MOS VS Custom optic cut?

[TK66]

Hi Guys,

I'm wondering if there is a real benefit to either. Other than the obvious benefit of being able to run various sights on the MOS.  I'm talking more about the height or strength of each style.

If someone has had both MOS and a custom optic cut, please post your opinion.

 

Thanks,

TK

[rooster]

I have a custom optic cut on my g17. I went that way because the sight is captured front and aft perfect. The front of the sight is a radius, so the cut reflects this. The sight cannot move in any direction it can only be removed straight up and down. The screw holes were not tapped they were cut by some special way. Don’t remember what they called it. Anyway there is no stress on the mounting screws so I think it will take the beating riding on recoil. So far I have about 5k rounds and it hasn’t moved. There’s no way a mos plate is as strong. But as you know there’s no free lunch. With the cut I cannot change to another brand.

[jcc7x7]

I retapped an open gun for the MOS plates, so I could change optics if the whim came over me

Plus have an MOS glock 34.

Neither has ever given me any problems holding the optic in place securely.

The thickness of the plate is not going to hinder the shoot ability of the gun.

[B_RAD]

I personally don't think the plate adds enough height to be an issue. So, for the idea of milling is better because it gets the optic lower, isn't worth milling alone, IMO. The MOS plate is not near as tall as other guns adapters. Even then, I wouldn't mill for that reason. 

 

As for the milling creating a tighter pocket that is somehow better for the optic, I'm not sure I buy that. It may take stress off the screws, or at least some of the stress, but the internals of the otpic still take the same stress. The slide still slams back and forth.  

 

If I was buying a new gun and that gun has the OR option, I'd choose that. 

 

The ability to change otpics, take it off completely and shoot production, and resale make the OR a better option for me.

 

 

[HoMiE]

There are companies that mill the slide and you can get a cover plate if you wa t to switch back to irons. 

[Aircooled6racer]

Hello: Another option is buying a slide with the sight cut you want. I went with a Brownells RMR G17 slide and I am so happy with it I actually bought another one for a spare. It did not cost much more than what people are charging for cutting the slide alone. So with my G17 I slide one slide off and it is now a Production legal pistol. One pistol two division ready in less than 10 seconds. I forgot to add I did have a G34 MOS and prefer the custom slide more. Thanks, Eric

[TK66]

Thanks for the replies!  I was thinking more along the lines for EDC.  I have a 17 MOS and its holding up well so far but I only use that at the range.

[Blue Jacket]

I ve used my 17 MOS for 4 run and guns with an RMR so far no problems.  I really like it.  

[hlpressley]

I always laugh when I hear people talk about how a custom milled slide is advantageous for finding the dot since it sits lower. If you put in the work to find the dot, you can find the dot no matter how high or low it is. If you don’t put in the work, you won’t. 

 

I own both, and have no preference either way. As someone mentioned above the plate doesn’t add enough height to matter. 

[TK66]

For me picking up the dot isn't a issue at all. Lots of drawing and dry firing makes it easy. I was more concerned with the strength of the type mount for everyday carry/abuse.  

[Helios]

Take a look at the Agency Arms AOS system if you want a universal low footprint optic system. I’ve never had a MOS, always had my slides milled, 5 RMRs and a DPP. But the AOS or even the Unity ATOM system look like better universal systems than the MOS in my opinion. 

[dapribek]

I have 2 G 34s, one milled and one MOS, can’t really tell the difference when shooting them. 

[TK66]

11 hours ago, Helios said:

Take a look at the Agency Arms AOS system if you want a universal low footprint optic system. I’ve never had a MOS, always had my slides milled, 5 RMRs and a DPP. But the AOS or even the Unity ATOM system look like better universal systems than the MOS in my opinion. 

I just looked at the  Agency Arms AOS.  Definitely one to consider if you want to try different optics!  

[PlayFront36]

I went with a Brownells slide to get the lowest sitting RDS option.  I do not own a MOS but have heard issues of users not using loctite on the plate screws and having those come loose beneath the RDS causing inaccuracy.

[Bfrisk72]

I havent pulled the trigger to have my G34 cut for an optic but in discussing the options with my gunsmith he did make a good point regarding the depth of milling and thread engagement on the MOS is minimal.  This seems to jive with me after hearing several stories about insufficient thread locker resulting in lost zeros or sights becoming detached. 

[MemphisMechanic]

On 3/10/2019 at 6:48 PM, hlpressley said:custom milled slide is advantageous for finding the dot since it sits lower. If you put in the work to find the dot, you can find the dot no matter how high or low it is. If you don’t put in the work, you won’t. 

 

I own both, and have no preference either way.

 

Intersting. I shot a Q5 Match and went back and forth between tall dot atop plate and irons. There’s a massive difference, and several days of dryfire are needed to get the presentation with the dot back, after you switch back to low irons for a couple weeks.

 

I now have a PPQ milled to put the dot where the low factory irons lived, and presentation with my ironsight walthers is identical. 

 

It made a huge difference for me.