Scope vs Red Dot

[Mike in Oregon]

I'm leaning towards a red dot, but I'm looking for input on what all your experiences might be. The gun it would be for is a New Ruger Blackhawk Bisley Hunter 44 Mag?

 

[TAJ45]

If for "HEAVENS....ITSA BEAR"!! = Irons
If for target shooting = haired scope
If for running n gunning, dot or irons
Steel Challenge - irons for your 7.5" bbl
I personnaly need a 6.5"+ bbl w irons for Steel Challenge.

 

[Mike in Oregon]

If for "HEAVENS....ITSA BEAR"!! = Irons
If for target shooting = haired scope
If for running n gunning, dot or irons
Steel Challenge - irons for your 7.5" bbl
I personnaly need a 6.5"+ bbl w irons for Steel Challenge.

Okay, more details needed for intent!

80% plinking
20% Trying out on rabbets and calling coyotes.

 

[Bottom Fodder]

I’m speaking strictly for handgun hunting, I used open sights for years on both 357 and 44 mag. Revolver. Later I went to red dot but that was using a Thompson Contender and Ruger Charger. From what I’ve seen using a red dot or scope on a 44 mag. You better have a good Mount and it better be very well mounted to the frame. Now I’m speaking from 20+ years ago things have changed

 

[Mike in Oregon]

I’m speaking strictly for handgun hunting, I used open sights for years on both 357 and 44 mag. Revolver. Later I went to red dot but that was using a Thompson Contender and Ruger Charger. From what I’ve seen using a red dot or scope on a 44 mag. You better have a good Mount and it better be very well mounted to the frame. Now I’m speaking from 20+ years ago things have changed

Of course, in regard to a solid mount. If I don't do a scope, my thoughts were drill & tap and do a picatinny base of some sort. My thoughts are the red dot will give faster target acquisition and better field of view.

 

[Rick in Oregon]

My 'bench pistol' in the rat patch is my old Ruger MK-I bull barrel target with a Holosun 507, and it's good out to 50+ yards on squirrels. For years I ran a Leupold/Gilmore dot, and it accounted for beaucoup rats.



For ringing my steel, it's my Kimber Aegis Elite Custom 9mm with a Vortex Venom 6MOA dot aboard. Both are good out in the sage chasing jacks with the dot sights. Much faster and easier than irons for sure, better for older eyes too.



I'd go with a dot sight of choice over a scope for what you intend to do with your Ruger. Let us know what you come up with.

 

[Kracken McGraw]

Some of those fluorescent front sights that they have now might be another option.

 

[TonyinKY]

I really like a 2-6X scope for accuracy and shots out to and beyond 100 yds with a 44 mag revolver. As well as my Ruger IV Competition. Anything that needs fast and <50 yds gets a red dot.

 

[LCazador]

If you will be shooting past 100yds you'd be better off with a scope. It also depends on your vision and how good you can see at 100 yards or better.

 

[precision1]

Scope will always be better....

 

[K22]

From a former Stone Age Pistol Hunter:

In the late 60's through the late 80's I hunted with S&W Model 27, 357 Magnum. I hunted groundhogs in Western PA where the rolling terrain permitted spot and stalk hunting. I took a couple of hundred with a pistol all, under 60 yards - all freehand. I only ever took 1 white tail with a pistol.

In my day, I followed Jeff Cooper, Bob Milek and Elmer Keith, all accomplished open sight pistol hunters.

If you have good eyesight (can clearly see the front sight) and hunt where shots are taken freehand, then I would opt for open sights.

A scope / red dot will only magnify your movement, not make you a better shot. The exception is if you are hunting from a supported position then an optic will provide better results due to a clearer sight picture with the reticle / dot overlayed on the target without the magnified movement.

An open sight revolver is easier to carry in the field, the open sights more robust than a scope or red dot, and you do not need any batteries. With enough structured practice, you can become a very proficient free hand shooter with open sights.

However, as stated in the opening of this post, I am from the stone age when open sights were the standard.

 

[Mike in Oregon]

From a former Stone Age Pistol Hunter:

In the late 60's through the late 80's I hunted with S&W Model 27, 357 Magnum. I hunted groundhogs in Western PA where the rolling terrain permitted spot and stalk hunting. I took a couple of hundred with a pistol all, under 60 yards - all freehand. I only ever took 1 white tail with a pistol.

In my day, I followed Jeff Cooper, Bob Milek and Elmer Keith, all accomplished open sight pistol hunters.

If you have good eyesight (can clearly see the front sight) and hunt where shots are taken freehand, then I would opt for open sights.

A scope / red dot will only magnify your movement, not make you a better shot. The exception is if you are hunting from a supported position then an optic will provide better results due to a clearer sight picture with the reticle / dot overlayed on the target without the magnified movement.

An open sight revolver is easier to carry in the field, the open sights more robust than a scope or red dot, and you do not need any batteries. With enough structured practice, you can become a very proficient free hand shooter with open sights.

However, as stated in the opening of this post, I am from the stone age when open sights were the standard.

You make total sense! I have good vision and practice is the name of the game. Thank you sir.

 

[snert]

I am with K22. I am a long time open sight pistol shooter...I hunted with a Ruger MK2 HB and a 686 4 inch, both for rabbits, groundhogs, raccons and such. Even took a grouse in flight with the 22, as well as numerous running rabbits on a dog.

I hunted from a tree stand with a 357 Herrett TC Contender and a 2X Leupold. Kilt a pile of whitetail with it.

I carried a Glock 22 40SW for two legged concerns for my 20 year career.

I continue to hunt with a TC and either a leupold 2x or a weaver 2-7. I prefer the 2x. I carry that Glock when I am working security now.

I have tried the red dot thing. I am too old to put in the time to learn it, I think. My eyesight is failing, but I am getting some new front sights, so while I can't plunk a rabbit anymore, I am confident in my skills to land shots in emergancies with open sights. If that front sight is bright, I am good to go. I find it so much faster and easier than the dot. I am sure if I had switched 25 years ago I would be a fan, but at this point I am stuck in the old days.

Just my experience.

 

[C.E.Smith043]

Okay, more details needed for intent!

80% plinking
20% Trying out on rabbets and calling coyotes.

Red dot gets my vote for these uses

 

[clowdis]

How does a red dot fit on a revolver? The metal across the top of the cylinder is usually pretty thin, so might have a look at that before you commit to anything.

 

[dantiff2]

Micro red dot's on revolvers is game changing!

Scope Mounts Archives

Explore all firearm scope mounts—Ruger, Smith & Wesson, Colt, Taurus & more—engineered for performance – Free Shipping!

jackweigand.com

 

[Mike in Oregon]

How does a red dot fit on a revolver? The metal across the top of the cylinder is usually pretty thin, so might have a look at that before you commit to anything.

The "Hunter" version comes with rings. But I would consider drilling and tapping for a picatinny rail as mentioned above if I went red dot.

 

[dantiff2]

The "Hunter" version comes with rings. But I would consider drilling and tapping for a picatinny rail as mentioned above if I went red dot.

No drilling and tapping with the Weigand mount