Like most things, the topic of pistol optics divides people into two camps: the dot devotees and the iron purists. Not particularly helpful, but human nature.
Anyway, if you follow my writing, you know that I am dot agnostic as I have and train with dots but still do the same with irons-only pistols. I think dot technology is here and now, not coming, as the technology is reliable enough for real world application, but the fact that handguns are utilized for concealment, often deep concealment, leads me to still appreciate the smaller, sleeker, less-maintenance profile of a pistol equipped with only irons. For me it is simple; a modern handgunner should know and love both.
While people with vision issues often find the dot unleashes their true potential, the primary benefit of the dot for all shooters is, certainly, distance accuracy. It Really does not matter who you are or how good you are with irons, the dot is more accurate as it is a much smaller, more precise, aiming point that also eliminates the need for sight alignment. However, while many say as much, there seems little in the way of direct comparison, so here is one.
To begin, let me say that I don’t shoot a lot of 25-yard B8 bullseye as it is not really my thing. I tend to shoot a single run at it, maybe every couple of months, just to see where my pistol accuracy is. I do this with cheap training ammo as well, and don’t seek out particularly accurate loads or any such thing, so I am not in any way a bullseye shooter.
The second obvious limitation to my comparison here is that I am comparing two different guns. A more scientific comparison would be between the same gun, just optics and irons. However, I can tell you that I have shot the Walther Q5 (my dot gun) with irons in the past and found no advantage in accuracy over my G19 (my irons gun) even though the Walther is likely the more accurate gun due to its superior trigger. In fact, my irons results on 25-yard bull with the Q5 was almost identical to what I can do with the G19, so I assure you, the difference you observe below is related entirely to irons versus optics, not the difference in guns.
I find that my experience in the accuracy and performance difference between irons and optics does not really manifest until about 15 yards and out. Starting around that distance, the dot facilitates more accuracy, but also faster shots. Within that distance, I really don’t track any difference. So, for my own purposes, the advantage to dot sights is entirely in distance shooting.
However, when we move to 25 yards, which becomes a universal standard for what is further distance for pistol shooting, we see an obvious difference.
Below is the example I shot recently with the G19, as I have been training exclusively with irons of late. A 92% on a 10-shot, 25-yard B8 is about the best I do with that gun, at least in the poor indoor range light that I shot it in.
Compare that with the B8 I shot several months ago when I was working with the Q5 Match dot gun, a 98%.
Now, you might be inclined to say, “wow, this article was helpful, now I know that the accuracy difference between irons and dots is exactly six percent!” If only life was so simple. I find that as the distance increases, the advantage of the dot increases on an order of magnitude.
Recall how is said I find essentially no difference inside of 15 yards? Well, now you can see significant difference at 25 yards. So, trust me when I tell you, the accuracy difference at 50 yards is enormous. I find that I can ring a C-Zone steel at 50 yards with iron sights consistently, but I need to take my time, and know the hold based on the ammo. However, with the dot, not only can I hit it on demand, easily, but at a much faster rate. The accuracy is much more consistent, and the time to make the shot is greatly reduced. No comparison.
The advantage of the dot is undeniable at extended pistol distances. I would argue that in our modern era of increased active killer attacks and looming terrorism, having more speed and accuracy at 50+ yards is a significant advantage in a handgun. A good shooter is not dead in the water with irons here, but the dot is more consistent and faster at these distances.
My suggestion is, rather than weigh into the argument based on your own preferences and bias, just put it to the test and see exactly where the difference is and make your choice in defensive gear accordingly. As I have written in the past, the argument that the red dot is slower at close range is bogus, if you train properly with it. So, the difference remains: smaller, sleeker, less complicated concealment profile, versus significant accuracy advantage at distance. That is the choice between irons and optics on a carry gun, and both are valid arguments to be made.
For the best prices on ammunition, shop Ammoman.com https://www.ammoman.com/
For the ammo I use for training, go to: https://www.ammoman.com/9mm-blazer-brass-124-grain-fmj-5201-1000
Reflex Handgun 
To dot or not to dot. That is the question. What I really like about this site is that it offers some of the most practical firearm information on the internet. Gun blogs are filled with big opinions, and polarizing views. This site offers very practical, real world information that is nuanced. As you point out, when it comes to red dots it does not have to be all or nothing. I used to be an irons purist, mostly due to concerns about battery life and astigmatism. However, I recently overcame concerns about battery life by co-witnessing irons on a couple of my pistols. My concerns about astigmatism I overcame by using a green dot instead of red. I decided to give dots a try. I’m glad I did. As you note, at a distance they really do make a difference. I was really amazed by the results. I didn’t want to like them, but at a moderate distance they really do make a difference.I did mount one on a on a carry pistol, but I have mixed feelings. I’ve carried this particular pistol less afterward which I think speaks for itself. Going forward I’m going to train with both irons, and a dot and consider the reflex site a nice option, but not a necessity.
LikeLike
Thank you for the kind words. I agree completely that it should not be all or nothing. Like you, I still roll with both. I have also noticed that green dots are clearer for astigmatism.
LikeLike