Primary Iron Sights

[aaron_c]

I've decided I'm going to run iron sights only. Yeah, I can use an RDS decently well when I have my glasses on at the range, but if someone breaks in I'm not going to tell them to wait while I go get my glasses. I'm going to run iron sights only on my AR15 from now on (sold the Aimpoint) because as fun/cool as the Aimpoint is, I'm far better off training/shooting at the range with my irons because that's what I'd be using if I ever had to defend my life/family in the middle of the night. My rifle is a midlength 16" with the standard F-marked FSB, and a DD Omega 9.0 is in the mail and should be here Friday. I'll also be running a tac light.

That explanation given, I just can't settle on an iron sight. I've been looking at the RRA stand alone/LMT rear sight, and I think they look the best, but I don't particularly like the A2 adjustment. I like the fact that the Daniel Defense A1.5 is so light, but it concerns me a bit as far as how much material they shaved out to make it so light (1.5oz I believe). The Troy fixed looks a little weird to me, but it may have the formula I'm looking for. Onto some questions.

What would you choose as a primary rear iron sight, and why?

Also, what is the general consensus on tritium irons, with them being the primary sighting system?

[GeorgiaBoy]

I have the the DD A1.5. I love it and have no troubles with it at all. It's one of the best fixed rear sights on the market right now.

I'm not sure why you are worried about them "shaving it off to make it so light", there should be no problems at all with strength/durability.

[aaron_c]

I'd discussed that topic with a couple of people who agreed on the A1.5. It's still pretty high on my list, but that's the one reservation I have with it. I'm not too concerned about weight with the rear irons, because it's weight near the back of the rifle that may help balance the rifle out.

[nimdabew]

Sounds like a carry handle is in your future.

[Cagemonkey]

IMHO the LMT rear sights are the best if your going to run irons as your primary sighting system. Then A2 type rear sights are durable, reliable and give you a good amount of flexibility. Find a TM 05538C-10/1A manual and read it. Contrary to popular perception, you don't have to be a rocket scientist to use and understand the A2 rear sight.

[masakari]

Larue fixed BUIS! They are perfection in my opinion.
http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p313/madcatjoe/2011-03-09_18-34-27_577.jpg
http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p313/madcatjoe/2011-03-09_18-32-50_467.jpg

[aaron_c]

Thanks for all the discussion, good stuff.

on A2 sights: I should have been more clear, I prefer A1 ADJUSTMENT to A2-style adjustment. I find myself always wondering if I've bumped the big adjustment knob of the A2 type sight, or had it catch on something, and forced it off zero. I could use witness marks, but with an A1 adjustment, there is no need for it.

I'm very anti-carry handle for a few reasons. One, it weighs more than is necessary. Two, and most importantly, it's completely useless to me. I'd never, ever, ever carry an AR15 by the "carry" handle. The barrel, to me, should point either up or down. Not in any horizontal direction unless I'm firing the weapon.

Does Larue make a non-QD iron sight? QD is pointless since I don't intend to ever remove it for my purposes. It's just another little bit of mechanical action that could get hung on something.

[nimdabew]

Does Larue make a non-QD iron sight? QD is pointless since I don't intend to ever remove it for my purposes. It's just another little bit of mechanical action that could get hung on something.

I believe you can order the Larue rear sight with the new rail grabbing thing and pay 25 dollars less than with the QD mount.

ETA: If you are going to do that, you might as well get the DD 1.5 sight.

[deuce9166]

Another vote for Larue. I really like them, and they "feel" lighter than the LMT sights.

[masakari]

The QD feature of the Larue is VERY low profile and extremely solid. It can't hurt to have.

[mikeahe]

What front site is that?

[JohnnyC]

Daniel Defense all the way.

[thehun]

I've been really pleased with LMT

[RyanB]

I've been really pleased with LMT

LMT builds good gear. If I ever need to take an M4 to Camp Perry I will definitely get one.

[lifebreath]

I like the A2 carry handle or LMT A2 style as a PRIMARY iron sight. IMO, most iron sights compromise in some area because they are designed as back up sights, not primary sights. I like the carry handle and LMT because 1) they are durable, 2) they are versatile in adjustments and zeroing schemes and 3) they have the large and small apertures, which provide advantages in different situations.

I set my carry handle up using the Revised Improved Battle Zero (you can review in this thread RIBZ (https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=65679)). Using this zeroing scheme, you've got the large ghost ring for out to 200+ yards and the small peep for 300+ using the drum elevations. You also have the small peep available for 100 yards and up if desired. I can't speak to the potential of inadvertently moving the drum.

[usmc1371]

I wouldn't be that woried about "bumping" the adjustments on the A2 sight. I carried an M16-A2 for four years including two tours in Iraq and never had a problem with the adjustments. If I were going the all iron route a carry handle is what it would be. The adjustments take a fair effort to adjust.

[Iraqgunz]

How many threads on iron sights and BUIS's do we need this week? This issue has been talked about hundreds of times. Please use the ORANGE search button.