Why does the AR sight off-set still persist?

[JeffWard]

I understand the legacy/history behind the huge offset between the barrel and the sights on the AR platform. The original Stoner design had a permanent carrying handle, with the rear sight on top. This required a very high front sight, to match up with the rear. Now... The majority of ARs being built TODAY have flat-top uppers, since the vast majority are running optics with no carrying handle. Many new upper/barrel combos are coming without an A-Frame FBS.

Why are no manufactures making a set of low-profile iron sights, or BUIS? I run a EoTech slammed LOW to the top of my flattop in 3-Gun, with NO BUIS. I don't need back-up irons on a non-defensive gun. The lower optic mounting position minimizes my offset between the bore axis, and the optic, so I don't have to hold over as much when running and gunning in 3-Gun. Offset and hold-over is a huge issue with precision shooting in CQB (hostage situation, etc).

I'd LOVE a pair of BUIS that would co-witness with an EoTech or Aimpoint, mounted flat down on the upper. Front sight on a low gas block, rear low on the back of the receiver over the charging handle...

The carry handle is a relic... Why must our sight options still make believe it exists?

JeffWard

[MisterWilson]

How small is your head, that you could get your face any lower on a stock?

They might be hard to find, but you may take a look at some HK MP-7 folding sights.

[Seraph]

With the straight inline design of the platform's stock, the sights you describe would be too low.

[Chameleox]

The answer lies in the original THREAD (https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=66902) that you were referencing. Look around posts 5 and 6.

The carry handle argument is only part of the rationale. The AR platform has the comb of the stock (where you put your cheek for a good cheek weld) in line with the bolt and barrel. With your cheek thus positioned, your eyes look over the flat top and the barrel a couple inches off the bore axis.
Advantage: The weapon recoils straight back into the receiver extension, buttstock, and into your shoulder. Makes it a little easier to control. This design also allows for adjusting length of pull a little easier.
Disadvantage: Higher sight offset, but this is mitigated by well researched and published hold over/under information, and adjustable sights.

Other designs, like those mentioned in the thread (AKs and M1/M14 FOW, for instance) have a more sloped stock, resulting in a comb that's noticeably lower than the bore axis.
Advantage: sights closer to the bore. Closer POA/POI for the most part.
Disadvantage: bolt travels rearward above where the stock meets the shoulder, resulting in the recoil having more of an effect on follow up.

Its not just a relic issue.

[arizonaranchman]

It wasn't so much the carry handle with sights on top of it that determined things as it is the fact that the bore sits lower down into the weapon than most rifles. Hence the "high" sights in relation to the boreline. The entire bore/action/receiver extention are low centered compared to most other rifles upon which you can just set the sights right down on the barrel itself.

If you can comfortably shoot the gun with sights slammed down lower on the gun that's great. Personally it's never bothered me as it is.

[IrishDevil]

How are you getting an Eotech lower on the upper? They have a fixed height, roughly the same as irons.

[stifled]

The answer lies in the original THREAD (https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=66902) that you were referencing. Look around posts 5 and 6.


I was starting to think I had déjà vu.

[JeffWard]

I was starting to think I had déjà vu.

Ah... I missed the "Original Post" (Why are AR sights so high).

I guess I'm seeing all the risers for the bottom 1/3 co-witness applications.

Since my EoTech-equipped gun never had iron sights, I don't have a reference. I guess the dot on my EoTech, would align right on with the front post on an A-Frame front sight, and with the aperture on the standard rears... It's the .300" riser to achieve a lower 1/3 co-witness that boost them all up.

I see pictures of the Aimpoint Micros all the time, that look like they are a LOT higher than my EoTech, but I guess it's just an illusion with the much smaller Micro body, and the .300" riser...

Thanks everyone with the great info. Learning more at M4Carbine.net.... A little every week!

Jeff

[citizensoldier16]

How small is your head

HAHA...my apologies to the OP but I laughed my a** off when I read that! :sarcastic:

I have a feeling it is as Mister Wilson states...since the barrel bore is so low compared to say an AK, you can't get your head down that far to engage sights that would maybe be mounted on the barrel instead of above it. Standby one....I think I've got some pics to illustrate what I mean.

EDIT:

Okay here we go. As we can see on the AK, the bore is higher compared to the stock's position on your shoulder, which in turn raises the barrel closer to your line of sight:

http://i293.photobucket.com/albums/mm53/emtjmd216/AK47.jpg

However on the AR, the bore is directly in front of your shoulder (to improve recoil control and lessen muzzle flip) so the sights must be higher to match up with you line of sight:

http://i293.photobucket.com/albums/mm53/emtjmd216/ar-15postbanbig.jpg

Hope that helps a little...

[Caeser25]

I've been wondering this for awhile but been forgetting to post. I've considered trying my T-1 on Larue HK mount and Troy stubbys.