Why is Trijicon RMR bad?

[Silverscooby27]

I’m shopping for dots, and the thing I hate the most is stuff that breaks. I have 4 vortex razors for PCCs, and one of 4 has already broken in less than a year. I’m shopping for carry optics so I understand that it rides the slide and really beats on the sight, and everything will break eventually. The RMR seems like it is probably the most durable, but nobody seems to like it for USPSA. I get that the window is square and small, but is this the only reason why it isn’t good for competition? Does it really matter that much? Has anyone used one with success or actually likes it? Thanks!

[M1A4ME]

I don't compete - but really, who looks at the window?  I thought the idea was to look at the target and when you have the dot on the target (where you want it) you squeeze the trigger.  You look at the target - the dot is there.

 

Honestly, I don't even notice the color issues many people complain about with RMRs.  It's the target and the dot.  Not the frame, not the color of the area around the dot/target.  The target and the dot.

 

But that's just me.

[Explosiveo]

Highly recommend the Delta Point Pro if your going to use it for competition. I guarantee you won't regret it. The window size absolutely does matter. DDP are proven to be a good Carry Optics optic.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[jnr88]

Can't go wrong with the DPP.

[Moloch38]

I use an RMR on an offset for my AR for the close up and awkward shots. Its not a PCC, but I like RMRs. 

[lacivilian]

It doesn't matter. Once you build up your index then the dot will always be there when you draw the gun. You look at the target not the dot so window size is almost irrelevant. The only upside is hard leans that you may find yourself fixing your presentation to find the dot. You can't go wrong with either the RMR or the DPP but it seems like you are already sold on the RMR. Pros: durable, brighter than dpp, easily adjustable, better battery life... Cons: small window

[Fo0]

RMR battery is on the bottom

[lacivilian]

5 minutes ago, Fo0 said:

RMR battery is on the bottom

It also will run for 3 years.

[Fo0]

16 minutes ago, lacivilian said:

It also will run for 3 years.

 

I can guaranty the battery is on the bottom, can you guaranty it will run for 3 years? 

[lacivilian]

1 minute ago, Fo0 said:

 

I can guaranty the battery is on the bottom, can you guaranty it will run for 3 years? 

I can guarantee you will take it off before the battery dies.

[caspian guy]

For a carbine i wouldn't mind one because the stock keeps you indexed behind the smaller window and the optic is closer to your eye than with a pistol which helps with the window size issue.

 

I tried one in CO and didn't like it for the smaller window (which was made worse by having the optic at arms length) and also it seems to have more distortion around the edge of the lens than the delta point did (gave a wierd visual as you transitioned the gun from target to target. ).

 

With a handgun anyway I was faster on the timer with the deltapoint than the rmr.

 

For background I am a decent middle of the road open shooter normally.

Edited August 9, 2018 by caspian guy

[MemphisMechanic]

The small window of the RMR along with a huge view-obscuring frame are the primary reasons it isn’t very popular in USPSA.

 

The popular ones:

 

Below is the RMR vs original Deltapoint. (Bear in mind that the Deltapoint PRO has a titanium shield around a considerably enlarged window as you can see in the post above. So the difference is even more dramatic.)

 

 

Edited August 9, 2018 by MemphisMechanic

[lacivilian]

If you’re not sold on any sight yet and you are putting this dot on a PCC. Then I have to recommend the Romeo3. Not nearly enough people give this optic the credit it deserves. It’s got a bigger window than the DPP, brighter dot, easier controls, and it is more durable than the RTS2. This is mine on my open gun and it is in my opinion the best micro dot on the market for uspsa shooters. I have shot it side by side to a DPP multiple times and the guys with DPP are blown away when they shoot the R3.

[Silverscooby27]

It’s going on a big fat carry optics gun, which is already barely making weight, so I don’t think it will fit, and even if it does may push it over weight. Thanks for the suggestion, though. On PCC I’m using an Aimpoint.

[Smithcity]

8 hours ago, MemphisMechanic said:

The small window of the RMR along with a huge view-obscuring frame are the primary reasons it isn’t very popular in USPSA.

 

The popular ones:

 

Below is the RMR vs original Deltapoint. (Bear in mind that the Deltapoint PRO has a titanium shield around a considerably enlarged window as you can see in the post above. So the difference is even more dramatic.)

 

 

 

Yep, this is why. Viewing area and bezel. Stray away from the RMR gen 1 for your pistol go for a Gen 2. You will find nothing that rivals it in durability. Honestly, the RMR won't hold you back from climbing the ranks in USPSA, it'll all have to do with you. Albeit, a smaller bezel and larger field of view will make things easier at the beginning. 

[MemphisMechanic]

11 minutes ago, Smithcity said:

Stray away from the RMR gen 1 for your pistol go for a Gen 2. You will find nothing that rivals it in durability.

 

Interesting how experiences differ! We have a thread full of people whose RTS2 and their backup RTS2 are both in for service, and then guys like you who find them perfectly reliable.

[ClangClang]

37 minutes ago, MemphisMechanic said:

 

Interesting how experiences differ! We have a thread full of people whose RTS2 and their backup RTS2 are both in for service, and then guys like you who find them perfectly reliable.

 

@Smithcity is saying that the RMR Type 2 is the most durable optic for CO. He's not talking about the RTS2 at all.

[Garmil]

Small window, large frame, not true 1x, overly tinted.

[Smithcity]

1 hour ago, ClangClang said:

 

@Smithcity is saying that the RMR Type 2 is the most durable optic for CO. He's not talking about the RTS2 at all.

Yes, my bad, Type 1 and Type 2 is the correct verbiage.  All referring to the RMR. I had the rmr type 1 flicker issue (albeit solvable). Type 2 worked out of the box on my M&P

[Janskis]

23 hours ago, M1A4ME said:

I don't compete - but really, who looks at the window?  I thought the idea was to look at the target and when you have the dot on the target (where you want it) you squeeze the trigger.  You look at the target - the dot is there.

 

Honestly, I don't even notice the color issues many people complain about with RMRs.  It's the target and the dot.  Not the frame, not the color of the area around the dot/target.  The target and the dot.

 

But that's just me.

The bigger the glass, the more room for error. Important when you are on the clock trying to make accurate hits on target, or (favourite of the americans') in a fight for your life -situation.

 

(Basically) zero parallax lets you use the dot for aiming no matter where it is on the glass. If you have a tiny glass, you basically lose that advantage.

[M1A4ME]

13 minutes ago, Janskis said:

The bigger the glass, the more room for error. Important when you are on the clock trying to make accurate hits on target, or (favourite of the americans') in a fight for your life -situation.

 

(Basically) zero parallax lets you use the dot for aiming no matter where it is on the glass. If you have a tiny glass, you basically lose that advantage.

I've done that.  Just to prove it to myself.

 

1st round with the dot on the target but with the dot at the left side of the lens.

2nd round with the dot on the target but with the dot at the top of the lens.

3rd round with the dot on the target but with the dot at the right side of the lens.

4th round with the dot on the target but with the dot at the bottom of the lens.

5th round with the dot on the target but with the dot in the center of the lens.

Convinced myself that I didn't need to "work" the dot into the center of the lens to put the bullet where it needs to go.  If the dot is where I want it all I need to do is squeeze the trigger enough to make the pistol fire.

 

Both mine are DI RMRs so I don't have battery/switch/electrical issues.  Some day they'll need new tritium for low/no light use but the FO should work forever for daylight use.

 

I have a couple DP Pros and have no complaints about them.  Batteries lasted just over a year on one and just under a year on the other one (this one sees extremes in temperature compared to the one on the CZ75 Compact of my wife's, hers is kept in the bedroom where she can get to it if she needs to.)  But I don't notice the "window" size on the DP Pros either.

[Janskis]

29 minutes ago, M1A4ME said:

I've done that.  Just to prove it to myself.

 

1st round with the dot on the target but with the dot at the left side of the lens.

2nd round with the dot on the target but with the dot at the top of the lens.

3rd round with the dot on the target but with the dot at the right side of the lens.

4th round with the dot on the target but with the dot at the bottom of the lens.

5th round with the dot on the target but with the dot in the center of the lens.

Convinced myself that I didn't need to "work" the dot into the center of the lens to put the bullet where it needs to go.  If the dot is where I want it all I need to do is squeeze the trigger enough to make the pistol fire.

 

Both mine are DI RMRs so I don't have battery/switch/electrical issues.  Some day they'll need new tritium for low/no light use but the FO should work forever for daylight use.

 

I have a couple DP Pros and have no complaints about them.  Batteries lasted just over a year on one and just under a year on the other one (this one sees extremes in temperature compared to the one on the CZ75 Compact of my wife's, hers is kept in the bedroom where she can get to it if she needs to.)  But I don't notice the "window" size on the DP Pros either.

I didn't try to argue that the RMR couldn't do that. Just that when you are on the clock, bigger glass means less searching since it is easier to find the dot and thus faster shooting.

[biggulp]

RMR pros: absolutely stupid tough.. when mine was installed on my M&P9, I'd use it as a slide racker on a regular basis just because I could. Also fairly compact, pretty much the perfect for those who want an optic on their real world carry gun.

 

RMR cons: tiny window, huge frame, blue fun house mirror lens, bottom mounted battery (long life, but when it does go, you have to pull the optic and re-zero)

 

Basically, if it's for a real world carry gun, it's absolutely good to go. If it's for a game gun (pcc, co, etc), there are a pile of far superior options.

[Jlr99]

The bigger the glass, the more room for error. Important when you are on the clock trying to make accurate hits on target, or (favourite of the americans') in a fight for your life -situation.
 
(Basically) zero parallax lets you use the dot for aiming no matter where it is on the glass. If you have a tiny glass, you basically lose that advantage.

Even with his subtle jab at American culture and our ability to use a firearm to defend ourselves instead of a wooden stick, his post is accurate about the larger glass.

Sent from my VS996 using Tapatalk

[Wisemenofgotham]

For a "go to war" optic, it's very difficult to find a better option than a Trijicon RMR (RM06 is my choice).  However for shooting sports, I highly suggest the ROMEO3.  All the best with your decision; with training, you can't make a bad choice.