AR15 optics-Do we really need "tactical"?

[TechBrute]

The AR-15 is the Barbie doll of guns. You can dress it up in so many cute outfits. The only real absolute reason to have a red dot sight is for low light shooting. Iron sights will do the rest.

My list of unnecessary stuff to dress up your AR-15

Mag pull gizmos
Fancy side mount sling attachments
Gadgets that hook one mag to the other
Vertical grip thingies
$350 Surefire integrated lights (a $30 light and duct tape will work)
Collapsible stocks
Extended charger handles
Hogue grips
Weapons mounted mag carriers

The list could go on. But, what would the bored gun owner do with all his extra money?

There is soooo much wrong with this that it's going to take me forever to type out this reply.

The only real absolute reason to have a red dot sight is for low light shooting. Iron sights will do the rest.

Ummm... no. Red dots are quicker to aquire, easier to shoot with both eyes open, and are often more accurate. Do a search. Read. Learn. Try one. Then tell Pat Rogers that they are unnecessary.

My list of unnecessary stuff to dress up your AR-15

Unecessary for whom?

Mag pull gizmos

I'm sure that the shooting you do never leaves a bench, so yes, maybe these are unecessary for you. However, if you decide to actually use your rifle one day, let me know how it goes. If you'd like to have a better chance at getting a positive hold on your mag and inserting it into the gun, instead of inadvertantly throwing it at your target, you may want to look into these "gizmos."

Fancy side mount sling attachments

Yes, these are clearly worthless, as it's always better to try untangle your body from your 1800's era sling while transitioning to a sidearm.

Gadgets that hook one mag to the other

Yeah, those silly soldiers that duct tape their mags together REALLY have no need for a quick reload.

Vertical grip thingies

Yes, ergonomics are clearly unnecessary. Come to think of it, let's all go back to straight stocks since a pistol grip in the rear is unnecessary, too.

$350 Surefire integrated lights (a $30 light and duct tape will work)

Um... do I even need to address this? Let me know when you find a $30 light that can compare to ANY Surefire.

Collapsible stocks

Yeah, easier storage and variable length of pull... completely unnecessary.

Extended charger handles

I don't know why I didn't think of this. Clearly, fumbling around with gloved hands desperately trying to grab the tiny charging handle is the way to go. While you're at it, let's lump the PRI Gas Buster handle in with this one and say that it's much better to take a faceful of gas with every trigger pull than to have the gas rerouted out the side.

Hogue grips

Yes, why would we want a positive grip and a comfortable hold when we could have a hard, slick, $2 piece of plastic instead.

Weapons mounted mag carriers

Yeah, why would we actually want the ammo WITH the gun? Actually, let's look at moving the primary mag out of the gun, as well. Why have a mag at all? Let's just load the gun one round at a time!

The list could go on. But, what would the bored gun owner do with all his extra money?

Of course we'd spend it on an ISP so that we could read more of these enlightened posts.

 

[TechBrute]

Sorry about the sarcastic thread hijack...

Anyway, to address the original question:

Half the discussion has been done in the many "why buy a more expensive scope when there are $30 scopes out there" threads. As far as specifically addressing the "tactical" aspect, you need to examine what makes it tactical in the first place. Practical and durable would be two things that spring to mind.

 

[artherd]

But it fails miserably at the Tacticalicious test, I'm afraid.

Are you kidding? There's plenty 'tactical' about a scoped AR! (and the difference between a Nightforce and that Weaver is negligible. To say the least. BOTH are hunting scopes, just hunting different things )

The ACOG is a great 4x scope that weighs as much (and has many of the benefits of) a Red-dot.

You pay for the ruggedness and the benefits of both with the feather-weight.



You mention self-defense as a possible use, does your life depend on your gun or not?

The AR is one of the best weapons platforms in the world, it is deserved of a world-class optic.


But The BSA might work just fine, and as long as it dosen't brake, you're good to go and better equiped than most!

 

[another okie]

Billl223's idea of the Leupold XV-2 1x4 sounds great to me. I looked in Natchez's catalog, and it's fairly moderately priced.
I'd like to hear more about it.
It seems like the true 1 power setting would let you do whatever you needed at short range. Four power is plenty for almost any purpose for which I would ever use my AR. I may have to go with that.

 

[Gewehr98]

I agree with TechBrute.

Dave 30.06 is wrong in his description:

The AR-15 is the Barbie doll of guns. You can dress it up in so many cute outfits.

A more accurate description of the AR-15 is that it's the Honda Civic of guns. It can work just fine as is, but why leave it alone?


And for the record, I'm issued an FN M16A2 as my ground firearm in Tent City when I'm not packing an M9 for my normal aircrew duties. No magpuls or Hogues on our guns, unfortunately Uncle Sam didn't see fit to issue them to us plain-vanilla GI poseurs.

 

[mark mcj]

Yuo haven't missed the low drag, tactial, all black anything. The flexability of the AR is one of it's top most features.
For your task a 20 inch goverment barrel and an adjustable scope sounds great. For durability go chrome lined and get a boresnake.

An AR can be anything.

 

[Lumpy196]

NEED is a word anti-gun politicians use...

 

[dave3006]

Techbrute, you may want those fancy do-dads, you may like those fancy do-dads. But, you don't NEED those fancy do-dads.

A good rifleman can hit with iron sights in the daytime.
I manage to get my mags out of my pouch without the Mag pull gizmos
My sling works just fine.
Gadgets hooking one mag to the other are unnecessary if you have a good gear
Vertical grip thingies are silly. You can't seriously say you NEED them to shoot.
I taped a Surefire Nitrolon to my Garand handguard and shot a class just fine.
Collapsible stocks. More fragile and less reliable than fixed.
Extended charger handles. Who cares?
Hogue grips are a want not a need.
Weapons mounted mag carriers. See note on mag gadgets above.

AR-15 the barbie doll of guns for people with lots of time and money on their hands.

 

[fix]

A good rifleman can hit with iron sights in the daytime.

True, but are you willing to remove all the optics from your weapons?

I manage to get my mags out of my pouch without the Mag pull gizmos

Not as fast or as sure as you could with the mag pulls.

My sling works just fine.

For what? It's all about context. If all you're doing is carrying the gun with it, then sure. But if you are using it as a "holster" then you will find it seriously lacking.

Gadgets hooking one mag to the other are unnecessary if you have a good gear

These I can take or leave, but there's no denying that reloads are faster with them.

Vertical grip thingies are silly. You can't seriously say you NEED them to shoot.

Well, you don't NEED a stock to shoot either. You don't NEED a lot of things.

I taped a Surefire Nitrolon to my Garand handguard and shot a class just fine.

I'm not even gonna address the tape issue.

Collapsible stocks. More fragile and less reliable than fixed.

True, but as mentioned above, you don't NEED a stock to fire the weapon. Furthermore, the new Magpull stock is arguably as tough as they come, though pricey.

Extended charger handles. Who cares?

Someone wearing gloves.

Hogue grips are a want not a need.

See above. I suppose the pistol grip is just a want as well.

Weapons mounted mag carriers. See note on mag gadgets above.

Your note actually applies to this one. I've never felt that these were useful.

You seem to have an aversion to all things tactical. The term is so overused and frankly misused that it's getting pathetic. Practical is a much better term. Anything that enhances your performance as a shooter in your given role should not be ruled out just because you're afraid of being called a poser. To do so is not only silly, but pretty short sighted if you ask me. Employing equipment and tactics in use by those who use their guns for a living is a pretty logical thing if you ask me. Folks who use their guns for a living have this tendency to know what they're talking about. But apparently, as far as you're concerned, they are a bunch of idiots playing with their toys. They should follow the lead of "serious riflemen" such as yourself I guess. The taped on flashlight comment does have a certain amount of entertainment value though.

 

[Joe Demko]

I'm not even gonna address the tape issue.

Why not? I've used tape, sometimes in conjuction with zip ties, to attach lights to several different long guns. Not as tactical as a dedicated mount, but nowhere near as expensive and it does work.

 

[fix]

If there's absolutely no other way, then tape is all you've got. Nothing wrong with that. But Dave seems to be advocating tape as THE WAYâ„¢.

Not as tactical as a dedicated mount

There's that word again. :banghead:

 

[TechBrute]

Well, Dave, you don't NEED a Garand. Why don't you just use a muzzleloader with a candle on it?

The Garand is a natural progression of a flintlock muzzleloading rifle. The AR is a natural progression of the Garand. You don't NEED a self-loading rifle. Is it better to have? Probably? Who are you to define people's needs?

A good rifleman can hit with iron sights in the daytime.

That same rifleman can hit quicker with a red dot.

I manage to get my mags out of my pouch without the Mag pull gizmos

I don't think I'd be satisfied with "manage" if my life depends on it. I'm going to find the absolute best way to get them out. Period. If it's a "gizmo" on the bottom of the mag, then so be it. I think everyone can "manage" to get their mags out.

My sling works just fine.

I'm sure it does, but I bet you have a nice nylon web sling or leather sling, right? You dont' really NEED that sling, do you? you could get by with a good pair of shoelaces tied together on your rifle. Why did you spend money on that fancy-schmancy sling when there's probably some rope in your garage?

Gadgets hooking one mag to the other are unnecessary if you have a good gear

What's good gear? Are you wearing your good gear when you wake in the middle of the night? Should you put your LBV on to hike to the latrine across camp? Again, mags themselves are completely unnecessary. People got by with muzzleloaders. Your line of thinking would still have us there.

Vertical grip thingies are silly. You can't seriously say you NEED them to shoot.

Wow. I can't believe I'm discussing a statement like, "Vertical grip thingies are silly." Anyway, it's for ergonomics. You're obviously beyond logical reasoning at this point.

taped a Surefire Nitrolon to my Garand handguard and shot a class just fine.

Why did you use a Surefire? You don't really NEED a Surefire. A $2.99 flashlight from Kmart would work, as would a candle. Hell, God gave us night vision for a reason, right? Let's just do away with all illumination, because we don't NEED it.

Collapsible stocks. More fragile and less reliable than fixed.

Yes, and fixed stocks don't transition well between body armor and no body armor, or winter coats v. t-shirts, they take more space, etc. Who are you to tell someone what they NEED?

Extended charger handles. Who cares?

Um... I think the guy trying to get the handle back in a crisis might care.

Hogue grips are a want not a need.

Here we go again. A semi-auto rifle is a want, not a need. Heck, the plastic A2 piece of crap is a want, not a need. Ask all the people that take the pistol grips off to get around stupid gun laws.

Weapons mounted mag carriers. See note on mag gadgets above.

Same here.

You have a strange ideal of what's a want and need. You're absolutly right that no one NEEDs any of this. But then again, no one needs an extra mag. Why don't we just shoot the gun dry and then reload the one mag we've got? Why have mags? Why don't you use a flintlock?

Your logic defies every accepted principal of improvement. If we NEED mags, why don't we NEED the best way to get at them? Heck, the belt carrier, vest, or chest harness that you carry extra mags in aren't NEEDed. Just put the mags in your pockets. No pockets? Just lay them on the ground, or carry them in your other hand. You don't really NEED anything better than that, do you?

 

[DMK]

Even better than tape: pieces of bicycle tube.

 

[fix]

Why don't you just use a muzzleloader with a candle on it?

 

[dave3006]

"You're absolutly right that no one NEEDs any of this."

Techbrute, I am glad you finally came around. You were too "needy" before. Now things are better.

The difference is that you can get the job done without these things. That makes them "wants". I didn't say that was bad or that you couldn't buy them. Only pinko communist Democrats would dare to say we can't have them because we don't need them.

The AR-15 the barbie doll of guns because it is fun to dress her up. It is just like my wife wanting to buy her 23rd pair of shoes (that look like all the rest) I didn't say she couldn't buy them. Just don't try to convince me or yourself you need them.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

The difference is that you can get the job done without these things. That makes them "wants".

So your argument is that nobody NEEDS to acquire the target faster, manipulate the weapon faster and more positively, engage in low light better, and ID targets more accurately?

I would think if someone was shooting at you, you'd need those things in the worst way possible.

 

[dave3006]

Bart, based on your logic, if I don't have that vertical hand grip thingie for my AR, then I'm a dead man walking in my next SHTF scenario with my AR?

You guys are needy!

 

[fix]

Always assume that your opponent has equal or greater skill than you. That said, if you get into a mano a mano fight with some guy who is every bit as skilled as yourself, but he has superior equipment...you are more likely to be the recipient of a good ole fashioned eye thump at the end of the encounter. You can count on luck if you want. I'd rather have skills and good equipment.

 

[uglygun]

Not sure if it's been recommended yet or not...


But if a person can't afford the Trijicon ACOG line of scopes, look towards their dual illumination Variable power 1.5-4x scope with the triangle reticle.

Can get them for down around 350 dollars if I recall correctly, it's a decent scope for 3 gun if you get the thing mounted correctly. The low end works well at closer distances while the higher magnification is good for the 150-200 yard plates.

They are on my list of optics to get for my AR15s eventually.


I've got a virtual plethora of scopes that I need to get, some high dollar stuff like Nightforce for my long range project rigs, to less expensive scopes that fill in a niche that nothing I currently own can manage to do.



As for the off topic stroll down the list of "who needs", I'm not gonna go there because if we want to play that game we're not a whole lot better than the anti-gunners who pigeon hole us and state "nobody needs" with reference to AK47 clones and the like.


I love my Surefire 500A that sits on my carbine, I got it for a song too(one of the few satisfied Botach customers) and that 225 lumens of light at closer ranges is fairly comparable to the output of a 500k candle power spot light. I love my Aimpoint Comp M, got it for a song too. Together they make for a nasty little setup. Do I "need" either of those two things, probably not but I'd say it doesn't hurt to have them and I may one day appreciate them being there if I have to call on them in the middle of the night.

oh, I also have a magazine holder on the rifle, a Johnson Redimag. I figure if I am hoping out of bed in the middle of the night, I might not have a pocket or place to hold a spare magazine. Would rather keep the spare with the rifle as I might not have time to put on a pair of shorts, boxer shorts that is.


Is my rifle a bit heavy? Yeah, but no more so than that of my 20inch barreled 870 loaded with 7 in the tube and 1 in the chamber. The AR has a shorter overall length and exhibits less recoil(heck, being so heavy it's virtually nill). My hope is I won't need more than 1-2 shots, but it doesn't hurt to have the additional capability.

 

[dave3006]

Our problem as gun owners is that we HAVE been arguing our rights on a needs basis. That is why we are losing.

We don't need AR-15s, AKs, or the like to protect ourselves. You will never convince any anti of this fact.

HOWEVER, living in a free country demands that we have the right to own them based on the fact that we want them because they are our right to own. You have more of a right to a fully automatic M16 than you do to a Ruger 10/22. Do you need a M16? Nope. Is it your right? Yes. The constitution says so and you want it. In a free country, that is good enough.

Arguing the gun issue based on need falls into their trap.

The communist motto: From each according to his ability, to each according to his NEED.

 

[fix]

 

[TechBrute]

Our problem as gun owners is that we HAVE been arguing our rights on a needs basis. That is why we are losing.

We don't need AR-15s, AKs, or the like to protect ourselves. You will never convince any anti of this fact.

HOWEVER, living in a free country demands that we have the right to own them based on the fact that we want them because they are our right to own. You have more of a right to a fully automatic M16 than you do to a Ruger 10/22. Do you need a M16? Nope. Is it your right? Yes. The constitution says so and you want it. In a free country, that is good enough.

Arguing the gun issue based on need falls into their trap.

The communist motto: From each according to his ability, to each according to his NEED.

Believe it or not, I actually see where he's going with this... took me a second, and he's a little off track, but I get it.

He's referring to the people that argue that we NEED guns for hunting.

Here's what I have to say: We NEED that full-auto BMG, M16, and M60, because if the .gov gets too uppity, the Founding Fathers wanted us to be able to overthrow them, and that's the equipment they've got.

Liberals aren't too interested in authorial intent. They like to wordsmith. If the Founding Fathers were alive today to redraft the 2nd Amendment, it would be 45 pages, but it would spell out the individual's right in language that even feinswine would understand.

 

[Gewehr98]

Bart, I see where your argument is going.

I would think if someone was shooting at you, you'd need those things in the worst way possible.

But in a SHTF scenario (another over-used term, much like "tactical") I'd be hell of a lot more afraid of somebody who knew how to use one of these, properly trained and sans doo-dads:



Than the person who relied on all of this to make him/her an instant rifleman:

Note the filename of the second pic. These guns, and their owners, are getting turned away after showing up at rifle courses like Thunder Ranch and Gunsite, where the guns earned the name of "Rooney Guns" from none other than Hizzonner Jeff Cooper - somebody I'd be hard-pressed to argue tactics with.

 

[TechBrute]

G98, you're making the assumption that someone with the bling-bling RELIES on them to make him an instant rifleman. Go tell Pat Rogers that his Aimpoint M68 doesn't improve his performance, or accuse him of relying on it.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

I'd be hell of a lot more afraid of somebody who knew how to use one of these, properly trained and sans doo-dads

Gewehr98, I don't think anybody is arguing that an untrained person is more dangerous than a trained one or that rifle accessories of any type replace training.

Having said that, a lot of that gear IS a force multiplier. Shooters, from experienced to novice, benefit from such gear (particularly optics).

If anything seems dangerous to me, it is the presumption that you can accurately judge the skill of the user by the gear on his rifle. I don't think that is case whether you favor your rifles plain or tacticalized. For all any of us know, some of the most decked out rifles may belong to the most skilled shooters - or it might be a mix.

Note the filename of the second pic. These guns, and their owners, are getting turned away after showing up at rifle courses like Thunder Ranch and Gunsite, where the guns earned the name of "Rooney Guns" from none other than Hizzonner Jeff Cooper - somebody I'd be hard-pressed to argue tactics with.

The gun in that picture is a joke and the picture originally appeared at AR15.com. If there is any evidence that somebody showed up to Gunsite or Thunder Ranch with a rifle that remotely resembled that configuration, I'd love to see it.

Actually, I had a discussion with Pat Rogers at AR15.com regarding the phrase "rooney guns" and gear that would go well with this thread. I'll have to dig it up when the search engine is back up over there.