No more AR optics

[MR Redneck]

I played with my carry around AR15 by putting different optics on it.
I had a 3x9, cheaper red dot, and a lazer on it.
All that crap sucked!
I was talking to the guys at Larue the other day and he told me to go Aimpoint red dot. He swore I would never have anything else if I went that way, but I cant dump $600 on something like that till I try shooting one. I believe the guy because he has a great deal of shooting and combat experiance, but im a little weird when it come to guns and optics.
Friday I put new iron sights back on my carry AR. Shot the crap out of it and had a blast. Im pretty good shooting iron sights, so I think i'll stay with the old stuff.
BTW, I have no clue what the lazer could be good for other than pestering my 3 dogs. I decided to take it off because people started drive by my shop and haulin ass. Guess they didnt like seeing me in the shop door pointing the lazer out in the yard for the dogs to chase it.

 

[jake75]

Especially if there is an AR attached to the laser. LOL I mounted a leupold scope to my AR, but its set up for hunting hogs and whatnot now.

 

[SIG_Fiend]

When it comes to optics, there is no cheap way around it. You gotta pay to play. There is no point even messing with inexpensive optics. Anything worth a damn is going to be over $200, and most half way decent stuff is going to start at $300, but keep in mind that is the bottom of the bucket as far as somewhat decent optics go. There are no red dots below $200 I would even consider. The only scopes under $200 I would consider are the new Redfields or Nikon Prostaffs, and if going with one of those I probably wouldn't use them on anything above ~.308/.30-06 or so. I will see many people that end up going through a few different cheapo scopes or red dots before either giving up, switching to irons only, or simply continuing to shoot oblivious to the fact their optic does not work and is inaccurate. The funny thing is, many times if these people just saved all the money they wasted on those multiple cheap optics, they could have purchased one decent quality optic and never had a problem. Do it right the first time and save yourself the trouble IMO.

 

[MR Redneck]

I actully had a very good scope on it. The scope showed me that I was moving the gun when I pulled the trigger. At 100 yards I could group pretty tight with crap ammo when shooting from a vise. Holding the gun I shot off to the side.
Im ordering a good trigger next week for 2 AR's.
I will put a scope back on one for hog and varmit hunting, but a truck gun, nope...
The rings I had positioned the scope up to tall so that sucked. If and when I go back to optics im getting Larues quick change. A friend of mine has one and he swears by it.
My red dot was a cheap piece of crap.
The lazer, well thats just a joke. It wont let you hit anything unless you shooting the same distance you sighted it to. I think a flashlight and iron sights would be better.
Oh wait, I did get a badass rail mounted light. Its going on the bottom rail .

 

[M. Sage]

Cheap is cheap for a reason. You usually really do get what you pay for.

Cruise the gun shows. Sometimes you can find a great deal on good optics. My Aimpoint Comp M2 only cost me $150. It's worn as hell on the outside, but it's built like a tank, adjusts properly and holds zero. I won't buy another EOTech, though. Cheap-built for an expensive optic and the battery life absolutely sucks. They eat batteries even when they're off.

My next AR sight is going to be an Aimpoint Micro.

 

[SIG_Fiend]

A laser can work, but IMO is really only useful for some very specific uses. The best way to setup a laser IMO is with a parallel zero, meaning it is parallel with the bore as opposed to the typical "intersecting" zero people do. By zeroing it parallel, your shots will always be the same amount off your point of aim, taking bullet drop into account of course.

Another often overlooked aspect is the optic mounting hardware. It's not good to cheap out there either. There are decent inexpensive options , but you really have to be careful what you go with. Ideally go with picatinny spec rails and rings/mounting bases to simplify things. Also, beware that there are many cheapo "picatinny" mounting components that are not in spec and can lead to mounting issues, inability to maintain zero, etc.

 

[balloo93]

I looked around for a cheap red-dot. I settled for a SPOT red dot to use until I figured out what I wanted. There was a guy who did a torture test on the SPOT on Arfcom and it survived. Not a bad optic, 3moa dot and approx 120hrs on a common cr2032 battery. I picked up two of them used and haven't had any issues with them in the 2-3yrs I've owned them.

The only other low end optic I would consider is the Primary Arms line. They have a decent rep so far.

My next big AR purchase will be an Aimpoint though. I'll then put the SPOT optics on my .22lr or maybe my kids BB gun once I buy one for them. How cool would a Scout Red Ryder be?

 

[Maxpower]

I'm real happy with my eotech

 

[tussery]

Yup I am perfectly happy with my EOTech also, but only because the reticule is better IMO. In fact I got rid of my Comp M3L after getting my XPS2. I do have an Aimpoint Micro on my AK (EOTechs are too tall and heavy for that.)

 

[skinman]

When I was in the Navy 40 years ago, I qualified with a basic, well used M-16. I really liked this weapon and like the old-school aesthetics of the original civilian version AR-15 with the carry handle and just cannot envision me putting a scope on one...but there again is the vision issue. My nearsightedness has worsened over the years and my tri-focals just don't work well with open sights so I have scopes on all of my rifles.

IMHO, optical sighting systems on military designed assault weapons platforms like this are probably more a matter of personal preferences and less of what actually works best. If you are a decent shot with open sights, then unless it is just something you have to have, why put expensive optics or lasers on a weapon like this? Will it really make you a better shot? Read on…

I read an article on the history and use of peep sights awhile back and one of the things brought out was that peep sights naturally overcome poor vision issues and was one of the reasons that they were so common on long-range rifles before the modern optical scope became affordable for the average hunter. The reason is that peep sights force the eye to focus on the target making it clear and sharp. I had an opportunity to see this for myself when I was invited to shoot a friend's AR-15 last summer. I cannot use open sights at anything beyond 25 yards, and I am only so-so at 25 yards, but I had no problem sighting in on a 10 inch target at 100 yards. The target was clear and sharp, the front sight was clear and sharp, and I was very pleased with my shooting.

I will get an AR-15 in the near future...probably a Colt with a handle upper like the M-16 I learned to shoot decades ago...and I am not trying to flame anyone here...we all know that opinions are like assholes, everybody's got one and it stinks, including mine...but I am not going to waste time and ammo money on trying to put some fancy optical system on it and look like some mall-ninja at the range.

 

[MR Redneck]

I think your dead on about the peep sights buddy. I put my first set on the AR I started this thread over. Peep sights are awsome. I can actually use them better with both eyes open. I like open sights target shoot, but i'll admit im not much for that kind of activity. I have always enjoyed Military Tactical training, and thats what I prefer.
Im am very, very good with iron sight shooting and I think thats the issue I have with red dots. I simply just dont need that stuff. I enjoy shoot at the local ran, but im not a " hole in hole" kind of shooter. I prefer hitting as many targets as I can in the least amount of time. We have a awsome silhoutte range. I love knocking down squirl sized targets from 50 yards with my old model 60 marlin. There is a trick to shooting iron sight, and it isnt focus, it's image.

 

[SIG_Fiend]

Try shooting at speed. Iron sights can slow you down drastically. Red dots are like cheating. You can shoot both eyes open (maximum situational awareness), shoot focused on the target, and just superimpose the dot. It's the way your body physiologically wants to do it anyways, and shooting with irons you are fighting the way your body naturally wants to do it. There's a reason red dots are used on anything and everything in many long gun, multi gun, and handgun competition leagues. It is good to know the fundamentals, but ultimately gun handling is about performance and things like red dots are performance enhancements if used properly.

As far as magnified optics, you cannot possibly hope to achieve the same level of accuracy with irons as you can with a magnified optic. It just will not happen. Most front sight blades are so wide that much past 100yds the front sight obscures most targets. Many front sight blades are ~5 MOA or larger unless you have some competition sights possibly. With an optic you can actually shoot groups. With irons, much of the time for most of us, you may get the occasional hit somewhere on that 8 foot tall falling steel target. Bottom line, have a good base of fundamentals to work from, but use technology to your advantage where possible.

Lasers are just about pointless on a rifle IMO, unless the person is using it in conjunction with night vision, which depending on the setup (night vision goggles) could obscure the sights. Military usage is a whole other deal (IR lasers), and yes there are some benefits there.

 

[skinman]

I am not trying to say that open sights are better only that IMO, there are some applications where they are more for show than go. Better for speed? Maybe, but not necessarily...muscle memory and practice can equal out optical enhancement advantage.

Once upon a time I also believed it was more about the weapon when I complained about having to qualify with a worn out M-16 because I just couldn't make the groups until the old Marine Gunny took the same rifle and proceeded to empty a mag into the center of the target at 100 yards without hardly looking at it...all the time cussing all Sailors trying to learn how to shoot and saying that 100 yards was too close. From that point on, I shut up and let him teach me how to shoot rifles and pistols, and I qualified with both. I never shot as well as he did and he never did stop cussing Sailors, but I did get proficient enough to where I was also able to pick up any M-16 from the rack and put a mag into the center... Today, my knees are shot, my eyes are not so good, and I am not interested in running around trying to shoot squatting or laying down or anything like that like I did decades ago, just putting all of the bullets as close together as I can get them as fast as I can shoot from as far away as I can.

I got a nice Zeiss scope on my Winchester 70 30-06 and I can put groups in center at 300 yards, and I can shoot quarter-inch groups at 50 yards with my scoped 10-22 all day long, and I can empty a mag into a 4 inch group with my 9mm and both .45 acp pistols out to 15 yards, so if the SHTF and the zombies attack, I am good.

Remember, never mess with an old man...he already knows he cannot whip you and he ain't gonna run away from you, so if you don't let him pass, he might just pull out a gun and shoot you.

 

[atacorion]

save your money and buy quality, A quality optic will pay for itself over the life of the optic and will probably outlast the barrel of the rifle.

 

[Angered_Kabar]

Primary Arms has some cheap fakepoints for less than $100. From all reports they've been holding up pretty well. If I didn't already have an Aimpoint I'd get one to try out and if I decided I liked how Aimpoints work I would get a real one, or just keep the one from Primary Arms.

 

[tussery]

The Primary Arms are good for their price I had one on my AK for a while. My only gripe is their so called 4 MOA dot which seemed more like 8 MOA. I replaced it with the H-1 I have now and you can tell the difference in optic clarity and the size of the dot. Aimpoints are worth the extra money IMO.

 

[jsimmons]

I use a Primary Arms microdot. $89 ($119 with a high-rise mount), and you're off to the races. Yeah, it would be nice (I guess) to be able to afford an Aimpoint (and it would have to be the Micro), but the simple fact of of the matter is that I can't.

I was at the range yesterday with my brother (visiting from CA), and dropped my PA. My brother, not knowing what I dropped, tried to stop it from falling, and succeeded in batting it about five spots down the firing line (we were at Bracken). It bounced off a table, the asphalt, the back wall, and then down the asphalt again. He had this look on his face that is beyond description. I put it on the rifle, and turned it on, and emptied a 30-round magazine into a 50-yard target. It seemed okay so we kept shooting. We used up almost 500 rounds during the afternoon, and the scope performed like it was new.

For $89, I think it's a helluva deal. I'm planning on getting an AimPoint toward the middle of this year, but it looks like the PA scope will fine until then. Even if it doesn't, I still have my flip-up irons to fall back to. I'm not concerned about it not being an AimPoint.