If I may ask, what was the reason the DD rails were chosen over the KAC rails for the RIS II contract?
Printable View
If I may ask, what was the reason the DD rails were chosen over the KAC rails for the RIS II contract?
My only "gripe" is that KAC's qd mounts don't have any rotation limiters in them.
Oh and stake the castle nuts from the factory.
Not a gripe but Im pretty sure we could get a ton of people willing to buy a run of taupe iron sights. I know Id buy 3-4 sets myself.
You're doing it wrong.
Scott's point is spot-on, and it's the reason that Troy came out with the M4-ear front sight vs. their original hooded version.
Scott explained why very well. The theory behind the hood, and the way you are using it, does not work with a sight where only the post is adjustable. The whole hood needs to move for it to work correctly, or the windage AND elevation need to be adjusted in the rear sight and not the front.
For the past 90 years, American infantry rifles have had outward ears on the front sight. M1917, M1, M14, and M16 all have outward ears. The M240 also has outward ears. Nobody ever complained.
Just in the past 5 years, all these companies thought we needed round hood front sights to be more HK/AK like because they think it is cool.
One of the biggest gripes of the SCAR is the round hood front sight.
Roger ... and this is the part that I did not/do not understand.
With the URX rail sight folded, it becomes just another length of rail. What would prevent one from mounting the X300 on top of it, per usual, and just placing a standard front BUIS on the rail space behind it?
AC