G19 with RMR06 and KKM compensator

[runcible]

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

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

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

[Paul D]

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

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

[GJM]

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

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

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

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

[s0nspark]

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

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

I am jealous of those for whom it works though!

[runcible]

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

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

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

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

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

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

[DocGKR]

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

Non-concur on this.

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

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

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

[Dave J]

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

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

[okie john]

Non-concur on this.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


Okie John

[TiroFijo]

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

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

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

[TCinVA]

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