Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 10/31/2003 10:44:56 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/31/2003 10:49:12 AM EDT by WaWaTuSi]
Thanks for all your help in the BUIS department. I think I am going to go for the ARMS #40.

EE has a:

40 with Trijicon Night Sights - An Eagle Firearms custom model. We make the necessary modifications and then install Trijicon M16 tritium aperture. Also included is tritium front sight and front sight installation tool.

http://www.eaglefirearms.net/ARMSnumber40.htm

Are there any disadvantages to this model? I am using an ACOG as a main sight.


Again Thanks for all yous guys help!

Link Posted: 10/31/2003 11:47:34 AM EDT
I think it's a waste of money. Your eye will be so close to the rear aperture that you'll just see two green blurs on the sides. If you really want tritium sights on your AR, get the front post only.
Link Posted: 10/31/2003 1:15:27 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/31/2003 1:16:36 PM EDT by DevL]
Its really quite nice but you have to do some experimenting to get the rear tritium to work. The rear tritium makes two perfect circles of green light and you need to put the front sight circle of light between and under the rear globes. You have to experiment as this 3 globes of light is different than using the irons in a traditional way. There is no way you can use the irons without front AND rear tritiums in certain circumstances. People who say the rear is just a blob of light and useless have never use a rear tritium sight. You will have to get used to where the front globe sits realative to the rear two globes. For instance if you make the rear globes just barely touch on the circumference and the front globe has the front circle intersecting the rear globes with the top of its circumference under the rear ones etc. You have to try it yourself to understnd I guess, but IT DOES WORK and it is way better than no tritium or just a front tritium. Be forewarned the aperatures and front blad are a tiny bit larger than stock and you will have to shave down a bit of the hood on the small aperature to get it to fit under a TA31.
Link Posted: 10/31/2003 5:28:28 PM EDT
Nice in theory, but a waste of money in my experience. Jack
Link Posted: 10/31/2003 10:46:54 PM EDT
I would rather have them than not. If your illumination fails, and it's dark, it's going to be harder to see your sights without them. If the rear glows too brightly for you, just go over them with a marker and dim them a bit. I got some cheap on the EE board. However, if you don't have some of the other accessories you need/want, the money might be better spent there first. I really like them on my uppers that have no optics or lights. Gives me another option where there was none.
Link Posted: 11/1/2003 3:47:08 AM EDT
I use an ashley big dot tritium on the front only of my goto gun. My theory is that if i have to use it then things are probably happening close and fast and i won't have time to align anything, just front sight and squeeze. I'm thinking about doing the same for the next set of handgun sigths i get.
Link Posted: 11/1/2003 4:35:44 AM EDT
I'm actually considering removing my front trijicon sight post. I have the military matech BUIS and there is not provision for rear tritium, the FS is getting distracting when using both eyes in the dark.
Link Posted: 11/2/2003 3:07:23 AM EDT
Just got an e-mail from EE. They say the trituim rear they make/modify wont fit under my Acog. Does it make sense to go with a regular ARMS #40 with a tritium front?
Link Posted: 11/2/2003 3:58:15 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/2/2003 4:01:32 AM EDT by futuredan]
Originally Posted By WaWaTuSi: Just got an e-mail from EE. They say the trituim rear they make/modify wont fit under my Acog. Does it make sense to go with a regular ARMS #40 with a tritium front?
View Quote
For What It is Worth (FWIW), in my CCW class the instructor constantly made the point that when surviving close quarter firearm combatents were asked what the last thing they saw was, the consistent response was "their front sight".
Link Posted: 11/2/2003 4:59:55 AM EDT
A spot of white on each side of the lg. aperature will do well as a (guide), and the same for the front or a trinium post if you so desire. Good shootin, Jack
Link Posted: 11/2/2003 2:18:11 PM EDT
[>:/] How would white dots help when there is insufficient light to see them? The only source of illumination may be coming from the direction of your target, and your side may be dark. I don't see how non-illuminated dots are going to help you in that case...
Link Posted: 11/2/2003 6:24:44 PM EDT
As I said, as a guide, white shows 100% better in low level light than black. The white dots will give you a rough alignment for faster time on a low light target. If there is any light at all you have a better chance to see the white dot of paint apposed to no dot of paint at all. They do not glow and don't give away a position to I-square NV. A dot of white paint or a trinium front post is needed if you use the rear dots to line up with something you can see in LOW LIGHT. A trinium front post can give you position away just like a trinium rear sight. It all depends on the battle field conditions, what you end up doing and using. Good shootin, Jack
Link Posted: 11/2/2003 10:39:41 PM EDT
3rdtk, I understand. But I laughed quite a bit over that last post. You seem to think everybody is in combat or is worried about it. I have absolutely no worries about being tracked on NV. I am not in combat. I am just a civilian. I don't need what "the military issues". I am sure there are some who are concerned with those aspects, but most of the members here are not in that situation (civilian). If someone is close enough to see my tritium sights, I have got a problem, cause that would be danger close, and they would have to be standing behind me cause my tritium sights only face to the rear. White dots are better than nothing, true, but tritium dots are better than white, at least for I am where there is total darkness for 24/day for extended periods, however that is a unique condition present here. I think it would be pretty difficult to put white dots on the sides of the standard front sight post, and you sure wouldn't want to paint the top white. I'll stick with my tritium sights, they work well for me. I don't even think the PD's here have NV gear, but if they did and are hunting me, I have bigger problems than what my one rifle can take care of...
Link Posted: 11/3/2003 9:06:48 AM EDT
I say buy the tritium version in the EE then have the top of the small aperature trimmed so it fits under your TA31 and cold blue the exposed metal. Other people have trimmed rear aperatures with no problem.
Link Posted: 11/3/2003 12:21:54 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/3/2003 12:30:07 PM EDT by wyv3rn]
Originally Posted By AK_Mike: 3rdtk, I understand. But I laughed quite a bit over that last post. You seem to think everybody is in combat or is worried about it. I have absolutely no worries about being tracked on NV. I am not in combat. I am just a civilian. I don't need what "the military issues". I am sure there are some who are concerned with those aspects, but most of the members here are not in that situation (civilian). If someone is close enough to see my tritium sights, I have got a problem, cause that would be danger close, and they would have to be standing behind me cause my tritium sights only face to the rear. White dots are better than nothing, true, but tritium dots are better than white, at least for I am where there is total darkness for 24/day for extended periods, however that is a unique condition present here. I think it would be pretty difficult to put white dots on the sides of the standard front sight post, and you sure wouldn't want to paint the top white. I'll stick with my tritium sights, they work well for me. I don't even think the PD's here have NV gear, but if they did and are hunting me, I have bigger problems than what my one rifle can take care of...
View Quote
I happen to enjoy 3rdtk's input and have found it invaluable at times. There is nothing wrong with having MORE information than you need. If you don't need or want to know the information that 3rdtk is providing for FREE then don't read it or disregard it. We all bring our own unique life experiences to the table and I am glad 3rdtk shares what HE knows not what he "thinks you need to know as a civilian". So please don't come onto this board and discourage the sharing of information or people with information from posting just because their input doesn't fit your particular requirements in a thread that is not yours. Please don't take this as a personal attack on you AK_Mike. I've read your posts and have gained valuable information from them as well. I like you very much.
Link Posted: 11/3/2003 4:14:29 PM EDT
wyv3rn, not to worry, I take no offense. I understand your concern as well, but I think you need to lighten up a little. In my post I stated that I understood what 3rdtk was saying, and that what he pointed out was definitely a concern to some, but not the majority as most are civilians who will not be worrying about NV. It still makes me laugh, not because I think he is wrong, it's just that 3rdtk is always in "combat mode" and I find that comical at times. I was ADDING to the thread by pointing out the civilian aspects, and my own personal opinion. If you think something in my post said his information or concerns were wrong for LE/military, please point it out. It's a simple fact that civilians and LE/military have different concerns and requirements. As for LE/Military, 3rdtks knowledge and concerns are very valuable, but they don't always apply to civilians, at least not in the same way. That's no attack, just a point of clarification. I think you simply took my post the wrong way. You can disregard my post as well, that's your choice. Again, sorry that you were offended. I don't think 3rdtk was, we have talked about that privately in the past, and he doesn't take it that way. His input is always valuable, but doesn't always cover the civilian side. What's good for the military is not always best for the civilian, and that's okay. [:)]
Link Posted: 11/3/2003 4:28:15 PM EDT
AK is right, but I thought I better put that NV part in or someone would have yelled at me for not mentioning that aspect of it. There are others onhere that may need to know and they are not aloweed to repond because of certain guide lines, so that is another reason I try to give extra when I can. Wyv3rn, thank you for your kind words, and both you guys are why I'm glad to help where I can. Good shootin, Jack
Link Posted: 11/3/2003 4:31:07 PM EDT
I am a big believer in Tritium irons myself. If you have folding front and rear sights the NV issue becomes a non issue unless your irons are deployed and your NV/powered optics are TU. If your back up irons are deployed and your facing an enemy with NV your screwed. Even then Id still prefer to be able to hit what I am aiming at a bit better and give up a little more of my position since I cant see them and they can see me like its daylight anyway.
Link Posted: 11/4/2003 8:40:37 AM EDT
3rdtk, thanks again for understanding. It just strikes my funny bone sometimes picturing you "hmm, what would 3rdtk do?". I am sure you sleep with a tactical blanket treated with anti-IR coating [:)]. I worded my original post poorly, and by trying to make a point, I was a jerk about how I wrote it, I see that now - NO OFFENSE intended. We can ALWAYS count on you to provide the serious angle, the ones the operators need to hear. If I were a soldier, I would be making sure to read EVERY post you make. I am the little kid in the corner who has to jump up and down yelling about the civilian angle. If you did not provide the operators take on things, I would be shocked, and you would be doing yourself and us a disservice. For a simpleton civilian like me, worrying about IR signatures and being tracked by NV is the last thing from my mind, if I did I would be paranoid. However, as military, this would be a paramount concern, and something I would have to consider or it could mean my life or the lives of my comrades. So - my apologies to all for wording my thread the way I did, that's what happens when you don't check what you just wrote. I am the first to admit my posts are usually poorly worded as bad as some are at spelling. P.S. I still like my tritium nightsights [:D]
Link Posted: 11/4/2003 9:05:43 AM EDT
JUST BECAUSE YOU MIGHT BE PARANOID, DOESN'T MEAN THERE NOT AFTER YA!!!! :) Jack
Link Posted: 11/5/2003 5:14:06 AM EDT
Originally Posted By WaWaTuSi: Just got an e-mail from EE. They say the trituim rear they make/modify wont fit under my Acog. Does it make sense to go with a regular ARMS #40 with a tritium front?
View Quote
I would argue against using tritium in your front sight if it is fixed, as it will cause an unwanted glow in the ACOG view. And if you don't have a front tritium sight, I wouldn't have them in the rear alone. [image]http://community.the-underdogs.org/smiley/angry/angryfinger.gif[/image] .
Link Posted: 11/5/2003 9:00:35 AM EDT
I dont notice the glow through an ACOG to be objectionable anymore than I find the front sight to be in the way.
Link Posted: 11/5/2003 9:01:57 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Feedingcannibal:
Originally Posted By WaWaTuSi: Just got an e-mail from EE. They say the trituim rear they make/modify wont fit under my Acog. Does it make sense to go with a regular ARMS #40 with a tritium front?
View Quote
I would argue against using tritium in your front sight if it is fixed, as it will cause an unwanted glow in the ACOG view. And if you don't have a front tritium sight, I wouldn't have them in the rear alone. [image]http://community.the-underdogs.org/smiley/angry/angryfinger.gif[/image] .
View Quote
I wonder if one could fashion a front sight condom maybe out of heat shrink that can be removed quickly if needed....
Link Posted: 11/5/2003 9:56:40 AM EDT
Waste IMPO.
Top Top