View Full Version : Shield RMS for Handguns
Anyone have any experience/feedback on this UK based sight ? Just ran across it the other day while looking for a low profile red dot for my PPQ/9mm . To me, a big negative is the company is based in the UK and I would guess customer service backup could be a problem.
I have also heard it sometimes has problems in areas of high moisture/rain .... but that may just be Internet " facts ". Also looking at the Trijicon RMR , but it mounts a little higher than the Shield , but it is a known quantity and made in the U.S. , which is a big factor for me .
Anyway , just looking now as I have my eye surgery tomorrow and have to wait 3 to 4 weeks to see how it all shakes out before I get any red dot .
.
I have also heard it sometimes has problems in areas of high moisture/rain .... but that may just be Internet " facts ". .
Doesn't seem like a stretch since it's not sealed at all on the bottom.
I believe it was sold for a number of years as the jpoint, only slightly modified as the rms.
Sent from my SM-N910T3 using Tapatalk
ruckusjuice
10-19-17, 10:45
I know that Aaron Cowan was recently testing one out. I believe he did not have great things to say about it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
MeanCarbine
10-19-17, 19:44
I've heard good things about it. There are a few YouTube reviews. Here's one. He has a full review coming out soon.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTLRkWMU5_0
I just installed one on a 17 MOS. It seems like a nice piece of gear, but it does not appear to be as robust as a Trijicon. With that said it is much smaller, lighter and cheaper. I have a couple hundred rounds through so far and may try to carry it for duty once I vet it a bit more.
jsrange and others , thanks , this is the feedback I`m looking for as I can`t find one look at and hold. The attraction for me is light weight and low profile which will hopefully allow me to use the aftermarket sights I just put on the PPQ .... Dawson rear and Ameriglo front . Since this gun is an EDC , this looked like it has some promise . They claim they have supplied over 15k of these to the UK Armed forces , so maybe it will hold up .
I`ll probably wait several weeks before ordering as I just had my eye surgery today and won`t have the bandages off until late tomorrow .... the Dr. said my vision will actually get worse for several weeks and then improve . I really hope he`s right on that as I don`t want to switch to right hand shooting using non dominate left eye if I don`t have to .
The sight also looks like it can double as a "iron" rear sight because of the notch shown in the picture .... and I have several different height front sights for the "Q" to play with if needed.
As an FYI , Walther just came out with a new PPQ already set up for a suppressor and drilled for common red dot sights , but I have to buy another gun , as if that`s a problem !
Sorry for any errors in m,y post as I`m still on Tramadole for pain .
I couldn’t find one either so I finally gave up and ordered direct from the manufacturer. They offer the RMS in bundles with the mounting plate for the MOS in either 4 or 8 MOA. Took about a month to get it, they warn you about that on their site. They also offer a LEO discount which I didn’t find out about until after ordering.
Thanks for the feedback. Did you get the 4 or the 8 MOA dot? Heading to the Dr. shortly to have the bandages removed and then have to wait several weeks for the vision in that eye to come back , so I probably won`t order one until then . Since I have an astigmatism in that eye , I have some issues with red dots in general. Some work ok and others look like a cluster of grapes . I`ll be sending them an e mail asking how this works with an astigmatism. While this surgery won`t correct that problem , hopefully it solved the other issue so the red dot is usable .
If you can , let me know how it is doing ..... thanks !
Thanks for the feedback. Did you get the 4 or the 8 MOA dot? Heading to the Dr. shortly to have the bandages removed and then have to wait several weeks for the vision in that eye to come back , so I probably won`t order one until then . Since I have an astigmatism in that eye , I have some issues with red dots in general. Some work ok and others look like a cluster of grapes . I`ll be sending them an e mail asking how this works with an astigmatism. While this surgery won`t correct that problem , hopefully it solved the other issue so the red dot is usable .
If you can , let me know how it is doing ..... thanks !
I went with the 4 MOA. I also have astigmatism and do see the star pattern around the dot, but not always. Even with the fuzziness, with the smaller 4 MOA, its not bad at all. It should be noted that I am not wearing the correct contacts for my astigmatism and I have not updated my prescription in several years, so I expect that it will be much better when I do.
There are some good deals on the Trijicon nowadays, but I went with the RMS because I think its just a better fit with the MOS and should be strongly considered for people in a position where they may not be able to alter their slide. The biggest benefit is that it sits low enough that you don't need suppressor sights and the mount is thin, but still very secure. I have heard issue of the Trijicon mount on the MOS shooting loose after several hundred rounds and needed frequent tightening. What you may give up in water resistance is offset in the ease of battery changes. I tried to help this out by using some petroleum jelly around the gaps. With that said, the jury is still out on the durability of the RMS and you will be signing on as a beta tester if you get one.
WickedWillis
10-20-17, 11:06
With how insanely low type 1 RMR's have been recently, why even bother with a mini RDS that "might" work?
MeanCarbine
10-20-17, 12:46
With how insanely low type 1 RMR's have been recently, why even bother with a mini RDS that "might" work?
Because the RMR type 1 has problems with the battery contacts,....annoying green tinted glass,...and can not co-witness with factory height sights.
WickedWillis
10-20-17, 13:15
Because the RMR type 1 has problems with the battery contacts,....annoying green tinted glass,...and can not co-witness with factory height sights.
Seal plate usually takes care of any flicker I have seen. Someone mentioned using batteries with thicker collars (Panasonic) helps as well on another thread, sounds like a good idea, but I haven't tested it.
blue tint is a non issue for most, including myself.
co-witness is subjective.
All I am saying is the reviews so far on these by anyone who uses dots full-time, or are SME on red dots on handguns, they are no go for anything more than a range plinker.
This is a neat idea, but I would wait to see how they hold up if you’re using it on a defensive handgun. I could t find any water resistance claims, so that kind of set off alarms. I may not be swimming out of torpedo tubes, but I’ve sure as shit been soaked to the bones in some storms. Last thing I need is to have my primary sighting system go down due to water.
They do offer some nice features. The fact that it sits flush with the sides of the gun is nice. Battery replacement without removal is awesome. Just a little bit of maturity and they will be pretty darned good.
HardToHandle
10-20-17, 20:16
Positive Shield RMS assessment from something less than 1000 rounds on my Glock 26.
- I carry IWB, with supressor sights, so waterproofing is less critical in my determination
- detested the RMR's blue tint and fuzzy reticle, YMMV
- smaller form factor than comparables
- able to swap batteries without a range trip to verify zero (pro tip... The zero can wander on RMRs on reinstall)
- downsides include plastic lenses, which collects a bit of dust
I made my choice after a disappointing RMR experience . I like the RDS concept, but not an RMR fan.
To date, the Shield RMS is adequate.
Tango Charlie145
10-22-17, 00:00
Our agency got one of the 4 moa models for test and evaluation. Came with mounting plate and two batteries.
We tested this on a GLOCK 17 MOS. Everyone who shot this weapons system really tightened their groups, especially from 25-50 yards.
The biggest advantage of this sight is the fact it will work with factory sights (which that expense we would have to consider), small, lightweight and very durable.
We shot over 10,000 rounds with a variety of different shooters without any malfunctions.
We did have to re-tighten the screws as we did not locktite it because it was a T&E setup.
With the evaluation, we have or are in the process of approving these for off duty carry.
We will be looking to going to the MOS models in the future but the only .40 cal they make is the 35. We issue both 9mm and .40, choice of the deputy. GLOCK 35 are issued to SWAT and they may be the first ones we issue to.
Sure, there are more robust, expensive sights, but the Shield seems to fit our requirements.
Good luck.
TC145
Ordered one from Brownells, with their low profile mounting plate. I have five hundred rounds through it, with no flaws. With the low profile mounting plate, you can co-witness with oem sights. It works for me.
Been running a 4 moa Shield (with low profile mount) on my Glock 41 for a month, having put 300-400 rounds through it. Optic has been solid with no issues relating to moisture or durability or anything else for that matter.
The only issue I've noted has been shooter related...learning to use an optic as opposed to standard pistol sights, after shooting fixed sights for 30+ years.
I now have several hundred (a lot for me) through my 17 MOS with Shield now with no problems so far. I like it, but its my first optic so I having nothing to reference for comparison. For me, speed hasn't really improved at closer ranges, but where it really shines is longer range precision.
KITTEN_FRENZY
10-31-17, 17:18
Sage Dynamics did a torture test!
Results are not good lol
The RMS was toast after a direct hit from 1 shoulder height drop.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0hGk4EUs4_c
Sage Dynamics did a torture test!
Results are not good lol
The RMS was toast after a direct hit from 1 shoulder height drop.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0hGk4EUs4_c
This video so reminds me of knife reviews where the tester tries to smash cinder blocks and pry chunks out of petrified wood with a pocket knife and then complains when they break it. They then give a negative review after putting the knife through torture that it was never designed to take. This video may not be that bad, but it’s close.
I guess the RMS is not too impressive if you regularly drop electronic devices from 6 ft onto concrete or slam them repeatedly into 2x4s. I however do not do those things and if I happened to have to do so to save my life well then I will replace it and consider myself lucky that I lived through the experience.
I am sure they could make it much heavier duty, but then you lose the advantages the RMS has to offer. For those tier-1 operators out there that regularly have to destroy their equipment while using it, its probably a hard pass, but for those who can treat it with even a modicum of care it will probably be just fine. I will keep using it for now, despite the horrible review. Wish me luck.
MeanCarbine
10-31-17, 18:56
I'm not surprised by the drop test. I bet the manufacturer isn't either. Doesn't really change my mind about the sight or its usage.
cutter_spc
10-31-17, 21:46
This video so reminds me of knife reviews where the tester tries to smash cinder blocks and pry chunks out of petrified wood with a pocket knife and then complains when they break it. They then give a negative review after putting the knife through torture that it was never designed to take. This video may not be that bad, but it’s close.
I guess the RMS is not too impressive if you regularly drop electronic devices from 6 ft onto concrete or slam them repeatedly into 2x4s. I however do not do those things and if I happened to have to do so to save my life well then I will replace it and consider myself lucky that I lived through the experience.
I am sure they could make it much heavier duty, but then you lose the advantages the RMS has to offer. For those tier-1 operators out there that regularly have to destroy their equipment while using it, its probably a hard pass, but for those who can treat it with even a modicum of care it will probably be just fine. I will keep using it for now, despite the horrible review. Wish me luck.
Well then take from the video the positives about the sight, it held up fine until the abuse started. It's hard for me to believe the RMS sees military use and survives though.
It is interesting to note, Sage did the same, maybe even worse, to a type II RMR and it past with flying colors.
As he said in the video, it's a sample size of one, so the test may mean nothing. And he put the sight through the ringer on his dime to show us what it can and can't take, so now we have an idea of what the sight is capable of.
KITTEN_FRENZY
10-31-17, 21:56
Well then take from the video the positives about the sight, it held up fine until the abuse started. It's hard for me to believe the RMS sees military use and survives though.
It is interesting to note, Sage did the same, maybe even worse, to a type II RMR and it past with flying colors.
As he said in the video, it's a sample size of one, so the test may mean nothing. And he put the sight through the ringer on his dime to show us what it can and can't take, so now we have an idea of what the sight is capable of.
Yep. I was reaaaally hoping the RMS would hold up. The untinted lens is appealing and its low profile seem great for CC. However, For a sight that's less than $100 cheaper than the RMR type 2, I don't really think it's worth it. I bought mine online for under $500 shipped :)
I guess the RMS is not too impressive if you regularly drop electronic devices from 6 ft onto concrete or slam them repeatedly into 2x4s. I however do not do those things and if I happened to have to do so to save my life well then I will replace it and consider myself lucky that I lived through the experience.
I think you may want to rethink that whole use it to survive and then replace. If you drop your gun or have it dropped for you in a parking lot you may not be able to use the sight. I think that’s why the Sage guys stated it was good for plinking, varmints or range toys but not for defensive tools.
I really want this system and as many others as possible to succeed. More competition means better prices.
I’m pretty careful with my gear, yet I’ve still dropped guns onto concrete by people who were finger banging my guns to see if they liked a set up. I’ve eve had some folks knock a gun off of a bench before as they were setting their stuff up. You never know what will happen.
Didn’t mean to come off like a dick. I do see the limitations to the sight and am glad someone did put it through its paces to save us from having to. I am also sure the RMR is a more robust sight. I just don’t think I need that level of robustness when I can get something lighter, cheaper, smaller, that doesn’t require slide milling to use regular sights and still does the job I require (hopefully). Also, the sight failing is not the end of the world, that’s why we have iron sights on the gun. I could be wrong though, it definitely wouldn’t be the first time.
WickedWillis
11-01-17, 18:09
Didn’t mean to come off like a dick. I do see the limitations to the sight and am glad someone did put it through its paces to save us from having to. I am also sure the RMR is a more robust sight. I just don’t think I need that level of robustness when I can get something lighter, cheaper, smaller, that doesn’t require slide milling to use regular sights and still does the job I require (hopefully). Also, the sight failing is not the end of the world, that’s why we have iron sights on the gun. I could be wrong though, it definitely wouldn’t be the first time.
From the video it sounds like a good optic for range fun and plinking, but completely no go for a serious defensive minded firearm. Not sure there's a better SME on red dots than Aaron Cowan either
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.