View Full Version : does anyone else here run iron sights only? (no optics)
hey all, I am new to the forum, but have used the M16/AR-15 platform for 9+ years in the Army. for the Majority of that time, I used nothing but iron sights. I have tried optics, but always end up going back to what is comfortable to me. I consistantly scored expert on my weapons Qual, so I feel proficient with the irons. It just seems that every rifle I have seen a pic of on the forums has some sort of optic on it as the main sights. Am I the only one who is still using my Irons?
BTW, I purchased my first ar-15, a bushmaster, before reading these forums, but have since staked the castle nut, and replaced the BCG with a colt. seems to be running fine, but I only have around 350 rounds through it. thanks for any feedback!
I still have irons but that's mainly because I didn't have the funds for any type of optic when I had mine built. I'm very comfortable with the irons out to 100yds and I figure that's good enough, not too shabby out to 200.
If I need further distance, I have something that'll handle it.
Now...if an optic falls outta the sky into my lap I'll give it a go but for now the irons will accomplish the purpose for my AR.
I'm purposely keeping one A1 carbine optics-free, but my aging eyes really do prefer optics.
I still have irons but that's mainly because I didn't have the funds for any type of optic when I had mine built.
This describes one of my rifles.
ICANHITHIMMAN
02-10-10, 08:32
Im in an IRONS only phase right now. I have aimpoint, ACOG, Eotech in the safe but right now im shooting carry handle irons. Im doing it as a kind of get back to the basics.
Overseas its ACOG or bust!
Ditto, 22 years Reserves, and always with iron sights. I have used a scope on my bolt rifle, and a 1Gen Aimpoint on an HK. I prefer the red dot IF it would have a better battery life. New ones do, but they sure aren't cheap.
Lots of pic's on forums are not working rifles, let's be honest about it. They are the proud expression of owners who kit them out and like to show them off a little. Of course I enjoyed that in the day - hunting with an HK91 in the '70's - '80's was not a Fudd way to do it, neither was using any red dot. Totally out of the box.
These days I use a Win 94 until the 6.8 gets finished. Iron sights work, but the red dot does a better job with really fast acquistion. At whatever cheek weld, dot on target = trigger pull. Until then, iron sights will do.
What most don't consider is the day to day field experience many older servicemen have with irons - which can take a lot of abuse and still work. Any kind of obscurant on just one lens of an optic puts it out of use and iron sights are immediately needed. It's the nature of the beast.
It's why I will build with a fixed front sight and make the red dot work with it, not the other way around. Unlike the scoped bolt gun, I'm choosing function over fashion with the AR.
when i bought my first ar i had to go buy an eotech since that's what all the cool kids on arfcom had. i ran it for 100 rounds and traded it off for ammo and mags.
when i bought my second ar i rushed out and bought an aimpoint because that's what all the other cool kids on arfcom had. it lasted 250 rounds before i traded it off for more ammo and a light mount.
when i traded both those ar's in on 1 top of the line grand hoohah ar i almost ran out and bought an acog. luckily i came to before i made it to the store and slapped some sense into myself.
for up close shots out to 25 yards i figured out a way to use just the front sight alone to aquire and hit com pretty fast and accurately. for anything from 25-150 yards i use the aperture. for anything out past 150 yards i use my feet to head the opposite direction. :cool:
arizonaranchman
02-10-10, 08:59
Both my AR's are carry handle A2 sights and I love them as-is. I'm working on a third gun and will have a carry handle on it for awhile til I can afford an Aimpoint T1.
I love iron sights and prefer them but do know that for certain applications it's hard to beat optics. Generally most of my rifles are iron sighted except for my 30-06. I live in a rural area and carry my rifle in the truck alot, keeping an eye out for predators and pests when I'm out and about.
gtmtnbiker98
02-10-10, 09:25
I'm currently running irons, only. However, I am also shopping around for a decent optic for 3-Gun.
I am only running irons, but I simply cannot decide which optic to go with between a micro and an XPS.
I have a new appreciation of iron sights since I came accross this thread on TOS:
http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=18&t=328143
Hoping to get out to the range soon and try it.
Aristogeiton
02-10-10, 12:36
I am running irons only, but I'm only doing this because I am focused on buying back up rifles, pistols, mags and ammo first.
My rifles will always have irons, but in my opinion I believe a carbine should have some sort of Red Dot Sight.
Irons are hard to see in low light/no light. I have lost them trying to pick up targets when shooting from a dark area to a light area where the target is silhouetted.
I also believe a good RDS is faster to acquire a targets and is easier for non-shooters to use with little training (my wife).
This is only my opinion....
:D
I say if that's what you like to shoot with, then use irons! No need to get approval from others. That being said, all combat MOS's carry weapons with optics now, for very good reasons. The .mil has done a lot of study on this, and the results say that optics improve target acquisition and effective engagement across the board.
No, because sometimes it's dark outside, and sometimes it's dark in buildings.
I have one iron-sighted rifle that fills a very narrow niche.
For me a quality red dot is a required piece of equipment on a fighting gun, unless it will be used in an SPR role then a quality 1-4 variable scope. I understand that batteries fail etc.. but i don't see a need to purposely put myself at a disadvantage by intentionally not running an RDS.
William B.
02-10-10, 13:22
One advantage I found in having a magnified optic while I was over-seas was that I could scan with my optic. I could scan areas off to the flanks and the rear and I could start scanning areas ahead for suspicious activity and IED indicators about 100yds before I got to it. They are also good for searching people from a distance if there is a suicide bomber threat in the area.
not really, no. I used to shoot NRA highpower but don't anymore as my aging eye sight is not up to the task. I do keep fixed sights behind my Aimpoint on my go-to rifles, however.
should the Aimpoint go down, fuzzy irons will be better than nothing at all...
all you lucky guys, when my unit went over to Iraq in 04-05, we never got any cool sights. BOO!! I see how they could have been AWESOME in use. thanks for the feedback.
goodoleboy
02-10-10, 15:45
I only own 1 AR (Colt 6920), and all I have are irons on it. I would like to have a red-dot or ACOG in the future, we'll see. The investment in the rifle and ammo set me back for a while.
While we are on the topic, if I were to mount an EOTECH or Aimpoint on it, would the front site post interfere with it? I'm leaning towards these because the ACOGs are so darn expensive and most of my shooting is 200 yards or less.
Dist. Expert 26
02-10-10, 16:00
I come from a NRA smallbore background, and even when scopes are allowed I run irons. My personal opinion is that you can be just as fast and accurate, it just takes more practice.
I come from a NRA smallbore background, and even when scopes are allowed I run irons. My personal opinion is that you can be just as fast and accurate, it just takes more practice.
When you think you're as fast and accurate as you can be switch to a RDS.
Learning to use iron sights is essential, but I'm debating the notion that they should be learned first anymore. Especially when you have a new shooter who cannot grasp shooting with irons and they are ready to give up. A RDS is so easy and effective that you are handicapping yourself if you refuse to use one. They are good for folks with older eyes. They were not made for lazy people, but even lazy people shoot much better with them. And for the experts on military ranges, once you begin to shoot dynamically--multiple targets, snap shooting, etc, you will find that a RDS is much more effective.
Belmont31R
02-10-10, 16:59
Irons are never going to be as fast as an RDS. With irons you have to line up 4 objects. The target, front sight, rear sight, and your eye. With the RDS the sight is one item so you are only lining up 3 objects.
Irons are also useless in the dark unless you have tritium inserts. In a unit of mine we all had either A2's or A4's unless you were a MG'er. We did a night fire exercise of shooting 20 rds at pop up targets on a normal qual range (just set the 25M target to pop up 20 times and record the hits). Then tie a glow stick to the target so you can see what you are trying to hit. I bought my own EOTech 552, and hit 20/20 times. The next highest score with everyone else using iron sights was something like 9/10. This out of over 100 shooters.
The ACOG allows you to shoot more accurately further out, ID targets, and scout positions. The BDC is calibrated to mil rifle setups so it takes the guesswork out of long shots.
I don't know why so many people are hung up on using iron sights. With the new breed of optics out there irons are no more reliable than a good optic. Ive yet to hear of a catastrophic failure of an ACOG or Aimpoint that wasn't caused by damage like a round hitting the actual optic. As I pointed out irons are near useless at night. They are not as quick due to the extra object that you have to line up. They are not as precise at range. They do not allow any better target ID or recon than the naked eye. The only reason to keep using them is for nostalgia or as a BUIS. Optics used to get a bad rap because of the technology at the time. My first rifle with an optic I ever owned was a Husqvarna commercial Mauser with an old Weaver scope. Tube body was not sealed so it fogged up in any moisture Click adjustments were not reliable. No QD mounts. Just as useless at night due to no illumination. With that level of technology iron sights were more reliable in the field. Not so much today where you have RDS's that last half a decade on one battery or 15 years with no batteries in the ACOG, near bulletproof reliability, and overall they are well made quality items. The old arguments for using irons are no longer applicable today.
No. I would never hit anything if I did.
I have been interested in running irons because the policy of the police force I am considering joining does not allow optics at all. However, I agree a RDS is pivotal for a fighting gun.
cougar_guy04
02-10-10, 18:26
This describes one of my rifles.
Same here. When I did my first build in college, glass was out of the question. I could probably throw an Aimpoint on it now, but I think I'll just keep it as it sits save for doing something with the barrel (HBAR 1:9).
I have two AR's.
The BCM M4 runs LMT BUIS with a EO512 as primary and on the Colt 6920, all I run is the detachable carry handle for it's sighting system.
I prefer one with just irons.
My agency issues the Colt 6721. Not a one w/ optics. Adding your own is not an option.
I prefer irons to anything else, especially after discovering the CSAT rear sight. Very fast and easy to acquire, rugged, inexpensive, and no batteries.
I also like the looks of the A2 style rifle over a flattop.
Just my .02,
LeonCarr
I've used irons successfully for over 20 years and am more accurate with them under optimum conditions and with a long sight radius, but to be truly accurate you still have to focus on the front sight post. I am also having eye issues and irons have become difficult under MANY lighting conditions.:( RDS I can keep eyes on my target, hit it if I can see it in any light and am much faster than with irons. Get an Aimpoint and use both;)
I have my old "Enhanced" Bushmaster with an A2 upper which is primarily iron only and my LMT and S&W MP15R (5.45mm) with an Aimpoint and EO Tech.
* "Enhanced" Bushmaster
14.5" w/ pinned BCM A2X flash hider
Magpul MOE handguards and stock
Magpul enhanced trigger guard
Ergo grip
Ambi-safety
DD M16 BCG
Colt front side sling mount
LMT Tactical charging handle
H buffer
William B.
02-11-10, 13:44
My agency issues the Colt 6721. Not a one w/ optics. Adding your own is not an option.
Why won't they let you guys run optics? I've heard several LEO's on M4C say this about their respective agencies.
Belmont31R
02-11-10, 15:01
Why won't they let you guys run optics? I've heard several LEO's on M4C say this about their respective agencies.
Many people have the attitude they are too expensive, and if you let people add your own half will show up with China junk optics.
Kinda like they guy in my old unit who showed up with a BSA red dot on his SAW, and the damn thing broke the 1st time he shot with it.
tracker722
02-11-10, 15:09
*****
William B.
02-11-10, 15:21
Many people have the attitude they are too expensive, and if you let people add your own half will show up with China junk optics.
Kinda like they guy in my old unit who showed up with a BSA red dot on his SAW, and the damn thing broke the 1st time he shot with it.
Yeah, I guess you're right. I've seen my fair share of people bringing their junk gear to the field. You'd think they would have a list of dept. approved optics or something, though. I guess a lot of it probably depends on the guy in charge.
I'm currently running an A1.5 on my BCM middy. My reasoning behind this is two-fold: First, I simply want to be proficient with using them. I'm not of the mind that it's "better" knowing how to use irons, nor do I feel they're some honorable lost art (though I do feel one should be familiar with them in case the optic goes down). Second, I depleted most of my money doing this build. I don't want to cheap out on a RDS, or mount. So I'll be running irons until my budget allows.
Why won't they let you guys run optics? I've heard several LEO's on M4C say this about their respective agencies.
Many people have the attitude they are too expensive, and if you let people add your own half will show up with China junk optics.
Kinda like they guy in my old unit who showed up with a BSA red dot on his SAW, and the damn thing broke the 1st time he shot with it.
With my organization its not a budgetary constraint but rather a dogmatic view that carry handles and iron sights are suitable and "have always been good enough".
That said, certain optics are authorized on individually owned rifles that have been inspected and approved for duty use.
RogerinTPA
02-11-10, 17:02
I've used iron sights on rifles, for the majority of my life (30 years+), mostly in competition and practice. Until joining this sight 3 years ago, it's all I shot, until I found the efficiency in shooting accurately, and faster, with a quality RDS (Red Dot Sight). Iron sights are the first thing a novice shooter should master, and an experience shooter should stay proficient in. I like shooting with Irons, but enjoy the no fuss aiming and accuracy that a RDS can afford the user. One day, I'll have enough balls to run strictly Irons, in a carbine course, but will have to practice my ass off to get as proficient in carbine drills as I am with a RDS.
CaptainDooley
02-11-10, 18:34
Looks like Kyle Defoor is going to run irons for a year:
http://www.kyledefoor.com/2010/02/iron-sight-project.html
CaptainDooley Looks like Kyle Defoor is going to run irons for a year:
http://www.kyledefoor.com/2010/02/ir...t-project.html
It sure does. He is/was running a standard DDM4. It is also possible for mere mortals to run fast with the Irons only.
Now I need to silence my inner Geardo and get back to the irons.
I used to be an irons-only guy.
Well, that changed. Now, I'm firmly in the camp of I Like Glass.
It's nice having optics, especially in situations where plain irons are less than optimal (like in the dark/dusk).
I still have a 10/22 with TechSIGHTs and a CZ 452 so I can get my iron sight fix on the cheap, though.
Learning the proper use of iron sights teaches the shooter more than just the use of iron sights. It teaches one to be a better rifleman. The shooter learns why form, breath control, trigger control and discipline are necessary as the iron sights are less forgiving than optics. Any mistake leaves it's signature on the groups fired to be read by the knowledgeable rifleman.
Teaching a beginner to shoot with optics or an RDS may be faster, but it's not as thorough. There is a reason why the USMC lays the foundation of basic marksmanship with iron sights whether the student goes on to be an infantryman or a sniper.
This isn't to claim that iron sights are just as good as an optical sight or RDS in all conditions. But what will the shooter do when technical difficulties render the optic or RDS inoperative? Will the shooter be founded enough in the basics to continue in the fight effectively, with our without BUIS? Chances are that if shooter has mastered the proper use of iron sights, form will come naturally and the rifleman will shoot well even with the lack of sights
I run irons-only...only because I can't afford an Aimpoint yet! :D
Given the level of technology, I don't think there is any real advantage to using irons over a good RDS like Aimpoint. The units are getting smaller, they are getting easier to use, they are opening up the field of vision, and they are getting better and better on battery life. Always have backup irons in case something goes wrong with the RDS, but I would not be surprise if in 20yrs or so iron sights won't be found any any military rifles anymore.
Learning the proper use of iron sights teaches the shooter more than just the use of iron sights. It teaches one to be a better rifleman. The shooter learns why form, breath control, trigger control and discipline are necessary as the iron sights are less forgiving than optics. Any mistake leaves it's signature on the groups fired to be read by the knowledgeable rifleman.
Teaching a beginner to shoot with optics or an RDS may be faster, but it's not as thorough. There is a reason why the USMC lays the foundation of basic marksmanship with iron sights whether the student goes on to be an infantryman or a sniper.
This isn't to claim that iron sights are just as good as an optical sight or RDS in all conditions. But what will the shooter do when technical difficulties render the optic or RDS inoperative? Will the shooter be founded enough in the basics to continue in the fight effectively, with our without BUIS? Chances are that if shooter has mastered the proper use of iron sights, form will come naturally and the rifleman will shoot well even with the lack of sights
I'll second this as well.
I use irons only. Have been all my life. I've used the EOTech & like it for up close & personal use, (don't like aimpoints at all). That being said, irons work just fine up close as you shoot it the same way as a pistol up close. Look down the sights not through them. I know these optics are the wave of the future but everyone should learn to use irons first & properly. The rest is just gravy.
Belmont31R
02-11-10, 22:50
Learning the proper use of iron sights teaches the shooter more than just the use of iron sights. It teaches one to be a better rifleman. The shooter learns why form, breath control, trigger control and discipline are necessary as the iron sights are less forgiving than optics. Any mistake leaves it's signature on the groups fired to be read by the knowledgeable rifleman.
Teaching a beginner to shoot with optics or an RDS may be faster, but it's not as thorough. There is a reason why the USMC lays the foundation of basic marksmanship with iron sights whether the student goes on to be an infantryman or a sniper.
This isn't to claim that iron sights are just as good as an optical sight or RDS in all conditions. But what will the shooter do when technical difficulties render the optic or RDS inoperative? Will the shooter be founded enough in the basics to continue in the fight effectively, with our without BUIS? Chances are that if shooter has mastered the proper use of iron sights, form will come naturally and the rifleman will shoot well even with the lack of sights
You can learn all those things with an RDS too. Not because someone will be less of a rifleman learning to use an RDS but its just an easier/quicker way to shoot, and hence why the military and most people use them. Learning to shoot with irons just teaches you there is more to shooting than looking down the tube.
Also the Army is transitioning to optics on basic training rifles.
You can learn all those things with an RDS too. Not because someone will be less of a rifleman learning to use an RDS but its just an easier/quicker way to shoot, and hence why the military and most people use them. Learning to shoot with irons just teaches you there is more to shooting than looking down the tube.
Also the Army is transitioning to optics on basic training rifles.As I said, it may be faster to teach a beginner using an RDS, but it isn't as thorough. One advantage to an RDS is that it is parallax free- at least with one model I was considering buying. Where the dot sets is where the bullet will strike regardless of where the eye is. You do not have to have a cheek weld. With iron sights, obtaining a good cheek weld is very important and practice teaches the shooter to acquire a cheek weld quickly and consistently. If the beginning stages of learning to shoot is with a sight where this isn't necessary, how will the shooter gain the skill? A good cheek weld is key to fast accurate shooting without sights.
Though it takes more training, the shooter is better trained if taught the proper use of iron sights.
I'm not against optics or the RDS and I know they are an important part of a fighting rifle or carbine. When I get to buy/build the AR carbine I want, I will install a low magnification ACOG on it when I can afford it.
Personally (let me emphasize personally) I find using the RDS strange. That's because I have almost no experience with them. I know with a little familiarization that I would become comfortable with the RDS very quickly. It's kinda neat have that blazing red ball floating over your target. Now if I can just overcome my distrust of batteries....:D
I don't think the OP was desiring to skip iron sight training or that any knowledgeable shooter would advocate skipping that process. I refused to hunt with scopes for years and only used irons (partially out of contempt for my scoped shooting buddies that I felt did not practice enough to be worthy to hunt), but I had great eyes, practiced and could consistently pull it off. There is obviously a time and place to use optics and an RDS. I think the experts on this site would say they can fight with irons, but can fight faster with a RDS.
The only reason I'm using iron sights is because I'm broke and can't afford an Aimpoint or anything else worth buying.
Belmont31R
02-12-10, 01:58
As I said, it may be faster to teach a beginner using an RDS, but it isn't as thorough. One advantage to an RDS is that it is parallax free- at least with one model I was considering buying. Where the dot sets is where the bullet will strike regardless of where the eye is. You do not have to have a cheek weld. With iron sights, obtaining a good cheek weld is very important and practice teaches the shooter to acquire a cheek weld quickly and consistently. If the beginning stages of learning to shoot is with a sight where this isn't necessary, how will the shooter gain the skill? A good cheek weld is key to fast accurate shooting without sights.
Though it takes more training, the shooter is better trained if taught the proper use of iron sights.
I'm not against optics or the RDS and I know they are an important part of a fighting rifle or carbine. When I get to buy/build the AR carbine I want, I will install a low magnification ACOG on it when I can afford it.
Personally (let me emphasize personally) I find using the RDS strange. That's because I have almost no experience with them. I know with a little familiarization that I would become comfortable with the RDS very quickly. It's kinda neat have that blazing red ball floating over your target. Now if I can just overcome my distrust of batteries....:D
You're just teaching the person a different skill set because the two sighting systems operate so differently. Irons require more skill to use well so there is more training involved but that is a reflection of why an RDS is a better choice than irons. Its kinda like teaching someone on a manual transmission vs. an automatic. Skills learned driving a manual don't really mean anything when you get into a car with an auto transmission as those skills are not needed to drive the car but its good know if you ever need to drive a manual.
As I said you can teach someone basic marksmanship fundamentals with an RDS or other optic.
As I said you can teach someone basic marksmanship fundamentals with an RDS or other optic
True, but what happens when the optic goes down? ( it will at some point. Murphy's law is always in effect)
The word "master" has come up in about four different posts. Do you guys mean soldiers should actually master using open sights or attain some basic level of proficiency? When I think of a "master" of using iron sights, I think of the guys at Camp Perry.
I'm not going to do the digging, but there are a couple of posts by Retreat Hell about knowing the stuff he learned in a (Magpul?) class would likely have prevented or reduced his injuries he sustained while deployed. Given a fixed time/training/$ budget for the Army/Marines, I suspect there are skills that would serve our forces more than having them "master" open sights. Being a great iron sight user is of no use if you get killed before you get a chance to use them.
Every carbine for serious use should have some form of iron sights. When I gain employment and buy my BCM upper, it will have a standard fixed front sight, a rear BIUS, and an Aimpoint. I do realize Murphy is around, I just think that there are a lot of other things that will go wrong before the Aimpoint dies.
These are just my opinions formed by lurking, because I've never signed the dotted line and agreed to let cowards shoot at me from behind women and children.
Having skills with the Irons is important. An optic will enhance speed and skills learned of the irons.
Without the fundamentals you will end up like a young kid I saw couple weeks ago. He had a custom AR with Geissele trigger, Eotech, all the bells and whistles and was unable to group or zero. Finally we got him off the eotech and on to the irons and he started making progress.
Irons have dropped a lot more targets than optics have. Even in cites and towns. Although they do require more work.
I practice with my irons only everytime shoot, but mainly to ensure the skill to acquire and shoot accurately is still there if my EOTech fails for some reason.
The EOTech without a doubt makes shooting much faster and much accurate. I cannot understand why someone would not want the advantage of being able to shoot faster and more accurate in a gun fight.
With irons you have to line up 4 objects. The target, front sight, rear sight, and your eye. With the RDS the sight is one item so you are only lining up 3 objects.
This is an odd way to try to understand this. With a decent aperture sight (like the irons on most ARs), your eye will center it's view through the aperture ("ghost ring"), and then you only need to put the front sight on the target: One-two.
Looking through an optic is about the same: look through the tube, and put the dot or crosshairs on the target: One-two.
"Open" iron sights do require aligning the front and rear sights, but AFAIK no U.S. military rifle since the '03 Springfield has been set up with open sights.
I won't use open sights on my rifles, and I've even replaced the open sights on my Glocks with ghost rings.
I know that an optic is better in low-light conditions and faster for the people who are accustomed to them (not me), but my carbine is an A2 upper. I've got a 2-8x scope to mount on top of the carry handle, but I don't use it much.
Bimmer
John_Wayne777
02-12-10, 13:17
Here's the thing, folks:
It is possible under ideal conditions to be very fast and very accurate with iron sights. Without question, a good shooter can use iron sights very effectively.
Fights do not always occur under ideal conditions, and all shooters are not equally skilled.
RDS sights make it easier to get an acceptable sighting reference under widely varying conditions, which makes accuracy easier, which in turn makes the person using the carbine more effective in combat. In the end, the primary goal is holes in the vital organs of bad guys. It has been demonstrated over and over and over again that RDS optics help to achieve that goal, which is why you can find red dots in use from the Son Tay raiders all the way up to Tier 1 units actively engaged in the hunt for terrorists as we safely chat on the internet.
Yes, we should all train and strive to be proficient with the iron sights that should be on our general purpose carbines...but we should also be very reluctant to voluntarily handicap ourselves if we're trying to use these things for serious social purposes. With training and dedication the size of that handicap can be shrunk considerably...I doubt Mr. Defoor's experiment will result in a vast performance gap that he will be unable to shrink when using irons only...but time and ammo are limited resources for most of us.
Scattergun
02-15-10, 21:29
I have four ARs and only one of them has optics.
skimbleshanks
12-17-15, 23:47
My carbine is irons only for now. Fixed front sight and DD 1.5 rear. 1100-1200 rounds and I'm pretty quick and confident in their use. The 11.5" pistol I just built my wife is eotech only, as hers is just a fun time blaster and mine is more a grab it when shit happens and work every time tool. I do want another eotech though. I know of more than a few guys that bought an ar an optic and bius and expect to be competent in their use should their optic go down without ever flipping them up.
Back when the Iraq war started, I was sent with only irons. Up to that point I'd never in my life used anything other than irons. A few months into the deployment, we were given Acogs. I tried it out, and wasn't really comfortable with it, and in the middle of the deployment was no time to start getting familiar with it, so I went back to the irons for the rest of that deployment.
With that said, I eventually started using an Acog, and still do to this day. The things are awesome, but shooting at close range with the magnification definetely takes some getting used to.
Use whatever you're most comfortable with, and what you can afford.
snowdog650
12-18-15, 16:52
I have 2 identical builds with 16" BCM mid-length uppers. The only difference between the 2 is that one has an Aimpoint and the other only has irons. From a bench, I shoot better with irons (probably because I have to concentrate more), but in a class or running drills it is no contest ... I perform exponentially better with the Aimpoint-equipped rifle.
One day I might get a matching optic for the back-up rifle ... but it will soon belong to my 7 year-old daughter, and I will teach her to run her rifle with only irons first. Might not be the best way to teach her ... but it was how I was taught.
How does one stumble upon a thread from 2010?
I run irons often, but have optics for most.
The rifle I built my wife, irons, she prefers them.
Chunky_Lover
12-20-15, 16:47
I have this problem where I want every weapon I own similar. So this could get very expensive if I had any sort of electronic sight on them.
I also have found you buy cheap ones, they dont last. The only expensive one I ever bought would drain the battery when turned off so I sold it.
I dont like having to fiddle around with brightness settings too. Call me lazy but it just seems like a hassle. And yes I know there are types that auto adjust to the brightness but then thats another thing that could fail or reduce battery life.
Years ago I went to all iron sights, why because they dont need any battery to work and are cheap. Much easier to use irons on everything I have then to buy electronic sights for them all. I dont want to have to rezero anything either if I transfer them from one platform to the other. I dont have a all around weapon they all can do different things so which one would get the electronic sight? Couldnt pick only one unfortunately.
All I do is shoot outside in the hills. I can hit most anything I can see even very far away with irons. May not be the tightest group on paper but thats fine.
Maybe they weight less, not as bulky as some red dots are really doesnt effect how I shoot using irons only. I just blast away mostly.
I do like using night sights though, at least can see them in total darkness and need no batteries.
I do have a scoped bolt action rifle, but it has no iron sight capability and its also a long range shooter so im fine with a scope on that one plus it came with the rifle I didnt buy it.
How does one stumble upon a thread from 2010?
I run irons often, but have optics for most.
The rifle I built my wife, irons, she prefers them.
LOL i was thinking the same thing. i wouldve just started a new thread if its been dead for a while. anyways ill chime in with my own few cents. i hav two colt 6920 ars. i still run irons on one. front A-frame and carry handle rear sight. for me theyre more fun to shoot than powered optics. on the other, i run an aimpoint ACO red dot. only reason i chose the aimpoint is long battery life and cheap. i hate stuff that expires and dont like changing batts often. my 2nd choice wouldve been an acog 4x tritium or fiber. but id rather have one 556ar and one 762ar with a quality scope thats not illuminated
I have to admit to being spoiled by an Aimpoint micro
For the past several years I've been using optics, more or less because I finally had the money to buy good glass and I wanted to use it.
Lately though I've been going back to using irons as I like the challenge that using them brings..my aging eyes don't like it, but then again they don't like red dots or holographic sights either.
I use irons on my AK's and AR. This is mainly due to money going towards practice/training/ammo.
Many will have that age old decision to make, optics or ammo. I say ammo/practice/training should win.
Once there is plenty of that, optics (like a quality red dot) can enhance your performance.
So in short, irons are fine and very usable. Optics are a bonus and should be considered once the other areas are covered.
brickboy240
12-22-15, 11:16
Only bad thing about AR irons is that rear peep sight is terrible in low light or dark conditions.
Only bad thing about AR irons is that rear peep sight is terrible in low light or dark conditions.
This is why we put a light on our rifles.
Red dots are prudent on fighting rifles.
Shooting from odd positions, on the move, under stress, and in low/no light is much easier with a red dot.
Irons are the core of my rifles... Optics are setup around quickly going back to them, and I do about half my training with irons. But I'd almost be spiting myself if I didn't have a dot on my defensive rifles.
I can get shit done with a typewriter, but a laptop just makes everything more efficient.
grizzlyblake
12-22-15, 12:50
I run irons on all my stuff because I'm a cheap ass and I like the durability and "set it and forget it" of a good set of irons once zeroed properly.
In the entire 2 weeks I've been in the AR owner class I've always stuck with irons. It seems odd maybe but in all that time I haven't come up with enough cash for a good red dot. I've been spending all my cash on mags and stuff like that and ammo. I can't forget the ammo.
Stupid comments aside (I did just get my first AR recently) I have always liked irons. I grew up with them and I trust them. Back in the 60's when I was a kid I knew a guy that had been a WWII sharpshooter (I think he was a sniper actually but I'm not sure if I remember that or my brain just made it up when I wasn't looking). Whatever the case that guy taught us something I've never forgotten. He said if you can see it you can shoot it - with irons. I saw him make some amazing shots with the iron sights on the rifle he carried all the time. He would pull up beside the road, get his rifle out and lay it on the top of his car. He'd tell me where he was shooting and every time a big hawk would fall from the top of a tree (it was the 60's and people still thought hawks kept the rabbit population down and we liked hunting rabbits not to mention eating them). I never saw him miss. I wish it had been coyotes or something he shot at but there were no coyotes around back then. There were no rabbits either which is why people shot hawks. They killed pretty much all the hawks but there were still no rabbits. So much for that theory. But he made it obvious a person can shoot really well with irons. I still have numerous rifles that have only irons on them because of what he showed me. I do have scopes though and I've used red dots at time. But I prefer lasers to red dots when it comes to shooting varmints etc.. You don't have to have your rifle at your shoulder and lined up with a laser sight. You can point it from the hip and never miss. But they have their obvious drawbacks.
I'll be getting some optics for my new AR as soon as I get some cash together. Right now I'm spending on friends and family.
I have nice optics but do keep one rifle with a carry handle and fixed DD front sight. I just like the carry handle and I dont know why...
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.