Red dot vs. Regular scope for hunting.

I just bought 629 classic 6 1/2" barrel for deer hunting. I want to put a scope on it, but I am not sure if red dot or regular scope would be better. Any input would be appreciated. Thanks

I have taken all of my deer with a Model 29 (8 3/8") with a Burris big dot scope (my favorite combination) or a Ruger Red Hawk (7½") with a Luepold scope. Both scopes are fixed two power (my preference).

They both have been very satisfactory.

That said, the scopes do all significant weight. That has it downsides and upsides. Extra weight translates to a somewhat easier recoil impulse. That is GOOD. However, it can change the balance of the revolver. In both my cases, the scope is mounted on the barrel. This results in a barrel heavy configuration that is helpful to me when shooting two handed (my normal shooting stance).

The past three years or so I have added Red Dot sights to a number of revolvers. I have come to really enjoy them. They add little weight so don't change the balance as much (if that is a concern). However, they DO require batteries so that becomes a maintenance problem. With me, I can't see a real problem with that. I buy batteries in bulk (a dollar or so apiece from "Battery Bob") and would just use a new one each hunting day. Being frugal, I would save them for reuse on the range (they wouldn't yet be expired).

Neither choice is a wrong choice. However, if you get a Red Dot sight be sure it is reliable against recoil of your chosen caliber. My Ultra Dots will take most anything including the .454 Casull. My Simmons Red Dots will not. So, "Horses for Courses"... I use the more expensive Ultra Dots on the heavy hitters and the Simmons and Bushnell's on the lesser calibers. Then, everyone is happy, including my wallet (I have about eight red dot sights).

FWIW
Dale53

It really boils down to personal preference and your style of hunting. My hunting revolver, a Blackhawk Bisley .45 Colt, is used in areas where the maximum shot is 100 yards, and the average less than 50. A 1x30 Tasco Pro Point works quite well, but I might just prefer a scope in more open areas.

It is personal preference. My preference is to not have magnification on a pistol. It is harder for me to get on target and stay on target with magnification. A zero power open lens reflex sight is faster and easier to get on target for me.

I've put red-dots on several revolvers, but perhaps most telling, is that I've put an Aimpoint 2X/2MOA 9000SC on my 14" .223 Super Contender, my Arizona handgun javelina season rig. It's accurate to at least one hundred yards (maybe farther, but untested beyond that range...) The red-dots are much more forgiving of eye relief/alignment, faster than conventional optics to bring to bear, etc. I tink you'll like them...

I have a 30mm UltraDot mounted on my 480 Ruger Super RedHawk. I am totally happy with it.

I have Burris 2-7 Power variables on my Contender barrels.
I have seriously thought about swapping the Burris for a 30mm UltraDot on my 35 Bullberry contender barrel.

I hunt in the woods, and about 70 yards is it for a long shot.

I taged an 11 point whitetail (Any Deer Tag), and a full size doe (Antlerless Only Tag) last season at 50 thru 55 yards. The 480 performed perfectly.

I have been so happy with my 480 Super RedHawk, that I have been neglecting my Contender.

Like was said above a Scope is good in wide open spaces. A 30mm Red Dot is the berrys in the woods.

Bob

First off lets take the tube type red dots out of consideration. I've shot with the tube type red dots and IMO if you are going to limit your visual field with a tube you may as well have the benefit of some magnification that a true scope will provide. So, I'll simply compare open frame Reflex Sights and Handgun Scopes.

IMO a lot will depend on how well you shoot and your maximum "useful" range. In addition it also matters on where you will be doing your hunting, there is a big difference in what works best in deep woods in comparison to wide open range land.

I'm old and trying to chase down a wounded deer has the potential to result in a trip to the hospital for myself, so I do not take shots that are marginal for me. That means that my personal 4 inch limit is 35 yards. Yeah, that's conservative. If you've ever pulled a shot because you got the "yips" and jerked the trigger you'll understand why I'm conservative.

At that range and less a Refelx sight is nearly ideal. They allow you you nearly as much visual field as open sights while providing a much more accurate means of sighting. However, one potential downside is that something that is white or near white in full sunlight can make the dot difficult to see. That's a simple function of contrast, any laser generated dot that isn't harmful to look at will be a bit "brightness challenged" by a white target in full sunlight. On the plus side most deer hunting in Michigan is done in the woods where shaded targets make shooting with black crosshairs a real challenge and deer aren't typically albino white.

Now, if you are shooting from a fixed rest for accuracy at long range IMO nothing beats a good scope. Once you get past 35 or 40 yards the dot size for almost any red dot sight on the market will start to obscure enough of your target to impede pinpoint accuracy. In addition the lack of magnification will make it more difficult to pick out a precision aiming point on your target. I've found that a 2 X scope will allow me to just pick out a 3/4 inch target dot at 50 yards so it becomes rather simple to put the crosshairs on that dot. Get out to 100 yards and I need more magnification to see that aiming point. Bottomline, when you are trying to hit a dime or a quarter it's kind of hard to beat a scope, however in a wooded setting for hunting I don't think a scope is nearly as useful as a reflex sight.

Finally, a bit of illustration and perhaps a tease. In the center of the image below is my "deer gun", a 10mm 610 that will drop a whitetail within 3 steps with one of Double Taps hunting loads. One huge benefit for this setup is that it only took me about 2 minutes to carve out a bit of clearance for the sight in the Galco Silhouette that I carry the 610 in. BTW, the sight is the J Point Reflex mounted on a S&W specific mount from J Point.

If I'm not using iron sights, then most of the time my deer hunting revolver will have a red dot rather than a magnifing optic. The Burris Holosight/EOTech soight has a one minute dot and has crystal clear glass. I use the AA battery powered version (with lithium batteries) if it will fit just for the extra battery life. Generally that set-up will last all season, but I carry spare batteries just in case.



Might try one of the newer micro red dots like the Trijicon RMR sometime on a hunting rig. The one I have on a rifle works well out to 200 yards. The RMR costs a bit, but it's tough enough to survive a fall or three. The Holosights have held up well under some rough treatment, too.




(basically an armored up Docter Optic type sight.)

>First off lets take the tube type red dots out of consideration. I've shot with the tube type red dots and IMO if you are going to limit your visual field with a tube you may as well have the benefit of some magnification that a true scope will provide

A very good point -- if you shoot with one eye open. I have three guns with tube-type sights, an AR15 carbine, a Remington 870 short shotgun and my Bisley. I shoot with both eyes open. Looking at my target and raising the gun to firing position, the dot appears on-target and I don't even see the scope.

Unless your taking a shot over 70 yards I would stick with a lighter red dot. The rmr mentioned above would be perfect since it is rugged. Though I don't hunt with it, my dan Wesson 445 would pack a good wallop at long range. It would be a lot of gun to shoot accurately without a rest.

Thanks for the input. I appreciate it.