Best irons

I'm a Magpul slut, so I'm gonna say the MBUS gen 2 sights.

>>33542923
MBUS Pro, KAC 300m micros, Troy HK style.

I don't particularly like the KAC 600m micro, and the Matechs break really fast (refuse to stay down).

>>33542923
I thought I was on /v/ and from the thumbnail it looked like a weird ass joystick

Bye

>>33542936
I despise these things, I cant aim for shit with them. But with the notch sights on my ak I can group nicely.

Any recommendations on somebody who really likes notchsights or fine peepsights?

Daniel Defense A1.5

>>33542961
>fine peep
KAC 300m has the smallest aperture of any "combat" sight I've seen yet, you'd have to go to an Olympic peep sight to get smaller. I do recommend getting a set of the KNS smaller-than-normal front posts for it though.
>notch
Ew. But anyway, one of the HK-style rear drums. They have 2 different sizes of notch sight.

File: 1491045719357.jpg (23KB, 337x343px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 337x343px

>>33542961
Weird, I can get pretty decent groups with mine on my MP sport. I'm not even saying I'm a good shooter or anything. Now you just have me wondering why that may be. Do different people just do better with different sights?

File: eratac-notvisierung-pica_23300_505_0[1].jpg (67KB, 600x401px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 600x401px

Are those rebranded US-brand sights? Anyone have experience with Recknagel/ERA-Tac?

File: 55q4sek.jpg (308KB, 1000x641px) Image search: [Google]

308KB, 1000x641px

>>33542923
>current year
>backup irons
Just use the money you saved not buying a Magpul MBUS Pro LR rear sight and KAC 99051 front sight and buy a better optic.

>>33542923
A.R.M.S.
R.
M.
S.

>>33543114
It is actually pretty sad they aren't teaching irons anymore. It is either to make a fighting force less effective or people in our military think someone will coup at somepoint.

>>33543369
Seriously, who isn't teaching irons?

>>33543369
>aren't teaching irons anymore
Stop talking out of your ass, I just graduated BCT from Sand Hill and we grouped, zeroed, and qualified with M16A4s with irons. Even the infantry fags across the street had to group and zero with irons before they get the red dots.

Knight's Armament Corporation Micros 600m.

File: wm_5285775.jpg (339KB, 3008x2000px) Image search: [Google]

339KB, 3008x2000px

>20 inch AR
here's the only iron sights you should use with that

File: IMG_20160922_174508549.jpg (3MB, 4320x2432px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4320x2432px

>>33542923
OP, I have the same kind as your pic related, they're great and really unobtrusive.

File: images.duckduckgo.com(29).jpg (200KB, 800x774px) Image search: [Google]

200KB, 800x774px

>>33542923
Those irons are inferior. Get actually good iron sights

>>33543610
>A2
McFucking Kill Yourself

File: god i wish that were me.jpg (63KB, 630x432px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 630x432px

>>33543610

>A2

File: 20161201_004807-1.jpg (2MB, 1486x3366px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1486x3366px

>>33544417
>>33544347

>Not liking A2S
>Sad!

>>33542923
Why not both?

>>33544245
>they're great
until you flip them too many times and they won't stay down anymore

>>33545694
The A2 is dogshit and irrefutable evidence that the Marines should never be allowed to make decisions about anything.
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a168577.pdf

>>33542983
I would say its more or less what you are comfortable with right?

>>33543114
Believe it or not some of us just have irons on our guns. And we like it.

>>33543369
>Be me, Army
>Range day, some retard forgot to check the batteries in the CCOs
>Ok, everybody flip up the irons
>privates just out of OSUT have never shot with irons and I have to teach them how to zero

>>33545879
nothing about sights in that fag

>>33542923
KAC micro off ebay

>>33546598
Are you retarded?
They go on for pages and pages about the A2's terrible fucking sights.

File: 1476436776273.jpg (41KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 640x480px

>>33546702
If I say yes you'll laugh.
If I say no you'll say I'm retarded.
So I'll just call you a fucking autistic fucking faggot for pulling up a pdf from two decades ago to attempt to justify your shitty life choices and know it all fucking attitude. How bout that?

File: 20170326_214829-1.jpg (3MB, 3211x1557px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3211x1557px

>>33545879
The A2 was an upgrade from the A1.
Just not a huge one.

Better sights
Stronger aluminum forgings
Stronger plastics
Better barrel twist
Brass deflector

Yes the barrel profile was kinda wacky
Theonger stock was good for tall people, bad for manlets
And yes the burst was University hated.

>>33542964
this guy knows

>>33547195
>more durable furniture
>can shoot heavier grain ammo better
>subhuman lefties no longer get mildly annoyed by brass
in exchange for
>shitty barrel profile
>heavier weight
>completely cocked attempt at a burst cam
>burst fire
>target sights that are never utilized beyond what the A1 sights were perfectly fine at
>shitty grip and stock profiles

not even a slight upgrade, it's a fucking downgrade in more respects

File: -Citation_needed-.jpg (3MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3264x2448px

>>33547195
>Stronger aluminum forgings

>>33542923
troy tritium

>>33547303
Most if not all of that is personal preference man.

The only concrete point you made was the barrel being heavier than the A1

As far as the sights, ur argument is not valid.
Just because the sights support more than the 5.56 effective range, doesn't mean the are bad.

It doesn't hurt the sights in any way.

>>33547303
>heavier
whats wong? poor wittle arms cant handle one extra pound?
>burst
irrelevant

File: image.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

I was in your position but with an a4 clone so I just went with the carry handle instead.

>>33545879
Why do people keep citing this bullshit report? You do realize that even the Army thought it was stupid and ordered their first 100,000 A2s the month after it was published.

>>33547356
You should get an ACOG for maximum Aesthetics.

>>33547391
In what specific ways is it bullshit?

>>33547424
Yeah, but I didn't think an acog was going to be $1400. Might as well build another ar15 w/ aimpoint pro for that money instead.

>>33547349
>The only concrete point you made was the barrel being heavier than the A1
>>33547303
>completely cocked attempt at a burst cam
>burst fire
>>33547195
>And yes the burst was University hated.

A2 owners are retarded, who knew

>>33547391
You got your shit pushed in the last time you made this baseless and asinine statement, you will have the same done here.

>>33547460
Ya they are pricy

>>33547462
>Has no proof
>Calls everyone else retarded
What did he mean by this?

>>33547489
are you literally unable to follow your own fucking arguments?

>>33547462
>keeps bringing up burst
>when talking about semiauto A2 clones
you can stop being retarded any time

File: 1489454428629.jpg (14KB, 515x310px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 515x310px

>>33547515
Still waiting for an argument nig nog.

File: e77.jpg (45KB, 600x451px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 600x451px

>>33547349
>Most if not all of that is personal preference man.
Government profile is an abortion, the added thickness does nothing but weigh the rifle down.
It is heavier than an A1.
The burst cam is objectively terrible because the only way it can reset is if it fires exactly three rounds. That means if you interrupt the burst, the next time you pull the trigger it is only firing those remaining one or two rounds instead of three.
No one likes burst, this is evidenced by the Marines ditching it entirely and the Army having rid themselves of that cancer long ago.
Nothing is preventing you from using the A1 style sight beyond 300
No one likes the nub on the A2 grip and the A2 stock is terrible if you have anything more substantial than a T-shirt on, which is why you see so many pictures of deployed Muhreens not even shouldering their rifles while aiming.

>>33547570
Oh ya, I almost forgot about that.
My clone lower has the Burst selector and auto Seir, but it's all fake.

File: WP_20170318_005[3].jpg (948KB, 1679x2260px) Image search: [Google]

948KB, 1679x2260px

>people unironically liking/defending A2s
Poor souls. ;^

>>33546330
thanks boss

File: 1489086002204.png (1MB, 634x802px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 634x802px

>>33547611
Your A1 has an A2 lower dumbass.
Pic: an actual A1 lower.

At least put some effort in your clone build.

On a other note, none of the A2s pitfalls matter in the civilian world.
Anyways

>>33548607

>M16A1 = M16 / SP1

There are, in fact, A1 rifles and carbines with partial fenced lowers.

File: WP_20161125_002[1].jpg (2MB, 3072x1728px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3072x1728px

>>33548607
Put some effort in your b8, sonny.

LaRue for a fixed BUIS

[spoiler]Magpul for folding[/spoiler]

>>33547303
Don't forget M855 ammo and 1:7 twist. Somewhere between this and the next 14.5'' barrel 5.56 killing power was lost.
>muh steel pot penetration

>>33547444
No setting for 25m zero- This is false as anyone who has gone through the Army BZO can tell you its one click up from 300

No low light sights- The front sight is compatible with A1 front sights and could use the existing low light kit.

No method for zero recording- The solution is to use the same method that has been employed since at least WW2. You mark your zero with paint and have a quick way to visually confirm zero.

No range estimation with the FSP- That is not true its in the marksmanship training manual.

The front sight on the A2 is more prone to bending- I really would like to see where they came up with this one.

M855 not compatible with the A1- This one is pretty dumb. The entire reason the A2 was developed was to be compatible with NATO ammo stocks (SS109).

No battle sight zero- The A2 has a 300m battle sight zero.

Accuracy, endurance, and reliability- These are all based on a MOT that conducted with defective XM855 (this was stated in the report) yet it fails to cite any subsequent tests with in-spec ammo.

>>33549441
Those are all valid points but the M16A2 is still terrible.

>>33547577
>Nothing is preventing you from using the A1 style sight beyond 300

With a 250m zero the hold over to hit a man sized target center mass at 350m is 11 inches. This means the shooter must aim at the shoulder leaving only the targets head exposed (which is pretty small at 350m). Beyond that the target is totally obscured by the sight. For ranges of 460m (the supposed max effective range of the m16a1) requires a 22 inch hold over.

File: RR-1.jpg (53KB, 966x617px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 966x617px

>>33548671
>Anything I don't like is bait
Again, that lower is NOT peirod corret.

It has a fully fenced mag release and a reenforced buffer tube.
That's an A2 lower tripfag.

Your lower is also missing the correct Colt emblem and serial numbers.

>>33548671
>posting a shitty b8 clone

put some effort into your b8, noguns

File: m16a1-assault-rifle_pics216-21651.jpg (40KB, 525x349px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 525x349px

>>33549761
You get a 2/10 for effort senpaitachi, and I'm feeling like a generous tripshit today.

File: 20160821_190033.jpg (3MB, 5312x2988px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 5312x2988px

>>33549794
That's nice and all, but ur clone is half assed.
My clone is correct top to bottom
Pic related
Every emblem and serial number is correct

Also, that a1 in ur pic Doesn't have the reenforced buffer tube.
So that's correct.

File: 3974c2db170a9d79b24fa7bac365ab3c[1].jpg (115KB, 1024x640px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 1024x640px

>>33549794
and you get a 0/10 for effort on both your b8 and """"""clone"""""

Should we go back to discussing back up sights and not whether the A2 was shit or not?

File: tumblr_nm7obgQuMA1rji3x6o1_500.jpg (44KB, 407x600px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 407x600px

>>33549988
but retards who don't know anything about vietnam ARs acting like they know everything is pretty funny desu

>>33550001
Why did you turn ur trip off?

>>33549761
Looks correct to me at a glance, look at the profile of the front pivot. I don't think you can really see if the buffer is reinforced or not by the angle. M16A1s came with full fencing, XM16E1s before them were transitional and mostly had partial fencing.
By the looks of how the lower doesn't quite match the XM Grey shade NDS uses (Compare to his NDS forge marked upper), I'm going to assume it's a McKay A1 lower.
That, and I'm not aware of anybody else adding that nice DOD acceptance stamp to their retro lowers besides McKay.

9.5/10 Repro, even took the time to find an unnotched safety and a grey mag release. The only give-away is the NDS forge mark in the upper.

>>33548671
that isn't even the right barrel type, loser. lol.

>>33549933
>faux third pin
RIP Doggo

File: 117818801-tfb.jpg (103KB, 785x589px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 785x589px

>>33543610
wrong

Get a KAC 2-600m off ebay and then pair with whatever front sight you like the profile of.

I found the Yankee hill machine to be an excellent set of backup irons.

>>33542983
I just have a hard time actually keeping the front sight centered. Its no problem with Notch sights or Pistol sights at all.
Also, I feel as though the MBUS 3 sights are pretty obstructive to my view which may be my main issue.

File: rm16a1-5.jpg (253KB, 1532x1296px) Image search: [Google]

253KB, 1532x1296px

>>33549933
Looks like you fudged up

>>33548671

Mil surp dude, you are such a faggot. kys