So I see all these guns with RMR's on them now. I admit, I see them and think, I prolly need one of those. But then I think, how is an RMR superior to just slapping a Crimson Trace on?

A laser is smaller for carry and can be shot from far more angles, heck, you don't even to have your head behind the sights if need be.

So is the RMR thing just about the new cool thing, or is there an advantage over something like a CT that I'm missing? I only have one gun with CT grips (J frame), so I'm not a "laser guy" or anything, just curious.

Thinking the RMR doesn't give away your position when a laser gives the perp something to aim at?

As you may have already discovered with your Crimson Trace grips on your J-Frame, lasers have a limited useful range. At roughly 15+ yards, most laser dots are too small and light to pick up easily, especially in bright lighting or on lighter-colored backgrounds. (When in dark or dim areas, the useful range is a bit further.)

This is exacerbated by the fact that the laser dot is also somewhat unstable. Even minute tremors in your hands are magnified significantly at 15+ yards. So at longer distances, you often end up with a tiny and light laser dot that's constantly moving around, which can be tough to pick up quickly and easily.

Red dots are still useable at ranges longer than 15 yards, in a variety of lighting conditions and settings. And provided you have a good grip and stance (similar to what you'd need to use iron sights but more forgiving), they're faster and easier to pick up than a laser dot.

So lasers really only have an edge at closer distances (10 yards and in, or so) when shooting from very unconventional positions where you couldn't see your sights or the FOV of a red dot at all. Point-shooting, if you will.

With something like a J-Frame, the sights suck, and it's too small for a red dot. But it's a close-range gun anyway. So the laser makes sense. On something larger like a compact/full size semiauto, the red dot would seem to have more advantages over the laser, if you're wanting something beyond just iron sights.

There's a reason that you don't really see anyone shooting handgun competitions with a laser, but you see plenty of folks competing with red dots.

Same thing on the prevalence of red dots on rifles vs. lasers.

To be fair, for self-defense the overwhelming majority of gunfights will be 5yds and under. So, a laser is a solid option for 90+% of what you'd encounter and any sights are still there. Taking it further...anyone who is concerned about 15+yd SD shots probably shouldn't be carrying a J-frame with crappy sights then (J-frame is capable, it's just the sights that suck).

It is understandable that lasers aren't used in competitions as they always involve longer shots...

I appreciate the post Rogue. That makes sense. I never shoot my J-frame more that 7 yards. The bouncing around of the dot if trying to hit plates at 15 yards could certainly be an issue. Makes sense now, I just couldn't come up with a reason on my own, but you've laid out a couple.

To each their own but I'm not a fan of this new fad of putting an RDS on a standard production handgun. It's great for competition pistols and I'm aware that it's easier, faster, better, etc. but the cost of the RDS + milling the slide = as much if not more than most of these guns are worth and for me that's simply ridiculous.

I have a friend who literally has dozens of Glocks and the 10 or so I saw had RMRs on them. I asked him if he hijacked a Trijicon truck and he laughed and told me how much it cost him

I showed him my carry piece with Crimson Trace grips and said for the price of one RMR installed, I outfitted four of my carry guns with CT grips.

some great reading about RMR and how they stack up. It's a long read but you can quickly scan over it and pick up some interesting information. I carry a Glock 19 with RMR, but it took me several thousand rounds of practice to feel that it gave me an advantage.


http://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/...903192fa603fce6f.pdf