handguns you can't even see the irons because they are too low or the optics are too high. So to compensate some irons are made taller. That's one of the reasons you see 1/3 cowitness. 1/3 cowitness or cowitness is a personal preference thing. It all depends on how you've trained. Since I have a long history shooting with irons I'd prefer cowitness. But one benefit of 1/3 cowitness is you can shoot longer ranges with it and still see the target. So with some practice I could get comfortable with 1/3. But I hit 100 yards chest size area last week with my handgun and irons. So either way is fine.
Last edited:
Ok, I can believe what I want, that's fair, but you can't deny physics or math. Well, I guess if you are progressive you can. Carry on.
Reading this whole thread will make you gay.
***I read the first 5 replies and skipped to the end to post this. That makes me not gay.
***I read the first 5 replies and skipped to the end to post this. That makes me not gay.
A mountain lion doesn’t generally attack adult humans in groups. It’s mostly the “lone jogger” type thing or the children.
There were 3 of us that came upon it.
Additionally the amount of traditional prey out here for it is very very high right now so it’s not hungry enough to get busy with people generally.
This X100000000. I just started using an optic on my pistol and have been working on my draw and bringing the optic to my eye. Gotta work on NPOA. Drawing with my eyes closed helps with indexing for me.
That's the same exercise when you use iron sights. But when you cowitness the irons to the dot the front sight is easier to se. Most people when they lose the dot the use the irons to guide them back to the dot. For me it's easier to do that when they are co-witnessed. If you all rather not do it that way it's perfectly okay.
Similar threads
