Different Sizes of MRDS Windows

[RJ]

I had asked a question on window size over in the Romeo X thread, asking for confirmation that the window size of the Romeo X Pro and Romeo X Compact were the same - they are.

It turns out I had been working updating all 12 of the EPS and EPS Carry MRDS Quick Reference Cards to Revision 12, which includes (where I know the data) the physical window size. So I had this on my mind. I got kinda bored this weekend so I did some research and dug out what I believe are the optic window sizes for several popular dots, and put them into a graphical representation, large to small:



(The numbers are width x height, inches. For Holosun, I got the numbers off their web site. For the Romeo X, I asked a user on the Gen Pop Sig web site for a measurement. The Trijicon values are measured using a steel ruler on a printout pdf that Trjicon supplies online. Close enough for government work, maybe).

Some thoughts/questions.

Does window size even matter? Consider an optical spherical cow: Ideally, the optic reticle would appear in free space, projected as a hologram. At present, the technology is such that the reticle is refracted off a prism (normally glass) over the emitter, with infinite focus. The glass is not sufficiently robust enough to stand on it's own, so we have to have a shroud (typically 7075 T1 aluminum) which encloses and offers some protection against impact.

Does a large window offer an advantage over a smaller window, if one's index is sufficiently developed? Perhaps for novice MRDS users, working to acquire the dot on presentation consistently? But does a M/GM shooter really worry about window size?

Anyway, food for thought.

[GJM]

The RMR measurement is misleading as it doesn't account for the deck of the RMR that protrudes into the display.

Yes, all things considered, a larger display is more forgiving to shoot -- especially support hand and with a less refined index.

[feudist]

Is vertical height more useful-forgiving-important than horizontal width?

[GJM]

Is vertical height more useful-forgiving-important than horizontal width?

For me, I find width more important. I am not trying to track the dot alongs its entire path in recoil, but rather focusing on the scoring area. However, a bit of misalignment usually manifests in side to side issues for me, and wider is more forgiving. I recently saw this when I went from an EPS Carry to a full size EPS on a Macro.

[MVS]

I was going to post this somewhere else like the Macro in competition thread or something, but since the question was asked here. Yes. IMHO window size matters. On my 365 Legion I have an EPS carry. On my 2 IDPA guns, 320 TXG X-Carry (SRO) and 320 Legion AXG (507Comp). I decided to shoot my 365 in this weekends match. I went down 45 points. It wasn't all due to the optic but for comparison at the match a couple of weeks ago, I was down 9 points. The difference in large part lied with a lot of one handed shooting in this match and me trying to shoot at the same speed as I would with the full size gun/optic. It didn't work out. The problem with the small window size is compounded by a slightly different index on the 365 Legion. The other issue doesn't have anything to do with the window size and that is the narrow grip.

[GJM]

I was going to post this somewhere else like the Macro in competition thread or something, but since the question was asked here. Yes. IMHO window size matters. On my 365 Legion I have an EPS carry. On my 2 IDPA guns, 320 TXG X-Carry (SRO) and 320 Legion AXG (507Comp). I decided to shoot my 365 in this weekends match. I went down 45 points. It wasn't all due to the optic but for comparison at the match a couple of weeks ago, I was down 9 points. The difference in large part lied with a lot of one handed shooting in this match and me trying to shoot at the same speed as I would with the full size gun/optic. It didn't work out. The problem with the small window size is compounded by a slightly different index on the 365 Legion. The other issue doesn't have anything to do with the window size and that is the narrow grip.

When I transition between my 320 Legion based limited optics gun, and the macro, I need to be especially careful to shoot in time with the macro as opposed to trying to simply mimic how I shoot the 320. The time doesn't end up being that different, but each needs to be treated as its own thing in my experience. When I was working with the macro more, I shot a Saturday Sunday match with the 320 game gun on Saturday and the macro (with PMM) on Sunday, and shot 91.6% of my match points with the macro. One hand, with the small window, is definitely unforgiving in terms of how I align the pistol between my dominant eye and the target.

[Clusterfrack]

I agree with @GJM that width is more important, and that size does matter. I tried using a 509t2 on a Shadow2 for rainy USPSA matches, but it slowed me down too much compared to a SRO. On long, precise shots I don't think there's much if any difference. But fast "paint with the streak" type shooting is way better with a bigger window. I can shoot anytime the sight picture is appropriate, regardless of where the dot is in the window. As well, the thickness of the window frame matters. The Acro is the worst in that regard.

[JCS]

Bigger is definitely better.

I would prefer a tall window over a wide window. I don't care so much about width and helping me pick up the dot on the presentation. That can be refined in dry fire. My missed indexes are usually on the vertical plane anyways.

I care more about seeing the dot return. I'm not following it with my eyes, but shooting a 507k vs SRO, the dot appears suddenly because it leaving the window on the smaller window. It's much easier to time shots to vision with a bigger vertical window.

[GJM]

I also have a preference for a circular display window like the SRO or Romeo three max. While it isn't appropriate for EDC use, the Sig Romeo 3 Max is my absolute favorite competition optic.

[1Rangemaster]

I’ll begin with a caveat: I don’t have experience with all the sights listed in the OP. That said, I think a larger window is better or more forgiving of misalignment or an index that’s off. Anecdotally, I saw this when I shot some rounds with a Holosun Comp (BIG window) a few weeks ago that was on a colleague’s pistol. It was “easier” to find the dot/see the streak for me. Typically, I’m shooting an ACRO on an MOS Glock for reference. The ACRO frame is thicker, and there is the visual clutter of the battery cap.
But, for context, I would still go with the ACRO or other enclosed optic for duty/self defense. First, I like the enclosed emitter for durability. Second, I’ve had the experience of a partially blocked window with an open single lens. That affected my preference. For me then, the smaller closed emitter is my choice. I just realize that I will have to work a little harder and be disciplined about practicing my index dry.
For competition, no argument- the larger window would be the way to go. There may be some visual advantage to a circular window, e.g., an SRO or the C&H Comp. That big Holosun did impress me.
None of this matters much unless one works with the sight. I’m sure there are folks who can do acceptable work with an RMR. They would have to work harder at it IMHO.