Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 22

Thread: New Irons Inbound

  1. #1
    Supporting Business NH Shooter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    New Hampshire, U.S.A.

    New Irons Inbound

    I've been running irons-only on my 16" BCM rifle, of the Daniel Defense fixed type. Very nice sights but I've been wanting to try something different. The fact that I may sometime soon roll with one of the new green dot MROs in an absolute co-witness mount also factored in. So today I placed an order for the following;

    Name:  PRI.png
Views: 730
Size:  26.0 KB

    I've always been a fan of the H&K style sights. When I found this PRI with a thumbwheel adjustment, I decided to look for a rear that would compliment it and satisfy my requirements;

    • folding for use with a dot optic (I prefer the rear out of my line of sight)
    • simple post construction that provides an unobstructed view as opposed to the blocky ear-type


    Midwest Industries recently introduced their Combat Rifle sights, the rear just what I was looking for;

    Name:  MI Battle.png
Views: 708
Size:  13.4 KB

    This sight features a single aperture of .145" in size, compared to the .07" and .2" apertures of a standard A2 rear sight. This seems like it will be a perfect compromise for fast target acquisition while maintaining reasonable precision at longer distances. The post style construction will give an unobstructed FOV and in combination with the PRI front, provide the H&K style circle-in-a-circle sight alignment.

    Additionally, I want to experiment with using only the front sight for engagements of about 50 feet or less, with the stock fully collapsed on an A5 buffer (11" LOP). I believe in conjunction with consistent cheek weld, using the front sight only should be wicked fast with suitable accuracy. I shall see...

    Modern American Sporting Muskets are money pits but can be a lot of fun!

  2. #2
    Site Supporter rob_s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    SE FL
    I’ll be interested to hear your thoughts.

    Whenever I tried a fully-shrouded front sight like that I struggled with my eye wanting to center the circles even thought the tip of the sight is actually what moves, so that may or may not wind up in the center of the circle after zeroing.

    I believe the original HK sights had a front sight that included the post and a circle in one piece that floated in the front, so that when done zeroing the circles were still centered as well.

  3. #3
    Supporting Business NH Shooter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    New Hampshire, U.S.A.
    Quote Originally Posted by rob_s View Post
    I’ll be interested to hear your thoughts.

    Whenever I tried a fully-shrouded front sight like that I struggled with my eye wanting to center the circles even thought the tip of the sight is actually what moves, so that may or may not wind up in the center of the circle after zeroing.

    I believe the original HK sights had a front sight that included the post and a circle in one piece that floated in the front, so that when done zeroing the circles were still centered as well.
    Having the post tip remain in the absolute center of the shroud would be ideal. Centurion Arms makes (or made) the sight construction you describe, but with an open top.

    Of course the post always remains centered from side-to-side with the PIR, and where the tip of the post ends up vertically for elevation will also depend on the "hold" over the target.

    The other factor that won't be known until the sights are actually mounted is the amount of daylight around the front sight shroud as viewed through the .145" aperture. Based on what I see through the two A2 apertures at the current 18.2" sight radius, I think it should be about right. Of course it also depends on the distance from the eye to the aperture, which can be somewhat manipulated with stock LOP.

    In use, simply "aligning the circles" and ignoring the post will be the technique I will try for the close-to-intermediate range shots (can't define that range until I actually try it, but perhaps 20 to 50 yards), and use the post for greater precision and/or longer range. What I'm really interested in experimenting with is using the front sight only (rear flipped down, normal cheek weld) for engagements of up to about 50 feet. In combo with a WML to provide contrast, I think this arrangement could work well for in-house defensive purposes.

    I'll update this thread with what I find.

  4. #4
    Member That Guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    overseas
    Quote Originally Posted by NH Shooter View Post
    What I'm really interested in experimenting with is using the front sight only (rear flipped down, normal cheek weld) for engagements of up to about 50 feet. In combo with a WML to provide contrast, I think this arrangement could work well for in-house defensive purposes.
    I always meant to eventually, one day, once I have the money for it, mount an optic on my AR. So for a rear sight I straight away got one that folds down (Magpul MBUS Pro), even though I knew I'd be using it as my sole sighting system for some time. Shooting with iron sights, during close range drills, I've managed to end up in a situation where my gear has managed to flip that rear sight down sometime prior to beginning the drill, and had to shoot the whole drill with no rear sight. If your targets are full size IPSC Metrics or something similar, I believe you'll find you can do pretty well at close ranges. (Never tried this intentionally, so I haven't tried pushing it and seeing how far away I can still get good hits, but let's say 30 feet and under at least.) However, with a shot that demands more accuracy, like having a no-shoot cover most of the threat target, it's not a really comfortable feeling trying to take that shot...

    Never tried it with a WML, but I would definitely not be comfortable using that sighting system for real world use, outside of an emergency situation (like finding your rear sight just plain isn't there any more). Unlike with something like a bead sighted shotgun, where the bead is right above the barrel, that AR front sight is really floating out there in space all by its lonesome. There isn't the same sort of an aiming reference as looking down the barrel of a long gun with less sight offset.

    Of course, YMMV. And it's not a bad idea to try shooting without the rear sight just to see what it's like.

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by rob_s View Post

    I believe the original HK sights had a front sight that included the post and a circle in one piece that floated in the front, so that when done zeroing the circles were still centered as well.
    This is correct. The HK Diopters make all elevation/windage adjustments off the rear sight only. When zeroed, the front sight post will always be in the center of both circles (the whole point for diopter type sights).

    It’s why I never understood the Troy HK style sights, since they make adjustments on the front sight post. Looks to be the same issue for the sight the OP posted.
    Last edited by Hunter Rose; 11-02-2018 at 10:33 PM.

  6. #6
    Supporting Business NH Shooter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    New Hampshire, U.S.A.
    Quote Originally Posted by That Guy View Post
    I always meant to eventually, one day, once I have the money for it, mount an optic on my AR.
    I've been burning $$ on ARs for about 25 years. In that time I have experimented with three different LPV scopes, a Leupold Prismatic (twice), two different versions of compact ACOGs, an EOTech and the Aimpoint Comp C3 and PRO. Each had its advantages and disadvantages, all were eventually sold.

    After all of that experimentation I have settled on the KISS concept: a BCM 16" mid-length ELW upper with a 13" KMR rail and iron sights, on a BCM lower with an A5 buffer assembly, ambi safety and a SSA trigger. Accessories are limited to a sling and a QD WML. I am happier with this arrangement than any other I've tried: light weight, compact, great balance, utterly reliable function with more than adequate accuracy and precision for my needs.

    I think the new sight arrangement will be an improvement over the DD irons I am currently using, but I won't know for sure until I spend some time with them. I'll be wringing them out real well in the coming weeks.

  7. #7
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    TEXAS !
    Quote Originally Posted by Hunter Rose View Post
    This is correct. The HK Diopters make all elevation/windage adjustments off the rear sight only. When zeroed, the front sight post will always be in the center of both circles (the whole point for diopter type sights).

    It’s why I never understood the Troy HK style sights, since they make adjustments on the front sight post. Looks to be the same issue for the sight the OP posted.
    Your analysis is correct.

  8. #8
    Member That Guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    overseas
    Quote Originally Posted by NH Shooter View Post
    I've been burning $$ on ARs for about 25 years. In that time I have experimented with three different LPV scopes, a Leupold Prismatic (twice), two different versions of compact ACOGs, an EOTech and the Aimpoint Comp C3 and PRO. Each had its advantages and disadvantages, all were eventually sold.

    After all of that experimentation I have settled on the KISS concept
    Either your eye sight or training conditions must be much better than mine. I'm sure I'm a bit of a sunshine patriot compared to some here, but over the years I have done shooting in the dark, at dusk, in the rain, in heavily overcast, gloomy days... And there is absolutely no doubt in my mind as to the superiority of optical sights in more difficult shooting conditions, compared to iron sights.

    I'm sure after a little while with your new MRO, you'll feel the same way.

  9. #9
    Site Supporter rob_s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    SE FL
    I'm really interested to try these. I don't know if they are... coplaner? is that the word? When the big hole and the little hole have the same centerline? I recall that being a big deal for me when I was picking irons previously, and I think it's how I wound up with the Troy, or BCM, or something?

    https://scalarworks.com/shop/iron-si...d-iron-sights/

    Last edited by rob_s; 11-03-2018 at 02:58 PM.

  10. #10
    Supporting Business NH Shooter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    New Hampshire, U.S.A.
    Rob, they are not. Here is a rear BUIS that is - https://www.gggaz.com/mad-back-up-iron-sight.html

    @That Guy, no doubt optics offer advantages on the AR platform, the value of which depends on the intended use/application. Of course there's no free lunch, with each optic option comes disadvantages as well.

    One thing for certain - we're fortunate to have so many great sighting options available, including irons.

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •