What do people have against A2 irons?

[T2C]

In case there are some of us who aren't in the 'if the women don't find you handsome they should at least find you handy' camp, XS sights sells a ready made rear sight blade with a .095 notch:



https://www.brownells.com/rifle-part...prod26948.aspx

That would be a faster, and better, way to install a notch sight than the way I did it. With a good WML, the notch works great for close up shots in low light.

And I am in the Red Green camp.

[davidjinks]

Reading online, which I know has its pitfalls, it seems like a lot of people don't like the A2 iron sights. I personally think they are the best iron sighting system for the AR rifle out there--either the carry handle or the fixed LMT "chopped carry handle" A2 rear. Obviously carry handle and fixed rear sight guns are a niche in the AR world, but I see a lot of people that seem to prefer an A1 style, like the Daniel Defense sights, or the Scalarworks sights. Arguments I've read against the A2 generally fall in the realm of "too complicated" or "target sights, not combat sights." Neither of those really make sense to me--with the ghost ring it's a very fast back up sight, and the two plane set up gives the shooter a lot of capability with regards to setting a functional battle zero. I recognize most people will never dial elevation on a rear sight, but it's a capability you have if you need it, or just want to get fancy and the range.

I am not exceptionally hard on my guns, but I don't baby them, and I'm not aware of any military stories of breaking A2 drums. The "chopped carry handle" style LMT makes does take up a little more space than some other fixed rear sights, but if you're running a fixed rear you're already accepting you won't be running a magnifier so it's not like there's a practical downside.

Obviously I get running A1 on a retro build, and that a folder backup rear is more practical for most applications. Is there some hidden downside to the A2 set up I'm missing?

The thing is…..the internet said so!

There’s nothing wrong with A2 sights. A whole lot of troops deployed with them and made very good use of them. Do optics give an edge? Sure. Are A2 sights worthless? No.

Rock what you want. I like irons as much as I like optics. I use them all.

[26 Inf]

That would be a faster, and better, way to install a notch sight than the way I did it. With a good WML, the notch works great for close up shots in low light.

And I am in the Red Green camp.

I knew that. Some of us wouldn't know how to file a straight notch - I'm in that camp.

Troy used to sell a fixed battlesight with that blade on it, couldn't find it but I was looking for a Vickers CQB sight, not a CSAT.

[T2C]

The wife and I were out for dinner last night, when I ran into two old school High Power competitors. Both of them were shooting High Power when most transitioned from the M-14 to the AR-15 for competition and saw the development of match modifications and ammunition development.

One of them is 75 years of age and a huge fan of Colt firearms. I told him I recently came into a 1993 vintage Colt Sporter Match HBAR and his eyes lit up. I asked him what accuracy he saw with match loads fired out of his older HBAR's and he said "it will hold the 10 Ring." When I asked him the size of the groups he measured on paper when he developed his go to 600 yard match load, he said "it will hold the 10 Ring." That's all I could get out of him.

I asked both shooters what they thought of the development of using optics in the High Power game and they both approved. Their opinion of the A2 sight was that it was a very good sight system, superior to the sights on the M1 Garand and M-14. The consensus was that if your eyesight was good enough, the A2 sight would get the job done at 600 yards.