Foregrips and sights

>>31494946
Foregrip is meme unless it's an angled foregrip and then it's just preference. Sights are not meme but only if you're shooting >300 yds and you have backup iron sights.

>>31494985
Why is an angled fore grip better than an fore grip?

>Why doesn't the Army just ditch the AR's DI system for piston?
>Forward-Assists are useless, anyone else agree?
>Y peepol use optics and foregrips?
Is this one autistic person at work or has /k/ gotten dumber over the past 24 hours?

>>31495033
seems like the same retard

>>31494946
Have you even tried either of them?

File: image (9).jpg (275KB, 735x980px) Image search: [Google]

275KB, 735x980px

>>31494985
>>31494946
I know full well this is b8, but maybe it's a jumping off point for a thread that's not total trash for people who might actually be interested or curious.

A CCO is about equal in quality to shooting irons if you're shooting from a static position at a distant target and have time to properly get your shots off. Most CCOs have a dot size between 1 and 3MOA across, which makes shooting quite great. CCOs really shine in close quarters or even at medium distance when you're shooting with hastily lined up shots. The fact that you no longer have to worry about lining up front and rear sights will make lining up shots much faster, and the illumination makes it easier to concentrate on the target area while still using the optics.

CCOs have what is known as infinite eye relief, which is to say that as long as you can look in the CCO window, you can use the optic. This is unlike irons where you have to be lined up, or magnified optics where the eye relief must be at a certain amount for the magnified picture to be not blurry.

>>31495080
Con't

Foregrips, like just about everything else with shooting are highly debated. A full sized VFG is good for somebody with a gun loaded up with lasers and lights, as the rail quickly runs out of good space for the hand. They also make a good stopper for the hand when using a push button light, as in OP's picture which is likely set up for a left handed person. VFGs make carrying a rifle in the patrol low carry more comfortable for some.

Smaller VFGs make good handstops, as well as providing a basis for using the rifle on a barrier in some techniques.

Angled foregrips became popular with the thumb over bore method as a way to provide a larger area to grip and simulate the larger grips that older rifles tended to have on quadrail equipped GI rifles. Some people like them, some don't. With free floating tubes, Magpul handguards, or other aftermarket non-quad rails, some people find VFGs unnecessary.

>>31495053
>I haven't personally used any sights other than iron or any foregrips on a rifle before

>Have you even tried either of them?

>>31494946
Foregrips are fine, sights are useless altogether

File: TCTU.gif (383KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

383KB, 1280x720px

>>31495126
What this dude is saying.

>>31495080
>Faggot hipster glasses

Opinion discarded.

>>31494946
Sights are cool because you just put the dot on the target in stead of lining up sights. Irons aren't hard to begin with but optics are one step easier. And they are usually illuminated which makes them easier to pick up against dark backgrounds. They are also good at night. Maybe it's just me but I can't see my front sight at night. I also can't see the crosshairs through a scope well at night, Illuminated reticles take care of that.

VFG's are for people who never actually shoot and only take pictures of their rifle. Or people with arthritis, turning their arm actually causes physical pain.

>>31495033
>>31495043

This is at least version 2 of this particular thread as well; there was another OP saying optics are useless in a more aggressive manner a couple days ago.

File: BCM-VG-S-BLK-4.jpg (210KB, 1024x680px) Image search: [Google]

210KB, 1024x680px

>>31496148
>VFG's are for people who never actually shoot and only take pictures of their rifle.
Sounds like a good description of you, friend.

File: IMG_2194 (2).jpg (186KB, 612x816px) Image search: [Google]

186KB, 612x816px

>>31496185
Yeah I totally suck.

File: IMG_2196 (2).jpg (170KB, 609x812px) Image search: [Google]

170KB, 609x812px

>>31496338
I started firing two shot groups after that flyer.

>>31496400
bench 100yd? whats your load.

>>31496338
>>31496400
>3 shot group
>2 shot group
You don't shoot

File: IMG_2208 (2).jpg (178KB, 596x794px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 596x794px

>>31496461
That was with PPU. I was trying to zero a new scope. Not an AR though, that's with my savage. This is the full target. Using a cheap shit bipod.

>>31496560
Post targets.

File: WP_20160902_008[1].jpg (2MB, 3072x1728px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3072x1728px

>>31496338
But anon, here's a 5 shot group with an AR that has a GG&G short VFG. :^

File: two_midgets_spanking_eachother.jpg (781KB, 1632x1224px) Image search: [Google]

781KB, 1632x1224px

>>31496582
>>31496573
>>31496560
>>31496461
>>31496400
>>31496338
>>31496185
>>31496148

I think you are both getting completely bogged down in dick measuring that's really aside from the point.

VFGs can/do serve many purposes depending on the rest of the rifle set up and how the rifle is being used.

Not all shooting is bench rested and done purely for accuracy. When speed of shooting, shooting from unconventional positions, attachments, and carrying the rifle on patrol are brought into the mix you will be looking at entirely new factors. It should be obvious that shooting a bolt gun from a bench is a different experience than firing an AR close quarters in a killhouse. Just as it would probably be silly to put a bipod on a a 10.3 AR meant for room clearing, it is probably silly to put a VFG on a bolt action used for long range shooting. It doesn't mean the whole concept is wrong.

You are both "shooters" but you have to recognize there is more than one way to shoot.

(I say this even as somebody who doesn't even use a VFG anymore.)

My .308 on left and 5.56 on right. No fore grips and iron sights cause I'm poor.

File: WP_20160609_001[1].jpg (1MB, 3072x1728px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3072x1728px

>>31496642
I'm really ready for the "VFGs are a meme" meme to die tbqhf.
>when the barrier-brace game is stronk

File: IMG_4082.jpg (791KB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

791KB, 2048x1536px

>>31496678
I also suck at the internet.

>>31496689
Unfortunately, as we move away from the heavy GWOT years and see a decline in active duty military, I think we will see more and more posts arguing about the tactical merits of different setups where all of the anons involved have only theoretical knowledge rather than a lot of practical experience or training.

Obviously we still have active 3-gunners and other knowledgable shooters, but the ratio is going to slide more and more in favor of anons who don't have any experience either sincerely or trollingly arguing this kind of thing.

It's a bit sad really. I remember all the combat experienced tripfags we used to have that I never see anymore. Even /r/icky hasn't come back for months.

>>31496612
That's a good group. VFG's don't make you suck but a lot of people want them before they even have a rifle. I still think you would do better with a handstop but I don't know how you were holding it.

>>31496741

Look we're going to have to get involved in North Korea/The Philippines/Venezuela sometime in the next few years, so I wouldn't worry too much.

>>31496864
I support going to another large war so /k/ has new stuff to talk about.

I remember when /k/ was around when Iraq was still hot as fuck and we'd have new stories straight from deployed anons, random new gear being tested out, new tactics and just in general a lot of OC. Now it's more and more rehashed shit and people who've never been in a firefight arguing the merits of different plate carrier designs or autistically nitpicking camo with cherrypicked photos. It's just. Ugh.

>>31496689
So you turned your AR sideways and planted your VFG on some sort of solid object for that group? Then you aimed through your sights and shot that group? Or you didn't use sights and just shot ~1moa sideways? I don't have beef with you, I know who you are this isn't an anon vs tripfag thing.

>>31496908
what the fuck are you even talking about?
he pushed the grip against a wall or windowsill or fence or whatever the fuck

>>31496899
>I didn't go to war but I want other people to do it so I have fun stories to read

>>31496956
>Implying

>>31496952
>he pushed the grip against a wall or windowsill or fence or whatever the fuck
And shot that group at an angle? If he is really shooting 1moa while sideways I respect the hell out of him. I was talking to him though and not you.

File: grip.jpg (64KB, 960x639px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 960x639px

>>31496999
definitely not supposed to push against it, nope

>>31496999
Anon, come on now. Group size has nothing to do with what direction your sights are in, just repeatability. You can shoot upside down if you get your gun back in the same place.

I will add that, as others have mentioned, the speed and controllability of a long barrel in close quarters is made much easier with a vfg. In addition, having shot innawoods for a few years, they make good improvised monopods.

>>31497078
Nice glass. I'll admit, this whole time I was thinking of those "barrier braces" or whatever the fuck things that people put on the side of their handguard so they can push is against door frames and stuff. I thought the idea was that you would turn your rifle sideways and push the VFG against a door frame.

I was mistaken and I retract my statement. That is one good use of a VFG. Even though it is not the intended use of one. You could use a backwards bipod or push an upside down scout scope against a barrier for the same effect.

I will concede this argument and you win for sure because I don't want to argue any more but you should just get a handstop. A sling swivel could do the same thing.

>>31495890
>faggot hipster glasses
Those are birth control glasses you twat

File: laughing-like-a-king-homer-simpson.gif (179KB, 375x375px) Image search: [Google]

179KB, 375x375px

>>31497315
Literallly fucking what? Is whatever that is better? Shit looks fugly as fuck.

>>31494946
foregrips suck, sights are great

>>31497392
Yeah they're ugly, that's why they're called birth control glasses. They're issued in the military. Literally if anything we should be taking his opinion and not the faggoty-ass opinion of some millennial who thinks they're "hipster glasses"

File: titus get yo cross.jpg (18KB, 480x712px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 480x712px

>>31495890

>>31494946
>haven't personally used any sights other than iron or any foregrips on a rifle before
>It seems like they're just pointless junk added on to a perfectly good gun.

oh, ok. You're one of those people.
What was the word for it? Fudd?
Is this a good example of a fudd?

>>31496690
>buying an UBR when you're that poor
why though

>>31497392
Lurk moar you neverserved millennial faggot. BCGs are durable as fuck military issue glasses, so nicknamed because they're ugly as fuck. Jesus.

>>31498555
>neverserved
cringe
criiiinge

File: So stupid it hurts.gif (497KB, 500x189px) Image search: [Google]

497KB, 500x189px

>>31496148
>VFG's are for people who never actually shoot and only take pictures of their rifle. Or people with arthritis, turning their arm actually causes physical pain.

>>31499259
Yo Ricky did you ever get back into EVE? Apparently it's going free to play soon.

>>31499315
Been way to busy. That's cool though, imagine the turnover rate for new players is going to be retarded high; not that it matters since it'll give experienced folks someone to shoot at.

>>31499315

>Apparently it's going free to play soon.
That makes me sad.

>>31499259

You were/are in the Regiment right?

What was/is your M4 setup, if you use/used one?

Just curious mang

>>31498474

I believe so.