Aimpoint® Next Gen
nextgen.aimpoint.com
It seems they are about to release something.. I guess noone has a clue about it?
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Aimpoint releasing product
- Thread starter Near miss
- Start date
nextgen.aimpoint.com
It seems they are about to release something.. I guess noone has a clue about it?
In for the disappointment of it being the exact same RDS technology in just another weird shaped housing with a $1498 MSRP.
Nothing really huge, they just improved the Acro series.
-2032 battery with 5 years batterylife
-No need to remove optic to change battery
-Brighter dot (did anyone need it?)
-And there is some lens cover apparatus to fit ARD on it
It is improvement but nothing spectacular. No doubt they worked hard to keep the unit as rugged with the 2032 battery.
-2032 battery with 5 years batterylife
-No need to remove optic to change battery
-Brighter dot (did anyone need it?)
-And there is some lens cover apparatus to fit ARD on it
It is improvement but nothing spectacular. No doubt they worked hard to keep the unit as rugged with the 2032 battery.
I think this is a pretty good development. The Acro was a great product in every way except the battery life. I will probably have to get the new one.
Have you guys ever thought about what is gained with a closed-emitter pistol RDS?
I have, and the answer is: not much
You still have two exposed pieces of glass that can get covered in lint (CCW), water, dust, mud, etc, etc and depending on what gets on them and how much of it you might not be able to use the sight at all. Just like an open emitter RDS. I've shot USPSA matches in the rain and have not had an issue landing accurate shots even with water pooled on the inside of the lens when the pistol sat on the holster with rain falling on it. Sure the dot wasn't perfectly round but it was still in the correct location so putting red on brown ends up with shots right where they need to be.
The emitter is obviously protected from the elements in a closed-emitter RDS. But what substances can get on the emitter to occlude it so much that the dot is no longer visible on the reflector? Mud, OK I'll give you that. The pistol would have to fall in mud slide down for this to happen. Snow? It'd have to be a bunch so it'd have to be snowing like a MF with big ass flakes. Both are possible but not likely. Rain? Not an issue. Drain holes will see to it running off. The first shot will also send any water pooled in front of the emitter flying out of there.
Bottom line, I'm not replacing my RMR and SROs with closed emitter sights any time soon.
But I know the tacti-tards at pistol forum are already salivating over this and proclaiming the end of open emitter sights.
I have, and the answer is: not much
You still have two exposed pieces of glass that can get covered in lint (CCW), water, dust, mud, etc, etc and depending on what gets on them and how much of it you might not be able to use the sight at all. Just like an open emitter RDS. I've shot USPSA matches in the rain and have not had an issue landing accurate shots even with water pooled on the inside of the lens when the pistol sat on the holster with rain falling on it. Sure the dot wasn't perfectly round but it was still in the correct location so putting red on brown ends up with shots right where they need to be.
The emitter is obviously protected from the elements in a closed-emitter RDS. But what substances can get on the emitter to occlude it so much that the dot is no longer visible on the reflector? Mud, OK I'll give you that. The pistol would have to fall in mud slide down for this to happen. Snow? It'd have to be a bunch so it'd have to be snowing like a MF with big ass flakes. Both are possible but not likely. Rain? Not an issue. Drain holes will see to it running off. The first shot will also send any water pooled in front of the emitter flying out of there.
Bottom line, I'm not replacing my RMR and SROs with closed emitter sights any time soon.
But I know the tacti-tards at pistol forum are already salivating over this and proclaiming the end of open emitter sights.
This is an interesting topic. Here in nordics it is raining snow or water around 1/3 to 1/5 of the training sessions I have and I decided to get the enclosed from the start since what do I lose? After comparing sizes, it really does not benefit the user one bit to take the open emitter. It only looks more simple.
When it comes to weather and open emitters.. I just talked to one guy who does really well in IPSC and he ran acro too. He said that he had a situation where water blocked the dot from showing up, not really nice since intuition tellls you to then move the pistol and look for the dot - instead of shooting. So it does happen and people to whom it happens, switch to closed emitter.
I really fail to see the downsides of closed emitters, they take much more beating and like one bullet is enough to counter the weight so if the few grams are too much, maybe start working concrete and bow hunting?
To me open emitter users stand as people who only go to the range on sunny days and like to shoot few rounds and touch guns.
I cannot believe you accept that freaking rain can wipe off your sight. Is the open emitter on an airsoft gun? I guess it is ok then.
I carry a handgun, concealed under my clothes, each and every day whenever I'm out of my house.
I compete and train for IPSC every week. Before these ammo shortages, I would easily burn through 15,000 rounds of 9x19 in training and matches.
I've been caught in the rain more than once at matches, and my competition optic (Trijicon SRO) has been soaked with water pooled on the near side of the lens. Never had a problem with a disappearing dot. Wasn't exactly round, but it was there and still boresighted so the first shot went where it should. As soon as the first shot was fired, almost all of the water flew off: because physics. The few droplets left on the lens were of no consequence.
So no, I'm not a guy who uses his guns only a few times when it's nice and sunny.
I don't know if you realize that the emitter is pointing down when the pistol is in the holster. Water will not flow upwards against gravity into it. I also don't know if you realize that your closed emitter RDS will also collect water on its occular lens if it's sitting in an open holster while its raining.
Just in case you don't believe me:
This tracks exactly with my experience with Trijicon products
This one isn't as good because he doesn't show the dot's reflection through the water and dirt
Last edited:
Gotta say, it seems to track very well. I knew the open emitters did ok in water and sand but that is much better than I anticipated.
But still, I do not see the downside of the closed emitter. But its upsides are not apparently monumental by any means.
I wonder if some technology makes one open emitter more prone to water getting in the way compared to another one. I mean, water has always bent light, how the rmr is not affected by it?
"I also don't know if you realize that your closed emitter RDS will also collect water on its occular lens if it's sitting in an open holster while its raining."
Aimpoint has 2 protective glasses and the lens itself is in the center, so the dot is inside the sight. This probably makes it slightly less affected by water on the outside glasses. But yes, it does collect water still.
The video you linked is not the best since he does not show the dot itself, just shoots. But I trust your word on it.
I just recently jumped into the pistol RDS world, and I narrowed my choices down to the Acro P1 and RMR. I was fine either way. The fact that plates for VP9 to RMR from HK were out of stock with no ETA from Germany at the time, I went Acro. Thus far it’s working well for me. Eventually I’ll add an RDS to another of my pistols, so I’ll get one of the Acro P2’s.
I can understand why someone doesn’t find it compelling enough to switch away from an exposed emitter, as I don’t see a reason to switch to an exposed emitter.
@308pirate, with that much time behind an RMR that’s proven itself to your satisfaction, that totally makes sense to me.
I can understand why someone doesn’t find it compelling enough to switch away from an exposed emitter, as I don’t see a reason to switch to an exposed emitter.
@308pirate, with that much time behind an RMR that’s proven itself to your satisfaction, that totally makes sense to me.
The inside of the objective lens (where the dot is reflected by the emitter) is protected from the weather in the ACRO but it doesn't matter because the lens you look through is not.
Everyone who thinks closed emitters RDS are the wave of the future think the exposed emitter is a huge issue. Not in my experience. But the lenses that you look through are ALWAYS exposed to the weather (and dirt, dust, fingerprints, etc, etc) regardless of the design of the sight.
Exactly. The advantages of the closed emitter are nowhere near great enough to warrant a switch. And for sport shooting there is nothing that compares to the Trijicon SRO, C-More RTS, and SIG Romeo 3.
The P2 does have the option of clear lens covers, protecting them from wear/scratches etc, so there is that. I don’t see them available on the Aimpoint US webstore yet.
Is this like a flip up cap on T2? Or a rubber cover like a scopecoat when not in use? Either way the cover would need to be removed (may be able to see through it although it wouldn’t be a great view) to get an ideal site picture so again, it seems like a small gain if any at all
It’s displayed in the P2 release video - it looked to me like the same kind of see-through flip up caps available for several of the other Aimpoint RDS products. One can shoot with them up or down.
I have some on an Aimpoint Pro, and they work quite well.
My understanding is that Trijicon has stated the SRO is rated for competition use, not ‘duty’ use, so more application specific.
Yep flip-up. ARD compatible.
Gun oils (motor oil) caught onto the glass are biggest cause of cleaning procedures for me.
Other stuff is easily wiped off with a thumb, or just watered.
It is nice to run clean optics but it is really not necessary..
Gun oils (motor oil) caught onto the glass are biggest cause of cleaning procedures for me.
Other stuff is easily wiped off with a thumb, or just watered.
It is nice to run clean optics but it is really not necessary..
The SRO's electronics are just as rugged as the RMR's. The SRO's frame is not as drop proof as the RMR's.
Have you noticed that the RMR has protruding corners at the top? They're there for a reason. Trijicon engineers designed it so that those corners would take any top impact first and then the forces of impact would travel down the sides and across the top. No impact forces travel into the glass. And they have the finite element analysis to prove it.
The SRO's round housing doesn't do that and dropping a pistol with an SRO has a higher chance of cracking the lens. It happened to a friend of mine.
The obvious benefit of the SRO's design is that the huge window can tolerate more misalignment from an ideal index before the dot disappears from view.
This is true. However, id imagine 80% of us arnt truly tactical and we all just pretend to play dress up most days. As long as you don’t drop the SRO, you are GTG. Sage Dynamics also agrees it’s not duty use, however he does beat it up pretty good by racking the slide off of it severallll times etc.
I'm a fan of closed emitters and will probably go with 509t's going forward. I have rmr's, DPP's, 508t's and one 509t. I wish it was American made but to me the 509 is a better mousetrap.
I was at a stormy carbine/pistol class a few weeks ago. Most everyone had a rmr, sro, 507/508, a few DPP's and one 509t. We were still getting hits but one dot turned into several and it took a second to figure out which dot was the real one.
A DPP went down because something blocked the emmitter. Took a q-tip and compressed air to make it useable again. The emitter is really buried in there and not something I'd considered before. Rmr/sro and holosun emitter lenses are pretty easy to wipe off with a shirt. The back of the main lens on the DPP is pretty easy to wipe off though with how large and shallow the housing is. The rmr and 507/508 are a pain because of how deep they are. If mud were to fly into them it would take a minute to get out. The rear lens on the 509 is pretty much flush. Swiping your thumb across it would clear most obstructions.
Eta: hopefully I can pick up one or two p1 acro's for a good price to use as offset dots on rifles.
I was at a stormy carbine/pistol class a few weeks ago. Most everyone had a rmr, sro, 507/508, a few DPP's and one 509t. We were still getting hits but one dot turned into several and it took a second to figure out which dot was the real one.
A DPP went down because something blocked the emmitter. Took a q-tip and compressed air to make it useable again. The emitter is really buried in there and not something I'd considered before. Rmr/sro and holosun emitter lenses are pretty easy to wipe off with a shirt. The back of the main lens on the DPP is pretty easy to wipe off though with how large and shallow the housing is. The rmr and 507/508 are a pain because of how deep they are. If mud were to fly into them it would take a minute to get out. The rear lens on the 509 is pretty much flush. Swiping your thumb across it would clear most obstructions.
Eta: hopefully I can pick up one or two p1 acro's for a good price to use as offset dots on rifles.
Last edited:
That tracks with what I’ve heard from friends that use RMR’s. Definitely well regarded!
The equation is different on a rifle
For a pistol that will ride under clothing until it's time to use it in extremis, a closed emitter RDS does not give me any compelling advantages. Neither does it for sport shooting.
I’ve run several MRDS on pistols on duty for the last 4 years. I’ve tested pretty much every MRDS on the market, save the random ChiComm OE shit like USO and SwampFox. I have the most time on an RMR, and I currently have a RM07 6.5moa version on my duty pistol, but it’s not going to stay there. I’ve run the ACRO P-1 on duty, and I have time on the 509T as several of my partners have them. I think open emitters are viable and work fine, provided that you understand potential issues and know how to alleviate them. That said, I‘m firmly under the belief that enclosed emitters are the future and every company should be making them going forward. The only drawback to enclosed emitters is the lack of options since there are only two viable options at the moment. I switched out from the ACRO P-1 after running it for 6 months because it ate batteries and it straight died on me on a call (dead battery). I was planning on actually swapping to the 509T up until I moved and bought a new house and money was tight for a bit, but now that Aimpoint has brought out the ACRO P-2, I’m likely going back to the ACRO.
The caveat to this is that I’m occasionally dealing with debris getting into the inside of the emitter housing. It’s as minor as dust buildup, or as significant as snow. Snow is kind of a thing here in Minnesota. On several occasions I’ve had blowing or falling snow become an issue with distorting the reticle. Sometimes it’s just inconvenience, but other times it’s a legitimate concern.
The caveat to this is that I’m occasionally dealing with debris getting into the inside of the emitter housing. It’s as minor as dust buildup, or as significant as snow. Snow is kind of a thing here in Minnesota. On several occasions I’ve had blowing or falling snow become an issue with distorting the reticle. Sometimes it’s just inconvenience, but other times it’s a legitimate concern.
Debris is getting into the closed optics like the ACRO? That literally defeats the only positive that the closed optics are suppose to have. Aka protection from the elements to keep the red dot emitter clean of debris.
That's what I understood as well. If that's what he meant, they are a waste of money because once the shit gets in there how do you clean it out?
And don't many duty holsters for RDS pistols come with some sort of shroud that shields the sight from shit falling on it like snow and rain?
My experience has been that water on Trijicon RDS is not an issue. Even if the dot is somewhat distorted because a drop is on the lens in the right spot, it's easy enough to center the blob on your target and rip one that will hit right where it should (BTDT) and after the first shot most of the water will fly off the sight.
I'm also convinced that people way overexaggerate the dust issue on open emitter sights. My RMR's lens is covered in t shirt lint after four or five days of carry and that lint is simply invisible when I draw and aim the gun even into strong sunlight. I've tested all this because I want to see for myself, not just take as gospel what I read. And if lint or dust on the lens obscures the dot on an open emitter RDS it will also do so on a closed emitter RDS.
I wash my aimpoints under under running tap water and would never expect something like that to happen. If it has dirt inside it must have been there from the factory.
A guy I talked to actually had this happen.. He sent it back. I really do not understand how the hell it is evem possible to get dirt in there during assembly.. Other than sabotage?
A guy I talked to actually had this happen.. He sent it back. I really do not understand how the hell it is evem possible to get dirt in there during assembly.. Other than sabotage?
Have you ever worked in manufacturing? I have for the last 26 years. There isn't a single manufacturing process in the world that is immune from defects.
The lens of a MRDS on a carry gun is going to become a second belly button for lint and body hair not matter what you do. It’s just got to be cleaned. The Aimpoint would be easier to clean off by wiping it off, but the open emitter MRDS clean off just fine with a shot of compressed air. Having the closed emitter would also keep all the lint and dust fibers from being lit up and turning into a bunch of mini dots and all it would do is obscure your view through the optic at that point but you’d have just one dot. I definitely see the advantages of the Aimpoint, and they are there.
I will not buy one however, because I’m sure just like every other Aimpoint product I’ll have a / instead of a dot. If I called Aimpoint about it they’d tell me I have an astigmatism which I do not (verified by several eye doctors) since that’s there go to response. So I’ll just keep rocking my RMR’s.
I will not buy one however, because I’m sure just like every other Aimpoint product I’ll have a / instead of a dot. If I called Aimpoint about it they’d tell me I have an astigmatism which I do not (verified by several eye doctors) since that’s there go to response. So I’ll just keep rocking my RMR’s.
True! Just that if I remember right he had had 2 sights with same issue.
Take a picture of the dot and send it to aimpoint. I know that lightning conditions greatly affect how my astigmatism (otherwise very good vision) plays out, so bear in mind when testing them against each other, always in the same conditions.
Your camera will see/show the real shape of your dot and they also have to believe it.
6390 RDS has a plastic hood that goes over the optic. Is it perfect? Not at all, but it sounds like it was made better than the ACRO.
Then again, my SRO just crapped out yesterday. Never been dropped and less than a year old. It’s heading back to Trijicon today to be looked at.
I gave up a long time ago with Aimpoint, they’re literally the only RDS manufacturer that shows a / for me and that’s there go to answer regardless. I know other who have the same issue with them and also don’t have any astigmatisms. I just avoid their products now.
I clean my RMR once every week or two with a small (clean) paintbrush that I keep in my nightstand. I just gently blow on it while sweeping with the brush.
In a pinch I'll just use a portion of my shirt, the back of the lens isn't deep enough in the housing to make that difficult, unlike the shit Holosun 507.
In the post he says he has an rmr07 on presently. Stuff in the emitter is the drawback switching from the acro(which eats batteries).
That's what I got out of it
You're going to have the same exact problem with a closed emitter RDS. A big flake of snow on either lens will fuck things up until you wipe it off. Same as an open emitter RDS.
Not sure why that isn't immediately obvious.
Depends. The back of the lens on Trijicon products is very easy to reach with your finger. Holosuns, not so much (due to the design of the housing).
Those are the two brands I have experience with.
I have 4 years of running both open and closed emitter pistol MRDS on duty in Minnesota. What I said is based on my experience and I’m acutely aware of what is obvious. Having also run an ACRO in the winter, the snow hitting the rear lens does not cause any significant issue. Snow does however settle into the emitter housing and can block the reticle, especially when you’ve been outside in snow in subzero temps on perimeter for over an hour.
Unless your experience in winter using both open and closed emitters down to temps of -40F and in blowing snow differs.
The flip covers on Safariland holsters seem to help but i still had a lens full of water when the pistol was holstered any length of time.
Some of these are easier to clean than others if debris/snow/water gets into the lens. One is vastly superior. I think closed emitters are the future for anyone carrying owb.
Some of these are easier to clean than others if debris/snow/water gets into the lens. One is vastly superior. I think closed emitters are the future for anyone carrying owb.
Attachments
Similar threads
