MP-Pistol Forum banner

1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
26 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Being fairly new to semi-auto pistols, I have a simple question. Why aren't all red dots (for pistols) the same size and base? I realize they are all made by different companies, but standardization is common on pic rails, Weaver mounts, most other optic mounts. Now the part that mounts on the gun is different on something like scope ring bases, and that's understandable. But if they were all the same hole pattern, no base plates would be needed, or backlogged on orders, plus the red dot would mount lower, and only use two screws instead of four. Am I missing something?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
295 Posts
Many optics companies base their footprint of the Trijocon RMR design, ie Holosun.

Often it comes down to cramming features into a small device. For example, top load battery. RMR screw pattern prevents this I believe.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
387 Posts
Many optics companies base their footprint of the Trijocon RMR design, ie Holosun.

Often it comes down to cramming features into a small device. For example, top load battery. RMR screw pattern prevents this I believe.
Are you sure?
The Trijicon, Leopold, and Aimpoint are the only three non range toy sights available and all have different mounting cuts.
Yes halosun fits the Trijicon footprint but do any others?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
295 Posts
Are you sure?
The Trijicon, Leopold, and Aimpoint are the only three non range toy sights available and all have different mounting cuts.
Yes halosun fits the Trijicon footprint but do any others?
Actually, I am not so I should have not made that statement. My other non RMR/Holosun sights use a pic rail now that I think about it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
26 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
They could standardize them easily. I like Holosun the best, for feature and price reasons. Burris for warranty. Vortex, who I like as a company, but not nuts about the dot sights. The Sig Sauer models are nice, but some design flaws on the lens housing. I had a Sig on my AR, and it was great. Which brings me to another point, why so much more for pistols???? My Sig on my AR was $130, and did everything the pistol models do .Thanks guys .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
332 Posts
They could standardize them easily. I like Holosun the best, for feature and price reasons. Burris for warranty. Vortex, who I like as a company, but not nuts about the dot sights. The Sig Sauer models are nice, but some design flaws on the lens housing. I had a Sig on my AR, and it was great. Which brings me to another point, why so much more for pistols???? My Sig on my AR was $130, and did everything the pistol models do .Thanks guys .
Your "SIG" is cheap because its a Holosun. They have a wide range of prices and options.

A standard for the mounting pattern will have to come from the firearms manufacturers. It’s doubtful that will happen soon. Right now Smith & Wesson is using Shield Sights out of England. So that would be the “standard” for theirs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
515 Posts
As long as we are on the subject, why does every pistol manufacturer use their own proprietary rear sight dovetail cut? There are a couple of "standards" like Bomar and Novak but neatly every maker has to use their own. Why?

And yes, there are numerous red dot footprints. The current M&P CORE pistols come with 7 mounting bases and 5 sets of mounting screws and even that doesn't cover all of the available red dots. Holosun does use the Trijcon RMR pattern and Vortex, Burris and Docter use the same pattern so there is some commonality.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
26 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
I'm with you Smith Shooter. All the different cuts for sights had me puzzled myself. A great way to increase the prices, if they all were the same, they should be cheaper. Same way with red dot mounts, give me one that fits everything (if they were standardized), and reduce the cost of the gun. I don't need six extra $40+ plates laying around.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
387 Posts
I'm with you Smith Shooter. All the different cuts for sights had me puzzled myself. A great way to increase the prices, if they all were the same, they should be cheaper. Same way with red dot mounts, give me one that fits everything (if they were standardized), and reduce the cost of the gun. I don't need six extra $40+ plates laying around.
They make the core type guns for cheap people that don't know what they want because it would s the closest to universal you can be.

If you do know what you want, do it correctly and have the slide milled for the sight you want. It will be mounted lower with no plates and more secure.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
515 Posts
They make the core type guns for cheap people that don't know what they want because it would s the closest to universal you can be.

If you do know what you want, do it correctly and have the slide milled for the sight you want. It will be mounted lower with no plates and more secure.
The problem is red dot technology is evolving almost daily and your favorite today may be replaced by something far better next week or next month. You do not want to lock yourself into one model forever.

BTW, the plates that come with the S&W CORE models are 0.04" thick (< 3/64"") so they raise the sight an insignificant amount and the mounting is very secure. Lower may be better but at some point low enough is low enough.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
387 Posts
The problem is red dot technology is evolving almost daily and your favorite today may be replaced by something far better next week or next month. You do not want to lock yourself into one model forever.

BTW, the plates that come with the S&W CORE models are 0.04" thick (< 3/64"") so they raise the sight an insignificant amount and the mounting is very secure. Lower may be better but at some point low enough is low enough.

My current slide/RDS is 4 years old, if a new RDS comes out that is better than the RMR, I'll buy another slide and use that. Remember the cheap people I mentioned, they will buy the current setup for a couple hundred bucks. Having the best cost money, cheap gets, as you said close enough.

I've seen two guys with core guns trying to mimick guys using the RMR to rack the slide and break it off the gun, haven't seen that with milled slide with bosses to secure it yet.

The thickness of the plate is like buying a size taller rings for your rifle scope, it might work but it isn't right way to do things.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
332 Posts
Ha, Ha, Ha, I’m guess I’m one of the cheap guys, because I would rather have my slide machined at the factory. My optics are for the range, I don’t need them on a carry gun, so I don’t need to rack my slide with the optic. :)

But if I’m not mistaken the big selling point for the Holosun is its survival through torture testing. I won’t buy one, but that is my understanding.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
26 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
I'm in the same boat, I'll take factory milling and stock finish. I could easily mill my own, but I'm not a fan of taking a endmill to a brand new stock pistol. I do like the lack of mounting plates, but thousands use them with no problems. I also like Holosun green dot multi recital sights, a lot better than Trijicon's offerings for what I want to do. RMR's are great, but I like the auto on and larger field of view.
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top