If this becomes an actual issue, someone will probably come up with a plate with nubs to engage a couple of those Grand Canyon serrations back there.
If this becomes an actual issue, someone will probably come up with a plate with nubs to engage a couple of those Grand Canyon serrations back there.
Haven't seen this brought up yet, but has any one else tried putting on an X300U-A on the rail? Mine has enough slop that the light wobbles up, down, left and right. Same light on a Glock 19 Gen 5 locks up solid.
What rail key are you using? The x300u-a comes with the Glock universal key installed, but includes a picatinny key (which locks up very tight on gen 5 guns) and a rail lock key, which may be what you need to try using if you’re getting slop with the picatinny key.Originally Posted by dfeder530
I am using the picatinny key for both the Glock and Walther. I know there is a tensioner you can add on to the light, but the side to side slop makes me wonder if the rail is supposed to actually be picatinny.
My main match gun was a salvage job, direct slide re-mill from one optic to another, no bosses, no lugs. Round count in five digits. After watching that video I guess I gotta expect something to break soon.
Doesn't read posts longer than two paragraphs.
If the plate isn’t tight fore and aft, I would say it’s a legitimate concern identified in that video.
Factory plates are already shipped to some people, if it turns out they have a fore and aft press-fit (and hopefully are made of steel) then I would say that lug issue would be much less of a concern.
Glock MOS plates have a very small lug but a bit of wiggle room, and break with some regularity.
All I see is clickbait title with claims that something WILL break - just like everything on this planet will. I'm sad to not see recoil lugs, but if tolerances are held correctly for the plates and the slide, and the screws aren't brittle, I'm not really seeing a long term issue from shooting this. The plate doesn't really move laterally, it moves longitudinally along with the recoil impulse.
My thoughts are that if this becomes an issue, there will be a plate to address it.
I'd also be stunned if Walther didn't test the mounting system heavily before release. Not because I trust Walther specifically or because firearm manufacturers don't screw up quality control/design, but because this can easily be tested by just throwing an optic on and firing 50k rounds. It should be a super easy test for a manufacturer who I'd assume wants to win government contracts.
From what I remember from undergrad mechanical design class, calculating whether/when the screws will shear in this application (transverse forces + vibrations involved) is not trivial. Anyone can wiggle an optics plate and say something but if he wants to throw his credentials around I think he should demonstrate that he is using the tools and techniques of his education VS just wiggling stuff.
Also the recoil bosses aren't strictly necessary if the front and back fit in the cut is snug, they will do the exact same thing mechanically (apart from preventing lateral forces on the screws, which I would expect to be minimal). The SIG cut he likes is not really that great. The way they did it (cutting into the slide, which accepts a recoil lug on the plate) is probably cheap for them to machine, but is also such that it makes it more expensive to machine a plate with a recoil lug, so nobody does that AFAIK.
Edit: I was wrong about that last one. CHPWS does machine a X5 legion plate with recoil lugs. My Springer plate lacks one.
Maybe this is why Walther defense asked chpws to build plates for them.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote