to mill again, or to get a Glock MOS gun

[DacoRoman]

I currently have a Gen 5 G17, milled for RMR (by Southwest Precision) to a depth of 0.150".

I really like this set up, and I would like to get a second Gen 5 G17 set up exactly the same way. One will be for practice, and the other will be a Match Gun for USPSA.

I would normally favor direct milling for the usual reasons, sits lower, less points of potential failure, etc. and, perhaps most importantly in this case, to have a gun that is exactly the same.

However, I am wondering if the second G17 ought to be an MOS gun. I'd get either a C&H Precision or Forward Control Designs optic plate for the MOS gun.
The advantage of the MOS gun would be that I could get different plates for different optics to future proof the gun to a certain degree.
I'd also be able to forgo waiting to get the slide milled/refinished, and the additional cost ($200 for the milling and re-finish with black nitride).

But, my milled pistol is milled to a depth of 0.150", and I'm wondering if an MOS gun with a plate would place the optic noticeably higher compared to the milled gun, to the point where it would possibly affect the efficiency of my presentation, and or the way the gun behaves in recoil?

Do any of you have any experience with how the two set ups compare when shot side by side?

Both guns would sport 507 Comp optics.

[GJM]

I would get a MOS pistol, for the reason you mention, and I wouldn't give a second thought to the difference in height between it and your direct milled pistol. I would also consider the DPP MOS plates for the RMR/SRO/Holosun 507 and Holosun EPS optics.

[Utm]

I use to be all for milling but after running MOS guns for work, I think it's just fine and wish I would've went with MOS from the jump.

[fatdog]

I have a pair of G17's both with 5 moa SRO in place, one is milled, one is MOS, when I have them up firing them I cannot tell the difference in height or any of that. They are identical for shooting purposes. I got the MOS because GSSF requires it for their carry optics division, but had the milling done because it "removed a point of failure" but with the good FCD plates properly installed with loctite blue, I don't think I have much to worry about.

Go MOS to be futureproof, we are in the early days still of the slide mounted optic, there are better things ahead we don't know about yet.

[Boxy]

I am at the same cross road to mill or not to mill. You folks provide good reason and logic to stay with MOS Glocks. I have a couple GSSF coupons for discounts and will be acquiring a couple pieces soon.

I love this forum. Thank you.

[DacoRoman]

Thanks for the suggestions everyone!

[EVP]

Like the others have said go MOS and go with a forward control plate, forget the C&H plate.


You can use your MOS to be the test bed for different optics.

[Henry]

Nice comments so far. I have a few milled Glocks and a few mos Glocks. I have no trouble adapting from one gun to the next. Seems like unless you know you want a milled slide; get an mos gun. The 507 comp is an ideal optic for the mos. The lens will not be unnecessarily near the ejection port and it has plenty of window to work with non "irons forward." Just don't skimp on the plate.

(not that there is anything wrong with other setups like some of the ones I have)

[DacoRoman]

Like the others have said go MOS and go with a forward control plate, forget the C&H plate.


You can use your MOS to be the test bed for different optics.

Y'all are making a strong case for MOS for sure! I'm still 50:50 on it! A GM friend of mine's words keep ringing in my head though: "if you want Twins, go all the way"!

But based on the responses here, if I do decide to go MOS, the good news is that it should be GTG. It's nice to know that I'm probably splitting hairs and either decision is legit!

While I'm still contemplating things, I may first just get another 507 comp, put it on my existing milled Gen5 G17, and use it as a training gun, and possibly use my milled Gen3 G17 with 507 Comp as my match gun, or vice versa, after a short trial to see if they are similar enough based on Drill performance.

The Gen3 has a better trigger hence I'm thinking it may be the Match gun. Accuracy seems close enough between the two (I have a WC drop in barrel in the Gen 3).

This is getting way off topic, but for the sake of discussion:

The Gen 3 has a 25 cent polishing job, 5lb striker spring, Zev V4 Race Connector, a reduced power drop safety plunger spring, and possibly a ZEV increased power trigger spring (the gun's recently come out of mothballs and I can't remember!).
The Gen 5 has a 25 cent polishing job, 5lb striker spring and "-" Glock connector. I think I can get it close enough to the Gen 3 by putting in a reduced power plunger spring.

I have a Talon Pro grips decal on the Gen3, and if I put the same grip decal on the Gen5 I think they'll feel close enough for RocknRoll.

Anyway, sorry for the digression, I guess I'm thinking out loud.

Why do you like the FCD > than the C&H? I'm kinda leaning toward the FCD already.

[DacoRoman]

Nice comments so far. I have a few milled Glocks and a few mos Glocks. I have no trouble adapting from one gun to the next. Seems like unless you know you want a milled slide; get an mos gun. The 507 comp is an ideal optic for the mos. The lens will not be unnecessarily near the ejection port and it has plenty of window to work with non "irons forward." Just don't skimp on the plate.

(not that there is anything wrong with other setups like some of the ones I have)

Another great data point about the inter-compatibility of shooting "feel" from milled to non-milled. If you run timed Drills, I'm assuming you can't tell a difference between hit factor between milled vs MOS?

You do bring up an interesting point about the optic issue. The 507 comp sitting a hair lower will make a tall optic like that less likely to get nailed by brass, although this only seems theoretical and not a real world problem, especially with Gen5 ejection patterns.

To follow up on my comments in the post above, if my milled Gen 3 and Gen 5 can be used as an interchangeable training/match pair, then my next Glock will 100% be an MOS gun...it may be a G45 instead of G17 at that point however .