View Full Version : Night sights on a rifle
I can't figure out if I like the idea or not and I can't figure out if they would be usefull or just expensive. Google hasn't been any help so I thought I'd check here.
Do many people run night sights on their ar15 do they come in handy or no?
Sorry for any poor grammar/spelling.
Sent from my XT1565 using Tapatalk
MajorLonghorn
10-16-16, 12:50
I have tritium Troy BUIS on one of my rifles. Have never used them. I'm buying polymer Magpul sights now.
ColtSeavers
10-16-16, 13:23
I have given this thought in the past.
I would go with a tritium front sight only, as the rear would be too close to your eye and mess with your vision. It would still not take the place of a weapon mounted light, but would be useful for indexing without silhouetteing/giving yourself away.
I think you should also pay close attention to some problems associated with them as well. Depending on the specific one you get, the tritium dot may be lower than the sight post top. Some will also have limited adjustment as they are fixed facing a certain direction requiring a full 360° rotation either up or down which limits zeroing ability, or avariation of that.
Ive messed with them a little on a Valmet. I really like them. The front has a vertical bar, the rear is a horizontal bar. Both flip up to use, the rear peep flips over forward for night sight use and is adjustable for elevation. Clever system. I believe rifle sights aren't as bright as pistol sights but don't have much experience to compare. Id like to see how the concept works on an AR, and also on a lever gun.
Night sights on a rifle.... it's called a red dot and wml.
With the tritium dot, it glows and you can see the sights but not the target in the dark. When you hit the target with the light then the tritium washes out and it looks like a regular (but wide) front post.
The wml is a must have so you can see your target. The tritium sights are just a gimmick.
556BlackRifle
10-16-16, 13:46
I thought it was a waste of money. My son put some Troy BUIS on his rifle. I tried them at dusk and completely changed my mind. It really does make a difference.
I thought it was a waste of money. My son put some Troy BUIS on his rifle. I tried them at dusk and completely changed my mind. It really does make a difference.
Could you be a little more specific as to what difference you noticed?
Sent from my XT1565 using Tapatalk
556BlackRifle
10-16-16, 13:50
Could you be a little more specific as to what difference you noticed?
Sent from my XT1565 using Tapatalk
Dusk conditions - not completely dark. The low light from the tritium sights made for faster target acquisition. Total darkness they don't help.
I quit using them. I tried for awhile, but once there's smoke, movement, and muzzle flash, the white light and silhouette of the front is all I'm using. Tritium helps for the first shot in transitional or ambient lighting, but not much else in my experience, and the front width is more of a hinderance to me in daytime use and silhouette use than the tritium is useful.
Just my experience with them, anyway.
As a handgun instructor I see night sights as a just slightly better way to make sure you have your dots oriented in the correct manner. Shooting at things in the dark is a very bad idea and can get you in a great deal of trouble. If you are into shooting in the dark, buy the proper night vision equipment and even then make sure you understand and follow gun safety rule #4.
My 2¢
SamuelBLong
10-16-16, 21:24
When I was locked into using Irons only per department policy, I installed a tritium FSP. It helped out a lot in low light.
Now that we are working with guns that have lights, lasers and optics I find that the tritium gets distracting when shooting low/no light with co-witnessed RDS.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Back in the bad old days (read before the dominance of red dot sights) I would use a tritium front sight post. Since going to Aimpoints or LPVO with lit reticle on all my serious use rifles I don't see a need for the trit front sight anymore.
Many years ago I bought a Colt from a LEO friend that had a tritium front post (XS Big Dot type). It had been his patrol carbine and was a Departmental requirement. While I have NS on all my carry handguns I found the DS BD front sight very distracting and detrimental to my shooting abilities. Rear NS on a rifle makes no sense because I shoot NTCH and would not see it anyway.
ETA: I've also used NSN ACOGs with their top mounted tritium back up sight (front BUIS was tritium). This I liked because those BUIS are only good for bedroom distances and the green dot helped me see the front in low light.
We have them on our patrol rifles. The rears are a total waste on an aperture sight because I can't see the dots when I'm looking through it at all. The front would probably be useful in low light but I couldn't really tell you. We shoot at night but really only zero/confirm zero with the irons and work with the optics the rest of the time.
On an irons only set-up I think they're a welcome addition to the front sight post; useless at best at the rear. With a scope or RDS they can be distracting.
The knock is their increased width obscures field of view, but I don't find they cover considerably more than traditional irons already suffer from. I like the XS version -- the larger vial is easier to pick up, as is the white outline in daytime conditions. I find I lose a traditional front sight post against a lot of backgrounds.
I have often wondered about the effectiveness of a tritium front sight on an AR. Appreciate all the feedback here.
Having never used them, just a thought, would rear tritium help guide your eye into the rear when bringing the rifle up, ensuring a good sight picture?
If I was running irons only I'd consider it, but don't see the point with an illuminated optic and light on the gun.
SamuelBLong
10-18-16, 20:05
Having never used them, just a thought, would rear tritium help guide your eye into the rear when bringing the rifle up, ensuring a good sight picture?
If I was running irons only I'd consider it, but don't see the point with an illuminated optic and light on the gun.
If your mechanics are consistent, as they should be when shooting irons... nose to charging handle method or whatever method of consistently mounting the gun you use to get the same head eye position, tritium in the rear only becomes distracting to your eye and doesn't benefit you.
It may have some benefit if you are in some weird position where you could use three dots as a reference to make a shot, but it would be exceedingly rare, and again distracting to the eye 99.9999 % of the time.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Years back they seemed like a "good idea" but now....no. Aimpoint PRO is pretty cheap.
Here's the problem, it is too distracting. For a Pistol it is good but for a rifle it is just too distracting due to its distance from your eye and trying to focus. As aforementioned a muzzle flash at night can still be bright.
I remember dusk/night shoot with an M16A2 and I could still focus on the standard front sight and get my "lollipop" hold on the silhouette. If you are shooting at like pitch black, you need a light or night vision.
Even indoor point shooting with a rifle is easier than with a handgun and more margin of error. Esp w/ the larger aperature. At point shoot distances, anything in that circle is gonna die or not be happy.
A red dot is less busy, more precise, and simply way easier. I think if a dept. is willing to spring for rifles, a light and a red dot should be a package deal. Maybe even suppressor if dealing with a high clan lab area.
JMO
Mysteryman
10-19-16, 19:49
No one has suggested a rifle with only tritium irons be the issued setup for MIL or LE users. The complaint about front post width is weak at best IMO. Irons are far from precision instruments, shots are rarely taken at extended ranges with irons and most irons on guns these days are BACK UP sights often with zero ability to dial for distance. Front sight width on a tritium post is nearly identical to a stock one.
It's obvious that you can't shoot what you can't see and white lights are necessary. What isn't always necessary is the use of the white light. There could be a situation where you can see your target clearly(positive ID) while shooting from a position of low/no light. Perhaps the shot is at a distance where the white light is all but useless. Without a tritium post you have no choice but to activate your light to see the sights or hunt for your sights in the dark. The tritium post offers a defined easy to see aiming point for those times where you need to shoot but wish to remain concealed as possible. I don't think a tritium post is ideal nor does it work in all situations, but it is a cheap item to add to your rifle and it solves some problems.
MM
I tried a tritium front post, but between the added width and its tendency to reflect more light than the standard post, I found it to be a huge detriment to accuracy. I would not be without tritium sights on any handgun used for serious purposes, but not a rifle. The possible need for a sight that can be seen in low light was the biggest factor to persuade me to try red dots and low power variable scopes.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I bought a blitzkrieg front sight post for my Magpul MBUS Pro with a luminescent Green Strip They also have one with a Tritium dot
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v39/cletus989/post1.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/cletus989/media/post1.jpg.html)
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v39/cletus989/post2.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/cletus989/media/post2.jpg.html)
Having never used them, just a thought, would rear tritium help guide your eye into the rear when bringing the rifle up, ensuring a good sight picture?
If I was running irons only I'd consider it, but don't see the point with an illuminated optic and light on the gun.
Not really. When I've messed with it at night I mostly just didn't even see the dots.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.