NO - - iron sights don't NEED to be co-witnessed to a Dot Optic

[theLBC]

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.

spot on. lots of newbs don't seem to even understand "co-witness".
the point of red dots is the dot is on target no matter where it appears in your sight, meaning your eye position is not critical like irons.
lots of newb think co-witness means that they should try to put the dot on the front iron sight, which completely defeats the fast acquisition advantage of the red dot.
in truth, if both options are sighted in, then you will always be able to "cowitness" them if you hold a certain way.

 

[WindstormSCR]

If the glass is fogged, how can you see the front sight?

That's how I know you don't know shit.

if the glass is fogged, he bought shitty optics because that means no anti-fog coating that is industry standard these days.....

 

[flyfisher117]

Lol this pissing match again. Those who train and shoot vs those who talk about training and shooting.

 

[xsn10s]

Not

Lol this pissing match again. Those who train and shoot vs those who talk about training and shooting.

It's been awhile since I was last on here. I guess this is the norm now lol.

 

[xsn10s]

I guess we can agree that it's nice to have the option for optics now.

 

[Aftermath]

Some would argue optics is a crutch. For me it's just another tool for the toolbox. Those who are inflexible tend to break.

Yeah.....It's not like @308pirate knows anything AT ALL about shooting a handgun.....

 

[xsn10s]

If the glass gets fogged BAC say both eyes should be open and focused on the target. So just superimpose the dot on target if fogged, blocked by mud, or otherwise.

 

[xsn10s]

Yeah.....It's not like @308pirate knows anything AT ALL about shooting a handgun.....

LOL such drama on here lol. I don't know him so I don't know anything about him. Simply saying I'd rather have MY handgun cowitnessed.

 

[308pirate]

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.

Most people don't know how to shoot a pistol, even fewer know how to use an optic on one.

Yours is the perfect example.

 

[308pirate]

spot on. lots of newbs don't seem to even understand "co-witness".
the point of red dots is the dot is on target no matter where it appears in your sight, meaning your eye position is not critical like irons.
lots of newb think co-witness means that they should try to put the dot on the front iron sight, which completely defeats the fast acquisition advantage of the red dot.
in truth, if both options are sighted in, then you will always be able to "cowitness" them if you hold a certain way.

This guy gets it

 

[xsn10s]

Most people don't know how to shoot a pistol, even fewer know how to use an optic on one.

Yours is the perfect example.

LOl okay. Well I'd argue against that since I trained LEO's and shot competitively. But whatever you want to believe is fine. This site sure got some sensitive people on here.

 

[theLBC]

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.

yeah, the biggest mistake i see with experienced shooters and red dots is that they "look for the dot" instead of presenting the gun the same way they have 1000s of times. once they are taught to present like they are using irons, they realize the dot is always going to be there.
for complete newbs, it will be a little harder because they don't already have that muscle memory, but it is still exponentially easier than lining up the iron sights, especially for older eyes.

 

[308pirate]

I trained LEO's

That's a pretty low bar

 

[xsn10s]

That's a pretty low bar

It can be. It depends on who you got to work with and the quality of the training. I was lucky enough to work with some really good people. Some were top in the their field. One was one of the "Chosen Few". He has passed on. I don't make it a habit to meat mouth first responders or veterans. Different stroke for different folks.

 

[texastonk]

I prefer my front site filed down so not to snag when I clear leather. Red dot on my Rossi is the tits

 

[Yondering]

This guy gets it

But you obviously don't, since he said the same things I did except for ranting about newbies.

Co-witnessed sights doesn't mean you have to line up the dots with the sights. Nobody here said it does.
It just means you can see both at the same time. And if they are zeroed to the same POI, when the irons are aligned the dot will be on the front sight. When the irons are not aligned (gotta spell this out since you refuse to understand what's being said), the dot can be anywhere in the window and is still zeroed. That is exactly how it works, as I said previously.

You have some massive failures to read what people actually say, and make arguments against things nobody said. It's pretty stupid, and just a failure of your own doing.

 

[Yondering]

Yeah.....It's not like @308pirate knows anything AT ALL about shooting a handgun.....

There's a really big difference between knowing something, and understanding what someone said. Or just communicating in general. His entire argument here is based on his assumption of what he thinks cowitnessing means, and his definition is wrong.

He does this a lot - too busy stroking his ego to stop and think about what anyone else is saying, so he'd rather argue and stir crap up. Sorry if he's your hero, but it's not commendable or admirable in any way.

 

[delta6]

i ciechi cercheranno di istruire coloro che possono vedere

This guy gets it

i ciechi cercheranno di istruire coloro che possono vedere

 

[308pirate]

And if they are zeroed to the same POI, when the irons are aligned the dot will be on the front sight.

Nope That's not how it works

But if it makes you happy, be my guest

 

[Aftermath]

Sorry if he's your hero, but it's not commendable or admirable in any way.

Fuck off, dipshit.

 

[JoshPutman]

 

[Yondering]

Nope That's not how it works

But if it makes you happy, be my guest

You seem intent on proving that you don't have a clue how any of this works. When irons and dot are zeroed to the same POI, they are by definition pointed at the same spot. If you look down the irons when they're aligned, the dot has to be right there too; if it's not, they aren't zeroed to the same point. That doesn't mean you have to have the irons aligned to use the dot, nobody said that.

Do you not realize some of us have been using red dot pistols for a long time now? I've been carrying one since 2012 myself, and was far from the first. We don't have to guess or imagine how this works. And it's not even that complicated.

But, most likely you're reacting based on yet another misunderstanding because your arrogance and defense of your ego has blinded you to what's actually been said. Don't you know that arrogance is directly correlated to stupidity? I think you're probably a reasonably intelligent guy, but that massive ego is like a wet blanket on that small ember of intelligence.

 

[Yondering]

Fuck off, dipshit.

Ouch. Sounds like I struck a nerve.

 

[scudzuki]

2 benefits to cowitnessed folding BUIS with an RDS are
zero one and the other can be zeroed using the first
and
If the RDS fails, the BUIS can be used without removing the RDS

 

[hlee]

2 benefits to cowitnessed folding BUIS with an RDS are
zero one and the other can be zeroed using the first
and
If the RDS fails, the BUIS can be used without removing the RDS

Where are you getting folding BUIS for a PISTOL?

 

[pineoak]

Where are you getting folding BUIS for a PISTOL?

He might be thinking carbine as well. I think the Magpul original BUIS plastic are the durable, value, performance bargain in carbines. The hard users I know prefer the PRO metal version from Magpul but I like the plastic. Mostly because they do the cool pop up thingy...

 

[Aftermath]

Ouch. Sounds like I struck a nerve.

Not at all. Just making sure you know you are a dipshit.

 

[Yondering]

2 benefits to cowitnessed folding BUIS with an RDS are
zero one and the other can be zeroed using the first
and
If the RDS fails, the BUIS can be used without removing the RDS

3rd (and should be the most commonly used) benefit is to verify the dot adjustment hasn’t changed. Personally I do this every morning when I put on my pans and holster the pistol, just part of the readiness check.

We’re talking RDS pistols here, but the benefits and function are the same for rifles too.

 

[xsn10s]

3rd (and should be the most commonly used) benefit is to verify the dot adjustment hasn’t changed. Personally I do this every morning when I put on my pans and holster the pistol, just part of the readiness check.

We’re talking RDS pistols here, but the benefits and function are the same for rifles too.

The difference between 1/3 co-witness and co-witness are so minor I'm not sure why some are getting so bent out of shape. Maybe snickers bars would help. I see plenty of YT videos where 1/3 co-witness is touted as THE way to do it. There's no hard rule as to what everyone should do. Much like trigger finger position. If you look at the way John Pride and Jerry Miculek position their finger on the trigger you'd see they're polar opposites. Unless Mr Pride has changed this in the last twenty years.

 

[Yondering]

The difference between 1/3 co-witness and co-witness are so minor I'm not sure why some are getting so bent out of shape. Maybe snickers bars would help. I see plenty of YT videos where 1/3 co-witness is touted as THE way to do it. There's no hard rule as to what everyone should do. Much like trigger finger position. If you look at the way John Pride and Jerry Miculek position their finger on the trigger you'd see they're polar opposites. Unless Mr Pride has changed this in the last twenty years.

I think a lot of people get mixed up between rifles and pistols, and try to apply rifle terms to pistols. On an AR, a full co-witness is a fairly common thing. On a red dot sighted pistol though, pretty much nobody does a full co-witness, with the irons in the center of the window; there's no reason for it and it obstructs what is already a fairly small window. You need enough irons sticking up to see them, and that's it. Like standard suppressor sights on a typical Glock RMR milling job.

The "lower 1/3" term really is just a rifle thing, and doesn't so much apply to pistols. When we talk about pistol cowitnessed sights, usually people are talking about something set up like the pictures below. You could call it "lower 1/3" cowitness, but really it's just a standard pistol cowitness setup. I guess I don't like the "lower 1/3" term for pistols because it implies the existence of a full cowitness, which is generally not what we're talking about when we discuss cowitnessed pistol sights.

 

[Yondering]

Since a lot of us learn better with pictures than with words, here are some pics. Keep in mind the camera changes the size of the dot/reticle compared to what the eye sees, and also that it's hard to get things perfectly lined up when looking through a camera for the picture.

This is what a RDS pistol setup looks like when the irons and dot are zeroed for the same POI. Pretty standard, for those who care to do things right.

When the irons are aligned with the shooting eye, you'll see the dot right on the front sight. (In this case, POI is the top tip of the red chevron.)

When the irons are not aligned with your eye, the dot can be anywhere in the window, and POI is still on the dot. Note that the dot and irons are still zeroed to the same point, we just aren't looking down the irons. (This is the same gun and same zero as the pic above; the camera just blurred the reticle into a large dot. Not what you'd see with your eye, but same dot location anyway.) And yeah, I needed to clean that lens, but it's a good illustration that the RDS is still useable with a dirty lens, to a point.

 

[xsn10s]

Since a lot of us learn better with pictures than with words, here are some pics. Keep in mind the camera changes the size of the dot/reticle compared to what the eye sees, and also that it's hard to get things perfectly lined up when looking through a camera for the picture.

This is what a RDS pistol setup looks like when the irons and dot are zeroed for the same POI. Pretty standard, for those who care to do things right.

When the irons are aligned with the shooting eye, you'll see the dot right on the front sight. (In this case, POI is the top tip of the red chevron.)

When the irons are not aligned with your eye, the dot can be anywhere in the window, and POI is still on the dot. Note that the dot and irons are still zeroed to the same point, we just aren't looking down the irons. (This is the same gun and same zero as the pic above; the camera just blurred the reticle into a large dot. Not what you'd see with your eye, but same dot location anyway.) And yeah, I needed to clean that lens, but it's a good illustration that the RDS is still useable with a dirty lens, to a point.

I'd have mine set up like yours. I wanted to get another Glock. but I may switch over to a Sig P365X/ XL or a Springfield Hellcat Pro. I like the thinner width, but the bummer is I'm fully set up for Glocks and have a 1000 rounds of Winchester SXT 40S&W in stock.

 

[502Chevelle]

It just seems that people don’t truely understand what co-witnessing is on a pistol, and while 308 pirate is correct, he can be a little harsh.

 

[xsn10s]

I've always understood that the dot can be anywhere on the heads up display. All I've said from the beginning is that when I shoot I'd still have the dot on the front sight.

 

[roostercogburn98]

I shoot like I jump out of planes…..both eyes closed right as shit

 

[Yondering]

It just seems that people don’t truely understand what co-witnessing is on a pistol, and while 308 pirate is correct, he can be a little harsh.

Right about what? All he’s done is argue that something is stupid, but he’s not clear about what or why, and as far as I can tell he doesn’t understand this stuff either.

I’d really like to know what you think he’s right about.

 

[502Chevelle]

That there are two separate sighting systems, and you don’t have to take the time to line up the dot with the sights. Doing so just takes longer. Shoot the dot, if it goes down, use your sights, but that is the difference between buis and “co-witnessing “. That is a term that seems to me is overused by folks who don’t quite understand the difference.

 

[Oryx]

I've always used the term co-witness referring to my set up not my sight picture.

 

[502Chevelle]

That’s what I mean. Having two sight systems is not co-witnessing.

 

[Yondering]

That there are two separate sighting systems, and you don’t have to take the time to line up the dot with the sights. Doing so just takes longer. Shoot the dot, if it goes down, use your sights, but that is the difference between buis and “co-witnessing “. That is a term that seems to me is overused by folks who don’t quite understand the difference.

Nobody said you have to use both. That’s what makes him such an idiot sometimes; arguing against things nobody said.

It’s you who doesn’t understand the “difference” here. You’ve arbitrarily applied the word cowitness to mean something different than it actually means, both in definition and in common use.

 

[Yondering]

That’s what I mean. Having two sight systems is not co-witnessing.

Wrong. That’s exactly what a cowitnessed sight setup is. It does NOT mean you have to use both at the same time.

You and 308 pirate don’t understand the words everyone is using, so you’re arguing against something that’s just your own mistake.

I’m constantly amazed how far wrong some of you are here about RDS pistols. It’s not that complicated, but some of you get it really wrong but are so convinced you have the answers.

 

[Yondering]

And yeah, insisting that you have to line up the irons and dot would be foolish, and simply a function of being too new to the system to know how it works.

We don’t really even have a word in common use for that, because it’s commonly understood to be not necessary.

But mistaking the common term cowitness to mean that, and therefore concluding that most people are idiots, is even more foolish. You’d have to be extremely arrogant to make that conclusion without considering that maybe you got it wrong instead of everyone else.

That ties right in to what I said above about arrogance being directly related to stupidity.

 

[HousePlant]

I shoot better with good irons on a pistol than a red dot because I cannot get my bloody public schooled brain to use a red dot properly.

 

[UpSideDown]

We should use the terminologies (or similar to) ‘partial cowitness’ and ‘full cowitness’ to prevent misunderstanding. In the rifle world ‘cowitness’ is an abbreviation of saying ‘full cowitness’. In the handgun world, you end up with arguments like this when that isn’t clarified.

Even those terms aren’t ideal, but they’re a carryover from the rifle world.

Some people are reading this as Full Cowitness, and some are reading this as Any Degree of Cowitness.

 

[Yondering]

We should use the terminologies (or similar to) ‘partial cowitness’ and ‘full cowitness’ to prevent misunderstanding. In the rifle world ‘cowitness’ is an abbreviation of saying ‘full cowitness’. In the handgun world, you end up with arguments like this when that isn’t clarified.

Even those terms aren’t ideal, but they’re a carryover from the rifle world.

Some people are reading this as Full Cowitness, and some are reading this as Any Degree of Cowitness.

Irrelevant. Full vs 1/3 cowitness refers to where the sights are in relation to the center of the optic. And it’s a rifle thing, not a pistol thing, even though some people get confused and try to apply the rifle terms to pistols, like you.

It has nothing to do with 308 Pirate’s silly conclusion that cowitness somehow means lining up both sights and irons to shoot. That’s not what cowitness means.

 

[UpSideDown]

Irrelevant. Full vs 1/3 cowitness refers to where the sights are in relation to the center of the optic. And it’s a rifle thing, not a pistol thing, even though some people get confused and try to apply the rifle terms to pistols, like you.

It has nothing to do with 308 Pirate’s silly conclusion that cowitness somehow means lining up both sights and irons to shoot. That’s not what cowitness means.

I'm not confused. Cowitness is either being seen as meaning the same zero as irons, and possible lining the dot up with them, or as meaning the irons are visible through the glass of the red dot as a backup, which is generally what is meant by saying cowitness on a handgun. My point stands but you're welcome to ignore it. It's meant as a clarification.

 

[Yondering]

I'm not confused. Cowitness is either being seen as meaning the same zero as irons, and possible lining the dot up with them, or as meaning the irons are visible through the glass of the red dot as a backup, which is generally what is meant by saying cowitness on a handgun. My point stands but you're welcome to ignore it. It's meant as a clarification.

All of which is irrelevant to whether you want to call it full cowitness, lower 1/3, or any other silly term that’s misapplied.

And no, cowitness does not mean lining up the dot with the irons to shoot. It never has.
The rest of the options you listed there are all the same thing as each other; there doesn’t need to be any distinction between them.

What is up with all the newbies to RDS pistols trying to make up new definitions? Y’all need to take some time to learn what things mean before you try to reinterpret them.

 

[Gustav7]

But you obviously don't, since he said the same things I did except for ranting about newbies.

Co-witnessed sights doesn't mean you have to line up the dots with the sights. Nobody here said it does.

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 believe he was referring to this statement made ^^^ ... this, IMO, implies he is using the sights to orient or find the dot, when in reality the iron sights should not even be recognized or thought of. The gun should come directly to the eyeline where the dot first imposes over the target, which should always be above the iron sights.

Co-witnessed sights doesn't mean you have to line up the dots with the sights. Nobody here said it does.
It just means you can see both at the same time. And if they are zeroed to the same POI, when the irons are aligned the dot will be on the front sight. When the irons are not aligned (gotta spell this out since you refuse to understand what's being said), the dot can be anywhere in the window and is still zeroed. That is exactly how it works, as I said previously.

Ya thats true, but also the problem, is that when you use a red dot correctly you're not lining up your irons because your eye line is going to be above the iron sights, looking through the optic to the target. The other guy on here, as well as other members in previous conversations said and have said they "use their irons to find their dot, or orient themselves". I think thats what he is saying is wrong.

Anyway this whole thread is just one big miscommunication of vaguely defined terms lol.

 

[xsn10s]

I believe he was referring to this statement made ^^^ ... this, IMO, implies he is using the sights to orient or find the dot, when in reality the iron sights should not even be recognized or thought of. The gun should come directly to the eyeline where the dot first imposes over the target, which should always be above the iron sights.





Ya thats true, but also the problem, is that when you use a red dot correctly you're not lining up your irons because your eye line is going to be above the iron sights, looking through the optic to the target. The other guy on here, as well as other members in previous conversations said and have said they "use their irons to find their dot, or orient themselves". I think thats what he is saying is wrong.

Anyway this whole thread is just one big miscommunication of vaguely defined terms lol.

Ah like I said I shot Bianchi Cup when red dots where first being used. The dots at that time were so high there was no way to see the sights. but I shot it fine. We shot at longer distances then most of the people here are probably used to and at movers. Heck we even worked with John Pride who got the first department in the nation deploy red dots on their duty pistols. So red dots on handguns isn't new to me. Now on a defensive weapon I'd want the sights cowitnessed (1/4 or 1/3 cowitnessed) to train with since this will be a new EDC. Doesn't seem to be that unusual method of setting up a pistol. The Dickens drill seems to be the rage these days. We shot 50 yards for PPC with either hand and 4 different positions. All with iron sights. Optics will just make that easier. If my terminology is off then so be it lol.

 

[Yondering]

I believe he was referring to this statement made ^^^ ... this, IMO, implies he is using the sights to orient or find the dot, when in reality the iron sights should not even be recognized or thought of. The gun should come directly to the eyeline where the dot first imposes over the target, which should always be above the iron sights.





Ya thats true, but also the problem, is that when you use a red dot correctly you're not lining up your irons because your eye line is going to be above the iron sights, looking through the optic to the target. The other guy on here, as well as other members in previous conversations said and have said they "use their irons to find their dot, or orient themselves". I think thats what he is saying is wrong.

Anyway this whole thread is just one big miscommunication of vaguely defined terms lol.

Sigh. Yes, some people use the irons to find the dot when they’re getting used to the system. It’s like training wheels, and there’s nothing wrong with that when you’re learning. Even if someone continues to do that, it’s fine, as long as they’re not insisting it’s necessary, which no one has.

And yeah, there’s been a bunch of miscommunication, caused by 308 Pirate and a couple others failing to understand the meaning of “cowitness” while also refusing to consider what anyone else actually said. In other words, it was caused by arrogance.

What’s really sad is the bully mentality of 308 Pirate and others like him, who are eager to come tell people they’re idiots, but then don’t have the balls to come back and admit to a mistake.