Does anyone actually do this? (From Gundigest)

Status
Not open for further replies.

zombienerd

Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2008
Messages
672
Location
New Hampshire
Now introducing "Home boy sights for your AR-15"

http://gundigest.com/article/GunDigest-09-17-09-Sighting-options-AR-15/

I'm all for finding quicker ways to get on target, but the picture just made me laugh as loud as I could. It just looks ridiculous.

Shooting-JP-sight_450.jpg
 
I've seen a number of 3-gun competition carbines set up with back-up or close range sights set at an angle to the primary optic. The idea is that as you move through a stage you can shift almost instantly between two or even three sighting systems, depending on range -vs.- speed -vs.- precision of the shot.

A "race" AR might have a 4x scope set up low on the flat-top rail, a red-dot or holo-sight mounted on top of that scope tube as a close-range speed sight, and a short iron-sight rail mounted on an angle to one side. If something fails, or just isn't optimal for a particular shot, you can rotate the gun slightly and make the shot with a different sight. Much faster than hitting your QD scope mount levers, removing and stowing the scope, raising your BUIS and getting back on target.

Justin and some of the more serious 3-gun competitors can probably give you a more complete explanation.
 
As funny as the Glock sights ad is (or was when it was first posted ... like 7 years ago), that's not what's going on in that picture.

There is a practical reason for having sights set up like that on a carbine as explained above. The name is just a humorous bon mot.
 
I've seen a number of 3-gun competition carbines set up with back-up or close range sights set at an angle to the primary optic. The idea is that as you move through a stage you can shift almost instantly between two or even three sighting systems, depending on range -vs.- speed -vs.- precision of the shot.

It makes sense. I can see why one would do it, it just looks so... Awkward.

I would have never thought of putting a BUIS system on a side rail and turning the gun on it's side... Looks uncomfortable.

I was just wondering how often people do it, if you're saying you've seen this on a regular basis at competition, that's interesting. Makes me wonder how many people have brass land down their collar, and if being closer to the ejection port causes any "discomfort" with the angle of the powder discharge. Any burned noses?
 
I think my greatest concern would also be where is that hot brass going to go when the rifle is held on its side like that. Other than that, the multiple sighting planes makes a good deal of practical sense. Semper Paratus.
 
Left handed shooters, or anyone shooting from the weak side are used to having their face near the ejection port anyway... not a problem; not even noticable if you do it all the time. There are even certain advantages to it.
 
I have shot my revolvers and M1911's Home Boy style, and you can still place your shots if you use your sights.

I have no idea why the guy is holding his rifle sideways, but it will still function, and for the distances he is shooting, it won't make much of a difference in point of impact.

Never tried such a thing at 600 yards. Don't know how I would arrange the sling for one thing.
 
I have no idea why the guy is holding his rifle sideways, but it will still function, and for the distances he is shooting, it won't make much of a difference in point of impact.

Look at the picture, up on the fore end mounted to the quad rail is a non magnifying red dot. On the top is a Scope of unknown X power, going to guess at a 4X. The scope is for long range the red dot gives quick target finds at closer distances. A few guys use this for 3 gun, I use something along the same idea only its mounted on the top only. I have a Trijicon red dot non magnifying, behind that is a Larue flip up "poor boy" 3 X I can quickly switch them for close or far shots depending. I have my switches planned out during my walk through.
 
When shooting from an odd position or angle, or from under or around cover you can't always hold your rifle in a vertical orientation. The offset sights allow for a much easier and more accurate shot than shooting "from the hip" because you can't get a proper sight picture, or cheek weld due to position or obstructions such as shooting under a car or around the end of your couch for instance.
 
NY32182
Left handed shooters, or anyone shooting from the weak side are used to having their face near the ejection port anyway... not a problem; not even noticable if you do it all the time. There are even certain advantages to it.

Speaking as a southpaw, what? I've only shot a couple autoloading rifles, and even that was a couple years ago, but how can there be advantages?
 
Speaking as a southpaw, what? I've only shot a couple autoloading rifles, and even that was a couple years ago, but how can there be advantages?

Operate a kalashnikov right and then left handed and you will see.
 
Im assuming that they act as secondary sights when you lean around a corner for whatever reason? the pistol sights make me wonder...
 
i had one setup like that for a while, although i didn't have to cant my gun nearly as far as the pic in the OP... more like the pic in post 14.
 
As an Industrial Engineer who specializes in ergonomic evaluations, I would tend to think that this type of aiming system would be fairly effective. If you hold an imaginary gun (try to imagine a standard AR configuration) the way you normally shoot, your right elbow is tucked into your ribcage. Let that elbow float to where it is most comfortable… and ‘Bam’… the angle of the trigger grip would make the aiming configuration in the picture seem natural.

On the flip side of the coin… while the trigger finger / hand / arm is in a more comfortable position, the left hand, which supports the weight of the firearm, is more subject to fatigue. That fatigue is what leads to poor accuracy and an unsteady muzzle.

Overall, I would think the change would be for someone who wants to draw attention to themselves at the range. The sight picture orientation change would not cause more than a minimal (nearly non-existent) improvement in accuracy.

Note: the above analysis was base solely on the inspection of the picture. I have never seen nor hear-of any such aiming configurations.
 
Ehhh... Call me the only skeptic in this group if you'd like, but I don't see much need for this outside of (maybe) the competition arena. I operate with a rifle for work, and I've never had enough problems negotiating corners/cover that I would see a need for a such a system. As for the short vs. long range sighting systems, I consider that argument to be moot. An AR-15 can easily be deployed to 500 yards with iron sights, let alone with some type of optic (my gun wears an Eotech).

Items used in competition are not always the same as on the street. I haven't competed much in events that use carbine rifles, so I'll leave that aspect of this sight system discussion to the more experienced 3-gunners among us. But, on the street (or on a battle field) I believe that simple is often better. Some of the guys in my department have rifles that look to have nearly 20lbs worth of useless crap hanging off of them. My rifle is setup with an Eotech, a flashlight, and a sling. The rifle also wears a set of Troy flip up sights, but I don't consider this redundancy entirely necessary in police work... Either system works fine on its own merits.

But, hey, everyone can spend their money as they choose, and if I ever see one of you guys at the range with a setup like this, you can be sure that I'll ask to try it out :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top