Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 40

Thread: Jeff Gurwitch and The Competition-to-Combat Crossover, Part 3

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    1,177
    Feedback Score
    0
    interesting, thanks for posting.


    i wrote this in 2012 on another board.
    i dropped BUIS and iron sights long ago. i don't put them on any of my new guns. i don't train with the ones that are fixed to my old guns.

    two reasons:
    1. none of my aimpoints or acogs (or swaro z6i) have ever let me down. not even once. never not been zeroed. never had a dead battery. i train to transition to a pistol if i need it, so that's what i would do instead of deploying a BUIS.

    2. BUIS don't meet my needs. If i didn't have an optic, the iron sight wouldn't allow me to see the targets i shoot at the distance i'm shooting them.
    granted, i'm not in the military, so I don't claim to know what they need, but ime, the first reason is just risk. the second reason is the bigger issue. when you get to the point that magnification is worth the extra size, weight and speed compared to a 1x aimpoint, then backups aren't really backups, are they? in the author's example, can you hit a 6" or 8" plate from 200-300 yards with your buis? i sure can't. i could get lucky at 200, but holdover at 300 will obscure that target behind the front sight.

    so if the risk calculation says you need a backup, the only viable option i know of is a QD lever and a second pre-zeroed optic stashed in your pack somewhere.

    just a thought...

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,234
    Feedback Score
    0
    Does he ever explain why he likes EMags so much? Compatibility? I don't think they have anything over standard PMags other than fitting a wider array of weapons.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    The Beach
    Posts
    58
    Feedback Score
    4 (100%)
    The Gurwitch articles referenced in this thread are a great read, especially as a reminder of how far the .mil has come since those carry handle M4s in 2001.

    ...

    As far as running a work gun without BUIS, I've seen several legit .mil guys run guns with only a RDS and laser. Usually it's the younger GWoT adventure crew.

    I prefer the EOTech window and reticle but its a wonky eletronic gizmo and can (and has) fail. "Transition to pistol" is nice for games, maybe not for a long fight.
    Last edited by StrikeFace; 01-26-16 at 09:54.
    Instructions: Remain calm.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    559
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by taliv View Post
    interesting, thanks for posting.


    i wrote this in 2012 on another board.


    granted, i'm not in the military, so I don't claim to know what they need, but ime, the first reason is just risk. the second reason is the bigger issue. when you get to the point that magnification is worth the extra size, weight and speed compared to a 1x aimpoint, then backups aren't really backups, are they? in the author's example, can you hit a 6" or 8" plate from 200-300 yards with your buis? i sure can't. i could get lucky at 200, but holdover at 300 will obscure that target behind the front sight.

    so if the risk calculation says you need a backup, the only viable option i know of is a QD lever and a second pre-zeroed optic stashed in your pack somewhere.

    just a thought...
    I disagree. Backups are just that, backups. They are not a supplement to primary optics and nor can they be. What a BUIS offers is the ability to make combat effective hits at traditional ranges(300 metres or so). Giving up on a 4-6oz of BUIS as some sort of advantage is flawed logic. Having an LPV is an advantage but it doesn't equate to needing the magnification for every shot, nor does it mean you need it for the majority of shots. An LPV gives you options/capabilities. A rifle with a dead optic and no BUIS leaves you very little in the way of options. For the gamer, yeah, omitting BUIS is viable as it will not allow you to compete against those who's optics did not fail them, nor is competition a life and death situation. For the MIL/LEO user, I think it's a foolish move.

    MM

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,291
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by jpmuscle View Post
    Do you think the no BUIS needed line of thinking is more prevalent in the gun oriented users or the less gun enthusiast user with respect to .MIL fielding? I'd assume the latter but I'm just spit balling.

    Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk
    The guys I talked to in Afghanistan said they only run at night; and between the lasers and Eotech they already had redundancy... almost none of the fast movers I brushed elbows with had irons on their rifles. Some didn't have them on their pistols (Glock .40 with RMRs)

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    OUTPOST 31
    Posts
    10,442
    Feedback Score
    30 (100%)
    That makes sense if your play time is after the lights go out

    Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk
    “Answer The Bell...” J.W.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Pentagon
    Posts
    497
    Feedback Score
    23 (100%)
    On the issue of BUIS. most of the Marine Corps despite spending tens of millions on them does have them mounted to their guns. Part of the reason for that is the RCOs tend to be very reliable, mounted in a manner that they are not readily removable and fire fights don't happen like many people think they do. Even with optics, the majority of the time you engage at any real distance, you don't have defined targets to shoot at, but the general direction or location of what you are shooting at and when close shooting occurs, point sights really are less important than indexing the weapon, just flashing the front sight over the target is sufficient.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    360
    Feedback Score
    0
    Solid article.
    Last edited by friendlyfireisnt; 01-28-16 at 09:58.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    528
    Feedback Score
    0
    That this seems to have turned into a debate of To BUIS Or Not To BUIS is hilarious to me. These are professional pipe-hitters out on the pointy end of things. I'm going to guess that they have fired more shots in anger (or, rather, cold calculation) than 99% of posters here. If they choose to not run BUIS, they are doing so for a reason.

    I'm liking how the VCAS appears to almost be standard issue on these rifles.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Rural PA
    Posts
    443
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    Looks like many have RIS w/ built in FSP. Just ghost-ring that shit through the tube if needed.

    But mostly I agree that the PEQ and night-ops are the reason for lack of BUIS, as much as optic reliability.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •