# Red dot site vs regular scope?



## triwithzinger (Jul 2, 2008)

I'm in the market for scope for my Rem 870 slug barrel, I was just wondering what some of you thought would be better a red dot sight or a regular scope?


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

I found this fall that for deer anything under 300 yards the red dot works, and anything under 100 yards it's a lot faster to get on target than a scope. I have the Bushnell holosight that I switch on and off with a scope on my AR15.


----------



## Jig Master (Nov 18, 2011)

I had two red dot sights, and now just one. I don't like them for three reasons; 1, there is no light gathering power as there is on any quality scope; 2, I'm always worried about the battery going dead at the wrong moment; 3, power settings must be re adjusted as light increases or decreases. A good quality scope eliminates all these problems, plus can give a bit of magnification if needed. It's best to save the red dots for target shooting or plinking.


----------



## triwithzinger (Jul 2, 2008)

I talked with a salesman at gander mtn today, and while he admitted he wasn't an expert with the scopes, mentioned the possibility that the red dot sights might not be able to withstand the recoil of a shotgun, that over time the optics might come loose or out of line.

Anyone have this problem?


----------



## Savage260 (Oct 21, 2007)

No scope "gathers" light. A few will amplify ambient light, and some run in the infra red spectrum, but none of them go out and bring more light in. The light that is available to go through the exit pupil is all the light that will go through the scope. A good quality red dot will easily handle the recoil of a shotgun firing slugs.


----------



## Jig Master (Nov 18, 2011)

Ok, so scopes don't gather light, they magnify ambient light. Red dots don't magnify ambient light which makes them less effective than scopes in low light situations. I've read many articles that refer to the light gathering abilities of scopes, so some people may refer to magnifying ambient light as light gathering. Please feel free to nit pick away.


----------



## KurtR (May 3, 2008)

He is not nit picking stating a simple fact and the hacks that are writing the articles just get paid for some thing. Light gathering is some thing the masses have liked to use to make them selves feel good about buying the newest counter sniper scope with the tritium reticle inside of a reticle


----------



## Jig Master (Nov 18, 2011)

In low light situations, I'll take a scope over a red dot any day of the week.


----------



## Savage260 (Oct 21, 2007)

Scopes that amplify ambient light are called night vision scopes. I am not nit picking, just trying to help the OP out. He may not know that you are not sure what you are talking about.

Regular scopes DO NOT make more light, amplify or increase the amount of light that is available. They only have the light available, that is it. They may filter the light, and make the picture more clear, but they have absolutly no way to increase the amount of light you see.

I would have to go the route of a HOLO Sight/EOtech type sight on a shotgun.


----------



## Jig Master (Nov 18, 2011)

Once again, in low light situations, scopes are better than red dots and there is no battery to worry about. Holo sights are expensive. There are good quality scopes available for less money.


----------



## Savage260 (Oct 21, 2007)

So, Jig Master, what scope would you suggest?

Any one with half a brain can change and make sure a fresh battery is in the scope. That would be like saying you shouldn't shoot a 12 gauge because you might forget and put 20 gauge rounds in the mag.


----------



## Jig Master (Nov 18, 2011)

Well savage 260, are you telling me that you don't know how to shop for outdoor products? Here's a hint; go online to Bass Pro Shops, Cabelas, or Midway USA just to name some and then click on optics. Anyone with half a brain can do that plus use spell check to spell gauge correctly.


----------



## Savage260 (Oct 21, 2007)

No, Jig, I am asking you what you would SUGGEST as a scope that can perform better in low light than a holo sight. I am waiting to hear what YOU would choose so I can explain to the OP why you are wrong. :eyeroll: Although, it doesn't seem the OP is very interested in this subject any more.

Any one with half a brain could read the words WHAT SCOPE WOULD YOU SUGGEST. I did spell those correctly, but thanks for the heads up on the mistake. Sorry, my Droid doesn't have spell check when I am on this site, and I usually type quickly as I don't have a lot of time to waste explaining simple things to people like you. I don't usually miss on my spelling, so good on you, you caught one!!!! :roll:


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

A good holosight will pass at least 90% light which is comparable to a scope. Because a shotgun is a close range weapon ( I would guess your not going over 100 yards) and because you can shoot with both eyes open the holosight has it all over a scope in low light. You may see some through the scope, but unless you light up those crosshairs your not going to see to put them on target. Beyond any shadow of a doubt you will see the red dot on target.


----------



## Jig Master (Nov 18, 2011)

If it becomes so dark that one cannot see the crosshairs on a scope, then the vital area on the animal you are shooting at is going to be difficult to make out, and if you put a red dot on it, it will just be a red dot floating around on a dark shape. Is taking this sort of shot ethical?


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Jig Master said:


> If it becomes so dark that one cannot see the crosshairs on a scope, then the vital area on the animal you are shooting at is going to be difficult to make out, and if you put a red dot on it, it will just be a red dot floating around on a dark shape. Is taking this sort of shot ethical?


Absolutely wrong. Unless of course you have crosshairs that look like crowbars. One of the first problems with low light is your crosshairs don't show on a dark animal. Take a black bear in dark woodland. If you know where the correct aiming spot is on the animal you only need to see the outline. Unless your very new at this. Then maybe you need to see more of the animal. I guarantee you I can blow the lungs out of a deer at 50 yards with just his outline visible.

Jig evidently your guessing at these things. I am speaking from field experience. I have a Bushnell that looks like the twin of Eotech. I shot one deer at 300 yards with it this fall. Mounted towards the back it provides a spectacular field of fiew. With both eyes open you could cover the front of the holosight and your eyes would subtend the dot in the correct spot. As a matter of fact that is how some of the first ones worked, and so did a bow sight a few years ago.

Scope, red dot, it's a matter of choice and both work. Close range and fast work the holosight takes the scope hands down. Close range and dark conditions the holosight takes the scope hands down. I like the holosight for 100 yards and under. Even though I prefer the scope for longer ranges the holosight is not a handicap for deer out to a couple of hundred yards.


----------



## Jig Master (Nov 18, 2011)

I am writting from practical experience as well. If you like taking shots at dark shapes, then I guess a Halo Sight is the way to go. One can also shoot with both eyes open with a low power scope or a peep sight with a fiber optic front sight, and that comes from practical experience as well. The original question was red dot sight or scope and I believe that enough information from all parties concerned has been provided.


----------



## KurtR (May 3, 2008)

I shoot every thing with both eyes open all the time. For fast finding targets fast and shooting quickly the holo sight always wins every time. With a shot gun just for turkey hunting i love the red dot. I would like to know what scope and what holo is being compared that would make a big differnece.


----------



## farmerj (Jun 19, 2004)

so today I was out looking at scopes and reddots at my local hole in the wall gun dealer. Nice thing is, you step outside his door and you can see how things will really work.

Decided against a holograph/relex sight because they showed a reflection in the lens that blocked the target in certain sun conditions. Looking from north to south with the sun over the sight, can't see the target. BAD juju in my book. (This was the TruGlo relex sight)

The red dot tube sight from Tru Glo did not give this problem. He didn't have one in the package I was willing to put the money down on so I just went and got some extra high rings for now to put the spare scope on my AR for coyote on Monday. Now to just zero it.

Which ever way you go, get it with the green light in it if you go reflex/red dot. Just seem easier on the eyes to see the reticle and the target.

I know my Aimpoint with the army didn't give me issues and not sure how an EoTech will work out.


----------



## 6162rk (Dec 5, 2004)

i would chose a good quality scope. been shooting one on a shotgun for more years than i can remember. i had a cantilever scope mount (custom by a gunsmith) before the manufacturers started putting them on their barrels. whatever your choice. choose something that will not only last you a lifetime, but work for you a lifetime. hopefully you will hunt for a long time.


----------



## triwithzinger (Jul 2, 2008)

I am still interested in the topic, and from what I can gather, a regular scope would be the best for low light situations and probably for durability and longevity, and perhaps reliability. A red-dot scope would probably work best for quick shots and when most of your shots are short range.

I really want to get a good scope that will let me make long range shots, but I also have a pretty limited budget, so ultimately, I will probably go with a less expensive red-dot since I rarely make long range shots anyway, and if I do it will probably be with my dads 30-06 that I borrow sometimes.

Anyway, thanks for all the advice and I hope the discussion keeps up, stay's lively and is informative!

Happy Hunting!


----------



## KurtR (May 3, 2008)

Long range and limited budget are two things that do not go together. It will cost more in the long run buying cheap glass than just saving and getting some thing worth a crap to start with


----------



## farmerj (Jun 19, 2004)

the only reason I use for purchasing cheap glass or anything else is to see whether or not I will like a technology in the first place.

Would you rather spend $40 to find out you like a green or red dot sight or $1000 and find out you don't like either?

But once you figure out the system you want/suits your needs, by all means. Buy quality, but don't get wrapped up in name brand.


----------



## KurtR (May 3, 2008)

I guess i would not expect a 40 dollar walmart reddot special to perform as a acog would the same as i would not expect the tasco to run with the schmidt. Best way is to find some one that has it and shoot with what ever system to go with then there is no question. Just the optics snobery i am afflicted with.


----------



## farmerj (Jun 19, 2004)

nah, it's all good.

Guards was kind enough to let me get some use with an Aimpoint CompM2. I never really was a big fan of the red light in it.

But there are things you try to see if you'd really like the feature. Side focus vs rear or front focus parrallax.

If you had never used a mil-dot scope before and weren't sure you'd like it, use it, understand it.

Would you want to jump in with a $1200 nightforce or a $300 Supersniper or a $80 tasco. Just so you could get some range time.

Yeah, you could get lucky and have a buddy who might have something for you to try, but what if you don't.

I don't think we are defining "technology" the same.

For me, it's a red vs green light. or a mil-dot vs multiplex reticle.

Technology of a US Optics VS a nightforce vs a tasco would be the difference in quality of material and manufacturing tolerances.

Two things entirely different. I play with the cheap stuff to find the technology I want in the good stuff so that when I do drop the coin, I don't get buyers remorse.

Goes back to my feelings on hunters, marketing execs and parting with my hard earned money.


----------



## Savage260 (Oct 21, 2007)

> and if I do it will probably be with my dads 30-06 that I borrow sometimes.


So it is safe for us to assume you are young, and don't have a lot of experience. I get that, we are all there at one point or another so I will try to be nice. Did you really read all the posts??? If you did, you NEED to read them again.

The only person that THINKS this: 


> a regular scope would be the best for low light situations


Also THINKS this:


> Ok, so scopes don't gather light, they magnify ambient light. Red dots don't magnify ambient light which makes them less effective than scopes in low light situations.


You should seriously reconsider what advice you take. 
Plainsman has more experience and probably puts more rounds down range than any 4 average guys on here, and People, from what I have read, is a very serious shooter too. They both say RED DOT. My personal experience is with Ultra Dot, and Tru Glo "tube" type red dots, and Burris, and EOTech "reflex" or "holo" sights. I can honestly say that against my $1000+ scopes set at the lowest power(4X,5.5X,and 6X respectively), these red dots beat them hands down for low light situations, even with lighted reticles in my Valdada IOR, and NightForce scopes. For long range.......well how long can you really go with a slug gun??? No need for any thing more than a red dot.

I tend to shy away from Tru Glo after the tube type red dot I used with my muzzle loader(very similar to my 870 with slugs) only lasted 4 pulls of the trigger before the objective lens fell out. The Ultra Dot has held up for well over 100 shots with my muzzle loader, and I also used it for indoor shooting with my .22 pistol. Pretty low light at our range, and it is still working at well as ever.

Any one use BLUE light in a scope or sight? I had a Konus M30 that had a blue lighted reticle, and I was surprised at how well it showed up. Never used it on any thing other than target shooting on an AR, and never when it was very dark, but it was different.


----------



## KurtR (May 3, 2008)

farmerj said:


> nah, it's all good.
> 
> Guards was kind enough to let me get some use with an Aimpoint CompM2. I never really was a big fan of the red light in it.
> 
> ...


ya i have been lucky knowing alot of people with the differnet stuff like the vortex pst i love the ebr2 reticle after shooting it but wondered so i see what you are saying. hey if you find a 1200 nsx let me know that would be a great price


----------



## Chiefs (Feb 19, 2010)

triwithzinger said:


> I'm in the market for scope for my Rem 870 slug barrel, I was just wondering what some of you thought would be better a red dot sight or a regular scope?


 If you check into the Trijicon RMR, you have the advantages of a dot for turkeys and it never needs a battery, great for a turkey gun.


----------



## Daniel44114 (Oct 5, 2019)

I would use a magnified optic. How much magnification is up to you. I have a 3-9x40 scope on mine right now, but would really prefer more magnification. 308 is capable of really good accuracy over a reasonably long distance. If you're just poppin off rounds on occasion then I'd just get a red dot or any low magnified optic you want. If you enjoy accuracy, like to push for better accuracy and longer distances ... why wouldn't you want significant magnification? Get what you can afford.
https://www.gunsafespot.com/best-red-dot-magnifier-combo-reviews/


----------



## Douglas96 (Sep 2, 2019)

I would use a regular scope. In a very short range, a red dot will be greater to quickly target.


----------



## mmorgan121 (Jan 9, 2020)

I would even try something like night scope in that situation.


----------



## mmorgan121 (Jan 9, 2020)

> You should seriously reconsider what advice you take.
> Plainsman has more experience and probably puts more rounds down range than any 4 average guys on here, and People, from what I have read, is a very serious shooter too. They both say RED DOT. My personal experience is with Ultra Dot, and Tru Glo "tube" type red dots, and Burris, and EOTech "reflex" or "holo" sights. I can honestly say that against my $1000+ scopes set at the lowest power(4X,5.5X,and 6X respectively), these red dots beat them hands down for low light situations, even with lighted reticles in my Valdada IOR, and NightForce scopes. For long range.......well how long can you really go with a slug gun??? No need for any thing more than a red dot.


Maybe you're right on that one. But did you try a thermal vision scopes as well? I've seen a lot of great options in here ( https://www.agmglobalvision.com/ ), and heard some great reviews from the customers of AGM. They give warranty for every item, and possess themselves like professionals of the military industry.


----------

