I voted yes but only because I can't say no 100% of the time for me.
Work and HD rifle- Yes
Night vision set up- No
Mini recce- No

We use BUIS on almost all our AR/M4's.  Almost all of them have FSP's.  So, if we want flip up rear's we go with Troy.  If we want fixed rear's we go with either Danial Defense or Larue.

NYH.

The answer is yes.
The reason is because this is a new shooter with only ONE other gun....a handgun.  Therefore, this is said shooters ONLY AR.

This is a bit of an odd scenario where a "new" shooter already has a handgun and wants to start shooting coyotes with a $1500 AR.

My ARs that I consider combat ready have front sight bases and quality, fixed rear sights. I prefer Daniel Defense 1.5s, as a complement to an aimpoint optic.

I’ve had enough optics go down on my even during my low speed, hi drag time in the 24th chairborne. I like the extra insurance.

A $40 Matech is cheap insurance for a rifle with a FSB.

You cannot take this question out of context.  If you were taking just 1 rifle with you through a one-way Stargate to another world, you're damn well going to want BUIS.

If you're headed to a 3 gun competition, you absolutely do not need that BUIS installed

Any optic with electronics absolutely.

LPVOs, usually but not priority

In an HD situation you’re not going to have time to remove a scope.

I would say go the other way. Skip the optic and shoot irons. I've very successfully hunted for the last 50 years and never used an optic. Optics are a luxury, sights are a necessity.

Spend <$50 on a pair of UTG offset irons. Before anyone whines about quality...I have 3 sets and they're all good to go...and remember...they're *backup* irons and don't need to be bulletproof. But they're pretty close, anyway.

Also, they're lighter than the Magpul Pro offsets, and that matters in a hunting rifle. And they're ~$100 less, so that money could be put into a better barrel, optic, or trigger.

I started using BUIS...and I've removed them. I have them on my one AR with red dot/magnifier...because.

I started thinking about what would cause my optics to go down. If the optic is damaged, I'd probably be out of the fight due to damage as well. Seriously, what would knock an optic out of the fight and leave the firearm still intact and my eyeballs, hands, face, and brain, undamaged? Then I started to think about what a PITA 45^ offset BUIS were (heavy and stuck out). Flip up front sights cause burns without gloves. (Ask me how I found out about that. Ouch.) So, a fixed front sight and flip-up back sight is about the only way I think to run a BUIS. That doesn't work with optics.

I'm not a door-kicker. I'm not an operator. I've never fast-roped onto a roof to clear a building. If I were any of those, maybe I'd have  different opinion. But, being what I am, and using my ARs for what I do, I cannot see any rational scenario where my optics are destroyed but my weapon (or me) stays in the fight.

Just my .02.

Until your eyesight goes south.....

Engaging armed individuals intent upon causing you or your family serious bodily injury or death is identical to shooting a deer.

No. I have quality optics in a quality mount. Anything that kills the optics will f me up, too. Plus at HD distances you should be able to roll the rifle and shoot it like a shotgun. Look down the rail and you’re done

Try reading the OP, coyotes don't shoot at you. And if you think a magnified optic is going to be useful in a home invasion situation then you absolutely should not own a firearm.

Better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it...

I agree with this mentality... if there is a zero chance of the rifle ever being used as a home defense rifle and is purely a competition/hunting/plinking toy, then no BUIS will get you by.  If you ever plan on using it for home defense, a set of BUIS is necessary... ESPECIALLY with a zoom optic on board... No way to use it effectively in close without some sort of BUIS, offset or otherwise.  Now... practically speaking... you could always buy them later if money is that tight.

10 shot group off the bench at 100 yds using my Magpul PRO BUIS's...Just checking the zero...

Old thread, but important.  The HD optic (different scenario than OP's 3-15 hunting scope) is more likely a red dot than a magnified scope.  If a red dot primary optic goes out, having backups would be helpful, as you can use them through the red dot.  Heck, just pop up the front (if you don't have an A2 FSB) and use the red dot as a ghost sight.

If this brace ban proposal goes through, you will see them less and less.

I love to use one of my AR as a calling rifle. Since that is its primary job I don't have irons on it. I have a traditional scope and try to keep it as light and handy as possible. I like to hunt on foot and make A big loop through my calling area. Since most of my shots are taken inside 200 yards, a 18" mid-length, light weight barrel works great. If it was truly a dual purpose rifle I would add BUIS to help with my OCD.

Given OPs specific scenario, BUIS would be pretty useless unless using offset sights or a QD scope mount. Since he didn’t specifically mention offset buis or a qd scope mount, my vote is no

AT3 offsets for 45 dollars.

Coyote gun with a scope, but then, a Prairie Dog startles you and you have no choice but to fight.



Cannot predict the situation. It's not a shotgun, you know. So Ima go with yes, you need BUIS.

I clung to buis for years.  

Waste time and money if you run an Aimpoint.  

I agree, and especially if it's in a strong mount like a Geissele.  I've used Aimpoints and they've been wonderful.

A lot of mental/fiscal effort can go into BUIS that could be used elsewhere.  Most of them are flawed in some way (too much wobble, bad aperture sizing, get in the way of the charging handle, too delicate) and not so great at night anyway.  Every time you make a minor change that requires a re-zero (switching flash hiders for example) now you need to zero both your optic and your irons.  You're expending time and ammo for something you will almost certainly never use.

Let's look at the history of them:  they're vestiges from a bygone era, that probably did need to be employed with questionable optics like EOTechs out there.  They did not appear because Aimpoint makes an unreliable optic and Geissele makes a delicate mount.  

I have BUIS on my ARs mostly just for fun.  I like playing with gadgets.  But I'd not worry too much if I didn't have them.

Get inexpensive BUIS, like a set from Magpul. The first time that I heard about them I thought, how can plastic sights on an AR be worth a damn. But they are actually good sights for the money.

Thread revival!

I will likely be on my death bed, shaking my fist, gasping "damn you arfcom, I never once needed those goddamn back up sights, or that damn forward assist!"

Still, I have them on every single rifle.  My money, my choice.

My life has been a long happy one, but Murphy still stops by every now and then kicks me square in the dick.

About the time I remove the BUIS, Zombies will walk my street, and I will drop my rifle tripping over a Unicorn horn, smashing my optic.

I love this place

I am amazed by people who think adding the weight (as little as 2.5oz for plastic or 3.3oz for metal) or the "complexity" of BUIS is a no-go.

I just scanned through the entire thread.  Looks like the question relates to a hunting rifle?  The guys I know that coyote hunt have thermals on their rifles and no BUIS.  Thirty plus years ago I wanted iron sights on my bolt action hunting rifles even though I had the most up-to-date Leupold optics on them.  Why? Because stuff happens to optics.

I have killed two Trijicon MROs, broken one Aimpoint CompM4S, "delaminated" one Trijicon TA11 ACOG, broken one USO SN-4, and others.   Anyone who thinks optics are infallible has lived a blessed life (and should buy a lottery ticket).

I was sitting here working and thinking about this thread, and realized I have three sighting systems on my "go-to AR" ...

LMT MARS with a Trijicon TA11 in a LaRue SDO mount, Trijicon RMR01 Type 2 in an ADM 33d Offset (in front of the ACOG), and KAC BUIS (200-600 rear / M4 front).

This gives me some precision or at least target ID to about 500 yards (ACOG), fast CQB (RMR) and "everything else failed" (KAC).

I haven't hunted in a long time so this isn't germane to the OP, but nonetheless I cannot get my head around people who don't see the need for BUIS (especially those who use battery powered RDS).

If this thread/poll was to start over today...I wonder if the split would be closer to 50/50?   I see more and more weapons without them these days.

Pretty much this.
Let's face it, if your optic goes down, you're just going to pack up and go home anyway.

How many times is this thread going to get resurrected from the dead?  It was started in 2015!

I know it's a necrobump, but this is an interesting look into the changing field/market and technology.  There will always be the "never not have BUIS" crowd.  No issues with that.  The introduction and improved quality of modern optics has made this less of a necessity.  All dependent on your choice of optic of course.  A decent quality LPVO should have an etched reticle.  So at worst, you might lose illumination.  But even if you take the battery out, you still have the same reticle in black.  That's also true of a prismatic optics.  Optics like the PA SLx 1X, Swampfox Blade, Vortex Spitfire, et al are effectively irons with the option to illuminate if desired.  So worst case scenario again is you lose illumination.  Red dots and holos are different.  If the battery dies, you have no sights.  I could see a strong argument for no BUIS on any rifle with an etched reticle.

Or you could break a LPVO where the entire internals fail.  This happened to my US Optics SN4 on a SCAR-H around 2014.  I paid over $1000 for that scope in 2013 (about $1240 in 2022 money) plus $165 for the LaRue mount so it wasn't cheap (and was considered among the if not the most durable LPVO available) ... just something to consider.

I simply do not understand why the "modern optics are infallible" crowd can't just put $65 2.5oz MagPul MBUS on their rifles in consideration of the evidence that ALL optics can fail.  I wonder if the same people carry a back up magazine? I mean, 70-90% of all SD shootings are resolved in 3-4 rounds.  The vast majority of those only take 1-2 rounds.  Why then have a back up magazine?  Your 30rd mag should be good for ... like ... 10 engagements (about 6000% more than most of us will ever experience).

Whatev.

I'm going to go play with my Bernedoodle.  I only have to show him something twice and he learns.

The 3 rifles I consider SHTF weapons have a PRO and back up sights.

Is your contention then that BUIS never fail and cannot break?  If BUIS break then what?  What if the BUBUIS break?  What if the BUBUBUBUIS break?  And so on.  My contention is more along the lines of how many belts and suspenders do you put on before you start to realize what you're doing isn't necessary?  There's certainly nothing wrong with putting BUIS on a rifle.  No worries.

Everything in our realm is a risk assessment.  Each individual assesses risk differently.  Case in point, if you're only planning to use your rifle for HD, what is the real risk of causing a catastrophic failure on an optic?  If you feel that's low, why bother with BUIS?  It's not an expense issue, it's a why bother issue.  But not everyone fits into that specific risk assessment.  YMMV.

You're specific account of a broken optic pre-dates this thread.  Not to point out the obvious, but things have changed since then.  Quality has improved exponentially since then even compared to high dollar optics of the time.  Of course, that's not to say that all modern optics are impervious to failure, but they have become stronger and more reliable than their 2014 counterparts (depending on what you get of course).  In particular, modern prismatic optics are borderline bullet proof.  Modern micro prismatics have little if any void space meaning they can take significant impact before seeing damage enough to render them useless.  The level of impacts needed to damage to that point would be enough to cause similar damage to BUIS.  Essentially, if you damage your optic to the point you can't use it you've probably damaged more on the rifle.

Not to seem argumentative, but the magazine argument is a bit of a strawman.  If you're talking about HD/SD, I would be willing to put money down that most of the people that have made the risk assessment to choose an AR as their HD/SD gun are not carrying a second magazine.  And that the ones who are carrying extra are expecting more than just a simple HD/SD incident.  And those who think that way probably already have a set of BUIS.  So it's not really a valid comparison.  

Yeah, I don't have any BUIS on my pistols at the moment....mostly because I'm trying out my white lights (or a laser) at noon, and I'm waiting to see which BUIS will be "Biden Brace Ban" approved.
Since I have AR pistols, they have to have red-dots with unlimited eye-relief.  I ended up going with a Sig Romeo 4T for my SHTF pistol since it is "Duty Approved" and can run without a battery (solar).  But there is still the chance that the entire optic takes a dump (not that I'm trying to shoot an AR pistol chambered in .300blk 300 yards with irons).
I have a Romeo 4H on my HD pistol at the moment since that one is Minnesota State Highway Patrol Duty Approved and is most the most part relegated to a temp controlled bed room.  
I'm looking into some offsets for everything.

And there's a key difference between a prismatic optic and a red dot optic.  The Romeos are red dots.  Something like the Bravo is a prismatic.  If the electronics on a red dot fail, the dot turns off.  If they fail on a prismatic, the reticle changes to black, but stays in place.  So IMHO, I'd be more inclined to have BUIS on a red dot or a holo sight .... oh wait, I do.  :)

I agree completely with the diminishing returns argument.  However, a set of MBUS are $65 and weigh 2.5 ounces.  There really isn’t a reason to NOT add them.

Well to be honest, it's not always that simple.  Sure maybe the vast majority it is.  For them, I'd say the reason not to would be simply because you don't want to.  They certainly are not a necessity like they used to be in today's world.  So it's more along the lines of if you want 'em, use 'em.  If you don't, don't.  (Disclaimer, if you read by previous post you'll note that this is a very application dependent case.  I'm speaking of etched reticle style optics only.  For red dots, the risk goes up significantly because simple failures can mean no sights as opposed to no illuminated sights.)

But the more complicated thing is that it's not always "just" $65 and 2.5 ounces.  For instance, I recently saw an individual who had his rear BUIS buried under an LPVO.  OK, but that requires one of two additional steps.  Either you have to pay more for a QD scope mount.  And that better be a good one that nearly guarantees zero hold on removal/reinstall so it's not gonna be cheap.  OR, you need to have a wrench/torque driver in your kit to take the LPVO off.  And I'm sure everyone drills the under fire tool based scope removal drill?  (Sarcasm)  OK, so you could choose offsets, but that's not $65 and 2.5 ounces.  You see what I mean?  And if you choose the route of a holographic with a magnifier (and there are good use cases for that choice), more often than not, there's no more room for a rear BUIS.  There are several reasons NOT to have BUIS when you start thinking it through.  It's all dependent on what you want and what your risk assessment concludes.  IMHO, I feel like there are more reasons now (2022) than there were in 2015 when the thread was started.  Much the same way red dots on pistols are becoming more ubiquitous.  That's fascinating to me.

My situation: If we're talking unmagnified, I like an eotech for close and quick, irons for longer, more precise shots. When I can afford magnifiers for my Eotechs, that will change I'm sure.

Would never dream of skipping backups on a fighting rifle.  I like the mbus pros.  Sorry, but two is one, one is none. I don't trust glass and batteries enough to skimp in this area, "muh battle tested reliability" or not.

For a hunting rig, I wouldn't bother.  If OP is looking to hunt and has good glass, save the dough. If it's a multipurpose setup, get them.

I voted yes, because generally I think cheap insurance is best.

Maybe after we see how the lawsuits shake-out.

Normally I would agree for a SHTF/duty/HD weapon....but.....
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/06/10/2021-12176/factoring-criteria-for-firearms-with-attached-stabilizing-braces

HD / SHTF / Work = Yes 100 %

My 20 inch Colt A4 has an aimpoint for anything out to 300, as it is not that easily adjustable on the fly.  Have a kac 200-600 rear for anything out to 600.  Just pop it up and dial it in.  

Sighted the kac out to 600 prior to putting the aimpoint on.  Then used it to aid in adjusting the aimpoint.  After verifying aimpoint set out to 300, turned the dot off, and verified kc still hit poa through the glass.  In all honesty, I was really impressed with the kac, but definitely prefer the aimpoint for closer/quicker.  I would strongly recommend both, especially if the rear buis is adjustable.  Extends your range considerably so, and definitely works if the optic fails.

Also have a carbine setup with only a DD1.5 rear and no optic.  I shot it once or twice at 600 at a CMP range.  Not really something I would rely on for anything further than 300.  Had to aim up in the number for the lane to hit the target.

Have another setup with a 2.5x10x40 for hunting.  Have not invested in a good qd option for scope, yet, to make buis a quickly usable option.  It is sort of like a classic hunting rifle, if scope fails - can remove scope, just not quickly, and use irons.  Options are good.

Like others mentioned, depends on purpose.