SIG ROMEO X

[Default.mp3]

https://www.sigsauer.com/romeo-x.html

Based on the ROMEO M17. That being said, I don't actually see any information that it's an enclosed optic, which would be a huge miss, IMO.

[Tokarev]

https://youtu.be/Eeu2uWVOUSg

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[APS-PF]

They both have a usable rear, nice for the OG 365 XL and M17/18 slides.

[Tokarev]

https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/sig-sauers-new-romeo-x-red-dots-built-with-romeo-m17-technology/

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[RJ]

Oof. Open emitter, $400 price point...IPX7 rated... Well, I like the built-in rear sight notches. And they have a "Compact" version for P365's, which is cool.

I bought an EPS Carry recently (street price well under $400), enclosed emitter, IPX8 rated...yeah I don't think I would swap it for a Romeo X.

[APS-PF]

Didn't notice it was an open emitter until RJ mentioned it. Rats, I got hot and bothered as my XLs have the removable plate/rear sight.

[HeavyDuty]

I’m not seeing the open emitter unless it’s under the hood outside the glass?

https://cdn0.thetruthaboutguns.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/pro-compact.jpg

[WobblyPossum]

The TTAG article states they are open emitter designs.

[RJ]

I’m not seeing the open emitter unless it’s under the hood outside the glass?

https://cdn0.thetruthaboutguns.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/pro-compact.jpg

Ja, it was in the TTAG verbiage:

107305

[Tokarev]

https://youtu.be/GlYJHbM7PVY

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[HeavyDuty]

The TTAG article states they are open emitter designs.


Ja, it was in the TTAG verbiage:

107305

Right, but 1) I’m not seeing it in the pics, and 2) it wouldn’t be the first time TTAG got something wrong. I’m holding out for independent confirmation.

[HCM]

Right, but 1) I’m not seeing it in the pics, and 2) it wouldn’t be the first time TTAG got something wrong. I’m holding out for independent confirmation.

Watch the video from SIG it’s obvious.

[Default.mp3]

Right, but 1) I’m not seeing it in the pics, and 2) it wouldn’t be the first time TTAG got something wrong. I’m holding out for independent confirmation.
https://youtu.be/GlYJHbM7PVY?t=229

The video from GunsAmerica that @Tokarev linked, at 3:49, pretty obviously shows there's no rear lens. The fact that there's zero mention of it being an enclosed optic in any of the literature is also a giveaway, given how they specifically call out the ability for the ROMEO2 to become enclosed, and how the ROMEO-M17 is specifically said to be "[a] fully enclosed, sealed, and purged optical system, for ultimate protection from the elements".

[HeavyDuty]

There’s no rear lens in that huge housing? Ok, I stand corrected.

I rarely watch videos, it’s not an efficient way for me to transfer knowledge. I’m a written word guy.

Man, that’s gonna collect shit.

[Default.mp3]

There’s no rear lens in that huge housing? Ok, I stand corrected.

I rarely watch videos, it’s not an efficient way for me to transfer knowledge. I’m a written word guy.Nah, I fucking hate videos, too, I only watched it (skimmed through, really) to see if they mentioned anything about it being enclosed that I missed. I really hate the video format, I wish that folks would do a transcript that I can just read, or at least a BLUF in the description section or something.

[RJ]

...it wouldn’t be the first time TTAG got something wrong.

Can't disagree with that!

On topic, looks like a short putt to create a QRC for it, first new one in a while.

[DaBigBR]

I agree that it's going to collect a ton of dust and lint.

[RJ]

I'm doing the draft QRC for this optic, question for you guys: the reticle shown on Sig's web page for the circle dot looks like a circle, but with a segment missing at the bottom. Blown up so you can see what I mean:

107346

Would you think Sig would really design an optic with a segment missing from the reticle at the bottom, or is it more likely to be a circle in real life, and the missing segment is just some artifact of publishing the image on the web?

https://www.sigsauer.com/romeo-x.html

EDIT I shopped the segment out for the QRC. I decided it's more likely to be a complete 32 MOA circle. Still interested if anyone knows.

[call_me_ski]

Would you think Sig would really design an optic with a segment missing from the reticle at the bottom, or is it more likely to be a circle in real life, and the missing segment is just some artifact of publishing the image on the web?

https://www.sigsauer.com/romeo-x.html




I would think that Sig got the reticle right in all of their promotional material. What reason do you have to believe that they didn’t leave a segment open at the bottom?

[RJ]

I would think that Sig got the reticle right in all of their promotional material. What reason do you have to believe that they didn’t leave a segment open at the bottom?

Why would they do that?

[call_me_ski]

Why would they do that?

To give a reference for level?(No idea) As far as mysteries go, the reticle design choice isn’t nearly as perplexing as making this open emitter.

[RJ]

Well gah dang, I guess they are right. I grabbed a screen shot from an earlier Sig video of the M17, sure looks like it is open at the bottom, and I was wrong. Very curious.

107347

34 seconds in:


https://youtu.be/8z4ptMyTW4Q

[WobblyPossum]

The circle reticle SKD the Holosun 507 Comp also leave a gap at the bottom of the circle. There’s probably a reason for it. I just don’t know it.

[HeavyDuty]

Holdover reference?

[RJ]

To give a reference for level?(No idea) As far as mysteries go, the reticle design choice isn’t nearly as perplexing as making this open emitter.


Holdover reference?

Ja, something like that I guess. I fixed and uploaded the QRC for the RomeoX, and tweaked the reticle in the M17 one while I was at it this morning. Both are in the Google drive.

[G19Fan]

https://www.sigsauer.com/romeo-x.html

Based on the ROMEO M17. That being said, I don't actually see any information that it's an enclosed optic, which would be a huge miss, IMO.

It is not enclosed. 2 future ones will be

[G19Fan]

Oof. Open emitter, $400 price point...IPX7 rated... Well, I like the built-in rear sight notches. And they have a "Compact" version for P365's, which is cool.

I bought an EPS Carry recently (street price well under $400), enclosed emitter, IPX8 rated...yeah I don't think I would swap it for a Romeo X.

Agreed. At eps carry price why would someone buy a Romeo x

[HeavyDuty]

It is not enclosed. 2 future ones will be

Oh really? What have you heard?

[HeavyDuty]

Agreed. At eps carry price why would someone buy a Romeo x

Not PRC.

[G19Fan]

Not PRC.

Parts still made there though

Just designed and assembled here.

[G19Fan]

Oh really? What have you heard?

Fdezwerks is at sig academy and mentioned that they said 2 encoded ones will be upcoming

Now the Romeo9T for 4K is the dumbest optic I have heard of

[Default.mp3]

Parts still made there though

Just designed and assembled here.Do you have a source for that claim? I would be curious to know for a fact that they are using PRC parts, as ROC, Japan, and even ROK are possible sources of PCBs from Asia. I know Aimpoint has claimed that they source nothing from the PRC, could be possible that other manufacturers have been able to do that to their supply chain. According to SIG, the ROMEO4T-PRO uses all American components, besides a single Japanese PCB.

Yes, yes, global supply chains makes everything harder to define the origin of, so it's totally possible there are Chinese materials in even a Japanese PCB or American component, but you gotta draw the line somewhere as to where the value is added, and if it's low enough to be raw materials, I think most people would give it a pass, as long as the high value added components are coming from allies.

[G19Fan]

Do you have a source for that claim? I would be curious to know for a fact that they are using PRC parts, as ROC, Japan, and even ROK are possible sources of PCBs from Asia. I know Aimpoint has claimed that they source nothing from the PRC, could be possible that other manufacturers have been able to do that to their supply chain. According to SIG, the ROMEO4T-PRO uses all American components, besides a single Japanese PCB.

Yes, yes, global supply chains makes everything harder to define the origin of, so it's totally possible there are Chinese materials in even a Japanese PCB or American component, but you gotta draw the line somewhere as to where the value is added, and if it's low enough to be raw materials, I think most people would give it a pass, as long as the high value added components are coming from allies.

Let me see if I can get a source. That is what I had heard 2nd hand from a friend with a relative in sig (but I don't know if parts are not from prc)

[HeavyDuty]

Fdezwerks is at sig academy and mentioned that they said 2 encoded ones will be upcoming

Now the Romeo9T for 4K is the dumbest optic I have heard of

Part of what I miss about living fifteen minutes away from the SIG Academy…

[Sig_Fiend]

Why would they do that?

Probably sub-contracted the reticle to India. Just kidding. Sorry, someone had to say it. ;)

107375

[HCM]

Parts still made there though

Just designed and assembled here.

In the past -yes. But it’s not 2016. SIG now has an actual optics factory in Oregon. They are capable of “making” optics as much as anyone actually “makes” anything nowadays.

Currently, some models are still assembled from imported parts, others are not and many of the imported parts are from Japan and the Philippines, not just the PRC.

Leupold and Vortex have products made in all 3 countries or made with parts from all 3 countries too.

Re: the Romeo 9T, do you use night vision? Do you need to passively aim under night vision because you are fighting near peers who also have night vision ?

If yes, you are using optics which cost $20k to $40k and a $3k laser so a $4k optic is loose change. If that’s the actual price.

If not, it’s not for you so what’s the problem?

As with all the comments about the Glock 47 and a whole bunch of other shit, not everything is for the commercial market. Some of those products may wind up on the commercial market if the demand is there, because gun companies exist to make money, not guns, so why do leave money on the table ?

[G19Fan]

In the past -yes. But it’s not 2016. SIG now has an actual optics factory in Oregon. They are capable of “making” optics as much as anyone actually “makes” anything nowadays.

Currently, some models are still assembled from imported parts, others are not and many of the imported parts are from Japan and the Philippines, not just the PRC.

Leupold and Vortex have products made in all 3 countries or made with parts from all 3 countries too.

Re: the Romeo 9T, do you use night vision? Do you need to passively aim under night vision because you are fighting near peers who also have night vision ?

If yes, you are using optics which cost $20k to $40k and a $3k laser so a $4k optic is loose change. If that’s the actual price.

If not, it’s not for you so what’s the problem?

As with all the comments about the Glock 47 and a whole bunch of other shit, not everything is for the commercial market. Some of those products may wind up on the commercial market if the demand is there, because gun companies exist to make money, not guns, so why do leave money on the table ?

Thanks for the clarification on that! Also this makes much more sense on te romeo9t

[RJ]

That was fast. New price hikes announced for 7/20. Compact MSRP $519.99, full size $589.99.

I'm sure this will help sales.

:cool:

107377

https://www.sigsauer.com/romeo-x.html

[Default.mp3]

Re: the Romeo 9T, do you use night vision? Do you need to passively aim under night vision because you are fighting near peers who also have night vision ?

If yes, you are using optics which cost $20k to $40k and a $3k laser so a $4k optic is loose change. If that’s the actual price.

If not, it’s not for you so what’s the problem?

As with all the comments about the Glock 47 and a whole bunch of other shit, not everything is for the commercial market. Some of those products may wind up on the commercial market if the demand is there, because gun companies exist to make money, not guns, so why do leave money on the table ?What's so special about the Romeo 9T in that regards to NODs usage? I know that it has uses non-standard emitter orientations to eliminate downrange visual signatures, but don't HWSes inherently also have this advantage? I always thought the real party trick being the dual, independently zeroed reticles, which would allow for extremely quick and easily differentiable reticles; AFAIK, nothing else offers the capability to quickly switch between zeros like that besides the Wilcox BOSS series (which uses a single reticle, and thus may be a little harder to tell which zero you're using without physically checking where the switch is if you've forgotten), although the Meprolight Foresight does let you change zeroes via an app.

[HCM]

What's so special about the Romeo 9T in that regards to NODs usage? I know that it has uses non-standard emitter orientations to eliminate downrange visual signatures, but don't HWSes inherently also have this advantage? I always thought the real party trick being the dual, independently zeroed reticles, which would allow for extremely quick and easily differentiable reticles; AFAIK, nothing else offers the capability to quickly switch between zeros like that besides the Wilcox BOSS series (which uses a single reticle, and thus may be a little harder to tell which zero you're using without physically checking where the switch is if you've forgotten), although the Meprolight Foresight does let you change zeroes via an app.

I’m familiar, but I was trying not to stray into those weeds.

A requirement for switching between supers and subs on the fly pretty much screams NV use.

The point is not everything is made for the commercial market or made for everyone. Just because it doesn’t fill a need for YOU doesn’t mean it’s “stupid.”

That in turn leads to the fact many gun companies in the “defense industry” space, especially European companies, see institutions as their primary customers and the commercial market a secondary.

[Default.mp3]

I’m familiar, but I was trying not to stray into those weeds.

A requirement for switching between supers and subs on the fly pretty much screams NV use.

The point is not everything is made for the commercial market or made for everyone. Just because it doesn’t fill a need for YOU doesn’t mean it’s “stupid.”

That in turn leads to the fact many gun companies in the “defense industry” space, especially European companies, see institutions as their primary customers and the commercial market a secondary.Sure, I get that this was a specialized product that was not intended for civilian use, and that any civilian release is just them making a couple extra bucks (the SureFire Micro Scout comes to mind). Just was intrigued by your emphasis for use under NODs; while the use case would certainly almost coincide heavily with NODs use, your wording just made it seem like it was designed specifically for use under NODs in general (which it does, for an RDS, but not totally unique), rather than a unique subset of that sort of mission.

[DamonL]

I like the battery location on the Romeo X better than the Holosun. It allows a lower mount.

The battery life on an EPS carry is suppose to be 50000 hours. The Romeo X is only 20000 hours. They do use different batteries.

The gap on the reticle circle could show if you are canting your pistol and sight picture, which might help for long shots.

[Tokarev]

A new video from the Humble Marksman:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ugg5ih--9pA

[stomridertx]

All of the major players have chimed in now and I can add Sig to the list of manufacturers not interested in making an enclosed pistol optic with a larger (5-6.5 MOA) dot. It looks like the Holosun EPS 6 is my option for the next few years. Time for me to buy a few of them and just be happy with it. I think I'm in a minority on this dot preference and I'll have to take what I can get and hope it doesn't get discontinued.

[GJM]

All of the major players have chimed in now and I can add Sig to the list of manufacturers not interested in making an enclosed pistol optic with a larger (5-6.5 MOA) dot. It looks like the Holosun EPS 6 is my option for the next few years. Time for me to buy a few of them and just be happy with it. I think I'm in a minority on this dot preference and I'll have to take what I can get and hope it doesn't get discontinued.

Not to be too picky, but Sig makes the semi enclosed, Romeo 2 in 6 moa.

[stomridertx]

Not to be too picky, but Sig makes the semi enclosed, Romeo 2 in 6 moa.

Yes, but it's not better in my view. It's larger, sits higher, not purged, much more expensive, and doesn't have a better mounting method. Semi-made in America is not enough if it's not a superior optic. If I blacked out the manufacturer name and just compare features side by side the EPS wins. If the EPS hadn't passed the Sage Dynamics test so well I might believe the Sig has a durability advantage, but I don't think that's the case. The EPS is also a known quantity to me as I have one giving good service on a pistol.
If the optic is equal in features or better than the EPS, then the "not made in PRC" factor becomes the tipping point.

[Archer1440]

The optic seems fine. The fact that it's a total dirt scoop, not so much.

[mrozowjj]

Humble Marksman has a video out on it from yesterday:


https://youtu.be/ugg5ih--9pA


The fact that he hammered a nail in with it is impressive but I also have no context for how hard that really is on a optic so maybe it's irrelvent.

[HCM]

All of the major players have chimed in now and I can add Sig to the list of manufacturers not interested in making an enclosed pistol optic with a larger (5-6.5 MOA) dot. It looks like the Holosun EPS 6 is my option for the next few years. Time for me to buy a few of them and just be happy with it. I think I'm in a minority on this dot preference and I'll have to take what I can get and hope it doesn't get discontinued.


Not to be too picky, but Sig makes the semi enclosed, Romeo 2 in 6 moa.


Yes, but it's not better in my view. It's larger, sits higher, not purged, much more expensive, and doesn't have a better mounting method. Semi-made in America is not enough if it's not a superior optic. If I blacked out the manufacturer name and just compare features side by side the EPS wins. If the EPS hadn't passed the Sage Dynamics test so well I might believe the Sig has a durability advantage, but I don't think that's the case. The EPS is also a known quantity to me as I have one giving good service on a pistol.
If the optic is equal in features or better than the EPS, then the "not made in PRC" factor becomes the tipping point.

SIG also made the Romeo 1PRO, Romeo 3XL and Romeo 3 Max in 6MOA.

I’d say it’s a little early to say they’re not making a 6 MOA version.

[G19Fan]

SIG also made the Romeo 1PRO, Romeo 3XL and Romeo 3 Max in 6MOA.

I’d say it’s a little early to say they’re not making a 6 MOA version.

I think he meant enclosed 6 moa

[HCM]

I think he meant enclosed 6 moa

The Romeo X models (the subject here) is not enclosed and commercially the enclosed M17 optic is still in the pre-release stage.

They have a history of offering other models in 6 MOA so it’s a bit early (and disingenuous) to be declaring they are “not interested” in making 6 MOA optics.

They are interested in making what ever institutions and individuals will buy.

I’m a fan of larger dots but Betamax was better than VHS and we know how that turned out.

[Tokarev]

Some of this may already be posted. Apologies if it is.

Here is some rear sight / deck height measurements for the Holosun EPS Carry and the SIG Romeo-X Compact.

Measuring from the sight base plate to the top of the rear sight.

Holosun .293"
X Compact .322"

And then the Romeo-X Pro which fits the Pro or Leupold footprint. Measured from sight base to top of rear.

X Pro .342"



Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[GJM]

I have spent some time shooting the new Sig Romeo X with the DP Pro cut. It is a very interesting optic. Has basically the Holosun arrangement of 2 moa dot, circle and circle dot. The X does some things well. It has a very bright dot intensity (brighter than a Holosun 2 dot) which allows you to bloom it if you desire a larger dot. The deck height is low and it has an excellent built in rear sight. The buttons are recessed preventing inadvertent activation. The glass is clear. The battery cap design is very robust (no Holosun little screws). Fits a DP Pro footprint and there is a compact model that goes on the RmSc footprint. I like it enough I just bought another Pro footprint and a compact one.

113113

113114

[John Hearne]

If you qualify for the NRA instructor pricing, the 2024 price list makes this thing a steal.
(Says the guy who just got an IOP compact and could have saved $100)

[G19Fan]

I have spent some time shooting the new Sig Romeo X with the DP Pro cut. It is a very interesting optic. Has basically the Holosun arrangement of 2 moa dot, circle and circle dot. The X does some things well. It has a very bright dot intensity (brighter than a Holosun 2 dot) which allows you to bloom it if you desire a larger dot. The deck height is low and it has an excellent built in rear sight. The buttons are recessed preventing inadvertent activation. The glass is clear. The battery cap design is very robust (no Holosun little screws). Fits a DP Pro footprint and there is a compact model that goes on the RmSc footprint. I like it enough I just bought another Pro footprint and a compact one.

113113

113114

Are the x compact pro enclosed? Didn't know if that is what the Pro designation meant

[GJM]

Are the x compact pro enclosed? Didn't know if that is what the Pro designation meant

No. They look like the enclosed Romeo 17 military optic, but they are an open emitter.

[WobblyPossum]

If you qualify for the NRA instructor pricing, the 2024 price list makes this thing a steal.
(Says the guy who just got an IOP compact and could have saved $100)

Holy smokes. You weren’t kidding. These prices are so good you’ve got me looking for the shortest NRA instructor course I can find. They’re substantially better than the IOP prices.

[Biggy]

Maybe a Sig Rep will give us his best guess as to when a enclosed emitter Romeo X's with a RMS-C (compact model) and a DPP footprint will be released at SHOT 24 in a few weeks. These look real nice but I am only really interested in their future closed emitter Romeo X models.

[Sensei]

Cowan’s 2000-round review of the Romeo X is up. The optic functioned fine up to the last drop test which shattered the front lens. The optic maintained zero despite the lens cracks and was still serviceable in an emergency. Overall, favorable review and he notes that this is a carry, not duty, optic and drop tests may not be realistic in for such optics.

[GJM]

After using the Compact and Pro model a while, the very bright dot intensity and guarded controls are very attractive.

[FreedomFries]

I have a Pro I purchased in December. When I mounted it, one of the mounting screws shaved off a metal ring from the optic. On further inspection, I noted imperfection on the underside of the screw head with a burr projecting out of the side. I called Sig and customer service promised me a free replacement set of screws. After almost 4 weeks, I called them again because I had not received the screws. I was told they were out of stock and they would email me that day with more information. Still haven't heard anything. Not too impressed with the customer service so far. I looked on their website today. Apparently, they are asking $24.99 for a set of mounting screws. You would think that $24.99 mounting screws would have better quality control.

[BillSWPA]

I have a Pro I purchased in December. When I mounted it, one of the mounting screws shaved off a metal ring from the optic. On further inspection, I noted imperfection on the underside of the screw head with a burr projecting out of the side. I called Sig and customer service promised me a free replacement set of screws. After almost 4 weeks, I called them again because I had not received the screws. I was told they were out of stock and they would email me that day with more information. Still haven't heard anything. Not too impressed with the customer service so far. I looked on their website today. Apparently, they are asking $24.99 for a set of mounting screws. You would think that $24.99 mounting screws would have better quality control.

If you know the size you can get a pack of 100 for that price from McMaster Carr.

[FreedomFries]

If you know the size you can get a pack of 100 for that price from McMaster Carr.

M4x0.7-9.75mm

I looked on McMaster Carr but unfortunately the metric flat head screws with torx drive had big T-20 drive heads. I found some other screws but they had a 50 degree angle. I think the best I can do is find some similar screws with small T-10 drive heads and 90 degree countersink angle, then grind them down to 9.75mm effective length. I think various screws sold to fit small Holosun optics onto Springfield Echelon and Hellcat slides with filler plates might work with shortening.

[BillSWPA]

M4x0.7-9.75mm

I looked on McMaster Carr but unfortunately the metric flat head screws with torx drive had big T-20 drive heads. I found some other screws but they had a 50 degree angle. I think the best I can do is find some similar screws with small T-10 drive heads and 90 degree countersink angle, then grind them down to 9.75mm effective length. I think various screws sold to fit small Holosun optics onto Springfield Echelon and Hellcat slides with filler plates might work with shortening.

I have never dealt with this place, but perhaps they have something close?

https://www.fastenersuperstore.com/products/metric-machine-screws?pid=5988

Hopefully that link shows a bunch of M4x.07 screws in various lengths.

[FreedomFries]

I have never dealt with this place, but perhaps they have something close?

https://www.fastenersuperstore.com/products/metric-machine-screws?pid=5988

Hopefully that link shows a bunch of M4x.07 screws in various lengths.

They have the same problem as the McMaster Carr screws. Large screw head with a T-20 drive. For the M4x0.7 10mm screws, the carton size is 10,000 screws. I think taking M4x0.7 screws from various aftermarket screw solutions for Holosun K/EPS optics and modifying the length will be the way to go.

https://freedomgorilla.com/collections/holosun-replacement-screws/products/springfield-echelon-eps-eps-carry-screw-set-set-of-4?variant=44284406038768

This set will likely provide 2 sets of screws since they will need to be trimmed to 9.75mm length.

I also have some extra screws from the DPP Titanium 43X/48 MOS adapter plate set, and these look like they will work too with some shortening.

[FreedomFries]

Update. Replacement screws sent by Sig! Excited to put this back on my P07 soon.

I thought of another potential use for a compact version (RMSc footprint?) of the RomeoX. Does anyone know if it has sufficient elevation adjustment to zero at 15 or 25 yards on an 856 TORO? Some reports say that zeroing the 407K/507K on that revolver is troublesome.

[HeavyDuty]

Noah - you made the following comment in the SIG 1911X thread, and it’s just now sinking in:


The Sig optics are the same as a 507K (if I said C earlier, I meant K) which has shorter front posts and no rear posts. An RMSC will fit a Sig/507K footprint but not the other way around.

Many (but not all- non 30 Super Carry Shield Plus and Glock Slimline MOS have all 4 posts) "RMSC" cuts are actually 507K cuts.

Point being, the RMR is too wide and Sig is always going to support their optics, but if this is the same RMSC cut that already exists on the P365, it will allow you to direct mount a Holosun EPS, EPS Carry, SCS Carry, SCS 320, and a few Sig optics.

ETA: looks like Sig is calling it the "Compact (RMSC)" footprint. Which further leads me to think it’s the same 507K type cut on the 365.

Are you saying there is a good chance the Romeo-X Compact would mount onto an EPS plate? I have two LTT 92 RDOs with EPS and a move away from Holosun is personally appealing. The only reason I picked EPS for these was the low deck height allowing for normalish sized irons, and from what I read the Romeo-X Compact is even lower than the EPS.

[Noah]

Noah - you made the following comment in the SIG 1911X thread, and it’s just now sinking in:



Are you saying there is a good chance the Romeo-X Compact would mount onto an EPS plate? I have two LTT 92 RDOs with EPS and a move away from Holosun is personally appealing. The only reason I picked EPS for these was the low deck height allowing for normalish sized irons, and from what I read the Romeo-X Compact is even lower than the EPS.

Possibly- the EPS/EPSC have some odd little nubs added and some EPS/EPSC plates will not fit any other optics. If you can post a pic of the plate I will let you know.

[HCM]

Noah - you made the following comment in the SIG 1911X thread, and it’s just now sinking in:



Are you saying there is a good chance the Romeo-X Compact would mount onto an EPS plate? I have two LTT 92 RDOs with EPS and a move away from Holosun is personally appealing. The only reason I picked EPS for these was the low deck height allowing for normalish sized irons, and from what I read the Romeo-X Compact is even lower than the EPS.

The Romeo X compact, like the earlier Romeo and Romeo Zero Elite use the same RMSC footprint as the Holosun K models and the EPS Carry.

I was going to post in your other thread about red dot 1911’s that there is no way I would cut a slide for the Ticon RMRCC footprint. It’s a proprietary footprint for a dead end optic that requires removal of the optic to change the battery.

If I were cutting a slide for a 1911, Browning high-power, or CZ 75, it would definitely be for the RMSC / Holosun K/ Romeo footprint.

[HeavyDuty]

Possibly- the EPS/EPSC have some odd little nubs added and some EPS/EPSC plates will not fit any other optics. If you can post a pic of the plate I will let you know.

I would need to pull an optic from one of my 92 RDOs. I’ll take a pic next time I do that.

[Noah]

I would need to pull an optic from one of my 92 RDOs. I’ll take a pic next time I do that.

BOLO for 2 small recoil posts at the front of the plate, in between the standard 507K posts at the outside of the footprint.

If LTT advertises their EPS/407K plate as one item, that's a clue, and if they list the EPS plate separate from a K plate, that's also a clue.

[HeavyDuty]

BOLO for 2 small recoil posts at the front of the plate, in between the standard 507K posts at the outside of the footprint.

If LTT advertises their EPS/407K plate as one item, that's a clue, and if they list the EPS plate separate from a K plate, that's also a clue.

LTT lists:


Our Holosun EPS Plate fits:

Holosun EPS
Holosun EPS Carry
Holosun 407k
Holosun 507k

So, the clue is that a Romeo-X Compact just might work?

[Noah]

LTT lists:



So, the clue is that a Romeo-X Compact just might work?

Yes!

[HeavyDuty]

Noah:

116501 116503

[Noah]

Noah:

116501 116503

Should fit! Looks like the plate is a 507K cut (2 wide spaced front posts) and optic is a full RMSC cut (4 corner posts). The EPS is 4 posts across the front.

[HeavyDuty]

The Romeo-X Compact is here, and it’s too tight to drop into the LTT plate recess - it’s very close, though. I would normally modify the plate, but I don’t know how I would do that with the concave surfaces. I think I’ll try my full size RDO 92 to see if it’s the same, and reach out to LangdonTactical if that doesn’t work.

Just kidding.

116538

It even used the LTT supplied fasteners, I just needed better light and different cuss words. I’ll let the crew over there know the existing EPS plate has another verified fit. I’ll be listing the 6MOA red EPS in the classifieds, and will likely replace the second shortly.

[John Hearne]

FWIW, I finally got my Romeo X mounted on my Macro. For the record, I have a P320 with a Romeo1 Pro and I've taken a MSP red dot class previously but never carried a dot or considered myself "good to go" with them.

I think the low deck height is a game changer. Making sure the dot comes up was dramatically easier. Even with strong and weak hand work, it just worked better. I hope to zero it and live fire it later this week.

[GJM]

It definitely has low deck height, but so do a number of the K Holosun optics. The X has a number of advantages over the Holosun options -- a better battery cap, shielded buttons to avoid inadvertent touches, a better rear sight, and brighter dot intensity.

[Noah]

FWIW, I finally got my Romeo X mounted on my Macro. For the record, I have a P320 with a Romeo1 Pro and I've taken a MSP red dot class previously but never carried a dot or considered myself "good to go" with them.

I think the low deck height is a game changer. Making sure the dot comes up was dramatically easier. Even with strong and weak hand work, it just worked better. I hope to zero it and live fire it later this week.

I had the same experience with an SCS on a G19 MOS. The deck on that is about flush with the slide.

[GJM]

I had the same experience with an SCS on a G19 MOS. The deck on that is about flush with the slide.

I wonder if a low deck height is more helpful for someone transitioning from iron sights to a dot, and is used to the height over the slide of iron sights? I find the size of the display a bigger factor in getting the dot support hand and in weird positions, with a larger display with minimal frame to be more forgiving.

[Noah]

I wonder if a low deck height is more helpful for someone transitioning from iron sights to a dot, and is used to the height over the slide of iron sights? I find the size of the display a bigger factor in getting the dot support hand and in weird positions, with a larger display with minimal frame to be more forgiving.

A large display increases the angular "cone" in which you can present the gun and still have dot in the window. I think the lower the display is to your hands, the "angular cone" in which you "get the dot" is much closer to the fulcrum point of your hands, and, the lower the optic is to the slide, the more simply lining up the slide in your peripheral vision will create success in "getting the dot". I'm not even talking about new dot shooters fishing for the dot, but rather, peripheral clues in a subconsciously visually guided index for experienced shooters, like came up with Craig in a different dot thread.

In a perfect world, in every single presentation, whether one handed, two handed, odd position, rainy, cold, weird dream last night, heavy turkey dinner, etc, our index would be so perfect that even with a tiny window mounted high over the gun, the dot would be directly on our point of aim, but that's not the case in the real world and small things add up.

[John Hearne]

I wonder if a low deck height is more helpful for someone transitioning from iron sights to a dot, and is used to the height over the slide of iron sights? I find the size of the display a bigger factor in getting the dot support hand and in weird positions, with a larger display with minimal frame to be more forgiving.

I think this is absolutely the case. I have spent 30 years and tens of thousands of rounds driving the gun along the same line (hopefully). If you're starting from a blank slate then it doesn't matter. If you can piggyback onto an existing, well-developed motor program, you should dramatically shortcut the learning process.

[RAM Engineer]

So, for Romeo-X Pro onto an MOS Glock 19, I just use the factory Delta Point Pro plate? Anything better?

[GJM]

So, for Romeo-X Pro onto an MOS Glock 19, I just use the factory Delta Point Pro plate? Anything better?

Yes, EPS 6 moa full size on a DPP plate. :p

Kidding aside -- sealed, and a bigger window.

[GJM]

I think this is absolutely the case. I have spent 30 years and tens of thousands of rounds driving the gun along the same line (hopefully). If you're starting from a blank slate then it doesn't matter. If you can piggyback onto an existing, well-developed motor program, you should dramatically shortcut the learning process.

Out of curiosity, are you trying to see the dot as early as possible or just have it reliably be visible in your aiming area when your arms reach extension?

[HeavyDuty]

Now that I have the Romeo-X Compact on my 92C, I need to shoot the snot out of it. This is going to be challenging to fit into my schedule.

[HeavyDuty]

I just realized a Romeo-X Pro may be a good alternative for my P320 XFIVE Legion. Has anyone seen info on how low they ride on a P320? Can you use the original front iron?

[John Hearne]

Out of curiosity, are you trying to see the dot as early as possible or just have it reliably be visible in your aiming area when your arms reach extension?

I've been working on as soon as possible. My thought is I want something that will work in suboptimal conditions. Everything seems to work standing flat footed on the range, I'm curious about what works with your feet reversed and your torso twisted or when you're not on your feet.

[GJM]

I've been working on as soon as possible. My thought is I want something that will work in suboptimal conditions. Everything seems to work standing flat footed on the range, I'm curious about what works with your feet reversed and your torso twisted or when you're not on your feet.

I think there a few ways to skin this cat -- with one method being more comfortable to transition by and the other offering more performance by using index/target focus. If you want, we can split it into a new thread, since it isn't just Romeo X focused.

[RJ]

I'm doing a numeric comparison of optic window size(s) across a few common MRDS, out of morbid curiosity and I'm bored.

I had a comment over on the gen pop Sig forum that the window sizes of the Romeo X Pro and Romeo X Compact were identical? Is that correct? I asked a question on the Sig Web site a few days ago, but haven't gotten a response yet. This dimension isn't in the Romeo X MRDS User Manual.

It seems odd to me that a "full size" and "compact" optic would have the same window size...but maybe they do?

[HCM]

I'm doing a numeric comparison of optic window size(s) across a few common MRDS, out of morbid curiosity and I'm bored.

I had a comment over on the gen pop Sig forum that the window sizes of the Romeo X Pro and Romeo X Compact were identical? Is that correct? I asked a question on the Sig Web site a few days ago, but haven't gotten a response yet. This dimension isn't in the Romeo X MRDS User Manual.

It seems odd to me that a "full size" and "compact" optic would have the same window size...but maybe they do?

According to several articles based on SIG’s press releases both have the same sized window:



This allows for a sight picture with less distortion or "fisheye" while having zero magnification. The Romeo X Pro, left, and Compact, both have a 1x24mm window.


https://www.guns.com/news/2023/07/18/sig-sauer-debuts-new-romeo-x-series-mrds-in-two-sizes#:~:text=This%20allows%20for%20a%20sight,both %20have%20a%201x24mm%20window.

117078

Which is the same size as the window of the SIG M17 optic. Makes sense given the Romeo X optics are simply open emitter versions of the M-17 optic.

Having had the opportunity to play around with the M17 optic on an M18 pistol, I think Noah is onto something with his argument. That window size doesn’t tell the whole story and how low the window sets to the fulcrum has some effect in actual use.

[RJ]

Thanks HCM very interesting stuff. Going to need to get another optic soon, looks like an R X Compact will be it.

[HeavyDuty]

So, the difference between the Compact and Pro is all footprint?

[GJM]

So, the difference between the Compact and Pro is all footprint?

Yes, I have both.

[HCM]

So, the difference between the Compact and Pro is all footprint?

117079

[GJM]

X Pro on left, and X Compact on right. Only difference is my X Pro battery cap is knurled and X Compact is not.

117080

[HeavyDuty]

I feel better about putting a Compact on my 92. Lol

[Tokarev]

Did I miss this info? Has anyone compared the SIG to the EPS in terms of window and then general brightness settings?

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

[GJM]

Did I miss this info? Has anyone compared the SIG to the EPS in terms of window and then general brightness settings?

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

The EPS (full size) has a larger display. The X is more like an EPS Carry size display. The EPS is plenty bright but the X is brighter. Both have a similar deck height. The X's integrated rear sight is superior.

[HeavyDuty]

There are some decent savings out there right now on both the Pro and Compact models. About $80 off on each.

[Sensei]

There are some decent savings out there right now on both the Pro and Compact models. About $80 off on each.

https://www.eurooptic.com/search.aspx?keyword=Romeo%20x

[HeavyDuty]

https://www.eurooptic.com/search.aspx?keyword=Romeo%20x

I saw the 3 MOA SORX1231 listed there, but can’t find much on it anywhere. It may be a 3 MOA dot only version.

[Sensei]

I saw the 3 MOA SORX1231 listed there, but can’t find much on it anywhere. It may be a 3 MOA dot only version.

That is interesting, isn’t it. Sig’s website has no mention of a 3 MOA dot version.

Interested parties should look at other venders such as Midway that have similar deals but show units in-stock. I really like EuroOptic, but they have a habit of listing products at insanely low prices that are on indefinite backorder. Sometimes, they do this with pre-release items. They still charge your credit card, but the wait could be months. Places like Midway and Primary Arms will give you back in stock notifications, but will not allow you to pay for an item that is not ready to ship. Of course, you are effectively locking in a sale price with EuroOptic which has its advantages if you’re not in a hurry. For example, I ordered a Romeo 2 in the circle dot configuration from EuroOptic during a Christmas Season sale. The price was about $100 less than what you can find for the 3 MOA version and about 40% off retail with free shipping. That was almost 6 months ago. Had it been any vendor other than EuroOptic, I’d be looking for a refund.

Finally, keep in mind the Memorial and Independence Day sales are just around the corner. I’m saving my pesos for those and hoping that Trijicon floods the market with RCRs over the next month.

[HeavyDuty]

I generally buy from one of a small handful of retailers that have both decent prices and no sales tax. And I know what you mean about EuroOptic, I’m going through that right now with them.

[Sensei]

I generally buy from one of a small handful of retailers that have both decent prices and no sales tax. And I know what you mean about EuroOptic, I’m going through that right now with them.

Do you mind hitting me up with a PM containing the retailers that you like?

I think that a bunch of people learned a painful lesson from Scott at Liberty Optic. The guy had great prices too and would take payment on items not in stock. Until...one day...he vanished with tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars in customer money.

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?58549-Liberty-Optics-is-apparently-out-of-business

Thus, I'm keeping my "accounts receivable" with EuroOptic under $1K.

I also use an AMEX card since they are very forgiving on refunds for charges that were never received.

[HeavyDuty]

I picked up a Romeo-X Pro and dropped it on my black M18:

118207

[stinx]

My M-17 with Romeo X

[HeavyDuty]

One of the differences between the Pro and Compact is the battery cover - its low profile on the Compact with only a shallow slot, and coin edged on the Pro. I found the Compact accepts the Pro cover for tool free battery changes with a very small amount of additional bulk.

I called SIG in Oregon and was able to get coin edged ones for all my Compacts (I’m up to four) and a spare. They were something like $7.50 each.

[Biggy]

I believe Sig said they had enclosed Romeo X models on the drawing board with what I believe will be an attachment method similar to the Holosun EPS series RDS’s. I wonder if we will see them before SHOT 25 ?

[GJM]

I believe Sig said they had enclosed Romeo X models on the drawing board with what I believe will be an attachment method similar to the Holosun EPS series RDS’s. I wonder if we will see them before SHOT 25 ?

An enclosed X would be awesome, as I don't enjoy how lint accumulates in the display of the X. Since the X is RMSc/EPS footprint, they are most of the way there already.

[HeavyDuty]

An enclosed X would be awesome, as I don't enjoy how lint accumulates in the display of the X. Since the X is RMSc/EPS footprint, they are most of the way there already.

I’ve found a quick weekly blast of air from a rocket is all it takes to keep mine cleanish. And yes, my rocket is red…

https://www.amazon.com/Giottos-AA1903-Rocket-Blaster-Large-Red/dp/B0013J0502

[DamonL]

I would buy an enclosed X over a Holosun just because of the battery placement. It is an upgrade over the Holosun.

[crosseyedshooter]

I would buy an enclosed X over a Holosun just because of the battery placement. It is an upgrade over the Holosun.

My particular wishlist would be an enclosed X-Compact, 6MOA red dot and shave down the back-up irons. I think the transition period for the old P365 optic cut has passed. I'd sell all my Holosun sights for that. (I only have their K size sights).

[HeavyDuty]

I’ve already replaced my Holosuns with RX, with the exception of a SCS on a G19.

[RJ]

Did I miss this info? Has anyone compared the SIG to the EPS in terms of window...


I missed this question earlier, but I took a gander at a few of the common optic window sizes here:

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?60256-Different-Sizes-of-MRDS-Windows

Here's the graphic, if you don't want to dive into that thread:

119253

[WobblyPossum]

I picked up that Macro with the Romeo X yesterday. I’m liking the optic so far. It would be nice if it was an enclosed emitter, especially with how far back the housing extends, but it’s not a deal breaker for a gun that will be carried concealed. The dot seems to get noticeably brighter than the Holosuns do. I would greatly prefer a larger dot but I’ve been dealing with 2-3 MOA dots for a long time between rifle optics and pistol optics so I’m used to it.

[HeavyDuty]

I picked up that Macro with the Romeo X yesterday. I’m liking the optic so far. It would be nice if it was an enclosed emitter, especially with how far back the housing extends, but it’s not a deal breaker for a gun that will be carried concealed. The dot seems to get noticeably brighter than the Holosuns do. I would greatly prefer a larger dot but I’ve been dealing with 2-3 MOA dots for a long time between rifle optics and pistol optics so I’m used to it.

What are your thoughts about the circle dot? I’m really liking it.

[WobblyPossum]

What are your thoughts about the circle dot? I’m really liking it.

I find circle dots too busy for me on pistol optics with the circles being so small. I’m a fan for rifle optics like the Romeo 4T because there’s more space between the dot and the edges of the circle. I’ve had a couple of people recommend the circle only reticle and I’ll probably give that a try just to see if it works for me.

ETA: the X is an improvement over the Zero and Zero elite in every way: battery placement, two buttons in a useable location, housing material that won’t deform and kill the optic if you accidentally over torque the mounting screws a little, common mounting screw type (Torx T10 for the X vs 2mm hex in the Zero), actual audible and tactile clicks for adjustment, a slightly better adjustment tool for the windage/elevation (the zero had the world’s smallest hex key that I’ve never seen for any other application so if you lose the included key, you’re screwed). I could go on and on.

[HeavyDuty]

My only other pistol optic with circle dot is a SCS-MOS, and I haven’t worked much with it. I do like circle dot in my carbine optics, though.

I’m finding that if I maintain target focus discipline with the RX circle dot I really don’t notice the dot part of the reticle unless I consciously change my focus. It seems to work for me, I’d like to see how I feel about it in time.

[HCM]

What are your thoughts about the circle dot? I’m really liking it.

I find the circle dot on most SIG and Holosun pistol optics too busy as well.

Plus it seems to cut battery life in half.

The only circle dot that I’ve liked on a pistol optic is the 2 MOA dot in the 8 MOA circle in the Holosun 507 Comp, and that’s only because with my vision it simply appears to be an eight MOA dot.

[Sensei]

I’ve found a quick weekly blast of air from a rocket is all it takes to keep mine cleanish. And yes, my rocket is red…

119275

Sweet Baby Jesus. I don’t want to know where the tip of that thing has been…

[Sensei]

My only other pistol optic with circle dot is a SCS-MOS, and I haven’t worked much with it. I do like circle dot in my carbine optics, though.

I’m finding that if I maintain target focus discipline with the RX circle dot I really don’t notice the dot part of the reticle unless I consciously change my focus. It seems to work for me, I’d like to see how I feel about it in time.


I find the circle dot on most SIG and Holosun pistol optics too busy as well.

Plus it seems to cut battery life in half.

The only circle dot that I’ve liked on a pistol optic is the 2 MOA dot in the 8 MOA circle in the Holosun 507 Comp, and that’s only because with my vision it simply appears to be an eight MOA dot.

I’ve got the circle dot option on my RomeoX Pro and Romeo2. I’m faster with it when shooting silhouette targets and single plates larger than 10” diameter when under 10 meters. Make me clear a 6” plate rack or any target beyond about 15 yards and I’m a single dot guy all the way. Thus, my Romeo2 on a P226 X-Five Legion for home defense is circle dot. All of my carry guns are just dot.

[HeavyDuty]

119275

Sweet Baby Jesus. I don’t want to know where the tip of that thing has been…

Once again, one of my finely crafted pervert traps has found a victim.

[HeavyDuty]

I’ve got the circle dot option on my RomeoX Pro and Romeo2. I’m faster with it when shooting silhouette targets and single plates larger than 10” diameter when under 10 meters. Make me clear a 6” plate rack or any target beyond about 15 yards and I’m a single dot guy all the way. Thus, my Romeo2 on a P226 X-Five Legion for home defense is circle dot. All of my carry guns are just dot.

I only have one RDO equipped pistol that is strictly target, a P320 X5 with a R1P - for me that’s an appropriate use for the smallish dot. For defense I like how the RX circle dot blurs into a very usable fat donut, and I suppose if I decide to shoot one of those pistols in a competition I would just flip it over to dot only.

[G19Fan]

I’ve got the circle dot option on my RomeoX Pro and Romeo2. I’m faster with it when shooting silhouette targets and single plates larger than 10” diameter when under 10 meters. Make me clear a 6” plate rack or any target beyond about 15 yards and I’m a single dot guy all the way. Thus, my Romeo2 on a P226 X-Five Legion for home defense is circle dot. All of my carry guns are just dot.

I carry circle only and prefer circle only out to about 25 yards on a headbox and 50 yards on a full sized uspsa.

Still more accurate dot only if going slow

[45dotACP]

I carry circle only and prefer circle only out to about 25 yards on a headbox and 50 yards on a full sized uspsa.

Still more accurate dot only if going slowI like the 32moa circle that Holosun does. Still not 100٪ sold on it so most of my shooting is just a solid dot.

Having astigmatism the 32moa/3moa circle dot is horrible when I have my glasses on, and even worse when they're off.

Recently, on a lark I bought a cheap Cyelee red dot to be a placeholder on a CZ that I robbed of its 407c and it uses a 64moa circle with a 3 moa dot and it's quite usable, even when my astigmatism isn't corrected.

Time will tell as far as the durability of the Cyelee dot, but some people have had good luck with them durability wise.

I plan on buying another for one of the less serious range guns and playing around with the 64 moa/3moa combo. It's the only circle+dot that doesn't look like a blur to me.

Sent from my SM-A326U using Tapatalk

[HeavyDuty]

Compact number five ordered. I hope these don’t end up having a fatal flaw down the road…

[DMCutter]

I've long been considering having Impact Machine direct mill one of my USPC 40s for a dot and I think the SCS Carry and Romeo X compact would have low enough deck heights so that I could keep my Trijicon HDs. I think I would have a higher level of confidence with the X on a 40 although that may be unfounded.

[KentuckyWindage]

Compact number five ordered. I hope these don’t end up having a fatal flaw down the road…

Same, just picked up compact number 3. I have been impressed with the M17 and the romeo x compacts so far.

[DamonL]

Its been almost a year. When are they going to release an enclosed emitter version?

[HeavyDuty]

Its been almost a year. When are they going to release an enclosed emitter version?

https://www.sigsauer.com/romeo-m17.html

[DamonL]

That fits guns other than the M17.:)

[HeavyDuty]

Details. Lol

Seriously, I wonder if a shop can retrofit the Big Hole to other P320 platform pistols?

[DamonL]

I would just buy the whole package ready to go.

https://www.sigsauer.com/m17x.html

https://www.sigsauer.com/m18x.html

[Sensei]

A Romeo M17 with ACRO-compatible footprint at a street price near the ACRO and RCR would be more popular than free sex.

That means we’ll never see it.

[RAM Engineer]

I would just buy the whole package ready to go.

https://www.sigsauer.com/m17x.html

https://www.sigsauer.com/m18x.html

No manual safety. Sig's history of providing a million SKUs *except* the combination I'm looking for continues unabated...

[DamonL]

Or you can spend even more money to get what you want. Buy the M17x and an M17 and then swap slides. Or if you qualify and they are available buy an M17 POW and a Romeo M17.

[HeavyDuty]

I still wonder if it’s possible to add the big hole to a civvie M17 or M18 slide. I have a LE SKU M18B that doesn’t have it, I’m not saying I’d do it but I’m curious.

[DamonL]

The hole patterns are different. Not just the big hole at the rear. This is from the Sig website.

https://www.sigsauer.com/media/wysiwyg/ROMEO-M17-FOOTPRINT.jpg

[Beat Trash]

The hole patterns are different. Not just the big hole at the rear. This is from the Sig website.

https://www.sigsauer.com/media/wysiwyg/ROMEO-M17-FOOTPRINT.jpg

Why oh why would they do such a thing...?

[HeavyDuty]

Why oh why would they do such a thing...?

Because they are SIG?

[HeavyDuty]

The hole patterns are different. Not just the big hole at the rear. This is from the Sig website.

https://www.sigsauer.com/media/wysiwyg/ROMEO-M17-FOOTPRINT.jpg

From that it looks like you can add the ROMEO-M17 holes without interference if you don’t mind the look of baby Swiss cheese.

[DamonL]

I am wondering if the government owns the technical data package for the M17 and Sig has to change things to sell a close to M17 gun?

[Sensei]

The Romeo M17 is a purpose-driven optic designed around the military’s M17 handgun.The gun is essentially factory milled for a proprietary footprint which is possible when one manufacturer controlled both designs. This allows a robust mounting system (likely) without the need for a plate, and with a low deck height that allows the use of standard height sights.

There are several reasons why we’re unlikely to see many civilian Romeo M17 a non-Sig pistols - at least retaining all of the advantages of the military version. First, most other pistols cannot be milled for the Romeo M17, and I bet that a strong majority people with guns that could be milled are going to be reluctant to go with such a niche footprint. Second, Sig seems unwilling to put forth a version that uses another manufacturer’s mounting system like Steiner did with the MPS using the ACRO footprint. Part of the issue is getting over the idea that such an optic would need a plate to fit Sig’s civilian pistols. Sig probably thinks that such a move would certainly impact the low deck height advantage and likely weaken the attachment (a disadvantage with any plate).

All this has already played out to some extent with the Romeo2. Part of the reason why this optic is not a completely enclosed design has to do with compatibility with their DPP mounting scheme. The Romeo2 would probably be a much more popular optic if 1) the battery was moved to the side like the Romeo-X/M17, and 2) it was completely enclosed design using the ACRO footprint. Yes, it would require a plate for Sig’s pistols and still have a deck height too tall for standard sights. However, it would sit lower than the current offering and obviate the shroud screws/bar that are obvious weak points in the design.

[DamonL]

Details. Lol

Seriously, I wonder if a shop can retrofit the Big Hole to other P320 platform pistols?

I found this one on line.

https://dualhammer.com/products/sig-p320-m17-m18-romeo-m17-optic-cut

[Sensei]

This just arrived.
120474

I plan to exchange the back-up irons on a standard legion slide and then mount an RXP Enclosed once available.

[RAM Engineer]

This just arrived.
I plan to exchange the back-up irons on a standard legion slide and then mount an RXP Enclosed once available.

The 226 Optic slides come stock for Deltapoint Pro mounting?

[GJM]

The 226 Optic slides come stock for Deltapoint Pro mounting?

Yes, I have an (open) X on a 226 or 229 slide — no plate and use standard height sights with it.

[GJM]

120502

120503

[crosseyedshooter]

120503

Ugh, that's a similar situation to my 407k and P365. Seeing two rear sights like that with slightly different windage would frustrate me and my OCD.

[HeavyDuty]

Ugh, that's a similar situation to my 407k and P365. Seeing two rear sights like that with slightly different windage would frustrate me and my OCD.

The new enclosed won’t be like that.

[crosseyedshooter]

The new enclosed won’t be like that.

Ah, yes. The answer to all our problems! :D

I’m really looking forward to the Romeo X Enclosed but I’m sure we’ll find something to complain about when it’s in more hands. Just human nature, I guess.

[HeavyDuty]

Speaking of which, has anyone seen release date info on the enclosed models? I was a little surprised to see the Compact is coming in 2 MOA, 6 MOA and Circle Dot versions - I don’t think I noticed that before.

[crosseyedshooter]

Speaking of which, has anyone seen release date info on the enclosed models? I was a little surprised to see the Compact is coming in 2 MOA, 6 MOA and Circle Dot versions - I don’t think I noticed that before.

I think it’s 3, 6 and 2 w/32 MOA circle. So, assuming the circle dot is a selectable reticle, that’d also serve as the 2 MOA dot option.

120512

[Sensei]

Speaking of which, has anyone seen release date info on the enclosed models? I was a little surprised to see the Compact is coming in 2 MOA, 6 MOA and Circle Dot versions - I don’t think I noticed that before.

A previous post mentioned a mid-July release according to Brownells.

[Biggy]

Now that all of my Holosun RDS's are gone, I am really looking forward to getting some of these new Romeo X enclosed emitter sights. 3 MOA dots for me.

[D-der]

Natchez is showing X compact 6 moa and enclosed 3 moa in stock. If the 6 moa dot is as perfectly sharp and round as Holosun's, I'm in.

[HeavyDuty]

Natchez is showing X compact 6 moa and enclosed 3 moa in stock. If the 6 moa dot is as perfectly sharp and round as Holosun's, I'm in.

Gone already. I went ahead and preordered an enclosed circle dot Compact for the hypothetical Staccato C that may be coming.

[Ndbbm]

Anyone have experience with these on a Glock mos plate? Would something like ameriglo 429 sights/10-8 performance optic height sights clear ok?

Jason

[GJM]

Anyone have experience with these on a Glock mos plate? Would something like ameriglo 429 sights/10-8 performance optic height sights clear ok?

Jason

Those sights are way taller than necessary, with a .315 front.

A .180-.220 front should work fine and obscure less of the window.

[DamonL]

So the street price seems more reasonable.

https://www.provenoutfitters.com/romeo-x

[HeavyDuty]

So the street price seems more reasonable.

https://www.provenoutfitters.com/romeo-x

Made me jump. Those are the older open emitter versions.

[DamonL]

My bad. :(

[HeavyDuty]

First of my 6 MOA Romeo-X Compact Encloseds arrived today:

https://pistol-forum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=121086&d=1721089983.jpg

[Mfbpt]

First of my 6 MOA Romeo-X Compact Encloseds arrived today:

https://pistol-forum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=121086&d=1721089983.jpg

I bought the exact one you did. Had it shipped express and installed ready to take it out for the weekend.
I had to send mine back today. Loved the crisp dot and clarity but it started to flicker bad then completely shut itself off all within 60 rounds. I changed out the battery and made sure the cap was tight but still got the same results. I hope they get the replacement back to me soon and with no issues.

[WobblyPossum]

First of my 6 MOA Romeo-X Compact Encloseds arrived today:

https://pistol-forum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=121086&d=1721089983.jpg

That’s the optic I’ve been dreaming of ever since I got heavily invested in P365s.

[HeavyDuty]

I bought the exact one you did. Had it shipped express and installed ready to take it out for the weekend.
I had to send mine back today. Loved the crisp dot and clarity but it started to flicker bad then completely shut itself off all within 60 rounds. I changed out the battery and made sure the cap was tight but still got the same results. I hope they get the replacement back to me soon and with no issues.

That’s not good. I’ve heard reports of overtightening the battery cap causing issues, I wonder what the issue is was yours. SIG’s CS seems to be good these days, and whenever I’ve talked to the OR optics people they’ve been great.

[Mfbpt]

That’s not good. I’ve heard reports of overtightening the battery cap causing issues, I wonder what the issue is was yours. SIG’s CS seems to be good these days, and whenever I’ve talked to the OR optics people they’ve been great.

I would think that you would have to be a real meat head to over tighten the battery cap. It can really only go so far and to go beyond snug would take some effort. They took care of me as far as getting an express shipping label to me and Sig customer service is 100% better to deal with than Holosun. I hope to hear you report back on yours with nothing but positive results. Everything about it is really nice except for the malfunctioning I was having. Now for me to wait for mine to return and hopefully it will be 100%.

[HeavyDuty]

…and a second Enclosed Compact 6 MOA that popped up on sale earlier in the week:

121210

I went ahead and cancelled my Compact circle dot preorder, I’ve always been a 6 MOA kinda guy and I want to see how I get on with these.

[RJ]

Is there a go to online supplier for Romeo X Compacts (open, 6 MOA, red) these days? I only previously purchased Holosuns, and the vendors I've used in the past (Midwest Optics, etc.) don't seem to stock the Sig optics. TIA Rich

[GJM]

Is there a go to online supplier for Romeo X Compacts (open, 6 MOA, red) these days? I only previously purchased Holosuns, and the vendors I've used in the past (Midwest Optics, etc.) don't seem to stock the Sig optics. TIA Rich

I have had excellent luck buying Sig and Holosun optics from Battlehawk Armory.

[RealSelf]

https://www.reddit.com/r/SigSauer/comments/1cuilr7/romeo_pro_x_not_fitting_the_dpp_footprint/

Link above references that the new Romeo X Pro Enclosed and likely the standard version also do NOT fit DPP cuts. Seems a bit ridiculous to sell an optic that fits DPP cut that does NOT actually fit and then insist customers need to file off recoil lugs to make it fit. I would understand an RMA being sent out for a replacement but it suggests they have no intention of actually fixing this either. I want to love SIG very much for all of the effort they put into development but how on earth can something like this even be a thing in the first place with their extensive emphasis that is put on engineering and boasting of how many engineers are on staff to handle anything that may present itself? I'd be curious to see what others experiences are with this if it is widespread or a very isolated sample size.

[HeavyDuty]

That thread is about an open Pro, not an enclosed.

As I posted in that thread, my single example of a Pro was at the time mounted on an M18 and had no issues. I have since removed it from that pistol, so I was able to put micrometer to it just now - definitely 3.8 mm.

I’m surprised this hasn’t gotten more play.

[WobblyPossum]

That thread is about an open Pro, not an enclosed.

As I posted in that thread, my single example of a Pro was at the time mounted on an M18 and had no issues. I have since removed it from that pistol, so I was able to put micrometer to it just now - definitely 3.8 mm.

I’m surprised this hasn’t gotten more play.

A post in that Reddit thread from two days ago indicates the enclosed variant has the same problem.

[HeavyDuty]

A post in that Reddit thread from two days ago indicates the enclosed variant has the same problem.

Aha, I saw it was the old one and didn’t scroll down. Usually Reddit threads have a one day half-life.

That’s a big fail on SIG’s part.

[HCM]

https://www.reddit.com/r/SigSauer/comments/1cuilr7/romeo_pro_x_not_fitting_the_dpp_footprint/

Link above references that the new Romeo X Pro Enclosed and likely the standard version also do NOT fit DPP cuts. Seems a bit ridiculous to sell an optic that fits DPP cut that does NOT actually fit and then insist customers need to file off recoil lugs to make it fit. I would understand an RMA being sent out for a replacement but it suggests they have no intention of actually fixing this either. I want to love SIG very much for all of the effort they put into development but how on earth can something like this even be a thing in the first place with their extensive emphasis that is put on engineering and boasting of how many engineers are on staff to handle anything that may present itself? I'd be curious to see what others experiences are with this if it is widespread or a very isolated sample size.


That thread is about an open Pro, not an enclosed.

As I posted in that thread, my single example of a Pro was at the time mounted on an M18 and had no issues. I have since removed it from that pistol, so I was able to put micrometer to it just now - definitely 3.8 mm.

I’m surprised this hasn’t gotten more play.


A post in that Reddit thread from two days ago indicates the enclosed variant has the same problem.


Aha, I saw it was the old one and didn’t scroll down. Usually Reddit threads have a one day half-life.

That’s a big fail on SIG’s part.

This is nothing new.

These new full size SIG optics have the same footprint as the SIG Romeo 1PRO and Romeo 2.

The DPP fits the Romeo1PRO footprint but the reverse is not true.

That’s why C&H Precision and others make Romeo1PRO specific plates for those wanting to put full size SIG optics on non SIG guns.

[HeavyDuty]

This is nothing new.

These new full size SIG optics have the same footprint as the SIG Romeo 1PRO and Romeo 2.

The DPP fits the Romeo1PRO footprint but the reverse is not true.

That’s why C&H Precision and others make Romeo1PRO specific plates for those wanting to put full size SIG optics on non SIG guns.

My error assuming that the post stating the RXP claimed to be DPP was correct - that’s what I get for not verifying something before commenting. Thank you for straightening me out.

[RealSelf]

This is nothing new.

These new full size SIG optics have the same footprint as the SIG Romeo 1PRO and Romeo 2.

The DPP fits the Romeo1PRO footprint but the reverse is not true.

That’s why C&H Precision and others make Romeo1PRO specific plates for those wanting to put full size SIG optics on non SIG guns.

That may be the case but looking at their website this afternoon I cannot help but think they are dancing around this issue and almost skirting the idea they are one in the same. How confusing is this to your average customer? This is taken directly from the Romeo-X Pro webpage at SigSauer.com........ https://www.sigsauer.com/romeo-x-pro.html

RX Footprint : PRO (DeltaPoint Pro)

This is the problem I have with it, it rings of false advertisement. The '(Deltapoint Pro)' is virtually guaranteed to be sending the message to consumers that this new awesome optic is good to go on their pistol which is compatible for the DPP pattern. In my view, they created their own modified DPP pattern which is actually a totally unique pattern since not reverse compatible. Shame on them.

I'd give them a pass if they said it was just for their pistols which are cut for DPP pattern slides. They do not and it certainly appeared to me for many months that it worked on any pattern DPP cut. Glad I did not jump as I was tempted, would be a serious blow to my confidence in SIG as it had been trending upward with recent events I've experienced. How can this be OK as marketing?

[HCM]

That may be the case but looking at their website this afternoon I cannot help but think they are dancing around this issue and almost skirting the idea they are one in the same. How confusing is this to your average customer? This is taken directly from the Romeo-X Pro webpage at SigSauer.com........ https://www.sigsauer.com/romeo-x-pro.html

RX Footprint : PRO (DeltaPoint Pro)

This is the problem I have with it, it rings of false advertisement. The '(Deltapoint Pro)' is virtually guaranteed to be sending the message to consumers that this new awesome optic is good to go on their pistol which is compatible for the DPP pattern. In my view, they created their own modified DPP pattern which is actually a totally unique pattern since not reverse compatible. Shame on them.

I'd give them a pass if they said it was just for their pistols which are cut for DPP pattern slides. They do not and it certainly appeared to me for many months that it worked on any pattern DPP cut. Glad I did not jump as I was tempted, would be a serious blow to my confidence in SIG as it had been trending upward with recent events I've experienced. How can this be OK as marketing?

Nothing in my post said SIG's claim was ok, nor was it OK 5 years ago when they made the same claim when the Romeo1 Pro was first released.

If you look up the first thread on PF on the Romeo1 Pro GJM bought one of the first ones and identified the same issue:

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?39024-Romeo-1-Pro



Earlier in the year, Sig announced the Romeo 1 Pro. This optic is similar to the Romeo 1, except the footprint is advertised as being the same as the Delta Point Pro. Also they say they improved the mechanism that holds dot zero with their “TruHold™ Lockless Zeroing System,” increased brightness of the dot, and offer 3 and 6 moa dots.

Today, my wife and I received two of them. We bolted the first one onto one of her 320 X5 Legion pistols. It went on easily, and without an adapter plate, as the Legion is direct milled from the factory for a DP Pro footprint. The Romeo has a rear sight as part of its design, and it appears to pair well with the front sight on the Legion. This is it:

Next, I tried to install the Romeo on a Gen 4 Glock 34 with a MOS plate. It wouldn’t fit, and the reason is the MOS plate has bosses that interface with the DP Pro base, and the Romeo does not have those. See picture:


Next, I tried to install the Romeo on a Glock slide that was direct milled by Primary Machine. The Primary cut does not have bosses, and so I was optimistic the Romeo would fit. Unfortunately, the Romeo was larger enough dimensionally, it would not fit on that slide.

I plan to try the Romeo on an X Compact and see how that works. My wife pointed out, by way of compatibility, the DP Pro cover fits nicely on the Romeo.

[Archer1440]

Positives concerning the new enclosed Romeo-X compact on a P365 X-Macro (non comp) slide:

-Zero-tolerance fit to the optic cut, lugged interface, uneventful installation with the included (proprietary) screws, practically no glass distortion, retina-searing upper end on dot brightness, the dot looks perfectly crisp to my non-astigmatic eyeballs, seems impossible to induce a false dot with this thing no matter what the sun/light direction may be, and it's zeroed to the irons, out of the box.

Slight negatives:

-Came with the cheapest possible Chinesium battery, proprietary screws, #6 Torx adjustment screws (needs a tool), and the brain-dead LCI slot in the X-Macro barrel hood is likely to spew ignition crap all over the front lens. Window has a heavy blue filter tint, reminiscent of an RMR. I guess that's needed to meet the service endurance of that little battery.

It's actually just fine as sight pictures go, and the irons are invisible when target-focused, but still usable. This is a vast improvement on their previous optic mounting schemes which would delete the slide rear iron, and leave daylight between the optic body and slide cut.

Off to the range now, to put 300 124-grain ball and 200 HST 124+P's through this silly thing. It's interesting to have a 30-ounce fully loaded (with optic) package that has the same capacity as my trusty P30L (no optic) which weighs 6 ounces more.

I haven't pressed the trigger on a plastic SIG in several years, so wish me luck. (IFAK is on bag...)

123413

[CleverNickname]

the brain-dead LCI slot in the X-Macro barrel hood is likely to spew ignition crap all over the front lens.
FWIW I got an XMacro TACOPS with a Romeo-X Enclosed last week and didn't notice very much junk on the lens after putting ~200 rounds through it.

[HCM]

Positives concerning the new enclosed Romeo-X compact on a P365 X-Macro (non comp) slide:

-Zero-tolerance fit to the optic cut, lugged interface, uneventful installation with the included (proprietary) screws, practically no glass distortion, retina-searing upper end on dot brightness, the dot looks perfectly crisp to my non-astigmatic eyeballs, seems impossible to induce a false dot with this thing no matter what the sun/light direction may be, and it's zeroed to the irons, out of the box.

Slight negatives:

-Came with the cheapest possible Chinesium battery, proprietary screws, #6 Torx adjustment screws (needs a tool), and the brain-dead LCI slot in the X-Macro barrel hood is likely to spew ignition crap all over the front lens. Window has a heavy blue filter tint, reminiscent of an RMR. I guess that's needed to meet the service endurance of that little battery.

It's actually just fine as sight pictures go, and the irons are invisible when target-focused, but still usable. This is a vast improvement on their previous optic mounting schemes which would delete the slide rear iron, and leave daylight between the optic body and slide cut.

Off to the range now, to put 300 124-grain ball and 200 HST 124+P's through this silly thing. It's interesting to have a 30-ounce fully loaded (with optic) package that has the same capacity as my trusty P30L (no optic) which weighs 6 ounces more.

I haven't pressed the trigger on a plastic SIG in several years, so wish me luck. (IFAK is on bag...)

123413

The 365 has none of the "mystery discharges" associated with the 320.

[Archer1440]

Follow-up on today's inaugural range session with the new (free!!) X-Macro (non compensated) with (slightly spendy!!) Romeo-X Enclosed Compact. (A firearm which shall henceforth be dubbed "The Noisy Cricket".)

300 rounds of S&B 124 ball, 100 rounds of HST 124 +P. (My wrist can't take much more of the plus-p in this light of a pistol).

Accuracy & precision: Pretty much dead nuts on despite the still-awful trigger. Not a problem, I shot equally awful HK USP's in DA for years, and I just treat this the same way.

To my slight befuddlement, the optic zero on installation, which bench-aligned precisely with the irons, needed absolutely no adjustment all the way out to 25 yards. This is very likely because I remembered to actually bring the adjustment tool. So of course I didn't need the wretched thing. (This also works with rain gear, in my experience).

Inside 15 yards, yielded consistent sub-2" groups, opening to 4-6" off my hind legs at 25. Irons were also dead on out to 20 (they kind of suck nearly as much as the trigger for precision work at longer distance, but that's not what this thing is for, after all).

Speed: Bill drills were obviously more difficult than with my competition and larger carry pistols, but still made a 3 second par from IWB (Tulster Oath) on five consecutive drills with a decent A-zone vertical group and no flyers on an IPSC turtle. In my book, considering this undersized (for my hands) pistol, that's just fine. Splits were .25-30 for the most part, so slow. But, hey, +p, and what? 22 ounces? Did I mention "noisy cricket"??

Mechanical: No issues at all, no primer wipe on the +P's, and adequate centering on the primer strike, with no signs of extraction issues or feeding issues. Mags seated reliably with my normal seating stroke, even with 17 rounds on a closed slide. If I find myself carrying this, any backup mag will be -1 anyway.

On-topic optics observations- I was wrong about the possibility of excessive blowback from the LCI slot in the hood. It stayed clean throughout.

The optic itself performed quite well, as evidenced by the dead-on out-of-the-box zero. Target focus was easy, indexing was natural, no fishing required. In my view, the 3 MOA dot on this specific example appears a bit larger than 3 MOA at lower illumination levels, and the brightness adjustment range is quite good- far too bright at the highest settings for normal use for me, but that's fine. I finished with slow-fire 25 yard work off a bag and had 3 of 5 HST rounds touching on my POA.

A couple more sessions with similar results and I can actually see myself carrying the thing (IWB, 3 o'clock) for certain situations. Will be adding the SIG magwell for this, just to preserve the plastic a bit better.

[HCM]

Follow-up on today's inaugural range session with the new (free!!) X-Macro (non compensated) with (slightly spendy!!) Romeo-X Enclosed Compact. (A firearm which shall henceforth be dubbed "The Noisy Cricket".)

300 rounds of S&B 124 ball, 100 rounds of HST 124 +P. (My wrist can't take much more of the plus-p in this light of a pistol).

Accuracy & precision: Pretty much dead nuts on despite the still-awful trigger. Not a problem, I shot equally awful HK USP's in DA for years, and I just treat this the same way.

To my slight befuddlement, the optic zero on installation, which bench-aligned precisely with the irons, needed absolutely no adjustment all the way out to 25 yards. This is very likely because I remembered to actually bring the adjustment tool. So of course I didn't need the wretched thing. (This also works with rain gear, in my experience).

Inside 15 yards, yielded consistent sub-2" groups, opening to 4-6" off my hind legs at 25. Irons were also dead on out to 20 (they kind of suck nearly as much as the trigger for precision work at longer distance, but that's not what this thing is for, after all).

Speed: Bill drills were obviously more difficult than with my competition and larger carry pistols, but still made a 3 second par from IWB (Tulster Oath) on five consecutive drills with a decent A-zone vertical group and no flyers on an IPSC turtle. In my book, considering this undersized (for my hands) pistol, that's just fine. Splits were .25-30 for the most part, so slow. But, hey, +p, and what? 22 ounces? Did I mention "noisy cricket"??

Mechanical: No issues at all, no primer wipe on the +P's, and adequate centering on the primer strike, with no signs of extraction issues or feeding issues. Mags seated reliably with my normal seating stroke, even with 17 rounds on a closed slide. If I find myself carrying this, any backup mag will be -1 anyway.

On-topic optics observations- I was wrong about the possibility of excessive blowback from the LCI slot in the hood. It stayed clean throughout.

The optic itself performed quite well, as evidenced by the dead-on out-of-the-box zero. Target focus was easy, indexing was natural, no fishing required. In my view, the 3 MOA dot on this specific example appears a bit larger than 3 MOA at lower illumination levels, and the brightness adjustment range is quite good- far too bright at the highest settings for normal use for me, but that's fine. I finished with slow-fire 25 yard work off a bag and had 3 of 5 HST rounds touching on my POA.

A couple more sessions with similar results and I can actually see myself carrying the thing (IWB, 3 o'clock) for certain situations. Will be adding the SIG magwell for this, just to preserve the plastic a bit better.

You mentioned that the grip is small for your hands. The SIG factory Mag well , which is originally from Tac Dev only works with the medium size backstrap.

The SLR rifle works Macro Magwell allows use of larger backstraps.


https://slrrifleworks.com/p365-x-macro-magwell/

[WobblyPossum]

You mentioned that the grip is small for your hands. The SIG factory Mag well , which is originally from Tac Dev only works with the medium size backstrap.

The SLR rifle works Macro Magwell allows use of larger backstraps.


https://slrrifleworks.com/p365-x-macro-magwell/

I haven’t tried it with the Small, but the factory mag well definitely works with the Large back strap as well.

[Archer1440]

You mentioned that the grip is small for your hands. The SIG factory Mag well , which is originally from Tac Dev only works with the medium size backstrap.

The SLR rifle works Macro Magwell allows use of larger backstraps.


https://slrrifleworks.com/p365-x-macro-magwell/

Thanks- but for the difference of $66, I think a bit of file work on the heel of that large backstrap will suit me fine ;)

[Archer1440]

SIG Magwell showed up this morning, absolutely no issue mounting to the Large backstrap, no modification needed.


On topic, comparing the HS EPS Carry Solar that showed up today, the Romeo-X Compact has the edge in having a lower deck height, less glass distortion (particularly at the top) and a taller window (which matters for tracking the streak).

123466

[Hunter Rose]

I'd like to try the Romeo X Enclosed Pro (or Compact) on a Glock 19.5 MOS that I impulse bought today to as a pistol RDS tester as I dip my toe into pistol red dots.

What plate do I need to mount the Romeo X? If no plate exists yet, I'm open to filing lugs off existing plates if need be and that is a viable solution.

[Archer1440]

I'd like to try the Romeo X Enclosed Pro (or Compact) on a Glock 19.5 MOS that I impulse bought today to as a pistol RDS tester as I dip my toe into pistol red dots.

What plate do I need to mount the Romeo X? If no plate exists yet, I'm open to filing lugs off existing plates if need be and that is a viable solution.

This thread discusses the general topic, though it addresses the Pro rather than the compact model. https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?61516-Mounting-a-SIG-Romeo-X-Pro-to-a-Glock-MOS-gun-Plates

[WobblyPossum]

Proven Outfitters has the 6 MOA Enclosed Compact (https://www.provenoutfitters.com/romeo-x-enclosed-compact-6-moa) for $410. I just ordered one. It’s the lowest price I’ve seen.

[Gater]

Proven Outfitters has the 6 MOA Enclosed Compact (https://www.provenoutfitters.com/romeo-x-enclosed-compact-6-moa) for $410. I just ordered one. It’s the lowest price I’ve seen.

Thanks for this. They are still showing them in stock. Has yours shipped?

[HeavyDuty]

Thanks for this. They are still showing them in stock. Has yours shipped?

Mine showed up the other day.

[WobblyPossum]

Thanks for this. They are still showing them in stock. Has yours shipped?

I received mine within a couple of business days. I’ve had nothing but good experiences with Proven Outfitters.

[John Hearne]

The Romeo-X Enclosed is now on the Sig Sauer NRA Instructor price sheet. Check the price, it's pretty amazing.

[WobblyPossum]

The Romeo-X Enclosed is now on the Sig Sauer NRA Instructor price sheet. Check the price, it's pretty amazing.

Woah. And now I’m looking for cheap NRA instructor classes in the area.

[EzGoingKev]

The Romeo X Compact takes a 1632 battery. The battery cover's OD is smooth.

The Romeo X Pro also takes a 1632 battery. It's battery cover's OD is notched.

Does anyone know if they will interchange?

[HCM]

The Romeo X Compact takes a 1632 battery. The battery cover's OD is smooth.

The Romeo X Pro also takes a 1632 battery. It's battery cover's OD is notched.

Does anyone know if they will interchange?

They do interchange. I believe HeavyDuty has swapped them on his optics.

[HeavyDuty]

They do interchange. I believe HeavyDuty has swapped them on his optics.

Correct - I’ve bought quite a few from SIG, I want to say they are $7.50 a pop or so.

[EzGoingKev]

Correct - I’ve bought quite a few from SIG, I want to say they are $7.50 a pop or so.

Awesome.

Does it stick out any further than the original cap?

Also, how did you buy them from Sig? I cannot find them listed on their site.

[HeavyDuty]

Awesome.

Does it stick out any further than the original cap?

Also, how did you buy them from Sig? I cannot find them listed on their site.

If they stick out more, it’s a very small amount. The edge is a little thicker, but I think the overall height is the same.

Call the CS number on the website and punch through to Electo-optics CS. They’re very helpful.

[John Hearne]

My Romeo-X Enclosed's are ordered. Have a Pro and a Compact on order. Sig advised 4-6 weeks. Hoping for a bit quicker delivery....

[piefairy]

Anyone know if the X enclosed will fit an X-5 TXG non legion. I cant seem to find any info on the non legion compatibility.

[EzGoingKev]

If they stick out more, it’s a very small amount. The edge is a little thicker, but I think the overall height is the same.

Call the CS number on the website and punch through to Electo-optics CS. They’re very helpful.
I called the other day. I told the guy what I needed and he said I called at the right time.

They are repackaging their electronics for the US market that take a coin battery and have a toolless cap. He said there is a new child safety law here banning toolless caps. Anything that takes a coin battery must require the use of a tool to remove it.

He had some in stock and sent me two for free.

My buddy has Romeo X Compact also. I told him about the caps so he called in. Whoever he spoke to told him the cap will not fit but he would sell him one for $15 and $10 shipping.

Very different customer service experiences.

[HeavyDuty]

They are repackaging their electronics for the US market that take a coin battery and have a toolless cap. He said there is a new child safety law here banning toolless caps. Anything that takes a coin battery must require the use of a tool to remove it.

WTF? https://www.cpsc.gov/Business--Manufacturing/Business-Education/Business-Guidance/Button-Cell-and-Coin-Battery#:~:text=Battery%20compartments%20containin g%20replaceable%20button,simultaneous%20hand%20mov ements%20to%20open.

[Sensei]

WTF? https://www.cpsc.gov/Business--Manufacturing/Business-Education/Business-Guidance/Button-Cell-and-Coin-Battery#:~:text=Battery%20compartments%20containin g%20replaceable%20button,simultaneous%20hand%20mov ements%20to%20open.

Button batteries are a major ingestion/poisoning threat to children. This is just pistol optics getting caught up in Uncle Sugar’s effort to keep the batteries out of kids’ mouths.

Granted, your implied point that about kids have access to guns in the first place is well taken.

[EzGoingKev]

My buddy called Sig again yesterday. He talked to someone else this time that told him the Pro's battery cap will not fit the Compact.

I texted him back this:

125348

JIC anyone is curious here it is with the original cap:

125349

Here are the measurements:

Original -
125350

Extra crispy -

125351

[HeavyDuty]

All of my open emitter RXCs have the Pro battery cap - I wonder how they will redesign things to meet the new regs?

[Default.mp3]

Maybe I missed this, but how do the SIG ROMEO-X Enclosed optics look under NODs for passive aiming compared to the ACRO P-2?

[HeavyDuty]

And now the bottom mounted RomeoX SIG-LOC:

https://www.sigsauer.com/media/catalog/product/cache/2f7933e2ff16f0ec074a16ab6b6195f2/r/o/romeo-x-compact-sl-hero-left-new.jpg

https://www.sigsauer.com/romeo-x-sig-loctm-compact.html


Please Note - Currently, the only slide compatible with the SIG-LOC™ mounting footprint is the P365-FUSE, with future integration across the P365 and P320 platforms.

[Tokarev]

And now the bottom mounted RomeoX SIG-LOC:

https://www.sigsauer.com/media/catalog/product/cache/2f7933e2ff16f0ec074a16ab6b6195f2/r/o/romeo-x-compact-sl-hero-left-new.jpg

https://www.sigsauer.com/romeo-x-sig-loctm-compact.htmlNifty. Did I miss what keeps the screws from coming loose inside the slide?

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

[Tensaw]

I've thought about this for all of five seconds, but,... so if the fastener(s) backs out on this new Sig optic, does that not run the very real risk of dropping into the FCU and deadlining the gun? That seems way worse than "merely" having an optic shoot loose.

[Tokarev]

I've thought about this for all of five seconds, but,... so if the fastener(s) backs out on this new Sig optic, does that not run the very real risk of dropping into the FCU and deadlining the gun? That seems way worse than "merely" having an optic shoot loose.On the M17 (and if I'm not mistaken because I haven't seen the M17 optic) the mounting screw sits above the firing pin stop plate. This should keep the screw from dropping into the guts of the pistol and causing damage.



Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

[Up1911Fan]

Also not visualizing a good way of witness marking the screws inside the slide.

[HeavyDuty]

Also not visualizing a good way of witness marking the screws inside the slide.

Toothpick, dab of paint on the head at 6:00.

[Up1911Fan]

Toothpick, dab of paint on the head at 6:00.

No I get it can be done. But I don't see the paint mark staying visible after a range session. Between oil and fouling it's not going to stay visible. Wiping it away will eventually wipe the witness mark away, sooner if actually cleaning and not wiping the fouling away. So just re mark it right? But is it still torqued to spec? If I don't want top down screws I think it would be better to stick with an optic that mounts via a clamp and dovetail.

[Tokarev]

https://youtu.be/29QhSCd2tX0?si=8eLYn8jtUcCQQpWR

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

[Tokarev]

No I get it can be done. But I don't see the paint mark staying visible after a range session. Between oil and fouling it's not going to stay visible. Wiping it away will eventually wipe the witness mark away, sooner if actually cleaning and not wiping the fouling away. So just re mark it right? But is it still torqued to spec? If I don't want top down screws I think it would be better to stick with an optic that mounts via a clamp and dovetail.Stake them with a punch. It (usually) works on M16 bolt carrier gas keys.

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

[crosseyedshooter]

Nifty. Did I miss what keeps the screws from coming loose inside the slide?

Well... (https://www.sigsauer.com/media/sigsauer/resources/OPERATORS_MANUAL_ROMEO-X_SIG-LOC_COMPACT_ENGLISH_7405336-01_REV01_WEB_FILE_3_.pdf)

125649

[RJ]

Well... (https://www.sigsauer.com/media/sigsauer/resources/OPERATORS_MANUAL_ROMEO-X_SIG-LOC_COMPACT_ENGLISH_7405336-01_REV01_WEB_FILE_3_.pdf)


Ja. I did the QRC for this new optic last night, and noticed Sig spent quite a bit of time on the fasteners in re: loctite 243 (blue). And the torque value specified is 18 in lbs, which is a bit more than you see for Holosun's K series (15) say.

https://mrdsqrc.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/r_x_loc_14.pdf


So I gather the Fuse is the only pistol that this new LOC optic currently mounts on? So a regular RMSc optic footprint is a no go? Interesting move by Sig.

[DamonL]

Is it weird that I want to buy a gun to try this optic on?

[Noah]

Ja. I did the QRC for this new optic last night, and noticed Sig spent quite a bit of time on the fasteners in re: loctite 243 (blue). And the torque value specified is 18 in lbs, which is a bit more than you see for Holosun's K series (15) say.

https://mrdsqrc.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/r_x_loc_14.pdf


So I gather the Fuse is the only pistol that this new LOC optic currently mounts on? So a regular RMSc optic footprint is a no go? Interesting move by Sig.

Their video said future 365s would be moving to the same cut as the Fuse.

The Fuse still direct mounts the other RMSC adjacent optics, yes?

[RAM Engineer]

This just makes me want a Fuse with a manual safety that much more.

[TAZ]

If sig eliminates the ability to mount the K series optics to the 365 line they will shoot themselves in the foot pretty hard. I’m thinking about a Fuse, but if I can’t recycle my EPS Carry, I’ll have to save up for another optic that I won’t be able to use anywhere else. So basically I’ll pass and go elsewhere. This IMO would be stupid, but maybe they think they have enough critical mass to become a driver in the optic footprint debates vs a follower.

Not a fan of the underside screws. Even though when I degrease, apply loctite and torque properly, I’ve not had any optic screws walk loose, I’m still not a fan. I like quickly seeing witnesses marks when I look over my gun. Even if they don’t fall out, I can’t imagine screw heads dragging on the FCU being helpful for reliability.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Noah]

If sig eliminates the ability to mount the K series optics to the 365 line they will shoot themselves in the foot pretty hard. I’m thinking about a Fuse, but if I can’t recycle my EPS Carry, I’ll have to save up for another optic that I won’t be able to use anywhere else. So basically I’ll pass and go elsewhere. This IMO would be stupid, but maybe they think they have enough critical mass to become a driver in the optic footprint debates vs a follower.

Not a fan of the underside screws. Even though when I degrease, apply loctite and torque properly, I’ve not had any optic screws walk loose, I’m still not a fan. I like quickly seeing witnesses marks when I look over my gun. Even if they don’t fall out, I can’t imagine screw heads dragging on the FCU being helpful for reliability.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Can’t you still mount a Holosun direct on a Fuse? I think it is still backwards compatible.

[HeavyDuty]

Can’t you still mount a Holosun direct on a Fuse? I think it is still backwards compatible.

That’s my impression, too.

[HeavyDuty]

This just makes me want a Fuse with a manual safety that much more.

Makes my ears perk up, too.

Anyone here with a Fuse that can check for the forward cut and mounting holes shown in the video? I’m curious if they all have them.

[HeavyDuty]

Their video said future 365s would be moving to the same cut as the Fuse.

The Fuse still direct mounts the other RMSC adjacent optics, yes?

Now I’m wondering if it’s possible to mill an existing P365 cut to take the forward tab and through holes needed for this sight. It sounds like something CHWPS would be able to do, and would be cheaper/easier than getting a new slide for my XL upper. I’m gonna ask.

[Noah]

Now I’m wondering if it’s possible to mill an existing P365 cut to take the forward tab and through holes needed for this sight. It sounds like something CHWPS would be able to do, and would be cheaper/easier than getting a new slide for my XL upper. I’m gonna ask.

I wouldn’t bet against that!

I’m sure Sig will sell a new slide kit for $600 too :)

[RJ]

Can’t you still mount a Holosun direct on a Fuse? I think it is still backwards compatible.

IIRC a guy over in Gen Pop had issues direct mounting a 507k on his fuse. Something to do with Holosun not fully complying with RMSc in terms of the depths of the fwd recoil bosses. I’ll go dig out some more details.

[Noah]

IIRC a guy over in Gen Pop had issues direct mounting a 507k on his fuse. Something to do with Holosun not fully complying with RMSc in terms of the depths of the fwd recoil bosses. I’ll go dig out some more details.

There were conflicting reports of the same in the Fuse thread

[HeavyDuty]

I wouldn’t bet against that!

I’m sure Sig will sell a new slide kit for $600 too :)

Bummer. Aaron got right back to me to say they wouldn’t be able to do the counterbored holes from the underside, they can only work top down. I suspect it could be resolved with fixturing using the cut as the index, but it may not be worth the effort for them.

[RJ]

Not my pictures:

125664
125665

The conclusion I reached in that thread was that for a K series going onto a Fuse slide, you'd need to omit the silver inserts, and install it direct, with just the screws. Which as far as I can remember is how a K series goes on to a P365 slide anyway, so I'm not sure it's a yuge deal.

[TAZ]

Can’t you still mount a Holosun direct on a Fuse? I think it is still backwards compatible.

The video isn’t very clear, but I saw nothing that looked like 2 threaded holes in the slide. Could have missed them, but all I see is the thru holes for the new optic. Unless they mount this optics with small enough screws to pass through the threaded holes for a Holosun… or have some T nuts that fit from the underside like the CHWPS plates.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Noah]

The video isn’t very clear, but I saw nothing that looked like 2 threaded holes in the slide. Could have missed them, but all I see is the thru holes for the new optic. Unless they mount this optics with small enough screws to pass through the threaded holes for a Holosun… or have some T nuts that fit from the underside like the CHWPS plates.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The question that answers this question is whether the video is about the existing P365 Fuse slide, which has threaded holes.

[crosseyedshooter]

The video isn’t very clear, but I saw nothing that looked like 2 threaded holes in the slide. Could have missed them, but all I see is the thru holes for the new optic. Unless they mount this optics with small enough screws to pass through the threaded holes for a Holosun… or have some T nuts that fit from the underside like the CHWPS plates.

The SIG-LOC footprint on all of the Fuse slides moved up to M4 screw holes in the slide so they could theoretically be used as through holes for M3 screws from the bottom.

As interesting as it is, I’d still like to understand what benefits these have over the K footprint besides lots of marketing for a proprietary footprint. I mean, are the current focal length optics and two-screw points of contact a problem?

[TAZ]

I’m also not really sure what the point is aside from possibly locking the 365 family into a Sig optic moving forward, which IMO is a bad move.

From what I remember the Holosuns mount using M3 screws that thread into the slide. If the X mounts using M4 threaded fasteners then these holes are useless for the Holosun. M4 clearance hole is 4.3-4.8 mm. There would need to be other holes or an insert from the underside.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[crosseyedshooter]

I’m also not really sure what the point is aside from possibly locking the 365 family into a Sig optic moving forward, which IMO is a bad move.

From what I remember the Holosuns mount using M3 screws that thread into the slide. If the X mounts using M4 threaded fasteners then these holes are useless for the Holosun. M4 clearance hole is 4.3-4.8 mm. There would need to be other holes or an insert from the underside.

I don't have one, but I've read that the FUSE comes with the needed M4 screws. It's backwards compatible with Holosun K footprint. The current P365 slides have M3 threaded bosses, so the optic holes are large enough to allow for the diameter of the threaded bosses. The FUSE doesn't have the threaded bosses and uses the larger diameter M4 screw instead. It's six of one and half dozen of the other as far as the holes in the optic are concerned.

ETA: Just to be clear, legacy optics would use M4 flathead screws mounted from the top. The new SIG-LOC optics would use M3(?) cap screws mounted from the bottom.

From another site:
125673

SIG marketing can't say that previous P365 mounting footprint with just the M3 screws and no recoil lugs is inadequate and there haven't been any reports of issues on any major forums that I've seen.

[EzGoingKev]

Never mind.

[TAZ]

I don't have one, but I've read that the FUSE comes with the needed M4 screws. It's backwards compatible with Holosun K footprint. The current P365 slides have M3 threaded bosses, so the optic holes are large enough to allow for the diameter of the threaded bosses. The FUSE doesn't have the threaded bosses and uses the larger diameter M4 screw instead. It's six of one and half dozen of the other as far as the holes in the optic are concerned.

ETA: Just to be clear, legacy optics would use M4 flathead screws mounted from the top. The new SIG-LOC optics would use M3(?) cap screws mounted from the bottom.

From another site:
125673

SIG marketing can't say that previous P365 mounting footprint with just the M3 screws and no recoil lugs is inadequate and there haven't been any reports of issues on any major forums that I've seen.

Thanks for digging that up!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[cornstalker]

Recent reviews for the Romeo X Enclosed on Amazon are not encouraging. Any one here having initial quality issues? The reviews posted on an ad for an X Enclosed. I guess it’s possible it may pertain to other models.
125713

[HeavyDuty]

Recent reviews for the Romeo X Enclosed on Amazon are not encouraging. Any one here having initial quality issues? The reviews posted on an ad for an X Enclosed. I guess it’s possible it may pertain to other models.
125713

I have three, the first one (very early production) had elevation issues. SIG replaced it immediately, and I’ve had no problems with any of them since. I chalk it up to teething pains.

[cornstalker]

I have three, the first one (very early production) had elevation issues. SIG replaced it immediately, and I’ve had no problems with any of them since. I chalk it up to teething pains.

Kind of beating a dead horse here, but...

The practice of completing significant R&D, proof of concept, and QC before rollout seems to be a sign of a dying breed. In my world, PE M&A is a rapidly growing and dynamic environment where the philosophy is to build the plane while flying it. There is no room for perfection. It is very much "now, not how." It doesn't surprise me to see this practice used by other industries. Over time, I suppose the consumer will adapt by lowering expectations. Trusting a brand is more of a crapshoot than ever. Sig continues to lead the charge in this area. I love the innovation they bring to the table, but my patience level for wasting time on new defective products may prompt me to choose a different product.

Still undecided for now.

[crosseyedshooter]

Kind of beating a dead horse here, but...

The practice of completing significant R&D, proof of concept, and QC before rollout seems to be a sign of a dying breed. In my world, PE M&A is a rapidly growing and dynamic environment where the philosophy is to build the plane while flying it. There is no room for perfection. It is very much "now, not how." It doesn't surprise me to see this practice used by other industries. Over time, I suppose the consumer will adapt by lowering expectations. Trusting a brand is more of a crapshoot than ever. Sig continues to lead the charge in this area. I love the innovation they bring to the table, but my patience level for wasting time on new defective products may prompt me to choose a different product.

Still undecided for now.

It’s a common adage to not buy the first production year of a new model car. I do the same for SIG and most mass-manufactured products (except iPhone, admittedly). Just in recent memory, there’s been the primer smearing and dead tritium front sights of the P365, then tight chamber/throats and extractor issue with the Fuse. I had multiple issues with the Holosun EPS Carry shortly after they first came out and Springfield famously had numerous issues with the Prodigy after launch. Manufacturing quality issues get sorted relatively quickly. But when design problems are discovered, it might take until the next model release to see a solution.

[medmo]

Picked up an open emitter X compact at Murdoch’s yesterday for $359 with their current 10% off on optics. It’s replacing a 407k that just crapped out on me. Need to contact Holosun for repair. Mounted the X compact on the Macro, dialed it in and ran 50 rounds through it today. Compared to the Holosun, window a little larger, lens more clear and distortion free and the dot seems more refined to my slightly astigmatated eye. Similar overall size. No knock on the Holosun but I prefer the X compact for now. Will have to see how it endures with a higher round count.

[Tokarev]

I was talking to an associate from Florida last week. His Sheriff's Department is currently in the process of transitioning the 500+ sworn to the Glock 47 and EPS.

The SWAT team previously had planned on going with the Romeo X but found some sights lost zero with not a tremendous amount of use. Hopefully SIG has identified whatever the issue may have been with these particular batches.

One unknown (I didn't think to ask and if he mentioned I've forgotten) is whether or not these were the compact or the pro optics. I assume pro since they were mounted on Glock duty handguns.

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

[Tokarev]

I just watched Aaron Cowan's Romeo X compact enclosed review. Everything was going well until the 3rd drop. The front glass broke on this drop. The optic kept its zero but he was seeing two dots instead of one.

He tested the open emitter version awhile back. It passed the drop tests without window failure. He wonders if the heavier gun used with the enclosed is what led to the failure.

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

[medmo]

Picked up an open emitter X compact at Murdoch’s yesterday for $359 with their current 10% off on optics. It’s replacing a 407k that just crapped out on me. Need to contact Holosun for repair. Mounted the X compact on the Macro, dialed it in and ran 50 rounds through it today. Compared to the Holosun, window a little larger, lens more clear and distortion free and the dot seems more refined to my slightly astigmatated eye. Similar overall size. No knock on the Holosun but I prefer the X compact for now. Will have to see how it endures with a higher round count.

Broke the 300 round mark this afternoon. Not exactly a hard core endurance test but no shift on the dot and still running strong. The dot is definitely more of a dot than a blob compared to my Holosun 407/507/C/K’s. That’s only according to my slightly astigmatism eyeballs though. All eyeballs will vary. I’m digging it a lot so far and think it’s better than the Holosun performance-wise.

[HeavyDuty]

Romeo-X adjacent, but more info about an upcoming black ROMEO-M17 is starting to trickle out. I have an AXG that I am considering having cut for one of these:

https://www.opticsplanet.com/sig-sauer-sorm1710-romeo-m17-enclosed-black-1-x-24-mm-2-moa-red-d.html

[Dr_Nimslow]

My compact enclosed showed up today. I was planning on putting it on my CC9 whenever it arrives, but now I'm thinking I'll try and vet it on another pistol first.

[WobblyPossum]

There seems to be a sale going on for Sig optics. EuroOptic has open emitter Romeo X Compacts for about $300. Dack Outdoors has the 3 MOA open emitter Compact for $260 and the 6 MOA Compact for $272. For some reason the open emitter circle/2 MOA dot is still $400. The enclosed emitter 3 MOA is about $344. The enclosed 6 MOA isn’t on sale. I ordered two of the 6 MOA open emitter ones yesterday and they shipped today. That’s substantially faster than my last Dack Outdoors order which took a month and a half. Free shipping with code FS511 today. I got $5 shipping those FLAT5 yesterday. I sold my two small dot Compacts to coworkers and I’m all in on the big dots.