New Irons Inbound

[NH Shooter]

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

This is why I've spent so much on trying all those optics on the AR platform: "Finally, an optic that should be perfect for me!"

Yes, a green dot MRO is tempting. I like green FO sights, so that new $500 optic should be amazing, even if the dot renders as a cluster of green grapes instead of red ones! Got to love astigmatism....

You mentioned that I must have good eyesight - actually quite the opposite. RDS (or GDS) render as globs, leaving me with greater accuracy potential with a good set of irons. Yes, the RDS is faster for target acquisition but if I have time to aim and squeeze, I'm at least as good with irons.

I like LPV scopes, they make me faster and more accurate, but because I never spent two or three grand on one, I was left wanting due to some optical/mechanical/feature shortfall on the sub-$1000 scope I had tried. On top of that (no pun intended) adding another pound or two so far over the bore axis changed the handling/balance of the rifle in a way I did not care for, the additional bulk/weight diminishing the "handy, light-weight" attributes that are of greater value to me in a "carbine."

So yes, I am aware of the advantages of various optic solutions for an AR, but I'm also acutely aware that each of them come with some baggage. For the role the AR carbine serves for me, a good set of irons remains the best option - and at the fraction of the cost of typical top-tier optic solutions it's less painful to experiment.

Just one old guy's POV, fully cognizant that others have undoubtedly arrived at different conclusions.

[WobblyPossum]

Rob, they are not.

Are you sure? The Scalarworks website says the apertures are on the same plane.

[LOKNLOD]

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.

This was my experience with set of Troy sights with HK-style front once upon a time. Great example of trying to copy a cool feature without really understanding it... I've been avoiding the combo ever since.

[NH Shooter]

No doubt having the tip of the front post perfectly centered vertically within the aligned circles is the most intuitive way to use this style sight picture.

Some say that even if the post is not perfectly centered, it's really just a matter of aligning the circles and then placing the target on top of the post, much as you would place the dot of an RDS on the target without the dot being perfectly centered in the FOV. Maybe not as intuitive, but maybe not a deal-breaker for some either.

I will start with the post adjusted to appear perfectly centered and see where the POI is at 50 yards. If the POI coincides with POA at some distance between 25 and 300 yards (even with some minor elevation tweaks of the post), I think it will be quite workable and just a matter learning the needed hold over/under for other distances. If it's way out, I may need to try something else.

[NH Shooter]

Some say that even if the post is not perfectly centered, it's really just a matter of aligning the circles and then placing the target on top of the post, much as you would place the dot of an RDS on the target without the dot being perfectly centered in the FOV.

The sights are mounted and initial impressions are positive.

I took some measurement with a set of calipers, including height from rail to top of post on the DD sight which was previously adjusted for elevation. Transferring that measurement to the PRI sight, the top of the post is .045" below the vertical center of the hood (the I.D. of the hood is .600"). The post may need to be adjusted upward when I sight it in as the old sights were adjusted with a bit of "six o'clock hold" that I can't seem to shake from my Bullseye days.

Though I can see the .045" when looking at the front sight, it does not seem the least bit distracting when looking through the sights. In fact, the tiny bit of extra room on top of the post seems natural, leaving room for the target.

The MI rear sight is very nice, locking solidly in both the up and folded-down positions. The .145" aperture works well with the .600" I.D. hood of the front sight, leaving plenty of daylight between the two to easily line them up perfectly concentric. I find my eye drawn to the post, not the hood, and focus on the post alignment to target is as intuitive as using an A2 sight. The biggest difference I'm finding is that the concentric circles are easier/faster to align precisely than the A2 front sight through the A2 rear sight.

I will grab a few photos tomorrow and post them. If all goes to plan I will be spending some time at the range with the new sights this coming weekend. At this point I am encouraged these sights will work as planned.

[NH Shooter]

The PRI sight seems well constructed and finished. I do wish the cross-bolt was positioned in the base so that the front of the sight was closer to the end of the rail to maximize sight radius.



With the post height transferred from the sighted-in DDs this set is replacing, the tip of the post measures .045" below the center of the hood opening (.600" I.D.). I had a bit of "six o'clock hold" dialed-in with the DD sights, so the post may end up getting raised a bit more. As is, when viewing through the sights, the post tip slightly under dead-center does not seem to be an issue for me.




Top view. The WML is a 400+ lumen 3P Lego in a QD mount, weighing 6.6 ounces in total. I like being able to easily remove it when not needed.




The MI rear sight. I'm impressed with its construction using steel components and strong detents holding the post in position.





MI rear in the deployed and folded-down positions.



New sights on my KISS BCM. Looking forward to some range time with these new sights!

[Guerrero]

I guess these are supposed to be run "gangsta-style" with the gun canted 90 degrees.

[Chuck Whitlock]

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?

I just replaced any A2 apertures with XS same-plane apertures:

http://www.xssights.com/Detail.aspx?...93118&CAT=8276

I did this with my previous agency's rifles when I was the armorer.

[NH Shooter]

Spent some time with the new sights, at distances from 45 feet to 200 yards. Quick summary;

• At 50 yards and beyond, accuracy seemed to suffer a bit with the .145" aperture vs. the .072" small aperture of the A2
• At 50 yards and in is where this sight set up really shines with what I feel is faster target acquisition, alignment and shot-release
• While my uncorrected vision enables me to see the front sight sharply, beyond 25 yards or so I struggle to align the sights on the target
• Wearing my corrective lenses, the target is plenty sharp but the front sight post is a blur

After sighting in at 50 yards off a bench, I set an IDPA target at 200 yards and went after it from an unsupported prone position. My first group was actually fantastic, four shots in about a 4-inch group just to the left of the A-zone and the fifth shot about 10 inches away just under the A-zone. I dialed-in some more windage correction and got into the center of the target, but never reproduced a group that good. I think it was mostly due to my growing wobble zone and not-so-good trigger control more than the sights.

Setting up at 50 yards, I fired three strings of 10-shot groups from the standing position. For each shot, I started at the low-ready, shouldered the rifle and fired the shot as soon as the sight alignment looked good. No timer, but I'd say I took about two seconds for each shot. The vast majority of the shots ended up in the A-zone, a few falling just outside of it. At this distance and making this kind of shot, this sight set-up seems to work really well. For these shots the stock was extended to the normal position, about a 12.75" LOP.

I then set the target at 15 paces away, which is the longest shot possible inside my house. In this scenario I kept the stock fully collapsed (about 11" LOP on an A5 tube) but with the rear sight folded down. Same drill as before, starting from the low-ready, quickly shouldering the rifle with attention to a consistent cheek weld, and releasing the shot as soon as the front sight was on the target. With the rear sight folded down and target focus, the shots broke very fast. For CQC inside my home, I'm convinced that with consistent cheek weld this is an entirely viable technique.

I then did the same drill but with the rear sight up. In this case I just got the front hood somewhere in the ghosted rear peep and fired the shots. It was noticeably slower for me as I took an extra split-second to reconcile the rough sight alignment.

Below is a photo of the results: the group on the left (shots circled) was sans the rear sight, the second group (lower right) was with the use of the sight. Interestingly the POI was affected much more than the actual precision of the shots;




Conclusions

• This sight set up seems faster to align on-target than the standard A2 sights
• Precision was not enhanced, perhaps a bit of loss
• The post not being in the vertical center does not bother me
• Front-sight-only at close range is wicked fast and offers a beautifully unobstructed view, 100% target focus
• Even with my astigmatism, a RDS/GDS would probably give me more consistent results beyond 50 yards

At least for now, these sights are staying on the rifle. For 50 yards and in, they're fast and accurate enough. That said, I will likely end up with a green dot MRO in an absolute mount, which I think the front sight will work well with.

[NH Shooter]

Iron sights on a pistol work great for me - with my uncorrected vision they present a sharp sight picture and the target is adequately focused. Certainly within typical pistol engagement ranges, I count myself fortunate to have vision that works well.

I now have to accept the fact that while irons work fine for me on a pistol, they don't work as well on a rifle at typical rifle engagement distances. With my glasses, the target is sharp but the front post is a blur, making it difficult to see the post on the target. Without them, the front post is sharp but the target is blurry, especially as distance increases, making it difficult to see the target to place the post over. I feel handicapped either way.

A discovery I made last year while experimenting with my .308 bolt gun with a SWFA 10X is that I can adjust the diopter to render both the reticle and target perfectly sharp without the use of my glasses. I now have that scope set that way and it has worked out extremely well (glasses suck).

As I've stated previously, a RDS don't work especially well for me due to astigmatism. While a RDS would be an improvement over irons, I've concluded that for a rifle a magnified optic works best. While a couple of pounds of optic and mount on a 14-pound bolt action precision rifle is not a big deal, I want to keep my carbine as lightweight as possible.

So here I go again with another somewhat out-of-the-box trial: a mount and scope that will weigh 12 ounces combined, provide a low level of magnification, have an adjustable diopter eyepiece to focus for my eyes, and be from brands of known quality;

https://www.leupold.com/scopes/rimfi...light-2-5x20mm

https://danieldefense.com/daniel-def...uble-ring.html

The scope is not illuminated, but at 6.5 ounces is extremely light and has a well-established reputation for durability and optical quality. A simple duplex reticle with covered turrets. Five inches of eye relief with a generous eye box. With a 50-yard zero, POI will be +/- a few inches well past 200 yards, which is the envelope this rifle is intended to fill. Many have stated in reviews that at 2.1X actual magnification, the scope is very usable with both eyes open for up-close and fast shots. I'll be able to see both the target and reticle clearly - YAY! Yes, there are far more "AR appropriate" scopes available but this one checks the most important boxes for me. Purchased from B&H Photo for $260 delivered.

The DD mount looks great, weighs 5.5 ounces and was purchased from Amazon for $137 delivered. With this optic set up, my rifle unloaded will still weigh only 7-pounds, 2-ounces. For now, the rifle will be sans any BUIS.

To be continued...