CraigC
Sixgun Nut
Even with the rail and a picatinny adapter, it's not going to be as high as a traditional optic.I dislike rails. The current mini reflex sights are all slide-ride so none of them fit a rail without an adapter. If I had to put a rail and then an adapter, the sight would be stacked too high.
Someone needs to make a direct-mount revolver optic. For example, a reflex sight that bolted directly to S&W's three top-strap holes. I currently use an adapter plate. This is better than a rail and then a rail adapter, but the plate would be superfluous if the optic had been designed for a revolver to begin with and not an optic cut slide. One could argue that the revolver's top strap should be designed for one of the standard optic footprints, but the flat, rectangular base of the reflex sights and their footprints are suited to the top of many slides but not so suited to a revolver top strap. There is a need for a revolver optic with a narrower base. They did it already for the slim pistols. Revolvers are next - I could wish. I also dislike the matte black finish aluminum housing that is ubiquitous in mini reflex sights. That only matches the couple of "tactical" revolvers out there.
I don't have any recoil concerns for a slide-ride optic mounted to a 3-pound revolver barrel. Even with 500, I can't imagine the g-forces are greater than a reciprocating slide.
I do believe tube optics are superior optically. I'd like to think they are. I'm pretty sure the dot in a Aimpoint H34S will look better than in my Trijicon. The only thing I have against tubes is they are too big for everyday carry.
Burris makes a Fastfire mount that attaches directly to the Ruger factory base cuts. It ain't the only one. I've seen one that replaces the rear sight on a revolver.