gun sights

[jim-00-4.6]

let me start by saying I don't know anyone who owns a gun, or would have any use for such a thing.
Now, on to the post...

I was having a conversation with a friend who also doesn't have any guns; we were talking about sights.

My position was a laser sight that actually projected a dot on the target is not super useful in the daytime.
I thought something like this would be better:

This item projects a dot onto the front glass.
After squawking at me for a while about the relative merits of iron sights, he was not convinced the item above would be the best thing for rapid target aquisition.
Not that I have any personal, first-hand knowledge, but rapid acquisition using iron sights seems like it would be more difficult than using either a projected dot on the target, or the product above.

Comments, opinions?

 

[1920SF]

I'd concur with your notion that a laser projected onto a target in broad daylight has limited utility-particularly if you are reliant upon that for engagement.

Visible lasers are something I've tended to shy away from so I may be biased there. They work well in movies, but many lack durability and the washout problem after a few yards is significant during daylight. At night they are a two way street-they point well but also tell everyone exactly where the dude with the laser is; for certain applications that doesn't matter (white light clearing inside buildings), but I wouldn't want to count on that mission. On the other hand I love IR lasers at night, but that comes with a $$$ associated with owning a good NVD to accompany it. Some seem to like them on, or in, pistols-particularly some of the 'fight inside an elevator' concealed carry setups. Since you reference iron sights/red dots I'm assuming you are talking long gun.

In terms of target acquisition (and here we start splitting hairs about relative range) between iron sights and red dots, with familiarity & training red dots win out (as does pretty much any good optical sight so long as the user is familiar with its employment) The Bushnell you posted is a cheap copy of the aimpoint style red dot-the aimpoints are exceptionally durable with very long battery life and do a decent job in my experience, but in bright sunlight you gotta jack up the brightness otherwise it's lost.

The trijicon reflex sight I used for awhile used tritium and that would wash out in broad daylight pretty quickly. I dumped that. The EOTech is like shooting a big screen TV; thought it eats batteries.

The crux of the question you posed for me is what kind of range are we talking about? At 100m the irons will get you on target fine, but the red dot will probably be a little faster and perhaps more precise at the same time.

If I was setting up a rifle for 200 and in work I'd probably do iron sights cowitnessing behind an EOTech and get the best of both worlds.

cheers-
Ray

 

[hafaday]

I concur, too the "T", with Mr. Ray.

 

[jim-00-4.6]

Thank you.
That particular Bushnell was just a random google find, but you got the gist of it.

Longer than a pistol, yes.
An 18.5" barrel on a rifle I've never seen.
I read a bit about AimPoint, all positive things.
The discussion centered around bringing the pain dispenser up quickly, acquiring the target, and transmitting a flying piece of ouch with as much accuracy and in as little time as possible.
Range in discussion was 50 yards max.

The alleged benefit to the projected dot on the target is the weapon doesn't have to come all the way up and actually be "sighted" in the conventional sense. While that would save a moment or two, it might as well be a vampire WRT sunlight.
I thought it would be quicker with the AimPoint-style device, rather than ghost ring or U-shaped fixed sights.

Unfortunately, most of the AimPoint products cost more than the hypothetical projectile dispenser; like putting a $3000 stereo in a $1000 car.

 

[jim-00-4.6]

By the way, that's a very scary black rifle in your picture.

 

[kennith]

You've frightened Jim. Your weapon is now banned.

Cheers,

Kennith

 

[jim-00-4.6]

You've frightened Jim. Your weapon is now banned.

Cheers,

Kennith

As long as the rifle doesn't sniff my balls, lick my face or leave little rifle-y prints on my legs, we'll be fine.
Then, after we're all friendly-like, it won't just randomly shoot me in the face.
Then I won't be askeered anymore.
The end.

 

[knewsom]

I'd concur with your notion that a laser projected onto a target in broad daylight has limited utility-particularly if you are reliant upon that for engagement.

Visible lasers are something I've tended to shy away from so I may be biased there. They work well in movies, but many lack durability and the washout problem after a few yards is significant during daylight. At night they are a two way street-they point well but also tell everyone exactly where the dude with the laser is; for certain applications that doesn't matter (white light clearing inside buildings), but I wouldn't want to count on that mission. On the other hand I love IR lasers at night, but that comes with a $$$ associated with owning a good NVD to accompany it. Some seem to like them on, or in, pistols-particularly some of the 'fight inside an elevator' concealed carry setups. Since you reference iron sights/red dots I'm assuming you are talking long gun.

In terms of target acquisition (and here we start splitting hairs about relative range) between iron sights and red dots, with familiarity & training red dots win out (as does pretty much any good optical sight so long as the user is familiar with its employment) The Bushnell you posted is a cheap copy of the aimpoint style red dot-the aimpoints are exceptionally durable with very long battery life and do a decent job in my experience, but in bright sunlight you gotta jack up the brightness otherwise it's lost.

The trijicon reflex sight I used for awhile used tritium and that would wash out in broad daylight pretty quickly. I dumped that. The EOTech is like shooting a big screen TV; thought it eats batteries.

The crux of the question you posed for me is what kind of range are we talking about? At 100m the irons will get you on target fine, but the red dot will probably be a little faster and perhaps more precise at the same time.

If I was setting up a rifle for 200 and in work I'd probably do iron sights cowitnessing behind an EOTech and get the best of both worlds.

cheers-
Ray

Ray, this seems like a winner of a setup to me... My biggest conundrum has been that I'd like to set up for like 600 and under. Problem is, big glass blows for under 100. No mag blows for anything over 300, realistically. I'm told that an EOTech with a 3X mag is the way to go, but I've been thinking about an ACOG knockoff and cowitnessing with irons. I think part of my concern is batteries, multiple moving parts, etc... but I've got big questions about the size of the EOTech holo crosshair when magnified. Is it fine enough to use with any kind of magnification and rage effectively?

 

[1920SF]

Longer than a pistol, yes.
An 18.5" barrel on a rifle I've never seen.
I read a bit about AimPoint, all positive things.
The discussion centered around bringing the pain dispenser up quickly, acquiring the target, and transmitting a flying piece of ouch with as much accuracy and in as little time as possible.
Range in discussion was 50 yards max.

The alleged benefit to the projected dot on the target is the weapon doesn't have to come all the way up and actually be "sighted" in the conventional sense. While that would save a moment or two, it might as well be a vampire WRT sunlight.
I thought it would be quicker with the AimPoint-style device, rather than ghost ring or U-shaped fixed sights.

Unfortunately, most of the AimPoint products cost more than the hypothetical projectile dispenser; like putting a $3000 stereo in a $1000 car.

Jim, def think your reasoning was on. As far as the Aimpoint and cost goes, the rule of thumb I tell a lot of folks getting into something like the AR platform is to be prepared to spend about 2/3 the cost of the rifle (back when they were at a reasonable price) to get a good quality optic-that varies of course depending on application, but it's very easy to match-or exceed-the cost of the rifle to get good glass.
r-
Ray

 

[1920SF]

Ray, this seems like a winner of a setup to me... My biggest conundrum has been that I'd like to set up for like 600 and under. Problem is, big glass blows for under 100. No mag blows for anything over 300, realistically. I'm told that an EOTech with a 3X mag is the way to go, but I've been thinking about an ACOG knockoff and cowitnessing with irons. I think part of my concern is batteries, multiple moving parts, etc... but I've got big questions about the size of the EOTech holo crosshair when magnified. Is it fine enough to use with any kind of magnification and rage effectively?

Kris-
I had an XPS with a 3x magnifier behind it on the LT swing away; it was a good setup but I'd be reluctant to take a shot out beyond ~400 with it-even though the dot is 1 MOA I think it would be tough-depending on what caliber you are talking and such. Don't get me wrong, I loved the XPS as a short range optic and it would work well out to 300 (just as L-3 points out in their rec's).

Absent the current madness I'd suggest just saving the coin and getting a used ACOG-I haven't looked at optics prices to see if they're matching everything else, but the ACOG is a good all around optic for that 100-500 range. I wouldn't say it's the apex of optics mind you, but what I would say is that it eclipses most shooter's capabilities to manipulate both the weapon and the glass. If you're serious about 600 (and in this I'm talking about 5.56mm, likely something like a 75 or 77gr match grade bullet on a good barrel, etc) then you may want to consider a Leupold and if you want to take snap shots put an offset mounted reflex on it.

All that being said, very few folks really need to reach out to 600 (don't let that dissuade you though!).

To put this rambling narrative another way, on my personal 16" AR I've had an Aimpoint Comp M4, a Trijicon reflex, an EOTech 512, an EOTech XPS w/3x magnifier behind it...and now she sits with an ACOG TA01 on it (which lets me have iron sights overtop the scope for close in engagements). The adage buy once, cry once doesn't just apply to rovers...
r-
Ray

 

[Timmy!!!!!!!]

Forget the ACOG this is what I want on my Evil Black Rifle http://elcansightingsystems.com/products/dual_role_sights.php

 

[Mongo]

can't beat this...

 

[kennith]

There are many different sighting systems, and they all have their purposes. My experiences with Eotech, however...

It's been made obvious over the years that I like to keep things very, very simple, but that's one piece of technology that changed the way I considered certain weapon systems.

I still use one, and in keeping with my obsessive tendency to plan for long-term equipment function without further supply*, I've got plenty of spares, and a stockpile of batteries to keep them going.

Cheers,

Kennith

*Every time I like something, it's fucking discontinued. I've learned my lesson. Many of my things have received the "Kennith's Razor"** treatment.

**It's like Occam's Razor, but physically practical, better, and chock full of sexy.

 

[KngTgr]

Why not have both, good optics and iron sights?

 

[stu454]

Umm, no.

 

[Mongo]

yeah, not...

 

[1920SF]

I don't understand the offset irons as pictured with windage and elevation.
I mean, I've got BUIS but that's along the top, and they're there should the optic fail and are zeroed like normal A2 style sights.

 

[KngTgr]

Why not?

 

[Mongo]

because I can pop the acog off and still have a2 iron sites...and shooting a gun sideways is gay ghetto gangbanger bullshit...

 

[1920SF]

because I can pop the acog off and still have a2 iron sites...and shooting a gun sideways is gay ghetto gangbanger bullshit...

Exactly.

The windage and elevation comments stem from the lack of functionality when in a poor shooting position (like the weapon tilted sideways). Works for close in shots, but where windage and elevation help you wouldn't want to shoot like that.

You also wouldn't want to have them close together; hypothetically it doesn't matter but for most breathing, sight picture, sight alignment, trigger squeeze and shooting posture all combine to make it nice to have the longer distance between front and rear sights help keep the sights more stable. At least that's my experience.
r-
Ray