4 MOA Red Dot

[akoda]

hi,

I am considering a new cc pistol, I have a m&p 9 compact and love it but it's a little to big to carry comfortably. I am thinking smaller and since my other pistols are all S&W going glock. the glock 43x fits my hands well. BUT I love the new shields and the PC shield has the 4 MOA Red Dot Sights. Is that ok for a carry and are the aftermarket grips any good?

I'll carry IMWB

thanks for your opinions



Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[swsig]

I have a Vortex Venom 3 moa red dot on my FNX 45T home defense pistol. The dot is very easy to acquire when I raise it to fire, so a 4 moa should be fine. I've never tried to carry a pistol equipped with a red dot optic, so I can't say how comfortable it is. There is also the issue of snagging as you draw, which may or may not be a problem for you.

As to grips, I have a thin Talon rubberized grip on my Shield 9, and a thick Hogue rubber grip on my Shield 45. Both grips are excellent products. They are comfortable and grippy, and they stay in place. I chose the thicker Hogue to help absorb the increased recoil of the 45, and I don't think you'll need it on the 9. The Talon grip is not only less expensive, it is way easier to put on.

 

[akoda]

I ordered a S&W PC9, ported with night sites,feared the optics on a CCW. I'll get one later with the optics


Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[CB3]

I have four carry pistols with RDS and I have shot them a lot over the last four years. I sometimes carry my Shield gen 1 9mm AIWB. (I’m not sure what your reference IMWB means.) It has the Shield (RDS Manufacturer) 4 moa red dot sight machined into the slide. It is the version 1 sight. Since then Shield has come out with a compact model RMSc that is the same length but a little narrower, and another model that has water “proofing” features the others do not have.

The Shield family of RDS sights have been around a long time, I believe almost two decades. They are best known for their more entry level sights called the JPoint here in the US. The JPoint has the same length as the higher quality and more expensive Shield RMS. Thus a slide cut for a JPoint will fit the RMS and I believe even the mounting holes are the same by design. The RMS is the smallest size (length, width, height) sight for a handgun so it is targeted at the compact market. Other more robust sights (Trij RMR) are much bigger and more expensive and typically require taller iron sights to co-witness.

You will note in company descriptions that S&W says very little about the optic they can mount on the 4” Shield. This is most likely because it is one of the cheaper Shield optics. The good Shield RMS sights are about the minimum for CCW in robustness and features, but their size and reasonable price make them a good choice. They are sometimes hard to find here as Shield is an English company. I would not trust my life to a JPoint quality optic. S&W’s price with the optic is also noticeably low for a mounted optic, inferring they cut $$ corners with the optic. There are a number of other threads on this here and elsewhere.

I like the idea of a 4” Shield. The new grip texture by all accounts is somewhat aggressive for some people to carry. Simply gently sanding sharp high points of the checkering fixes that issue. The optic slide cut will accommodate the better Shield optics. I’d get the cut model and supply my own better optic.

However, the fiber optic sights S&W is putting on that Shield are not good to go for CCW both because they are relatively bulky and fragile, but mostly because they will present a colorfully confusing sight picture when paired with a red dot. Stupid rookie mistake.

Now, as to the wisdom of putting an optic on a compact carry gun. The only real drawback is the expense. Other than that, optics are a faster, more forgiving sighting system than irons once you get the basics of correct pointing mastered, and you can still use the irons. With the Shield/Shield setup, you will still be able to use standard height iron sights and co-witness through the optic.

The Glock 43 makes an excellent host for a Shield RMS and would perform well and be able to be set up the way you need it for little more than buying the Shield with its baggage. You would still be shopping a la carte as plastic Glock sights should be replaced, you need the slide machined, and you would have to buy a Shield RMS.

I would be happy to share more to help you with your decision if the above is helpful. PM.

 

[snowman.45]

I just bought a Shield M2.0 4" PC 9mm with the RMSc red dot. After mounting the RMSc and making very slight adjustments, I put about 200 rounds through it; 150 FMJ and 50 JHP. This little pistol shot very tight groups and was absolutely reliable. It shot so well that I'm considering another in .45 ACP.

I'm interested to see how well the RMSc holds up over time. It seems well-constructed, but it hasn't been used enough yet to determine overall reliability. I believe there is a new aluminum-bodied Shield RMSc that is supposed to be quite rugged and reliable. At least there is an option should the RMSc shipped with the gun have issues.

 

[kmanick]

I've had 2 of the Shield mini sights, the 4moa came on my performance Center 9L
and I just happened to come across a deal on an 8Moa so I snagged that one as well.
The 8 just came off of my 9L and was replaced with a Trijicon
SRO. the shield mini sights are very small and light .
The auto adjust is very good and they stay on all the time.
The battery life on the ones I've had have been great, I change them once a ear.

Now to the bad. They use a plastic for the lense not glass and it
scratches and 'fogs up permanently" very easily, so be very very
careful when cleaning it do not use a hand towel or anything
that could scratch it.
I have a 9C version one that I carry now almost exclusively
over my shield (I shoot it much better) and I am thinking about
milling it for an RMR. Originally I was thinking about using the
4moa Shield sight but it's so scratched up, that am just going
to go with an RMR (it's not that much bigger)

 

[CB3]

All plastic lenses scratch. Economically priced optics use plastic lenses. The care of plastic is different than glass. When properly taken care of, plastic will work just fine.

My Shield RMS is almost three years old. It has been cleaned many dozens of times and has no scratches or occluding. Its as good as the day it was mounted. I often use a soft lens brush on it for dust. When it needs more, a soft lens cloth with lens cleaning solution rubbed gently does the trick. Plastic is less likely to break compared to glass which allows housings to be smaller, lighter and less robust to protect against impacts. There are always trade-offs. I do not see a plastic lens as a reason not to buy a smaller optic for a smaller gun at a more economical price. However, I have not dedicated the small Shield with the Shield RMS to every day carry. It is for occasional use when I do not carry my full size gun with an RMR.

The RMR (I have three) is the king of RDS. I love mine (all version 1) and have found them reliable. They are on a full size M&P, which is my carry piece about 80% of the time, and a Glock 17 and 19. The RMR is bigger than a Shield RMS in every dimension. On top of a (small) pistol small increases in both width and height translate to big differences that influence concealed carry. I would not hang an RMR off a Shield or Glock 43, but some do. A compact M&P is wider than a Shield and can handle a wider optic better. The RMR is a better optic in every way except size and cost.

 

[Doug M.]

I was worried about the fiber optic sights on the Shield when I tried one last weekend. I didn't even perceive them because I was focused on the red dot. It shot great, a really useful compensation for my age related eye problems. If I do end up with an issue, I'll replace them in a heartbeat.

The sight is enough lower than the Aimpoint on my G17 that the dot shows on presentation; the one on my G17 is just enough different from sights that I am slow with it. The correct answer, from doing some research on training, is a different presentation, to a higher plane and about 5000 practice draws.

This version of the Shield RMSc is likely sufficient for many shooters, who will not use it a lot or hard. If mine develops problems, I will replace it with the more expensive version. Not perfect, but no biggy - it is not a duty gun. A duty gun gets an RMR. One of our new patrol deputies just got back from the academy and they are now set up to teach to the population of RDS users. I don't need a co-witness except that my eyes still want to look for the sight and then move to the dot; not needed on the Shield, at least for me. On the Glock I have only the front, as it is enough to cheat, and if the RDS dies, I would use it like a ghost ring.