But is that really practical toBut is that really practical to have 4 dozen $600 optics?
???get to where you have dozens and dozens of 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.No more impractical than having 4 dozen pistols.
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.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...
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.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Any red dot you buy today will likely be very out of date 5-10 years from now, assuming the thing still turns on and works
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.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.
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.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
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.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 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).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.
Sure, but it's now worth 4X what I paid.Are there other costs associated with all that property you own?
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.(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).
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...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...
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.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.
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.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.