I think there is a lot of truth to this. Aimpoint pretty much owns the RDS market segment for long guns. They should not risk that business history by releasing any system that isn’t ready simply cause they have to have one to match Trijicon.
I’m sure if they ever release an even smaller variant of the T series it will be a hit and many, myself included, will consider it.
Shrinking the T/H's would be a bad idea.
The T/H series has a smaller field of view and is much less forgiving on presentation than an RMR.
Attachment 48689
Agree, but they need something with a smaller footprint that the T/H series. If they had a similar field of view as the T/H in a shorter in length and height above the slide it would be a hit IMO.
The RMR is definitely not CCW optimized. Those ears tend to protrude and print for me. I’m sure the extra 30# I’m carrying around my waist isn’t the issue . Not that the little bump screams gun or anything, but a rounded window would work better.
Half moon about the height of the RMR with of the same OAL and a sealed emitter would be cats meow.
From my understanding the ears were specifically designed as pillars to take impacts and move the stress of those impacts away from the glass and down the sides of those pillars. I have seen other red dots on pistols crack the glass at 12 o'clock for that exact reason-impacts to the top of the dot were transmitted into the glass and caused cracking.
Correct. Generally speaking, arcs are stronger than straight beams under loading.
This is my understanding as well. Caveat being that I don’t think the RMR was intended/designed for pistols. So the impact energy it needed to handle was considerably larger aka rifle falling on it vs a handgun falling.
I’m sure (hopeful) these are the issues that Aimpoint is addressing.
Bookmarks