G19 with RMR06 and KKM compensator

[DocGKR]

After seeing benefits of RDS use on duty pistols, a number of officers around here had sub-compact back-up (BUG) and compact off-duty pistols equipped with RDS’s (primarily S&W Shield, G26, S&W M&P9c, and G19). Interestingly, many felt the compact pistols with shorter slides were actually easier to shoot accurately and rapidly with the RDS compared to the larger duty pistols. With an RDS equipped pistol, there is no “sight radius”, so there is no accuracy benefit to having a pistol with a longer slide. In addition, many end-users report that when shooting rapidly, it is easier to track the RDS dot shot-to-shot when mounted on a shorter slide. As a result, many shooters who previously used long slide, iron sighted pistols like the G34/G35 to benefit from the enhanced sight radius on demanding shots requiring precision accuracy have now found they can use a smaller pistol like a G19 with an RDS and shoot just as accurately with the smaller pistol as they previously would with longer iron sighted handguns. Going one step further, folks found that with a compensator installed, they can have a compact handgun that is softer shooting, lighter weight, and offers better accuracy than their previous iron sighted long slide pistols. As a result, late last year, we began testing the use of RDS equipped G19's with KKM compensators attached. Note that this is described in our 5 yr updated RDS test report.

http://i1292.photobucket.com/albums/b580/DocGKR2/G19%20comp%20RMR06%20x300U_zpshfaoztua.jpg

The KKM compensated G19's have a bit more blast than a stock G19, but not anything to complain about. In slow fire at 25 yds, they shoot just as accurately as any other G19 with a match barrel--I shot two KKM compensated G19's yesterday slow fire at 25 yds and got a 100-5x & 99-3x. Where the KKM compensated G19's shine is in rapid fire, they are slightly faster, but more importantly result in much tighter shot groups, especially at longer distances. I am a huge fan of the DOW; a couple of recent DOW allowed quantifiable data to be gleaned from shooting the same drill with a G19 with both a KKM compensated barrel and a non-compensated KKM barrel: https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?15590-Week-106-Three-Bills and https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?15746-Week-108-GM-Test. The compensated G19 was consistently faster to shoot--particularly at longer ranges, generally offered better accuracy, and had noticeably tighter groups. When shot 10 rounds slow fire at 25 yds on an NRA B8 target, the KKM comp barrel shot 99-3x, the KKM standard barrel shot 100-3x.

The G19 with KKM compensator is the same size as the previously used G34's and fit into standard G34 holsters, including the excellent Safariland ALS 6354DO.

http://i1292.photobucket.com/albums/b580/DocGKR2/G34%20vs%20G19%20comp_zps3mtlmkka.jpg

http://i1292.photobucket.com/albums/b580/DocGKR2/G19%20comp%20in%206354DO%20x300U_zpsd3ydjwjw.jpg

[MD7305]

Doc, that's some good info. Out of curiosity or maybe ignorance, I wondered if the comp presented any issues in lowlight with regard to increased muzzle flash?

[Seven_Sicks_Two]

Thanks for the review!

A couple of quick questions:

1) What magwell are you running on the 19s? I've tried a couple and can't find one I like.

2) How is the comp attached? Threaded and screwed on? Is not having it a deal breaker? I'd deal with shipping it out of state and permanently attaching one (I'm in CA) if the juice was really worth the squeeze.

[farscott]

2) How is the comp attached? Threaded and screwed on? Is not having it a deal breaker? I'd deal with shipping it out of state and permanently attaching one (I'm in CA) if the juice was really worth the squeeze.

I assume the comp has to be threaded, screwed on, and secured with set screws, and that it has to be removable to get the barrel out of the slide during a field strip. Unless I am missing something (quite possible as I am on my third straight day of eighteen-hour work days), the comp attachment cannot be permanent if one is to be able to pull the barrel from the slide.

As for the test data, I must say I am not surprised based on my experience with Hybra-Ported SP-101 revolvers.

[Gray222]

Interesting...I wonder effective of a ccw they would be.

[Chuck Haggard]

As effective as your carry gear. I was on the phone with Doc over the weekend, he was carrying that blaster AIWB

Han Solo approves.

[SGT_Calle]

I'm so glad you shared this Doc!
I really like the idea of compensators but I've never invested in one, mostly because of a feeling of "tacti-cool-ness" I wanted to avoid. This info really pushes me toward giving it a try.
It doesn't hurt that I already have an excellent Fricke seraphin for my G34 MOS.

[Jeep]

This is very interesting information--I have the sense that if testing keeps working out what you are describing might be the future of the pistol. Thanks for the information and please continue to keep up informed.

[Chuck Haggard]

I hate to be all shadowy and what-not, but one of the guys Doc and I know who is testing this same set-up is a no BS tier 1 good guy with massive experience overseas shooting very real bad guys, and lots of them. It's a for real option.

This info has just made me wish I had gotten off my butt back in 2006 when I came up with the non-comped idea for this pistol and gave it a try. My hold-up was only that work wouldn't have allowed me to use it. Now that I can do what I want, that's not an issue.

[Lon]

I tried the Glock 19 w/ MRDS and comped barrel a few years back. Mine was a Jaeger comp. I couldn't get it to run reliably with non +P ammo. I was using it for 3 gun. I ditched it cuz I don't reload. What kind of ammo are you guys using with this set up? Does it run 100% with good ball ammo? I tried a bit of everything - Lawman, Fiocchi, Blaser Brass, Federal. Nothing ran 100%. Loved the concept, just couldn't get it to work without reloading my own.

[Jeep]

I hate to be all shadowy and what-not, but one of the guys Doc and I know who is testing this same set-up is a no BS tier 1 good guy with massive experience overseas shooting very real bad guys, and lots of them. It's a for real option.

This info has just made me wish I had gotten off my butt back in 2006 when I came up with the non-comped idea for this pistol and gave it a try. My hold-up was only that work wouldn't have allowed me to use it. Now that I can do what I want, that's not an issue.

I figure opsec makes questions about your friend off limits, but are you going to try a similar set up, Chuck? On seeing Doc's photos above I had the feeling that I might very well be seeing the future, and thus the more highly trained guys who test it the better, I think. It is pretty clear to me that the future belongs to the RDS, but I hadn't considered using compacts with compensators to enable more rapid fire. At first blush, though, it has a lot of logical appeal.

[Vinh]

I tried the Glock 19 w/ MRDS and comped barrel a few years back. Mine was a Jaeger comp. I couldn't get it to run reliably with non +P ammo. I was using it for 3 gun. I ditched it cuz I don't reload. What kind of ammo are you guys using with this set up? Does it run 100% with good ball ammo? I tried a bit of everything - Lawman, Fiocchi, Blaser Brass, Federal. Nothing ran 100%. Loved the concept, just couldn't get it to work without reloading my own.
I tried a KKM comp on a 17 about 11 years ago. Ran fine with factory ammo, but there was insufficient gas to make it worth it. Perhaps the shorter barrel of the 19 helps a bit in that regard.

[Chuck Haggard]

I tried a KKM comp on a 17 about 11 years ago. Ran fine with factory ammo, but there was insufficient gas to make it worth it. Perhaps the shorter barrel of the 19 helps a bit in that regard.

What ammo? Subsonics have less gas pressure than +ps, and gas pressure is what makes a comp work.

[Default.mp3]

My primary concerns about this general setup is shooting from retention and holster compatibility, with muzzle flash in low/no-light scenarios being a minor consideration. While it probably wouldn't be too problematic to find proper holsters for a Glock 19, I don't think I'll have the same luck trying to source a retention holster for a P30LS with a comp. That, and I have to find a quality comp threaded for 13.5×1 LH, which may prove difficult, since I don't know where to start..

[StraitR]

Chewing at the bit to send a VP9 off to APO for an RMR milling. Doc's always reliable data and Chuck's testament to it's validity isn't helping, either. I know for me, putting a MRDS on a pistol is a slippery slope, and once I do it to one, all matters of hellfire and fury will rain down on my fun money outfitting others.

[KevinB]

I've seen the blaster that Chuck alludes too. Guy who owns it is a no shit guy.
His comments on low light is that the side ports with pistol ammo do not cause any issues - either with NOD's, or unaided due to the U Boat below.

It's all about being able to kill the target faster - and more efficiently.

Between the comp and the belt hook thingy on a Glock, I've seen some what I thought oddball stuff, used very effective - and explained in crystal clear messaging as to the why.

[Totem Polar]

I find this thread intriguing. A G26 in similar future-proof, 19-sized CCW guise makes a ton of gut-level sense.

[45dotACP]

Very interesting...

I was always under the impression that a compensator was useless with most standard pistol rounds like 9, 40 or 45....that those guns didn't produce enough gas to make a noticeable difference in recoil.

[KevinB]

They work - whether or not its due to weight on end of barrel - or the gas is unk to me.

[LittleLebowski]

the belt hook thingy on a Glock

Huh?

[Jeep]

They work - whether or not its due to weight on end of barrel - or the gas is unk to me.

I find that a light on a Glock noticeably helps to tame barrel rise, so maybe the weight is part of the equation.

[Chuck Haggard]

9mm, especially +P, has enough gas to make a comp work pretty well, obviously more gas is more gooder, hence why guys hot-rod .38Supers and such for Unlimited guns.

A comp on a .45acp is a waste IMHO


Ref dude giving advice on this gun set-up other than Doc, not that Doc is actually "just a dentist", ask yourself if a guy like Paul Howe, Kyle Lamb or Pac McNamara told you this gun was good to go, would you trust that opinion? This guy's opinion is that solid as well.

[Trajan]

How would this do when shooting from a high pectoral index?

[JMS]

Huh?

Crye Gun Clip, maybe...?

[KevinB]

Negative - the TechnaClip or whatever.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v193/EvilKev/Mobile%20Uploads/glock-brl_2_zpsc301f694.jpg

I know three solid SMU guys who have them --- it's a niche, but I had completely discounted them as a farce until one day a few years ago, myself, F2S where meeting with some folks, and while discussing MRDS on a pistol - whipped out his Glock19 from AIWB. He had a little trigger guard thing (like a shaved VG2) on a cord - but was using the clip. Seems for some NPE stuff he found that was the best method of carry - no belt just a shoelace - entire thing was a 2 second drop and discard setup --- it also made it easy to carry in running shorts etc.
It's a low-vis thing --- but another example of things I would have laughed out loud about until seeing a solid dude with it, and having them explain the rationale for the usage.

[farscott]

On the clip above, the text at the top translates as "Do not use the clip to carry where there is a round in the chamber". Is that an attorney worried about liability or is there a real issue with AD/ND with a loaded chamber while carrying the pistol with this device?

[JMS]

Ahh...gotcha.

Yeah, those things were a "not only no, but HELL no" proposition before stand-alone TG covers were as available as they are now.

Dunno the fella Chuck's talking of, only know OF him...but yeah, this'd not be the first time looking at what he's got to say and thinking "Dammit, now I wanna buy a buncha #@$%^..."

[BWT]

9mm, especially +P, has enough gas to make a comp work pretty well, obviously more gas is more goder, hence why guys hot-rod .38Supers and such for Unlimited guns.

A comp on a .45acp is a waste IMHO


Ref dude giving advice on this gun set-up other than Doc, not that Doc is actually "just a dentist", ask yourself if a guy like Paul Howe, Kyle Lamb or Pac McNamara told you this gun was good to go, would you trust that opinion? This guy's opinion is that solid as well.

I would think the military shooters would pretty much use 124 gr +P exclusively?

[KevinB]

On the clip above, the text at the top translates as "Do not use the clip to carry where there is a round in the chamber". Is that an attorney worried about liability or is there a real issue with AD/ND with a loaded chamber while carrying the pistol with this device?

Since it does not come with a trigger guard cover - I would assume it is legaleze to protect them when the unwashed masses jam them in and ND themselves...


I've been looking for something like this for my MRDS equipped Shield for those days when putting real pants on it too much hassle.

[Chuck Haggard]

I would think the military shooters would pretty much use 124 gr +P exclusively?

Not really, they have options, but US made NATO 9mm, while not really +P, is rather warm most of the time.

[Savage Hands]

Just a sad FYI, Kevin Mcintire of KKM just died in a motorcycle accident on 04/18/15.
http://www.kolotv.com/home/headlines/NHP-Motorcycle-Crash-Closes-SR-341-300545251.html?device=phone&c=y

[DocGKR]

Note that all the timed testing we did comparing compensated and non-compensated G19's was done with Federal 147 gr AE9FP standard pressure FMJ with NO lights on the pistols.

[45dotACP]

9mm, especially +P, has enough gas to make a comp work pretty well, obviously more gas is more goder, hence why guys hot-rod .38Supers and such for Unlimited guns.

A comp on a .45acp is a waste IMHO


Ref dude giving advice on this gun set-up other than Doc, not that Doc is actually "just a dentist", ask yourself if a guy like Paul Howe, Kyle Lamb or Pac McNamara told you this gun was good to go, would you trust that opinion? This guy's opinion is that solid as well.

Now that is something I didn't know beforehand. Awesome thread.

[Ptrlcop]

What about stock "c" models?

[Beat Trash]

I hate to be all shadowy and what-not, but one of the guys Doc and I know who is testing this same set-up is a no BS tier 1 good guy with massive experience overseas shooting very real bad guys, and lots of them. It's a for real option.

This info has just made me wish I had gotten off my butt back in 2006 when I came up with the non-comped idea for this pistol and gave it a try. My hold-up was only that work wouldn't have allowed me to use it. Now that I can do what I want, that's not an issue.


Must be nice. I've got six more years...

[Chuck Haggard]

What about stock "c" models?

Not even close to the same thing, also they carbon up bad and have reliability issues according to reports I have

[Chuck Haggard]

Must be nice. I've got six more years...

Brother, it is very nice.

[LSP552]

Brother, it is very nice.

Yep, there is life after retirement!

[BWT]

What brand Magwell and floor plate combination is that?

The Glock 34 appears to be a Dawson Magwell. The Glock 19's is different.

Are you pleased with the Magwell?

[lightning fast]

How do you put an RMR on a Shield?

[Ptrlcop]

How do you put an RMR on a Shield?

Very carefully...

[Eyesquared]

What brand Magwell and floor plate combination is that?

The Glock 34 appears to be a Dawson Magwell. The Glock 19's is different.

Are you pleased with the Magwell?

To my eye the Glock 34 one looks like the Sentinel Designs while the 19's looks like the VTAC one.

[RAM Engineer]

I find this thread intriguing. A G26 in similar future-proof, 19-sized CCW guise makes a ton of gut-level sense.
Exactly what I was thinking.

[DocGKR]

G34 Magwell is a Sentinel; the G19 is a Salient.

[LSP972]

Not even close to the same thing, also they carbon up bad and have reliability issues according to reports I have

Among other things, they strip the "plating" off of plated bullets; and we're seeing a lot more of those show up in the bulk pack or other economy cartridges... from big-three name brands.

Joe-Bob blasting away at beer cans in the back 40 probably wouldn't notice the resultant accuracy loss… but one's mileage may vary.

.

[farscott]

Among other things, they strip the "plating" off of plated bullets; and we're seeing a lot more of those show up in the bulk pack or other economy cartridges... from big-three name brands.

Joe-Bob blasting away at beer cans in the back 40 probably wouldn't notice the resultant accuracy loss… but one's mileage may vary.

.

That is really an interesting observation. I wonder if that is due to how Glock ported the barrel in the "C" models or how the gilding metal is applied to the bullet. In my experience with Hybra-Ported SP-101 revolvers, which are done by EDM, there is no rough edge or burr on the port, and no discernible bullet damage or scoring from recovered bullets. And that is with both lead SWC and JHP bullets. But there is some lead and powder than ends up in/around the ports. Cleaning one of these can be a bit challenging. I wonder if some debris is sticking to the edge of a port, causing the damage to the gilding metal.

[GJM]

This is an interesting thread. I am glad Gary went to the trouble to test this stuff.

I really like new stuff and fiddling with things for performance gains. Not sure why, but I have a very strong visceral reaction, and that is this pistol configuration makes me want to throw up, laugh or go pull even the grip plug off my Glock pistols.

[Chuck Haggard]

That is really an interesting observation. I wonder if that is due to how Glock ported the barrel in the "C" models or how the gilding metal is applied to the bullet. In my experience with Hybra-Ported SP-101 revolvers, which are done by EDM, there is no rough edge or burr on the port, and no discernible bullet damage or scoring from recovered bullets. And that is with both lead SWC and JHP bullets. But there is some lead and powder than ends up in/around the ports. Cleaning one of these can be a bit challenging. I wonder if some debris is sticking to the edge of a port, causing the damage to the gilding metal.

The polygonal bores on the Glocks are already not kind to cheap plated bullets. I was at Tom's instructor course a couple of years ago and on one of the exercises I checked my target and thought I had forgotten how to shoot, then I noted little copper ninja throwing stars all over the paper, the Blazer Brass 115gr I was using was stripping the jackets into fragments and the bullets were yawing clean off of the target. That was from a stock G17

[farscott]

The polygonal bores on the Glocks are already not kind to cheap plated bullets. I was at Tom's instructor course a couple of years ago and on one of the exercises I checked my target and thought I had forgotten how to shoot, then I noted little copper ninja throwing stars all over the paper, the Blazer Brass 115gr I was using was stripping the jackets into fragments and the bullets were yawing clean off of the target. That was from a stock G17

Is this something particular to Glock's rifling or all polygonal rifling? Or is it the abrupt step from Glock chamber to rifling? Something else?

[Chuck Haggard]

Is this something particular to Glock's rifling or all polygonal rifling? Or is it the abrupt step from Glock chamber to rifling? Something else?

Polygonal vs standard rifling, I've seen this with HKs as well. Same-same the issues with shooting lead bullets through polygonal rifled barrels.

[farscott]

Polygonal vs standard rifling, I've seen this with HKs as well. Same-same the issues with shooting lead bullets through polygonal rifled barrels.

Hmm, that might help to explain some of my personal issues transitioning from the 1911 to the P30. Unfortunately, it can only be a small factor in my particular case as I am the dominating issue.

Great information for me to learn. Thanks for the explanation.

[Chuck Haggard]

I bought a USP .45 Match for cheap because the guy selling said it was inaccurate. Inside of the bore looked like a sewer pipe. After getting the lead out of it, left behind from home cast bullets in reloads, that was a 1" at the 25 yard line gun.

[breakingtime91]

I bought a USP .45 Match for cheap because the guy selling said it was inaccurate. Inside of the bore looked like a sewer pipe. After getting the lead out of it, left behind from home cast bullets in reloads, that was a 1" at the 25 yard line gun.

Gotta love that

[DocGKR]

"Not sure why, but I have a very strong visceral reaction, and that is this pistol configuration makes me want to throw up, laugh or go pull even the grip plug off my Glock pistols."

Why?

[Jeep]

Note that all the timed testing we did comparing compensated and non-compensated G19's was done with Federal 147 gr AE9FP standard pressure FMJ with NO lights on the pistols.

If you get a chance to test them again with the lights mounted that would be extremely interesting because it might give a clue on whether it is the weight, the action of the compensator (or both) that is reducing barrel jump.

I should say that while I personally almost never like new stuff, my visceral reaction to those pistols was very different. My first thought was that "I'm looking at the next stage in the development of the 9mm as the dominant fighting pistol. This is the future."

Anyway, please keep us updated.

[GJM]

Why?

I don't know why. I had that reaction initially, checked the thread a half dozen times since, and it continues.

Maybe because I don't shoot open class. Maybe because I view trigger control at speed to be the biggest challenge shooting a Glock. Maybe because I don't think some incremental improvement in split times would offset transforming one of the most carryable pistols, the 19, into something a lot bigger. Maybe because I know this will lead to a multi page thread at another forum.

Wouldn't stop me from happily shooting one for a few hours, though, even if I had to buy the 147 AE -- especially if it was in private with no cameras allowed. :)

[Chuck Haggard]

When I was driving a shield on high risk warrants 3-4 times per week I would have killed for that gun, or a G17 just like it.

I think one handed shooting is a place where the comp advantages will be ever more apparent.

[DocGKR]

"Maybe because I don't think some incremental improvement in split times would offset transforming one of the most carryable pistols, the 19, into something a lot bigger."

Ah...keep in mind that the concept was initiated as a replacement for G343/35 size pistols that had lights mounted, so the guys get a pistol that is easier to shoot, but is is no larger than what they previously carried.

http://i1292.photobucket.com/albums/b580/DocGKR2/G34%20vs%20G19%20comp_zps3mtlmkka.jpg

[Default.mp3]

I think one handed shooting is a place where the comp advantages will be ever more apparent.

What about with a .40 S&W? IIRC, the gunslinger that this configuration is named after stated that there is a large difference in the shootability of the G22 and the G23, enough that it was his opinion that the G23 wasn't worth the squeeze; would a comp on the G23 mitigate that issue?

Also, given that KKM doesn't make a 13.5×1 LH comp, who should I look to if I wanted something like this for my P30LS? Especially if I want one that's not any wider than the P30LS's slide, for holster compatibility?

[Chuck Haggard]

What about with a .40 S&W? IIRC, the gunslinger that this configuration is named after stated that there is a large difference in the shootability of the G22 and the G23, enough that it was his opinion that the G23 wasn't worth the squeeze; would a comp on the G23 mitigate that issue?

Also, given that KKM doesn't make a 13.5×1 LH comp, who should I look to if I wanted something like this for my P30LS? Especially if I want one that's not any wider than the P30LS's slide, for holster compatibility?

The .40 doesn't really put out any more gas than the 9mm, so recoil mitigation might not be similar at all, never tied it. I do know that comp'd G22s have been tried.

As far as the HK, no idea really, don't know of anyone running such a set-up on an HK

[LSP972]

That is really an interesting observation. I wonder if that is due to how Glock ported the barrel in the "C" models or how the gilding metal is applied to the bullet.

As Chuck noted, polygonal bores are hard on plated bullets, as they tend to squeeze the bullet instead of just cutting grooves, as a conventionally-rifled barrel does.

That said, we have noted that all of the several compensated pistols we've test-fired show serious stripping on plated bullets, regardless of make or caliber. Keep in mind that we are firing into a huge water tank, and the bullets are pretty much the same as they were upon exiting the muzzle upon recovery… so we can take a detailed look at them.

.

[farscott]

As Chuck noted, polygonal bores are hard on plated bullets, as they tend to squeeze the bullet instead of just cutting grooves, as a conventionally-rifled barrel does.

That said, we have noted that all of the several compensated pistols we've test-fired show serious stripping on plated bullets, regardless of make or caliber. Keep in mind that we are firing into a huge water tank, and the bullets are pretty much the same as they were upon exiting the muzzle upon recovery… so we can take a detailed look at them.

Thank you for that post. That is fascinating data to me for two reasons: 1) The idea that the polygonal rifling, which is marketed as providing faster muzzle velocities and improved accuracy due to less bullet scoring, is actually harder on plated bullets (and accuracy) than traditional cut rifling, and 2) data that shows that compensated barrels are detrimental to accuracy with jacketed bullets. Tradition is to not use unjacketed bullets in polygonal-rifled barrels or compensated barrels, yet test data contradicts that -- at least in part.

Yet a polygonal-rifled barrel is capable of providing above average pistol accuracy, at least until the barrel is too fouled with lead, based on Chuck's HK USP Match.

[LSP972]

Thank you for that post. That is fascinating data to me for two reasons: 1) The idea that the polygonal rifling is actually harder on (and accuracy) than traditional cut rifling, and 2) data that shows that compensated barrels are detrimental to accuracy with jacketed bullets. Tradition is to not use unjacketed bullets in polygonal-rifled barrels or compensated barrels, yet test data contradicts that -- at least in part.



Whoa there, sir. I never stated that polygonal bores are "harder" on accuracy. Not sure what you mean by that, but polygonal rifling, done properly, most assuredly has greater accuracy potential than conventional rifling- whether same is cut, drawn, or hammer forged. The "extra" velocity bit I wouldn't know about, as you'd have to have some specific-parameter barrels, a really good chronograph, and carefully prepared ammunition to be able to get repeatable, accurate results on that sort of testing.

And I never stated that compensators are detrimental to accuracy in general. When they strip the plating from a cheap bullet, then you bet. But we haven't seen that occur with genuine jacketed bullets; and we've always had to shoot those in a compensated pistol to get a usable bullet for microscopic comparison.

Just trying to make sure we don't have a commo disconnect here; if the above is not what you were trying to convey, my apologies.

As for shooting lead bullets in a polygonal bore… that's one of those i-expert topics that has a tremendous amount of bullshit surrounding it. Tons of folks shoot lead through tons of polygonal barrels with great regularity; and the ones having issues are those who don't:

1. Keep their bores clean
2. Use a hard-enough alloy
3. Refrain from making rhino-rollers (namely, USPSA types trying to achieve Major-class velocity out of the Euro-Pellet, or pushing their .40 loads too hard, or Cletus who just HAS to "go big")

I have been reloading for a very long time. I have shot lead bullets (both cast and swaged) out of Glock, HK, and Kahr barrels for over 20 years. I haven't one blown one up yet.

Yes, your average nimrod who has no clue what "attention to detail" means should avoid the practice.

Sorry for the diatribe; my supper is late…;)


.
.

[GJM]

I am hoping Gary loans out that top end for some forum testing. If it is really good, maybe .357 Sig will work even better with the comp.

Chuck mentioned something about using it with a shield, and this is how I envision that to work:

http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg251/GJMandes/image.jpg1_zps2ahigovi.jpg (http://s250.photobucket.com/user/GJMandes/media/image.jpg1_zps2ahigovi.jpg.html)

[farscott]

Just trying to make sure we don't have a commo disconnect here; if the above is not what you were trying to convey, my apologies.

Thanks for the clarification. That lines up better with my experience with .357 JHP and Hybra-Ported guns. One of my "making money" shots was hitting a hanging gong at more than 75 yards with one DA shot from my three-inch SP-101. That ported revolver is plenty accurate with a good 158 SWC. I also have somewhere in the back of the safe a 9x19 Hybra-Ported SP-101 that needs some quality range time.

[Steve m]

Doc,

Are you using mag extensions with the 19 mags?

[LittleLebowski]

Serious question: would anyone here disagree that competitive shooters led the way on this?

[Chuck Haggard]

Serious question: would anyone here disagree that competitive shooters led the way on this?

Not me.

This is obviously the case. Kind of like dots on carbines, some of that was GTG for gaming, where gear failure is research or a lesson learned. The gear just had to get to be more robust to be able to handle the demands of people putting their lives on the line with it.

I'm a big redundancy guy. In the pistol in question, if the dot fails, your have BUIS, so "FIDO" is still in play, same-same if the comp falls off, light dies, etc. You still have a working gun that can handle austere conditions, a gun that works in a fight.

[Jeep]

Competitive shooters have been leading the way, BUT competitive shooters aren't enough. The gear has to be refined, and this is one of the first refinements that makes sense to me. It is a development with many fathers--and I think it is just the start because if this works as well as early indications show, someone is going to start making it as a package and drive the (currently very substantial) costs down.

[GJM]

Serious question: would anyone here disagree that competitive shooters led the way on this?

Yes and no.

While this pistol looks vaguely competition inspired, it wouldn't likely be competitive in any USPSA class. As a general rule, when I compare similar shooters, open scores tend to be 10 percent higher than Limited, and Limited another ten percent higher than Production. I think this pistol would be unlikely to fare well in Production, no less Limited or Open.

If I wanted a max performance, with a red dot, it would be in a 1911/2011 format. Those guns truly shoot flat, accurately and fast. With an effective compensator, you could easily use a slide mounted optic with BUIS, addressing holster and reserve sight considerations.

A few shooting comparisons between this Glock and a real open gun would quantify the difference, and it would be significant.

[orionz06]

Yes and no.

While this pistol looks vaguely competition inspired, it wouldn't likely be competitive in any USPSA class. As a general rule, when I compare similar shooters, open scores tend to be 10 percent higher than Limited, and Limited another ten percent higher than Production. I think this pistol would be unlikely to fare well in Production, no less Limited or Open.

If I wanted a max performance, with a red dot, it would be in a 1911/2011 format. Those guns truly shoot flat, accurately and fast. With an effective compensator, you could easily use a slide mounted optic with BUIS, addressing holster and reserve sight considerations.

A few shooting comparisons between this Glock and a real open gun would quantify the difference, and it would be significant.

I think this is going a bit too literal to the question. The concept is surely proven in competition. Now it's adapted to the field and it sounds like it meets or exceeds the needs of its users.

[GJM]

I think this is going a bit too literal to the question. The concept is surely proven in competition. Now it's adapted to the field and it sounds like it meets or exceeds the needs of its users.

Tom, I am not tracking. I am suggesting that if you shot this Glock next to a 1911/2011 with comp, slide mounted red dot, and BUIS, that the 1911/2011 would do lots better. Why isn't that the relevant comparison?

Assuming this concept is driven by pure performance, this is an instance where vetting this concept in open class would be very relevant.

[DocGKR]

A 1911 open pistol would crush this in competition. But then the 1911 open pistol is much more expensive, requires more true gun-smithing, and does not fit into a retention duty holster. Different requirements, but definitely cross-pollinated. Competition guys definitely bring significant innovation to the shooting world, some of which is quite relevant for LE and military requirements.

[orionz06]

Tom, I am not tracking. I am suggesting that if you shot this Glock next to a 1911/2011 with comp, slide mounted red dot, and BUIS, that the 1911/2011 would do lots better. Why isn't that the relevant comparison?

Assuming this concept is driven by pure performance, this is an instance where vetting this concept in open class would be very relevant.

Question asked: Serious question: would anyone here disagree that competitive shooters led the way on this?

Your response seemed to literal and was a comparison. Not how it would do head to head in competition.

[SLG]

I would completely agree that competition advances have helped drive tactical advances, but to be fair, AFAIK, red dots were first seen on tactical rifles, long before they were seen on any competition firearm, pistol or rifle. I'm sure you are all familiar with the Son Tay raid.


GJM, I think the point being made is that the gun Doc showed, is designed for combat, not competition. It would not excel in any competition I am aware of. A 1911/2011 would be a far more capable competition gun, but far less suitable for combat, for a whole host of reasons I don't think I need to get into.

[JHC]

Son Tay -duct taped Quik Points onto carry handles I think.

[TiroFijo]

I remember docter MRDS being offered for "practical" pistols in South Africa in 1990, 25 years ago...

[TiroFijo]

I remember docter MRDS being offered for "practical" pistols (not competition, but carry) in South Africa in 1990, 25 years ago...

[BigT]

I remember docter MRDS being offered for "practical" pistols in South Africa in 1990, 25 years ago...


Around the same time I remember another British made unit (iirc) that was glued to the top of the slide. Even co witnessed as I recall. Also here in SA.

[runcible]

GJM wrote: "I am hoping Gary loans out that top end for some forum testing. If it is really good, maybe .357 Sig will work even better with the comp."

Short answer: it seems unlikely that any of this will make a Glock in .357 Sig more pleasant to shoot or effective overall.

Long answer: the restriction of ammunition options for practice and carry may bring flash issues back to the forefront, in combination with the caliber change. Additionally, most shooters that I have observed do not enjoy shooting the mid-size .357; the only individual I know who used to run\carry a subcompact Glock in .357 had a ton shooter-specific physical conditioning, and has transitioned to a different carry weapon since. Given discussions of old, regarding the G22 v. G23 as far as the loss\gain in shootability during rapid fire compared against the loss\gain in concealability; Glocks in .357 Sig seem to re-present the argument but more forcefully. While there's certainly plenty of potential for flash and recoil impulse; I don't know that any increase of gas-flow through the comp will offset the increased linear portion of the impulse to make it a good tradeoff.

[Chuck Haggard]

I dunno if the .357Sig will do so, but I have seen and shot .38Super comp guns that recoil downward at the muzzle due to how much gas is being thrown out the top of the comp vents.

[Tamara]

I would completely agree that competition advances have helped drive tactical advances, but to be fair, AFAIK, red dots were first seen on tactical rifles, long before they were seen on any competition firearm, pistol or rifle. I'm sure you are all familiar with the Son Tay raid.

Well, to be fair, even the Normark Singlepoints at Son Tay were COTS (http://shootery.blogspot.com/2010/07/moldy-oldie-review-singlepoint-sight.html). :)

[GJM]

I was joking about .357 Sig, although the Open shooters using 9 major don't seem to mind that velocity one bit. As to .357 Sig in a mid size, this week I bought a Sig 320 Compact in .357 Sig. It is for a special purpose.

[SLG]

Well, to be fair, even the Normark Singlepoints at Son Tay were COTS (http://shootery.blogspot.com/2010/07/moldy-oldie-review-singlepoint-sight.html). :)

Absolutely. But they were not being used in competition before they were used in combat.

[runcible]

I was joking about .357 Sig, although the Open shooters using 9 major don't seem to mind that velocity one bit. As to .357 Sig in a mid size, this week I bought a Sig 320 Compact in .357 Sig. It is for a special purpose.

Mea culpa; you wrote without smilies and whatnot, so I read it as a serious thought.

The issue is less .357 Sig in a mid-size weapon; but .357 Sig in a Glock mid-size weapon. Sig is unsurprisingly the go-to brand for running that chambering; Glock is not.

[Jeep]

Personally, I'm not a far of the .357 SIG in an M&P as well, even though M&P's are good with the .40 in my experience.

[okie john]

After seeing benefits of RDS use on duty pistols, a number of officers around here had sub-compact back-up (BUG) and compact off-duty pistols equipped with RDS’s (primarily S&W Shield, G26, S&W M&P9c, and G19). Interestingly, many felt the compact pistols with shorter slides were actually easier to shoot accurately and rapidly with the RDS compared to the larger duty pistols. With an RDS equipped pistol, there is no “sight radius”, so there is no accuracy benefit to having a pistol with a longer slide. In addition, many end-users report that when shooting rapidly, it is easier to track the RDS dot shot-to-shot when mounted on a shorter slide. As a result, many shooters who previously used long slide, iron sighted pistols like the G34/G35 to benefit from the enhanced sight radius on demanding shots requiring precision accuracy have now found they can use a smaller pistol like a G19 with an RDS and shoot just as accurately with the smaller pistol as they previously would with longer iron sighted handguns. Going one step further, folks found that with a compensator installed, they can have a compact handgun that is softer shooting, lighter weight, and offers better accuracy than their previous iron sighted long slide pistols. As a result, late last year, we began testing the use of RDS equipped G19's with KKM compensators attached. Note that this is described in our 5 yr updated RDS test report.

http://i1292.photobucket.com/albums/b580/DocGKR2/G19%20comp%20RMR06%20x300U_zpshfaoztua.jpg

The KKM compensated G19's have a bit more blast than a stock G19, but not anything to complain about. In slow fire at 25 yds, they shoot just as accurately as any other G19 with a match barrel--I shot two KKM compensated G19's yesterday slow fire at 25 yds and got a 100-5x & 99-3x. Where the KKM compensated G19's shine is in rapid fire, they are slightly faster, but more importantly result in much tighter shot groups, especially at longer distances. I am a huge fan of the DOW; a couple of recent DOW allowed quantifiable data to be gleaned from shooting the same drill with a G19 with both a KKM compensated barrel and a non-compensated KKM barrel: https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?15590-Week-106-Three-Bills and https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?15746-Week-108-GM-Test. The compensated G19 was consistently faster to shoot--particularly at longer ranges, generally offered better accuracy, and had noticeably tighter groups. When shot 10 rounds slow fire at 25 yds on an NRA B8 target, the KKM comp barrel shot 99-3x, the KKM standard barrel shot 100-3x.

The G19 with KKM compensator is the same size as the previously used G34's and fit into standard G34 holsters, including the excellent Safariland ALS 6354DO.

http://i1292.photobucket.com/albums/b580/DocGKR2/G34%20vs%20G19%20comp_zps3mtlmkka.jpg

Doc, thanks for such an informative post. I wonder if you'd gain anything by shortening a G19 slide to G26 length, which would give you a piece with top end somewhere between the G19 and G17 in length. I think that might make it a little easier to conceal than a pistol that's G34 length. I'm not sure I'd want to make these mods to a G26--I find that I shoot a G26 as well in slow fire as I do its bigger brothers, but my reloads and other manipulations are slower because the grip is shorter.


Okie John

[DocGKR]

Since the G26 does not have a light rail and many shooters fine the grip too short for rapid reliable mag changes, that would likely not be the best option. As OrigamiAK/Mr. White has proven, the G34 conceals just fine and the comp'd G19 is no larger than that and also conceals quite well--even AIWB.

[Eyesquared]

Since the G26 does not have a light rail and many shooters fine the grip too short for rapid reliable mag changes, that would likely not be the best option. As OrigamiAK/Mr. White has proven, the G34 conceals just fine and the comp'd G19 is no larger than that and also conceals quite well--even AIWB.

If I understand correctly, he meant taking a G19 and chopping the slide and barrel to G26 length, so that the comp would add back the missing length and give you a gun roughly G19 size. Sort of like a Wilson Carry Comp, I guess.

Edit: Now that I think about it, the whole threaded barrel thing adds a lot of excess length to the gun. Seems to me like a comped 1911 with 4" barrel would be shorter by a half inch. If there were a better way to attack Glock comps I bet you could get a G19 down to just a tad over G17 length.

[DocGKR]

One advantage of the G34 length, is that it gets the barrel out past the end of the light, so it does not soot up as rapidly.

[GJM]

Perhaps it was done, and I missed it, but I would like to see testing of the KKM 19 against a standard 34. Since the overall length of both is so close, that seems the most relevant comparison.

The 34 is one of the softest shooting 9mm pistols on the planet, and if the KKM 19 shot better, that would be high praise for the benefit of the comp.

[okie john]

Since the G26 does not have a light rail and many shooters fine the grip too short for rapid reliable mag changes, that would likely not be the best option. As OrigamiAK/Mr. White has proven, the G34 conceals just fine and the comp'd G19 is no larger than that and also conceals quite well--even AIWB.

Thanks. Makes perfect sense, as usual.


Okie John

[ranger]

Does this mean that a high capacity, .355 caliber, compensated, red dot sighted pistol is now practical - daresay tactical? If so, there are a lot of pundits who have been making fun of "gamer guns" who owe the competition crowd an apology.

Sorry, had to make this observation as a USPSA competitor from 1986 who heard so many denigrating remarks about comps, dots, high cap, etc. only to see a "practical" application of high cap, red dot, compensated, .355 caliber pistol.

I do think that competition has raised the bar for military and LE equipment such as optics.

[DocGKR]

Competition definitely helps improve equipment and technique for military and LE shooters; PMAC has a great story about using a compensated 1911 in a lethal force encounter while on active military duty....

On the other hand, competition "tactics" may have less influence on real world encounters.

[Jeep]

One advantage of the G34 length, is that it gets the barrel out past the end of the light, so it does not soot up as rapidly.

That is a significant advantage. You can destroy the lens on a light from residue with a normal G19 or G17.

[DocGKR]

"The 34 is one of the softest shooting 9mm pistols on the planet, and if the KKM 19 shot better, that would be high praise for the benefit of the comp."

The KKM comp G19 shoots "softer" and with less visual disturbance of the optic, yielding faster, more accurate shots based on time and score.

[LittleLebowski]

That is a significant advantage. You can destroy the lens on a light from residue with a normal G19 or G17.

Even with oil or Chapstick on the lens?

[okie john]

This thread has really gotten me thinking, which could cost serious coin.

I’d love to see whether it’s possible to do the same thing for less money or by using more OEM parts. Starting with a Gen4 gun would provide the increased accuracy that the KKM barrel provides. Or you could add a muzzle device and an RMR to a G19 TB. If Glock ever sells an MOS version of the G19, then you could add an OEM threaded barrel/muzzle device/RMR. Hmmm….

It might also make sense to start with a G26. In slo-mo video, I’ve seen that a G17 slide goes back into battery long before the pistol reaches the top of its arc in recoil. If using a G19 reduces slide mass and gets the gun back into battery faster, then using a G26 should reduce it even more. The question is whether that reduction is worth the trouble of adding a rail and a magwell that makes the G26 long enough to manipulate easily at speed.

Finally, I know that some of these guys run jobs with handgun(s) as their primary. I’d love to hear more about the typical ranges for these engagements if it doesn’t violate OPSEC.

Yeah, this is definitely going to be one of the most expensive threads I’ve ever read.


Okie John

[RevolverRob]

Since the G26 does not have a light rail and many shooters fine the grip too short for rapid reliable mag changes, that would likely not be the best option. As OrigamiAK/Mr. White has proven, the G34 conceals just fine and the comp'd G19 is no larger than that and also conceals quite well--even AIWB.

Doc - I presume you are carrying it as shown in this thread with magwell and extended magazine?

Conceivably, this setup could work better for CC than a G34 without the magwell and extended magazine, because the G19 butt is smaller with a 15-round magazine in it.

Any thoughts or hands on data with +P duty rounds on recoil vs. G34?

-Rob

[Saur]

Doc, how are you guys securing the compensator to the barrel? Do the allen screws have red/blue loctite or something else? Do you remove the comp for cleaning, or do you leave it on and move the barrel through the slide and clean around it? Any carbon build up issues near the muzzle crown to be wary of?

Thanks!

[BillB]

Interesting

I have been thinking about taking the RMR plunge but I always saw them more on the larger weapons.

I shoot the G26 about as well as I do my G17 so I may be rethinking this.

[DocGKR]

The screws can back-out if Loctite is not used Allen screws.

So far no issue with carbon build-up.

I generally don't clean Glocks, just occasionally lube them.

Keep in mind that non-LE or mil use in California, the comp must be soldered/welded/or otherwise permanently installed and blind pinned before installing on the pistol to avoid making an illegal "Assault Weapon".

[Saur]

The screws can back-out if Loctite is not used Allen screws.

So far no issue with carbon build-up.

I generally don't clean Glocks, just occasionally lube them.

Keep in mind that non-LE or mil use in California, the comp must be soldered/welded/or otherwise permanently installed and blind pinned before installing on the pistol to avoid making an illegal "Assault Weapon".

Thank you for the response, I don't have experience with comps and so when I saw the pics I wasn't sure if they were supposed to be routinely removed for cleaning, etc. Sounds like they must be pretty durable if they can be a "set it 'n forget it" type of arrangement.

Crazy; did not know that about CA law and comps.

Also, thanks again for this thread.

[DocGKR]

It is not comps, it is threaded barrels (only when installed in the pistol) that are illogically unlawful here. If a comp attaches to the pistol in a way that does not use a threaded barrel, then a removable one is fully legal.

[Jeep]

It is not comps, it is threaded barrels (only when installed in the pistol) that are illogically unlawful here. If a comp attaches to the pistol in a way that does not use a threaded barrel, then a removable one is fully legal.

Illogical? Au contraire! Rather, it is clearly the case that your politicians were just doing their best to prevent dastardly crimes in which criminals use threaded barrels on pistols to mount bayonets, which would create a truly dangerous "assault pistol," which could therefore both shoot and stab, thereby putting innocent children at terrible risk. Thankfully, the children of California are now safe from such dangers.

Either that, or a lot of California politicians have IQ's lower than that of an avocado.

[45dotACP]

So...how would a G17C compare? I'm guessing not favorably...

[DocGKR]

Correct.

[darkparadox]

Were any alternatives to the KMM compensator tested ?

[Default.mp3]

Given that the compensator would probably make shooting from retention quite difficult, especially if using a thumb pectoral index, do most people think this set-up is viable for civilian self-defense? I get the feeling that while this set up would be quite awesome in the role envisioned by the guy it's named after, I'm not too sure about for us every day folk who aren't actively hunting armed opponents.

[Eyesquared]

Given that the compensator would probably make shooting from retention quite difficult, especially if using a thumb pectoral index, do most people think this set-up is viable for civilian self-defense? I get the feeling that while this set up would be quite awesome in the role envisioned by the guy it's named after, I'm not too sure about for us every day folk who aren't actively hunting armed opponents.

It doesn't seem to me that the comp on a 9mm would really affect retention shooting. Seems like there would be not enough gas coming out to really do anything. I do wonder if a barrel weight or one of those goofy pistol flash hiders might have a similar effect to a comp.

[JM Campbell]

It doesn't seem to me that the comp on a 9mm would really affect retention shooting. Seems like there would be not enough gas coming out to really do anything. I do wonder if a barrel weight or one of those goofy pistol flash hiders might have a similar effect to a comp.
Contact shots will not push the slide out of battery in a FUT just like a revolver has been favored by some for just that possibility.

[Byron]

Contact shots will not push the slide out of battery in a FUT just like a revolver has been favored by some for just that possibility.

Why not? Pushing directly on the barrel of a Glock pushes it out of battery. Why would a large object attached to the barrel change that?

People have claimed the same thing about suppressors... until they actually try pushing the suppressor into something.


Sent from my HTC6525LVW using Tapatalk

[sig765]

Wouldn't wanna shoot a comp'd gun in close like grappling close nor in low/no light situations.
This seems like a range toy to me personally and I think anyone who follows the study of shooting to live would agree the comp adds all kinds of wtfs to a whole basket of scenarios. As far as hunting hadji in the sandbox yea maybe but even at that I'd pass. Just my two cents. I've seen glass get etched from gas powder etc coming outta comps so I can imagine what it'd do to your body.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BillB]

I think that if I end up grappling for the weapon the ability to not only shoot, but also set fire to my opponent.......would be wonderful :-)

All the more reason to go G26 so the bad guy has no choice but to wrap hit meathook around the comp!

[sig765]

I think that if I end up grappling for the weapon the ability to not only shoot, but also set fire to my opponent.......would be wonderful :-)

All the more reason to go G26 so the bad guy has no choice but to wrap hit meathook around the comp!

This is retarded lol.
You'll be moderately amused when you hear "CLICK" because your piece is outta battery.
But I digress it's your life not mine. As far as the Rds sight all day everyday aiwb but I'll personally pass on the comp

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Chuck Haggard]

This is retarded lol.
You'll be moderately amused when you hear "CLICK" because your piece is outta battery.
But I digress it's your life not mine. As far as the Rds sight all day everyday aiwb but I'll personally pass on the comp

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm not LoLing. Mind your manners. You want to point out something factual then do so, calling people retards isn't factual.


BTW, one of the guys involved in this pistol set up is a Paul Howe, Kyle Lamb, Pat McNamara level of real world bad ass. Fact. Think about that for a second.


Ref grabbing the comp on such a gun and having to hold onto it when it went off; you would lose meat off of your hand. Another fact.

[Jeep]

This is retarded lol.
You'll be moderately amused when you hear "CLICK" because your piece is outta battery.
But I digress it's your life not mine. As far as the Rds sight all day everyday aiwb but I'll personally pass on the comp

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

sig: All guns are compromises. This set up contains a different set of compromises than you are comfortable with. But one size doesn't fit all, and there are an almost infinite amount of possible tactical scenarios. I might be wrong, but I think this set up will work for a lot of them. Personally, I have no intent of setting up a carry gun this way (the chance of me needing to shoot at distance is small), but I think that it very well might help solve certain home-defense issues for me.

As for knocking a gun out of battery, it can happen but the risk is, in my opinion, overstated. I knew a guy who was demonstrating how easy it was to force a 1911 out of battery--and ended up with a hole in his hand. However, if I were significantly worried about it, I would get a 2 inch barrel K-frame and avoid all autos.

[sig765]

True but why add an accessory to a gun that introduces any compromises. I understand the revolver point. That's why I carry a .38 as my back up piece. I'm not trying to piss in people's cornflakes here I'm just say lets get real. If you want to comp a carry or hd gun go for it, it's your world but I personally think it creates problems. Take it for what it's worth it's just my lowly opinion.
As a side note with the comp that the same size if not bigger then a 17 length wise. And with practice you should be able to control recoil on your carry/HD gun well enough to not need a comp. and last but not least unless your in an NPE and concealment has to be 100% no exception why carry such a small gun unless your too fat to conceal and in that case I'd recommend some exercise instead of new guns. Again all just my opinion sorry if I offend


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JM Campbell]

You learn something every day, hence I'm part of the student and not the teacher of the pistol.

[t1tan]

True but why add an accessory to a gun that introduces any compromises. I understand the revolver point. That's why I carry a .38 as my back up piece. I'm not trying to piss in people's cornflakes here I'm just say lets get real. If you want to comp a carry or hd gun go for it, it's your world but I personally think it creates problems. Take it for what it's worth it's just my lowly opinion.
As a side note with the comp that the same size if not bigger then a 17 length wise. And with practice you should be able to control recoil on your carry/HD gun well enough to not need a comp. and last but not least unless your in an NPE and concealment has to be 100% no exception why carry such a small gun unless your too fat to conceal and in that case I'd recommend some exercise instead of new guns. Again all just my opinion sorry if I offend


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Can you just stop? Your speculations, what-ifs, etc are just taking away from the conversation for those that are interested.

[sig765]

Roger


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[sig765]

I'm not LoLing. Mind your manners. You want to point out something factual then do so, calling people retards isn't factual.


BTW, one of the guys involved in this pistol set up is a Paul Howe, Kyle Lamb, Pat McNamara level of real world bad ass. Fact. Think about that for a second.


Ref grabbing the comp on such a gun and having to hold onto it when it went off; you would lose meat off of your hand. Another fact.

Just on an ending note. I meant that statement was retarded that I quoted not the author.
Fact look at the kkm feed ramp compared to OEM Glock. Much narrower and prone to FTF.
Fact comps add ridiculous amounts of noise and muzzle flash. (Unless your gonna run that x400 constant on in low/no light there goes your night vision)
Fact all the big names you mentioned are in the business of making money. I'd sell you the same setup all day long for a price.
Fact I bet you won't personally shoot that gun from close retention.
But at that I'll stop posting things that debunk unicorns fart rainbows.
I will say for idpa its probably a killer setup !


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DocGKR]

sig765: No one here is shooting IDPA with this type of pistol--they have been used for duty/carry use by experienced individuals and teams specifically to replace previously used G34/35's. Tens of thousands of rounds have been fired through the KKM barrels without any malfunctions. I personally have a G19 with KKM barrel that has fired over 10,000 rounds without a single malfunction--not exactly prone to FTF. When used with appropriate engineered modern duty ammunition, flash is much less than some of the old crappy Remington Golden Saber loads fired from standard barrels. Blast and noise is less than one experiences when standing on the line next to officers who are firing a neighboring agency's 357 Sig pistols. Firing from retention has not been an issue.


"Fact all the big names you mentioned are in the business of making money."

Uh...you seemed to have utterly missed the point there.

[LittleLebowski]

Tag...

[JMS]

Fact I bet you won't personally shoot that gun from close retention.

Lost that bet before you ever made it. Some of us don't hold up our pinkies when we drink stuff, nor break our fingers when we rub them over the dimples on a golf ball. Shooting a comp'd pistol from retention isn't a big deal.

Narrower feed ramp means that the feed ramp is narrower, not automatically prone to anything as a stand-alone factor. Correlation/causation fallacy. Somebody taught you wrong.

The difference between calling a person retarded, vs. a statement retarded is a difference that's more than simply semantic, and deserves to be noted at the time retardation is brought up, especially in a medium where all that body language and non-verbal cues can't be read.

You just joined (perhaps for the express purpose to throw brickbats, here...?), so maybe you need to figure out the manner in which you're expected to comport yourself (which you agreed to, at the time of your registration), before you open your jib again...particularly when two staff members have told you to check the way you express things.

[Default.mp3]

To confirm, is the compensator being used this one:
http://www.shootersconnectionstore.com/Assets/ProductImages/comp_g17.jpg

A 2 port compensator with 1 side port on each side?

[KevinB]

Just on an ending note. I meant that statement was retarded that I quoted not the author.
Fact look at the kkm feed ramp compared to OEM Glock. Much narrower and prone to FTF.
Fact comps add ridiculous amounts of noise and muzzle flash. (Unless your gonna run that x400 constant on in low/no light there goes your night vision)
Fact all the big names you mentioned are in the business of making money. I'd sell you the same setup all day long for a price.
Fact I bet you won't personally shoot that gun from close retention.
But at that I'll stop posting things that debunk unicorns fart rainbows.
I will say for idpa its probably a killer setup !


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Dude you are so far out of your lane on this, it is incredible.

[GJM]

May 15 join date, you guys are taking Mr Sig too seriously.

I wonder if KKM makes a comp for the 229. I am thinking no exposed emitter, as I plan to swim, or at least shower, with it.

Anybody worried the comp will cause you to outshoot your headlights?

[KevinB]

My take on comps is that it allows the shooter to keep his MRDS on the target during recoil, and shave time there allowing quicker transition to new targets -- to me its not making splits etc faster, its making more control over the entire engagement process.

You much better at processing information if less things are moving in and out of your LoS/Periphery.

[matt7184]

Just on an ending note. I meant that statement was retarded that I quoted not the author.
Fact look at the kkm feed ramp compared to OEM Glock. Much narrower and prone to FTF.
Fact comps add ridiculous amounts of noise and muzzle flash. (Unless your gonna run that x400 constant on in low/no light there goes your night vision)
Fact all the big names you mentioned are in the business of making money. I'd sell you the same setup all day long for a price.
Fact I bet you won't personally shoot that gun from close retention.
But at that I'll stop posting things that debunk unicorns fart rainbows.
I will say for idpa its probably a killer setup !


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Alright Mr. Seal Team Ranger 0 combatz. We get it. You don't think this "piece" works for anything. :rolleyes:

How about you let the knowledgeable people speak about the topic instead of your Mall Ninja BS.

Doc, any issues with more or less soot on the slide mounted RMR with the comp and no blast shield?

[DocGKR]

No issues with that.

[okie john]

A guy who used to be on my A-detachment went to an SMU that adopted the 40 S&W. He said that they used FMJ for training but other loads on the job, so I think it's safe to consider the possibility that the pistol in question is being used with low-flash ammo, which may affect the amount of crud left behind after firing. Still curious about engagement distances, though.


Okie John

[TCinVA]

My take on comps is that it allows the shooter to keep his MRDS on the target during recoil, and shave time there allowing quicker transition to new targets -- to me its not making splits etc faster, its making more control over the entire engagement process.

You much better at processing information if less things are moving in and out of your LoS/Periphery.

One of the drawbacks of the RDS is losing the dot during recoil and having to find it again...so I can see how keeping the muzzle down and the dot inside the "window" would be beneficial.

[KevinB]

One of the drawbacks of the RDS is losing the dot during recoil and having to find it again...so I can see how keeping the muzzle down and the dot inside the "window" would be beneficial.

I shoot so slow, that I don't have that issue :p

[LittleLebowski]

One of the drawbacks of the RDS is losing the dot during recoil and having to find it again...so I can see how keeping the muzzle down and the dot inside the "window" would be beneficial.

I experienced the same. I am not personally sold on the cost/benefits to me of having an RDS. I fully acknowledge that it works for others.

[GJM]

I experienced the same. I am not personally sold on the cost/benefits to me of having an RDS. I fully acknowledge that it works for others.

Regarding this -- the rumblings I am hearing are that military contracts are at least contemplating the red dot on the service pistol, where the trend I notice amongst shooters I know, is that interest in the slide mounted red dot has declined to it being just the exception, mostly for those with eye issues. And, the reason for that is pure performance.

[Jeep]

Regarding this -- the rumblings I am hearing are that military contracts are at least contemplating the red dot on the service pistol, where the trend I notice amongst shooters I know, is that interest in the slide mounted red dot has declined to it being just the exception, mostly for those with eye issues. And, the reason for that is pure performance.

I am not sold on the current red dot for pistols except for shooting at a distance. But I have little doubt that the technology will continue to improve and that within X years dots (or their successor technology, whatever that is) will be on most higher performance pistols.

[LittleLebowski]

Regarding this -- the rumblings I am hearing are that military contracts are at least contemplating the red dot on the service pistol, where the trend I notice amongst shooters I know, is that interest in the slide mounted red dot has declined to it being just the exception, mostly for those with eye issues. And, the reason for that is pure performance.

Good for them, TCinVA and I both tried KevinB's setup and it didn't work for either of us.

[Beat Trash]

In my opinion, the red dot on a service pistol is at about the same point as the RDS was on rifles several years ago. The technology is constantly improving as more and more people use them and discover changes that are needed.

I also agree that currently it is a valid option for some, and yet some can function well without them. I believe that in about 15 years, just like defensive AR carbines, you'll see more people with a RDS on a handgun that not.

I personally have mature (over 50 years old) eyes. The RMR concept on a defensive pistol would bring a lot to the table for me. But the only thing preventing me from installing an RMR on all of my carry guns is that I am still a LEO in an agency mandating that I carry an issued M&P9. They will not permit me to mount an RMR on their gun. And I don't want to rely on an RMR equipped pistol when off duty, only to have to carry a non-RMR equipped gun when at work.

I fully intend to send off a Glock 19 and have an RMR installed shortly before I retire. I want to be able to carry it the day after I retire...

[GJM]

In my opinion, the red dot on a service pistol is at about the same point as the RDS was on rifles several years ago. The technology is constantly improving as more and more people use them and discover changes that are needed.

Not sure about "several" years ago. My Comp III Aimpoints were nearly a 100 percent solution for long gun use. Lost track, but weren't they around like 15+/- years ago?

[runcible]

Not sure about "several" years ago. My Comp III Aimpoints were nearly a 100 percent solution for long gun use. Lost track, but weren't they around like 15+/- years ago?

Given the context of service weapons, I do not understand your quibble. Are you sharpshooting his use of "several years" instead of "many years?" Are you relating your experience using an unissued model of optic during Mil or LE service?

Comp M2 and M4's represent only part of the USGI RDS body; and another brand in particular had a long way to go during the time of the initial fielding of M68's. That other optic may work fine for many on the outside, but it required significant upkeep and user modification to fit the needs of those services; which fits rather well with Beat Trash's assessment.

[Paul D]

Have the MRDS manufacturers been keeping the specs on their bases consistent from generation to generation? Some of the outfits that do the milling on the slide seem to intimate that even within the RMR line there are minor differences. Thus if I want to upgrade or change within the manufacture line, will I need to redo the slide?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

[GJM]

Yes, I disagree with "several years," and I don't see it at all as just a quibble.

From the moment I put an Aimpoint on my carbine, there was no question that that it was a major improvement compared to iron sights. That is not the case with the RDS on the service pistols that I have tried it on (Glock, M&P, Sig).

For +/- 15 years, I have been running an Aimpoint on a carbine, shotgun and rifles through .458 Lott, with zero reliability problems. Not the case with the currently available RDS sights for service pistols.

The RDS no doubt has a bright future on service pistol handguns, but the future isn't here yet.

[s0nspark]

The RDS no doubt has a bright future on service pistol handguns, but the future isn't here yet.


Even as one with eye issues, I agree - there are surely upsides, especially at distance, but the chief downside for me is losing the dot in recoil. I don't have that problem with Trijicon HDs and am not sure I could train it away with an MRDS, given my visual challenges.

I am jealous of those for whom it works though!

[runcible]

Yes, I disagree with "several years," and I don't see it at all as just a quibble.

From the moment I put an Aimpoint on my carbine, there was no question that that it was a major improvement compared to iron sights. That is not the case with the RDS on the service pistols that I have tried it on (Glock, M&P, Sig).

For +/- 15 years, I have been running an Aimpoint on a carbine, shotgun and rifles through .458 Lott, with zero reliability problems. Not the case with the currently available RDS sights for service pistols.

The RDS no doubt has a bright future on service pistol handguns, but the future isn't here yet.

Several years ago, was the EOTECH 553 a 100% solution, as issued?

In what year was the Comp M3 issued to a DOD component?

[DocGKR]

"Regarding this -- the rumblings I am hearing are that military contracts are at least contemplating the red dot on the service pistol, where the trend I notice amongst shooters I know, is that interest in the slide mounted red dot has declined to it being just the exception, mostly for those with eye issues. And, the reason for that is pure performance."

Non-concur on this.

Many of upcoming handgun contracts actually REQUIRE slide mounted RDS capability.

Below are comments from one of the most experienced individuals I know; in fact, he is the guy who motivated us to start our RDS trial back in 2010:


"I love my 34/35 and my last pistol kill was with one, but the Era of the RDS has rendered them obsolete. The only thing that my long slides do better is run irons. As soon as RDS are incorporated into the mix the smaller pistols start making more sense. ......If you are a hard shooter, you just gotta continue that trigger squeeze all the way through the recoil. The dot will come back into view as the gun settles. It's science. It is really no different than tracking your front sight. People are slower because they lose the dot and pause or release their trigger squeeze until the gun tracks back on the target. The gun is traveling the same arc with the RDS on it as it does with irons. The difference between the two is that the RDS gives the shooter a better visual depiction of what the gun is actually doing.......I don't discount that dot loss can be a mind fuck, but I qualified the triple nickel with a slide mounted RDS. Three consecutive runs in under 5 seconds. So explain to me where the loss of speed is again? If you can out run your red dot, I'm pretty sure that you are out running your headlights too.........The rhythm of your shot cadence in a fight is totally different than in a course of fire on the flat range where you only have to process brown or white paper targets. My world ain't everyone's world, I will take pistol shots in excess of 25 meters, I will shoot my handgun under NVG'S, I will take percentage shots against threats while myself, the threat and the no-shoot are all in a state of motion. The use of red dots has been so great that I wouldn't even think of going back, the only problem with red dots are the red dots themselves. Industry is working on it."

[Dave J]

In reference to Runcible's questions, which I forgot to quote:

IIRC, Comp M2's (M68's)were fielded in significant numbers starting in about 1997-98. They worked extremely well, except that the dot on the early ones wasn't bright enough for desert use, which was something I never noticed in the woods at Ft Bragg. Aimpoint fixed that, but by then a lot of units had purchased EoTechs, and SOCOM was on the 553 path.
IMHO, even though the early M2's weren't perfect, and EoTechs came with their own set of problems, either was still a significant improvement over irons, and completely worth having...so I'm really interested in these pistol RDS developments.

[okie john]

Non-concur on this.

Many of upcoming handgun contracts actually REQUIRE slide mounted RDS capability.

Below are comments from one of the most experienced individuals I know; in fact, he is the guy who motivated us to start our RDS trial back in 2010:

Doc, I find your post very encouraging, especially this part:


The use of red dots has been so great that I wouldn't even think of going back, the only problem with red dots are the red dots themselves. Industry is working on it.

I feel like while the innovation part of the task is never done, the focus is now shifting to evolution, and evolution takes time.

I think the contract requirement you mention comes from former Tier I people serving throughout SOCOM and the rest of the military, where they have the chance to raise awareness of all the right things. Of course it's an uphill battle, but at least we've got some of the good guys influencing people at levels where it can affect entire organizations, not just units.

It strikes me that maybe the state of the RDS is like the state of the telescope rifle sight circa WWII, and that we'll get the right thing from the manufacturers once they understand it better.


Okie John

[TiroFijo]

"My world ain't everyone's world, I will take pistol shots in excess of 25 meters, I will shoot my handgun under NVG'S, I will take percentage shots against threats while myself, the threat and the no-shoot are all in a state of motion."

You could add suppressors too, the MRDS work well with them. The capability to add a MRDS is indeed important, no matter if the user finally puts one on or not.

But to put a super qualified shooter as an example for everyone perhaps is not very realistic, as he points out...

[TCinVA]

I really do need to get off my butt and do some extended work with a good RDS setup.

[matt7184]

No issues with that.

Thank you for the reply. I notice some of the more current pictures you have been posting are of set ups with RDS in between the irons rather than the RDS in the middle (ala ATOM) set ups. Have your preferences changed to which you prefer now?

[KevinB]

Tim,

Get the DP Pro... ZEV does outstanding work on the installations, I'm having some stuff done there based on some other recommendations. I've also used Mark at L&M.

The advantage of the DP Pro is that it has an iron on the back of it (if you wish to use it - or you can remove)


Across the world most of the Tier1 entities have or are in the process of getting MRDS pistols, also many SOCOM entities (SF Groups, SEAL Teams, have either bought or are buying MRDS sights for their pistols)

[Jeep]

Across the world most of the Tier1 entities have or are in the process of getting MRDS pistols, also many SOCOM entities (SF Groups, SEAL Teams, have either bought or are buying MRDS sights for their pistols)

I have no doubt that electronic sights are the future--and I think we have only seen the beginning of that evolution. I also have no doubt that the 9 mm is going to become the primary choice for users who are allowed to deploy hollow point rounds.

The most intriguing thing about Doc's pistols here, though, are the comps. I had thought that comps were too finicky and had too many problems and thus were for gamers. If these comps can cause a polymer framed 9 mm pistol to reliably shoot materially flatter (and thus faster), I think that they too could change how we shoot for everything except for suppressed guns.

Anyway, while all of this is in its infancy--and we are therefore going to see some false steps--I have to hand it to all of you who are helping to push the technology forward.

[RAM Engineer]

When I can buy a factory Gen4 G19 MOS gun, I'll be all up in this space. I can't bring myself to mill down my pre-2009 Gen3 guns.

Kevin, Can you elaborate on the advantages of the DeltaPoint Pro over the Trijicon offerings besides the built-in BUIS?

[Flexmoney]

Note that all the timed testing we did comparing compensated and non-compensated G19's was done with Federal 147 gr AE9FP standard pressure FMJ with NO lights on the pistols.

Long thread and I may have missed it...did you post the testing setup and times (data)?

[okie john]

When I can buy a factory Gen4 G19 MOS gun, I'll be all up in this space.

This.


Okie John

[LSP972]

Not sure about "several" years ago. My Comp III Aimpoints were nearly a 100 percent solution for long gun use. Lost track, but weren't they around like 15+/- years ago?


More like 20 years ago.

.

[DocGKR]

matt7184--No change in preference. However the flexibility of the ATOM mount requires the BIS to be between the optic and ejection port. Personally I could care less where the BIS are.

Flexmoney--Links to that information were included in the first post of this thread.

[Rakombo]

So it looks like the "tactical" world is still lagging behind the competition world. The competition guys were using railless handguards with the option to add rails where needed for years while every tacticool guy used a quad rail, now the minimalist rail is all the rage. Then we have red dots on pistols. I suppose it can be said that the technology for a low profile red dot wasn't there before, but the RMR was out for a while before anyone seriously considered it as a legit option for a self-defense pistol. Now we have comps on SD pistols.

I'm just curious, why is the sd community so slow? I understand that the bandwagon effect is a part of it and now that Doc shared this I fully expect to start seeing this setup on forums and on the range, but what takes the guys in the know so much time to figure out that physics and physiology don't care if you are shooting steel in a match or shooting some scumbag on the street, or is it more of a case of them not bothering to share their findings with the masses? Genuinely curious.

[StraitR]

Not sure if it's best done in it's own thread as to keep the information workflow separate for reference purposes, but is there a general consensus on any of the following...

1. Current best optic offerings? Pros/Cons on each?

2. Who's doing quality milling work. As in, where should one get in line?

3. Are any of the current COTS optic ready slides GTG? ex. Trinity/Suarez?

4. Preferred sight set up and why? i.e. rear sight in front or back of optic?


About 5 years ago I played with an RMR on a G19, mounted with Trijicon's rear sight dovetail mount. I found it just too tall and after 5 months took it off. I still have the mount around here somewhere. I suppose I could quickly mount it up again to play around with while waiting for slide work.

[runcible]

So it looks like the "tactical" world is still lagging behind the competition world. The competition guys were using railless handguards with the option to add rails where needed for years while every tacticool guy used a quad rail, now the minimalist rail is all the rage. Then we have red dots on pistols. I suppose it can be said that the technology for a low profile red dot wasn't there before, but the RMR was out for a while before anyone seriously considered it as a legit option for a self-defense pistol. Now we have comps on SD pistols.

I'm just curious, why is the sd community so slow? I understand that the bandwagon effect is a part of it and now that Doc shared this I fully expect to start seeing this setup on forums and on the range, but what takes the guys in the know so much time to figure out that physics and physiology don't care if you are shooting steel in a match or shooting some scumbag on the street, or is it more of a case of them not bothering to share their findings with the masses? Genuinely curious.

If you are genuinely curious, and not looking solely for validation, you might receive a better response without the leading questions and pejoratives.

The fundamentals of shooting apply across the board; but things differ in the details of the doing and the consequences of failure. That latter bit encourages a more ponderous, even Luddite-like, approach to change; and for cause.

To use your examples: a LEO must observe and diagnose his target "on the street" wholly differently then a competitor does, and with a greater degree of time involved; if shooting multiple steel plates vs shooting multiple people, which has more sight pictures?

More importantly, given the stated background for this build, and bringing things back to the OP; what does prejudice against the SD world have anything to do with this?

[Tamara]

The first low-pro lightweight handguards were relatively fragile compared to the quad rails of the time.

It took a while before red dots got good enough with battery life and rugged enough with holding zero that it made sense to carry them on the belt or screwed atop a carbine for months at a time instead of popping them out of the foam-lined case and making sure the batteries were fresh one or two weekends a month.

Considering the extremely large cross-enrollment between the artificial (not to say 'bogus') groups of "tactical world" and "competition world", attempting to draw some sort of distinction makes the poster look not very bright.

[GJM]

I think there is an obvious reason why the SD (military, LE) community is "so slow" compared to the competition world. If your competition gun, with the latest innovation fails, you screw up the stage. If your real SD gun fails at the wrong time, you or someone else gets hurt. Common sense and prudent risk management require that go slow approach.

Now here is the part where I differ. Once there is a concept, like this KKM/RMR pistol, I think the best way to vet whether it really does work, and work better than alternatives, is to compete with it. While I understand there is certain technology, because of expense, practicality or secrecy, that can't be tested in competition, this Glock set up is perfect for testing in competition.

Have a bunch of shooters, of different skill level, run this rig with comp and optic against their regular Production guns, at a handful of USPSA matches, and we would quickly get some meaningful data that wouldn't cost the tax payers a dime. I, and a bunch of people on PF and other places, essentially did this with the RMR on a service pistol. For most, the juice wasn't worth the squeeze, and almost all are back to shooting iron sights. Maybe the comp addresses the issue of losing the slide mounted dot, and changes this. I would want to see results from a wide range of shooter abilities to confirm.

[TiroFijo]

So it looks like the "tactical" world is still lagging behind the competition world. The competition guys were using railless handguards with the option to add rails where needed for years while every tacticool guy used a quad rail, now the minimalist rail is all the rage. Then we have red dots on pistols. I suppose it can be said that the technology for a low profile red dot wasn't there before, but the RMR was out for a while before anyone seriously considered it as a legit option for a self-defense pistol. Now we have comps on SD pistols.

I'm just curious, why is the sd community so slow? I understand that the bandwagon effect is a part of it and now that Doc shared this I fully expect to start seeing this setup on forums and on the range, but what takes the guys in the know so much time to figure out that physics and physiology don't care if you are shooting steel in a match or shooting some scumbag on the street, or is it more of a case of them not bothering to share their findings with the masses? Genuinely curious.

The MRDS adds bulk, cost, complexity and maintenance issues into a self defense pistol, which primary use is relatively short range, fast shooting.

The needs of a SWAT/SF operator that may use NV, suppressor, etc. and who does not care much about size and complexity/maintenance issues because they are covered by a daily maintenance check up are different. MRDS really shine when you shoot past 15-20 m, and more as distance increases.

[TCinVA]

.

I'm just curious, why is the sd community so slow? I understand that the bandwagon effect is a part of it and now that Doc shared this I fully expect to start seeing this setup on forums and on the range, but what takes the guys in the know so much time to figure out that physics and physiology don't care if you are shooting steel in a match or shooting some scumbag on the street, or is it more of a case of them not bothering to share their findings with the masses? Genuinely curious.

Why are groups who go to some of the most hostile places on the planet under some of the most awful conditions slower to adopt a piece of equipment similar to what you saw show up at the last USPSA match? Do you have any idea how much testing weapons and weapon related equipment has to go through before a military unit, even a high-speed one, can actually use it? And that doesn't even begin to consider budget and logistics planning that has to be in place to ensure that whatever item we are talking about can be kept up and running on a demanding op tempo across the globe.

...all because...and this cannot be overstated...if the shit don't work, people die.

It's somewhat worse for Police agencies who have much smaller budgets, a reluctance to let enterprising officers modify issue weapons, and ultimately have to retain the ability to defend every piece of equipment they use in court. Bob the Competitor doesn't have to worry about being cross examined over his equipment decisions on his competition gun.

You also don't seem to realize that some of the high speed military units have tried outright race equipment before. There are, believe it or not, a number of 2011 pistols chambered in .40 that were issued by one of our Tier 1 units floating around out there...they were abandoned because it turns out maintaining those as an issue weapon to that sort of unit was a logistical and budgetary disaster.

The upper end of the "tactical" side of things is always on the hunt for something lighter, faster, and easier to use. Always. Show a guy who has to hump 80 pounds of gear up the side of a mountain in Afghanistan how to make his rifle half a pound lighter without losing any capability or durability and he is all ears...I assure you.

Making decisions as one guy trying to get a competitive advantage in a competitive endeavor is one thing. Making decisions as one guy concerned with defending himself on a limited budget with limited time is something else. Making decisions as the leader of a small LE unit with budgetary, manpower, and legal constraints is an entirely different thing to the other two. Making decisions for a military unit that's been involved in a decade and a half of constant warfare is several orders of magnitude different than even the LE guy can comprehend.

The red dot on the pistol has actually been in use in some units for a number of years, almost a decade at this point (where do you think those Safariland holsters for Glocks with mounted Aimpoints came from?)...but it's always been a bit of a make-do mess because the hardware hasn't been well sorted.

The hardware may be hitting a point of critical mass which will, of course, lead to wider adoption. That would be great...and it's a reflection of a whole lot of work that will be invisible to most people. They will just see the results.

I mean, you are seeing some results in this thread without realizing the YEARS of work it represents and why that work is necessary. It should be sufficient to realize that the optics companies aren't developing slide-mounted red dots that can survive being submerged in salt water for long periods of time because USPSA competitors need that feature.

Concepts might be universally applicable, but equipment most certainly isn't. Getting the right equipment is not a trivial task, and there is only so much gambling you can do with equipment lives depend on.

[Rakombo]

If you are genuinely curious, and not looking solely for validation, you might receive a better response without the leading questions and pejoratives.

The fundamentals of shooting apply across the board; but things differ in the details of the doing and the consequences of failure. That latter bit encourages a more ponderous, even Luddite-like, approach to change; and for cause.

To use your examples: a LEO must observe and diagnose his target "on the street" wholly differently then a competitor does, and with a greater degree of time involved; if shooting multiple steel plates vs shooting multiple people, which has more sight pictures?

More importantly, given the stated background for this build, and bringing things back to the OP; what does prejudice against the SD world have anything to do with this?
It has nothing to do with prejudice, it's a simple observation. Seeing as we're all adults here I don't feel the need to sugarcoat my opinions or beat around the bush. I said what I had to say bluntly. The crux of the post is that it looks like the sd community is slow to pick up on ideas that seem rather obvious. How exactly am I supposed to ask my question without saying that and explaining why I think that?

It seems you misunderstood the post completely. You are talking about tactics while I'm talking about gear that enhances your shooting performance. I don't expect soldiers or cops to utilize cover like the top idpa guys, they obviously have different goals and approach the issue differently, but for all of them being able to shoot quickly and accurately is very important or at least very useful.


The first low-pro lightweight handguards were relatively fragile compared to the quad rails of the time.

Sure, especially the JP unit that Kyle Lamb was using years before they became mainstream.


I think there is an obvious reason why the SD (military, LE) community is "so slow" compared to the competition world. If your competition gun, with the latest innovation fails, you screw up the stage. If your real SD gun fails at the wrong time, you or someone else gets hurt. Common sense and prudent risk management require that go slow approach.

Seems reasonable enough, but it looks like it take them a lot of time to try certain setups. Once testing commences they ascertain rather quickly whether the idea is good or not. In Doc's post he stated that the process of testing compensated pistols was going on for about a year. We can argue whether that's a long time or not, but I'm sure both of us can agree that it's a short amount of time when compared to the amount of time comps were used in the competition world.

[TCinVA]

You assume that no military or LE unit has ever tried a comped weapon before...which would be incorrect. In other words, your perceptions are entirely a function of the limitations of your knowledge on the subject.

[Tamara]

Sure, especially the JP unit that Kyle Lamb was using years before they became mainstream.

They were mainstream on privately purchased guns about the time Kyle Lamb was using them for the same reason Kyle Lamb was using them.

I'm like the janitor in The Breakfast Club: I sold you people your shit for fifteen years. I saw who bought what and listened to what they said about why they bought it.

[Rakombo]

You assume that no military or LE unit has ever tried a comped weapon before...which would be incorrect. In other words, your perceptions are entirely a function of the limitations of your knowledge on the subject.
Maybe so. I'm just going by the information I have. As far as comps go I just don't see any significant changes that happened the last few years to produce radically different results, so if you tell me that it's effective now I make the assumption that it was effective a couple of years ago too. I don't think that's unreasonable.

As far as your military comment goes. I imagine those guys can have radically different requirements, but my question wasn't limited to mil guys. I don't think cops need to contend with sandstorms or salt water very frequntly.


They were mainstream on privately purchased guns about the time Kyle Lamb was using them for the same reason Kyle Lamb was using them.

main·stream
noun
1.
the ideas, attitudes, or activities that are regarded as normal or conventional; the dominant trend in opinion, fashion, or the arts.
The dominant trend. Those were full quads.

[TCinVA]

Tell that to Miami SWAT...or NYPD ESU, or any number of other LE tac teams that train and function in salt water quite a bit. Again...limitations of your knowledge.

There are military units who have changed sidearms at least four times that I know about in the last 15 years, with 3 different calibers involved to boot. They've been pretty damn busy.

[Tamara]

main·stream
noun
1.
the ideas, attitudes, or activities that are regarded as normal or conventional; the dominant trend in opinion, fashion, or the arts.
The dominant trend. Those were full quads.

I know what it means, yes.

"Mainstream" with who? People were already making derisive comments about "rail farms" on Arfcom (which I think we can define as "as mainstream as it gets" for ARs) at least as far back as '06.

Anyhow, y'all carry on. I should have known better than to comment in the first place. This is my official concession. You were right, I was wrong, no need to rebut. You win the internet trophy. Et cetera.

[Rakombo]

Tell that to Miami SWAT...or NYPD ESU, or any number of other LE tac teams that train and function in salt water quite a bit. Again...limitations of your knowledge.

I thought we we're talking more broadly here. Now we're talking about specific units? Yes, I understand that some still have very specific requirements stateside, but are those guys in the majority or in the minority?



"Mainstream" with who?
Majority of firearm owners.

You were right, I was wrong, no need to rebut. You win the internet trophy. Et cetera.
Bravo.

[GJM]

Tell that to Miami SWAT...or NYPD ESU, or any number of other LE tac teams that train and function in salt water quite a bit. Again...limitations of your knowledge.

It is hard to marine this KKM/RMR rig was designed for serious use with folks operating in salt water and inclement conditions.

1) It has an exposed emitter, which through personal experience, I know a bit of snow or moisture in the wrong place makes the red dot and BUIS unusable.

2) To change the battery requires removing, and confirming zero again, with the RMR. Not so great for those that routinely change batteries before important things or operate in the extreme col.

3) The barrel can't be removed from the slide for post salt water maintenance without taking a tool to the two hex screws holding the comp on the barrel.

This has to be more a prove the concept item, than hard use tool.

[LSP972]

I thought we we're talking more broadly here.


Three quarters of the United State's borders are on salt water. That's quite a few various LE agencies that have to have units available to work in a salt air/water environment. Just how broad do you want???

But by all means, keep digging. This is starting to get interesting.

.

[SLG]

Rakombo,

TC and others did a very good job of explaining why the SD community is slow to change. You don't seem to want to get it. Of course there is institutional bias against some of the things we are now looking at. Doesn't mean they were wrong, just that they might not be as progressive as you want.

Specifically, the JP unit is not a well made, heavy duty item. I respect Kyle quite a bit, and use a fair number of products that he helped develop, but that forearm is not one of them. I know a fair number of of guys who went to it pretty early on (because they saw an advantage) and then removed them shortly afterwards because they didn't work out as well as hoped. Also, though none of us run quad rails by choice today, the slick fore-end does not make the weapon shoot better. It's still the shooter.

The red dots that USPSA was running for years were tested, repeatedly, over the years by the SD community at large, and by units I was in in particular. None of them were durable enough for duty use. None were small enough for carry (pistols, not carbines). There are still issues today with well known RDS, both pistol and carbine versions.

Re-read TC's post and then stop trying to defend your position and accept that you don't see the bigger picture. That's how we all learn.

[DocGKR]

Rakombo--You were given some pretty good answers above. How many CONUS coastal cities are there? Most of the larger ones, particularly those with ports, will have some sort of LE presence on the water. The majority of LE? Definitely not, but it is a fairly sizeable minority that cannot be ignored. As noted previously, pistol mounted RDS have been tried by both LE and military folks going back to the late 1990's. Comps have been on some duty pistols even longer. One of the more famous former military instructors who now teaches firearms classes has some great stories about using a comp'd handgun in combat back in the 1990's. Just because it was not talked about in public, does not mean it has not been tested before. One of the biggest problems with the initial use of RDS on duty handguns was a lack of effective retention holsters; likewise the early RDS units were relatively fragile for pistol use. Those areas have rapidly improved over the past 5 years.

[SLG]

Now here is the part where I differ. Once there is a concept, like this KKM/RMR pistol, I think the best way to vet whether it really does work, and work better than alternatives, is to compete with it. While I understand there is certain technology, because of expense, practicality or secrecy, that can't be tested in competition, this Glock set up is perfect for testing in competition.

Have a bunch of shooters, of different skill level, run this rig with comp and optic against their regular Production guns, at a handful of USPSA matches, and we would quickly get some meaningful data that wouldn't cost the tax payers a dime. I, and a bunch of people on PF and other places, essentially did this with the RMR on a service pistol. For most, the juice wasn't worth the squeeze, and almost all are back to shooting iron sights. Maybe the comp addresses the issue of losing the slide mounted dot, and changes this. I would want to see results from a wide range of shooter abilities to confirm.

The difference is in need. The RDS provides things in a fight that offset the perceived or real lack of split speed. Competition will not show the things that matter in this regard.

[Rakombo]

Three quarters of the United State's borders are on salt water. That's quite a few various LE agencies that have to have units available to work in a salt air/water environment. Just how broad do you want???

The majority, is that really that difficult? Three quarters of the borderdrs, that's huge only until you take into account the rest of the country.

[DocGKR]

StraitR:

There are several other threads that discuss your questions, but a short re-cap is below:

1. Right now the RMR06, micro-Aimpoint, and DeltaPoint Pro are the leaders.

2. David Bowie, Doug Holloway at ATEI, Mark Housel were some of the early leaders, folks like Robar and Zev have also gotten into it.

3. We have had the best luck with milled OEM, but folks like Zev and others make quality optic ready slides.

4. The BIS location is irrelevant as long as they are there in some fashion.

[LSP972]

The majority, is that really that difficult? Three quarters of the borderdrs, that's huge only until you take into account the rest of the country.

Okay, fine. You're obviously looking for a fight here, so drive on. I appreciate the entertainment.

.

[Rakombo]

The thing is that I got about 3 different answers to the same question. And every person that says User X gave a good answer goes on to state something completely different.
The answers so far:
1) It takes time to test gear because the risk is greater i.e. in competition you lose a match in SD you lose your life.
2) Even elite units be it police or military have to contend with logistics.
3) The idea was good but the execution was poor, the technology just wasn't there yet.
4) There were tests but whether something was implemented or not wasn't discussed on an open forum.

So which one is it?

[TR675]

Hello, I am new forum guy. I would like a simple answer to a complex multifaceted question regarding why something has not yet happened. Please reduce your answer to one of the following categories: practical, institutional, technological, or secret squirrel.

I will only accept one answer; because clearly, a nonocurrence cannot have multiple causations, at least, that is not something that the Internet can accept.

[LittleLebowski]

The thing is that I got about 3 different answers to the same question. And every person that says User X gave a good answer goes on to state something completely different.
The answers so far:
1) It takes time to test gear because the risk is greater i.e. in competition you lose a match in SD you lose your life.
2) Even elite units be it police or military have to contend with logistics.
3) The idea was good but the execution was poor, the technology just wasn't there yet.
4) There were tests but whether something was implemented or not wasn't discussed on an open forum.

So which one is it?

Rakombo, who here do you label in your mind as speaking for the "SD community?" Furthermore, are you the competitive community's designated representative?

Is there any way we as gun owners can rise above this silly and divisive "us and them" nonsense?

[Rakombo]

Hello, I am new forum guy. I would like a simple answer to a complex multifaceted question regarding why something has not yet happened. Please reduce your answer to one of the following categories: practical, institutional, technological, or secret squirrel.

I will only accept one answer; because clearly, a nonocurrence cannot have multiple causations, at least, that is not something that the Internet can accept.
Christ. Yes, that is exactly what I want, an oversimplification of a complex issue. It has nothing to do with solidarity.

[GJM]

The difference is in need. The RDS provides things in a fight that offset the perceived or real lack of split speed. Competition will not show the things that matter in this regard.

What I would like to see is the exact spec for what is trying to be accomplished, and then discuss and test that. Without knowing the exact spec and who and how it is tested it is hard to evaluate.

As just one example, consider use in low light and darkness with NVG stuff, which is apparently a priority. Based on my testing, which is obviously a fraction of what has been done, I would prefer my Sig 226 with the CT military model, waterproof, dual IR and visible laser grips to my 226 upper with the RMR. The dual laser works great in low and no light with the visible laser, or in darkness with my -14, and brings virtually no downsides, compared to the RMR which has a number of downsides. It should pretty easy to test this and figure out whether my experience is normal or abnormal.

Just the other day, I shot a G4 17 with HD sight against an otherwise identical G4 17 with an RMR at eight inch steel at 50 yards. I found no difference to a slight advantage with the iron sights in terms of hit rate. Not that surprising, because the primary issue with hitting an 8 inch target at 50 yards with a Glock is trigger control, and the RMR is either a non-factor or slight negative with trigger control.

You could go on and on down the spec list and figure out what was trying to be accomplished and what the testing showed, across a variety of shooters of different skill levels.

[LittleLebowski]

Christ. Yes, that is exactly what I want, an oversimplification of a complex issue. It has nothing to do with solidarity.

Solidarity with regards to whom?

[Dave J]

So which one is it?

Considering that in this thread touched on three very different categories (dots, comps, and even carbine handguards), If shouldn't be surprising that there were varied answers.

[LOKNLOD]

Just the other day, I shot a G4 17 with HD sight against an otherwise identical G4 17 with an RMR at eight inch steel at 50 yards. I found no difference to a slight advantage with the iron sights in terms of hit rate. Not that surprising, because the primary issue with hitting an 8 inch target at 50 yards with a Glock is trigger control, and the RMR is either a non-factor or slight negative with trigger control.

I can't see crap at 50 yards; I wonder if an RMR would help with the visual side enough that I could isolate the trigger control effort?

[TCinVA]

the thing is that i got about 3 different answers to the same question. And every person that says user x gave a good answer goes on to state something completely different.
The answers so far:
1) it takes time to test gear because the risk is greater i.e. In competition you lose a match in sd you lose your life.
2) even elite units be it police or military have to contend with logistics.
3) the idea was good but the execution was poor, the technology just wasn't there yet.
4) there were tests but whether something was implemented or not wasn't discussed on an open forum.

So which one is it?

all of the above.

[Clobbersaurus]

Doc, do you know of anyone is in the process of making a quick detach suppressor/compensator system for the KKM barrel? I'm assuming now that this is being vetted properly as a viable concept, that would be the next logical progression?

[TCinVA]

Just the other day, I shot a G4 17 with HD sight against an otherwise identical G4 17 with an RMR at eight inch steel at 50 yards. I found no difference to a slight advantage with the iron sights in terms of hit rate.


Now stop for a minute and consider a guy who just got through selection for unit X who has had, up to this point, minimal pistol training. He now needs to be on par in pistol skill with the other face shooters in his new unit. Would it be easier or harder to get him up to snuff with an RDS on his issued pistol, or with iron sights? Keep in mind pistol shooting is but one of literally dozens of things he has to be trained up on...and he's needed PDQ because the other guys in his unit who have been at this for a decade or so are getting physicals and finding out that SURPRISE! You have two broken vertebrae!

The benefits of the RDS, at least on static targets, are probably lost on people who have excellent vision and who have put considerable skill into learning to use irons proficiently. In low light, on moving, thinking, fighting targets? I personally can't imagine that the mini RDS would work better than a laser for that task. The mini RDS is likely a lot more reliable than a laser, especially on a gun that gets beat up with duty use. CT grips, as much as I love them, break a lot when subjected to heavy use.

I'm open to being proven wrong on the efficiency of a laser vs. RDS, though, as I don't do a lot of shooting on moving, thinking, fighting targets.

[DocGKR]

TCinVA: Great comments!

GJM: It has been tested. The vast majority of end-users prefer the RDS (although some folks use both), as the previous quote I shared on page 4 illustrates.

To everyone: Be cautious in extrapolating things beyond your ken, else you find yourself as a poster child for Dunning-Kruger....

[StraitR]

StraitR:

There are several other threads that discuss your questions, but a short re-cap is below:

1. Right now the RMR06, micro-Aimpoint, and DeltaPoint Pro are the leaders.

2. David Bowie, Doug Holloway at ATEI, Mark Housel were some of the early leaders, folks like Robar and Zev have also gotten into it.

3. We have had the best luck with milled OEM, but folks like Zev and others make quality optic ready slides.

4. The BIS location is irrelevant as long as they are there in some fashion.

Roger Doc.

I suppose I was looking for the most up to date information to parallel the findings in this thread, but should have stated as such. I'm relatively familiar with the other threads, but I'll go back and take another look anyway.

Thanks

[JodyH]

From my personal experience and observations as a USPSA RO, the RDS/comp excels at static targets and falls behind on low percentage moving targets when it's a D to low-B level shooter on the trigger.
I see this time and time again on the "Polish plate rack" and "Texas Star". If the shooter can hose it down fast enough that it just slightly rocks side to side the RDS shooters are usually faster than the iron shooters. As soon as things really start spinning and changing directions the iron shooters are consistently faster.
Once you're into the A+ shooters the open guys are consistently faster all around.

I don't see how a compensated Glock 19 generates enough pressure with factory 9mm to make any difference myself.
Most comps require ammo loaded to pressure levels that would be dangerous in a Glock 19 and even +P+ JHP's from Winchester (127gr. @ 1250 = 158PF) aren't close to 9mm Major (124gr. @ 1330fps = 165PF).

I don't get it?

[Clobbersaurus]

^^ Port design, both at the top and sides of the brake/comp/whatever makes a huge difference. Baffle design and angle makes a huge difference as well. I did a LOT of research on the subject several years ago, and properly designed comps/brakes, are generally ammo, caliber, and barrel length specific. Some of the designs I worked on, especially with short barreled AR's (10.5's) over compensated on shorter barrels but were just fine on longer barrels. I didn't do anything with pistol calibers, but depending on the design, they can be quite effective.

I was in way over my head, and the mathematics / physics knowledge needed to do it properly would require some serious time back at school.

[JodyH]

I just see current slide mounted MRDS's as too much compromise for the advantage.
The day we get a frame mounted MRDS with the durability of current generation Aimpoints and a size envelope that'll work for CCW I'll give them serious consideration.
On comps, again IMO there're too many compromises for the advantage when it comes to a G19 sized 9mm pistol.

[LSP972]

I just see current slide mounted MRDS's as too much compromise for the advantage.


After five years of on-again/off-again working with the concept (and three pistols so equipped), that is the conclusion I have come to.

Someone will introduce a perfect CCW package (and at this point in my life, that is all I'm interested in) eventually; I just hope I'm not too feeble to use it when that happens.

Never been even slightly interested in compensators, because what little experience I have with them is largely negative. So, rightly or wrongly, that is not an issue for me. I understand there are compensators, and then there are compensators. Still not interested…;)

.

[GJM]

Now stop for a minute and consider a guy who just got through selection for unit X who has had, up to this point, minimal pistol training. He now needs to be on par in pistol skill with the other face shooters in his new unit. Would it be easier or harder to get him up to snuff with an RDS on his issued pistol, or with iron sights? Keep in mind pistol shooting is but one of literally dozens of things he has to be trained up on...and he's needed PDQ because the other guys in his unit who have been at this for a decade or so are getting physicals and finding out that SURPRISE! You have two broken vertebrae!

The benefits of the RDS, at least on static targets, are probably lost on people who have excellent vision and who have put considerable skill into learning to use irons proficiently. In low light, on moving, thinking, fighting targets? I personally can't imagine that the mini RDS would work better than a laser for that task. The mini RDS is likely a lot more reliable than a laser, especially on a gun that gets beat up with duty use. CT grips, as much as I love them, break a lot when subjected to heavy use.

I'm open to being proven wrong on the efficiency of a laser vs. RDS, though, as I don't do a lot of shooting on moving, thinking, fighting targets.

TC, in speaking with Bill Rogers on this exact topic, and observing folks shoot them, I think the better shooters adapt to the slide mounted RMR style optic easier. The reason for that is the window positioning to see the dot is very critical, and that is dependent on index. Less experienced shooters have a less developed index. This is especially apparent when they shoot support hand, in the dark or in weird positions when they are struggling to find the dot. I think Jody is reporting basically the same thing.

Slightly different take, but TLG had a fairly recent post on the RDS over at PT:

http://pistol-training.com/archives/9309

[45dotACP]

From my personal experience and observations as a USPSA RO, the RDS/comp excels at static targets and falls behind on low percentage moving targets when it's a D to low-B level shooter on the trigger.
I see this time and time again on the "Polish plate rack" and "Texas Star". If the shooter can hose it down fast enough that it just slightly rocks side to side the RDS shooters are usually faster than the iron shooters. As soon as things really start spinning and changing directions the iron shooters are consistently faster.
Once you're into the A+ shooters the open guys are consistently faster all around.


WARNING!!! Shameless Bruce Lee Quote inbound!!!!

"Before I studied the art, a punch to me was just like a punch, a kick just like a kick. After I learned the art, a punch was no longer a punch, a kick no longer a kick. Now that I've understood the art, a punch is just like a punch, a kick just like a kick. The height of cultivation is really nothing special. It is merely simplicity; the ability to express the utmost with the minimum. It is the halfway cultivation that leads to ornamentation."

Expert shooters tend to be experts, though I think a MRDS can probably function like a laser insofar as you are able to get more feedback on your trigger control, recoil control etc...as you progress with one. That may help a shooter progress faster, but then again, I'm not a SME on the matter so I will endeavor to stay in my lane.

I will say this, somebody like Eric Grauffel is probably one of the top open sighted shooters in the world, and to compare his score to the GM who is the top open shooter in the world would probably show Mr. Grauffel as scoring less. Enough to matter? Yes for the game. If we're talking about fighting with a gun, I have no affiliation with that world at all.

I think I'd love to get an MRDS equipped pistol at some point, but I've already got a few guns and should probably stop buying new toys and instead focus on performance, as I'm likely not a skilled enough shooter to reap the true benefits of a MRDS equipped pistol, and I'd likely benefit more from training with a few expert level guys and listening to their advice.

[JodyH]

I will say this, somebody like Eric Grauffel is probably one of the top open sighted shooters in the world, and to compare his score to the GM who is the top open shooter in the world would probably show Mr. Grauffel as scoring less. Enough to matter? Yes for the game. If we're talking about fighting with a gun, I have no affiliation with that world at all.
Another good data point would be C class open shooters versus C class limited shooters, at most local matches there is usually no difference in the results between the two divisions.
A good USPSA C class shooter is a better than the vast majority of people who carry a handgun for a living.
USPSA open guns are pretty much the pinnacle of current dot/compensator technology and they rarely give any significant advantage to the shooter until B class and above.

Pull up pretty much any USPSA match on the Practiscore results page and the Open and Limited shooters are mixed at the top of the combined results, neither one dominates at the club level.
If RDS and comps were that much of an advantage then the results would show a trend of open shooters scoring higher than limited and that trend just isn't there until you get into the top shooters in the world then it's only a few percentage points across an entire match.

[GJM]

Over the past year, I have studied the differences between Production, Limited and Open at a number of matches. My study isn't scientific, but generally the same shooter (looked at G, M and A) finishes about 10 percent higher in Limited compared to Production, and another 10 percent higher shooting Open compared to Limited. In other words, the same shooter that would be 100 percent of match points in Open, is 90 percent in Limited, and 80 percent in Production. Not apples to apples in pure shooting, since going from Production to Limited brings major scoring and higher capacity, where Open has major scoring, higher capacity yet, and the optic.

Here is a link to the recent Area 2 results. KC was first overall in Open with 100 percent, Nils was first in Limited with 89.3 percent, and Dave Sevigny was first in Production with 75.3 percent of the overall match points:

https://practiscore.com/results.php?uuid=6fb248f2-1f80-467b-955e-d4cfd955dc51&page=matchCombined

[45dotACP]

Very interesting data GJM. Thanks for sharing.

[JodyH]

When it comes to big matches and the differences between Production, Limited and Open I think the biggest advantage Open has is magazine capacity (170mm vs. 140mm vs. 10 rounds) instead of dots and comps.
Big matches tend to have more high round count stages that local matches.
Production scoring minor and 10 round capacity will obviously be slower on a 25 round stage versus a Open gun scoring major with a 27 round magazine and then a limited gun with 20 rounds.
No reload versus 1 reload versus 2 reloads.
When you get to Level 1 local matches and 15-25 round stages then the Open vs. Limited score differences tighten up considerably.

I don't think a Glock 19 with KKM comp and a slide mounted Trijicon MRDS is going to score 10% higher in a match than a Glock 34 if both run the same magazines.

While USPSA is a looooong ways from fighting with a pistol, it is a solid barometer of pure handgun performance.

[okie john]

So it looks like the "tactical" world is still lagging behind the competition world. The competition guys were using railless handguards with the option to add rails where needed for years while every tacticool guy used a quad rail, now the minimalist rail is all the rage. Then we have red dots on pistols. I suppose it can be said that the technology for a low profile red dot wasn't there before, but the RMR was out for a while before anyone seriously considered it as a legit option for a self-defense pistol. Now we have comps on SD pistols.

I'm just curious, why is the sd community so slow? I understand that the bandwagon effect is a part of it and now that Doc shared this I fully expect to start seeing this setup on forums and on the range, but what takes the guys in the know so much time to figure out that physics and physiology don't care if you are shooting steel in a match or shooting some scumbag on the street, or is it more of a case of them not bothering to share their findings with the masses? Genuinely curious.

It’s not that the SD community is slow to adopt things, but that the competition community is fast.

When I shot in competition, I spent more time at matches waiting than I did shooting. Like everyone else, I passed that time by talking with other shooters about gear and technique, whether the game was bullseye pistol, high-power rifle, action pistol, or metallic silhouette.

I soon realized that like anyone else who functions at very high levels, the best competition shooters rarely do anything but shoot. That’s all they care about, so they’ll invest significant time and money into new techniques and gear. The people in other communities have other needs and interests, so they adopt competition-related things more slowly. A lot of them also have to fight institutional bias and cruelly ignorant leaders to get the right gear, training, and policies adopted at the organizational level.

Think of it as the difference between innovation and evolution.

Did that answer your question?


Okie John

[SLG]

I still think the point is being missed. To my mind, the MRDS pistol is not about pure shooting performance. It's about fighting (in this thread, anyway). One of the benefits of the MRDS includes the ability to look at the target and still aim the gun. To do so in low light, bright light, Nods, etc.. is an advantage for many people actually engaged in fighting. A laser is better at some of those things, but they are rarely as robust. I've broken countless lasers on 9mm alone.
At the risk of agreeing with Nyeti;-), gunfights are very rarely won at the cyclic rate. I'm aware of a couple, but they were at about 3 feet. Mostly going cyclic means lots of misses and dead nuns/school buses etc. The pace required to hit fast and accurately in a fight beyond arms length is usually slower than most USPSA matches. A cursory study of gunfights that involve lots of hits will show this. Do the research.

[TiroFijo]

I still think the point is being missed. To my mind, the MRDS pistol is not about pure shooting performance. It's about fighting (in this thread, anyway). One of the benefits of the MRDS includes the ability to look at the target and still aim the gun. To do so in low light, bright light, Nods, etc.. is an advantage for many people actually engaged in fighting. A laser is better at some of those things, but they are rarely as robust. I've broken countless lasers on 9mm alone.
At the risk of agreeing with Nyeti;-), gunfights are very rarely won at the cyclic rate. I'm aware of a couple, but they were at about 3 feet. Mostly going cyclic means lots of misses and dead nuns/school buses etc. The pace required to hit fast and accurately in a fight beyond arms length is usually slower than most USPSA matches. A cursory study of gunfights that involve lots of hits will show this. Do the research.

Great explanation! Thanks.

What do you think of the pros vs cons of MRDS for a civilian user, to be used in CCW mode?

[okie john]

gunfights are very rarely won at the cyclic rate.

Sig line material, sir.


Okie John

[DocGKR]

SLG--Absolutely fantastic comments!

[GJM]

I still think the point is being missed. To my mind, the MRDS pistol is not about pure shooting performance. It's about fighting (in this thread, anyway). One of the benefits of the MRDS includes the ability to look at the target and still aim the gun. To do so in low light, bright light, Nods, etc.. is an advantage for many people actually engaged in fighting. A laser is better at some of those things, but they are rarely as robust. I've broken countless lasers on 9mm alone.
At the risk of agreeing with Nyeti;-), gunfights are very rarely won at the cyclic rate. I'm aware of a couple, but they were at about 3 feet. Mostly going cyclic means lots of misses and dead nuns/school buses etc. The pace required to hit fast and accurately in a fight beyond arms length is usually slower than most USPSA matches. A cursory study of gunfights that involve lots of hits will show this. Do the research.

SLG, there is a lot that makes sense here. What is so confusing to me, is that in the initial post of this thread, and in subsequent posts, it was specifically the cyclic rate that was put forth as the primary advantage of the KKM comp, compared to a non comp'd 19 and even a 34.

Let me ask you a straight up question. Would you deploy into a hostile environment, where you expected to be out in the field for some days, with a handgun with a RMR with an exposed emitter, and that required the optic to be removed to change the battery? And with a comp like the KKM, that required tools to detach the comp so as to be able to separate the barrel from the slide?

[runcible]

GJM,

Doc'll have to set it straight, but I believe the individual's work gun runs a T-1, which may alleviate some of the concerns you mentioned.

That said, relubricating has priority over cleaning in the field, and that doesn't require dis/ass for most weapons, including Glocks.

[JodyH]

Iron sights are useable under more lighting conditions than MRDS's, especially the self regulating ones that have a hard time getting the dot intensity right when shooting from a dark area into a bright area. MRDS also have a hell of a time with fogging when moving from a warm moist environment out into the cold and from the cold into a warm area.
It's a fact that MRDS are not nearly as robust as iron sights, not even close. The added reciprocating weight on the slide also decreases the pistols reliable operating envelope.
A comp hanging off the end of a tilting barrel handgun (and the actual compensation) adds yet another variable into the reliability mix.
When you add in that the more shit you hang off a pistol that's attached with screws or that requires batteries the greater the chance of failure and I just cannot see where the juice is worth the squeeze with current generation slide mounted MRDS and a comp on a Glock 19 sized pistol shooting factory ammo.
I'd have to see the math that proves X% performance gains outweighs Y% reliability/durability losses.

[runcible]

Replying more about irons, having a raindrop sitting on one's front sight or peep rear can yield interesting results downrange. Mud clinging to either front or rear iron bolluxes the pair, but a T-1 is viable as long as enough of the rear window is exposed to perceive the dot. Neither the RMR nor the T-1 in question here are self adjusting. Irons don't work well under IR/NVG lighting, transitional periods in the endless cycle of day/night, when covered in snow, and so forth. Unsurprisingly, irons and RDS can be impaired by the same factors.

It should also be mentioned that rapid temp changes affecting weapons extends to more then just sighting systems, is well known of in the military world, and is likely a far greater issue for the civilian reality of moving in and out of climate control.

I apologize if these thoughts are disjointed; I'm replying in brief with my phone.

[JodyH]

There's no contest when it comes to environmental conditions negatively affecting a MRDS more than irons on a handgun. It's not even close.

[GJM]

There's no contest when it comes to environmental conditions negatively affecting a MRDS more than irons on a handgun. It's not even close.

Especially at times like this:

http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg251/GJMandes/sig1_zpsd4cf5b9b.jpg (http://s250.photobucket.com/user/GJMandes/media/sig1_zpsd4cf5b9b.jpg.html)

[Jeep]

There's no contest when it comes to environmental conditions negatively affecting a MRDS more than irons on a handgun. It's not even close.

Yeah--but when you have back up irons (and perhaps a laser also) you have more options, and options are good (unless, of course, they interfere with each other).

It is that optionality (and the potential of an effective comp) that makes this set up seem intriguing to me. I also have to think that the military guys who are testing similar set ups are finding them to be robust enough for tough conditions, and with the beta testing that this thread is going to cause, my guess is that we will see enough hard usage over time to get some pretty good data on whether it really works (yet).

It might not--problems might come up--but this kind of this will help push the technology to the point it is fully robust.

I might have to eat my words at some point (it won't be the first time) but I am convinced that this really is the future, whether or not it works well enough at the present.

[JodyH]

I think the future is a ultra low profile EoTech style sight integrated with the frame.
No exposed emitter, no tube to look through, just a reticle floating on a piece of glass with a protective rollbar that's rigidly mounted to the frame so it's not slamming back and forth with the slide.

A slide mounted MRDS is a football bat.
:cool:

[runcible]

There's no contest when it comes to environmental conditions negatively affecting a MRDS more than irons on a handgun. It's not even close.

Absolutely! The T-1 absolutely excels in nearly all aspects, though the battery life isn't quite on par with tritium vial service life yet.

[Haraise]

I'd have to see the math that proves X% performance gains outweighs Y% reliability/durability losses.

Do you have any examples of that kind of math existing? Examples you can link to? Especially math that proves the weight.

[GJM]

Are both these quotes from the same guy? The second quote came from a 9 versus 45 PF thread, and the manner of speech seems similar.

http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg251/GJMandes/image.jpg1_zpsvdw2aorf.jpg (http://s250.photobucket.com/user/GJMandes/media/image.jpg1_zpsvdw2aorf.jpg.html)

http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg251/GJMandes/image.jpg2_zps4nfpdrzu.jpg (http://s250.photobucket.com/user/GJMandes/media/image.jpg2_zps4nfpdrzu.jpg.html)

[Gviz]

I think JodyH brings up some good points. The RDS is not without some drawbacks. Although I have not extensively trained in multiple environments with my RDS G19, for me, tracking the dot is faster than trying to align a front and rear sight. I have trained myself to look for the front sight instinctively and the dot then appears. If you just try to search for the dot independently, its going to be slower, much slower.

[Sigfan26]

The possible downfalls of the RDS that Jody listed are the reason that BUIS are mounted. You have irons and optics.

[JodyH]

The possible downfalls of the RDS that Jody listed are the reason that BUIS are mounted. You have irons and optics.
Unless the optic is shattered, fogged, frozen or mud/snow covered.
There's a reason quick release mounts are popular with rifle shooters.

[SLG]

GJM,

I would not personally take a MRDS as a carry gun, today. That doesn't mean that I don't think it makes sense for lots of other people though. Certainly environmental issues that you and others have brought up are one reason.

As far as the purpose of the comp, I think it is natural for people to want to shoot faster, since everyone spends more time on a range than in gunfights. Does it matter for a fight? I don't know, but I don't think so. However, you can't argue with being able to go faster and more accurately, if everything else is equal. I can shoot a MRDS pistol every bit as fast off the draw, and for the first shot from ready, and almost as fast on a bill drill, as I can with irons. Most people, it seems, cannot, so it makes sense to try and reduce recoil and keep the dot in the window. I think its an interesting development, but far from mature.

I should add, my only MRDS equipped pistol is a G19. As soon as my Unity Tactical slide arrives, I will have a G22 to do apples to apples comparisons with the .40.

[Sigfan26]

Unless the optic is shattered, fogged, frozen or mud/snow covered.
There's a reason quick release mounts are popular with rifle shooters.

The optic shattered is valid (and very difficult to do...). In the other situations, who says that those environmental factors wouldn't effect irons? A dip in the mud could occlude sights. Any situation where frozen environments are present will result in lowered shooting ability. Having used a RDS Glock in most of those conditions (simulated, not operational), I can say that it isn't as big of an issue as it's made to be. Even with the lens occluded by a large amount of dried sweat, clothing lint, and hair, I could still make head shots at 25 yards. Even frosted over, UTC hits were doable. My astigmatism and cross eye were the only reason I moved back to a traditional iron sighted pistol

[Gviz]

True, but I cant see my irons well through the glass if it is fogged or somehow breaks.

[Gviz]

The optic shattered is valid (and very difficult to do...)Even with the lens occluded by a large amount of dried sweat, clothing lint, and hair, I could still make head shots at 25 yards.

Thats impressive

[Sigfan26]

Optics do not require you to have a crisp front sight picture... They just require you to put the dot on the target and follow the fundamentals.

[Sigfan26]

Thats impressive

I'm not saying it was easy, or fast, but doable.

[GJM]

GJM,

I would not personally take a MRDS as a carry gun, today. That doesn't mean that I don't think it makes sense for lots of other people though. Certainly environmental issues that you and others have brought up are one reason.

As far as the purpose of the comp, I think it is natural for people to want to shoot faster, since everyone spends more time on a range than in gunfights. Does it matter for a fight? I don't know, but I don't think so. However, you can't argue with being able to go faster and more accurately, if everything else is equal. I can shoot a MRDS pistol every bit as fast off the draw, and for the first shot from ready, and almost as fast on a bill drill, as I can with irons. Most people, it seems, cannot, so it makes sense to try and reduce recoil and keep the dot in the window. I think its an interesting development, but far from mature.

I should add, my only MRDS equipped pistol is a G19. As soon as my Unity Tactical slide arrives, I will have a G22 to do apples to apples comparisons with the .40.

I am in agreement with all your comments in paragraphs one and two.

I have or have had RMR slides for the G17, M&P9 FS, P226 and M&P .45 mid size. I have never tried one with .40, and it will be interesting to see how the optic holds up to .40. Some low light whitetail hunting might be a fun test environment.


The optic shattered is valid (and very difficult to do...). In the other situations, who says that those environmental factors wouldn't effect irons? A dip in the mud could occlude sights. Any situation where frozen environments are present will result in lowered shooting ability. Having used a RDS Glock in most of those conditions (simulated, not operational), I can say that it isn't as big of an issue as it's made to be. Even with the lens occluded by a large amount of dried sweat, clothing lint, and hair, I could still make head shots at 25 yards. Even frosted over, UTC hits were doable. My astigmatism and cross eye were the only reason I moved back to a traditional iron sighted pistol

I kind of assumed BUIS were a near 100 percent solution with the RMR. That was until I fell in the mountains into a bunch of snow, and with moisture on the emitter, it created a starburst of multiple red partial dots, making all of them and the BUIS unusable. Sealed or exposed emitter, I hope future installations allow you to QD the optic like you can with an Aimpoint on a carbine.

[Sigfan26]

I am in agreement with all your comments in paragraphs one and two.

I have or have had RMR slides for the G17, M&P9 FS, P226 and M&P .45 mid size. I have never tried one with .40, and it will be interesting to see how the optic holds up to .40. Some low light whitetail hunting might be a fun test environment.



I kind of assumed BUIS were a near 100 percent solution with the RMR. That was until I fell in the mountains into a bunch of snow, and with moisture on the emitter, it created a starburst of multiple red partial dots, making all of them and the BUIS unusable. Sealed or exposed emitter, I hope future installations allow you to QD the optic like you can with an Aimpoint on a carbine.

I'm gonna have to occlude the sight completely now and try an experiment...

[Default.mp3]

Are both these quotes from the same guy? The second quote came from a 9 versus 45 PF thread, and the manner of speech seems similar.

http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg251/GJMandes/image.jpg1_zpsvdw2aorf.jpg (http://s250.photobucket.com/user/GJMandes/media/image.jpg1_zpsvdw2aorf.jpg.html)

http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg251/GJMandes/image.jpg2_zps4nfpdrzu.jpg (http://s250.photobucket.com/user/GJMandes/media/image.jpg2_zps4nfpdrzu.jpg.html)

I have every reason to believe so. I believe he is still actively posting in certain groups on Facebook and on another forum.


Unless the optic is shattered, fogged, frozen or mud/snow covered.
There's a reason quick release mounts are popular with rifle shooters.
http://i.imgbox.com/O1R5hqAV.jpg
But since they don't make those for the P30L, I made do with an X400U-GN. Which can, of course, also be occluded by foreign matter. C'est la vie.

[DocGKR]

You naysayers realize these types of RDS equipped pistols have been in use in combat and LE duty for over FIVE years now with many hundreds of thousands of rounds fired? Most folks that have used them in real world situations do NOT want to go back to irons. Perhaps that should be a clue. Why don't you go tell them that their experiences are all wrong and they don't know what they are doing. You guys sound as bad as the whiners who are complaining over on Doodie about this thread.

RDS obscured by debris? Pull the trigger; the recoil usually knocks everything loose.

If an RDS has a simple electronics failure, the RDS glass remains intact and transitioning to a BIS is immediate with no delay in shooting. If the glass cracks or spiderwebs in a slide mounted RDS, then one of several things
happens:

-- if the dot is still be visible, the sight can continue to be used like an old OEG.
-- if the dot stops functioning, but the BIS are still visible through the glass, then the target can be engaged using the BIS.
-- if the dot is not working and the BIS is not visible through the cracked optic, then the optic either needs to be removed or the broken glass punched out using a knife or multi-tool in order to effectively use the slide mounted BIS.
-- if a laser is mounted on the pistol, then the target can immediately be engaged in the event of a dot failure, irrespective of the glass condition of the RDS.

[45dotACP]

Sure, there are benefits of the RDS, but I personally will see better return on investment training 1200 bucks away with a decent instructor, rather than a new toy, given where I'm at skills wise. They may well be the next hot shit in handgun tech, but for me, it'll probably have to wait until most likely well after there's a G19 MOS model available.

[DocGKR]

"Sure, there are benefits of the RDS, but I personally will see better return on investment training 1200 bucks away with a decent instructor, rather than a new toy, given where I'm at skills wise."

By all means, that is a wise and prudent use of your resources.

No one is suggesting that everyone go run out and get a comp'd RDS pistol

However, for some folks, not necessarily you, it is the best tool so far for their job.

[JodyH]

RDS obscured by debris? Pull the trigger; the recoil usually knocks everything loose.
Great plan for when everything downrange is a free fire zone, not so great a plan in Disney World on memorial day weekend.

[ranger]

This is an interesting thread. I started shooting USPSA in 1986 and watched the high-cap .355's (38 Super, 9x21, etc) and optics change the sport. I heard the same type of comments on optics slowing you down, etc. from competitors - those competitors had moved to optics within a year. Over time, the equipment improved and shooters improved techniques. I am thankful as the sport pioneered new equipment and techniques that military, LEO, and civilian shooters now benefit. I am confident that the RDS for pistols will continue to improve and become more prevalent.

[GJM]

Has the decibel level of the KKM G19 been measured, compared to a stock barrel?

Most of my non-range shooting ends up done without hearing pro. I replaced the ported Vang barrels on my 14 inch shotguns, with non ported barrels, because the porting was painful when shooting in the field. Same reason, no porting on my hunting rifles, and I don't stand close to Open shooters at USPSA matches. Over the years, I have had multiple guides from Africa to the western US tell me how much they DESPISE ported or comp'd rifles with clients in the field. Trackers in Africa quickly learned to stay well back and put their fingers in their ears when a client had a ported rifle.

One more question. Not sure how the gas coming out of a 14 inch shotgun barrel compares to a 9mm, but I once accidentally got my left thumb over just one Vang port when sighting in slugs over the seat of an ATV. At the shot, my thumb was blackened, the pain was intense, and I feel lucky to still have a thumb. Any sense what the KKM is like against your body?

[DocGKR]

JodyH: I was not aware that Disney World had a problem with heavy snow and ice on Memorial Weekend.

GJM: Addressed earlier on page 4 of this thread.

[md8232]

Doc

Would the ALG 6 second mount on a G17 w/o comp be able to compete with this setup?

[SLG]

I agree with Doc, some of this reminds me of that other forum. Comp/MRDS/magwell pistols may not be for everyone, but obviously some serious dudes are using them. Throwing stones doesn't seem very appropriate to me. I love the idea, and will surely go to it at some point, but for now, I'm content to play with it occasionally, and watch the development. If you don't want Doc and others to share, by all means, keep throwing stones. Legit questions are always welcome, but some of these seem more condescending than legit.

[SLG]

Doc

Would the ALG 6 second mount on a G17 w/o comp be able to compete with this setup?

Not Doc, but the ALG is a better way to go from a shooting standpoint. Just harder to carry.

[JodyH]

but some of these seem more condescending than legit.
I completely agree with you...

[GJM]

GJM: Addressed earlier on page 4 of this thread.

You must have your pages set up to format differently than me, because I can't find it on my page 4 or the pages surrounding it. This thread has become long! Can you point me to a post #?

[Jeep]

I agree with Doc, some of this reminds me of that other forum. Comp/MRDS/magwell pistols may not be for everyone, but obviously some serious dudes are using them. Throwing stones doesn't seem very appropriate to me. I love the idea, and will surely go to it at some point, but for now, I'm content to play with it occasionally, and watch the development. If you don't want Doc and others to share, by all means, keep throwing stones. Legit questions are always welcome, but some of these seem more condescending than legit.

Yep, but as I read the comments, in the end most people are saying either "this works now"; or (2) "not quite yet". I see very few comments that imply "never," and I have to think that in fact the technology really is here now for some people's needs and not quite yet for others.

Thus, while perhaps the heat quotient was a bit high, I think overall this has been an excellent thread that is addressing a significant issue in handgun development. I am extremely glad that Doc started it and I hope he keeps us up to date because I continue to think this is the way of the future for most of us (and for some, of course, it is the present).

[TR675]

^^ well said. I am following this thread with great interest.

[GJM]

I agree with Doc, some of this reminds me of that other forum. Comp/MRDS/magwell pistols may not be for everyone, but obviously some serious dudes are using them. Throwing stones doesn't seem very appropriate to me. I love the idea, and will surely go to it at some point, but for now, I'm content to play with it occasionally, and watch the development. If you don't want Doc and others to share, by all means, keep throwing stones. Legit questions are always welcome, but some of these seem more condescending than legit.

I sure hope my questions are not perceived as condescending.

I really like Gary, consider him a friend, like the contributions he has made here and elsewhere, and enjoy dissecting this concept. Based on my own experiences, I don't think this concept is ready for prime time, yet, for the reasons I have pointed out. That doesn't change at all how I feel about Gary.

This thread wouldn't have gone as long as it has, if it wasn't interesting and subject to different points of view.

[SLG]

I'm not directing what I said at anyone, just the tone the thread takes at times. I can come across as condescending as well, and I don't think it hurts to be reminded of that.

[LSP972]

I still think the point is being missed. To my mind, the MRDS pistol is not about pure shooting performance. It's about fighting (in this thread, anyway). One of the benefits of the MRDS includes the ability to look at the target and still aim the gun. To do so in low light, bright light, Nods, etc.. is an advantage for many people actually engaged in fighting. A laser is better at some of those things, but they are rarely as robust. I've broken countless lasers on 9mm alone.
At the risk of agreeing with Nyeti;-), gunfights are very rarely won at the cyclic rate. I'm aware of a couple, but they were at about 3 feet. Mostly going cyclic means lots of misses and dead nuns/school buses etc. The pace required to hit fast and accurately in a fight beyond arms length is usually slower than most USPSA matches. A cursory study of gunfights that involve lots of hits will show this. Do the research.

As I stated earlier, I have been messing around with this, on and off, for five years. I agree with everything you wrote, and in fact the red dot sight is THE answer for "old man eyes". But if the optic cannot be depended upon...

But as you wrote earlier (I think it was you), the JPoint is not the most durable of optics. This is the main reason I never went "all-in" with my three pistols; I simply did not trust it. And that finally came home to roost a few weeks ago. What was even more aggravating, my third pistol has an RMR02 which has been SO much better than the Trijicon/JPoint clones- mainly in the ease of POI adjustment- and IT has begun to go dim between shots. While the possibility exists that both of the two new batteries I tried are exhausted… probably not.

A newer-production RMR will probably… probably… be good, but I'm stuck like Chuck with the other two pistols because their slides are milled for the JPoint "footprint".

So, basically, for me to get back up-to-speed on this is going to cost some serious coin. I naively thought that the VERY serious coin I spent having these three pistols done would tide me through. IOW, the juice is worth the squeeze… until your optic/s take a dump on you.

So, I think I'll sit back a while. I can still get by with certain types of irons; and when the day comes when I can no longer do that, hopefully Trijicon will have finally made the RMR bullet proof...

[LSP972]

MRDS also have a hell of a time with fogging when moving from a warm moist environment out into the cold and from the cold into a warm area.


Actually, if you carry IWB, that is simply not an issue. IOW, the optic stays reasonably warm while you're carrying it, so no opportunity for condensation. I was concerned about this, and tried it in various temperatures, down to slightly below freezing. No problem.

Now, a pistol carried openly or OWB would be a different thing altogether.

.

[SLG]

As I stated earlier, I have been messing around with this, on and off, for five years. I agree with everything you wrote, and in fact the red dot sight is THE answer for "old man eyes". But if the optic cannot be depended upon...

But as you wrote earlier (I think it was you), the JPoint is not the most durable of optics. This is the main reason I never went "all-in" with my three pistols; I simply did not trust it. And that finally came home to roost a few weeks ago. What was even more aggravating, my third pistol has an RMR02 which has been SO much better than the Trijicon/JPoint clones- mainly in the ease of POI adjustment- and IT has begun to go dim between shots. While the possibility exists that both of the two new batteries I tried are exhausted… probably not.

A newer-production RMR will probably… probably… be good, but I'm stuck like Chuck with the other two pistols because their slides are milled for the JPoint "footprint".

So, basically, for me to get back up-to-speed on this is going to cost some serious coin. I naively thought that the VERY serious coin I spent having these three pistols done would tide me through. IOW, the juice is worth the squeeze… until your optic/s take a dump on you.

So, I think I'll sit back a while. I can still get by with certain types of irons; and when the day comes when I can no longer do that, hopefully Trijicon will have finally made the RMR bullet proof...

I really like the Unity slide/Atom mount concept for that very reason. I have shot guns with T1's/DP's/RMR's/JP's etc. I think the T2/DP2/RMR each have plus's and minus's, and I like to be able to switch between them on occasion. And of course, when something better comes along, you just can't beat the Unity stuff. Plus, those guys are good dudes, with lots of real world experience.