New offering from Vortex https://vortexoptics.com/red-dots-de...A~Defender~Dot
I had to download the manual to see the footprint, it's Delta Point Pro.
New offering from Vortex https://vortexoptics.com/red-dots-de...A~Defender~Dot
I had to download the manual to see the footprint, it's Delta Point Pro.
That's kind of a high price point for an open-emitter MRDS...
“There is no growth in the comfort zone.”--Jocko Willink
"You can never have too many knives." --Joe Ambercrombie
DPP footprint, open emitter, but you can change the battery without removing the optic. This seems like a super-late arrival for the "SRO at home" kind of joke. They should have at least used the RMR footprint IMO.
I've softened my stance on open emitters as I run HS508T and HS407C dots as offsets on my AR-15s and it hasn't posed any problems for me. While we do get rain quite a bit in the Texas Panhandle, it's not all the time and rarely when I'm training. I've heard anecdotes that open emitter dots don't fog up as bad when going between extreme temps, but I haven't vetted that info with any real-world experience or experiments. The enclosed EPS is still my favorite dot I've experienced on a handgun to date. My favorite thing about closed emitters is squarely a first world problem: I find it easier to wipe the lenses clean before carrying.
I really like that Vortex is offering both 3MOA and 6MOA dots and not falling into the circle nonsense. I like the side buttons and the polymer shock absorbing thing might be a great idea. They advertise a distortion free aspherical lens, which is another awesome feature if it performs to that promise. The DPP footprint is meh, but that does mean it will work in the Badger Ordnance C1 ecosystem as a secondary dot on a rifle and there will be plates for it on pistols. The biggest thing that worries me is my experience with the Vortex SPARC solar. I had to send it back twice and wound up selling the third from an overall lack of confidence. I had better luck with the Vortex Crossfire dot before that so I don't think all Vortex dots are trash, but there seems to be hit and miss going on. There are reports of dot flicker problems on the original Defender, but I'm not sure if that was unique to the shooter's eyes and not a real issue. I'm pretty brand agnostic, but I do have a soft spot for Vortex and would love a reason to run their dots instead of Holosun.
I’m ok with open emitter.
My question have they fixed the atrociously slow refresh rate that made the RMSC footprint model unusable for anything but slow fire.
Setting the refresh rate slower to extend battery life is lazy and bad engineering.
I've seen more than one video on this today where it's highlighted that the refresh rate has been fixed and the shake awake shutoff now kicks in at 10 minutes of inactivity. They would be wise to make an inline change to the Defender CCW to bring it up to this standard and have consistency in the lineup.
The above video insinuates more dots are coming.
They have my attention.
This reviewer indicates Vortex has addressed the refresh rate issue (what he styles “Phasing and pulsing”) in the new optic..Originally Posted by HCM
I really don't like the RMR footprint. It is too wide for direct mill on many pistols that don't have the boxy shape of a Glock. That's why so many pistols have to use plates to get the width of an RMR mount. DPP, Docter/Noblex, Vortex, Shield, etc. all have less distance between mounting screws that allow for direct milling on almost anything.
The DPP footprint also allows for a top mounted battery rather than side mounted. This allows for the body to be shorter, which can accommodate backup sights lower than suppressor height.
With liberty and justice for all...must be 18, void where prohibited, some restrictions may apply, not available in all states.
If I’m not mistaken, the DPP actually has a higher deck height than the RMR, necessitating taller irons. I get the thinner footprint, though. But the RMR is overall a more robust and more popular optic, so the footprint is in wider use. The Shield/407K footprint would really be the ideal choice here, I guess.
The DPP has a higher deck, but not every optic that uses the DPP footprint has a high deck.
EoTech, Bushnell and SIG all make optics which fit the DPP footprint without the deck height of the DPP.
Reply With Quote