Do Trijicon RMRs affect reliable functioning?

[314159]

Aging eyes have me considering mounting an RMR on a carry pistol (P2000 9mm). Question: does the added weight of the RMR affect reliable function? Is it smart to go to a higher energy round? I like the 147 loads since I perceive they bounce the least, maybe a 124+P is a good idea to ensure cycling? Any experiences, positive or negative appreciated.

[LSP972]

The answer to your question is: given a proper installation, no, no issues (other than you needing to invest the time and ammunition to learn the different nuances of shooting an RDS-equipped carry piece).

That's the good news. I'll preface the bad news with the fact that I am a dyed-in-the-wool HK guy; I have been carrying one or another HK pistol EDC for over six years now; basically since I retired from being a cop. I LOVES me some HKs. My wife and I have ten of them between us. That said, they are not the best "platform" for an RDS installation. The design of the P2000's slide complicates the job, plus the slide's taper, while super-smooth as is for concealed carry, lends itself to a rather clunky-looking mount. Also, the firing pin block on HKs is in exactly the wrong place… i.e., in the way, right where the optic needs to go, and since it has to be shortened that limits how far down into the slide the machinist can go on the inlet job.

As you might surmise, this can can (WILL) cause problems if not done JUST right. There are mechanics doing it, so it can be done, and I have not heard of any serious problems from the few I know about… except the time I had it done, but that was the guy's first attempt at an HK, so I chalked it up to a learning experience for both of us. He has since done several successfully, I hear.

The main thing here is, some pistols adapt to the optic, so to speak; I have two Glock 19s with Trijicon clones of the JPoint inlet into their slides that are just as compact and handy as they were before the work. The USPc I had done, OTOH, was clunky and ungainly… even if it had worked. I dunno, some folks don't agree, but for my money you'll ruin an HK for concealed carry purposes this way.

That is a subjective opinion; this is not. If you use a carry holster IWB with any sort of forward rake, you WILL have to make adjustments, or more likely, get a different holster. That optic sitting up there will see to that.

Which brings us to the point of aggravation. I, for one, think the HK pistols are "better" than the others… until you talk about mounting a red dot sight on one for carry purposes. I am in the same boat as you; getting old, with a commensurate deterioration of my vision. The red dot sight is THE answer to "old man eyes"; but that solution comes at a price. For me, the price is dumping my beloved HK pistols and going back to a DisposaGun. FWIW, I carried a Glock for many years, and have done a lot of teaching with them, so I am quite familiar and comfortable with them. I just don't LIKE them; especially compared to an HK.

Please understand I am not trying to talk you into, or convince you of, anything. You asked for experiences, good and bad. Those are mine. I know the day is coming when I will have no choice but to shelve the HKs and pick up those Glocks. Macular degeneration is an evil bitch… and one that cannot be denied once she grabs you. I have worked with my RDS G19s enough to know what is required to successfully carry one; the necessary holster mods, daily maintenance of the glass, keep track of your battery history, and the great deal of re-training necessary so you can properly (and quickly) deploy the pistol. Get ready to play "find-the-dot" when you begin practicing your presentations from the holster. You have to change the way you hold your wrists, at the very least.

But that's getting ahead of ourselves. I strongly suggest you find a good picture of a P2000 (or P30, they are close enough in configuration so you can get the idea) with the optic you plan to use mounted, and study that picture very closely. If you can get your hands one, more the better. And a final cautionary note… be careful… VERY careful… regarding who you choose to do the work. I am not fully up-to-speed on the current crop of folks doing this work. I can recommend David Bowie without reservation, but he really doesn't like HKs, for what that's worth.

Good luck.

.

[GJM]

I would be a lot more concerned about a T1, especially on a pistol with marginal extraction/ejection. I would be very leery of a T1 on a Gen 4 34 with non +p ammo.

[Chuck Haggard]

However, a dot added to the slide of a Glock 22 seems to slow things down just enough to help the gun run better

[GJM]

I understand, from someone in a position to know, that Gaston Glock spent a bunch of time in development with the original 17, getting slide mass just right to optimize reliability.

[LSP972]

I would be a lot more concerned about a T1o.

Well, I'd agree... But I think you'll find that many of the folks caught up in the T-1 euphoria figured out pretty quickly that it is way too big to realistically conceal for most. No doubt some still do it, and will say I'm full of it. Good for them.

I can tell you this: I have three RDS-equipped pistols, all g19s, one with a RMR and two with JPoint clones. I have shot many thousands of rounds through them; LSP552 put over a thousand through one by himself. I haven't experienced the first malfunction that could be attributed, IMO, to "lessened slide velocity". And I've run some pretty weak reloads through them.

IOW, in my experience with my three, and several others (three Glocks and one M&P), the extra weight of a realistic optic for handgun carry (RMR. DeltaPoint, JPoint, etc.) does NOT indicate the need for +P ammunition.

That includes an Advantage Arms .22 kit for the G19, that I have a JPoint on.

.

[GJM]

My understanding is there is no, or negligible at most, net weight increase with an RMR installation, as done by Mark Housel and similar installations. The weight of the RMR is offset by the material removed. Not so with the T1. A T1 made a G4 17 I had stop running, despite going to an Apex extractor. Ran fine again when the T1 came off.

[xmanhockey7]

My understanding is there is no, or negligible at most, net weight increase with an RMR installation, as done by Mark Housel and similar installations. The weight of the RMR is offset by the material removed. Not so with the T1. A T1 made a G4 17 I had stop running, despite going to an Apex extractor. Ran fine again when the T1 came off.
^ agreed

[DocGKR]

We did extensive testing of the RDS concept on a variety of service weapons. The RMR's did not effect function of 9 mm Glocks (G17, 19, 26, 34), S&W M&P (9c, 9, 40, 45), or M1911 (5" .45 Auto steel and alloy frame) pistols. Likewise the micro-Aimpoints (H1/T1) did not inhibit reliability of Glock 17's, 19's or M&P9's. 9 mm ammo was primarily standard pressure 147 gr FMJ & JHP, .40 S&W ammo was 180 gr FMJ & JHP, .45 Auto ammo was standard pressure 230 gr FMJ & 230 gr JHP, as well as some 230 gr +P JHP.

While we standardized on RMR's primarily due to dot sharpness and duty holster availability, when using well designed holsters, there was no significant difference in CCW ability between pistols with the RMR vs. micro-Aimpoint.

http://i1292.photobucket.com/albums/b580/DocGKR2/2MampP9RDS_zps33251d05.jpg

[overton]

That includes an Advantage Arms .22 kit for the G19, that I have a JPoint on.

sorry for derailing, but how did you manage to cut the AA slide so that the RDS could be mounted?
fire4effect declined that its possible when I wanted to do this.

[GJM]

We did extensive testing of the RDS concept on a variety of service weapons. The RMR's did not effect function of 9 mm Glocks (G17, 19, 26, 34), S&W M&P (9c, 9, 40, 45), or M1911 (5" .45 Auto steel and alloy frame) pistols. Likewise the micro-Aimpoints (H1/T1) did not inhibit reliability of Glock 17's, 19's or M&P9's. 9 mm ammo was primarily standard pressure 147 gr FMJ & JHP, .40 S&W ammo was 180 gr FMJ & JHP, .45 Auto ammo was standard pressure 230 gr FMJ & 230 gr JHP, as well as some 230 gr +P JHP.

While we standardized on RMR's primarily due to dot sharpness and duty holster availability, when using well designed holsters, there was no significant difference in CCW ability between pistols with the RMR vs. micro-Aimpoint.

http://i1292.photobucket.com/albums/b580/DocGKR2/2MampP9RDS_zps33251d05.jpg

Noticed you left the 34/T1 combo out. Did you not test or it wasn't reliable?

[Default.mp3]

I recently got an RMR installed on my P30LS slide, and since then I've run 442 rounds of Freedom Munitions 115 gr. (their reman), 151 rounds of Monarch 115 gr. (cheap Russian steel case), 24 rounds of Speer Gold Dot 124 gr. +P, and 13 rounds of Winchester Ranger Bonded 147 gr. (RA9B). There was one failure to feed with the Monarch. The gun had previously had 11894 rounds through it, before the RMR install. Mark Housel of L&M Precision was the one to install the RMR on my P30LS, and he will soon have another install to do for me; I'll note that he was the one that figured out how to install RMRs and H&Ks, when David Bowie of Bowie Tactical had originally declared it impossible (although it did require an adapter plate, so perhaps Bowie had merely meant it was impossible without an adapter).

http://t.imgbox.com/ODl6Fq0y.jpg (http://imgbox.com/ODl6Fq0y)

Here's a pic that should give you the idea of the depth the RMR is sunk in:
http://2.t.imgbox.com/JUcUMu21.jpg (http://imgbox.com/JUcUMu21)

[JM Campbell]

I recently got an RMR installed on my P30LS slide, and since then I've run 442 rounds of Freedom Munitions 115 gr. (their reman), 151 rounds of Monarch 115 gr. (cheap Russian steel case), 24 rounds of Speer Gold Dot 124 gr. +P, and 13 rounds of Winchester Ranger Bonded 147 gr. (RA9B). There was one failure to feed with the Monarch. The gun had previously had 11894 rounds through it, before the RMR install. Mark Housel of L&M Precision was the one to install the RMR on my P30LS, and he will soon have another install to do for me; I'll note that he was the one that figured out how to install RMRs and H&Ks, when David Bowie of Bowie Tactical had originally declared it impossible (although it did require an adapter plate, so perhaps Bowie had merely meant it was impossible without an adapter).

http://t.imgbox.com/ODl6Fq0y.jpg (http://imgbox.com/ODl6Fq0y)

Here's a pic that should give you the idea of the depth the RMR is sunk in:
http://2.t.imgbox.com/JUcUMu21.jpg (http://imgbox.com/JUcUMu21)
I sent Mark my P30ls side years ago to see if it was possible and did preliminary measurements for future projects. I'm glad he finally pulled it off. I just wish I stuck with the platform. I do regret dropping the P30s.

[314159]

A very nice bunch of replies. Thanks everyone, my worries assuaged and food for thought. What more can you ask for?

[DocGKR]

"Noticed you left the 34/T1 combo out. Did you not test or it wasn't reliable?"

Did not shoot enough of them to make a firm commentary, although the G34's with micro-Aimpoints we did test ran without issues.

[LSP972]

sorry for derailing, but how did you manage to cut the AA slide so that the RDS could be mounted?
fire4effect declined that its possible when I wanted to do this.

Sorry, didn't see this before.

I didn't cut the slide; I used an adapter plate the fit into the rear sight dovetail.

.