low power scope versus red dot

[cbourbeau32]

I would like to hear from you folks who shoot revolvers out to 100 yards (give or take) about your opinions regarding a zero magnification red dot (3 moa dot) versus a 2x scope. Please share actual experience if you have it. Thanks in advance. Charlie

[Camba]

I am definitely not an expert in this subject and the only experience I have is the following:

I love the red dot scope for making easy to point and place the dot where you want the bullet to hit (assumed the gun had been sighted properly).  As much as I like the red dot; and I had killed deer having one mounted to my 44 mag S&W, I had also experienced the battery power go dead and makes the revolver useless.  I tryed to put a deer out of its missery that my friend shot and to my supprize, the battery was dead.  I spent 3 shot on the wounded deer trying to kill him from a 10 feet distance.

As far as the scope, I like the 2x Leopold as long as there is lots of light.  For sure, I don't have to worry about the battery going dead but the crosshair is so small that if you are hunting in a heavy timber area and is getting close to dark, it makes it very difficult to place the crosshairs on the animal.

I still use both and I like them both.  However, more often than not, I see myself carrying an open sighted gun and keep my shots to 50 yards or less.
For small game hunting, I like my Ruger Mk II/III with a scope or open sights as needed basis and the same goes with my Ruger Super Blackhawk Hunter.  The scope can easily mount and unmount at will and pretty much maintains the point of impact while allowing the option to go open sighted without much trouble.  You cannot do that withwith other guns.

Camba

[Bigeasy]

Camba made a lot of good points.  I think it depends on your hunting style and location.  Over the years I have tended to move from scopes on my hunting handguns to red dot type sights.  They provide good accuracy for revolver range shots (under 100 yards), and are fast to use.  I tend to hunt in the Northeast, usually in dark, heavy woods, where the cross hairs of a scope can be slow to find.  Now if you primarily hunt in open terrain, with better light, then a scope may be more appropriate.  I do use scopes on my Contender barrels, so as to take advantage of their long range capabilities.  My favorite deer rigs are a Redhawk and a Smith 29, both with with an UltraDot sight.  Iron sights are still a good choice, just not as quick in poor light situations.  Key to any electronic sight is to choose a model with decent battery life, and always carry a spare battery.  Though I have not used one on a handgun, seems to me a low powered scope with an illuminated reticule might be the best of both worlds, though expensive for a quality model.  Cheap glass has no business on a handgun that has any real recoil, as it will sooner or later fail.

Larry

[Junior1942]

I performed a dim light test on all of my pistol and scout scopes and on a red dot.  At dusk one afternoon I turned off the room lights and aimed the scopes and sight one by one through my screen door at my mailbox some 75 yards across the front yard.  With a Leupold 2.75x I could read the white letters on the side of the black mailbox.  With the other scopes, 2x through 4x, I could tell there were letters on the side of the mailbox.  Through the red dot sight I could not even tell I was looking at a mailbox. 

Conclusion of test: I replaced all the non-Leupold scopes and the red dot with Leupold and Burris pistol or scout scopes. 

[drdougrx]

Just wondering if a 2x pistol scope with an illuminated reticle would help.....   I have a RSRH in 480 that I'd like to do something with optics wise.

[mbopp]

I had a Leupold 2X pistol scope on my 14" Contender for deer hunting, a 1" Millet red dot on a .22 pistol, and tried a Bushnell Holosight on my slug gun.
I didn't like the Holosight on the shotgun so I tried it on the Contender. That is now its new home. I find it to be brighter and easier to line up a shot with compared to the scope. The red dot field of view was too restrictive so it's now on my BL-22.
The Holosight is a battery hog though, I make it a point to carry spare batteries with me.
The Leupold is waiting for a new gun or I may put it up in the classified here.

[coyotejoe]

I've shot some tiny groups on paper with a scoped handgun but I just find them too heavy, slow and awkward, awkward both to carry and to shoot. You really can't "point shoot" with a handgun wearing either a scope or a conventional red dot. So I have gone to option number four, a tubeless red dot. Some call them holographic sights or reflex sights but they're really just a red dot without the heavy, bulky tube. They weigh less than two ounces and if mounted over the original rear sight location the gun can still be carried in conventional holsters. I now have four handguns so equipped with four different brands of sights. My accuracy is probably not the equal of a scope but still much better than open sights and the guns are just as easy to carry and point just as well as open sights. I also like the fact that I don't have to turn it on and adjust the brightness. They come on when the hood is removed and self-adjust for brightness, though some do have an on-off switch for long term storage. They work very well in any light. I attach the hood to the holster with a thong so that the hood pops off when the gun is drawn and it doesn't get lost. Battery life is for years but I'd still choose one like the "tru-Point" which permits battery change without loss of zero. I had gotten to the point that I just could no longer shoot good groups with iron sights but with the little red dots I shoot better than ever. Eye relief is unlimited so you can shoot from any position.

[ole 5 hole group]

I’ll go along with ole coyotejoe on this one.  Those light weight but sturdy reflex sights are the cat’s meow – just no comparison between them and open sights.  Concentrating on the front sight and getting your alignment spacing perfect is a thing of the past if you go to a red dot.  I have the Leupold DeltaPoint, which weighs right at a half ounce and sets back where the rear sight use to be.  It will take some revolver handling time to get use to the electronic sight but once you have it mastered – well, it’s just a nice feature to have available. 

The difference with the DeltaPoint is you can use the tip of the delta as your aiming point for load development/shooting for group, as the tip is probably finer than a 0.5” MOA dot and that is small.  Most red dots are 3 to 4 MOA, which makes them just a little harder to shoot small groups using a 6 O’clock sight picture on the bullseye.  The Delta itself is 7.5” MOA, which makes it easier to get on a fast moving target with good accuracy using both eyes open.  The only drawback to the DeltaPoint is the cost – you’ll have to pay $400.00 for the sight and if you want to use a base other than a weaver style, you’ll have to pony up another $50.00, which is well worth it for most.  Battery life is very good – I’m still on my 1st and it has seen a couple months of hard use – the battery is motion activated, so it’s basically on all the time you’re in contact with it.     

For load development at 100 yards I use a 2.5X8X32 Leupold and I zoom up to 8X, which allows me to shoot close to the revolver & load potential.  I can’t do that with either the red dot or 2X scope because with both the 2X & red dot the X-hair/dot appears to be rock steady and we all know that’s not reality.  Zoom up to 8X and you can see the x-hair dance around that 4” red bullseye at 100 yards – you just have to “time” the dance for your best groups.  An example is one of my best loads at 100 yards with the 8X is 3” consistently while the Deltapoint will print 5” to 6” normally but on occasion it will do close to the scope’s performance.  Of course, sometimes I can shoot groups at 100 yards that you’ll have a hard time covering with both hands.

I’ve used the DeltaPoint with calibers from 45 Colt, 454 Casull to the 500’s (Smith & JRH) with no problems so far. 

[coyotejoe]

As I mentioned I now have four handguns so equipped. I pictured the AMT .22 mag with a Burris Fastfire. Here are the other three. From the top they are an S&W 22A with a very cheap NcStar sight which works surprisingly well for a $50 sight, although getting it zeroed took a full 50 rounds.
 Next down is my Rossi .357 with a DrOptik sight which cost more than the gun but it is highly accurate.
At the bottom is my Ruger flat Top .44 mag with a TruGlo which so far is my favorite.
And yes, I do like shoulder holsters for long and heavy handguns.

[Glanceblamm]

I like my 3moa red dot and really like the feature of being able to select "Green" for the dawn or dusk.

The scope is going to be a little more precise "when shooting groups" and even the low powered ones are going to be able to turn time back abit in the low light.

I am liking Bigeasy's thoughts on this.

seems to me a low powered scope with an illuminated reticule might be the best of both worlds