shooter444
Member
I doubt that a red dot makes anyone a better shooter, but I know it gets me on target faster. Which is all that I wanted and expected from one. If it didn't, it would be back on my rifle, in a heart beat.
RMR on Glock 34
- Thread starter 338lapua
- Start date
Welcome to ArizonaShooting.org!
Join today!
So the Glock 34 mounting plate keeps coming loose. Screws have thread lock on them and twice it has loosened to the point of a shift of the bullet impact. The M&P has also come loose as well and that is with thread lock as well. Hope I don't have to go with red loctite to keep them from coming loose. Torqued to 15 inch pounds, may have to go to 20-25 to stop them from shifting.
shooter444 said:
Actually, co-witnessing with the front sight enhances the use of a red dot on a pistol. The physics for most in shooting a pistol is to either find the front sight, place it on the intended target or locate the intended target and place the front sight on it. Then our focus goes to the rear sight and we align the rear sight, flat across the top, even daylight on the sides. Once aligned, then our focus goes back to the front sight for the shot. With a red dot, the issue is not alignment, the issue is finding the dot. Unlike a rifle, where we have 3 points of contact to align and find our sights, with a pistol we basically have one.
When standing, we draw our pistol and if we have a great draw stroke, finding the dot is some what easier, but not guaranteed. We know where the gun is and where it should be at extension but we are dealing with 3 planes our head, arms and the firearm. Since the dot can be anywhere in the window and since the window is relatively small finding it can be at times problematic. Again, some can do this better than others, practice always helps, but the real solution is co-witnessing.
By having a front sight on your pistol, co-witnessed with your red dot, when you draw or aim your firearm you go thru the normal process of bringing the firearm level with the target, placing the front sight on your target, but at that point the red dot appears and the front sight disappears.
The issue of having a rear sight is always an interesting discussion. Is it absolutely necessary; that is for each individual to decide for himself. For me, since red dots on slides have had their issues, I have to agree with knockonit, having a complete set of back-up sights, if your red dot goes south is probably good insurance.
shooter444
Member
Delta6 your pistol sighting recitation is 100% correct, at least to this neophyte, it sounds right!
But, I have to disagree with your opinion on mixing a red dot system with iron sights.
By mixing the two, you are trying to marry two totally, world apart, sighting concepts. Red Dot technology was developed (IMO) to increase target acquisition speed, by eliminating the need of lining up two sights (front&rear), to shoot.
I believe, introducing iron sights into the Red Dot sight system, restricts at best, and hinders at worst, the ONE SIGHT ON TARGET PRINCIPAL, by forcing it back into the multiple lined up sighting system.
Not what I went to a Red Dot sighting system on my pistol, for.
As you stated, getting a red Dot on target can be challenging, at times. Which substantiates my position, that mixing a possibly problematic Red Dot characteristic and aligning it with iron sights, only compounds any negative inherent characteristics, of getting on target.
NOT that training to line up a Red Dot with Iron Sights isn't possible and may be an advantage to some! I just don't see the advantage! Actually, just the opposite!
By mixing/co-existing (IMO) causes even more of a sighting problem than using either ONE, or, THE OTHER.
A RED DOT doesn't need the red dot in the center of the lens to hit your target. It just needs the red dot on target, no matter its lens position. That is one of the amazing things about a single sighting, red dot system!!! Now, not having the red dot in the center of the lens may be sloppy shooting, but, in a confrontation, getting on target, any way you can, is more important, (IMO).
If one has a problem getting on target with a RED DOT, obviously more practice is required, as you inclined. Just as practice with iron sights, is standard procedure, if one is deficient.
As I stated before, having iron back up sights for any electronic sight is prudent, as you stated as well!
I just can't see any advantage of mixing the two.
But, I have to disagree with your opinion on mixing a red dot system with iron sights.
By mixing the two, you are trying to marry two totally, world apart, sighting concepts. Red Dot technology was developed (IMO) to increase target acquisition speed, by eliminating the need of lining up two sights (front&rear), to shoot.
I believe, introducing iron sights into the Red Dot sight system, restricts at best, and hinders at worst, the ONE SIGHT ON TARGET PRINCIPAL, by forcing it back into the multiple lined up sighting system.
Not what I went to a Red Dot sighting system on my pistol, for.
As you stated, getting a red Dot on target can be challenging, at times. Which substantiates my position, that mixing a possibly problematic Red Dot characteristic and aligning it with iron sights, only compounds any negative inherent characteristics, of getting on target.
NOT that training to line up a Red Dot with Iron Sights isn't possible and may be an advantage to some! I just don't see the advantage! Actually, just the opposite!
By mixing/co-existing (IMO) causes even more of a sighting problem than using either ONE, or, THE OTHER.
A RED DOT doesn't need the red dot in the center of the lens to hit your target. It just needs the red dot on target, no matter its lens position. That is one of the amazing things about a single sighting, red dot system!!! Now, not having the red dot in the center of the lens may be sloppy shooting, but, in a confrontation, getting on target, any way you can, is more important, (IMO).
If one has a problem getting on target with a RED DOT, obviously more practice is required, as you inclined. Just as practice with iron sights, is standard procedure, if one is deficient.
As I stated before, having iron back up sights for any electronic sight is prudent, as you stated as well!
I just can't see any advantage of mixing the two.
superdrag67
Member
- Joined
- May 16, 2018
- Messages
- 276
338lapua said:
Yeah, not good. Oh well. Maybe someday a company will come out with a real competitor to the RMR.
I hope Vortex brings their sights up to somewhere close to the RMR as far as durability of the electronics as I like them as a company but they are lacking in durability for the high volume shooters.JMpcc17 said:IMO. Red dots on handguns are great for target shooting fun. And that's it.
Vortex is a fine outfit regardless of model. Customer service is exceptional.
Yeah that's why the military and police are starting to get comfortable with them. Red dots on rifles in the military and with police is here to stay and nobody ever has a issue with this but they do when it is on a pistol. I am now getting to the point where I am increasing speed with the red dot now that I have learned not to loose the dot on recoil. 60 shots Glock 34 60 shots M&P CORE both with a 3.25 moa dot. .25 splits on the M&P and on the Glock I was getting .20 and lower splits so 4-6 rounds in a second and this kind of group at 10 yards. I would be at .4-50 splits with irons to get this group.
Azbuilder said:
I am using the Glock and S&W mounting plates. All my slides are cut for optics. I am thinking about having one of my guys mill a Glock slide for me where I can directly mount the RMR to the slide without a plate.
I like what they did with the mount but it is a little high for my tastes as I want it lower but I think it would work fine. They need to make it for the RMR.
M&P core with RMR and Glock34 to the head at 10 yards 150 rounds. Beretta M-9 below for 3 groups. Both pistols are now at 5K rounds a piece and other than tightening them after shooting no issues. The two today were my 2 carry guns, I feel confident with them, down to a mag a week with them from now on. 
harleypower69
Member
:handgestures-thumbup: ^ Great shooting right there
javelinadave
Member
I just came back from the range testing out my Fastfire 3 on my new Gen 5 G34. After shooting my whole life with iron sights it was really weird and will definitely require a fair amount of practice.
I have been shooting my Gen 3 G34 for quite a while and I have to say I really hate the Gen 5 trigger. It doesn't have a distinctive break, it just fires. Anybody else finding this same issue? Can anybody recommend an aftermarket trigger for a Gen 5?
I have been shooting my Gen 3 G34 for quite a while and I have to say I really hate the Gen 5 trigger. It doesn't have a distinctive break, it just fires. Anybody else finding this same issue? Can anybody recommend an aftermarket trigger for a Gen 5?
javelinadave
Member
Update. I stopped by the Glockmeister and showed him the trigger. He said is came with some funky trigger bar (Blue Label Program) and they swapped it out for whatever standard trigger bar that I had in my old G34. Thankfully the world is good again.
javelinadave said:
I am 15,000 rounds into this and now it is easy to cut out parts of the target. I have a Robert Vogel competition trigger in my 34 and it is used as a carry gun for about half the week. I run the 4.5 pound firing pin spring, had a few light strikes on the 4 pound spring.
https://glocktriggers.com/product/vogel/
I have another 34 with a Johnny Glocks competition trigger that is at about pound.
