Irons still worth using?

[SoDak]

Lately I've been kicking around the idea of building my own version of the bushhamster dissipator, but with specs that fits my needs better than what bushy did. I like the full length sight radius on a carbine since my eyes don't work well with a carbine sight radius. My problem is that by the time I build this, I figure I could have built a standard m4 or midlength and have enough money to pay for at least part of an aimpoint. I've played with aimpoints and have recognized their superiority over irons. I'm just starting to wonder if there is any practical need to build a carbine that's made with the intent of using irons soley. Have irons been completely superseded by red dots for any serious use?

[SpartanArms]

SoDak,

If you want to build a carbine set up solely for irons then by all means go ahead. It's your money and we still live in a free country (at least partially)!:D If you already have a regular carbine length AR, I might consider building another carbine with irons only. If this will be your only AR, you would probably be better served with a standard carbine or mid-length AR with an RDS and BUIS.

Now don't get me wrong, there are many shooters who are quite successful shooting irons only (think USMC rifle team). However, they shoot a lot of slow strings of fire from the prone position, their targets are stationary and usually at long distances. Most civilian shooters who employ an AR for defensive use will be shooting at things much closer up and in a very compressed time frame; and in this arena the red dot sight (RDS) really comes into its own.

If you're going to be shooting primarily at targets 100 yds or closer, and at targets that may be moving and possibly even shooting back at you an RDS is king. Most well known trainers today have very strong opinions about the RDS (esp. the Aimpoint) and are quite fond of them for fighting carbines.

To quote Larry Vickers, "Even if you have to whore out your wife or star in gay porn films to pay for one, you NEED a red dot sight - I prefer Aimpoints." Don't ask LAV about EoTech's...:D

To quote Pat Rogers, "See the MF'er, Shoot the MF'er, Quit Thinking About It." The RDS allows you to accomplish this task much faster than you could with iron sights.

Hope this helps. I assume you would be backing up your RDS with a BUIS, correct?

[Parabellum9x19mm]

go fixed irons w/ an Aimpoint. lower 1/3 co-witness mount.

my eyes are lens corrected and i get eye strain if i'm shooting with irons for a long time, even with a rifle or midlength sight radius.

the red dot alleviates that to a great extent. it also allows for greater precision and speed.

i know they've changed the qual ranges in the army. i always had a hard time with the 300m pop-ups because the front sight post covers up the whole thing. when you focus on your front sight and you're trying to keep that 300m pop-up fuzzy it was really difficult to hit.

the fact that you can now shoot the qual range with a red dot really says something to me. it makes sense tho, especially if you're supposed to train how you fight. i'm not the best shot, i know it, but red dots do help me to be a bit faster and more accurate. if that's the case for me, i'm sure its the case for most everyone else.


at this point, irons will always be a back-up for me on the AR. i used to want a carry handle, iron sight only AR...but i gave up that idea five or six years ago. the fact that my vision has never been great and will only degrade as i get older played into the decision, as well as the fact that an A1/A2 upper paints you into a corner as far as future sighting options.

[SoDak]

I've got a few ar including a standard carbine that's awaiting a new mount so I can put a red dot on it as well as a bushy dissipator. I've always liked the concept of the dissipator, but think bushhamster got it all wrong. I've always had the idea of building the dissipator the way it should have been, but like I said guns with red dots outclass it so much it's hard to justify it. I've used an aimpoin on one of my ARs and was blown away by how good it was. It is way easier to use in low light and darkness and even with hardly any practice using this gun I was able to make running hits on jackrabbits. Having a rifle length sight radius would still be nice for backup irons, but since aimpoints are so reliable I don't forsee needing a buis often(although my carbine is getting an mbus when they come out). Maybe I should build a carbine with a rifle length sight radius and then stick an eotech on it. Then I would have a legitimate need for some good back up sights.;)

[Caeser25]

I wanted to do the same thing but went with the carbine setup and still saving up funds for an aimpoint.

[lanceriley]

learn to shoot the irons. you'll need it if your red dot breaks.

just because most cars are automatics nowadays. doesn't mean you don't have to learn the stick.

[Iraqgunz]

IMHO if you have a carbine, rifle, etc..you should always have iron sights as a first. The one exception would be for a precision sniper rifle.

[Littlelebowski]

I often find myself more accurate with irons on slow shots. There's something about that front sight post that helps me. I'll never have a carbine without irons.

[SpartanArms]

Just want to make sure everyone understood my reply. I'm NOT advocating that the OP should only have an RDS and no iron sights, I'm saying he should DEFINITELY have iron sights on his carbine. I'm also saying that if he is planning on using this as a fighting weapon he should consider an RDS in addition to the iron sights. Hope that clarifies the point I was trying to make.

[SoDak]

Just want to make sure everyone understood my reply. I'm NOT advocating that the OP should only have an RDS and no iron sights, I'm saying he should DEFINITELY have iron sights on his carbine. I'm also saying that if he is planning on using this as a fighting weapon he should consider an RDS in addition to the iron sights. Hope that clarifies the point I was trying to make.

I get that if you use a red dot, you should always have irons for back up and should practice with them. I was more looking at the idea of building a carbine designed specifically to use iron sights to their fullest potential and whether or not it really has any value in this day and age.

[lanceriley]

if it's a fighting weapon irons is a must. I would prefer fixed.

[Aristogeiton]

I agree that a carbine with a RDS is better for fighting, but there is something I really enjoy about shooting iron sighted ARs with a full sight radius.
:D

[peabody]

I agree that a carbine with a RDS is better for fighting, but there is something I really enjoy about shooting iron sighted ARs with a full sight radius.
:D



i agree. they are fun/cool/cheaper.


peabody

[Exporter]

IMHO,

If you run a RDS, you HAVE TO HAVE IRONS! This is to verify your RDS zero to the irons. Cant remember how many times my RDS zero was either slightly off or way off (M2 on ARMS mount). This rifle is worn daily and bounced into metal ladders, concrete walls, etc. While the irons can also be off, you will know something is wrong when they dont co-witness.

[John_Wayne777]

Lately I've been kicking around the idea of building my own version of the bushhamster dissipator, but with specs that fits my needs better than what bushy did. I like the full length sight radius on a carbine since my eyes don't work well with a carbine sight radius. My problem is that by the time I build this, I figure I could have built a standard m4 or midlength and have enough money to pay for at least part of an aimpoint. I've played with aimpoints and have recognized their superiority over irons. I'm just starting to wonder if there is any practical need to build a carbine that's made with the intent of using irons soley. Have irons been completely superseded by red dots for any serious use?

You ask two separate questions which require two separate answers:

1. Is there any practical need to build a dedicated iron sight gun? Not really. From a pure social purposes perspective, there's no reason to limit yourself to iron sights on a weapon if you aren't forced to by department policy. If you can pick your own gear, invest in a red dot.

2. Have irons been rendered obsolete? Absolutely not. While the reliability of RDS sights and mounts today is remarkable by any standard, they still take batteries. Anything with batteries...be it a RDS or a pacemaker...can go TU on you with little notice. I wouldn't consider a carbine for serious social purposes that didn't have irons on it. When training with my carbine I always try to spend at least half of the time with the dot turned off to keep my skill with the co-witnessed irons honed.


IMHO,

If you run a RDS, you HAVE TO HAVE IRONS! This is to verify your RDS zero to the irons. Cant remember how many times my RDS zero was either slightly off or way off (M2 on ARMS mount). This rifle is worn daily and bounced into metal ladders, concrete walls, etc. While the irons can also be off, you will know something is wrong when they dont co-witness.

While I agree with your stance on irons, I feel compelled to point out that your zero shift issues were most likely the result of using a really shitty mount. :D I think I would rather use hoseclamps than bother with another ARMS mount ever again.

[Exporter]

While I agree with your stance on irons, I feel compelled to point out that your zero shift issues were most likely the result of using a really shitty mount. :D I think I would rather use hoseclamps than bother with another ARMS mount ever again.

I agree as well. :D Back in the Prehistoric Era when they issued our equipment, Blackhawk tac vests, ARMS mounts and HBAR's were pretty high speed stuff...:rolleyes:

[JHC]

RDS advantages are undeniable. OTOH, at todays 3 gun, it was a close range affair, a "zombie" match for grins in October with head shots only on a lot of targets under 25 yds and a few out at 40. I unsnapped my SPR-E/1-4x and decided to run it my N4 carbine with the BUIS and shot very accurately and very fast with them. Bungled my shotgun reload but that's another issue. ;)

One of our local M4carbine.net SMEs has strongly advocated an iron sighted AR carbine with irons and a light for HD for many users. I think that is very good advice.

[3CTactical]

When I first started shooting ARs, I was only shooting irons, because I couldn't bring myself to buy a quality red dot - I thought they weren't worth it. When I actually got a chance to try a red dot, I went out and purchased 4 more for all my carbines - there really is no comparison to how much easier it is to shoot with a red dot. I can now hand one of my carbines to someone with no real experience shooting and say just put the dot on what you want to hit and pull the trigger. A comment from a inexperienced friend we went out shooting last week with was "you just can't miss with that red dot!"

However, I believe if funds are limited, adding a quality flashlight to an iron sighted carbine is the most important thing you could do. Then start saving for that red dot....

[BravoCompanyUSA]

Lately I've been kicking around the idea of building my own version of the bushhamster dissipator, but with specs that fits my needs better than what bushy did. I like the full length sight radius on a carbine since my eyes don't work well with a carbine sight radius. My problem is that by the time I build this, I figure I could have built a standard m4 or midlength and have enough money to pay for at least part of an aimpoint. I've played with aimpoints and have recognized their superiority over irons. I'm just starting to wonder if there is any practical need to build a carbine that's made with the intent of using irons soley. Have irons been completely superseded by red dots for any serious use?

IMHO, building a carbine with irons as a primary sight is fine for a fun plinking gun, a competition gun (in iron sight class), but not ok for a real defensive/fighting gun.

A red dot optic is way faster than sight picture/ sight alignment.

[SoDak]

Damn, I'm surprised to see this thread come back.

Ultimately I never did build my ideal iron sighted gun, because it just didn't seem to be worth the time and money. I still sort of like the idea because while I do run aimpoints, I wish I had a better iron sight setup on my m4. For some reason(maybe someone could help me on this), I have troubles keeping the front sight in focus on M4s. On other guns that have the front sight further out I don't seem to have this problem. I can use the irons on an m4 ok up close, but it gets more difficult out past 50 yards.

I should have mentioned back when this was origionally posted that I was using an aimpoint on one of my rifles. I realized back then how much better they were and still do.

If I remember right my reason for a lightweight gun with a better iron sight setup was based on my desire to have a ranch rifle(so not a true defensive carbine, I've got other guns for that) that that was lighter than my dissipator, but still had more usable irons(for me) than an m4. I didn't really want an red dot on that particular rifle since I was trying to keep weight, cost(which i true to a point), and complexity down. Problem was that I realized that for the intended role, my planned rifle wasn't that much better than my dissipator. Sure it would be lighter, but at the cost of an expensive gun that fits into a small niche. That and after having my dissipator ride around with me in trucks and tractors all summer, I found the hbar wasn't nearly as big an issue as I thought it was. So I just keep using my dissy and maybe I'll just do some upgrades to that one of these days(milspec re, and magpul acs). That leaves money for more useful projects.

[a1fabweld]

A good friend recently took a tactical class. The instructor's views on red dot's are that in low light situations, one's eye's are focused on the red dot rather than the target. He explained how irons create less distraction & your eyes focus more on the target & peripheral view is better. I'm not agreeing, just sharing a different perspective.

[John_Wayne777]

A good friend recently took a tactical class. The instructor's views on red dot's are that in low light situations, one's eye's are focused on the red dot rather than the target. He explained how irons create less distraction & your eyes focus more on the target & peripheral view is better. I'm not agreeing, just sharing a different perspective.

I don't know who that instructor is, but that's a pretty fruity outlook given that we have lots of information from people who have done a lot of gunfighting in low light who have said that red dots are many orders of magnitude more efficient in low light than irons.

Red dots as a hinderance in low light is a new one on me.