I recently noticed on Ace Ltd. and ZM Weapons that they have the rear sight mounted at the front of the receiver as opposed to the rear. Is there a reason for this or was the guy putting it together simply an asshat who thought it would look cool, not having a clue about function? I have always thought that the shorter the distance between the front and rear sights the more off your aim will be...

Comments?

I think this is pure foolishness.  Have you ever moved your rear sight to the front of the rail?  Try it and see just how hard it is to see your target while looking through the small aperture.  Shorter sight radius and shitty site picture = inaccurate rifle.

I don't know why ACR or ZM does it - but I do it on one of my rifles (and I got the idea from an instructor who does it).

Primary reason is space on the flattop.  My TA50-2 works best (for eye releif) when it's all the way back on the upper.  So I put it there as its my primery optic on that rifle.

However, I still desire iron sights for a backup.  I put and ARMS #40 all the way forward so if the scope goes TU I remove it and flip up the #40.

No it isn't optimal and I won't win any shooting matches - but it works at carbine ranges.

Here is a pic of it down (normal condition):


Here is a picture of it up (normally the scope would be removed - its up just for the photo):

Maybe its for shooting Iraqi style with the buttstock over your right shoulder!

I was like Forest. I had an ARMS flip-up and an ACOG TAO1NSN. In order to get the proper eye relief I forward mounted the rear sight. On the ARMS sight the first one to pop up is the larger peep for 0-200 meters. It actually worked pretty well like that. Just what I did to help make it home.

I have my #40 mounted 2 notches forward.  Since the 0-200 is the first thing that pops up it isn't that bad.  All the way forward would be different though.

Canadian military puts it in front to: