Iron Sights, Marksmanship

File: IMG_3915.jpg (1MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3264x2448px

If you flip the rear site to the large "0-2" aperture, you are now BZO to hit closer to point of aim at 0-200 yards. Notice the aperture is set higher (lowering your point of impact) and to the right (to account for the quarter turn of windage that is made when you rotate the rear site on the threads).

File: IMG_3919.jpg (1MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3264x2448px

For what its worth these sights are pretty idiot proof and I would say pretty reliable. Its hard to fuck them up I guess.

https://robarguns.com/blog/2013/11/24/battle-sight-zero-bzo-who-has-it-right/

https://archive.org/stream/MCRP3-01A#page/n85/mode/2up

How do other anons zero their weapons? Each site/weapon will sort of have its own BZO procedure right? I notice a lot of kids at the range drop thousands on a rifle and nice glass but never seam to high target. I am guessing this is because they zero their shit at 100 yards or whatever but past that their elevation needs to be adjusted. Or something. But basically they are not using their glass the way it was designed, I'm sure each optic has a way to set it up so you can hit point of aim at 25/200 for example, then use different marks on the optic to adjust for range.

File: 20160408_123525.jpg (2MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x1080px

My AR is zeroed for 50/300, like I learned in the Army. Pretty fun rifle.

File: IMG_3918.jpg (1MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3264x2448px

>>31985543
So I'm guessing that flatter 50y initial intersection makes a flatter trajectory then my 36/300. You should however hit low at 300y right? Not by much but indeed low.

>>31985543
What do you have on that AR there, anon?

>>31985564

Not him, but looks like MBUS and a Vortex Strikefire with Magpul grey furniture

>>31985462
I like them for the challenge, in terms of marksmanship though they are clearly inferior.

>>31985462

every gun should have iron sights.
everyone should learn to shoot with iron sights.

however, a red dot will absolutely improve your shooting.

but having the "iron fundamentals" is essential. Murphy says your battery/fancy sight will fail you when you need it most. hard for iron to fail.

>>31985474

the smaller rear sight apature is for day time, the larger one, which you pictured, was designed for night time. Everyone someone dolt in boot was missing shots, he had the larger rsa up.

>>31985487

Most optics come with a recommended sighting distance.

25/200, 50/300, etc...

it really depends on the use.

mine is 25/200 due to my area. however, i know where to paint my target to hit it at 250,300,350, etc...

as long as you buy a quality optic, and know it's moa, sight away. then go practice how to adjust for farther distance as needed.

>>31985972
>diopter sight for night-time shooting
That's just dumb. Is there any tritium or similiar in the M16 sights?

File: 1347135638805.gif (986KB, 400x225px) Image search: [Google]

986KB, 400x225px

>>31985959
My eyes are too shit to use anything resembling a peep sight. Targets that are too dark or too far away simply disappear, which is just about everywhere except perfectly lit indoors.
That's why I have to settle for a red dot on top of my optic.

>>31986057

no.

but keep in mind, it was designed in the 60's when such things (tritium) were not cheap. the larger opening allows your eye to adjust quicker in low light situations. 60's hack for a now easily solved problem.

you can get replacement tritium night sights for AR.

>>31986116
What about phosphorus though? You'd think the US could afford that shit when the FDF managed to do it in the 60s as well. Phosphorus nightsights since '64 and tritium since '72.

File: AR 15.jpg (836KB, 1851x2955px) Image search: [Google]

836KB, 1851x2955px

>>31985462
I like Iron sights, will never switch them off my full length AR.

>>31986144

ahhh... but you're forgetting. Robert Macnamera, Secretary of Defense at the time. He wanted something fairly cheap, and quick. over time they made improvements.

shot it took them almost 10 years to change the feed ramps, chemically treated/made night sights were not their most pressing concern. different time. we have since learned.

>>31986208
i-is that a 20" barrel with a telescopic stock?

Moar pics!

>>31985480
is that an FN barrel?

File: rearsight.jpg (22KB, 512x384px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 512x384px

simplistic iron sights best iron sights

>>31987216
No, it's not.

That's clearly a fixed stock

What is the A2 sight supposed to be set to? I zeroed mine at 25 yards, couldn't hit dick at 100, 300 I didn't have a target set up but the impact sites looked about where I was aiming

>>31987216
Please explain exactly what about that picture looked like a collapsible stock

And then please explain to us what you think a collapsible stock looks like

>>31985543
50/300? I thought it's 25/300 and 50/200.

File: m16_ads.jpg (74KB, 720x960px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 720x960px

>>31990360
It is.

File: vlhctIG.jpg (82KB, 1015x698px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 1015x698px

>>31985462
>>31985474
>>31985480

We did the same "combat zero" with out 16s in the Army only I've always been taught that your point of aim will be the the same at 25 as it is at 300. The old A2s also were marked 8/3 on the elevation knob. Also you'd be surprised how you can fuck up the front sight, bent front sight posts was a really common problem when I was in and always confused the fuck out of me how it happened.

Fuck if that thing wasn't dead on at 300 when you zeroed it right, I loved shooting irons and my saddest day in the Army was when they took my 16 away and issued us pretty new M4s with CCOs on top of them. I loved my beat up old 16, it was an FN contract A2 upper with a rickety old Colt A1 lower that had been re-stamped A2 and still had an auto trigger group in it. Fuck them for taking my baby away.

>>31990360
25/300 is what I've always done, my rifle seems to agree but that was an M16A2. Is 50/300 more matched to the M4 trajectory?

File: image.jpg (28KB, 540x452px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 540x452px

>>31985462
Always zero your iron sights, in case your CCO goes down

If you can shoot 40/40 with iron sights on a 300M qual range then perhaps its time to get practicing me boy

>>31991555
*cant.

File: 1452715555782.jpg (661KB, 3824x1568px) Image search: [Google]

661KB, 3824x1568px

Enfield Micrometer sights are phenomenal.

File: WP_20160803_005[1].jpg (3MB, 3072x1728px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3072x1728px

>>31985487
50/200. Also, fuck the A1 FSP.

>>31985462
3 fire from 36 yards. 2 isn't a grouping. And we do it 3 to 4 times.

Other than that yeah I think most is correct here.

>>31985487
you zero your guns based on practical use of your given firearm and ammo combination, there is no wrong or right answer. Like for example I would never worry about shooting my irons at a man 300 meters away because that would never happen for my intended usage.

File: tmp_15779-Snapchat-30364645843218677111313351831.jpg (584KB, 1440x2392px) Image search: [Google]

584KB, 1440x2392px

Doing the best I can with thicc mosin front post and poorfag tulammo at 100 yds
>dat one outlier on the left cause I flinched when the guy next to me shot and ruined my nice group
3rd time ever shooting, d-don't judge

File: DSCF9355.jpg (812KB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

812KB, 2048x1536px

I use irons on 2 of my superior rifles.

File: maxresdefault.jpg (240KB, 1162x850px) Image search: [Google]

240KB, 1162x850px

>>31991176

>FN contract A2 upper with a rickety old Colt A1 lower that had been re-stamped A2 and still had an auto trigger group in it.

That sounds like my dream gun.

>>31991176
please tell us stories of her