shooter521
Certified Glock Nut
Thought I'd share this Email received from a friend. The pic in the link toward the bottom is quite revealing.
_____________________________
I had two sets of IMX night sets from a March-May 2001 group buy organized when IMX first came on the scene. I also noticed that they were dim dim dim now, so I called MMC/PT (who bought out IMX) in Los Vegas, NV and asked if they had a warranty for them as they were only 8 years old but really dim. They said, yes, they do and have been replacing these sights for a bit (key bad omen music), just send them in and they'd replace them.
So, I drift them out (my sight tool being out on loan) and I bag them with a letter and send them in for warranty replacement. One month later, a small package shows up with two new sets of sights, including sight screws, and a $12 bill for shipping (eh, that's less than $76/pair plus shipping).
These are just as solid as the old ones (which were basically milled steel), they look like they've got fresh parkerizing (very thin) and seem fine. The old ones were "flat" in the back, these look more bulbous, like they've got a lens to make the dots bigger. They also look a little odd, sort of like the myopic person who installed said lenses had an unsteady hand and set them a little differently for each tritium vial. I think, "Ok, but if they work, they're only $12 and beggars can't be choosers."
So I set about installing them, and recall the part above about them being milled? They're slightly oversized or exactly sized and unlike the mild steel bases of Trijicons and Meprolights that are designed to "squeeze" and keep the sights tight, these are completely solid so the entire base has to deform as you squeeze the sight in to the dovetail for the rear sight. So, that's not so good as I literally had to use the returned sight tool in a vise with a lever arm to rotate the screw that drives the sight into the slot. Never mind the set-screw in the sight, these things are not going anywhere, with or without the screw as they're that much tighter.
So, I finally get them in and install the front sights and look. Yes, they glow, but they seem to be a bit dim. Well, I set about installing two more sets of night sights, one Trijicon and one Meprolight in two other slides. Yes, these look a lot brighter, it wasn't my recollection... So I grab two old sets, one Trijicon and one Meprolight. Huh, these look brighter than the new MMC/PT ones I got back under warranty.
So set them up for a low light exposure. 1/3s, f/4, ISO 800 on a tripod in the complete darkness of the bathroom:
NightSight_Compare.jpg photo - jmkc photos at pbase.com
No, I wasn't imagining things, these new sights are dimmer than the oldest Meprolights (from 6/1997). So much for new and bright. The old Trijicons from 9/2001 (which were brighter than the dead IMXs that were sent back) are still brighter than the "new" MMC/PT sights. I don't think this is a case of getting one bad set, I have four random sets of Trijicons and Meprolights spanning over a decade and not one, but two, new sets of MMC/PT sights to compare against.
While I can recommend MMC/PT's customer service, I cannot recommend their sights if these are representative of their offerings, given that their "new" is dimmer than Trijicon or Meprolight's "old and ready for replacement."
Also, I note that you can see the difference in Meprolight (large and fairly bright) vs. Trijicon (smaller and really intense) as far as rear night sights go. The fronts are out of focus and not really visible from the angle I took the picture (you can see slight halos around the edges of a couple sights from the out of focus fronts).
_____________________________
I had two sets of IMX night sets from a March-May 2001 group buy organized when IMX first came on the scene. I also noticed that they were dim dim dim now, so I called MMC/PT (who bought out IMX) in Los Vegas, NV and asked if they had a warranty for them as they were only 8 years old but really dim. They said, yes, they do and have been replacing these sights for a bit (key bad omen music), just send them in and they'd replace them.
So, I drift them out (my sight tool being out on loan) and I bag them with a letter and send them in for warranty replacement. One month later, a small package shows up with two new sets of sights, including sight screws, and a $12 bill for shipping (eh, that's less than $76/pair plus shipping).
These are just as solid as the old ones (which were basically milled steel), they look like they've got fresh parkerizing (very thin) and seem fine. The old ones were "flat" in the back, these look more bulbous, like they've got a lens to make the dots bigger. They also look a little odd, sort of like the myopic person who installed said lenses had an unsteady hand and set them a little differently for each tritium vial. I think, "Ok, but if they work, they're only $12 and beggars can't be choosers."
So I set about installing them, and recall the part above about them being milled? They're slightly oversized or exactly sized and unlike the mild steel bases of Trijicons and Meprolights that are designed to "squeeze" and keep the sights tight, these are completely solid so the entire base has to deform as you squeeze the sight in to the dovetail for the rear sight. So, that's not so good as I literally had to use the returned sight tool in a vise with a lever arm to rotate the screw that drives the sight into the slot. Never mind the set-screw in the sight, these things are not going anywhere, with or without the screw as they're that much tighter.
So, I finally get them in and install the front sights and look. Yes, they glow, but they seem to be a bit dim. Well, I set about installing two more sets of night sights, one Trijicon and one Meprolight in two other slides. Yes, these look a lot brighter, it wasn't my recollection... So I grab two old sets, one Trijicon and one Meprolight. Huh, these look brighter than the new MMC/PT ones I got back under warranty.
So set them up for a low light exposure. 1/3s, f/4, ISO 800 on a tripod in the complete darkness of the bathroom:
NightSight_Compare.jpg photo - jmkc photos at pbase.com
No, I wasn't imagining things, these new sights are dimmer than the oldest Meprolights (from 6/1997). So much for new and bright. The old Trijicons from 9/2001 (which were brighter than the dead IMXs that were sent back) are still brighter than the "new" MMC/PT sights. I don't think this is a case of getting one bad set, I have four random sets of Trijicons and Meprolights spanning over a decade and not one, but two, new sets of MMC/PT sights to compare against.
While I can recommend MMC/PT's customer service, I cannot recommend their sights if these are representative of their offerings, given that their "new" is dimmer than Trijicon or Meprolight's "old and ready for replacement."
Also, I note that you can see the difference in Meprolight (large and fairly bright) vs. Trijicon (smaller and really intense) as far as rear night sights go. The fronts are out of focus and not really visible from the angle I took the picture (you can see slight halos around the edges of a couple sights from the out of focus fronts).
