HKPRO Forums banner

21 - 40 of 59 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,079 Posts
But is that really practical to have 4 dozen $600 optics?
But is that really practical to
get to where you have dozens and dozens of Pistols
???

The dot is a performance enhancer if one's willing to put some work in, as multiple people alluded to above. "Practical" is a function of how much performance you want out of the gun. You don't have to have a dot to get a good performance, but there are numerous shooting tasks where the dot gives big advantages. An individual choice what one's going to compromise on, cost, size factor, complexity, or performance.

Not a bit surprised on the content of original post. Don't see HK going into pains of retooling the machinery to give legacy slides cuts. I mean, they still haven't given UPs a standard rail...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nick101ABN

·
Registered
Joined
·
91 Posts
No more impractical than having 4 dozen pistols.
I disagree. Firearm technology hasn't changed all that much when you think about it. We're still firing projectiles that were invented around the early 1900's, from Pistols that for the most part use designs from John Browning. We're talking about USP's, that were designed in the late 80's. Guns hold their value and are collectible. Electronic battery powered optics? Not so much. They're like a smartphone. You're on an upgrade hamster weel.

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
91 Posts
But is that really practical to ???

The dot is a performance enhancer if one's willing to put some work in, as multiple people alluded to above. "Practical" is a function of how much performance you want out of the gun. You don't have to have a dot to get a good performance, but there are numerous shooting tasks where the dot gives big advantages. An individual choice what one's going to compromise on, cost, size factor, complexity, or performance.

Not a bit surprised on the content of original post. Don't see HK going into pains of retooling the machinery to give legacy slides cuts. I mean, they still haven't given UPs a standard rail...
Sure. They hold their value for the most part, if not go up in value. You have different Pistols for different tasks. Different calibers for different uses.

Any red dot you buy today will likely be very out of date 5-10 years from now, assuming the thing still turns on and works

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
497 Posts
Discussion Starter · #25 · (Edited)
For those of us willing to move on from 400-year old sighting technology, there are lots of choices. The RMR has been around for 11 years, with a stellar track record, and I have C-more sights that are 25 years old that still work as well as the day they came out of their plastic yellow boxes.

The technology is only getting better, more reliable, and more affordable.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,079 Posts
Sure. They hold their value for the most part, if not go up in value. You have different Pistols for different tasks. Different calibers for different uses.

Any red dot you buy today will likely be very out of date 5-10 years from now, assuming the thing still turns on and works
Outside of anomalous times like these days, handguns lose value like cars, the minute you take them off the dealer's lot. You need either a niche gun and a collector wanting it like a P7, or panic buying rush to get your money on them.

As far as RDS getting outdated and losing value: in some way, I wish it was the case. RMR remains one of the top defensive optic options and it was released in 2009. That's 12 years and they sell just fine at those prices. I myself wish they had moved on with the design.
I already mentioned it was a performance enhancing item and people who work on performance shoot ammo worth its value in 1-3 months, pre-covid prices. Practically, if it lasts 1-2 years, it is already an expendable item, and they last a long longer.

In my experience folks who actually use their guns a lot don't really get concerned with collector's values and cost of enhancing options. On the other hand, folks who have four dozens handguns for various reasons don't really have a realistic chance on using all of them in a high volume ways so there is really no point for them to invest into any additional bolt-ons.
 

·
I Bleed Urban Gray
Joined
·
2,908 Posts
Guys, please stay on topic and don't get testy about other people's comments. Let these words guide you:

290103
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
583 Posts
I disagree. Firearm technology hasn't changed all that much when you think about it. We're still firing projectiles that were invented around the early 1900's, from Pistols that for the most part use designs from John Browning. We're talking about USP's, that were designed in the late 80's. Guns hold their value and are collectible. Electronic battery powered optics? Not so much. They're like a smartphone. You're on an upgrade hamster weel.
As previously noted by @YVK, guns don't really hold their value, certainly not normal mass-produced polymer frames (some allowances will have to be made for limited production units, I'll concede). And at that point, you could just as easily have invested on gold or a blue chip or fine art and see better returns if the goal was to get something that holds value. I'm not saying that having 4 dozen handguns is stupid; I get that some folks like guns for the sake of guns, and that's totally cool, but like most hobbies or passions, it's hardly practical when looked at purely through an objective economical analysis.

The argument for different pistols & calibers, different uses, strikes me as kinda off. What kind of uses are we talking about here? From my perspective, there's about 4 different uses for a handgun: NPE carry, normal carry, woods gun, and competition. You certainly don't need more than a dozen handguns to cover the first three, even factoring in spares, let alone 4 dozen (I view competition is its own animal); calibers you could easily get away with just 9×19mm for the first two, while a woods gun would be its own caliber.

As for the need to upgrade, do you really though? We still got plenty of folks getting away with using the Aimpoint CompM2 on long guns, and that was released in 2000. The CompM4 remains one of the top choices in hard use long gun RDS, and that's from 2007. The aforementioned RMR is also quite old. You can keep jumping on new optics if you want, but older ones are hardly obsoleted, and still give a performance edge over iron sights. Hell, how many people do we have on this website that still recommend the old Insight UTLs for a WML for a USP, despite that actually being thoroughly obsoleted?

So yeah, I do think it's a damn shame that H&K won't be making optics-ready versions of their hammer-fired pistols still in production, as I do think from a pure shooting performance perspective, RDSes are far superior to irons, and having a factory option instead of needing to do expensive aftermarket milling is always a good thing. But then again, I do think it's a damn shame that H&K wouldn't even put a 1913 rail on a USP, so it's not really surprising at all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
91 Posts
You dudes sure assume a lot. First, I shoot a lot. Well, prior to COVID I did, but for now I'm not going to burn up a lot of my ammo stores. I own a lot of property, and I have ranges that Hickok45 would be impressed with.

As for firearms being an investment, you are assuming that every pistol purchased is brand new. Many times, you can find a pistol that's technically used, but only had a box put through it. That dude took the brunt of the depreciation, and now the second guy can probably sell it for what he spent, or probably more later if needed.

This wasn't meant to be a discussion that firearms are a good investment, simply stating that it's silly to think that adding 40+ $600 optics to a collection is realistic. You guys squawking the loudest probably own far less than that, and you know it.

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
586 Posts
You dudes sure assume a lot. First, I shoot a lot. Well, prior to COVID I did, but for now I'm not going to burn up a lot of my ammo stores. I own a lot of property, and I have ranges that Hickok45 would be impressed with.

As for firearms being an investment, you are assuming that every pistol purchased is brand new. Many times, you can find a pistol that's technically used, but only had a box put through it. That dude took the brunt of the depreciation, and now the second guy can probably sell it for what he spent, or probably more later if needed.

This wasn't meant to be a discussion that firearms are a good investment, simply stating that it's silly to think that adding 40+ $600 optics to a collection is realistic. You guys squawking the loudest probably own far less than that, and you know it.

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk
first you are also assuming that most people resell their firearms. personally i have never sold a single firearm that i have bought. they will go to my kids.

second, who are you or anyone else on a message board to tell someone how to spend their money. you can spend your however you see fit and i will spend mine on what i want to rather it being firearms, optics, or firearms with optics.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
583 Posts
As for firearms being an investment, you are assuming that every pistol purchased is brand new. Many times, you can find a pistol that's technically used, but only had a box put through it. That dude took the brunt of the depreciation, and now the second guy can probably sell it for what he spent, or probably more later if needed.
I mean, you're still not making money, if not losing money. A normal USP isn't going to appreciate in value by any meaningful amount, not compared to actually investing in it. If you bought a used USP for 700 USD in 2015 and sold it for as much in 2019, you're losing money due to inflation, and you would definitely be behind compared to just putting it into an index fund.

This wasn't meant to be a discussion that firearms are a good investment, simply stating that it's silly to think that adding 40+ $600 optics to a collection is realistic. You guys squawking the loudest probably own far less than that, and you know it.
I dunno. To me, I'd rather have 20 handguns with optics than 40 handguns without optics. Many folks would think having >40 handguns is pretty silly, too, no? I'll freely admit that my gun collection is tiny, but this is a matter of priorities and wants; I don't really feel the need to have many guns, and would simply rather outfit them all as I like; my P30LSes taken as a package I've all spent probably 3.5k USD on each. Some folks think that's stupid, and would rather have 7 stock Glock 17s than 1 tricked out P30LS. It is what it is. If you have enough money to buy just 2 VP9s, or else a VP9 and an RMR, sure, go for the 2 VPs, that gives you a back-up gun in case your main gun goes down, or you can use them as a carry vs. practice duo. But once you get to having >40 plus handguns, I don't think you have much credence in claiming what is reasonable and what isn't when it comes to economic cost/benefit (unless you're actually going out and buying collectibles specifically as investments; >40 custom 1911s from the masters like Burton, Yost, Heinie, etc. would certainly be a sound investment strategy).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,261 Posts
So...I saw my first red-dotted semi auto probably about 25 years ago on a stainless S&W. It's not new, and it's not going anywhere. I will remind people with a quote from a SlipKnot song...."Old does not mean dead; new does not mean best".

IF you have a sh*t about performance, you likely don't care about investment...and vice versa. They don't often go hand-in-hand as we tend to prefer some custom features as we progress into our skill level and knowlege base and that will likely conflict with "collector value".

If HK wouldn't adapt in the last 15 years to a weapon-mounted light worth a damn (of which there are basically 2 as of this date) with some pic slots, why would anybody think that they would consider doing a far more invasive OR program to which there are far more flavors that NO ONE can agree on?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16 Posts
As an FFL, i PUSHED HK to make an optic-ready P30...this was 2 years ago and I got the same response. Such a shame HK is becoming dead last in the Glock-Sig-FN-etc. world in terms of innovation and new products. I got rid of my VP9 and VP9SK and replaced with 320XCompact and a P365....biggest 2 reasons were capacity, modularity, and optic-ready capability. And this is coming from a BIG HK fan...I always applauded them on quality, accuracy, reliability but it is unacceptable at this point that they can't release new, innovative products. Even take their MR556 as an example. Great quality, excellent accuracy, yet its equipped just like any AR15 from 2008. I wish they would import or build the MR223s they have overseas, complete LWRC/DD killer if they brought it stateside.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
91 Posts
Are there other costs associated with all that property you own?
Sure, but it's now worth 4X what I paid.

I'm done arguing with fools. You guys enjoy yourselves, but just remember that HK appears to agree with me. The same HK that is selling SP5's over MSRP as fast as they can pump them out. The same basic MP5 design from about the 1960's...

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,079 Posts
(unless you're actually going out and buying collectibles specifically as investments; >40 custom 1911s from the masters like Burton, Yost, Heinie, etc. would certainly be a sound investment strategy).
Not even that. I've a couple of Michigun's 1911s that are just about 7 grand each and there's no way I'd get that out of them. Not that I'd wanna sell them.


Back to the original post, HK will HK in the ways how they HKed since whenever. There are a non-player in a global pistol market in general, and especially with their legacy guns, so the question whether they were to upgrade those to RDS was a non-starter to begin with.

The same HK that is selling SP5's over MSRP as fast as they can pump them out. The same basic MP5 design from about the 1960's...
Smart business decision if you ask me. Since the organizations who were the intended MP5 users have dropped them about 20 years, it makes all the sense for HK to keep milking that cow by selling an outdated weapon to its fanbase. 1911 makers have been doing this for almost half a century with the same basic design since about 1905...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
55 Posts
Got the VP9 LE and the long slide optic ready, still in the factory box.
I plan to use it in the future, but not for edc. I don’t care about the red dot so much.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,983 Posts
What if I told you that you could have irons with an RDS?

How well can you shoot with irons at night? In variable lighting? How about under NODs? How does your iron sight accuracy compare against an RDS at 25 yards? 50 yards? What if we introduce a short par time, maybe something like a >80 score needed on a B-8 at 25 yards under 20 seconds? What about shooting on the move? How well can you shift focal planes so you can observe the target while also keeping a decent front sight focus? A nice FO can work about as well as an RDS if you're shooting A zones 7 yards... but at that point, I can just slide index and get A zone hits most of the time, too.

Concealing an RDS is trivial. Most of y'all just suck as concealed carry.

And I certainly wouldn't call "[putting] the front dot in the center of the rear notch and [squeezing] the trigger" "not that hard", not if you want to combine speed and accuracy. Simple, perhaps, but hardly easy. Go to any Steel Challenge or USPSA match and you'll see how difficult it can be to perform that at a high level with consistency.

As for the topic on hand, I'm slightly surprised at the P30 not being updated, given how it's a relatively popular issued sidearm in European LE... but I guess there's a general move away from hammer-fired guns anyway. Shame.
Your points are well taken, but those scenarios mostly pertain to police/duty scenarios or competition where the handgun is carried OWB in plain sight and where the size of the pistol is trivial. I'm not shooting my pistol in civilian self defense scenarios from 10+ yards away when it's dark out. It's either going to be up close and personal, or I'm gettin' the hell outa dodge.

If there is an altercation between 2 parties (e.g. dog vs. child) or someone on a shooting spree in the local mall at say 15+ yards away during daylight hours, and assuming I knew with 100% certainty in that moment who the evil-doer was that deserved to be put down, am I taking a chance and firing shots, potentially hitting innocent bystanders in the process? I'm not so sure I want to try and play hero in that scenario whether I have a RDS or not. As for shooting on the move, shifting focal planes, going for speed and accuracy, etc., a RDS does not magically make any of those things easier if you don't have the same proper fundamental training required out of a gun with iron sights. At the end of the day, proper presentation of the gun and alignment between the rear and the muzzle are prerequisites for fast and accurate shooting, whether with RDS or irons. With proper irons (to me, that means plain black rear w/ fiber optic front), there is no shifting focal planes. Your focus stays on the target, and the red dot covers your intended POI the same way the red dot in a RDS would. I can't say the same about 3-dot sights or poorly designed sights with bad proportions, dot position, etc. where you do actually have to change focal planes and your brain has to work too hard to figure out when your sights are aligned and on target.

I will give you that a RDS makes for greater precision potential simply because there is nothing obstructing the view of the target around the red dot whereas with irons you have some of the front sight blade obstructing the area immediately around your intended POI. However, this is still only going to be a marginal improvement in precision, and it will only be advantageous if let's say a police officer has to make a miracle shot at distance when innocent bystanders are right there and at risk.

Running a pistol under NODs? Seems a bit silly to me. If you're kitted out to that level and on a mission involving NODs, grab a freakin' carbine or SMG/PCC.

RDS do have their place in the pistol world, but for me and for the average Joe carrying a gun purely for self defense, it's simply not going to do anything to help their chances of survival when SHTF if the fundamentals aren't there to begin with. For cops and competition shooters? Sure, go for it. The marginal increase in performance could be the difference between making a head shot and saving the hostage or winning Sunday's shooting match, but I guess I should have made that distinction between the possible applications of a RDS in my initial argument.

They still annoy me when I see them on a P365 intended for Joe "I'm new to guns and want it to look tacticool" Schmoe's waistband.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
583 Posts
Your points are well taken, but those scenarios mostly pertain to police/duty scenarios or competition where the handgun is carried OWB in plain sight and where the size of the pistol is trivial. I'm not shooting my pistol in civilian self defense scenarios from 10+ yards away when it's dark out. It's either going to be up close and personal, or I'm gettin' the hell outa dodge.

If there is an altercation between 2 parties (e.g. dog vs. child) or someone on a shooting spree in the local mall at say 15+ yards away during daylight hours, and assuming I knew with 100% certainty in that moment who the evil-doer was that deserved to be put down, am I taking a chance and firing shots, potentially hitting innocent bystanders in the process? I'm not so sure I want to try and play hero in that scenario whether I have a RDS or not. As for shooting on the move, shifting focal planes, going for speed and accuracy, etc., a RDS does not magically make any of those things easier if you don't have the same proper fundamental training required out of a gun with iron sights. At the end of the day, proper presentation of the gun and alignment between the rear and the muzzle are prerequisites for fast and accurate shooting, whether with RDS or irons. With proper irons (to me, that means plain black rear w/ fiber optic front), there is no shifting focal planes. Your focus stays on the target, and the red dot covers your intended POI the same way the red dot in a RDS would. I can't say the same about 3-dot sights or poorly designed sights with bad proportions, dot position, etc. where you do actually have to change focal planes and your brain has to work too hard to figure out when your sights are aligned and on target.

I will give you that a RDS makes for greater precision potential simply because there is nothing obstructing the view of the target around the red dot whereas with irons you have some of the front sight blade obstructing the area immediately around your intended POI. However, this is still only going to be a marginal improvement in precision, and it will only be advantageous if let's say a police officer has to make a miracle shot at distance when innocent bystanders are right there and at risk.

Running a pistol under NODs? Seems a bit silly to me. If you're kitted out to that level and on a mission involving NODs, grab a freakin' carbine or SMG/PCC.

RDS do have their place in the pistol world, but for me and for the average Joe carrying a gun purely for self defense, it's simply not going to do anything to help their chances of survival when SHTF if the fundamentals aren't there to begin with. For cops and competition shooters? Sure, go for it. The marginal increase in performance could be the difference between making a head shot and saving the hostage or winning Sunday's shooting match, but I guess I should have made that distinction between the possible applications of a RDS in my initial argument.

They still annoy me when I see them on a P365 intended for Joe "I'm new to guns and want it to look tacticool" Schmoe's waistband.
The problem arises that you may need to be on the offensive and take a long shot even if you don't want to, e.g., at a grocery store if you are perhaps separated from your spouse or child when the incident occurs. I totally get the idea of non-intervention as a civilian, and I do think that most folks that CCW have unrealistic expectations of what to do in an incident. While my hypothetical is extremely unlikely, so is the act of using a CCW gun in general, so meh. For me, I see zero downside to an appropriately selected RDS outside of financial cost and possible time that must be used to get past the learning curve (which I think is overblown, honestly, but I may be biased from my own lack of difficulty adopting RDS handguns); I don't buy the size issue, nor the reliability issue. Your typical open emitter RDS has the bulk of the optic right at the ejection port, which is often going to be right at the belt anyway when holstered, so outside of some extreme NPE issue, I don't see it as being a noticeably more difficult item to conceal. As for reliability, irons can shift, too (I've had my irons shift more than I've had issues with my RDSes), and the thing is, you can still keep your irons even with an RDS, so I would argue that RDS increases reliability, as you now have more redundancy built into your sighting system.

Low-light and transitional lighting are still issues, though; I'm not talking about dead darkness, but simply darker times, such as a dimly lit room or in the rain, where an FO just doesn't really pop out half as well as an RDS. This is especially relevant when it comes to precision, which doesn't need to manifest itself in 25 yards shots, but perhaps a target that presents only a small portion of themselves at 5 yards.

A pistol is still useful under NODs for the same reason a pistol is useful even if you have a rifle, which is to act as a secondary weapon, and if you're under NODs, it can be nice to be able to aim consistently without resorting to an IR laser, which are rare enough for pistols, and create even more holster challenges.

Do I think most CCW or home defense situations can be handled by irons? Absolutely. Hell, I think most situations that arises could be handled by a gun without any sights. But as you yourself noted, an RDS can absolutely improve outcomes, and so I would vehemently disagree with your original assertation that "[a] well designed set of irons accomplish the exact same thing with less to go wrong". The RDS on the pistol absolutely still needs solid fundamentals, and will not magically improve someone's shooting abilities if they don't put the work in, but I'm of the belief that it can provide a decent shortcut to higher levels of performance, and is one of those things that can be considered a legitimate way to "buy skill". I totally agree when you say that "RDS do have their place in the pistol world, but for me and for the average Joe carrying a gun purely for self defense, it's simply not going to do anything to help their chances of survival when SHTF if the fundamentals aren't there to begin with", but if the fundamentals are there, then there's a higher possibility for a better outcome, no?
 
21 - 40 of 59 Posts
Top