New Pistol Red Dot

[voodoo_man]

so trijicon?

I have an RMR...there are a few others that are US based (pay US taxes and employ US citizens) that I'll take a look at as well.

[ADK]

For all those awaiting the (eventual?) Aimpoint sealed mrds, might this actually be it, today? http://www.shieldpsd.com/shop-2/sis-...ght-center-dot Apparently it's the updated, auto adjust + manual brightness version of the CQS/CQB that was chosen by the British military over the Aimpoint micro due to superior ruggedness. It's basically a well sealed version of the Sms, sold in the US as the jpoint. It's apparently provided great service, and is smaller and thinner and lighter than the t1. And shield sells an aimpoint micro adapter plate, allowing the sis to be mounted to any aimpoint micro mount, like the ATOM perhaps? Would be curious to get impressions of the sis on a pistol slide from the experienced mrds users here.

[RevolverRob]

The reason to reject this sight has nothing to do with it not being a U.S. based business and everything to do with it not having a shielded emitter and sealed optics. It will suffer the exact same problems that Deltapoints and RMRs suffer in wet climates, dot washout. Also, I just don't care for RMR reticles. Having finally shot enough of the various MRDSes, I'm pretty particularly sold on the Amber Triangle in the Deltapoint as the best reticle out there currently. But the optic itself is still a no-go in wet/humid climates.

[Paul D]

They sell this line at Brownells. I think Misanthropist did a review of these sights for the magazine he writes for. If it is a good review, I will buy 'n try. Don't know what Glock MOS plate it uses though.

[Maple Syrup Actual]

I did review these...I still have one on a 34 MOS.

I have yet to see an issue in wet climates (and Vancouver, where I live, is essentially Seattle with more rain and less football) but I also haven't spent a ton of time with it in heavy rain.

I will say that I have seen aimpoints become completely unusable in the rain here simply on account of condensation so I do have some experience running guns in the wet. I think that would happen long before the electronics would become an issue, despite having been repeatedly assured that this never happens.

The one on my MOS is basically an Eotech 65/1 reticle and lending it to non-shooters is genuinely disturbing. "Oh, the bullet goes on the dot. Wow, every time! And it's in the middle of the big circle. Oh, this is so easy."

Anyway I would assume that the Shield optics also have deficiencies, and I am not in the business recommending anything without reservation. But the company is solid and I have beaten the tar out of their stuff and it works well. Something else may work better and I can't really comment on that because I've never used any other mini red dots beyond a quick goof-around.

The main thing for me is that it's a killer reticle on a sight that's been 100% reliable for me from a company I trust.

Sent from my SM-N900W8 using Tapatalk

[Maple Syrup Actual]

Oh: I did find that really bright targets washed out the reticle when I was in a low light area. They do have a backup rear notch so I shift to that when shooting white stuff while in the dark. I feel like there's a really un-pc #BLM joke in here somewhere but I am not finishing that thought in print.

Sent from my SM-N900W8 using Tapatalk

[ADK]

Thanks misanthropist, great looking mag you've got up there.

If I searched correctly, it looks like you've reviewed the rms on the Glock mos, and the cqs on a rifle (and under a jeep, etc).

I was wondering about the viability of the sis on a handgun. It looks like it might be able to fit on the Glock mos, maybe barely, if shield makes a custom plate like they did for the rms/sms that could accept the bottom-up screws I believe the sis uses. The sis is advertised as being slightly more compact and lighter than the cqs. Based on your experience with the cqs, do you think an sis on the mos is a possibility? Base length would be the limiting factor in the mos' 2-inch-long cutout.

Based on your testing, I assume you'd agree that the sis would be way more durable and less subject to the elements than the rms. And it offers manual adjustment to eliminate the white wall issue, and you can choose reticles within the sight. Drawbacks of course would be size, weight and need for tall irons for cowitnessing.

Thanks for your input! (Wow that was a lot of acronyms!)

[Maple Syrup Actual]

Okay, look. It's saturday, 2130 local time, and anything I say should be taken with some himalayan pink salt off the rim of a mason jar filled with tequila, cointreau, and lime juice. I'll do my best here but no promises. It's been about half an hour since my last post and I've been lying in a sauna consuming the above-mentioned recipe since about 1900.



1) Thanks! you'd think any rag that put me in charge of the writing would be pretty messed up but these guys are all right.

2) I actually hadn't heard about the SIS before right now and I'm way too far gone to do any rational analysis of the technical improvement it may represent over the CQS/CQB.

3) Oh wait, yes I had. I just forgot and didn't recognize the acronym.

4) I believe the SIS has the same outer dimensions as the CQS and I have a couple of those so I'll check tomorrow if that would fit on a MOS.

5) I have some suppressor sights on a G19...I'll see if they'd be adequate to work with an SIS.

6) Yeah, they're plenty tough. You won't survive anything that kills an SIS.

[Paul D]

Okay, look. It's saturday, 2130 local time, and anything I say should be taken with some himalayan pink salt off the rim of a mason jar filled with tequila, cointreau, and lime juice. I'll do my best here but no promises. It's been about half an hour since my last post and I've been lying in a sauna consuming the above-mentioned recipe since about 1900.



1) Thanks! you'd think any rag that put me in charge of the writing would be pretty messed up but these guys are all right.

2) I actually hadn't heard about the SIS before right now and I'm way too far gone to do any rational analysis of the technical improvement it may represent over the CQS/CQB.

3) Oh wait, yes I had. I just forgot and didn't recognize the acronym.

4) I believe the SIS has the same outer dimensions as the CQS and I have a couple of those so I'll check tomorrow if that would fit on a MOS.

5) I have some suppressor sights on a G19...I'll see if they'd be adequate to work with an SIS.

6) Yeah, they're plenty tough. You won't survive anything that kills an SIS.

The CQS looks pretty big and seems more at home on a long gun. Do you have a picture of it on your Glock 34 MOS? Which plate does it use?

[Maple Syrup Actual]

Sorry for any confusion but I only have the CQS on long guns. I have a Mini on a MOS. I'll have to check whether something CQS-sized could fit on a MOS.