matchdot mounting position

When mounting a matchdot on a 1911, it can be mounted towards the rear of the slide, in the middle, or more towards the front.  Is there a preference or reason for mounting position?
Seems like position could affect balance and recoil recovery, to think of a couple things.  I also notice Zinns mounts his Aimpoint at the rear of the slide, he must have a good reason for that, must be what works for him.  sooo, rhymes and reasons?
Thanks, Kurt

Its all about balance and personal preference. I mount my 9000SC's toward the rear.

In addition to balance, it occurred to me that the farther foreword it is mounted the more the wobble could be magnified. Which appears more stable when shooting, the rear sight or the front sight?

I've not done anything to see if there is a difference though.

Mine is as far to the rear as it will go for the following reasons:

1) It takes the least amount of effort to hold, as I think about a weight dangling off the muzzle vs a weight dangling off my elbow

2) I imagine the red dot will move around more the farther forward or rear of my grip it is

3) It's how all the shooters better than I am have it

4) It was like that when I bought it

My preference would be that the dot sight would be mounted on a 50 yd long extension so that I could just put it against where I want the bullet to go.  My next preference would be on a 49 yd long extension...etc.  I want the dot sight as close to the target as possible - same as my front sight on open sight guns.  If I'm trying to look at the target and the sight at the same time, then sure, the dot jumps around (regardless of where it's mounted, but then again, I'm not supposed to be doing that.

zanemoseley wrote:Its all about balance and personal preference. I mount my 9000SC's toward the rear.

Doesn't such a heavy sight have an effect on the recoil spring?

Until I bought a used one here, I didn't realize how great the 9000SC is - big, bright picture, a perfectly shaped dot, full range of brightness, and there are some excellent mounts available for it, nicer than the stock ones.

For me, with almost any sight, the further back it is located, the less I notice the additional weight.  
My 9000sc ended up on the Clark barrel on my Model 41.  

I don't think I'm as "steady" as many of you guys, but the additional weight of the 9000sc seemed to stabilize my already heavy Model 41.  I put it on twice before, but removed it because of the weight.  This time I decided my arms would just need to get used to it.

Hold a sledge hammer out. Much lighter when the head is in your hand

My 41 and 52 have them at the rear most position for balance. The weight on the 52 helps a lot, too.

mikemyers wrote:

zanemoseley wrote:Its all about balance and personal preference. I mount my 9000SC's toward the rear.

Doesn't such a heavy sight have an effect on the recoil spring?

Until I bought a used one here, I didn't realize how great the 9000SC is - big, bright picture, a perfectly shaped dot, full range of brightness, and there are some excellent mounts available for it, nicer than the stock ones.

For me, with almost any sight, the further back it is located, the less I notice the additional weight.  
My 9000sc ended up on the Clark barrel on my Model 41.  

I don't think I'm as "steady" as many of you guys, but the additional weight of the 9000sc seemed to stabilize my already heavy Model 41.  I put it on twice before, but removed it because of the weight.  This time I decided my arms would just need to get used to it.

It sure does. I not only have a 9000SC but my 45 was built by Jon and is still very tight. I go no lower than a 10 pound recoil spring then I add powder till it cycles reliably.

james r chapman wrote:Hold a sledge hammer out. Much lighter when the head is in your hand

Good point.

IT1 Wes wrote:

james r chapman wrote:Hold a sledge hammer out. Much lighter when the head is in your hand

Good point.

Well, if I'm going to use a sight at all, the choice is between a sledge hammer (Aimpoint 9000sc) or regular hammer (Aimpoint Micro or Matchdot II).

I found out last Sunday at a match that I either need a lighter sight, or a lot more holding drills - it got to where my arm was shaking so bad at 50 yards I couldn't even keep my aim at the backing board, lot alone the target.  Things got a little better when we moved to 25 yards, and I decided to take all my shots quickly and early; my arm recovered somewhat.

Two handed, I flat out love the 9000sc.  The dot stays on the target, I can take my time, and shoot when I feel a good time is developing.
One handed, my wobble, even if I shoot early, is much more than twice as much as if I use two hands.

Thanks to a new friend of mine    :-)   as of today I have a Matchdot II I just bought from him that was going on a different gun, but maybe I'll put it on the 41 for a while.  I can use my wrist weights for practice, then take them off when I shoot at the range.  



'mustachio', I haven't decided whether or not to put a red dot sight on my Model 52.  I'm enjoying it so much with the stock sights.  When I look at your photos above, I can easily visualize my 52 with an Aimpoint Micro up on top.

With a Burris FF3. Great sight. Really helps.

Wobbley wrote:With a Burris FF3.  Great sight.  Really helps.

Oops, I should have clarified - my previous post here was about sights for my S&W Model 41, which now has the Clark barrel.  It's already heavy; the 9000 just makes it more so.

Burris FF3 - I'm wondering how that would compare with an Aimpoint Micro, or an Ultradot L/T.  
Both of mu 52's are still stock.  I haven't decided for sure if I want/need to install a dot.
Who makes the mount for the Burris - are they readily available?

Gee, things didn't work out as I expected.  Someone I know through the forum sold me a Matchdot iI, and it came with a really nice set of mounts.  Because I'm struggling to get used to the weight of the gun shooting one handed, I planned to take the Aimpoint 9000sc off, and install the new Matchdot to make it lighter.  However, the Matchdot felt heavier than the Aimpoint...   So I weighed them.

Aimpoint 9000sc, with heavy duty mounting rings - weight 293 grams.
Matchdot II with heavy duty mounting rings - weight 281 grams.
My original Matchdot II, which I just took off another gun - 209 grams.

So, I'll use the lighter setup with my old Matchdot II, and wear wrist weights until I build up my muscles, when I hopefully can put the Aimpoint back on.

Mike lighten you gun with this setup
1" UD with Leupold rings

Move the rear ring to in front of the front ring, then move the whole dot so the it’s overhanging the slide. Looks odd, but works,

Hmm, I used to do that long ago.....    sure, will do it again.  Weight won't come down, but it will "feel" lighter.

Thanks, Jack H - Dave Salyer also wants me to get a 1" sight.  He likes the Matchdot.  

Back to the shop........   will move the sight as suggested.

Even better!!   Thanks!!

The Aimpoint Comp only takes one ring and balances the 41. And is shorter. Lighter??

Len, I messed up.  Good idea, but my fingers are not strong enough to rack the slide when the sight is in the way.  Gun is back to "normal".  
It's only a 22, but I've got no "gription" reaching into the gun the way it was.  Now it's back to "normal".

Mike
This is a cut off 7" barrel, both ends.  A Weaver base turned around 180, and Leupold rings.  The secret is the grip tape on the slide up front so you can work it from underneath.

Jack H...

Sneaky!!!   "Thinking outside the box."

Brilliant idea!!!