Last week I began some comparative testing between my current favorite iron sight setup (Ameriglo’s orange CAP front with Pro Operator rear) and the Crimson Trace LG-850 Lasergrip. To save you the trouble of looking back, the results were pretty straightforward. The Lasergrip averaged better than a quarter second faster (4.52 vs. 4.80) on the F.A.S.T.
This week, I tackled the F.A.S.T. again but as promised previously I shot the laser version first and the iron second to switch things up from the original test. While I didn’t do as well with either aiming system, the laser again proved most victorious:
| Irons | Laser | |
| Avg Score | 5.35 | 4.81 |
| 3×5 acc | 85% | 95% |
| 8″ acc | 95% | 100% |
| avg draw | 1.46 | 1.45 |
| avg 3×5 splits | 0.48 | 0.49 |
| avg reload | 1.97 | 1.99 |
| avg 8″ split | 0.21 | 0.23 |
| best run | 4.36 | 4.36 |
| worst run | 7.50 | 6.77 |
Unlike last time, the speed was almost identical between the two… but the accuracy just wasn’t there with the irons. It was far from my best day at the range (as you’ll see in detail below), but the laser did a better job of compensating for my shortcomings. Winner: LASER.
Next, I shot one of my favorite drills/tests, JodyH‘s 99 Drill. It’s been a while since I’ve shot the 99 and my results were far from what I’d like to see. With irons, I shot an 88 (-3, -3, -3, -2). With the laser, I scored a 93 (-1, -1, -3, -1). Neither came close to my personal best of 97, but the laser scored a significant five points more than the irons. Winner: LASER.
Finally, I shot some Bill Drills using the 8″ circle of a Q-PT as my scoring zone. I deliberately shot at a pace that guaranteed my hits, so this was as much about how fast I could track the different sights as anything else. Note to self, tracking a laser dot across a target full of holes is kind of difficult. The irons averaged 2.17 seconds and the laser 2.15 seconds. I only shot each version five times, so the data is a statistical tie. Winner: Neither.
And Crimson Trace just debuted the prototypes of their upcoming green (daylight visible) lasers at the SHOT Show. Hey Crimson Trace, here’s a great marketing opportunity: team up with a shooter named Green to promote the new lasers. I’m sure you could find someone…
Train hard & stay safe! ToddG
You seem a little too vested in orange to finally try and play the “Green” card… 😉
Now if they’d just make a integrated green laser grip for the H&K P30…
What is most interesting to me about this, has nothing to do with a laser — it shows the potential of a next gen RDS, where the dot is as easy to acquire as the laser dot.
Todd, this is really interesting. I don’t have any guns mounted with lasers so these reports are quite intriguing. Why do you think you’re faster with the laser? When you have the laser on, do you see the front sights? Is there any confusion between locking on the front sight versus locking in on the laser dot?
I have a theory and am interested in Todd’s (or anyone’s experienced opinion).
A skilled shooter has established a solid index or natural point of aim that just about guarantees they are pointing the gun at the target when they present the gun.
An unskilled (less skilled) shooter does not have that index/npoa figured out and it is 50/50 whether they are actually pointing the gun at the target during presentation.
Because of their “index” the skilled shooter will alway find the laser because it is already on the target while a less skilled shooter will struggle to find the dot which may or may not be on the target.
Less skilled shooters rely on using their sights to finalize their presentation and get the gun oriented on target while a skilled shooter uses the sights to fine tune where the bullet will hit.
Anecdotally I have seen many less skilled shooters with lasers present the gun and begin the hand wiggle to try and locate the dot because their initial presentation had the laser pointed a foot beside the target and they have no idea where the dot is.
Having said all that my theory is that a laser would help a skilled shooter speed up incrementally while a less skilled shooter might do worse.
Lomshek — I don’t think it’s that black and white. I’ve seen a lot of unskilled shooters pick up a laser-equipped gun, especially in force on force scenarios, and get an instant benefit in terms of the ability to place hits at speed under stress.
But your basic premiss is sound. This past weekend, there were two folks running lasers at the inaugural AFHS class: me and a student. When we were shooting the plate rack back at 20yd, I was able to use the laser pretty easily because, as you say, I have a good enough index that the gun was where I wanted it to be without needing to look through my irons to get it there. The other student, who is newer to using the laser, struggled because his dot would appear and disappear from the plate and the backstop we were using was not conducive to tracking the laser.
The force-on-force makes sense because I owuld guess they are shooting big targets close up (i.e. “typical” defense scenario) whereas the plate rack gives no margin for error in initial aiming.
Sounds like the basis for some studies if anyone is willing with a group of shooters of various skills.
3 feet, 3 yards, 7 yards and 15 yards with lasers & no sights on the gun (or taped over) and then with just irons.
Something like some multiple mozambiques at each distance to give you a mix of big and little targets.
I’m curious to see how a laser would stack up against a red-dot, as GJM suggested. I admit to being biased against lasers as a ‘hollywood gimmick’ for the most part, but I can see their applicability in some circumstances. Having one thing to focus on (the dot) instead of two things (front sight and rear sight) does make things easier. It’s just a matter of how the dot is shown… on the target in the case of a laser, or on your eye in the case of an Aimpoint or Docter or the like.
Of course, if the laser gets fouled by dirt, it doesn’t get in the way of the iron sights like a Docter or the like will.