User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 10/20/2016 10:52:16 AM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I don't know skipper. I was pleasantly surprised at how easy it is to get decent hits with a 1" site radius. I was sceptical at first but once I tried it my confidence in the dueck defense mount was established. I was about to get the slide milled when I found the dd mount. Considers that it mounts the rmr, includes sights, and still allows the use of the holsters I already have I think its a worthy option. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Thoughts on BUSINESS of a suppressor sight in front or behind the optic? Ok...beans or no beans? My thoughts...more gimmick. The front sight on an RDS gun belongs EXACTLY where the front sight is on a non RDS gun...battery or sight failure...do you want an extremely short 1" or so sight radius or the full length factory radius? The default if an RDS fails should be exactly the same as the stock gun. RMR are rugged but do fail (I have seen only 1) On tritiums vs blacks...tried a set of trits on my gun as what I thought was an upgrade (?) Got a great deal on a set. I ran them for a couple of range sessions and pulled them off, tooo busy with 4 dots in my window, some like them I do not...plain black suppressor sights for me. I don't know skipper. I was pleasantly surprised at how easy it is to get decent hits with a 1" site radius. I was sceptical at first but once I tried it my confidence in the dueck defense mount was established. I was about to get the slide milled when I found the dd mount. Considers that it mounts the rmr, includes sights, and still allows the use of the holsters I already have I think its a worthy option. Brother if it works for you, your confident with it....Rrrrrun it. My concern with add ons, mounts that slip in to the rear sight dovetail or on a Glock the cover plate is failure...not a lot of metal hokding it all together, slide speed, recoil impulse and metal fatigue are real issues. I know of a very attractive woman who now has a nice scar centerline top of her nose from a Glock MOS hitting her safety glasses during a failure. Black eyes are long gone but shes still real pissed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2016 11:03:19 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Brother if it works for you, your confident with it....Rrrrrun it. My concern with add ons, mounts that slip in to the rear sight dovetail or on a Glock the cover plate is failure...not a lot of metal hokding it all together, slide speed, recoil impulse and metal fatigue are real issues. I know of a very attractive woman who now has a nice scar centerline top of her nose from a Glock MOS hitting her safety glasses during a failure. Black eyes are long gone but shes still real pissed. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Thoughts on BUSINESS of a suppressor sight in front or behind the optic? Ok...beans or no beans? My thoughts...more gimmick. The front sight on an RDS gun belongs EXACTLY where the front sight is on a non RDS gun...battery or sight failure...do you want an extremely short 1" or so sight radius or the full length factory radius? The default if an RDS fails should be exactly the same as the stock gun. RMR are rugged but do fail (I have seen only 1) On tritiums vs blacks...tried a set of trits on my gun as what I thought was an upgrade (?) Got a great deal on a set. I ran them for a couple of range sessions and pulled them off, tooo busy with 4 dots in my window, some like them I do not...plain black suppressor sights for me. I don't know skipper. I was pleasantly surprised at how easy it is to get decent hits with a 1" site radius. I was sceptical at first but once I tried it my confidence in the dueck defense mount was established. I was about to get the slide milled when I found the dd mount. Considers that it mounts the rmr, includes sights, and still allows the use of the holsters I already have I think its a worthy option. Brother if it works for you, your confident with it....Rrrrrun it. My concern with add ons, mounts that slip in to the rear sight dovetail or on a Glock the cover plate is failure...not a lot of metal hokding it all together, slide speed, recoil impulse and metal fatigue are real issues. I know of a very attractive woman who now has a nice scar centerline top of her nose from a Glock MOS hitting her safety glasses during a failure. Black eyes are long gone but shes still real pissed. Screw failure or did the plate break? Even on the dedicated milled slides the optic is held on with screws that can sheer or loosen. Have you used the dueck defense mount? id trust the milled steel mount over the screws any day. There isn't a lot to go wrong with it. Less so than the MOS |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2016 11:06:27 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Actually they will. I use my wifes rmr with new shooters who cant even hit the paper Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
If you cant shoot with worth a shit with irons they will not make you a better shooter. I have tried them but prefer irons.  Actually they will. I use my wifes rmr with new shooters who cant even hit the paper I am a believer of people learning the basics before moving to optics. If they do not understand the fundamentals, sight alignment, sight picture among others, then they have no business going straight to a red dot. Different strokes for different folks.
Also, that's not making you a better shooter. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2016 11:10:59 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Saaaaaweet gun...I have drooled over one of those for a while.... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I love my RMR on my P-09. Moving targets are easy and it also shows you exactly what you're doing wrong. http://i106.photobucket.com/albums/m255/90Z51/Guns/P-09/WP_20150227_17_16_52_Rich.jpg Saaaaaweet gun...I have drooled over one of those for a while.... Thanks. I really liked the P-09 and wasn't sure I wanted to cut it for the RMR just in case I didn't like the RMR. I'm happy that I did though, it's awesome to shoot. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2016 11:11:33 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Thread needs more 6 Second Mounts Okay. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2016 11:13:44 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I am a believer of people learning the basics before moving to optics. If they do not understand the fundamentals, sight alignment, sight picture among others, then they have no business going straight to a red dot. Different strokes for different folks.
Also, that's not making you a better shooter. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
If you cant shoot with worth a shit with irons they will not make you a better shooter. I have tried them but prefer irons. Actually they will. I use my wifes rmr with new shooters who cant even hit the paper I am a believer of people learning the basics before moving to optics. If they do not understand the fundamentals, sight alignment, sight picture among others, then they have no business going straight to a red dot. Different strokes for different folks.
Also, that's not making you a better shooter. Are you arguing that you can't build shooting skill while using a red dot? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2016 11:20:28 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Thoughts on BUSINESS of a suppressor sight in front or behind the optic? Ok...beans or no beans? My thoughts...more gimmick. The front sight on an RDS gun belongs EXACTLY where the front sight is on a non RDS gun...battery or sight failure...do you want an extremely short 1" or so sight radius or the full length factory radius? The rear sight on an RDS gun belongs EXACTLY where the rear sight belongs on a non RDS gun. Most rearward portion of the gun providing the clearest visual image to the shooters eye. Lots of faux innovation out there in the name of coolness and being one off or different. The default if an RDS fails should be exactly the same as the stock gun. RMR are rugged but do fail (I have seen only 1) On tritiums vs blacks...tried a set of trits on my gun as what I thought was an upgrade (?) Got a great deal on a set. I ran them for a couple of range sessions and pulled them off, tooo busy with 4 dots in my window, some like them I do not...plain black suppressor sights for me. Thanks for over looking the auto-correct fuck up and for the reply. Re: RMR's failing, my step dad has had to send his RMR back for repair twice now. Once for intermittent dot and again for the entire prism assembly backing out of the housing. That last one happened to me while I had borrowed his slide to see if I liked the set up. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2016 11:30:16 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Screw failure or did the plate break? Even on the dedicated milled slides the optic is held on with screws that can sheer or loosen. Have you used the dueck defense mount? id trust the milled steel mount over the screws any day. There isn't a lot to go wrong with it. Less so than the MOS Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Thoughts on BUSINESS of a suppressor sight in front or behind the optic? Ok...beans or no beans? My thoughts...more gimmick. The front sight on an RDS gun belongs EXACTLY where the front sight is on a non RDS gun...battery or sight failure...do you want an extremely short 1" or so sight radius or the full length factory radius? The default if an RDS fails should be exactly the same as the stock gun. RMR are rugged but do fail (I have seen only 1) On tritiums vs blacks...tried a set of trits on my gun as what I thought was an upgrade (?) Got a great deal on a set. I ran them for a couple of range sessions and pulled them off, tooo busy with 4 dots in my window, some like them I do not...plain black suppressor sights for me. I don't know skipper. I was pleasantly surprised at how easy it is to get decent hits with a 1" site radius. I was sceptical at first but once I tried it my confidence in the dueck defense mount was established. I was about to get the slide milled when I found the dd mount. Considers that it mounts the rmr, includes sights, and still allows the use of the holsters I already have I think its a worthy option. Brother if it works for you, your confident with it....Rrrrrun it. My concern with add ons, mounts that slip in to the rear sight dovetail or on a Glock the cover plate is failure...not a lot of metal hokding it all together, slide speed, recoil impulse and metal fatigue are real issues. I know of a very attractive woman who now has a nice scar centerline top of her nose from a Glock MOS hitting her safety glasses during a failure. Black eyes are long gone but shes still real pissed. Screw failure or did the plate break? Even on the dedicated milled slides the optic is held on with screws that can sheer or loosen. Have you used the dueck defense mount? id trust the milled steel mount over the screws any day. There isn't a lot to go wrong with it. Less so than the MOS On a dedicated milled slide (at least on Glocks) the screws DO NOT hold the RMR...they only secure it to the slide. They incur zero shearing forces that are the main inducers of failure. The slide if milled properly should have an exceptionally high tolerance fitment. On mine you would almost think it was cut to small. You must take a minute to ensure the RMR is going in square, its that tight. You have got to actually think about getting it in correctly. The screws simply hold it in place. The front and rear shoulders of the cut bear 100% of the shearing loads. The MOS Plate failed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2016 11:31:07 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I am a believer of people learning the basics before moving to optics. If they do not understand the fundamentals, sight alignment, sight picture among others, then they have no business going straight to a red dot. Different strokes for different folks.
Also, that's not making you a better shooter. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
If you cant shoot with worth a shit with irons they will not make you a better shooter. I have tried them but prefer irons. Actually they will. I use my wifes rmr with new shooters who cant even hit the paper I am a believer of people learning the basics before moving to optics. If they do not understand the fundamentals, sight alignment, sight picture among others, then they have no business going straight to a red dot. Different strokes for different folks.
Also, that's not making you a better shooter. Ok so you dont think hitting the target vs not hitting the target is more betterer? The USMC has found that starting recruits with optics makes them better shooters as well but they don't know what they're doing either. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2016 11:32:48 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: My M&P9 with a RMR. The holster was custom made. I call the holster the Crusader  http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x166/CnAPhot/firearms/Crusader%20holster1_zpszqw9aldn.jpg |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2016 11:35:11 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I love my RMR on my P-09. Moving targets are easy and it also shows you exactly what you're doing wrong. http://i106.photobucket.com/albums/m255/90Z51/Guns/P-09/WP_20150227_17_16_52_Rich.jpg |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2016 11:35:39 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Ok so you dont think hitting the target vs not hitting the target is more betterer? The USMC has found that starting recruits with optics makes them better shooters as well but they don't know what they're doing either. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
If you cant shoot with worth a shit with irons they will not make you a better shooter. I have tried them but prefer irons. Actually they will. I use my wifes rmr with new shooters who cant even hit the paper I am a believer of people learning the basics before moving to optics. If they do not understand the fundamentals, sight alignment, sight picture among others, then they have no business going straight to a red dot. Different strokes for different folks.
Also, that's not making you a better shooter. Ok so you dont think hitting the target vs not hitting the target is more betterer? The USMC has found that starting recruits with optics makes them better shooters as well but they don't know what they're doing either. When I was really into USPSA (I know, I know... gamers) I heard it repeated time and time again that if you really want to get better with irons you should shoot Open for a year. The red dots make it very obvious what you're doing wrong and what you're doing right, you're able to easily see things eith the dot that you'd probably never notice if you only ever shoot irons. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2016 11:36:26 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
On a dedicated milled slide (at least on Glocks) the screws DO NOT hold the RMR...they only secure it to the slide. They incur zero shearing forces that are the main inducers of failure. The slide if milled properly should have an exceptionally high tolerance fitment. On mine you would almost think it was cut to small. You must take a minute to ensure the RMR is going in square, its that tight. You have got to actually think about getting it in correctly. The screws simply hold it in place. The front and rear shoulders of the cut bear 100% of the shearing loads. The MOS Plate failed. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Thoughts on BUSINESS of a suppressor sight in front or behind the optic? Ok...beans or no beans? My thoughts...more gimmick. The front sight on an RDS gun belongs EXACTLY where the front sight is on a non RDS gun...battery or sight failure...do you want an extremely short 1" or so sight radius or the full length factory radius? The default if an RDS fails should be exactly the same as the stock gun. RMR are rugged but do fail (I have seen only 1) On tritiums vs blacks...tried a set of trits on my gun as what I thought was an upgrade (?) Got a great deal on a set. I ran them for a couple of range sessions and pulled them off, tooo busy with 4 dots in my window, some like them I do not...plain black suppressor sights for me. I don't know skipper. I was pleasantly surprised at how easy it is to get decent hits with a 1" site radius. I was sceptical at first but once I tried it my confidence in the dueck defense mount was established. I was about to get the slide milled when I found the dd mount. Considers that it mounts the rmr, includes sights, and still allows the use of the holsters I already have I think its a worthy option. Brother if it works for you, your confident with it....Rrrrrun it. My concern with add ons, mounts that slip in to the rear sight dovetail or on a Glock the cover plate is failure...not a lot of metal hokding it all together, slide speed, recoil impulse and metal fatigue are real issues. I know of a very attractive woman who now has a nice scar centerline top of her nose from a Glock MOS hitting her safety glasses during a failure. Black eyes are long gone but shes still real pissed. Screw failure or did the plate break? Even on the dedicated milled slides the optic is held on with screws that can sheer or loosen. Have you used the dueck defense mount? id trust the milled steel mount over the screws any day. There isn't a lot to go wrong with it. Less so than the MOS On a dedicated milled slide (at least on Glocks) the screws DO NOT hold the RMR...they only secure it to the slide. They incur zero shearing forces that are the main inducers of failure. The slide if milled properly should have an exceptionally high tolerance fitment. On mine you would almost think it was cut to small. You must take a minute to ensure the RMR is going in square, its that tight. You have got to actually think about getting it in correctly. The screws simply hold it in place. The front and rear shoulders of the cut bear 100% of the shearing loads. The MOS Plate failed. How so? The dd mount has zero for/aft movement as well. Not only do the front and rear sight hold the optic tightly the threaded portions fit into the sight. It is being held front, rear, and middle. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2016 11:37:26 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
maybe that will make it easier to chamber a round. I found it difficult and annoying how minimalistic the gripping area of the slide is due to its slim nature. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I love my RMR on my P-09. Moving targets are easy and it also shows you exactly what you're doing wrong. http://i106.photobucket.com/albums/m255/90Z51/Guns/P-09/WP_20150227_17_16_52_Rich.jpg Not with the P-09 but with my Shadow I've shot many USPSA matches and had many unloaded table starts. I've never had a problem in actual use (and rushing since it's timed) working the slide, and I don't recall ever seeing anyone else with a CZ have a problem working the slide either. I agree that the thin slide looks like it would be a problem but it seems that for most people it's not an issue. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2016 11:38:08 AM EDT
[#15]
Can anybody recommend best sight/best way to mount a MRD on a USP Tactical? Like a 2008-ish model, came with soft case, tall sights, etc.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2016 11:38:11 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Red dots "for me" are much more accurate, but of course YMMV. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
My bedside G17 sports a Veridian light and green laser combo. Irons are better for accuracy, but for fast and scared shots, it's quite effective. I imagine the RMR is similar. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Red dots "for me" are much more accurate, but of course YMMV. I don't doubt that. For me, the speed of a laser is impressive in low light conditions. I've got it set up so that the light and pulsating green laser comes on when drawn from the holster. I thought it was going to be cheesy, but it's pretty slick. However, it's not for long range or accuracy work. But that's not what a bedside gun is for. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2016 11:39:46 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not with the P-09 but with my Shadow I've shot many USPSA matches and had many unloaded table starts. I've never had a problem in actual use (and rushing since it's timed) working the slide, and I don't recall ever seeing anyone else with a CZ have a problem working the slide either. I agree that the thin slide looks like it would be a problem but it seems that for most people it's not an issue. I've been shooting CZ75 variants in IDPA, USPSA, and 3-gun for about 8-9 years now.... more "empty chamber" starts than I could count.. It's just not a problem. It looks like it might be, but it isn't. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2016 11:44:06 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Dots on pistols make a huge difference in hitting small targets (or far away targets). For me, and for the kind of shots I could realistically see me needing to make with a handgun (read: close and scared shitless) iron sights are just as fast if not a touch faster. Naturally, YMMV, everyone has different eyesight, hand-eye coordination, etc. But for me, the RDS isn't the "game-changah" on the pistol like it is was on the rifle. Irrespective of my personal opinion, the trend is here to stay. USPSA has a "Carry Optics" division now, and it's proving to be pretty popular. Several manufacturers are offering models already cut for optics. I can't wait to see what the next few years brings to market. I'm keeping my fingers crossed for ful integration. Battery, emitter, adjustment system... all built into the slide from the factory. Only the actuall sighting window protrudes from the top of the slide. This is my experience as well. I can shoot smaller groups on small targets at longer distances with the dot, however, for HD/SD situations I don't think the dot adds anything. I shoot recreationally (sp) with the dot, but don't carry with the dot. YMMV |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2016 11:45:36 AM EDT
[#19]
First, thanks for over looking the auto-correct fuck up and for the reply. no problem...I knew, or thought I knew what you were talking about Second, I was actually asking about where to put the BUIS rear sight and if there are any benefits to having the optic further to the rear and moving the rear in front of the optic. It's my bad for not being clear. Apologies. My 2 cents...run the irons, where the irons traditionally are, the rearward most portion of the slide or frame. My default is the time honored accepted mode...think of how many 10's -100's of thousands of sight presentations you have made over the years, where was the rear sight on everyone of them? Why screw that up and in the heat of the moment have to hunt for a rear sight that is not where it was 211,173 times before? Third, my step dad has had to send his RMR back for repair twice now. Once for intermittent dot and again for the entire prism assembly backing out of the housing. That last one happened to me while I had borrowed his slide to see if I liked the set up. Intermittent dot in my experience has been cured 100% of the time by the addition if an RMR sealing plate, a thin, SS plate cut to the exact footprint of the RMR and placed onto the slide with a dab of lithium grease smeared onto the slide, then the RMR is placed on it and snugged down. Never heard of a glass failure but the great news is Trijicons warrantly is flawless. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2016 11:49:18 AM EDT
[#20]
The dd mount has zero for/aft movement as well. Not only do the front and rear sight hold the optic tightly the threaded portions fit into the sight. It is being held front, rear, and middle. 03RN, I will give you that the DD is the best non milled RMR option I have seen so far. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2016 11:51:52 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Are you arguing that you can't build shooting skill while using a red dot? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
If you cant shoot with worth a shit with irons they will not make you a better shooter. I have tried them but prefer irons. Actually they will. I use my wifes rmr with new shooters who cant even hit the paper I am a believer of people learning the basics before moving to optics. If they do not understand the fundamentals, sight alignment, sight picture among others, then they have no business going straight to a red dot. Different strokes for different folks.
Also, that's not making you a better shooter. Are you arguing that you can't build shooting skill while using a red dot? Read my last post again, and my first post for that matter. It will answer your question.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2016 11:57:05 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Ok so you dont think hitting the target vs not hitting the target is more betterer? The USMC has found that starting recruits with optics makes them better shooters as well but they don't know what they're doing either. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
If you cant shoot with worth a shit with irons they will not make you a better shooter. I have tried them but prefer irons. Actually they will. I use my wifes rmr with new shooters who cant even hit the paper I am a believer of people learning the basics before moving to optics. If they do not understand the fundamentals, sight alignment, sight picture among others, then they have no business going straight to a red dot. Different strokes for different folks.
Also, that's not making you a better shooter. Ok so you dont think hitting the target vs not hitting the target is more betterer? The USMC has found that starting recruits with optics makes them better shooters as well but they don't know what they're doing either. Since the military does it that way then it must be the best. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2016 11:59:46 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Since the military does it that way then it must be the best. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The USMC has found that starting recruits with optics makes them better shooters as well but they don't know what they're doing either. Since the military does it that way then it must be the best. It is in this case. Train like you fight. Which mean rifle irons are a back-up, which means they should get about 10-20% of the rifle training time. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2016 12:00:33 PM EDT
[#24]
I was pissed when I found out the Corps only taught irons on the pistol ( bets on how before they adopt RDS pistols?) I too was a fervent believer that irons was the only way to teach ab initio instruction...it was blasphemy....until I realized the Corp was right...the only thing that changed was sight alignment, sight picture...they still instilled ALL the basics, BRASS, posture, position, all the points of exceptional marksmanship, the only difference now was that the mechanical optical interface between four objects (eye, rear sight, front sight and target) was dropped to 3, eye, dot, target due to obsolescence, time consuming alignment and picture check are gone. Marine Corp PMI's (one of my MOS's) are still cranking out the best, most accurate riflemen in the world only now its with ACOGS...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2016 12:01:07 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Since the military does it that way then it must be the best. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
If you cant shoot with worth a shit with irons they will not make you a better shooter. I have tried them but prefer irons. Actually they will. I use my wifes rmr with new shooters who cant even hit the paper I am a believer of people learning the basics before moving to optics. If they do not understand the fundamentals, sight alignment, sight picture among others, then they have no business going straight to a red dot. Different strokes for different folks.
Also, that's not making you a better shooter. Ok so you dont think hitting the target vs not hitting the target is more betterer? The USMC has found that starting recruits with optics makes them better shooters as well but they don't know what they're doing either. Since the military does it that way then it must be the best. In a word...YES! |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2016 12:06:12 PM EDT
[#26]
I heard that RDS can get beat up by the slide moving back and forth. So it wont hold zero or stops working. Something along those lines.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2016 12:12:12 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I heard that RDS can get beat up by the slide moving back and forth. So it wont hold zero or stops working. Something along those lines. Yes...absolutely...kinda like comparing a G19 with a Hi-Point...buy once cry once...not all RDS's are equal...the gold standard is the Trijicon, theres just no argument there, closely followed by DeltaPoint and all the others tagging behind...a decade or so back it was truer...now not so much. Mean failure rates were measured in thousands then tens of thousands now millions of rounds go down range between failures statistically. I have easily 25k+ rounds thru my G19, I have replaced every component on the gun (frame included) except the slide and RMR, has not so much as hicupped. The great part is Trijicons warranty...if its broke...WE FIX OR REPLACE IT...PERIOD. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2016 12:59:55 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Okay. <a href="http://s1311.photobucket.com/user/TrojanManSCP/media/ADB5E6ED-1C83-4255-BAF1-8383061B94A3_zpse1ttadti.jpg.html" target="_blank">http://i1311.photobucket.com/albums/s675/TrojanManSCP/ADB5E6ED-1C83-4255-BAF1-8383061B94A3_zpse1ttadti.jpg</a> Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Thread needs more 6 Second Mounts Okay. <a href="http://s1311.photobucket.com/user/TrojanManSCP/media/ADB5E6ED-1C83-4255-BAF1-8383061B94A3_zpse1ttadti.jpg.html" target="_blank">http://i1311.photobucket.com/albums/s675/TrojanManSCP/ADB5E6ED-1C83-4255-BAF1-8383061B94A3_zpse1ttadti.jpg</a> 
Ditto |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2016 1:04:34 PM EDT
[#29]
Just got a RM02 for $490 shipped on EBay. Seemed like about as good a deal as I could find. Thinking I'm going to send my slide to Lonewolf for milling.
Damn this thread and costing me money! |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2016 1:09:19 PM EDT
[#30]
A game changer just like when red dots started being attached
to rifles. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2016 1:12:00 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
A game changer just like when red dots started being attached to rifles. I don't think it's ever going to represent the same level of "capability boost" that RDS on rifles gave us. The mechanics just don't work the same. Dots on rifles are very forgiving of sloppy cheekwelds and "creative" shooting positions. On handguns, not so much. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2016 1:16:08 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
In a word...YES! Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I am a believer of people learning the basics before moving to optics. If they do not understand the fundamentals, sight alignment, sight picture among others, then they have no business going straight to a red dot. Different strokes for different folks.
Also, that's not making you a better shooter. Ok so you dont think hitting the target vs not hitting the target is more betterer? The USMC has found that starting recruits with optics makes them better shooters as well but they don't know what they're doing either. Since the military does it that way then it must be the best. In a word...YES! 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2016 1:22:38 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It is in this case. Train like you fight. Which mean rifle irons are a back-up, which means they should get about 10-20% of the rifle training time. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The USMC has found that starting recruits with optics makes them better shooters as well but they don't know what they're doing either. Since the military does it that way then it must be the best. It is in this case. Train like you fight. Which mean rifle irons are a back-up, which means they should get about 10-20% of the rifle training time. I don't believe you that the USMC starts recruits with optics. They may move on to optics just like the Army does after the fundamentals are learned but they don't give a recruit a rifle and then an ACOG and send them to the range. They are great at speeding up target acquisition times and hitting further targets due to the MOA disparity between the dot and the sight post but that is not making someone a better shooter. Good tools for an already experience shooter but is cutting a corner trying to get somebody on target when they don't understand the relationship between sight alignment and sight picture and the other fundamentals that should come before glass. I like them on my rifle but I would never, go without iron sights and I would never use an optic as a shortcut when training a new shooter to get them on paper. Don't care for them on a carry gun. Like I said different strokes for different folks. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2016 1:27:20 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I was pissed when I found out the Corps only taught irons on the pistol ( bets on how before they adopt RDS pistols?) I too was a fervent believer that irons was the only way to teach ab initio instruction...it was blasphemy....until I realized the Corp was right...the only thing that changed was sight alignment, sight picture...they still instilled ALL the basics, BRASS, posture, position, all the points of exceptional marksmanship, the only difference now was that the mechanical optical interface between four objects (eye, rear sight, front sight and target) was dropped to 3, eye, dot, target due to obsolescence, time consuming alignment and picture check are gone. Marine Corp PMI's (one of my MOS's) are still cranking out the best, most accurate riflemen in the world only now its with ACOGS... Yeah, every branch says their way is the best and we all know everyone claims their branch has the best marksman in the world. Bottom line is, learn the fundamentals, then try an optic and if it improves an area of your shooting (speed, distance, or whatever) then use it or don't.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2016 1:29:43 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I don't believe you that the USMC starts recruits with optics. They may move on to optics just like the Army does after the fundamentals are learned but they don't give a recruit a rifle and then an ACOG and send them to the range. It wasn't my assertion.. I have no idea. But if they don't, they should. They are great at speeding up target acquisition times and hitting further targets due to the MOA disparity between the dot and the sight post but that is not making someone a better shooter. It isn't? Why do we give troops guns in the first place then, if not to hit small targets as fast as possible? Good tools for an already experience shooter but is cutting a corner trying to get somebody on target when they don't understand the relationship between sight alignment and sight picture and the other fundamentals that should come before glass. Shooting with an optic absolutely teaches sight alignment/sight picture and all of the other fundamentals of marksmanship... just not in the way you learned it. We probably don't spend much time drilling troops on muzzleloading drills with paper cartridges either. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The USMC has found that starting recruits with optics makes them better shooters as well but they don't know what they're doing either. Since the military does it that way then it must be the best. It is in this case. Train like you fight. Which mean rifle irons are a back-up, which means they should get about 10-20% of the rifle training time. I don't believe you that the USMC starts recruits with optics. They may move on to optics just like the Army does after the fundamentals are learned but they don't give a recruit a rifle and then an ACOG and send them to the range. It wasn't my assertion.. I have no idea. But if they don't, they should. They are great at speeding up target acquisition times and hitting further targets due to the MOA disparity between the dot and the sight post but that is not making someone a better shooter. It isn't? Why do we give troops guns in the first place then, if not to hit small targets as fast as possible? Good tools for an already experience shooter but is cutting a corner trying to get somebody on target when they don't understand the relationship between sight alignment and sight picture and the other fundamentals that should come before glass. Shooting with an optic absolutely teaches sight alignment/sight picture and all of the other fundamentals of marksmanship... just not in the way you learned it. We probably don't spend much time drilling troops on muzzleloading drills with paper cartridges either. Teach them how to use the BUIS, but don't waste too much time on it. Like I said before, about 10-15% of training time/training rounds sounds about right. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2016 1:30:58 PM EDT
[#36]
I would like to check out a Sig P320RX. It is factory equipped with their Romeo1 sight. Cabellas has 'em listed at $799
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2016 4:00:01 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I don't believe you that the USMC starts recruits with optics. They may move on to optics just like the Army does after the fundamentals are learned but they don't give a recruit a rifle and then an ACOG and send them to the range. They are great at speeding up target acquisition times and hitting further targets due to the MOA disparity between the dot and the sight post but that is not making someone a better shooter. Good tools for an already experience shooter but is cutting a corner trying to get somebody on target when they don't understand the relationship between sight alignment and sight picture and the other fundamentals that should come before glass. I like them on my rifle but I would never, go without iron sights and I would never use an optic as a shortcut when training a new shooter to get them on paper. Don't care for them on a carry gun. Like I said different strokes for different folks. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: The USMC has found that starting recruits with optics makes them better shooters as well but they don't know what they're doing either. Since the military does it that way then it must be the best. It is in this case. Train like you fight. Which mean rifle irons are a back-up, which means they should get about 10-20% of the rifle training time. I don't believe you that the USMC starts recruits with optics. They may move on to optics just like the Army does after the fundamentals are learned but they don't give a recruit a rifle and then an ACOG and send them to the range. They are great at speeding up target acquisition times and hitting further targets due to the MOA disparity between the dot and the sight post but that is not making someone a better shooter. Good tools for an already experience shooter but is cutting a corner trying to get somebody on target when they don't understand the relationship between sight alignment and sight picture and the other fundamentals that should come before glass. I like them on my rifle but I would never, go without iron sights and I would never use an optic as a shortcut when training a new shooter to get them on paper. Don't care for them on a carry gun. Like I said different strokes for different folks. It's been going on for several years now if I remember correctly. I believe 2012 is when they fully implemented RCOs in boot camp. Believe it or not, scores are going up. News flash, optics are better than iron sights. I didn't even have BUIS for a large majority of my career. Always had an RCO. It is pointless to waste time teaching Marines a less than optimal sighting system when they have a better system to be teaching them on. Especially when more often than not, Marines either won't have them equipped on their rifles, or be given enough the opportunity to use them.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2016 4:07:42 PM EDT
[#38]
I used to think that red dots on handguns were a gimmick... but as my older cool guy friends lose the sharpness of vision they are transitioning to red dot and finding that MRDS + handguns are hugely advantageous.
In particular, hitting steel at 200 yards with irons on pistols is amazingly impressive, but easy peasy with a glock with an RMR. I definitely think long guns are always the better solution, but when one can easily walk around with pistol with a red dot and light concealed in the waistband comfortably thanks to advancements in holster design (Raven Concealment FTW) it's time to accept Han Solo blasters as a thing, not a fad. The biggest weakness in the platform/system is still the MRDS. The shock imparted on slide mounted MRDS kills em in 2-5K rounds fired. For folks in high speed units issued em, they can afford a supply train to keep em running. The average joe however, will need to send in their RDS for rebuilds regularly which takes time. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2016 4:49:45 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I used to think that red dots on handguns were a gimmick... but as my older cool guy friends lose the sharpness of vision they are transitioning to red dot and finding that MRDS + handguns are hugely advantageous. In particular, hitting steel at 200 yards with irons on pistols is amazingly impressive, but easy peasy with a glock with an RMR. I definitely think long guns are always the better solution, but when one can easily walk around with pistol with a red dot and light concealed in the waistband comfortably thanks to advancements in holster design (Raven Concealment FTW) it's time to accept Han Solo blasters as a thing, not a fad. The biggest weakness in the platform/system is still the MRDS. The shock imparted on slide mounted MRDS kills em in 2-5K rounds fired. For folks in high speed units issued em, they can afford a supply train to keep em running. The average joe however, will need to send in their RDS for rebuilds regularly which takes time. Buy a RDS that costs more them $40.00 I have several with well over 12K, ~3 years of hard 3 gun competition use, change the batteries once a year and go. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2016 4:58:01 PM EDT
[#40]
I'm always worried the Rd will fog up when getting out of the truck
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2016 5:27:19 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm always worried the Rd will fog up when getting out of the truck Use nature's anti-fog (spit) or a commercial product on the lens and it'll be fine. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2016 5:32:26 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I don't believe you that the USMC starts recruits with optics. They may move on to optics just like the Army does after the fundamentals are learned but they don't give a recruit a rifle and then an ACOG and send them to the range. They are great at speeding up target acquisition times and hitting further targets due to the MOA disparity between the dot and the sight post but that is not making someone a better shooter. Good tools for an already experience shooter but is cutting a corner trying to get somebody on target when they don't understand the relationship between sight alignment and sight picture and the other fundamentals that should come before glass. I like them on my rifle but I would never, go without iron sights and I would never use an optic as a shortcut when training a new shooter to get them on paper. Don't care for them on a carry gun. Like I said different strokes for different folks. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The USMC has found that starting recruits with optics makes them better shooters as well but they don't know what they're doing either. Since the military does it that way then it must be the best. It is in this case. Train like you fight. Which mean rifle irons are a back-up, which means they should get about 10-20% of the rifle training time. I don't believe you that the USMC starts recruits with optics. They may move on to optics just like the Army does after the fundamentals are learned but they don't give a recruit a rifle and then an ACOG and send them to the range. They are great at speeding up target acquisition times and hitting further targets due to the MOA disparity between the dot and the sight post but that is not making someone a better shooter. Good tools for an already experience shooter but is cutting a corner trying to get somebody on target when they don't understand the relationship between sight alignment and sight picture and the other fundamentals that should come before glass. I like them on my rifle but I would never, go without iron sights and I would never use an optic as a shortcut when training a new shooter to get them on paper. Don't care for them on a carry gun. Like I said different strokes for different folks. You don't believe me? lol ok but your wrong |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2016 5:43:03 PM EDT
[#43]
I did a little competition with myself tonight before I clocked in. I shot the RI ccw qualifier. 30 rounds at an Army L target at 25 yards. I shot my wifes glock with an rmr then my beretta vertec. I shot a 266 with both out of 300. Which is good for me. I typically hang in the 250s.
I was expecting a little more disparity between the two though |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/21/2016 6:44:24 AM EDT
[#44]
Alright. Have an interest in this.
Really debating if I want to think the 6 second mount would let stuff live longer since it is not riding with the slide all the time vs. milling slide or the version that goes in the rear slight slot. I read someone posting about 12k rounds in 3 or so years. I fully agree that if messing with it and serious then trijicon prices are what I should look at if wanting more than a range toy. And even for range toys, I hate stuff tearing up. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/21/2016 6:51:36 AM EDT
[#45]
I have a rmr on my g20...only problem I've had is finding a suitable holster for it. A shoulder holster that is. I use it for hunting so a belt holster is out.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/21/2016 7:18:37 AM EDT
[#46]
Every time one of these threads pops up, it re-fuels my wanting to try one.
I now use reading glasses and front sight is a lil fuzzy 
Just not sure yet. When I get ready to commit, I'm gonna run across the river to LA and use Primary Machine. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/21/2016 10:01:23 AM EDT
[#47]
My G17 is being delivered later today. I'll be setting it up with a T1 on a 6SM. G all. the. things. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/21/2016 11:44:32 AM EDT
[#48]
The RDS doesn't make much difference at 5 yards and in for speed but stretch that out to 15-100+ yards and speed and accuracy increase a lot. If it wasn't a big advantage you would see the top guys shooting irons and beating the open class guys, but we all know that doesn't happen. The RMR and Deltapoint Pro have made reliability a non issue if properly installed. People try a RDS a couple of times and decide it doesn't make an difference, wrong, it is a training issue. Once you learn how to shoot a RDS it is a game changer. I shot a Vickers class this summer with my duty 34 MOS and RMR. All I heard was the whining about it being an open gun and it wasn't fair. No shit! In a gunfight I want every advantage I can get and the RMR is a big advantage. Nobody would choose to go into a gunfight without optics today on a rifle, handguns are just catching up. RDS have been used in USPSA 20 years now. If you buy a quality RDS, mount it properly and actually learn to shoot it, it is night and day compared to irons. Yes you still have irons, same as my rifle with a bombproof Aimpoint because sometimes shit happens. The keyboard commandos that shoot 1/2 inch groups at 50 yards(still haven't seen these groups in person) will be fine without an RDS but the people that actually shoot will improve.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/21/2016 12:10:58 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The RDS doesn't make much difference at 5 yards and in for speed but stretch that out to 15-100+ yards and speed and accuracy increase a lot. If it wasn't a big advantage you would see the top guys shooting irons and beating the open class guys, but we all know that doesn't happen. The RMR and Deltapoint Pro have made reliability a non issue if properly installed. People try a RDS a couple of times and decide it doesn't make an difference, wrong, it is a training issue. Once you learn how to shoot a RDS it is a game changer. I shot a Vickers class this summer with my duty 34 MOS and RMR. All I heard was the whining about it being an open gun and it wasn't fair. No shit! In a gunfight I want every advantage I can get and the RMR is a big advantage. Nobody would choose to go into a gunfight without optics today on a rifle, handguns are just catching up. RDS have been used in USPSA 20 years now. If you buy a quality RDS, mount it properly and actually learn to shoot it, it is night and day compared to irons. Yes you still have irons, same as my rifle with a bombproof Aimpoint because sometimes shit happens. The keyboard commandos that shoot 1/2 inch groups at 50 yards(still haven't seen these groups in person) will be fine without an RDS but the people that actually shoot will improve. Thanks for the post squat dog. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/21/2016 12:24:02 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The RDS doesn't make much difference at 5 yards and in for speed but stretch that out to 15-100+ yards and speed and accuracy increase a lot. If it wasn't a big advantage you would see the top guys shooting irons and beating the open class guys, but we all know that doesn't happen. The RMR and Deltapoint Pro have made reliability a non issue if properly installed. People try a RDS a couple of times and decide it doesn't make an difference, wrong, it is a training issue. Once you learn how to shoot a RDS it is a game changer. I shot a Vickers class this summer with my duty 34 MOS and RMR. All I heard was the whining about it being an open gun and it wasn't fair. No shit! In a gunfight I want every advantage I can get and the RMR is a big advantage. Nobody would choose to go into a gunfight without optics today on a rifle, handguns are just catching up. RDS have been used in USPSA 20 years now. If you buy a quality RDS, mount it properly and actually learn to shoot it, it is night and day compared to irons. Yes you still have irons, same as my rifle with a bombproof Aimpoint because sometimes shit happens. The keyboard commandos that shoot 1/2 inch groups at 50 yards(still haven't seen these groups in person) will be fine without an RDS but the people that actually shoot will improve. Yesterday, I shot my tripod leg  at 75yds with my G19, sounds like an RMR may have prevented that.
I really think I'm gonna fo pretty soon. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
