Super Redhawk red dot advice

Status
Not open for further replies.

LaneP

Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2019
Messages
1,142
Location
North Carolina
I've never mounted a red dot on top of my .454 Super Redhawk but lately have gotten the itch to do so. Research I've done gives positive feedback for Ultradot, Burris and Aimpoint. I'm sure there are others.

The questions I have if anyone has input are

- Tube diameter. Many are 30mm vs 1 inch. Is there a benefit or disadvantage to one or the other?

- Dot size. My primary purpose will be punching targets between 25 and 50 yards. But I'd like to be able to shoot out to 100 occasionally. What is the most flexible dot size?

- Durability. Which brands have the best reputation for not coming apart under severe recoil?

As always, thanks in advance for your help and guidance.
 
The ones you have mentioned are good, you can also look at Vortex Venom, which has the best warranty/CS in the biz, or a large window C-More.
A large dot gives quick acquisition, but poor long range performance, covering too large an area on the target. For bullseye or long range you will want a 2 or 3 moa, at most.
C-More has modular dots you can quickly change sizes.
 
The ones you have mentioned are good, you can also look at Vortex Venom, which has the best warranty/CS in the biz, or a large window C-More.
A large dot gives quick acquisition, but poor long range performance, covering too large an area on the target. For bullseye or long range you will want a 2 or 3 moa, at most.
C-More has modular dots you can quickly change sizes.

I considered a lot of things and ended up going with the Vortex Venom 6 MOA. Along the way I decided I'd probably get a lot of use out of this sight on one of my Ruger Mk III's. I haven't decided how it might integrate with my SRH just yet. It may be that a tube optic would be a better bet if I get good results from the Warne style M77 mounts for the SRH. Thanks for your help with this question.
 
One trick to using large dots on paper targets...think peep sights. If you have a round dot (not always the case for people with astigmatism), use the dot and target as concentric circles. Not perfect, but better than nothing.

I have a dot on a Redhawk, and it is good clean fun.
 
One trick to using large dots on paper targets...think peep sights. If you have a round dot (not always the case for people with astigmatism), use the dot and target as concentric circles. Not perfect, but better than nothing.

I have a dot on a Redhawk, and it is good clean fun.

Thanks. Following my previous post and after more investigation of the benefits/disadvantages I changed dot size to 3 MOA. I think based on the type of shooting I typically do a 3 is going to work out better.
 
3 will be plenty large enough for your needs. The big dots are more applicable to action shoots, running, and hitting general zones on silhouette targets, quickly.
Sounds like your leaning more towards Target accuracy, and longer hits.
Even a 2moa is easy to pick-up quickly, it's about grip and muscle memory. You made a good choice.
 
Just remember that the larger the dot size is the more difficult it will be to shoot at more distant targets as it may cover the target. On the plus side it does make for faster acquisition on nearer targets.
 
So this particular SRH project ran off the rails (pun intended). In the process of getting advice for the SRH optic I got bit by an interest in putting a Vortex on my Mk III Hunter.

First a big thanks to a forum member who mentioned in another unrelated thread that Ruger Mk III's ship with an accessory rail. I was about to order a new one from ShopRuger and after reading that, searched my box collection and low and behold, there was the accessory rail still in its original packaging in the box.

Another thanks goes out collectively to those that suggested a 3 MOA dot. That's what I got and already I know it will be more beneficial to me than a 6.

So here it is, snugged down and ready for the next range trip. I WILL get a tube-style optic for my SRH at some point, and it will be the 4 MOA, 30mm Ultradot.

Thanks!

VP3GIcE_2G5jVBM7DbzyNrBS3saF23j8wfwhpqfEr96i4MFX1l3uFBZKqckbww9LJbGU9qRNFyhI7_8FpQ=w1200-h689-no.jpg
 
Aimpoint ACRO P-1.

Sealed emitter, very tough, and Aimpoint developed it to live on violently reciprocating pistol slides, specifically .40S&W. The G forces encountered fore and aft on a slide far exceed what the revolvers fixed top strap can ever dish out.
 
Last edited:
I have an UltraDot 30mm on my SRH. Used primarily for hunting and I would recommend it. If I was mostly target shooting I might consider a good scope.
 
First outing with a red dot ever, and there is no doubt this is a superior (to me) sighting system.

A few observations. It will take a bit of practice to pick up the red dot quickly, but I noticed immediately it lends itself better to shooting with both eyes open. Typically I am focused on the front sight and everything else blurs slightly. This sight allows me to keep the target in clear focus and the dot simply settles where I want the bullets to go.

I only shot at the 50' range today, but that was more than enough to know this sight will be a permanent part of my Mk III.

Once again a thanks to those recommending the 3 MOA dot. There are radiating highlights from the dot (my bad eyes) but the center of the dot remains clear and sharp enough to be very precise. the 3 dot is also the perfect size for the distances I typically shoot. A 6 dot would have just been too big.

I was sighting in with Remington Thunderbolt bulk .22. A note about those. They are cheap, and I believe I know why. I shot about 100 today and had about 4 misfires and about as many that felt undercharged. There was still enough power to cycle the bolt but the round felt noticeably weaker.

That's a 10 shot group, and during that 10 shot string, two of the shots felt undercharged, which I cannot positively attribute as the shots that are separate from the other 8, but I have to wonder.

I also shot some old CCI Stingers I've had for eons and they performed as well as I always remembered. Stingers are costly but they are a premium, highly dependable, powerful and accurate. I was so impressed by how well they shot I got home and immediately ordered 500!

wpLmkqvv4Fh43j8AK68fnZ2eeHwr3nZI3aE0pyrAZTByrmt-qatx7TaPh2CetPeGky-7IuCHSPPa9uxzWQ=w1165-h874-no.jpg
 
The G forces encountered fore and aft on a slide far exceed what the revolvers fixed top strap can ever dish out.
Got to agree with @CraigC , never heard of a semi auto that can put down punishment on the shooter even a fraction of the big magnums. Yeah, I get it the abrupt stop at the back and the slam forward but we're talking small mass, if it would batter the optic so badly think of the longevity of the grip frame.
 
AS the slide moves rearward it is being acted upon by a spring in the opposite direction essentially hampering its rearward movement and dampening the shock at the rearmost moment. The forward movement is only spring pressure. Nothing of either of those shocks is anything like 454 Casull at the moment of ignition which far exceeds what a 40 cal or 10mm or...well....just about any auto pistol cartridge can dish out in even a fixed breech gun.
 
It’s all about rapid acceleration and deceleration, a pistol slide even with a spring is moving a heck of a lot faster than a heavy recoiling revolver ever does in the shooter’s hands. Which is why miniature red dot sights get durability tested on semiauto pistols with high slide velocities. Aimpoint knows what they are doing and even though .40 S&W is not at all common in Europe they used that round specifically because the G forces generated by it in relatively small and light slides are pretty extreme, and the relatively heavy recoil springs tend to impart some nasty acceleration in the opposite direction with very sudden deceleration as the slide and barrel lock up.

What the shooter feels is completely irrelevant, it’s all about the forces the sight is being subjected to. Figure my .454 weighs over 50oz, and the slide on something like a Glock might weigh 13 ounces, probably a bit less depending on the model. My revolver has to overcome the friction of my grip to start initiating acceleration on firing plus overcome that 50+ ounces. An auto pistol slide has little friction to overcome, low slide mass, and a recoil spring. Watch slowed down video of both a revolver and and auto pistol being fired, the slide on the outs pistol will be flat out moving.
 
I have to say I have a 25mm Ultradot on a 44 mag SRH and it has held up for several thousand rounds. It is the basic old original model. I think it is a 4 moa dot and it works great out to 100 yards+. As I am getting older age dictates that I need magnification at distances much past that. If you are worried about the dot being too big at distance sight to the top of the dot instead of dot covering target. I am not the best shot out there but at 50 yards I shot this today off of a rest. That was 6 rounds on an 8” knockdown target and better shots than me can really smoke it. 33381140-9801-4FF7-9455-3C2A7D4B1F23.jpeg
 
I have to say I have a 25mm Ultradot on a 44 mag SRH and it has held up for several thousand rounds. It is the basic old original model. I think it is a 4 moa dot and it works great out to 100 yards+. As I am getting older age dictates that I need magnification at distances much past that. If you are worried about the dot being too big at distance sight to the top of the dot instead of dot covering target. I am not the best shot out there but at 50 yards I shot this today off of a rest. That was 6 rounds on an 8” knockdown target and better shots than me can really smoke it. View attachment 887280
That's what I do with my rmr. It has a 6.5 moa dot. The trajectory of my bullet puts the poi right at the bottom of the dot at 100 yds.
 
Got to agree with @CraigC , never heard of a semi auto that can put down punishment on the shooter even a fraction of the big magnums. Yeah, I get it the abrupt stop at the back and the slam forward but we're talking small mass, if it would batter the optic so badly think of the longevity of the grip frame.

I don't know the ultimate answer (whether slide-riding or big-bore revolver use is harder on a sight), but I will say that there are a lot of sights that stand up just fine if they are mounted on a non-reciprocating mount attached to the frame of a semi, but will reliably fail within 3-5k rounds of being mounted on the slide. That slide accelerates pretty hard in recoil, slams to a pretty abrupt stop at the rear, accelerates forward somewhat more gently, and then slams to a fairly abrupt stop at slide closure. You're racking up 3 sudden accelerations per shot with a slide-rider as opposed to only 1 per shot with a revo'.

I would also note that adjustable rear sights on semi-auto slides seem to have a higher failure/adjustment loss rate than adjustables on revolvers. At least that's the perception I have, and the experience I've had.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top