Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 31

Thread: STI 2011 - DUO or other plate for RMR?

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,566
    Feedback Score
    45 (100%)
    My Staccato P and CHPWS plate gets here Tuesday. I'll follow up with some photos and my thoughts once I can ring it out.

    This will probably make me buy a C2 now.
    Only hits count......you can not miss fast enough to catch up


    "I'm just a one man army waging jihad against shitty ARs, one rifle at a time." Will Larson (IraqGunz) I miss you my friend

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    3,480
    Feedback Score
    58 (100%)
    Went with a .250”H X .115”W Dawson FS. Got it installed last night and verified sight height GTG this AM.
    This shoots POA/POI with my range loads.
    The lower mount required a different/taller FS.

    53C491A0-E877-4FAC-A3B9-CE88414EECED.jpeg
    AEBDF516-FB48-468F-8E8E-BC60DECB695C.jpg
    A true "Gun Guy" (or gal) should have familiarity and a modicum of proficiency with most all firearms platforms.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    306
    Feedback Score
    21 (100%)
    Owning both a P and a C2 now, I see the salient points of both guns.

    I know there are a lot of guys claiming that they can conceal a full-size 2011 (appendix, even!) without a problem. I am not one of them. The C2 does provide a G19esque concealment experience and I can appendix it fine in an LAS Concealment AIWB holster. It shoots, for me, at about 90% of the speed of the Staccato P (maybe .21-.22 splits versus .18-.19 on the P) I actually prefer the VIP (C2) grip for my hand size a little bit because the lip at the base of the front strap is perfect to catch my pinky finger. A magwell on the P would likely make it equivalent to me in this regard.

    I prefer the tool-less guide rod on the P to the recoil master on the C2, but I understand that Staccato is using what they use for maximum reliability with each slide length. The Dawson tool-less is just easier from a maintenance standpoint.

    I stand by the RDSM as a good mount, but I think Chambers Custom's method of selling you the mount on their site and then limiting installers to a small handful who generally don't stock the mount. It makes for a clumsy buying experience where, in both cases, it's taken a couple days for Chambers to get the mount shipped and then a separate interaction with the gunsmith is required.

    I used two different gunsmiths for my installs. One of them accepted the work and completed it promptly, but then notified me that the only payment option was a money order or cashier's check AFTER the work was done, adding a delay for me to mail payment. I should have asked in advance but I was perturbed that that wasn't part of the initial exchange. The second smith completed even faster (less than a week) and accepted PayPal, but when the screws provided by Chambers to mount the RMR were far too short (no threads were able to engage), he dumped me back to Chambers to resolve it. I guess I don't find that to be a surprise, but I could tell the screws were too short from looking at them and it adds yet another wrinkle to resolve.

    So...

    Overall, the RDSM is still a "go" for me. If you're ordering a Staccato, consider the iron sight models and RDSM. I think the C&H plate for the DUO guns looks good, too, but adding $145 on to the $500 premium for the DUO gun to get a mount that is, at best, about as low as the RDSM, seems like a lot to spend.

    One final thought: I went with the RM09 on the Staccato P (RM06 on the C2). This was on the advice of Aaron Cowan at a recent class. I really, really like the 1 MOA dot.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    12,145
    Feedback Score
    43 (100%)
    I see this is where all the adults and people who enjoy fancy things hang out.

    I'm debating the STI Staccato P or DUO.

    I generally like RMRs on guns, but as mentioned above it does sit very high and it's 25% more expensive.

    Can't decide
    Why do the loudest do the least?

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    SWMT
    Posts
    8,188
    Feedback Score
    32 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Eurodriver View Post
    I see this is where all the adults and people who enjoy fancy things hang out.

    I'm debating the STI Staccato P or DUO.

    I generally like RMRs on guns, but as mentioned above it does sit very high and it's 25% more expensive.

    Can't decide
    I chose both.

    " Nil desperandum - Never Despair. That is a motto for you and me. All are not dead; and where there is a spark of patriotic fire, we will rekindle it. "
    - Samuel Adams -

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,566
    Feedback Score
    45 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Eurodriver View Post
    I see this is where all the adults and people who enjoy fancy things hang out.

    I'm debating the STI Staccato P or DUO.

    I generally like RMRs on guns, but as mentioned above it does sit very high and it's 25% more expensive.

    Can't decide
    The DUO with the CHPWS is where it's at. You'll need a new front sight though but anything in the .190 height should be GTG.
    Only hits count......you can not miss fast enough to catch up


    "I'm just a one man army waging jihad against shitty ARs, one rifle at a time." Will Larson (IraqGunz) I miss you my friend

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    OUTPOST 31
    Posts
    10,518
    Feedback Score
    30 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by DaBigBR View Post
    I've been a little remiss. Here is my C2 with RDSM.



    I have since obtained a Staccato P and had an RDSM installed on it, too. I dig the mount.
    Da,

    Is the rear of the optic supported with the Chambers plate? I’ve seen pictures of guns with rear support in place and then also with the rear of the slide flat milled off for whatever reason which would seem problematic.

    From all the research I’ve done on this it seems the only legitimate options are the CHPWS and RDSM given their significant improvements over factory DUO design if milling a standard slide. So I’m trying to narrow down which way to go.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    306
    Feedback Score
    21 (100%)
    Mine has a small lip on the rear. The mount is also milled for removable bosses that Chambers can provide if desired. Joe says that they don't see them as necessary but I understand the trepidation with asking the screws to hold the optic in place in the vertical and horizontal planes.

    I think the C&H at $150 over the already $500 premium on the DUO is just a bridge too far. I would also consider Nighthawk's mount and maybe even Trijicon's as viable options that are cheaper than the DUO alone let alone with the C&H plate.

    Note that I have no issue with C&H's plate or even it's price, it's how much Staccato wants over base for the DUO.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    OUTPOST 31
    Posts
    10,518
    Feedback Score
    30 (100%)

    STI 2011 - DUO or other plate for RMR?

    Quote Originally Posted by DaBigBR View Post
    Mine has a small lip on the rear. The mount is also milled for removable bosses that Chambers can provide if desired. Joe says that they don't see them as necessary but I understand the trepidation with asking the screws to hold the optic in place in the vertical and horizontal planes.

    I think the C&H at $150 over the already $500 premium on the DUO is just a bridge too far. I would also consider Nighthawk's mount and maybe even Trijicon's as viable options that are cheaper than the DUO alone let alone with the C&H plate.

    Note that I have no issue with C&H's plate or even it's price, it's how much Staccato wants over base for the DUO.
    I'm tracking on that. The Nighthawk plate design looks good. Downside they’re for new builds only.

    I agree the up charge on the DUO is criminal, especially considering how unsupported a RMR ischemic mounted.

    As for the Chambers if they said they precision fit the optic to the plate then alright lets party. History has shown that simply bolting an optic onto a slide with no additional axial support will inevitably fail so I'm not sure why the 1911 crowd hasn't seem to have caught on to this yet. Also I think its wack he wont sell the plate outright but maybe that’ll change someday. His seems to be the lowest out there so that’s where I’m leaning at the moment.

    Are the removable bosses similar to the new V4 style from CHPWS?
    Last edited by jpmuscle; 08-15-20 at 22:54.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    306
    Feedback Score
    21 (100%)
    Oops...I missed that Nighthawk wasn't doing theirs as a service. I never really pursued it myself...my fault.

    The bosses for the Chambers are little metal ...nubs?... that drop into machined spots in the mount and then stick up high enough to interface with the optic. I have a set for one of my RDSMs and have not installed them to see how tightly fit they are. They aren't as nice as the T posts from C&H, but it's notable that the bosses are milled into the V4 C&H plate, it's the screw posts that are replaceable. It's been "on the list" of things to do, but the Staccato P that could use them is a range only gun and is just so dead nuts perfect right now that I don't want to pull the optic until the end of the shooting season. There's a little bit of superstition in there, but it's where I'm at on it...

    Now that I'm on a computer and not my damn phone I can talk a little more about the mount. I originally had the C2 done. The optic on it is a Type 2 RM06. The fit is very snug...not like ATEI snug, but snug. The P was done next and has a Type 2 RM09. The second RDSM does not fit to the optic as tightly. There is maybe a paper width of space between the optic body and the front of the wall. I talked to Joe about this and he says that it's because of the variation in optic dimensions and needing to make the mount big enough to fit the largest variation of the optic. That makes sense to me. He sent me out a little bag of bosses at no charge. This is probably going to be the case with any 1911/2011 optic mount because nobody is milling slides for the guns like they are for Glocks...it's all bolt on mounts (at least with the RMR).

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •