A brief reflection on running an trijicon RMR on my Glock 19 in MDFI HG1/HG2

**willowofwisp** · 04-18-11, 22:40

This weekend I took MDFI (Michigan Defensive Firearms institute) HG1 and HG2 which was taught by Erik Utrecht of Blue Cell protective services and Tom Fineis of Raven Concealment. I had just picked up the Glock 19 from Doug a local machinist (he does slide/trigger work for Steve Fisher and Chris Costa of Magpul). I promptly zero'd the the RMR and just put a few rounds through the gun before putting it away for the weekend. Over the weekend I ran roughly 700 rounds through the gun. The first advtanges I noticed from the RMR were speed, I could quickly get hits on both steel and targets past 15 yards..much faster than I was with Irons, another advantage is the huge RMR on top of my slide, which allowed for a ledge for either racking the slide or press checking. The only disadvantage I really noticed was shooting close up, anything closer than 5 yards and I was much slower with the dot versus irons, at that point if it wasn't precision shooting and just COM hits I was using the RMR as a huge ghost ring, which worked pretty well.

I think one of the biggest advantages with the RMR came with one handed manipulations..most of my guns have had some type or rear sight wiht a ledge, which helped for one handed racking the slide, but sometimes the ledge would slip off the holster or belt or you could miss the surface entirely, with the RMR it was ridiculous, I could rack the slide off of my knee or really any surface, the huge window of the RMR was a huge help in that category.

**FromMyColdDeadHand** · 04-19-11, 00:07

What dot is that on the RMR?

What do you think about the rear sight placement in relation to the RMR?

**decodeddiesel** · 04-19-11, 00:37

I have a feeling we are seeing the future now with this. Very cool stuff.

**TomF** · 04-19-11, 12:18

I first shot a red-dot pistol close to three years ago, and I'm still spending time with the concept. Most people end up slower at closer distances trying to find the dot. Seeing the iron sights coming into your vision is typically enough 'guidance' for our hand-eye coordination to line them up and press our shots off.

Unlike a rifle, there is no solid cheekweld to force our eye to look through the red dot. I find most people (myself included) end up pointing the pistol higher than it needs to be, and have to move it downward for the dot to become visible. Once you find the dot, it seems fairly easy to make good hits and find the dot again quickly after recoil.

I'm not totally sold on it, but we have had a lot of students that it works well for. Aging eyes especially have benefited from this set up, and guys with very serious eye dominance issues have had good luck as well.

It's a lot of fun clanging steel at 100yds over and over, though. As the distance increases, the dot becomes more and more of a multiplier, IMO.

For my use, I'm fairly certain I will stick with a good set of irons, but this setup can be beneficial given the shooter and situation.

**Don Robison** · 04-19-11, 12:46

Originally Posted by willowofwisp

I was using the RMR as a huge ghost ring, which worked pretty well.

That is the way we recommend using it in close.

**dookie1481** · 04-19-11, 16:29

Originally Posted by Tom Fineis

I first shot a red-dot pistol close to three years ago, and I'm still spending time with the concept. Most people end up slower at closer distances trying to find the dot. Seeing the iron sights coming into your vision is typically enough 'guidance' for our hand-eye coordination to line them up and press our shots off.

Unlike a rifle, there is no solid cheekweld to force our eye to look through the red dot. I find most people (myself included) end up pointing the pistol higher than it needs to be, and have to move it downward for the dot to become visible. Once you find the dot, it seems fairly easy to make good hits and find the dot again quickly after recoil.

I'm not totally sold on it, but we have had a lot of students that it works well for. Aging eyes especially have benefited from this set up, and guys with very serious eye dominance issues have had good luck as well.

It's a lot of fun clanging steel at 100yds over and over, though. As the distance increases, the dot becomes more and more of a multiplier, IMO.

For my use, I'm fairly certain I will stick with a good set of irons, but this setup can be beneficial given the shooter and situation.

I've never used one of these, so take this for what it's worth, but isn't "chasing the dot" the reason some people object to lasers as well? I've been told RE: lasers that one should use their normal visual reference, but when that is an issue, such as low light, shooting on the move, etc. that the laser is beneficial.

So should one rely on irons at close range, and utilize the dot when it becomes an advantage? Or is the optic obtrusive enough that it would preclude you from doing this?

**TomF** · 04-19-11, 17:53

Originally Posted by dookie1481

Or is the optic obtrusive enough that it would preclude you from doing this?

This. If you can see the irons, you can see the dot. And if you have a choice of irons or dot, I would choose the dot. The problem is getting the proper press out and sight picture to consistently find the dot quickly. It's a training issue, but even with a lot of practice on them, I'm still not totally sold (for my uses).

**willowofwisp** · 04-19-11, 18:10

Originally Posted by Tom Fineis

This. If you can see the irons, you can see the dot. And if you have a choice of irons or dot, I would choose the dot. The problem is getting the proper press out and sight picture to consistently find the dot quickly. It's a training issue, but even with a lot of practice on them, I'm still not totally sold (for my uses).

On day one that's what I was going doing and I thought pretty well, but for some reason on day two I was getting lazy with my press outs and started to chase the dot, it definitely showed with my speed being much slower.