Page 7 of 17 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 161

Thread: Trijicon RMRcc

  1. #61
    Site Supporter farscott's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Dunedin, FL, USA
    Here is what drives me nuts. I have owned two dot-equipped pistols that have a common footprint, namely the Optima 2000 aka J-Point aka Shield RMS(c). Trijicon even private-labeled the sight as I had one on a S&W M&P .45c. For all of the other issues with the Shield sights, the common footprint is definitely a good design choice. So for basically a decade, one can find a sight for a pistol and not worry about plates or needing a new slide. Iron sights are bad enough in terms of footprints, but the cost is minimal as sights can last a decade with no issues. Dot sights fail a lot more often, and I am not willing to obsolete perfectly fine weapons because a sight footprint is made obsolete. And Trijicon just added a new footprint.

  2. #62
    I contacted primary machine to ask about them direct billing the new RMRcc optic. They said as of now, they are not aware of any suppressor height sights that work with the 43X/48 slide?
    Likes pretty much everything in every caliber.

  3. #63
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    the Deep South
    Quote Originally Posted by GJM View Post
    I contacted primary machine to ask about them direct billing the new RMRcc optic. They said as of now, they are not aware of any suppressor height sights that work with the 43X/48 slide?
    Check 10-8 performance. The website mentions their MOS sights working for the slim Glocks.

    Sent from my moto e5 cruise using Tapatalk

  4. #64
    Member Xhado's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Helotes, TX
    Quote Originally Posted by GJM View Post
    I contacted primary machine to ask about them direct billing the new RMRcc optic. They said as of now, they are not aware of any suppressor height sights that work with the 43X/48 slide?
    Why do you need suppressor height sights when it can be co-witnessed with regular height sights?

  5. #65
    Quote Originally Posted by Xhado View Post
    Why do you need suppressor height sights when it can be co-witnessed with regular height sights?
    Apparently not.
    Likes pretty much everything in every caliber.

  6. #66
    Member Xhado's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Helotes, TX
    Quote Originally Posted by GJM View Post
    Apparently not.

    Send it to ATEi.


  7. #67
    Having owned an ATEI milled Glock for RMR, as well as a Glock that was milled in even lower than ATEI, I am gonna wait till someone else checks out their claim in regards to RMScc and regular height irons.
    Doesn't read posts longer than two paragraphs.

  8. #68
    Not an RMRcc, but I have a Brownells G48 slide milled for a Shield RMS and put a Holosun 407K on it. Ameriglo suppressor height sights fit just fine, give a perfect co-witness, just like my RMR'd Glock 19s and 17s.

    FWIW, Ameriglo says their suppressor height sights are not compatible with the 43, 43x and 48. They are a little snug on width, but mine work fine.

    FWIW #2, the height of the Holosun 407K is the same as the regular RMR, so co-witness requirements are the same.

    FWIW #3, the Brownells slide has four indexing posts meant for the RMS. Ya have to mill them down completely in the rear and about halfway in the front to accommodate the Holosun 407k. Totally worth it, though. The optic practically snaps in like Tupperware, no movement at all.

    Regarding sight height, I also have a G43 that's been milled and has an adapter plate for an RMR, which is too wide for a G43. Because of the extra height by the adapter plate MOS height sights a required for proper co-witnessing.

    Which is best? Well, I like'em both. The 407K is the same width as the 43/48 series, so no adapter plate is required. Only down side to the RMR'd G43 is the MOS front sight looks kinda goofy and might cause a problem with a holster. Mine rides in a Bravo Concealment rig and drags a bit, but has never given me a problem drawing.

    I won't be getting an RMRcc. Price, proprietary footprint, no new innovations ... there's nothing for me there. The 407K is still new but my 507s have been excellent, so if anyone asks, I say go Holosun.


  9. #69
    Site Supporter davisj's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Somewhere between Manteo and Murphy

    Sage Dynamics Review


  10. #70
    Site Supporter HeavyDuty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Not very bright but does lack ambition
    I’ve been toying with the idea of picking up a second slide for my 43 or 48 and having it milled for a RMRcc as low and as far back as is physically possible removing the rear dovetail, and either running no front sight or something that just provides a gross index through the window as a backup. I’m curious if it would be practical, but that’s a fair amount of money for an experiment.
    Ken

    BBI: ...”you better not forget the safe word because shit's about to get weird”...
    revchuck38: ...”mo' ammo is mo' betta' unless you're swimming or on fire.”

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •