SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  SIG Pistols    Glock 19 MOS aftermarket plate preference
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Glock 19 MOS aftermarket plate preference Login/Join 
Just mobilize it
posted
Who does everyone like for aftermarket MOS plates for a Holosun 507c? I’m putting it on my gen 5 19 MOS. I have read things about C and H and Forward Control Designs, though FCD does not appear to have cross compatibility with the RMR like CHP.

I could use the factory plates though I’ve read they are hit and miss. I’ve also read about “sealer plates” though not sure if that is better than just getting an entire aftermarket adapter plate or not.

I’m not a high volume shooter, even aside from the pandemic ammo crisis, maybe shooting max 200 rounds in a session with any particular platform. I don’t plan to be torture testing this and racking it off metal or wood barricades and rolling around in gravel. Who knows though I may change my mind if I am confident in the system.

What would you recommend based on your personal experience or research?

Thanks!
 
Posts: 4611 | Registered: July 24, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
I kneel for my God,
and I stand for my flag
posted Hide Post
C&H Precision.

 
Posts: 1812 | Location: Oregon | Registered: September 25, 2001Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Just mobilize it
posted Hide Post
^^^^^nice! That will be pretty much my setup. Got the ACSS reticle and eager to get it mounted.
 
Posts: 4611 | Registered: July 24, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
I agree with C&H. I have not used FCD but I think some of the C&H features are innovative and worth it. I'm sure you'd be fine with either.
 
Posts: 5163 | Location: Iowa | Registered: February 24, 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Diablo Blanco
Picture of dking271
posted Hide Post
I have 3 of the C&H plates set up on 3 of my MOS Glocks and one on a P320 and highly recommend them. They have become my go to mounting plates.


_________________________
"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile - hoping it will eat him last” - Winston Churchil
 
Posts: 2956 | Location: Middle-TN | Registered: November 05, 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Just mobilize it
posted Hide Post
Okay C and H it is. Seems like $75 for a little metal plate is ridiculous though you get what you pay for right? Thanks guys!
 
Posts: 4611 | Registered: July 24, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
I just put a FCD on a gen4 mos. I went with the RMR, and FCD based on advice from a friend. I don't see any gaps in at all.

My next one may have to be a little cheaper, the RMR cost the same as the gun.
 
Posts: 380 | Registered: March 30, 2009Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Forward Controls Design are far superior to C&H. Perfect fit to slide, tight fit to sight.

I have both the RMR and RMRcc plates but sold my Glocks. They are are posted in the classifieds.
 
Posts: 4713 | Location: Indiana | Registered: December 28, 2004Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
I prefer the C&H due to the extra thread engagement provided by the T posts, however the FCD plate is also good. Both are superior to Glock factory plates.

My agency requires C&H plates for use with the Glock MOS system, as does at least one other federal agency and multiple large local agencies I'm aware of.
 
Posts: 528 | Location: Texas | Registered: March 25, 2013Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of bcjwriter
posted Hide Post
I also like the CH Precision.



 
Posts: 1965 | Location: Southern CA | Registered: July 27, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
The C&H plates I purchased and returned were unacceptable in quality of machining, fit, and basic design. Visible machining marks, loose fit to slide, and poor alignment with slide features. One had the holes for the plate to slide screws off location enough to cause the screws to slant a little and one side of the screw head to stick up and interfere with the optic.

The T-nuts that are countersunk into the bottom of the plate are only captured by a very thin piece of 6061 aluminum that will tear out with a good enough hit to the optic. The extra thread engagement doesn't do you any good if that happens.

Seriously, I was really surprised how bad the design is and I don't understand why any agency would spec them. Maybe good marking by C&H, but from an engineering and manufacturing perspective they aren't worth the money. I wanted to like them and thought the T-nut idea was good in theory, but found it is not in practice, so I returned them.

FCD plates fit the slide perfectly, and the optic fits very snug to the plate. All features are aligned between plate and slide, and they are 4140 steel. Machining and finish quality is much better than C&H.

The entire FCD design principle is for the optic to fit the plate tightly, and absorb all the recoil forces so the screws only have to clamp. Torque spec for optic screws is around 13 in-lb and with loctite they aren't going to back out. And with 4140 (barrel steel) the threads are strong enough to take the torque and not strip.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Lefty Sig,
 
Posts: 4713 | Location: Indiana | Registered: December 28, 2004Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Rustpot
posted Hide Post
Also worth noting the FCD plate is not advertised as cross-compatible with Holosun because it's made to tightly fit the RMR/SRO and the Holosun body tolerances may require fitting or have a slightly loose fit. But if you want that plate and a Holosun it's very likely you can get them to fit if you're willing to do a little modification to something.
 
Posts: 6030 | Location: Romeo, MI | Registered: January 03, 2009Reply With QuoteReport This Post
The wicked flee when
no man pursueth
Picture of KevH
posted Hide Post
I have a C&H plate, but would not buy from them again.

They're overpriced for many items, their customer service and quality control is...well...lacking.

I would probably go with the FCD plate.


Proverbs 28:1
 
Posts: 4198 | Location: Contra Costa County, CA | Registered: May 28, 2004Reply With QuoteReport This Post
  Powered by Social Strata  
 

SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  SIG Pistols    Glock 19 MOS aftermarket plate preference

© SIGforum 2024