>>64909225
Nope, you're correct. Especially with 5.56, you could just set it to 100 and use it as a point blank zero clear to 300 yards with no real problem. The concept of dialing your irons for range compensation is absurd.
>Tell me what imagined scenario you have in mind where you need to shoot beyond point blank range with your backup iron sights
The real reason is because older rifles had them for indirect volley fire that literally never happened. So then when boomers got ahold of the AR they said "what the actual fuck where is my range adjustment I need my range adjustment" even though they most definitively did not.

>>64909240
3, 4, 5, 6, + battle sight/night sight, is not an unusual arrangement. If you don't like it, don't use it.

>>64909225
Neat blog post, it'll effect nobody but yourself. Congrats on having an opinion.

>>64909243
indeed, it's not unusual. It is entirely pointless however.

>>64909249
For whom? What makes your standards universal to everyone?

>>64909254
>For whom?
People with 5.56 rifles.
>What makes your standards universal to everyone?
Because I said so.

>>64909246
>it'll effect nobody but yourself.
good morning, saar!
>>64909240
>The real reason is because older rifles had them for indirect volley fire that literally never happened.
they absolutely did the volley shit. It's just they did it in like the late 1800s. They were still lining up like Napoleon war style in the late 19th century because they didn't have a better way of organizing troops due to lack of radios or other types of communication and they would fucking volley fire at each other. That's why the US and bong governments both flipped out about "snipers" using 7mm mauser in the spanish American war and boer war and why we ditched the krag and the .30-40 and why the bongs tried to ditch the enfield and .303 before WWI

>>64909258
there is zero appreciable difference in range between .30-40 krag and 30'06. That has nothing to do with anything dork.

>>64909243
>>64909254
that's a lot of settings with basically no purpose. You can get a 5.56 rifle to shoot point blank out to 300 yards without a significant parabola since 5.56 is so flat shooting and you're not going to hit men outside of 300 yards anyway

>>64909257
>because I said so
Well then
>>64909258
>good morning saar
It's 10:17pm where I am, that's pretty far from Bombay or Bangalore. Congrats to you for also having an opinion, a rare achievement these days

>>64909259
go fucking read the army reports. they were seething about snipers on san juan hill. (which is even dumber because the rough riders had trapdoor springfields and not krags). I'm not saying it wasn't retarded. I'm saying that's why they changed rounds
>>64909268
a native english speaker knows the difference between affect and effect, saar!

>>64909258
Good morning Saar! Hope you are having a good day

>>64909261
>you're not going to hit men outside of 300 yards anyway
isnt it amazing how far iron sight standards have degraded in 20 years. now its impossible.

>>64909271
>>64909258
Indian detected, you can't fool me Patel

>>64909277
Funny, isn't it? One generation of internet experts, suddenly everything prior to them is not only wrong but flatly idiotic. Millennial arrogance is only matched by boomer arrogance, even then it's fucking close

>>64909271
>I'm not saying it wasn't retarded. I'm saying that's why they changed rounds
fair enough ok
>>64909277
They haven't degraded. No military has ever been combat effective at distances greater than that with irons.
>b-but I can hit an unmoving brightly painted target at 1000 yards all day long!
that's great

>>64909274
>>64909281
damn you are mad as FUCK you got called out on confusing effect with affect, saar!
>>64909277
literally every army study since WWII has shown most combat happens within 300 yards

>>64909225
Yeah I think it's retarded also. I have matech and kac buis and they have that (the max is incredibly intricate) but I never saw a point. I just zeroed them at 50 yards and called it a day.

>>64909293
>>b-but I can hit an unmoving brightly painted target at 1000 yards all day long!
not even 1000
350-400 is totally possible

>>64909337
Statistically untrue

File: Cover-ACOG.png (577.6 KB)

577.6 KB PNG

>>64909225
>hes back for more

>>64909306
>a small retort taken as a tell-tale sign
Again, Patel, convincing work, but not good enough

Retarded armchair general should be its own regular thread.

>>64909337
>>64909288
yeah on a flat kd range at a target that's super visible and not trying to avoid fire or shoot back at you

>>64909350
read the army manual, no gunz. there is no 200m aiming point. it's not a target shooting optic for high power. the army manual literally says if someone is within 300 meters aim with both eyes open and start shooting when any of the red is on the target
>>64909360
you literally got caught ESLing affect and effect and now you're mad as fuck, ESL

>>64909364
tell me more about how you use the adjustments on your sights in the middle of combat and don't just use the battle sights

>>64909410
Tell me more about how you've been in combat vs reading about it

>>64909415
not him but I put the ACOG reticle on the guy and I pull the trigger. He hits the ground. If it wasn't an ACOG it was an eokek, guess what, dot goes on guy, guy hits the ground. One time I had to aim a little above the guy instead.

yeah

>>64909225
Counter arguments:
A) I like shooting with irons
B) I like using MBUIS as my primary iron sights since my AR has a railed upper and railed handguard rather than a carry handle and front sight.
C) Fuck
D) ya mudda.

File: mw2 second sun.png (452.9 KB)

452.9 KB PNG

>>64909225
>Tell me what imagined scenario you have in mind where you need to shoot beyond point blank range with your backup iron sights

>>64912370
then get an ACOG.
plus, again, depending on how you set your sights
point blank with an AR is between 250 and 350 meters with the 3 most popular zeros

File: higher retardation m855 ballistics.png (140.1 KB)

140.1 KB PNG

>>64912450
>3 niggerball fields is point blank

File: 1759021840583779.jpg (108.8 KB)

108.8 KB JPG

>>64912509
>(you)

point blank is how far you can shoot and hit a target in center mass without needing to adjust your sights, retard.
a 50 yard zero will put you like 4 or 5 inches low at 250 meters, so 250 meters is point blank
a 36 yard zero will put you like 3.5/4 inches low at 300 yards so 300-310 yards is point blank. actually if you go with the M16a1 manuals, they say you can push it to like 350 yards and still be considered acceptable point blank
And then again, if you have a 25 yard zero you're probably like 5 or 6 inches low at 350 meters so anything within 350 meters is point blank, no gunz
https://www.scribd.com/document/50874069/M16-M4-data
people don't fuck with the sights in combat, that's a known distance target shooting thing. there's basically ZERO drop between 0 and 200 meters and very little drop out to 300 meters. you don't shoot

>>64912509
see>>64912551, retardo

File: POINTBLANK.png (70.9 KB)

70.9 KB PNG

Well, would you look at that. An M4 firing M855 has a convenient 36 yard zero, with a maximum point blank range of 300 yards for an 8 inch target. Funny that.

>>64912593
exactly. 5.56 is flat shooting as fuck and is point blank out to about as far a someone is reasonably going to shoot in combat with no magnification. even more so for a private citizen who probably isn't even going to need to shoot 300 yards

>>64909277
Not that anon, but honestly I think most iron sights these days are actually horseshit and not nearly as accurate as the old vnotch iron sights on older rifles.

>>64909225
>>64909240
>>64909261
>>64912551
Your squad comes across an enemy position, a wooden shack, measured with a hand held laser range finder to be 600 meters out.
The squad leader instructs everyone to zero at 600 meters and shoot suppressing fire, aimed single shots, at the muzzle flashes coming from the shack so that a separate maneuvering element can close in for the kill.

There you go, a use case for adjustable sights. It's not meant for scenarios where a soldier might see a single enemy soldier and immediately take a shot. It's for scenarios where you know the range, such as an ambush or a point target etc. and can coordinate for everyone to zero their rifles for that range such that your fire is more effective.

>>64912974
and is there any evidence of anyone doing this in the last 100 years?
hitting an individual guy with an AR at 600 meters is very unlikely. it's not like the spanish American war where they were firing into columns 50 men wide

>>64909225
>Tell me what imagined scenario you have in mind where you need to shoot beyond point blank range with your backup iron sights
any event in which i might have to use my rifle at extended range because i am in poverty and cannot afford an optic of any kind

File: hq720.jpg (48.1 KB)

48.1 KB JPG

>>64912974
>>64912998
VOLLEY FIRE PRESENT, AT SIX HUNDRED YARDS!

>>64909288
>Funny, isn't it? One generation of internet experts, suddenly everything prior to them is not only wrong but flatly idiotic
well, the internet is an instantaneously updated worldwide almanac that's trillions of times bigger than all other written works in human history combined. Wouldn't we expect internet access to reasonably challenge huge sectors of prior human understanding?

>>64913343
point blanks is like 300 meters for an AR
>>64913359
>100 years ago
>zulu
didn't zulu happen in like the 1870s? They totally did volley fire at 600 yards back then, but that was because troops still lined up the same linear warfare napolianic formations they lined up in for decades (centuries?) at that point due to lack of modern tech allowing for better communication and organization. This was further exacerbated by the fact rifles could easily defeat cavalry (see the thin red line shit in crimea) and because indirect fire wouldn't be invented by the nips and bongs until like the 1890s early 1900s so men with rifles outranged artillery. And again, it's way easier to score hits when you are shooting at a line of 100 men, 50 across 2 deep as opposed to trying to hit one dude

>>64909225
If you don't have irons capable of delivering at 300m on your primary, you are fat fuck neverfought. Optics are great right up the moment they break. And if you can't provide effective overwatch fires because your piece of shit broke, you are a useless bag of shit that is nothing but a fucking liability to the rest of the unit.

>>64913437
see>>64912593
a 36 yard zero puts your point blank out to 300 yards, a 25 meter zero puts it out a little farther and a 50 yard zero puts it out to 250 yards, no gunz. you don't need a range drum to hit out to 300 meters with AR irons

>>64912450
ACOGs don't even work on this mission.

>>64909225
I don't think back up irons are important at all, I only use them for clonefagging purposes.

>>64913527
that makes no sense. acogs are powered by fiber optics

File: SmartSelect_20260228_172715_Brave.jpg (97.8 KB)

97.8 KB JPG

People hate this company because of politics or something but this is the best buis.

>>64913470
Apparently, you failed to actually read the OP

>Tell me what imagined scenario you have in mind where you need to shoot beyond point blank range with your backup iron sights

And no, none of the bullshittery in this thread is "point blank". Wherever you noobs picked up that stupid phrase talking about accurate delivery at 300m is fucking retarded. If you're zeroed at 36/50m, your 300m bullshittery is fucking Kentucky windage. Good shooters with a shitload of practice can absolutely make that work. Dildos who exclusively use optics are 100% fucked with that set of problems.

>>64913567
it's because they hired the cocksucker who murdered vickey weaver in cold blood and shot those innocent waco cultists from a helicopter
>>64913602
>t. no gunz thirdie
holy shit you are FUCKING RETARDED. point blank literally just means the max distance you can shoot without having to adjust your sights. a 36 yard zero does not need Kentucky windage at 300 yards retardo. it's literally point and shoot. a 36 yard zero will put you like 3-4 inches low at 300 yards. that's still a hit on a center mass shot and it's only like 1 moa off. you don't need to aim high or guess or whatever, it's literally put front sight on center mass and pull the trigger out to like 350 or so yards, retardo
fucking no gunz shouldn't post on here

You're all sick people.
I hope you all get cancer. Fuck youse all.
I put a curse upon you all.
Fuck ya
mudda

>>64913688
Okay, smartass. You are textbooking your way into the toilet. Let me spell it out for you: If your target is at the exact same altitude you are, yes. If you are shooting at approximately 500m above sea level, yes. If your atmospheric conditions are ideal, yes.

NONE of those happen in combat, numbskull. You're shoot up, down, lateral, all the fucking time. Overwatch shots get fucked with wind, rain, and atmospheric pressure all the fucking time. I slapped down more 300m pop-up targets in rifle quals during my career than you can possibly imagine. Did it more than once with a weapon handed to me out of a truck and had to do a double 3 rnd group zero before quals. So you're not doing anything telling me that horseshit. There's a reason the flip aperture on a standard M16 worked, dumbass.

In any case, I find it amusing you pimply-faced asshats keep arguing stats about AR bullshittery. M60 gunner for a fucking reason, yet that didn't prevent me from doing the deed every time with a rifle I'd never used before. You optics twats have no idea wtf you're doing.

>>64914211
didn't read. reddit spacer, you have never shot a gun in your life

>>64909350
I already posted it once.
Zero the 300 at 25 yards.
Tip is 100, bottom of tip is 200, 300 is bottom of chevron
Between 25-300 you put the chevron on the target like a "hat"

>>64913567
I thought troys were great until i got my hands on an arms. The arms is just better but it was 250 dollars. It was not worth double or triple the price for the minor really nice changes.

>>64914221
Excuse me 25 METERS
Its works very well for 5.56

>>64914219
Excellent. You read it and posted hate pretending you didn't. Mission accomplished.

>>64914256
I didn't read it, no gunz
>>64914221
no one aims using the crotch of the chevron

>>64914271
Amaze-balls, you read it again

File: alg6ty.jpg (121.5 KB)

121.5 KB JPG

>>64914271

>>64914305
>imageflip.com
>no timestamp
not your gun, homosexual

>>64912974
>presented use case scenario is so fucking retarded and niche that there is no recorded instance of it ever happening

File: alg7hq.jpg (127.3 KB)

127.3 KB JPG

>>64914317
If you can't see you own posts in those images, you really are a fat-fucking nobody looking for attention because your alcoholic single mother neglects you.

File: 20260301_001216.jpg (3.7 MB)

3.7 MB JPG

>>64914360
you have no gun, you have no father, you have no penis. your uncle molested you and you wear your mother's clothes

File: pinger@200.jpg (1.7 MB)

1.7 MB JPG

>>64913437
Kiddo I shoot with irons all the time and even I think you're laying it on a bit thick. Settle down.

>>64914376
Alright, let's go. Why would you use an image that had nothing to do with this thread to make a failpoint that never would have won?

>>64914389
what the fuck are you talking about retard?

>>64914389
>failpoint
?

>>64914386
Settle down? Please. There was a point to made here.Secondly, I'm over 50 years old, retired maroon beret who managed to get out without disastrous physical damage. My hearing is shot, and my back is fucked, but my eyes work just fine and training is training and combat is combat. Sometimes people here have been here for a long fucking time.

File: WP_20151213_006.jpg (715.1 KB)

715.1 KB JPG

>>64914416
Anon, buddy, I am literally 63.

>>64914424
Then you'll immediately understand "kiddo" in this thread.

File: IMG_20220608_144148411_HDR.jpg (1.1 MB)

1.1 MB JPG

>>64914431
I understand you're a kiddo, kiddo.

>>64914435
>>64914424
>>64914386
based surp grandpa shitting on tryhard schizo unc

>>64914435
If that's true, you're either not the guy who claim to be 63, or you are that guy and both of you are liars.

>>64914386
>>64914424
>>64914435
based boomer king dabbin' on the airshitter

File: WP_20151213_007.jpg (2.2 MB)

2.2 MB JPG

>>64914443
Those are certainly words, but I appreciate it!
>>64914448
I'm not following, what?

File: dog-smile.gif (901.4 KB)

901.4 KB GIF

>>64914452
Nevermind. You're full of shit too. HAND.

>>64914448
Meds now pls.

>>64914460
Shocking a bullshit anon poster rolls with "mental illness" after their position is trashed. Please tell us more about your expertise.

File: IMG_20230529_115828189_HDR~2.jpg (3.5 MB)

3.5 MB JPG

>>64914459
You are a very baffling individual anon, and this seems to have strayed from the original discussion significantly.

Now, to get back on track, irons are fun, but rather antiquated on the modern battlefield. You should open your horizons! :)

>sundowning codger having an episode
>shizoid having a melty
>bot starting to hallucinate
Call it friendo

>>64914473
There is absolutely nothing "antiquated" about iron sights on the modern battlefield. Whatever the dumbasses here had to say, the axiom still holds. If you don't have dumb iron sights on your weapon, and know how to use them, you are a fucking liability. Optics are fragile pieces of shit. Secondly, using the words "point blank" for field-zero at 300m is fucking ridiculous. Whatever you weirdos want to think, glass is fragile. Irons take punishment. If you're not prepared to switch, you are garbage.

File: WP_20160219_005.jpg (1.1 MB)

1.1 MB JPG

>>64914497
>There is absolutely nothing "antiquated" about iron sights on the modern battlefield.
Untrue!
> If you don't have dumb iron sights on your weapon, and know how to use them, you are a fucking liability.
Oh come now, let's not be silly.
>Optics are fragile pieces of shit.
Even more silliness!

>>64914476
you forgot
>faggotass troll acting like a faggotass troll

>>64914516
Okay. You got me. You're pretending to be somebody who knows what they're doing without actually knowing what they're doing.

>>64914497
Do you know what an ACOG is or has your senility robbed you of that information?

>>64914555
As the rest of this thread fucked it up, you missed it too.

>>64914568
Mom, the bot's starting to fuck up again!

>>64914476
good morning, saar!
>>64914497
300m is point blank, no guns retardo and optic are pretty good now, retard
>>64914555
he thinks acogs are precise match optics where you aim using individual sections of the optic instead of just putting red on the dude and firing

>>64912998
>>64914337
>is there a case of a squad using organized and directed fire at a target larger than a single enemy soldier
idk maybe use your fucking head

>>64913602
>If you're zeroed at 36/50m, your 300m bullshittery is fucking Kentucky windage
It's literally right on target

>>64914211
What the fuck did you just fucking say about me, you little bitch? I'll have you know I graduated top of my class in the Navy Seals, and I've been involved in numerous secret raids on Al-Quaeda, and I have over 300 confirmed kills. I am trained in gorilla warfare and I'm the top sniper in the entire US armed forces. You are nothing to me but just another target. I will wipe you the fuck out with precision the likes of which has never been seen before on this Earth, mark my fucking words. You think you can get away with saying that shit to me over the Internet? Think again, fucker. As we speak I am contacting my secret network of spies across the USA and your IP is being traced right now so you better prepare for the storm, maggot. The storm that wipes out the pathetic little thing you call your life. You're fucking dead, kid. I can be anywhere, anytime, and I can kill you in over seven hundred ways, and that's just with my bare hands. Not only am I extensively trained in unarmed combat, but I have access to the entire arsenal of the United States Marine Corps and I will use it to its full extent to wipe your miserable ass off the face of the continent, you little shit. If only you could have known what unholy retribution your little "clever" comment was about to bring down upon you, maybe you would have held your fucking tongue. But you couldn't, you didn't, and now you're paying the price, you goddamn idiot. I will shit fury all over you and you will drown in it. You're fucking dead, kiddo.

>>64917224
cool, so you can't find a single example of people doing that with an M16, faggot
>>64917239
it's technically not. it's like 100% acceptable point blank for center mass a torso but you're going to be like 6 to 8 inches low. like you won't change your aiming point, but the far zero for 36 and 50 yard zeros are like 280ish yards and 225ish yards

>>64913567
I like that adjustments require a deliberate tool. Keeps retards from playing with the dial when I'm not looking. Where they fail is in drop tests though. Any iron sight that locks open is going to stand up to zero drifts from being dropped worse than ones that are spring loaded.

>>64917612
Troys are great if you're still in the late 2000s, otherwise they've aged like milk. Anon's retarded for not realizing things have progressed since then.

>>64917700
in your opinion who makes a better rear folding sight? ignore price just talk about the features. i know troys not perfect.
personally i think arms are better but those are older. what advances are you referring to?

>>64917891
>in your opinion who makes a better rear folding sight?
Magpul and KAC, mainly.
>what advances are you referring to?
In terms of zero retention, size, shit like that. Troys are big, take up a ton of space, and since they're spring tensioned that can wear down. Not even getting into that drop test.

>>64917910
>they're spring tensioned
they arent unless you are counting the button to unlock/lock it as a spring.
how are you complaining about troy bulk when you suggest magpul?
as for kac those are better at being a backup but from a shooting standpoint when you have to actually use it its worse.

File: products-GetImage_16.png (76.9 KB)

76.9 KB PNG

>>64917961
NTA
>how are you complaining about troy bulk when you suggest magpul?
Are you high? MBUS rear BUIS is shitloads slimmer
>as for kac those are better at being a backup but from a shooting standpoint when you have to actually use it its worse.
Bruh explain yourself

File: mag276-blk_magpul_mbus_pro_sight_rear_02_1.jpg (134.8 KB)

134.8 KB JPG

>>64917983
nah i get it your priorities and my priorities are different.when i say bulk i mean this stupid ass square blocking out your sight picture. your prioritizing how small and out of the way it is when folded. meanwhile i care about actually using them.

File: magpul-back-up-rear-sight-mbus-pro__91893.jpg (144.1 KB)

144.1 KB JPG

>>64917996
Anon, are you baitposting?.

File: 97082-1.jpg (15.8 KB)

15.8 KB JPG

>>64917983
>Bruh explain yourself
this is pure backup
as in its better than nothing at all but thats a downgrade to your normal carry handle and worse than >>64913567
from a is out of the way im never going to use this its much better but when you have to actually use it ehhhhh.

File: 25650-1-scalia-product-single.jpg (13 KB)

13 KB JPG

>>64918031
anon...

>>64917996
>>64918017
I'm assuming he wants a ghost ring for some reason, which is dumb, just use a red dot

>>64918046
But that's the thing, he can HAVE THAT WITH THE MBUS! There is literally zero reason to go with the Troy.

>>64918049
his retarded ass logic is he wants a ghost ring that doesn't have an ourside shell, like >>64918038 and >>64918031 because he wants to not see the rear sight and keep his head far back on the rifle. assuming he shoots at all, which he probably doesn't, he only shoots offhand. it's like that thing where you see ACOGs hanging way off the back of the receiver because the guy only ever shoots offhand

>>64918017
no im serious. the square makes it harder to see stuff that you arent directly aiming the gun at. you lose peripheral vision.
i know your going to argue oh when you look through them it ghosts out but there is a difference
i get what the issue is i actually have experience from years of using troy and you dont. we also place different importance on the backup vs sight part of backup sight

>>64918049
im not even arguing troy supremacy magpul sights are inferior to your basic ass carryhandle in sight picture.

>>64918062
You do not shoot.

File: lookguns.jpg (733.2 KB)

733.2 KB JPG

>>64918072
right just keep telling yourself that.
it took me time to take the picture and edit the filesize to fit. thats why its a few minutes ago.

>>64918062
>>64918067
>>64918072
>>64918097
cool, so I was 100% right. he's keeping his head up and back and only shooting offhand with the bigger peep, probably indoors at short range, and he doesn't like the fagpul rearsight because he's trying to completely ghost out the rear sight. I 100% do that that too when shooting offhand, but you can get around it by doing nose to charging handle and it's not a big deal if you shoot from the prone or kneeling

>>64918114
how the fuck did you get all that from having the rearsight where its supposed to be? thats some projection, what is this twitter?

>>64918122
when you shoot prone or sitting your eye is closer to the rear sight. it's why high power shooters who use scopes have adjustable stocks with marked locations on the stock because they change their stock length to maintain the same eye relief on their scopes in different positions. I used to scope myself with an acog all the time because my head was closer to the scope when I shot the sitting stage than for standing or prone. when your eye is closer to the rear sight it appears bigger because things look smaller farther away and bigger when they are closer. and again I do the same shit he does where when I shoot offhand I basically shoot with the stock as high up on my shoulder as possible and I don't lean my head forwards at all and I get that same ghosting effect on my .22 doing that, where as when I shoot my match rifle prone, because my eye is so much closer to the rear sight I can use a tighter sight and the stuff outside the sight doesn't bug me or factor into my sight picture
it's a big reason why, historically, hunting rifles used to have receiver peeps, but target rifles had (and still have) tang peeps or extensions on the receiver peep that brings the rear sight closer to your eye

>>64918038
those arent much better you have range adjustment you are never going to use but its still a backup. the priority is backup.

im just going to stop cause im arguing with a guy who makes up shit in his head. then deflects more when proved wrong. you cant have a conversation with that.

File: Rear_aperture_sight.jpg (49.6 KB)

49.6 KB JPG

>>64918158
>but target rifles had (and still have) tang peeps or extensions on the receiver peep that brings the rear sight closer to your eye
if you have something like this and you dont know where the target is and you have to actually scan the environment through it you cant see shit. its the same with the magpuls to a significantly lesser extent. if you dont actually use other irons youd accept it as usable. and it is usable as a backup. but when you know the difference its there.
keep in mind this is strictly about irons. dont say some stupid shit like well just use a reddot if you want to be able to see things again.

>>64918201
notice how it's off the receiver and not on the receiver so it has shorter eye relief?
also just use a fucking red dot or an acog, retardo

>>64918062
>no im serious. the square makes it harder to see stuff that you arent directly aiming the gun at. you lose peripheral vision.
Retard, the actual aperture is going to grey out for the most part when you focus in on your FSP, if you're going to be sperging out about peripheral vision then everything above and to the sides is still there and anything under is going to be blocked by the gun itself. You're just coming up with bullshit to justify your fondness for a shitty BUIS that can't stand up to a drop-test.

>>64918211
you dont even comprehend what im talking about. you keep making up shit in your mind then go off and refute those points.
you are the one who randomly assumed i wanted a ghost ring. im not even sure if you understand what that means.

File: IMG_20220119_1419167592.jpg (2.2 MB)

2.2 MB JPG

>>64918067
>magpul sights are inferior to your basic ass carryhandle in sight picture.
You better be pretending anon

love how one sped is pretending there's any real difference in sight picture between one AR15 aperture sight and another

>>64918230
a1s are great really fun to use.
im not going to go to the safe to take more pictures cause frankly it would change nothing. this guys going to continue to not understand my point.

>>64918241
this is a weapons board your going to argue over 9 vs 40 vs 45 you can argue about irons.

>>64918244
anon he's saying you're a retard for making that claim he quoted.

>>64918221
he's probably not focusing on the front sight
>>64918228
you're literally saying you want a ghost ring so you can maintain peripheral vision. Do you primarily shoot offhand or not, homo? do you shoot head up or nose to charging handle?

>>64918308
yeah you dont understand shit. im not saying i want a ghostring. all these sights are ghostrings by default. im saying magpuls limit your peripheral vision compared to a troy or standard carryhandle. you havent said anything to prove this wrong. you just keep tangenting and making up headcannon.
>do you shoot head up or nose to charging handle?
middleish of stock roughly an inch away from being nose to charging handle.
ive got multiple period correct ars with different stock lengths. head position changes based on gun and stance.
if i had to categorize it bladed nam era stance without the chickenwing.
roughly something like this https://www.youtube.com/shorts/UMK-O4egzmI

>>64918391
>all these sights are ghostrings by default. im saying magpuls limit your peripheral vision compared to a troy or standard carryhandle.
yeah you want a ghost ring, you want the sight to ghost out and to not have anything outside the ring like the wings on the carry handle. you want a ghost ring

>>64918433
the wings on the carry handle are fine.
you just keep making assumptions in your head. its impossble to talk to you.

>>64918449
the wings on my carry handle obstruct my vison more than the fagpul sight

Reminder KAC Micro 600m can easily be found for less than $100 if you don't mind the USMC stamp.

>>64919326
that seems like a pretty useless feature. the only part of that that's slightly interesting is that you could zero it at 50 yards and then leave it at 300 yards. But even then it's pretty meh outside of K/D target range shooting because unless you are in actual combat 25/36/50 yard zeros don't actually make a difference at self defense ranges