Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Chrome308

  • Rank
    Looks for Range

Profile Information

  • Real Name
    Jacob Crow

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Why do you think green is more visible to the human eye, and if it was, how relevant is that when the brightness is adjustable? i’ve heard this before about green being more visible, but for me that abstract statement is not the entire story. Dot glass coatings, brightness vs battery life tradeoffs, and emitter technologies are all factors which may outweigh the blanket statement about colors and the human eye.
  2. I’m using the SpringCo trigger springs. The safety blade does have nearly as much pressure now as the reduced weight trigger itself, so your technique has to be on point to get the trigger to pull without engaging the safety. If you pull straight back and/or depending on your hand size and ergonomics it could be a non-issue or a big problem. I’m taking it as a teaching point to improve my trigger pull technique, but sometimes I dont get my finger on it just right and the safety catches. using just one of the two springco trigger springs might be an option for some people. personally, I refuse to shave down the trigger safety. I may want to return to a 100% stock trigger at some point.
  3. Dara shipped to my doorstep 4 days from my order, and it came already cut for an optic. Also I really like their paddle option. It sits in a drawer now since my Red Hill competition holster finally arrived.
  4. Well thats interesting. Good idea to test that. FWIW, after 1k rounds, my Q5 SF has some play, but not enough for any contact thus far. Mags and slide show no signs of metal to metal contact and no failures of any kind as of yet.
  5. Thats just not going to be as durable with as the RMR with that design, but good on Trijicon for going for a big window.
  6. Depends on the model, but (on paper) the STS2 C-More is similar in size to the Deltapoint (which is good).
  7. I've noticed an ongoing trend, and comparing an RMR recently at a store to a Burris Fastfire 3 I own brought up the issue again. What good is a larger red dot front window if the view from the rear is obstructed anyway? Trijicon SRS, MRO, and yes, even the RMR I'm looking at you. Red dots have an eyebox. The eyebox is where you can place your eye and see the dot against the target. You can see through the window glass of a red dot from a many angles, but the dot can only be seen if your eye is within the parallel lines at the edges of the optic window. For simplicity, I'll describe this eyebox as a rectangle, viewed from above, with the sides of the rectangle being parallel to the direction of aim, and the width of the rectangle being decided by the /smallest/ of the optic's one or two windows. If the limits of the eyebox are truly parallel depends on if the dot is actually projected at infinity or if its projected closer, at say, 100y or 50y or something. The differences are minor however, so lets assume infinity for simplicity. Note: I don't actually believe most manufacturers claims that the dots are 'parallax free', only that they're mostly parallax free. Anyway, I digress. So what's the benefit of having a larger front aperture than the rear if the eyebox is decided by the smallest aperture? I'd say there is no benefit, other than the very slight quality of life from having a bit less optic housing obscuring your dominant eye, but when shooting with two eyes open, this seems pretty insignificant. So IMHO the SRS and the MRO's larger front apertures are snake-oil. They offer an eyebox only as large as the smallest of their two windows. And the RMR, which has a glass window which is 0.56" high and 0.87" wide on paper sure seems visibly shorter than a Burris Fastfire (not a durable optic BTW), despite the FF3's window being nearly equivalent at 0.58" high x 0.82" wide. Looking through both, the Trijicon RMR seems significantly shorter, despite the nearly identical technical specs. Taking a closer look, the rear of the RMR protrudes above the bottom of the glass by about 10%-14% of the height of the glass, which eliminates that bottom part of the glass from the eyebox. That part of the glass is useless, you'll never see the dot in the bottom portion of the glass, no matter how you align it with your eye. So this was long, but I wanted to highlight some B.S. that's going on in the red dot market. Don't fall for it. Front window size doesn't matter on red dots if the view is constrained behind it, by a smaller rear aperture, or part of the rear housing in the case of the RMR.
  8. My Pro model just came in today, so that tells me the April batch is now here! Mine doesn’t seem to have the extreme magazine side to side play on initial inspection, but its also still a virgin. Will get some rounds downrange with it tomorrow. TTI +5 baseplates just barely fit with the Pro magwell (on a PPQ M2 mag body and follower for 20 total).
  9. I really appreciate the info on this forum. I already put money down on a SF, so naturally I'm very interested in this issue as it seems like it could be a serious design defect. So how many FTEs are we talking about here? Anybody have significant numbers of rounds downrange with NO failures? I'm seeing echos of this on the Walther forums now, and with only 2-300 guns out there now, that's not good for the next batch of 2,000 due in a few weeks here. I'm not in a rush to get a new competition gun, the new SF just seemed like exactly what the doctor ordered, but I won't accept a gun that malfunctions once a match. I've been using a Walther P99 AS for literally 10 years now, and I can't remember how many years its been since I saw a failure of any kind. Side to side play on the magazine measures ~0.065" or 1.6mm and there is really no way for the magazine to contact the slide at either extreme. Its not good news that Walther took one gun back and decided it couldn't reproduce the issue. That tells me they may be in denial or completely unaware as of yet there there is an issue. Should I refuse to accept the gun that I paid for from the dealer when it shows up?
  10. I play a ton of MW3. Its great fun, but unfortunately, outside of the occasional sight picture, I don't think it translates at all to actual practical shooting.
  11. I've noticed that I also tend to flinch more when shooting static. In that sense, practical (rapid) shooting is helping to teach my slow-fire.
  12. A sparring stance is a good start for general purpose dynamic movement, but its not optimized for the same duties and tasks as a stationary shooting stance. For one thing, movement in martial arts is quite different from movement in a stage (skipping versus even heel-toe talking). Tai chi walking is probably the most similar, but its more optimized for uncommitted steps and hand to hand combat. Sparring stance vs shooting stance: Similarities - keeping the knees bent, upper body slightly forward, weight on the balls of your feet. Differences - aggressive recoil management = more aggressive forward lean. perpendicular to target (isosceles stance) for balanced grip. Sticking to what you're comfortable with won't let you grow to your full potential. Since often you're on the move anyway, what the lower body is doing is probably less critical than what the upper body is doing.
  13. It depends on your style, but most people load them into the sidesaddle from the bottom, w/ primers facing down. This should be fastest for refilling the mag tube. I also keep a couple inverted in the side saddle for over the top loads directly into the chamber.
  • Create New...