Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 9/22/2004 7:32:35 AM EST
If so, why. Everyone I have seen seems to have opted for A3, I am wondering if there is any good reason to keep my A2 configuration as-is.
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 7:49:44 AM EST
Yes both mine are A2 Uppers! Guys going for the A3 are after the latest fad and thats it, you can mount red dots ,scopes etc on an A2 upper as you know! Besides with an A2 you won't lose your rear sight assembly carry handle, or knock off the zero by having it bang around hanging from youe gear! Or what if the rail gets banged up on the A3 reciever and accesories won't mount anymore? It is after all only aluminum!

Just my Two Cents!
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 7:59:48 AM EST
I have both. they both serve their purpose. IMO the A2 is a horible platform for mounting a scope. the first AR I bought was a A2. I mounted a aimpoint to the top of the carry handle. way too high. so now its just iron sights only. YMMV

Remman
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 8:01:42 AM EST
That's kind of the line of thought I have been following. I mean, I really have no problem with the A2 config. I can tear a hole through the bullseye all day with it, but I was concerned about what other guys are saying about being able to use both eyes and peripheral vision and all that jive with the A3. I like not having to worry about batteries and more moving parts, but is the speed and target acquisition gain all that better with an A3 and optics?
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 8:03:58 AM EST

Originally Posted By Fireguy3:
Yes both mine are A2 Uppers! Guys going for the A3 are after the latest fad and thats it,
Just my Two Cents!



You've got that right. I mean, look at the U.S. Marine Corps M16A4 for example. Those Jarheads are always chasing the latest in firearms fads. Too bad you aren't in charge of their weapons procurement.
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 8:07:17 AM EST
If I have a reason to go A2, I have a reason to go A1.

If you want the sturdiness and simplicity of iron sights, go all the way.
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 8:14:21 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/22/2004 8:16:44 AM EST by FortyFiveAutomatic]
Good point. Believe me, if there had been a Bushy m4gery with a1 irons at the shop, I'd have gotten it (that is, until this A3 concern arose)
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 8:24:36 AM EST

Originally Posted By Not_A_Llama:
If I have a reason to go A2, I have a reason to go A1.

If you want the sturdiness and simplicity of iron sights, go all the way.



Same here. I like the A1 style - but replaced with an A2 aperature.
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 8:27:21 AM EST

Originally Posted By FortyFiveAutomatic:
That's kind of the line of thought I have been following. I mean, I really have no problem with the A2 config. I can tear a hole through the bullseye all day with it, but I was concerned about what other guys are saying about being able to use both eyes and peripheral vision and all that jive with the A3. I like not having to worry about batteries and more moving parts, but is the speed and target acquisition gain all that better with an A3 and optics?




I shoot both eyes open no matter what i shoot, from bow to ARs its all the same

Remman
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 8:30:13 AM EST
I prefer the A2 and is what I have on a full size 20". I subscribe to the KISS theory. However, on a carbine type system that is designed for CQB I would probably opt for different sighting set-up.

Honestly, I'm not that familiar with the A4 platform. Maybe Sukebe could put the sarcasm aside for a moment and explain to me the advantages of it. The A4 has come about since my time in the Corps.

Semper Fi!
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 9:07:15 AM EST
A1:
SP1

A2:
Ultralite
9mm

Flat top:
AR-10
M4
Armalite carbine
20" HBAR
45ACP (but with a detachable A2 handel)

Got flat tops on stuff I use optics for, got handles on stuff I don't use optics for.
Simple as that.
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 9:17:25 AM EST

Originally Posted By Not_A_Llama:
If I have a reason to go A2, I have a reason to go A1.

If you want the sturdiness and simplicity of iron sights, go all the way.



+1 A1 all the way!
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 9:20:30 AM EST
dunno. i'll let you know when my a2 stops working.
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 9:23:01 AM EST
iron sights on the AR/M16 series, the A2 is best so far.

now, any other kind of sighting system, the A3 rules.
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 9:25:20 AM EST
I dumped both my A2 uppers for A1/C7's years ago. I hate A2's.
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 9:25:54 AM EST

Originally Posted By Fireguy3:
Yes both mine are A2 Uppers! Guys going for the A3 are after the latest fad and thats it, you can mount red dots ,scopes etc on an A2 upper as you know!



Link Posted: 9/22/2004 9:32:45 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/22/2004 9:34:22 AM EST by Hokie]
From a SHTF perspective, the key is to be one up on your opponents. Red dots speed up target acquisition. No one can deny that. A3 platforms cater to optics.

So.....if I were in a gun fight with zombies and I had my trusty A2. I would be okay with that, provided none of the zombies had red dots on THEIR guns.

Personally, I merged the two. I use an M4gery with an Aimpoint and LMT BUIS. Nothing finer for 0-200 yard engagements.

Granted nothing says "hell ya" like a lightweight A2 M4gery slung over the back while you align the 3X9 crosshairs on your bolt gun.
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 9:37:19 AM EST
I'm sure the jarheads here do

(I'm a swabbie I'm alowed)
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 9:39:23 AM EST
Yea, I'm an A2 guy. While it's fun to play with scopes and reddots, I like to be able to fall back to the simplicity and durability of open sights.
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 9:58:48 AM EST

Originally Posted By TeuffelHunden1775:
I prefer the A2 and is what I have on a full size 20". I subscribe to the KISS theory. However, on a carbine type system that is designed for CQB I would probably opt for different sighting set-up.

Honestly, I'm not that familiar with the A4 platform. Maybe Sukebe could put the sarcasm aside for a moment and explain to me the advantages of it. The A4 has come about since my time in the Corps.

Semper Fi!



Tell me about putting aside sarcasm...

I'm with TH here to a point. I love the A2 sight system, but I also love the concept/look of the TA31F and a BUIS, like on Lumpy's A4. Can't choose between the two at all.
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 10:01:13 AM EST
For rifle length, I prefer A2.
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 10:16:38 AM EST
Gotta love them A2 upper, it makes the M16A2 look complete. I like the classy stuff.

Link Posted: 9/22/2004 10:21:42 AM EST
Ain't an AR without the handle.
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 10:41:40 AM EST
If you want to stick with Iron Sights go with the A2 which is what I have a real FrankenRifle Bushy Lower Rock River upper Olyarms 4 pos stock and Tango Down battle grip. Black tele stock, OD grip, camo forearms and a tan homemade forward grip anyways it works great but my next upper will be an A4 with a ACOG no worries there durable and no batteries to burn out, faster sight picture and you can actually see you target and cross hairs in low light.
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 11:17:41 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/22/2004 11:18:25 AM EST by wes15a2]
I love the A2. It can put rounds on target using iron sights if I do
my part. I would love to find a 6921 in the A2 configuration.
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 4:16:12 PM EST
I used to have a full size AR15 plain jane with A2 sights...

And a Colt M4 upper & stock on a PWA lower with the decked out works (actually paled in comparission to the latest M4 styles) with the double mag holder, BUIS, & Trijicon Reflex:


Can you guess which one I thought was more fun? I had alot more fun with the A2 Rifle. Infact when I used to go up to the mountains to shoot I found myself usually only taking my A2 rifle most of the time. The M4 certainly looked really cool to me, but I just couldn't stand the fact that I spent so much damn money on it and I still liked the A2 more, which only cost me about $650 to build. Not to mention by now that the M4 actually weighed more than my Rifle! Its definately a preferance thing, IMO. I never noticed myself shooting any faster with the reflex than with the irons. About the only thing the M4 had going for it in my situation was that it was easier to get out of my Jeep than a full size AR15 and I now had night firing capability with the illuminated sight.

To each his own, its definately all about preferance, IMO.

Like my dummy? It got the shit blew out of her after that pic was taken.
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 4:45:57 PM EST
I prefer the A2 for a CQ carbine with the red dot mounted on a FF fore end.

For a dedicated scoped gun for precision work, the A3 is the only way to go.
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 5:38:54 PM EST
Count me in as an A2 guy as well... When it comes down to it, I just like irons, I guess. I would like to mount a compact ACOG on the handle, however, if I can ever get my hands on one...
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 5:46:24 PM EST
+1
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 6:01:23 PM EST
had optics on my AR's, but much prefer irons. A2 sights are #1 with me.
Link Posted: 9/23/2004 2:53:18 AM EST
Well thanks a million for all the opinions, guys, now I don't feel like I'm missing out as much. I really like the look of those ACOG's, but it's hard to throw down that much cash for a scope, esp. when that glass costs significantly more than your gun. The Remmy 700 with the AICS was still less than a Unertl 10x....ahh, my budget deserves the name "scope fund" more than gun fund... hinking.gif
Link Posted: 9/23/2004 3:20:12 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/23/2004 3:22:40 AM EST by WizardOfAhs]
While some are sold on optics or like the LOOK of an ACOG, etc, I prefere a sight system I can rely on in a multitude of conditions without having to mess with some battery operated gizmo where just too many things can go wrong that LOOKS COOL. For this reason, on a tactical carbine, A2, all the way. For those with difficulty engaging targets from 1 to 300 meters away with iron sights, might I suggest bifocals! For those that cite shorter target aquisition time necessitating an ACOG, I suggest more training time with your A2. Just my humble opinion.
Link Posted: 9/23/2004 3:23:58 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/23/2004 3:24:40 AM EST by FortyFiveAutomatic]

For those with difficulty engaging targets from 1 to 300 meters away with iron sights, might I suggest bifocals!

Link Posted: 9/23/2004 4:03:46 AM EST
I have an A2 and love it although I want to get a scope mounted, maybe Ampoint or an EOTech.
Link Posted: 9/23/2004 8:28:46 AM EST

Originally Posted By FortyFiveAutomatic:
Well thanks a million for all the opinions, guys, now I don't feel like I'm missing out as much. I really like the look of those ACOG's, but it's hard to throw down that much cash for a scope, esp. when that glass costs significantly more than your gun. The Remmy 700 with the AICS was still less than a Unertl 10x....ahh, my budget deserves the name "scope fund" more than gun fund...



This is just my opinion, the ACOG is simply not worth what they cost. I have purchased a TA11 ACOG in the past, I paid $850 for it brand new. It was a cool looking scope, it looked like something the Predator would have mounted on a weapon. I definately had alot of fun playing with it on my Rifle, but I couldn't see anything really special about it. I also didn't notice a speed increase through the BAC, maybe because of my eyes. Where I would place the donut on sight with my left eye and when I switched to my right eye, magafied view, it was off target by a few feet. So it didn't work out for me. Keep in mind that everyone has this euphoria problem to a certain degree when using ACOGs, mine just happened to be too far off for my liking. I ended up selling it for what I paid and went back to irons because, quite simply, they work fine! Did I mention I now had an extra $850 in my pocket for another rifle?

I know optics just look cool on our Rifles, but saving the money for a Bolt action, large caliber rifle will really show you what long range shooting is all about. You will have more fun with that, I guarantee.
Link Posted: 9/23/2004 8:34:07 AM EST
The A2 is a great first AR variant.
It is insexpensive, accurate, and dependable.
Once you get one, you will obviously need another.
That is when you should get a flat top.
You will spend as much on a flat top upper, as you did on your whole other rifle.
Everyone needs an A2.
Everyone needs to learn to shoot with iron sights first.
Link Posted: 9/23/2004 8:42:32 AM EST
I love my A2! Cant beat solid iron sights.
Link Posted: 9/23/2004 8:42:33 AM EST
I shoot regularly at 600+ yards with the Remington; it's my baby

But I think I will stick with the A2 for now on my AR. Just can't afford high quality uppers, optics, and labor at this time. But true, once the AR bug bites, one just ain't enough!
Link Posted: 9/23/2004 8:45:45 AM EST
Two of my three AR's have A2 uppers. I bought them that way in order to prevent myself from spending thousands of dollars on detachable flip-up sights and red-dot optics.
Link Posted: 9/23/2004 9:10:25 AM EST
For any AR my first choice is the flattop (depending on the Mfg they are called A3s or A4s).

My 2nd choice for a carbine is the C7 upper (M16A1 type with brass deflector).

There is no need for an elevation adjustment for a carbine - especially as the elevation adjustment is calibrated for the 20" rifle.
Link Posted: 9/23/2004 7:50:34 PM EST

Originally Posted By Forest:
For any AR my first choice is the flattop (depending on the Mfg they are called A3s or A4s).

My 2nd choice for a carbine is the C7 upper (M16A1 type with brass deflector).

There is no need for an elevation adjustment for a carbine - especially as the elevation adjustment is calibrated for the 20" rifle.



No need for an elevation adjustment for a carbine? *sneezing* Ahhh ahhh ahhhhh HAAABULLLSHITTTTT!

Link Posted: 9/24/2004 5:09:45 AM EST

Originally Posted By WizardOfAhs:
[No need for an elevation adjustment for a carbine? *sneezing* Ahhh ahhh ahhhhh HAAABULLLSHITTTTT!




No there is no need. Flat trajectory allows you to make head shots to 225m and easy com shots to 300M.

Are you really going to make a 500M shot with the elevation adjustment? With a carbine? Especially as:
1) The odds of seeing anything at 500M is very low.
2) The odds of hitting anything with mil ammo & a carbine at 500m is very low
3) The sights are not calibrated for the carbine.
4) Are you going to play with your sights when people are shooting at you?

There is a big diffence in hitting a big black bullseyse on a 500M target range and actually seeing an enemy combatant and effectively engage them at 500M.

So no it's not needed.
Link Posted: 9/24/2004 5:28:48 AM EST
Link Posted: 9/24/2004 5:38:32 AM EST
+1
Link Posted: 9/24/2004 8:40:30 AM EST
+1 amen!
i use iron sights on 80% of the guns i have, everything from my Colt AR-15 to my Pennslyvaina flintlock .54 cal. the only 2 guns i have with scopes are target type guns in .223 and .22 LR.
Link Posted: 9/24/2004 10:40:05 AM EST
Originally Posted By TomJefferson:
1) A1 and 3) A2's

I guess I'm old school and like iron sights. Scopes break.

You can tell you are old school when you originally had A1 sights and never touched them for long shots but simply aim a little higher.The day the ban expired I had my ffl order a new A1 carbine from bushmaster,but like T.J. said you [know you're old school ] when you compensate. That's the way I was taught to shoot in the Army with the A1.If I am going to invest in optics it will be new glasses.Don't get me wrong to each his own just guess I'm old fashion.
Link Posted: 9/24/2004 10:54:39 AM EST

Originally Posted By Fireguy3:
Yes both mine are A2 Uppers! Guys going for the A3 are after the latest fad and thats it, you can mount red dots ,scopes etc on an A2 upper as you know! Besides with an A2 you won't lose your rear sight assembly carry handle, or knock off the zero by having it bang around hanging from youe gear! Or what if the rail gets banged up on the A3 reciever and accesories won't mount anymore? It is after all only aluminum!

Just my Two Cents!






The A3 upper is as much a "fad" as the A2. It is here to stay. You can do anything with an A2 that you can to a A3, ONLY NOT NEARLY AS WELL!!!. Why limit yourself when you can reconcile the two so easily? I love the classical approach myself, which is why I opted for the 20" A3 for my 1st rifle. As it is I use it with the detachable carry handle. if/when I ever have $ for optics I remove the handle. It only makes sense, so much sense that I ordered the detachable front sight post from Bushmaster along with my PROPERLY configured 20" replacement barrel.
Link Posted: 9/24/2004 11:21:40 AM EST
It seems silly to me to prefer to be limited in options, unless you gain something (which you don't really gain anything considering you can have a detachable carry handle). I never really used my carry handle when I had a detachable one, except for the built in sight. Hell, in the military they will not even let you use the carry handle in basic training.
Link Posted: 9/24/2004 11:31:43 AM EST
A1 sights for me.

My Carbon 15 has a flat top, I consider that gun my "toy." The guns I'd grap if TSHTF all have A1 sights. To each their own.
Link Posted: 9/24/2004 11:35:10 AM EST
These new fangled automobiles are just a fad. And to anybody who can't get where they're going fast enough on a bicycle I have two words: WORK OUT!

hahaha

Kidding! sort of...
Link Posted: 9/24/2004 11:50:50 AM EST
I only own one AR, I have a new bushmaster upper on order. 16' HBar and A2 upper. I prefer the simplicity, I can not aford the good BUIS much less a top notch optic.

After I get this upper I am gonna start a new rifle, cav arms lower, 6 months later I will be able to get an upper. IT will probably be a flat top unltralightweight, then I will save again for the optic. The Classic Bushy will still be my "go to gun"
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top