Originally Posted by
jd950
Although I have seen the threads about C&H quality, I would note that for reasons beyond my control, I am required to use the C&H plate on the M&P 2.0, along with a number of co-workers, and we have not had any problems with those even under fairly hard use. Maybe there was a bad batch? We have some fairly clear guidelines on torque, thread locker, one-time use, etc.
I was interested in the Calculated Kinetics plate for the gas blocking feature, but have not seen anything on holster comparability and that could be an issue. I doubt those would be approved for that reason. The eleven71 plates look nice and if I could do so, I might use one. I am tempted to see if i could get one on loan for T&E, and if approved, I would buy one, or maybe I should just buy one and submit it for evaluation, but I don't know how many other folks I work with would be willing to pay the price.
I often take user complaints about products with a grain of salt. I see a lot of plate screws improperly torqued and coming loose, being damaged, and sometimes then shearing. For whatever reason, this seems most common with Glocks. I don't mean to say it is a Glock problem, and the fact Glocks are most common may be the simple answer. We require the LE/Mil steel plates on Glocks now.
I have see people mounting and re-mounting optics without adequately degreasing screw holes, improperly using thread locker or using the wrong product, or not letting it cure, guessing at torque or not even thinking about it, re-using screws that are really intended as one time use, etc., and that could play into user complaints.
Just some additional points to consider.
Edit: The EPS is probably the most popular holosun I am seeing, and perhaps that is also a factor. I have a vague memory of some mounting problems a while back with the other Holosun models.