Looking to get my first handgun and decided on a used Glock 17...gen 4 or 5. I was considering whether to get the MOS model. I like the idea of having the option down the road, but my focus right now would on basic shooting skills with iron sights first. Is it worth the extra cost? Would love to hear your thoughts and insight. Thanks!
Glock 17 MOS or Glock 17?
- Thread starter AD1974
- Start date
I'm just in the process of cycling my pistol from one that is irons only to pretty much the same model that can take irons or red dot.
I think pistols now are where rifles and carbines were 10-+5 years ago. People still holding onto the idea that optixa are fragile, unnecessary, slower or should be learned after iron sight use.
Buy the MOS. The minimal extra cost is not huge, and the option is there
I think pistols now are where rifles and carbines were 10-+5 years ago. People still holding onto the idea that optixa are fragile, unnecessary, slower or should be learned after iron sight use.
Buy the MOS. The minimal extra cost is not huge, and the option is there
I didn't "embrace" the micro red dot sight (MRDS) craze for the longest time, stuck with 'iron sights" as my eyes aged, I began to take a closer look at the MRDS options?, glad I did. It's the future, and I enjoy shooting much more. I wouldn't purchase a pistol today without the MRDS option.
Your going to get people to "chime in" about reliability and "what if's", unless your an SF dude, not likely your depending on the pistol for "life and death" situations. Battery life in optics like the Holosun is 50,000 hrs, so you could leave it on all the time, however with the "shake awake" technology, that's not necessary. Reticle choices, and mounting optics are many, so it really is the future & no need to spend more money on iron sights.
Your going to get people to "chime in" about reliability and "what if's", unless your an SF dude, not likely your depending on the pistol for "life and death" situations. Battery life in optics like the Holosun is 50,000 hrs, so you could leave it on all the time, however with the "shake awake" technology, that's not necessary. Reticle choices, and mounting optics are many, so it really is the future & no need to spend more money on iron sights.
Last edited:
Pretty happy with my gen4 Glock17 with upgraded iron sights. No interest in MOS models.
IMO just another flavour of the month trend; seems like every manufacture is jumping onboard - just another way to make more sales I guess.. but why does everything have to red dot ready? if thats what you want get it, if not than dont.
IMO just another flavour of the month trend; seems like every manufacture is jumping onboard - just another way to make more sales I guess.. but why does everything have to red dot ready? if thats what you want get it, if not than dont.
Just wait til those peepers see a blurry front or rear sight...........or both!!! In my experience
Once you "learn" a red dot, it's not slower and usually more accurate at for example 25 yds and beyond.
Have to agree, I’m “ learning” a red dot at the moment and I really can’t imagine not having one now, they are so intuitive it’s ridiculous.
To the OP, I would buy the MOS version without a doubt.
optic and rifle is not a 10-5 years more 30 years and more ...
i sold a g19x very fast and it was not mos at all ...
Now I don't know anything about this, but what I hear - from a lot of competent firearms trainers - is that, instead of 'starting' everyone with iron sights, we probably should be 'starting' everyone with a pistol equipped with an optic. No personal experience, no dog in the fight, but... that's what I hear.
A lot of folks want everyone else to suffer through the same crap they did, before you get to the stuff that makes things easier and faster. Why train someone to use iron sights when you know they'll grasp what you're teaching a lot faster when they use a red dot?
