AR-15 - Do you prefer sights or scopes?

[ckcollins2003]

Just wondering what guys prefer on your Ar's, either iron type sights or scopes. Im looking to dive into the world of the Ar and mostly I like the open sights on the rifles I have now. But an Ar being a totally different animal over just a normal rifle, what do like for accuracy, target acquisition Which do you prefer and why?

Trijicon makes a great ACOG scope, which also has a built in "iron sight" feature. The rear sight is directly on top of the ACOG scope, which enables you to have both.

You can also get a riser for your scope mount and have the luxury of both worlds at once if you don't want to spend the money on an ACOG. The riser will set the scope high enough to look through your iron sights for closer range shooting.

For quick target acquisition I would suggest an open sight optic. Osprey makes a wonderful optic that you can usually find at gun shows for around $100, which is much much cheaper than your EOTech and does the exact same thing.

Hope this helps you decide what you want.

 

[sgreen3]

Deffinatly like the red dot in the first vid. But perhaps like was said maybe a bit of practice w/ the iron's would be in order before spending on a sight.

 

[ckcollins2003]

Most definitely use irons before spending the money on an optic. In boot camp we shot out to 500 yards with iron sights.

I'm not saying you will be as fast going between targets with irons as you will an optic but you will be just fine if you're only shooting groups or for fun. Until you go out to 300 yards or you are shooting multiple targets there's really no need for an optic.

 

[esrice]

Most definitely use irons before spending the money on an optic.

Agreed. Good quality optics are an expensive investment. Getting some time behind the gun with the irons will not only get you comfortable with handling the weapon in "back-up" configuration, but will also give you time to save up some $$ for the right optic.

A base model Aimpoint (with base model mount) will run $400. A Micro in a LaRue mount will go $600. An ACOG or Accupoint will run $800-1k. High-end long range magnification stuff goes from $1k and up!

 

[teddy12b]

Poor Teddy

Me??

 

[gunowner930]

Most definitely use irons before spending the money on an optic. In boot camp we shot out to 500 yards with iron sights.

I'm not saying you will be as fast going between targets with irons as you will an optic but you will be just fine if you're only shooting groups or for fun. Until you go out to 300 yards or you are shooting multiple targets there's really no need for an optic.

^therein lies the advantage of being equipped with an optic.

 

[sgreen3]

Yea it probably pay off practiceing with the irons first off to get a feel for the rifle. Then get a red dot for it. But I would say a red dot would work for what were wanting to do. With the Run an Gun course. But all in due time, lol

 

[451_Detonics]

Iron sights should always be considered the primary system on a combat rifle. Scopes and optics are easily damaged so being able to access and use the iron sights is an important skill. I keep the irons on most of my ARs and remove the carrying handle for optics...gives the best of both worlds with a good QD mount.

 

[ckcollins2003]

Yea it probably pay off practiceing with the irons first off to get a feel for the rifle. Then get a red dot for it. But I would say a red dot would work for what were wanting to do. With the Run an Gun course. But all in due time, lol

If you go with a red dot in due time, might I suggest an open style red dot, rather than a tube model? To each their own, but with the open, you have much more peripheral vision. If you go to a gun show sometime in the near future, find a stand with the Osprey red dot open sights. They have 4 different reticles and light up in red, green, and blue. They have all been tested for durability on a .50 BMG and only cost about $100.

You could go with Aimpoint or EOtech if you want a name brand model, but I can assure you that the Osprey is clear and easily seen even in the brightest daylight and will work just as well at a fraction of the cost.

I'm not a name brand junkie but I've played with an EOtech and there's not hardly any difference between it and the Osprey. Just my

 

[mrfjones]

I am really trying to decide this same thing for myself. I have two different buis that I like but I am really trying to decide whether i should scope it or use a red dot with a magnifier.

The info here is very good, thank you all

 

[Zephri]

I prefer fixed irons, no folding sights for me.

 

[Fordtough25]

I have to agree, fixed irons for me. I just don't care for the red dots, ACOG's are very nice but way expensive. The old peep sight serves me well in my shooting.

 

[esrice]

If you go with a red dot in due time, might I suggest an open style red dot, rather than a tube model? To each their own, but with the open, you have much more peripheral vision.

I have to disagree here. When using a red dot sight, you shoot with both eyes open, which means that while one eye looks down through the tube and at the dot, the other looks down the side, completing your peripheral vision. This means that the sight body virtually disappears, leaving you with seeing just the dot. The Aimpoint rep actually touches on this in the first video posted above. Unfortunately you can't really capture this in a picture or video, as you must be physically behind the gun to experience it.

Tube-style sights are often more rugged due to their round design. Also, due to the round viewing window, they can be used as a makeshift rear "ghost ring" in the event that the electronics go down.

"Open" red dots suffer from having the emitter out in the "open", meaning it can become blocked by debris.

You could go with Aimpoint or EOtech if you want a name brand model, but I can assure you that the Osprey is clear and easily seen even in the brightest daylight and will work just as well at a fraction of the cost.

I'm not a name brand junkie but I've played with an EOtech and there's not hardly any difference between it and the Osprey. Just my

Brand name fanfare aside, an Aimpoint/EOTech will outperform an Osprey RDS by far. The difference between them and an Osprey is going to be ruggedness, reliability over time, ability to maintain zero, and battery life.

At the end of the day, however, its up to the buyer to decide what level of performance is necessary for his/her shooting regimen.

 

[dom1104]

I dont have as much energy as Esrice does to give differing opinions...

But I will not be selling my aimpoint to buy some chinese red dot.

Not on my goto gun anyhow.

 

[U.S. Patriot]

I prefer iron sights. Unless I plan on shooting 100+ yards on a regular basis. You can be just as fast and accurate without an optic, it's a matter of practice. I see to many people at the range, that become reliant on their optics, yet have never properly sighted in their iron sights. If you optic fails, what then? Before I added an optic, I would become comfortable using iron sights first.

 

[esrice]

I prefer iron sights. Unless I plan on shooting 100+ yards on a regular basis. You can be just as fast and accurate without an optic, it's a matter of practice.

But isn't everything a matter of practice? The same guy shooting the same gun will always be faster with a red dot than with irons-- always.

I see to many people at the range, that become reliant on their optics, yet have never properly sighted in their iron sights. If you optic fails, what then? Before I added an optic, I would become comfortable using iron sights first.

Amen. Always have a backup (that you know how to use ).

 

[Zephri]

Just a note on the shooting with both eyes open thing with reddots, it doesn't work well with a lazy eye.

When I try this my left eye looks down the sight and my right looks at the ground, which splits the image.

Just one thing to consider with them.

 

[451_Detonics]

The same guy shooting the same gun will always be faster with a red dot than with irons-- always.

I would disagree with this. With a peep sight like the AR has the dot may have an edge up close but at 50 on out I can be as just fast with the aperture sight. It is the same principle, you need only put the front sight on the target and squeeze. Your eye will automatically center the front sight in the aperture once you are use to it.

 

[esrice]

I would disagree with this. With a peep sight like the AR has the dot may have an edge up close but at 50 on out I can be as just fast with the aperture sight.

While I agree with this in principle, keep in mind that most red dots sights are used 100 yards and in, with the majority being contact to 50 yards. Otherwise you're getting into an irons vs. magnified optics debate.

The part that slows you down with irons is in the initial lining up of your eye to the rear peep, and then to the front sight. A red dot cuts down that time by only having a single point to "line up".

A red dot also makes it easier to hit from awkward positions where lining up the rear and front sight may be more difficult.

 

[ckcollins2003]

I have to disagree here. When using a red dot sight, you shoot with both eyes open, which means that while one eye looks down through the tube and at the dot, the other looks down the side, completing your peripheral vision. This means that the sight body virtually disappears, leaving you with seeing just the dot. The Aimpoint rep actually touches on this in the first video posted above. Unfortunately you can't really capture this in a picture or video, as you must be physically behind the gun to experience it.

Tube-style sights are often more rugged due to their round design. Also, due to the round viewing window, they can be used as a makeshift rear "ghost ring" in the event that the electronics go down.

"Open" red dots suffer from having the emitter out in the "open", meaning it can become blocked by debris.


Brand name fanfare aside, an Aimpoint/EOTech will outperform an Osprey RDS by far. The difference between them and an Osprey is going to be ruggedness, reliability over time, ability to maintain zero, and battery life.

Shooting with both eyes open is a personal preference. I don't shoot with both eyes open, I was taught and trained to only shoot with my dominant eye, which is my right eye. I find my shots to be much more accurate, which is why I use the open sight rather than tube. I can see my targets with one eye closed while still maintaining great accuracy, as opposed to looking through a tube which blocks my vision.

I've tried both, I prefer open sights to tube. You may shoot with both eyes open and not lose peripheral vision, but most shooters shoot with 1 eye closed.

As far as the Osprey optics, I think performance on a RDS depends more on the shooter than it does the sight itself. As long as both hold zero and the batteries work, it's up to the shooter to make the shot count.

Just because they are made with foreign parts and sold for $300-$400 less than the US made ones doesn't mean they are "crap". Look at Honda and Toyota's, chinese SKS's for a firearm example... I love my uncle's chinese SKS. You can't convince me that chinese/japanese made parts are "crap"...

I don't mean to argue on here but I feel you should take into account that some people might not have $500 to spend on an optic, or even want to spend on an optic for a backyard paper puncher... Also, people shoot different ways. Not everyone is going to shoot with both eyes open even with a red dot. I don't feel comfortable shooting that way, and I'm much more accurate my way because I am used to it.

I own this one
HGMD

And I can tell you right now that it holds zero with no problems at $450 less than an EOtech. Yes, it's battery isn't going to live as long, and I wouldn't recommend taking it for a swim in the ocean, but for a backyard paper puncher it sure as hell beats spending $550. Use the other $450 and get a new pistol or some ammo if ya want...