downside to MOS?

[davsco]

other than price, any downsides to the glock MOS handguns vs non-MOS relating to USPSA shooting?  maybe higher sights?  anything else?

 

and since i'm asking, any backwards compatibility issues with a gen 5 regarding using gen 4 magazines, sights/sight cuts, etc?

 

thanks!

 

edit - this gun would not have a dot on it, just production using iron sights

Edited August 6 by davsco
clarification

[Moloch38]

Its been argued to death earlier, but I don't think higher sights are an issue for your application. Mags, sights, etc are compatible, as is the ambi mag release and if you move to a full length guide rod w/insert. The slide stop is Gen 5 only and magwell needs to be Gen 5 as it is a wider gun (would squeeze the grip too much to not drop mags). I would check triggers, I got a Gen 5 trigger, but the trigger bar, springs, etc all seem the same. Plunger geometry is different. 

[NWfront]

The only downsides I've noticed with the MOS is that the additional plate and screw's increase the chances of something coming loose.  The other is that in my Gen 4 brass would often hit the optic but that seems to no longer be an issues with my Gen 5's. 

[Southpaw]

You mean downside of MOS vs. custom milled slide for optic or downside of MOS if just shooting with iron sights?

 

If just using iron sights, the MOS limits your sight options as most sights would hang over back of slide and also cover part of MOS plate. Dawson makes sights for MOS Glocks, both normal height and taller ones to co-witness with an optic.

[davsco]

1 hour ago, Southpaw said:

You mean downside of MOS vs. custom milled slide for optic or downside of MOS if just shooting with iron sights?

 

If just using iron sights, the MOS limits your sight options as most sights would hang over back of slide and also cover part of MOS plate. Dawson makes sights for MOS Glocks, both normal height and taller ones to co-witness with an optic.

yeah just shooting with iron sights.  seems their gen 5 g 34 is MOS-only.

[Southpaw]

Yeah then just fewer options on sights. I also wish they made the 34 Gen 5 in non MOS.

[tdp88]

The sights would be the only issue but Dawson makes a set but I don't think they are adjustable. If you don't like Dawson I've seen several who grind on the Taran and Vogel sights to get them to fit the MOS. I don't think it takes much to get them to work. 

[Moloch38]

1 hour ago, tdp88 said:

The sights would be the only issue but Dawson makes a set but I don't think they are adjustable. If you don't like Dawson I've seen several who grind on the Taran and Vogel sights to get them to fit the MOS. I don't think it takes much to get them to work. 

Taran makes Gen5 MOS sights now for if are are using an RMR. Worked great for me.

[tdp88]

1 hour ago, Moloch38 said:

Taran makes Gen5 MOS sights now for if are are using an RMR. Worked great for me.

 

Didn't know that. Looks like they are doing standard height as well as co-witness. 

[OdinIII]

Anyone know if the RMR height Dawson’s work with the SRO?

[JohnnyD]

I'm trying to decide on building a Gen3 stripped frame up for Carry Optics with Brownells slide or buying a complete MOS.  The Gen3 route would be slightly cheaper and have the sturdier mount but can't make up my mind.

 

Probably going to go 507C or SRO if I feel like splurging.

[OdinIII]

I only know what I’ve read but it sounds like you want the Gen5 for the better ejection. Gen3’s and I’m assuming ones with aftermarket slides have to be tuned to reduce brass strike on the optic. If that isn’t an issue for you then it doesn’t matter which one you go with.

Personally, I like the flexibility of the MOS system.

[JLB-US]

15 hours ago, tdp88 said:

I've seen several who grind on the Taran and Vogel sights to get them to fit the MOS. I don't think it takes much to get them to work. 

Taran sights work fine in mine with no mods. Little overhang on back, but not enough to be an issue, and honestly if you look at other designs a slight overhang is not uncommon on many models .

 

No dot right now, so I felt no need to grind off the front of the rear sight (i.e. my tactical MOS plate retention ledge).

Edited August 8 by JLB-US

[Terp]

 

I get all my slides milled; the more than quadruple the number of threads securing the optic to the slide helps me sleep at night.

 

 

 

[deerslayer]

On 8/6/2019 at 6:43 AM, davsco said:

other than price, any downsides to the glock MOS handguns vs non-MOS relating to USPSA shooting?  maybe higher sights?  anything else?

 

and since i'm asking, any backwards compatibility issues with a gen 5 regarding using gen 4 magazines, sights/sight cuts, etc?

 

thanks!

 

edit - this gun would not have a dot on it, just production using iron sights

 

I believe gen 5 uses a different height sight.  

[Honeybooboo]

Optic sits higher and it’s not as secure. People try to justify the MOS as being just as good but it’s not. Just a matter if it’s worth it to you to spend a little extra to get it milled. 

[Braxton1]

On 9/26/2019 at 10:42 PM, Terp said:

 

I get all my slides milled; the more than quadruple the number of threads securing the optic to the slide helps me sleep at night.

 

 

 

 

The top photo illustrates the cause of MANY failures of the MOS (and any other design that uses interchangeable plates to mount the optic).  Look just aft of the plate-mounting screwholes and you'll see where the optic-mounting screws have projected through the plate so far that they're bottoming out against the slide.  No plate can take that kind of stress for long....

 

Thanks for posting that pic.  It illustrates a point I've wanted to make for a minute.

 

 

 

[firerain]

you never know if you are going to stick with one brand of red dot. So mos is much more convenient.

[Terp]

35 minutes ago, firerain said:

you never know if you are going to stick with one brand of red dot. So mos is much more convenient.

 

Some of us know...indecision is a dirty word.

[JLB-US]

I’m kind of with firerain, we are in a time of such flux with pistol mounted red dot sights (and mounting patterns). I had hoped the RMR was going to be the new standard with holosun now using it, but the Army apparently went with the Leupold system on the M17 muddying things. 
 

Even if it’s less than optimal, the plates will keep you from locking into what you find out is the “Beta max” or “8-track” of red dot systems 18 months from now.
 

I can easily see someone going for top 16 at nationals taking that risk for a dedicated slide though.

Edited November 10 by JLB-US

[TDF]

The only downside for irons on an MOS is that most of the popular sights like Warren and Dawson hang of the back of the slide since the dovetail is cut all the way to the rear of the slide.

[tdp88]

On 11/9/2019 at 9:07 PM, TDF said:

The only downside for irons on an MOS is that most of the popular sights like Warren and Dawson hang of the back of the slide since the dovetail is cut all the way to the rear of the slide.

Dawson makes non-cowitness mos sights that don't hang off the back. I don't think they have an adjustable option though. 

[TDF]

9 minutes ago, tdp88 said:

Dawson makes non-cowitness mos sights that don't hang off the back. I don't think they have an adjustable option though. 

Yeah I thought they did. I just meant that most of them do so your options are narrow. I run them anyway, they don’t  hang off much so it’s not an issue really. 

[TCB]

Has anyone experimented with shooting a MOS pistol with the plate removed? Like the saddle cut on Atlas Guns to reduce reciprocating weight...just something I’ve been curious about. 

[OdinIII]

Has anyone experimented with shooting a MOS pistol with the plate removed? Like the saddle cut on Atlas Guns to reduce reciprocating weight...just something I’ve been curious about. 

I have not but it doesn’t seem like a structural part. I think you’ll be fine.