Iron Sights for AR's

[tx4guns]

Buy once, cry once. Troy are the only ones I'd buy, and I will be pulling the trigger on some very soon.

[student28]

I have collapsable irons on my grendel made by Sabre Defense Industries. I have not used them yet. I mounted my acog before I sighted them in and now don't want to move the acog at this point - it is DEAD on. When I need to, I will get them where they need to be, but for now, they remain unused. In the Corps, I was deadly with the standard irons on the m16 (fixed). I was able to shoot a "possible" 10 for 10 in just under ten seconds from the 300m in the prone position. I always qualified expert before I reached the 500m line and was able to put the round in the face of the silhouette - even knocking out the spindles of the shot spotters. But what I really enjoyed doing was skipping the rounds off the very top of the burm - skimming it - so it threw dirt onto my buddies pulling in the pitts!! lol. I was already qualified expert by that point so it was ok for some extracurricular.

[warped]

Yeah the irons on the old M16A1 were pretty good, I am sure the old Vets like Gene recall beating the front post into the 12 o'clock and then continuing to shoot 39-40 out of 40 on ranges out to 350-400yds.

We were younger then and the eyes were much better.

I really want to get lasik

[bwaites]

I really want to get lasik

Best money I ever spent! I was 20/800 before Lasik, with terrible vision for 25+ years. Woke up the next day and had 20/13 vision.

I've aged, and now I'm at 20/20, but still way better than anything I would have imagined!

Bill

[LR1955]

Yeah the irons on the old M16A1 were pretty good, I am sure the old Vets like Gene recall beating the front post into the 12 o'clock and then continuing to shoot 39-40 out of 40 on ranges out to 350-400yds. We were younger then and the eyes were much better. I really want to get lasik

Randy / Guys:

Actually, the A-1 was more a pain than the A-2 because we needed a sight adjustment tool to adjust windage and the A-1 rear sight did not adjust elevation at all so you zeroed it and if your zero was OK the small aperture rear sight had a battle sight zero of about 350 meters. If you wanted to shoot farther, you had to hold over or adjust the front sight. Both of which are impractical unless you are on a KD range where you have the time and you are using a six foot square target frame of white paper with a nice black bullseye or silhouette centered in the middle of that white paper.

The A-2 rear sight solved the distance problem as it adjusts elevation but I still believe that the major design flaw with both the A-1 and A-2 were the need to adjust the front sight for elevation in order to zero. After a while the front sights become badly damaged and bent so when you adjust elevation you may also adjust windage. A major design flaw that could have been fixed with the A-2 but wasn't.

When I was issued an A-1, we qualified on a 300 meter Train Fire range. There wasn't any reason to qualify at farther distances due to doctrine, limitations of the A-1 and its ammunition, availability of ranges that would allow for longer distances with feedback, and historical precedent in terms of when the Infantryman would use his rifle. In fact, I do not believe the Army had any qual that went past 300 when I was using the A-1.

LR55

[warped]

IIRC Ft. Dix had 350yds

Also several other courses were used at Bragg, Benning and also while OCONUS. (if another unit was not hogging the range) sometimes we just joined them.

Those huge units really took up the time on the ranges.

Heck, there were times we needed to travel just to get on a range.

Yeah we used holdover but it worked damned well and really did help for when you needed to engage at distances past what the sights allowed.

I can still recall getting the very first XM16E2 in our unit, damn there was a lot of rifle envy.

I got the first M16A2 in our unit when they were being fielded as well, the sights were nice and the bbl was so much better.

I may not have always gotten dibbs on the newest gear, I did however always seem to get the newest or best condition rifles.

[MrSurgicalPrecision]

I'm using a MaTech rear and a MagPul BUS front with KNS sight post on my 5.56. I plan to replace the front later on.

[LRRPF52]

If you look at the original AR10 from Gene Stoner's design in 1955, it had an elevation wheel in the rear sight housing. This reappeared on the M16A2 about 30 years later. I actually prefer the Model 601/602 AR15 & M16 to the A1 and A2, but the A2 is set up to be a more AMU or Marine Marksmanship Unit rifle for the KD range than a fighting rifle, as long as the 3-round burst trigger is replaced.

I have seen what LR1955 is talking about when a slightly bent front sight post gets zeroed dead on for windage with the rear sight, but then needs a quarter or 3/4 turn in elevation, and the windage is now off.

The PRI flip-up sight solves this problem by providing a fully-hooded circular front sight, so the likelihood of it getting bent or damaged is reduced significantly.

LRRPF52

[Bill Alexander]

Building guns I have to cater for a number of shooters and budgets. I use both Midwest Industries and Troy folding sights. Both provide good sight picture but I prefer the hooded front sight as this seems to more naturally align especially at short ranges such as the shoot house. The Troy is certainly a superbly made unit.

Diverting to the reason for this post, I have recently been playing with the diamond head sights. These are very well made, similar to Troy in quality, but have a diffent aperture type, being a square set up onto its corner. Initially not intuative, this seems to work well and does not cause the eye disruption when shooting at a wide variety of target shapes, especially at speed.

I would urge anyone seriously examining the use of iron sights to look at this concept and use this forum to comment upon what they find.

Bill Alexander