How much difference in accuracy, Lasers vs open sights

[Ccctennis]

Reply

45 auto you misunderstood what I meant. I didn't mean I would run a course with my laser vs their iron sights. I meant just because I choose to have a laser attached to my gun doesn't mean I'm not a good shot with iron sights. I was saying I would shoot against those that think laser fans are weak.

 

[mavracer]

what you NEED to see to take the next shot. With the laser, you're actually bringing that dot back from wherever (ceiling, wall behind, target's feet, hat, out the door or window, etc., etc.) and having to physically get it back on the desired point of impact.

Your arm geometry is the same returning the dot and returning the sights back to the target requires the same motion, when you first started using sights you had to "learn" how to reaquire a proper sight picture to shoot fast. Same thing goes for the laser you need to actually practice enough with it that you stop having to "find" it and trust muscle memory will automaticly put it back on target.

 

[Sam1911]

That may be at least somewhat true -- I hesitate to say it is completely wrong -- but does still have drawback of the visibility of the aiming system being target-dependent. However, you point out what David E. said. A really good shooter may do ok with laser sights. A mediocre one probably will be better off with irons, as the front sight remains in view throughout the shot and recovery.

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

Again, I don't think the laser has no place...it most certainly DOES as another tool which we may utilize for conditions to which it is suited. But it's not the only tool and it should never be thought of as such.

There's an old saying: "When all you have is a hammer, everything starts to look like a nail." As shooters we need to recognize that there ARE other tools available to us...be they lasers, iron sights, scopes, or what-not. And, like any other conventional tool we may have in the garage, each is optimally suited for certain things and less so for others.

I do not doubt that some people here (or anywhere) may be better at using a laser sight than iron sights. They may even be better with a laser sight than many people with iron sights. However, individual performance is not the issue here.

The question is whether there is a significant difference between the two as applied to the broad spectrum of humanity with respect to the CAPACITY of one method as compared to the other based on how the human body and nervous system work together.

This capacity is based on the physical ability of a person to use particular sighting method to quickly acquire a proper target sight and actually place a bullet on target. This isn't based on choosing special circumstances that clearly favor one over the other, such as shooting around corners where visual sight alignment of iron sights is not possible. It's based on realistic circumstances in which both methods of sighting can be brought into play for the purpose of evaluating their relative performance.

It is my supposition, based on my layman's understanding of how the body and nervous system work, that the closer your physical skills approximate the natural, instinctive neuro-musculature behavior of the body, the quicker and more accurate a person will be with a firearm.

The moment we start moving away from this and incorporating the use of other senses and processes, then the brain has to take a larger role in processing this new data before translating that into the body functions that are required to make things happen. When we do this, it will result in an unavoidable increase in reaction times.

 

[mavracer]

A mediocre one probably will be better off with irons, as the front sight remains in view throughout the shot and recovery.

I'm not so sure most of the mediocre shooters I see are target focused to start with and need to train to actually use the sights at speed.
I still agree that they're going to have very limited use in real life, I just don't think they should "with just a bit of training" slow a good shooter down. I'm pretty sure most grand masters could shoot an el prez with they're eyes closed, don't think too much.

 

[9mmepiphany]

Really? you're scores shooting a el prez are the same with a LCP as they would be with a full size 1911?
Your splits are the same shooting a LCR as they would be shooting a 4" GP 100?

Sorry, I had a much longer post and edited it it for readability. I guess I edited it too much and didn't address some points...I blame posting before finishing my coffee

What I meant to post was that having the laser wouldn't change the way the same gun would be run on a course of fire. I took out the part that if a smaller gun wouldn't be appropriate, because it was so much slower, maybe it really wouldn't be appropriate for effective defensive purposes either.

However, to address your question. I don't run guns at either end of the spectrum...neither a LCP or a 1911...if I'm testing suitability for defensive use (which is what I use IDPA for).

Interestingly, I have run a 2.5" M-66 against a GP100 and a 686 in SSR and our shooting was on par. I wouldn't think, depending on round count and number of reloads required in the COF that a LCR would be much slower

I agree which is why I wonder why you would condem a laser because you tried it once and found it to be slower than your sights that you've been training with for years.

I actually tried a laser for quite a bit before forming my opinion. I've tried them on J-frames, LCRs, 1911s, Glocks and Kahrs...it makes it easier if you have a lot of friends who are equipment geeks...over a period of months. First on a static line to get a feel for them and then in shooting bays set up for movement and reaction targets.

I don't condemn lasers...I think they can be very useful for training...but I do warn against folks who think they can be a replacement for sighted fire training

 

[Shawn Dodson]

"For years, J-frames were considered "arm's reach" weapons, that is until CTC Lasergrips were added. With the mild recoil of target wadcutters, officers are actually practicing with their BUG's; when combined with Lasergrips, qualification scores with J-frames have dramatically increased. Now 5 shots rapid-fire in a 6" circle at 25 yds is not uncommon--kind of mind blowing watching officers who could not hit the target at 25 yds with a J-frame suddenly qualify with all shots in the black… " -- Doc GKR (See - "BUG's: .380 ACP vs. .38 Sp" at http://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?4336-BUG-s-380-ACP-vs-38-Sp )

 

[mavracer]

What I meant to post was that having the laser wouldn't change the way the same gun would be run on a course of fire. I took out the part that if a smaller gun wouldn't be appropriate, because it was so much slower, maybe it really wouldn't be appropriate for effective defensive purposes either.

Ok that work's better for me.
And I agree I think if more people would shoot "on the clock" they'd get a better understanding of what works.

I don't condemn lasers...I think they can be very useful for training...but I do warn against folks who think they can be a replacement for sighted fire training

My feelings as well, I use mine mostly as a training aid for dry fire practice and practicing point shooting from odd angles without burning up ammo.
As I said in my first post I think the accuracy advantage they do give on small pistols is realistically unusable in the SD world.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

I see no mention of speed involved other than "rapid fire" which is somewhat open for debate since it wasn't defined (1 shot per second, 1 shot per 2 seconds?) and how much time were they given to actually line up the first shot? Were they starting from a ready position like Dallas PD does at 25 yards or from the holster? Little things sometimes make a big difference in getting that first shot on target quickly and accurately.

Did any of this practice translate to such good marksmanship without the laser grips?

A lot of information is missing, though I don't doubt the accuracy of what DocGKR said.

Interesting that he is describing the sights for a niche line of guns, BUGS, in this case, a J Frame revolver BUG. Sounds like the laser is a decent compensation for a short sight radius on a gun with a less-than-wonderful DA trigger.

 

[JohnBiltz]

I was a major laser advocate. I carried and shot with one for about 3.5 years. During that time I always split my shooting 50/50 with it on and off. I went away from it. There are advantages and disadvantages. The two main advantages of a laser I feel are: 1. There are times you just can't use your sights because you are in a awkward body position. 2. You are not using your sights. An awful lot of shoot outs take place where people never think to use their sights. So it doesn't matter if you are better with your sights because you are not using them. I believe people use their sights if they have time to get the gun to presentation before the fight starts. If they are fighting from the draw then a lot of people don't. They are looking at the target and just don't make the visual/mental switch to front sight. If they have a bit of point and shoot ability that laser dot will show up in their vision as they look at the target. That doesn't guarantee they will keep continue to use the laser though but it is more likely than they suddenly realize they have sights and should be using them.

Lasers have disadvantages as well. Picking up the target is the big one. If your target has a wall behind it you can walk your laser to the target because the dot is easy to see. If there is open behind the target its hard to get the laser on target because there is no dot to see. You don't have any idea where your point of aim is in relation to the target. Irons are much quicker in a case like this because you know where your point of aim is and can track that point of aim to the target. That is in my opinion why they will not do well in competition they will be slower finding the target.

 

[9mmepiphany]

If your target has a wall behind it you can walk your laser to the target because the dot is easy to see. If there is open behind the target its hard to get the laser on target because there is no dot to see. You don't have any idea where your point of aim is in relation to the target.

Thank you for bringing this up...I often forget.

Many folks who practice at home or at a range will find the dot on the target backing and then move it onto the target.

This isn't always available in the non-practice world. When your dot isn't on target and you aren't behind the sights (the awkward positions mentioned as a justification for a laser) to point the gun the correct direction, you'll really have no feedback as to where the dot is.

That doesn't happen with open sights

 

[LightningMan]

I will add to my previous post; as I said before shoot both ways (laser & sights) when practacing. I know this is not SD but when our club has its yearly bowling pin league, I use a laser only, (BTW I'm about the only one that does) anyway the last 3 times that I shot our yearly league, I won the overall standings. BTW I have tried a red dot, and open sights but the laser works best for me. I believe the reason is that I am righthanded but left eye dominate so I can't shoot with both eyes open if I want to see my open sights or my red-dot but with a laser I can. LM

 

[Onward Allusion]

Every time the "laser or not" debate comes up, I always think about Archery and the Recurve vs Compound vs Primitive argument. It really comes down to personal preference.

For me, lasers are just one more tool. Kind of like using a sight on a bow or shoot by pointing & sensing target placement. On almost all of my guns for SD, they have lasers and night sights or glow sights. Nightstand/House guns always have a light. We're smart apes that learned to use tools to get where we are, so why not use them?

 

[gym]

Debatable on a carry gun, most I know want as little as possible on their weapon.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

I want as little as possible on my gun...that will allow it to accomplish the needs I have.

 

[wally]

I think lasers are potentially most accurate sighting system going.

When I got my first Crimson Trace Laser Grips on my SC360 .357 J-frame I sighted it in off sandbags at 10 yards.

First shot, a few inches off the 1" target blaze orange aiming dot, second shot, I started cussing "the darn POS doesn't hold zero well enough to even stay on the paper!" then I noticed the first bullet hole was now elliptical, darn near a William Tell shot through the same hole.

Unfortunately as a practical matter I had to wait for very cloudy day to even see the laser dot on the paper. Shooting steel plates with a laser, they are much slower as picking up the laser dot at 10 yards is much harder than picking up the front sight or a red dot optic. Using a red dot optic is much like using a laser in that you are focusing on the target and looking for the dot but with the optic you can easily "find" the dot and then find the target, whereas with the laser its really hard to find the dot at some place on the backstop so you get near zero visual feedback adjusting your aim. What actually worked best for me with the laser was using the front sight as normal to get the dot on the plate and then find the laser -- shot much tighter groups, but any hit is a good hit and being slower loses.



IMHO, if you don't mind the expense and the marginal real-world utility I do think they are a nice option to have in very poor light, or to make shots from behind cover if you can see the laser dot. Their best real-world utility is dry fire practice, and for this a cheap laser pointer and some tape will do the job.

 

[gym]

I used to think that they were terrific. I think that in some cases they still may be the optimal sighting system. There is no right or wrong here, only what makes sense for the individual at the time.
If I had no space constraints causing me to minimize my shooting package, I would probably put as much "stuff" on my gun that "could" help me under every occasion.
Unfortunately, in my analysis, that's not the case. I would love to slap on a Veridian green laser with the strobe light combo, if it didn't weigh anything and take up so much space and stealth.
I can't see how I can get all the gadjets on my carry gun, "any of them" without sacrificing printing weight and stealth along with it.
Also in my own trials with timing, I shoot faster and just as accurate without the laser as with it, only not as many shots, because I find myself waiting on the laser to pull the trigger. So I may not have had the perfect shot, but still would have hit the guy without it. That's my analysis, making it as simple and honest as I can. The brain reacts funny when it thinks that the dot has to be in a certain place than when it is free to let go. IMHO
On the other hand, a blinding white light, will not only make it easier to see the target, but also blind the opponent, if used properly.