red dot placement

[unknown]

Hi there,

As I continue to understand my AR's ergonomics, I came upon a question I wasn't able to find much info.

How far should my red dot be from the charging handle? Is there a specific distance or is the placement down the rail matter of preference?

Thanks for your thoughts.

[gman1868]

Assuming you are talking about a 1x red dot optic similar to an Aimpoint T-1, as far forward as possible. It allows for a wider field of vision, and as John Farnam states it "greatly increases the speed of target acquisition and allows you to see around the scope as you are looking through it, making you aware of your close-in surroundings". In other words you maintain your peripheral vision as well as being able to acquire and fire upon your target rapidly. I don't have a rail on my hand guard so I mount mine as far forward on the upper receiver as I can.

An example:

[TTS]

Generally it is a matter of personal preference.

My preference is to have larger tubes like an Aimpoint M2 mounted further forward and a smaller tube like an Aimpoint micro further back. If you are running a magnifier or NVD you will likely need a forward mount.

I do not like mounting optics on a handguard because no matter how solid they are they are never as solid as the receiver.

[UnaStamus]

Farnam... I realize that he's been around, but instructors with much better credentials have touched on this topic ad nauseam and all have presented a very different perspective. Most of these perspectives I have seen first-hand professionally and in training. In short, there is a law of diminishing returns with the distance that you mount your optic.

When you mount an RDS that is parallax and eye relief free, you have to consider placement. With placement on the rail, it's generally not recommended unless you have a rifle handguard that integrates with the receiver in some way. This basically applies to the LMT MRP, SCAR, ACR, LWRC IC and SPR, Mega Arms monolithic upper, VLTOR polylithic upper, etc. Short of that, you don't want to be putting optics on handguards because they can shift, warp or bend under stress. There are very few handguards that I can't put some degree of bend into with moderate force. A few millimeters of flex can mean yards of deflection at distance. Additionally, you are mounting the optic about the barrel and gas tube, and if you shoot your gun a lot, you are now putting high radiant heat underneath your optic.
The receiver is solid and not going anywhere, and it is rigid enough that it can't warp like a handguard will.

In terms of the distance overall, you have to balance your level of comfort with the ocular housing with your desirable sight picture. When using binocular vision, you will have a very good FOV regardless of where you mount the optic. Your peripheral vision doesn't improve or decrease with optic placement unless you are putting the optic literally right in front of your face. Once the optic is about 4-5" from the eye, your vision opens up. If you use binocular vision (both eyes open), the ocular housing should fall out of focus and nearly disappear. However, once the optic gets out to a certain distance, your eyes lose the ability to dissolve the ocular housing. The housing stays visible in your FOV, and it will obscure the target. This is amplified when using micro optics like the Aimpoint Micro or Bushnell TRS-25, due to the smaller 1" ocular internal diameter vs the larger 30mm interior of say, an Aimpoint PRO or M4. The inability to dissolve the ocular housing is where the diminishing returns come in, because you have to understand that you're literally looking through a tube. The closer the tube is to your face, the larger your FOV on target. You have to account for human vision, which functions with a progressively widening visual angle average of 155°h x 120°v. When things are close, your vision continues to open up through the objects and outward. When the tube is farther away, you lost that ability because it funnels your vision.

Point being, mounting your optic too far out can be problematic. There is no one right answer because every person is different. Generally speaking though, the front of the upper receiver is the ideal happy medium. Moving an optic forward or backward to increase target transition speed is subjective to the user, and by no means a universal rule. This concept was applicable to scout rifles vs normal scoped rifles due to eye relief, but it does not translate over to RDS use the same way. I have tested optic placement with patrol officers and SWAT operators, and have never been able to identify the one single position that is optimal for speed and ease of use. The only constant is that there is such thing as "too close", and "too far". The area in the middle is pretty wide open, but on most rifles you are limited to the upper receiver area and that works perfectly fine for 99.8% of the population.

[2in2out]

Well put, UnaStamus.

[Boone]

I personally ignore a lot of the things that are said with optic placement. No one has the same eyes as you.

If I were you, I would decided if you will be bring the rifle up on target or shooting it off a bench. If there is any chance of bring it up on target. Then I would run a few different drills.

Drill: Mount optic close to charging handle. From the low ready position, bring rifle up, fire 1 round on target using a shot timer. Record time, do this 3 - 5 times and record average. Then move the optic forward and repeat until optic is at the end of the rail. Find out what your fastest time is and place optic at that distance. Depending on stock distance, reticle and even type of optic, times can be different. However, what works for someone else might not work for you.

People can lie, data doesn't.

[shooter115]

Great post UnaStamos. The same theory applies for mounting scopes with 2-piece ring mounts. Unless you are running a true monolithic upper, don't mount one ring on the receiver and the forward ring on a railed hand guard. I see this all the time and it drives me crazy. Yea it might seem to hold zero on the bench, but wait until you are applying different directional forces on to the end of your handguard, such as bracing off a tree or barricade or preloading a bipod.

[gman1868]

There is no one right answer because every person is different. Generally speaking though, the front of the upper receiver is the ideal happy medium. Moving an optic forward or backward to increase target transition speed is subjective to the user, and by no means a universal rule.

This is the best part of UnaStamus' suggestion. Depending upon your equipment and what works for you is ultimately "the best". As instructors our goal should be to educate and provide reasonable options for individuals to then decide what works best. I think we can all agree that having the optic back near the charging handle near your face is the least desirable option

I guess I don't understand the suggestion that John Farnam is not one of the foremost experts in the field of defensive firearms, or that he does not have the "credentials" to give a reasonable recommendation on how to use rifle optics. I have worked with people like Massad Ayoob and James Yeager, both who acknowledge John as a leading expert in the field. Regardless of the opinions of others, check out John's bio and decide for yourself: http://defense-training.com/dti/instructors/

[Dave Timm]

Una Stamus and I often agree on things and this in another one of those times. I prefer the front of the upper receiver for all of the reasons mentioned. From there you can fine tune for you and your preferences.

Gman,

I haven't trained with Farnam so I can't say, but looking at the bio you posted his last class and training he lists was from 1980 something. I assumed he has trained since then and just hasn't updated but I can't say for certain. Both Una and I have had the pleasure of training with guys like Larry Vickers, Pat Rogers, Jeff Gonzales, Louis Awerbuck and other like trainers. These type of guys have truly been founding fathers of modern gun fighting and have used techniques that have been proven in the field around the world. I know Farnam is a combat Vet too but we have learned a lot since then. Farnam is the one of the only, if not the only, instructor I know that runs a red dot that far forward. Additionally Ive shot with some of the worlds best shooters at matches and have yet to see anyone run a red dot like that so there is some justification in questioning the technique. I've tried that type on an AK and immediately saw the negatives compared to having the sight further back.

Ultimately to each is own, but don't just take one instructors word or experience for anything. Seek as many resources as possible, different methods and different classes. I've taken things from every class and always try to keep an open mind. I certainly would be interested in taking a class from John, but at the same time I know the level of training I will get from instructors mentioned above. It's not just money but also time so I am picky where my time goes.

Your Milage will vary,
Best regards

Dave

[crbutler]

From a practical standpoint, I have a JP CTR 02 that I use for 3 gun shooting.

I have a optima type reflex sight mounted on the handguard at a 2:00 position on a rail attached to the free float handguard tube about 3" in front of the receiver. In matches, which are not the same as real life, of course, I can reliably hit targets (full size IPSC targets or clay pigeons) out to 100 yards (probably more, but I haven't tried as far as man sized- the clays take a lot of concentration after 50 yards or so as the dot is bigger than the target...) I also have a 4x Trijicon in the "usual" place.

As stated above, you do get some blind spots if you close one eye on the dot. With both open, its a non issue.

In 3 gun shooting you will be firing a lot of rounds, so any POI shift should be notable, and I have not seen it, but this is not a precision application, either.

In use, if its a lot of big targets under 100, or smaller targets under 30, I use the dot, over that I use the magnified scope. The dot gives faster target acquisition, the magnified scope, precision.

I also have a .470 NE double that I use cape buffalo hunting. The Trijicon RMR on that is mounted just behind the iron rear sight leaf on the rib. I don't notice the sight at all with that one.

I think you need to consider what you are using the gun for before you make a decision. Since (as Jim Shockey says ad nauseum) I bet my life on the performance of the double, I obviously think the further back is the better choice, for me. Doing time drills will help you decide, but remember that the drills will favor whatever you are currently doing more than what is intrinsically better unless you practice a bunch and then do several hundred reps on the clock, and analyze the results.

My suspicion is that like with iron sights, if you get the dot further away from you, your precision increases a bit, how much, ???

[Hmac]

I mount the RDS as far forward on the receiver as I can so the mount doesn't cross the joint between receiver and rail, just like Dave, Louis, Jeff, Sully, and Larry taught me. It leaves just enough room for a magnifier and the BUIS.

[UnaStamus]

I know that Farnam has been around a while, and I respect what he's done in the past, but his resume ends in the 1980's. Unfortunately for his curriculum, he hasn't updated all of his training to reflect modern TTPs in use by professional gunfighters in the MIL, GOV and LE world. With the training I have received, how I have formulated my own operational preferences and how I am expected to operate by my partners in a tactical environment, there is a lot of conflict between what Farnam teaches and what is being used in modern tactical operations/TTPs. I don't classify him as bad or good, but simply that a large portion of his training conflicts with what I've been taught over the years by instructors who have significantly heavier operational resumes than Farnam. In the interest of being diplomatic, let's just say that I have reason to disagree with a lot of what he teaches.

As a side-note, James Yeager has no credibility in the legitimate tactical community. I can expand more elsewhere about him and a couple other "big name" instructors, but that's off-topic to the thread.

[Hmac]

I have great respect for Massad Ayoub and no reason to disrespect James Yeager (know nothing about him - although I've read some stuff...). I've taken a couple of courses from Mas. In the 1980's. That was a long time ago...doubt that I'll take any more training from him, but it's always interesting to hear what he has to say. I see John Farnam doing courses not far from here and I've been tempted, especially this year after Louis Awerbuck died and his course up here cancelled, but I've never done it. I've never taken a firearms course from anyone where I didn't learn a lot, but as Dave mentioned, finding time for training courses is difficult and it's important to be selective. If I take one or two courses a year, I want to be sure that I'll be taught relevant, modern techniques, so I'll stick with the other quality trainers with more recent credentials, at least as long as they're available to me up here, thanks to Dave. I must say...mounting the RDS that far forward is one of those things that make me say "huh?"....

[Erik_Pakieser]

Farnam will readily admit he likes to mount the RDS further forward than most folks. He's fond of saying "I don't like glass in my face."

Personally, I agree that the RDS should be mounted more forward than back but I like to roughly center it on the weapon for balance. The sweet spot for me seems to be straddling the joint between the upper and the forward rail on the AR15; I use the Ultimak scout rail on my AK.

As for Farnam staying "up to date" I see him at the ILEETA conference every year, and I know he attends other training events as well. I've known him for about 20 years and I've seen the methods he teaches evolve and change over time. I agree with him on some things, but not everything.

You take what you like, and leave what you don't.

[samginko]

Place it where it's most comfortable at the range. Most people seem to place it above the mag well.