Quoted:
People get fixed front sights because they are less expensive and they have an unreasonable fear that a folding fron sight is somehow not tough enough... yet they run a folding rear and think nothing of it.  I also dont use the front slign swivel (I used a QD socket on the rail) and dont use the bayonette lug.

I prefer the folding front for the sight picture, the real estate on the rail, the look, and the weight.  You can actually cut weight by getting a light folding front sight, low profile gas block, and a rail that extends 2" longer than a comparable set up with a fixed FSB complete with bayonette lug and front sling swivel.  Not much, but you CAN get it lighter.

Quoted:
I don't have much, if any experience shooting an AR15 with an optic. Right now I am spending most of my time shooting a basic M4 type carbine (Stag) with a F type front sight and a fold down rear.

I am putting together another carbine, 16" mid length, and want to put an optic on it.

With respect to either a scope, (ike an accupoint) or something like a EOTECH/Aimpoint, what are the pros and cons of having either a fixed front sight or a folding front sight?

I like the simplicity of having a fixed front sight but I am concerned that it might get in the way/field of view while using an optic.

Quoted:
Id argue my reasons are pretty accurate...  and why do you run fixed front and rear?  IMO its always about speed of getting the BUIS into action or lack of reliability in the folding units if it si not price.  Yet, I have never heard of anyone who had a good optic fail AND didnt have the time to deploy a set of BUIS.  If your case is different it will the first time I have heard a reason other than those two.

We have guys who have fixed FSB in my department on their patrol rifles.  Its USUALLY a cost issue, with an occasional reliability claim.  Its no different with the recreational shooters here I know and shoot with.

I think not only are you wrong on cost having nothing to do with it, but it is the PRIMARY reason people dont use them.  If it were free to try both set ups and there was no price difference for people buying them, folding front sights would dominate the market IMO.

Comparing free to the cost of a new longer rail (that is more expensive, a low profile gas block or paying to cut one down and the cost of a Troy front that is a major deterant.

Quoted:


So you dont want the folding front because of a perceived reliability issue... is that correct? Or is the simplicity you reffer to about the speed in getting it into action?

Quoted:
Id argue my reasons are pretty accurate...  and why do you run fixed front and rear?  IMO its always about speed of getting the BUIS into action or lack of reliability in the folding units if it si not price.  Yet, I have never heard of anyone who had a good optic fail AND didnt have the time to deploy a set of BUIS.  If your case is different it will the first time I have heard a reason other than those two.

We have guys who have fixed FSB in my department on their patrol rifles.  Its USUALLY a cost issue, with an occasional reliability claim.  Its no different with the recreational shooters here I know and shoot with.

I think not only are you wrong on cost having nothing to do with it, but it is the PRIMARY reason people dont use them.  If it were free to try both set ups and there was no price difference for people buying them, folding front sights would dominate the market IMO.

Comparing free to the cost of a new longer rail (that is more expensive, a low profile gas block or paying to cut one down and the cost of a Troy front that is a major deterant.