Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Posted: 10/26/2006 7:20:46 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/27/2006 9:12:26 PM EST by AyeGuy]
Somewhere recently I saw where some troops in the Rangers said that front irons mounted on handguards suck, and that front sights belong on the barrel...know what they meant?

They could not have tried this with a RAS, right? The only other rifle it could have been was the SR-25, and that has a sturdy FF handguard...or is any handguard really sturdy enough to mount irons on?

Title edited for accuracy
Link Posted: 10/26/2006 9:58:26 PM EST
Link Posted: 10/26/2006 10:33:48 PM EST
I don't know about rangers, but I was in the Marine Infantry and would have loved to have the AR I have now to carry. I have a Troy mid length ff and troy sights mounted on it and it works great. Course, I'm addicted to my EoTech...
Link Posted: 10/27/2006 6:54:38 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/27/2006 7:37:30 AM EST by CitySlicker]
You are referring to this thread, Info on SDM-R rifle.

This is what Sinister wrote:


Originally Posted By Sinister:
A Front sight on the rail was unsatisfactory for the 3rd Ranger Battalion's SPRs.


This is what you said:


Originally Posted By AyeGuy:
Somewhere recently I saw where some troops in the Rangers said that front irons mounted on handguards suck, and that front sights belong on the barrel...know what they meant?


What you posted is a lie. EDIT: Perhaps that was a bit harsh. Allow me to rephrase that: what you posted is knowingly incorrect. I presume that's a bit less accusatory. The Rangers did not say, "front irons mounted on handguards suck." Sinister simply said that 3/75 was not satisfied with a rail mounted front sight. No 3/75 Ranger posted in that thread.

Phoebus then went on to explain why they feel this way:


Originally Posted By Phoebus:

Originally Posted By CitySlicker:

Originally Posted By Sinister:
A Front sight on the rail was unsatisfactory for the 3rd Ranger Battalion's SPRs.


Why is that Sir; durability concerns?

Justin


More likely because putting sights on a FF [free float] rail creates some of the same problem you have with a barrel and a non-FF rail. If you change between, for example, resting on a bipod or not, your front sight will shift with the FF tube while your barrel remains in the same place.

The counter-arguement to this is that irons on something like this are just backup, so accuracy is not crucial.



Basically, a rail mounted front sight can defeat the purpose of a FF rail in certain situations.

Justin
Link Posted: 10/27/2006 7:33:04 AM EST
City Slicker, you don't need to accuse him of lying.
Link Posted: 10/27/2006 7:35:24 AM EST

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
City Slicker, you don't need to accuse him of lying.


All right, perhaps that was a bit harsh. But it irritates me when folks knowingly shove words into others' mouths.

Link Posted: 10/27/2006 7:36:11 AM EST

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
City Slicker, you don't need to accuse him of lying.



No Shit, what a fucked up thing to say.
Link Posted: 10/27/2006 7:39:55 AM EST
You will see a lot of sights mounted on the forward handguard in three gun matches where the shooter usually has an optic mounted on top. They may have the scope turned up to shoot the longer range plates or targets and then use the sight on the forearm to shoot the targets at CQB distance. What no one has mentioned is how lovingly we treat our match rifles, but we aren't jumping out of planes, fast roping, climbing in and out of PBRs, choppers and trucks, where a sight on a forend would take a lot of punishment. I think a sight on the forend is a great idea, if you know what you can and can't do with it.
Have a good one!
Link Posted: 10/27/2006 7:42:20 AM EST

Originally Posted By CitySlicker:

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
City Slicker, you don't need to accuse him of lying.


All right, perhaps that was a bit harsh. But it irritates me when folks knowingly shove words into others' mouths.



I don't think he knowingly did it.
Link Posted: 10/27/2006 8:46:04 AM EST
Not that it matters, for a rail mounted sight should be a backup, but I wonder what the measured deflection is on all the big name rails out there. Like, prone supported, sling holds, resting on a bi-pod, etc etc etc..

Sooooo....., Does anybody want to volunteer to do an unaffiliated, bipartisan, deflection test on them?
Link Posted: 10/27/2006 9:54:45 AM EST
This is a good example of Human nature to Hear, see or read something, and how it changes depending on the person retelling the story. and 3 people seeing or hearing the same thing will tell it 3 different ways...

That's why the Internet can be a double edged sword of Misinformation....

Again the Ranger Battalions have specific mission requirements that drive their gear selection. Saying something is not the "best" for a certain application in know way means it's Sucks.....
Link Posted: 10/27/2006 10:46:24 AM EST
the one piece upper/handguards would be the only way to have no flex.
Link Posted: 10/27/2006 11:51:26 AM EST
Link Posted: 10/27/2006 11:57:08 AM EST
Rangers say: front irons mounted on hand guards suck

Wouldn't this be singular?

Link Posted: 10/27/2006 3:36:50 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/27/2006 3:39:35 PM EST by DevL]
Probably that is due to the fact that the only rail mounted flip front sight in the military is the KAC unit which has no way to lock in the up position and generally is not a good choice. A non pinned flip FSB on the barrel is not a good choice either.

The other option would be they tested their idea out on a non FF rail. The defelction on a FF rail is so little as to not matter.

I personally dont care if the Troy flips on a rail are no that great past 200m as they will never ever get used past that distance anyway.
Link Posted: 10/27/2006 6:53:47 PM EST
No, I wasn't lying, nor was I trolling...I just remembered hearing that info, and decided to ask about it here, as I was considering putting a front BUIS on a ff handguard. And, if this aspect about the inadvisability of putting irons on handguards is known to some, it is definitly not common knowlege, as this pic just posted today on army.mil attests:



Ohio Army National Guard Soldiers from the 107th Cavalry Regiment practice cordon and search tactics at Camp Buehring, Kuwait.

linked due to biggosity

If you look at the big pic, you can see that all these guys have mounted theor M68 CCO's on their RAS's.
Link Posted: 10/27/2006 7:11:45 PM EST
I brought this up a year ago and the leading authorities had no comment. Of course the big name forends ALL have deflection which moves the site independent of the barrel. Monolithic rails seem to lessen the problem dramatically. I guess if it is back up, retains zero, close enough.
Link Posted: 10/27/2006 8:44:50 PM EST
As a matter of fact, I was going to put the BUIS (folding, front and rear) on a Monolith.

Deflection of the handguard aside, it just seems that you would get better accuracy if the front sight was on the barrel, since then the front sight would be pointing whetrever the barrel is, but I suppose this only matters if you are doing some real precision shooting with the irons.

In any event, I consider them to be EBUIS (Emergency Back-Up Iron Sights), since you'll prolly never use them, given the reliability of the typical optics most of us use.
Link Posted: 10/27/2006 8:57:33 PM EST

Originally Posted By AyeGuy:
No, I wasn't lying, nor was I trolling...I just remembered hearing that info, and decided to ask about it here, as I was considering putting a front BUIS on a ff handguard. And, if this aspect about the inadvisability of putting irons on handguards is known to some, it is definitly not common knowlege, as this pic just posted today on army.mil attests:

www4.army.mil/OCPA/uploads/medium/2006/CSA-2006-10-25-090135.jpg

Ohio Army National Guard Soldiers from the 107th Cavalry Regiment practice cordon and search tactics at Camp Buehring, Kuwait.

linked due to biggosity

If you look at the big pic, you can see that all these guys have mounted theor M68 CCO's on their RAS's.


Some have the carry handle on, some don't. The guys in the background, all appear to have ACOGs.

If you aren't twisting on the RAS, it shouldn't move that much. Obviously bipods etc. would be a problem.

But there's a school of though that the further forward the 1X optical sight is mounted, the less it obstructs the shooter's field of view. Field of view is a good thing in CQB.
Link Posted: 10/27/2006 8:58:49 PM EST
So how much would rail mounted front BUIS be "deflected" if used in combination with a bipod?


TS
Link Posted: 10/27/2006 10:10:31 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/27/2006 10:12:40 PM EST by Harv24]

If you look at the big pic, you can see that all these guys have mounted theor M68 CCO's on their RAS's.


Just cause you see a pic of something done a certain way, does not make it the best way.

Mounting a M68 on a RAS is not the best set up. Sure a CQB distance you can get by, but what about 100M or further.
No Thanks, I leave mine on the receiver.


Yeah, I know a few guys will get on here and say they did it and it worked,yadda,yadda, but its not making me change to that set up at all. Hell, I saw a pic of an E-2 with a BSA red dot sight and a Beta Cmag in iraq... Don't make it right.

Plus what does this pic have to do with a front rail mounted sight not being an optimum set up fro a few units...

Link Posted: 10/28/2006 5:51:49 AM EST
Blue on the bolt carriers = simunition uppers?

They might have all of their stuff mounted on the RAS because it's easier and won't make a big difference with simunition.
Link Posted: 10/28/2006 6:57:16 AM EST

Originally Posted By Harv24:

If you look at the big pic, you can see that all these guys have mounted theor M68 CCO's on their RAS's.


Just cause you see a pic of something done a certain way, does not make it the best way.
Mounting a M68 on a RAS is not the best set up. Sure a CQB distance you can get by, but what about 100M or further.
No Thanks, I leave mine on the receiver.


Yeah, I know a few guys will get on here and say they did it and it worked,yadda,yadda, but its not making me change to that set up at all. Hell, I saw a pic of an E-2 with a BSA red dot sight and a Beta Cmag in iraq... Don't make it right.

Plus what does this pic have to do with a front rail mounted sight not being an optimum set up fro a few units...



I wasn't advocating putting the Aimpoint on a rail, just pointing out that it is being done by "professionals"; while I heard long ago that doing this is a no-no, evidently not everybody else has.

As far as what this has to do with irons on a handguard, it's the same thing, isn't it? Sight alignment is sight alignment regardless.

But that is in the specific case of the RAS. My inquiries were directed as to wether the same applied to the more stoutly mounted ff handguards.
Link Posted: 10/28/2006 8:37:53 AM EST
Link Posted: 10/28/2006 8:53:29 AM EST
Link Posted: 10/28/2006 11:26:05 AM EST
Originally Posted By AyeGuy:
I wasn't advocating putting the Aimpoint on a rail, just pointing out that it is being done by "professionals"; while I heard long ago that doing this is a no-no, evidently not everybody else has.

remember theres a big difference between the ohio nasty girls and the ranger regiment.
Link Posted: 10/30/2006 7:21:12 AM EST
Some units, particularly ones without backup rear irons, will put their '68's in front of the carry handle, leaving the carry handle as a permanently fixed backup iron and allowing a co-witness. It's a cheap way of doing the cut-down carry handle style rear BUIS, I guess, but I didn't like it as much.
Link Posted: 10/30/2006 8:07:52 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/30/2006 8:10:13 AM EST by twl]
Link Posted: 10/30/2006 12:32:30 PM EST
3rd Battalion + 75th Rangers= Whiney bitchass crybabies
Link Posted: 10/30/2006 12:57:39 PM EST
Why doesn't someone other than KAC produce a pinned flip-up sight/gas block?
Link Posted: 10/30/2006 1:02:36 PM EST

Originally Posted By kc3:
Why doesn't someone other than KAC produce a pinned flip-up sight/gas block?


PRI...
Link Posted: 10/30/2006 1:05:41 PM EST
Link Posted: 10/30/2006 2:38:02 PM EST

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:

Originally Posted By kc3:
Why doesn't someone other than KAC produce a pinned flip-up sight/gas block?


PRI...


Not pinned I believe, and neither are the YHM or GG&G offerings...

I think LaRue Tactical is capable of designing an excellent gas block/folding front sight combo and I've been screaming for one for a few days now, but to no avail. Mark, any chance here?

At present, the KAC unit is the only durable solution offered, but those are nowhere to be found; one sold on the EE a few weeks ago for $500, so the demand is definitely there.

Justin
Link Posted: 10/30/2006 2:49:42 PM EST
Weren't yours, Mark -- at the AMU we put on lots of Larues and Daniels for the boys at 3rd Battalion and Regiment. They like them a lot.

The guy who said front sights on the rail suck is the Sniper Platoon Sergeant for the 3rd Ranger Battalion, a Distinguished Rifleman with the Bronze Star with V device, and the 2005 Army Rifle Champion. He's won BUNCHES of sniper competitions. I think he knows what he's talking about.

The rifle he was talking about is the Mark 12 SPR with Knights' rail and front sight. His battle experience with about 3 dozen rifles is the muzzle may be pointing one way, which may not be the same place the front sight is pointing (on the rail).
Link Posted: 10/30/2006 4:20:18 PM EST
Link Posted: 10/30/2006 5:36:26 PM EST
OK, a guy with those skills and that background is going to have a wholly different set of standards for what constitutes a good versus bad front sight arrangement, especially on a long-range rig like a Mark 12 than somebody of lesser skills running a carbine length weapons system. Say that guy could hold and hit a man-size target with irons at 600 yards when his front sight is on the barrel, and only 400 yards with a FF mounted front sight. Well, of course its going to suck by comparison in his opinion.

My relatively untalented ass has to work hard to put that round on the 300 yard E-type sillhouette and knock it down because our Big Army barrels are more worn out, our triggers are stiff Colt stock ones, and the targets have holes in them already. Also, I'm not an Army championship rifle shot. Never will be. I don't have that last ten percent of talent that seperates Expert Rifle badge wearers from All-Army competition winners.

So what constitutes a less desirable rig for the gifted shooter might still work well for those of us with more pedestrian requirements.
Link Posted: 10/30/2006 5:58:02 PM EST

Originally Posted By CitySlicker:

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:

Originally Posted By kc3:
Why doesn't someone other than KAC produce a pinned flip-up sight/gas block?


PRI...


Not pinned I believe, and neither are the YHM or GG&G offerings...

I think LaRue Tactical is capable of designing an excellent gas block/folding front sight combo and I've been screaming for one for a few days now, but to no avail. Mark, any chance here?

At present, the KAC unit is the only durable solution offered, but those are nowhere to be found; one sold on the EE a few weeks ago for $500, so the demand is definitely there.

Justin


The original version of the GG&G front sight is pinned on, I believe. That's why you have to return your bbl to GG&G for install.
Link Posted: 10/31/2006 3:52:09 AM EST

Originally Posted By Onslaught:

Originally Posted By CitySlicker:

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:

Originally Posted By kc3:
Why doesn't someone other than KAC produce a pinned flip-up sight/gas block?


PRI...


Not pinned I believe, and neither are the YHM or GG&G offerings...

I think LaRue Tactical is capable of designing an excellent gas block/folding front sight combo and I've been screaming for one for a few days now, but to no avail. Mark, any chance here?

At present, the KAC unit is the only durable solution offered, but those are nowhere to be found; one sold on the EE a few weeks ago for $500, so the demand is definitely there.

Justin


The original version of the GG&G front sight is pinned on, I believe. That's why you have to return your bbl to GG&G for install.

That is correct. GG&G has two versions. The one you typically see is set screwed on but they also have a pinned on version that you have to send you barrel to them for installation. (Cost ~ $200 with installation). That's the only problem with pinned on versions, proper installation is not something that just any old hillbilly with a drill can do correctly. Hell look how much problems BM has had installing FSB that are not canted!

That said, I personally do not trust a gas block\flip up sight combos that is not pinned on. Other types may be fine for range toys but if I was going into harms way, pinned on is the only way I would accept it. I can deal with set screwed lo-pro gas blocks (non-BUIS versions) assuming you dimple the barrel where the setscrews will tighten down and locktite the setscrews and cover\protect the gas block with a one-piece rail.
Link Posted: 10/31/2006 4:43:51 AM EST

Originally Posted By Sinister:
Weren't yours, Mark -- at the AMU we put on lots of Larues and Daniels for the boys at 3rd Battalion and Regiment. They like them a lot.

The guy who said front sights on the rail suck is the Sniper Platoon Sergeant for the 3rd Ranger Battalion, a Distinguished Rifleman with the Bronze Star with V device, and the 2005 Army Rifle Champion. He's won BUNCHES of sniper competitions. I think he knows what he's talking about.

The rifle he was talking about is the Mark 12 SPR with Knights' rail and front sight. His battle experience with about 3 dozen rifles is the muzzle may be pointing one way, which may not be the same place the front sight is pointing (on the rail).


That wouldn't happen to be Sgt Wear would it?
Link Posted: 10/31/2006 4:08:08 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/31/2006 4:11:02 PM EST by brianksain]

Originally Posted By genpowell71:
3rd Battalion + 75th Rangers= Whiney bitchass crybabies


I guess I will have to take exception to this comment.

God bless em. All of them.

Sinister ... gimme a call when you got a minute 409-983-8643 PD C.I.D.

BK
AmericanSnipers.org
Top Top