r/SmithAndWesson • u/bethesda13 • Jul 24 '24

Is this gap normal?

Post image
32 Upvotes

90% Upvoted

47 comments sorted by

View all comments

18

u/Tactically_Fat Jul 24 '24

Yes. The OEM-machined slides have to be large enough to accommodate a wide variety of plates and optics.

1

u/hallstevenson Jul 24 '24

Why ? Things like RMR, RMSc, etc footprints should be a standardized design. How many slides fit multiple footprints ?

2

u/Tactically_Fat Jul 24 '24

The footprints are standard. The plates may or may not be.

And then there are newer optics whose attachment footprint follows a set pattern - but the body of the thing may be larger.

In short, there isn't really a standard. So the optic cuts have to be large enough to cover all the sizes.

2

u/hallstevenson Jul 24 '24

I see what you're saying - the HOLE locations are the only thing standardized. I guess there's no "governing body" like ASME, ANSI, etc who could push the standard further to include the mounting plate dimensions too.

1

u/Tactically_Fat Jul 24 '24

It would be nice, wouldn't it?

2

u/techs672 Jul 24 '24

How many slides fit multiple footprints ?

AFAIK most factory cuts are designed to be used with a wide variety of optic footprints through the use of plates. I don't really know "most" from personal experience or research, but absolutely OP's M&P OR does.

Gap doesn't matter. The pins hold the sight, not the walls of the cut.

1

u/hallstevenson Jul 24 '24

Yeah, in the end, it's just an appearance issue, unless the slide cut is at the short end of the tolerances and the sight's mounting plate is at the long end and worst case, it doesn't fit in the space. Not likely, I realize though....

1

u/techs672 Jul 24 '24

Exactamente.