value in running a reddot on a carry peice

[OneBadV8]

I understand that the Vortex mounts on the rear site location of the slide. What I haven't seen is that you get cowitnessed iron sights for the same $479. The only guns I've seen with cowitnessed sights include about $500 or more of machining and supressor sights attached to the firearm.

I would not trust a firearm with red dot only for defensive use. Cowitnessing is a MUST.

I know the Vortex is battery operated only right now, but there is a version of the Trijicon RMR that is Tritium and Fiber Optics. That would take the battiers out of it. However, I'm not sure what they'd charge to replace the tritium when it quits glowing.

 

[Rookie]

correct the 479 will not cowitness. it been a long time since i paid for machine work, but i would think you could get the slide milled for 100 bucks, you wouldnt need to refinish the slide, and if your running the gun suppressed now i would assume you already have suppressor sights on the slide.

I only know of two that are machining and it's right at $300. You would want to treat the machined metal, unless it's stainless.

 

[indyjoe]

correct the 479 will not cowitness. it been a long time since i paid for machine work, but i would think you could get the slide milled for 100 bucks, you wouldnt need to refinish the slide, and if your running the gun suppressed now i would assume you already have suppressor sights on the slide.

Not running suppressed. Suppressor sights look like the only way to cowitness. I guess one advantage of milling the slide is that you are removing some mass to compensate for the mass of the RDS. So that should make cycling more stock, even with lower powered ammo.

Sight $500. Machining and refinishing looks like $350 at best. Not sure what suppressor sights run $50-100? We are getting really close to my $1000 figure.

 

[42769vette]

Not running suppressed. Suppressor sights look like the only way to cowitness. I guess one advantage of milling the slide is that you are removing some mass to compensate for the mass of the RDS. So that should make cycling more stock, even with lower powered ammo.

Sight $500. Machining and refinishing looks like $350 at best. Not sure what suppressor sights run $50-100? We are getting really close to my $1000 figure.

i guess i assumed if you machined the rds in in front of the rear sight you could get it low enough to cowitness with factory sights. i will know more when i get mine back and do it myself. it will depend on how much metal is on your slide to remove. i was figureing it off 100 bucks to machine the slide, if they are charging 350 to machine it i need to quit selling scopes and get better on my mil so i can do it for people. im a novice on the mil to say the least and i still dont think it will take over 1.5 hours. i figure a actual machinest can do it in a hour @ 100 bucks a hour. but like i said im a novice and could be way off on my times. i guess we will see

 

[indyjoe]

i guess i assumed if you machined the rds in in front of the rear sight you could get it low enough to cowitness with factory sights. i will know more when i get mine back and do it myself. it will depend on how much metal is on your slide to remove. i was figureing it off 100 bucks to machine the slide, if they are charging 350 to machine it i need to quit selling scopes and get better on my mil so i can do it for people. im a novice on the mil to say the least and i still dont think it will take over 1.5 hours. i figure a actual machinest can do it in a hour @ 100 bucks a hour. but like i said im a novice and could be way off on my times. i guess we will see

I don't think there is any way to get it to cowitness with the factory sights without machining through the slide. The RDS base is thicker than the slide top surface. After you mill the slide you would need to refinish the slide. So it is more than just milling. It would also ruin any warranty on the slide portion of the gun.

I have no doubt that if this gets to be more popular, the price of the machine work will go down. I could probably do it on my mini-mill, but I would want to see what a new slide cost first.

 

[42769vette]

I don't think there is any way to get it to cowitness with the factory sights without machining through the slide. The RDS base is thicker than the slide top surface. After you mill the slide you would need to refinish the slide. So it is more than just milling. It would also ruin any warranty on the slide portion of the gun.

I have no doubt that if this gets to be more popular, the price of the machine work will go down. I could probably do it on my mini-mill, but I would want to see what a new slide cost first.

im sitting here looking at some of the numbers and i think it will take about .13 off of the slide to cowitness. i could be off as i dont have my glock in front of me to measure. i agree you need to coat the milled part of the slide, i just dont think you need to refinish the entire slide.

but just to be clear im a novice to say the least at the machining side of gun work

 

[42769vette]

ive been looking at some of the companies that do this. it appears they relocate the rear sight to in front of the dot. im not sure what their reasoning for this is but ill guarntee they know more about this than i do and there is probably a reason they do this, i just dont know what it is. in other words more research required

 

[esrice]

in other words more research required

Sometimes the research is the fun part!

 

[lovemachine]

Any idea if they mill in a dovetail for the scope?

 

[lovemachine]

I've never seen it in person, but I'm just guessing 1-1.5 hours to mill the slide. It MAY even take 30-45 minutes.

I'm a machinist

 

[esrice]

it appears they relocate the rear sight to in front of the dot.

Some put it in front (see Rookie's M&P, Bowie did his IIRC), and others put it behind (TSD).

 

[Rookie]

Bowie will put it where you want. TSD will put it where THEY want.

 

[42769vette]

you will have to cut a dovetail infront of the rds, and just mill out the old dovetail. im just curious if there is any advantage to having the rear sight infront of the rds. i dont think the shortened sight radious would make enough of a diffrence to measure, i just dont see the point in the extra work, but im sure there is one

 

[42769vette]

I've never seen it in person, but I'm just guessing 1-1.5 hours to mill the slide. It MAY even take 30-45 minutes.

I'm a machinist

i didnt think it would take long. my buddy has a cnc, mabye ill jsut draw a program and offer the service someday

 

[Rookie]

Call Bowie tactical, he's more than willing to answer questions.

 

[42769vette]

Call Bowie tactical, he's more than willing to answer questions.

id rather find the answer myself, i hate to call a vendor and ask alot of questions about what he does only to do it myself. im sure i could do it, but id feel bad

 

[Rookie]

trying to figure out if the rear sight should be in front or behind the RMR?

 

[42769vette]

trying to figure out if the rear sight should be in front or behind the RMR?

trying to figure out the advantages of 1 way over the other way. i may call him, the more i think about it i may hire this one done. a new glock 17L slide is alot more expensive and hard to find than a glock 19 etc. i guess i have plenty of time to think about it

 

[cedartop]

For those with this question who didn't check the link. I offer this from Gabe.


The RMR was a definite improvement, but the “hunt the dot” problem remained. The pistol came up and the eye wanted to find the dot, but there was little success in quickness. I tried working up a ghost ring type system with the “tv screen” and the front sight, but that was also imprecise. We worked with Fastfires and Leupolds and even that J-point unit whose advocates claim has a built in rear sight. All were found to be less than optimal, although the RMR led the way with ruggedness. The RMR was the only unit that survived our testing. But the execution on a pistol was still not optimal.
Then I saw an FN45 with a Docter sight on it and still sporting the iron sights. Interesting idea. I took one of my Glock slides an RMR and tracked down some tall suppressor sights. I took it to several gunsmiths. All said it was “unnecessary”, “impossible”, and all manner of other excuses. I finally found someone at a gun store that said they would do it. Thus the first TSD type pistol was born.
As soon as we unveiled it, the detractors rolled out from under their rocks. I have seen this so many times before I was only surprised about how long it took them. “Its a fad”…”Its stupid”…and on, and on. Well, its been a couple of years at least and the momentum has not stopped. We still see guys trying to tell us that they sights need to be in front of the RMR. I will tell you why they say that. They have invested a great deal of money, advertising, and effort into selling the concept WITHOUT back up sights. And now their customers, seeing the advantages of the TSD application, came back complaining. In an business-saving effort, they added a rear sight as an after-thought, to placate the complaints. More on this later. As well, attempts are made to subsititute something “cheaper” in place of the RMR. In the early days we would work with other red dot systems, but abandoned them as we found our sales reps turning into customer service reps for Burris and J-Point and others. Now it is Trijicon RMR or nothing.
On the rear sight placement thing. Here is what I refer to.

They install the sight foreward of the red dot. Now lets fire up the bullsh*t meter. How many repetitions do we have bringing the pistol up into eye level, catching the rear sight and using that as a visual anchor to run the eye toward the front sight? Thousands? Try hundreds of thousands. Change that up and those body indexes hard wired into the muscle memory (eye muscle memory as well) are gone. We set a pistol up that way. The one in the picture is mine. I ran that one, and my other properly set up pistol, head to head for 500 rounds noting accuracy, times, and overall impressions. The sights forward unit was visually clumsy, slower, and more challenging to do well with. The standard unit, on the other hand, was almost effortless. If you take an honest look at the situation, rather than trying to create a “patch” for a poor execution of concept, you must agree that the sights belong in their traditional positions.

 

[42769vette]

If you take an honest look at the situation, rather than trying to create a “patch” for a poor execution of concept, you must agree that the sights belong in their traditional positions.

thanks, i hadnt gotten around to reading the article yet, i still need to but this is the bullet point of what im looking for. i couldnt see a advantage of them being infront of the rds and now i know why.

i appriciate all your help here, im pretty new to the pistol side of optics (about 100 rds in) and honestly im just not a big pistol guy, i bet i dont shoot 1500 rounds a year out of a handgun. so i defintally have a ton to learn about all of this.