RMR, FFIII, other????

[BigDog58]

Just go with a C-More. I have tried the FastFire's and didn't really like them for fast target acquisition. I find the dot and target much faster with a C-More. By the way, this is a Glock 34. The mount is from Carver Custom.

b22 (21).jpg

Which CC Mount are you using? I'm thinking of putting a C-More on my G-17

[UnaStamus]

Your a little off on the open guns. They actually have to make a major power factor(bullet weight x velocity /1000 must be 165 or greater) which in most cases far exceeds factory rated ammo. I shot open for years in 38 super, still have the gun. The open guys mostly run 2011 variants and the optics are frame mounted verses slide for faster sight picture recovery, also reduces the mass movement which allows the gun the cycle faster.

In terms of LE, again understand these are done by agencies putting out a spec and getting bids, companies work very hard to tune that spec to basically make their product the exclusive item. The fact LE uses something is little to no indication of the quality or functionality of a product. LE over and under buy all the time, it is like any other government institution - do you really think they are the ultimate authority on much?

For 9mm, yes you are correct. The power factor allows for lighter loads for .40 and .45 however, which is why you see a lot of race guns in those calibers as opposed to 9mm. In my IPSC league, the .40 is the predominant caliber for the 1911 race guns, with the .45 being a very close #2. The only 9mm people are the ones shooting production.

You make a good point about the mounting system. This has been a noted issue for years back when frame-mounted optics first appeared years ago. The ALG 6-Second mount is the evolution of that, and it reduces reciprocating mass versus slide mounting, which helps with recoil control.

Re: LE agencies...
LE agencies don't dictate the velocity or energy of commercial loads. They can dictate the desired terminal performance effects, but the ammo manufacturer determines necessary velocity based on the projectile design and targets being shot. The velocity is designed to allow the bullet to function properly, while at the same time functioning reliably. Custom loads can be developed for a solicitation, but they tend to be higher performance.

[mmcnx2]

Your a little off on the open guns. They actually have to make a major power factor(bullet weight x velocity /1000 must be 165 or greater) which in most cases far exceeds factory rated ammo. I shot open for years in 38 super, still have the gun. The open guys mostly run 2011 variants and the optics are frame mounted verses slide for faster sight picture recovery, also reduces the mass movement which allows the gun the cycle faster.

In terms of LE, again understand these are done by agencies putting out a spec and getting bids, companies work very hard to tune that spec to basically make their product the exclusive item. The fact LE uses something is little to no indication of the quality or functionality of a product. LE over and under buy all the time, it is like any other government institution - do you really think they are the ultimate authority on much?

For 9mm, yes you are correct. The power factor allows for lighter loads for .40 and .45 however, which is why you see a lot of race guns in those calibers as opposed to 9mm. In my IPSC league, the .40 is the predominant caliber for the 1911 race guns, with the .45 being a very close #2. The only 9mm people are the ones shooting production.

You make a good point about the mounting system. This has been a noted issue for years back when frame-mounted optics first appeared years ago. The ALG 6-Second mount is the evolution of that, and it reduces reciprocating mass versus slide mounting, which helps with recoil control.

Re: LE agencies...
LE agencies don't dictate the velocity or energy of commercial loads. They can dictate the desired terminal performance effects, but the ammo manufacturer determines necessary velocity based on the projectile design and targets being shot. The velocity is designed to allow the bullet to function properly, while at the same time functioning reliably. Custom loads can be developed for a solicitation, but they tend to be higher performance.

40 and 45 are non-existent in open for USPSA, 38 super and more recently 9 are the rounds of choice due to increase round count with the mag length rules. And these loads are very hot. 40 is used in limited and lim10, production is all 9, revolver is moved from 45 to 9 and single stack is a mix of 45 and 40, with a few guys running minor 9's.

[goalie]

If price is the reason you don't want a RMR, I would look at the Vortex Venom

It isn't just not wanting to spend the money, as it isn't really a lot in the grand scheme of things, it's just that I don't want to spend as much as the pistol on a sighting system that may not be my cup of tea.

I KNOW I will appreciate good glass on a rifle. Until I have the same feelings about micro red dots on pistols, I am leery.

Any of you guys use the Venom?

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

[mmcnx2]

If price is the reason you don't want a RMR, I would look at the Vortex Venom

It isn't just not wanting to spend the money, as it isn't really a lot in the grand scheme of things, it's just that I don't want to spend as much as the pistol on a sighting system that may not be my cup of tea.

I KNOW I will appreciate good glass on a rifle. Until I have the same feelings about micro red dots on pistols, I am leery.

Any of you guys use the Venom?

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

I have a buddy running the Venom on a Glock 10mm long slide and he likes it. He is a vortex fan and again it has a lifetime warranty.

[goalie]

Just go with a C-More. I have tried the FastFire's and didn't really like them for fast target acquisition. I find the dot and target much faster with a C-More. By the way, this is a Glock 34. The mount is from Carver Custom.

b22 (21).jpg

Ok, dumb question time: is that mount just clamped onto the rail, and also attached with a special trigger-pin?

It would seem to me that such a mount would be a lot easier on the optic.

What is the downside to something like that over an MOS Glock type mount?

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

[mmcnx2]

Just go with a C-More. I have tried the FastFire's and didn't really like them for fast target acquisition. I find the dot and target much faster with a C-More. By the way, this is a Glock 34. The mount is from Carver Custom.

b22 (21).jpg

Ok, dumb question time: is that mount just clamped onto the rail, and also attached with a special trigger-pin?

It would seem to me that such a mount would be a lot easier on the optic.

What is the downside to something like that over an MOS Glock type mount?

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

3 basic ways to mount the optics on a auto.

1. Drill and tap the frame for a mount that holds the optics over the slide.
2. Use a MOS slot milled in the slide, either factory or added
3. There are brackets that attach to an existing picatinny rail under the barrel and loop around to hold the optic over the slide.

1 and 3 both make holsters a little more challenging and add bulk. Both don't require the optic to move so it should be easier on the optic from a force standpoint.
2 is cleaner, less bulky and manufactures are making commercial holster for many of the setups. The down side is the optic is riding on the slide and is subjected to those forces.

I have both, my open gun is drilled and tapped the 34 I used the MOS slot. The revolvers use a more hybrid mount that goes in place of the rear sight and make a shelf for the optic.

[usnret]

It clamps on the rail underneath, and you replace the trigger pin with the supplied screw that goes through the gun and screw into the mount on the other side. You have to remove your iron sights to run this mount. This mount is a 90degree mount. It puts the dot right at about the same height as where your sights would be for a faster target acquisition. They have other ones that position the optic in the upright position. They also have ones for the STS and Burris optics.

Here's a link:http://www.bb-enterprise.biz/glockscopemountslvl2.cfm

[usnret]

Just go with a C-More. I have tried the FastFire's and didn't really like them for fast target acquisition. I find the dot and target much faster with a C-More. By the way, this is a Glock 34. The mount is from Carver Custom.

b22 (21).jpg

Which CC Mount are you using? I'm thinking of putting a C-More on my G-17

Here you go. I am using the 90 degree mount.
http://www.bb-enterprise.biz/ecommerce/ ... mounts.cfm

[Randygmn]

As already stated, recoil is a known killer. The RMR is exceptional in handling recoil, although I know of a few cases where the glass has broken on them from 1 handed manipulations. Obviously, they were being used as hard use, fighting pistols (both died during training.). I believe Youtuber Hossusmc had one where the glass exploded, too. The Delta pro is also good for serious use.
I've been considering buying a Glock 19 with an RMR for carry. Last year I started to see IWB kydex holsters with relief cuts for the RMR. I've had a chance to shoot with one on a few different occasions, and I know that there would have to be a commitment to train enough before becoming proficient. After decades of traditional pistol sights, the eye/brain plays its own trick and instinctively wants to line up the irons with the dot before shooting. That's obviously counterproductive and much slower. I was told when starting out it's a good idea to place a piece of electrical tape over the sights when training. Fwiw.

[igofast]

...
What is the downside to something like that over an MOS Glock type mount?

Height over bore/co-witness. The MOS/CORE/RX/OSP/optic on slide generally will allow you to co-witness iron sights(although you would need high or suppressor sights). None of the non-reciprocating mounts get low enough. Is it important? Maybe if your battery or sight dies. It also helps if you 'lose' the sight:

http://www.breachbangclear.com/pistol-optics-red-dot-sight/

Someone else already touched on the holster issue and the bulk issue.

[crbutler]

My personal experience is a red dot is more accurate but is a bit slower on the first shot than good irons at conversational distances, but after 1-2 shots the dot is faster, to go along with more accurate.

I have ran the old beer can dots, a smaller tasco dot tube scope, a bunch of c-mores, a tasco optima, j point, doctor, trijicon RMR, and shot a friend's micro dot. Ran them on mostly 9x23 uspsa open pistols, but also an old bullseye .45, .22rfs, open division 3 gun rifles, 3 gun open shotguns, and on some big bore dangerous game rifles up to .470 NE. So I think I have some expeience.

The big sights damaged the dust covers on the .45. Never frame mounted any on a glock, and with the frame being as flexible as it is, would not expect either great accuracy or maintenance of zero. Slide mounting is not a problem with the RMR's, and they are made for that.

The C more has the brightest dot, but can be a bit touchy until you get used to it to find the dot. It's also a pain to zero, but holds zero best except for the trijicon.

The tube scopes are easiest to acquire the dot on a handgun.

In general, the tech moved on and I replaced the gun before any of the sights became useless...except for a 1st gen j point and some of the optimas.

The trijicon has handled about 50 rounds of full bore .470 NE plus a bunch of practice ammo. A promenent Pro hunter in Africa uses one on his .600 NE, and recommended it to me. It is still going strong, but one little item is that it does not do well going from dark (under a thorn tree) into full sunlight, in that your dot washes out. The opposite is not an issue. I have killed two Cape buffalo and a couple baboon withit, so I do trust it. The battery powered rmr's do better with light conditions than the fiber optic/tritium trijicon for that, and the latest generations of them don't wash out like the earlier ones do.

The trijicon has the most reproducible adjustments, but is also the heaviest of the RMR style sights.

As far as use, you will need to be more involved if you use one for carry. You will need to check zero periodically, although with competition use you will see some drifting of your shots and pick up on it, for me it's more time than rounds, and if you pull the sight to change batteries, you need to check zero and adjust 9 times out of 10. You will also need to clean the sight and change batteries periodically. I have yet to see one make manufacturers battery life claims, but most make it through a season on one set of batteries (read 1year or so, but the Trijicon has been good for 2 years so far, but it does not have batteries anyhow.)

[goalie]

Well, I tried a Vortex Venom on my Canik TP9TSFX and just took it off.

The increase in long-range accuracy wasn't enough for me when weighed against the size, Mr Murphy potential, and slight loss (for me) in first shot speed.

It was definitely NOT the "OMG, technology is awesome!" moment that shooting with an Aimpoint on a rifle was.


Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

[usnret]

You have to have your gun set up for what ever works for your eyes and you.

[Randygmn]

Recoil is a known killer, even with the RMR. Trijicon just released their Gen2 last month with greatly beefed up internals that purports to eliminate past problems. It's clear that they are the leader in the market and everyone else is playing for second place. If you want the best, the RMR is it. I've shot with one in the past on a limited basis and am saving for one for a Glock 19.