Dumb, dumb AR question...


PDA






TimboKhan
July 24, 2007, 05:17 AM
So, I am not a newbie to guns, and my fairly large armory and reasonably large library of firearms books will attest to that fact. However, I have what I view as a pretty stupid question about AR's, and even though I have no desire to be mocked for my incompetence, I just gotta ask...

My Bushmaster has a removable handle. Thats great. It also has the standard AR post front sight, which is not immediately removable. Thus, if I want to mount a scope or a red dot on the picatinny rail after removing the handle, doesn't it stand to reason that the post is going to be in the way? I don't happen to have a spare scope to mount it and see for myself, but just sort of looking at it leads me to believe it will....

Allright, let the mocking begin....

If you enjoyed reading about "Dumb, dumb AR question..." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Zeke Menuar
July 24, 2007, 05:25 AM
The A2 post won't show up in the scope.

I've had four scopes on my AR since I bought it. The post doesn't show up.

The is some sort of technical reason for the post not showing up. Not sure what it is.

Gratuitous AR nudity

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v145/ZekeMenuar1/RIM00005-1.jpg

ZM

Dionysusigma
July 24, 2007, 07:08 AM
It won't exactly "show up" per se, but it'll darken the image a tad on a scope with any sort of magnification.

On a holosight, however, it is distracting. :banghead: People talk about co-witnessing, but it (to me) isn't much more than denial that they didn't think things through too well on their setup. Co-witnessing (in my experience) puts way too much out there for the shooter to process if there's a lot going on. The dot gets in the way of the post, or due to parallax it's not even in the same spot. :scrutiny:

Never liked it, myself.

Dr. Dickie
July 24, 2007, 08:06 AM
The red dot on my AR is not a problem. The front post is way below the dot, I can just ignore it.

DMK
July 24, 2007, 08:27 AM
With a magnified optic, the front sight block is so far out of focus as to be invisible.

On a holosight, however, it is distracting. People talk about co-witnessing, but it (to me) isn't much more than denial that they didn't think things through too well on their setup. Co-witnessing (in my experience) puts way too much out there for the shooter to process if there's a lot going on. The dot gets in the way of the post, or due to parallax it's not even in the same spot.I use a red-dot co-witnessed to my sight. I actually leave my rear sight up too, looking through the rear aperture. No denial here, it works exactly how it should. If you are using your red-dot properly, you are focusing on your target, not the sights or the red-dot reticle. You could put tape over the front of your red-dot and it would still work (target in left eye, reticle in right). I think most folks that have trouble with this are trying to line everything up. Don't. Either use the dot (focusing on target) or use the sights (focusing on front sight post), don't use both at the same time. If you can't put the extraneous objects out of your mind while shooting, then this setup isn't for you.

Bartholomew Roberts
July 24, 2007, 08:34 AM
Except on very low magnification (1.1-2x) the front sight post will only show up as a vague shadow. This is because the front sight post is inside the focal length of the lens usually.

You can see the same thing with astronomical glass. Stand in front of someone's telescope while they are looking at the stars and it is as if they were looking right through you. No obstruction at all - just a shade darker.

TimboKhan
July 24, 2007, 03:40 PM
Huh. Interesting stuff about the scope. I can honestly say that I learned something today! I am a pretty big fan of iron sights, but I am also interested in a red dot of some sort so it's nice to know what I am faced with.

Geno
July 24, 2007, 03:54 PM
In a way it is a blessing. Let me explain. With my 1X reddot sight, the dot lies in perfect alignment with the very tip of the front sight. So, as I switch between iron sight and reddot, I have no worry about shifting zero. If my reddot shifts, it will be immediately observable. Too, the dot is larger than the sight, so it does not obstruct my line of fire.

On many of my early hunting rifles, I would intentionally mounted the scope as low rings, so that when set at 2, 3 or 4, I could see the iron sight through the scope, and thus check my scope's vertical crosshair against it. If life gives you lemons...

RockyMtnTactical
July 24, 2007, 03:57 PM
You may see the front site in the optics, but you hardly notice them. At least that is my experience. It may bother some people, but not me.

another okie
July 24, 2007, 10:42 PM
I don't think it's a dumb question. Good answers. I find the front sight distracting when using a red dot.

So I replaced the gas block with a G & G part that gives you rails on the top and sides, and then mounted a fold down front sight on the top rail.

Some folks don't like that because they want instant access to the iron sights if the batteries fail on the red dot.

If you enjoyed reading about "Dumb, dumb AR question..." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!