If FAL has one glaring deficiency, it is the rear sight. Does

File: PC220062.jpg (244KB, 2377x1783px) Image search: [Google]

244KB, 2377x1783px

Garand

File: 16_yo.png (896KB, 561x780px) Image search: [Google]

896KB, 561x780px

>>34177793
>he doesn't shoot with both eyes open
disgusting

For that matter, why does either rifle use a circular rear sight and a non circular front sight hood? I find it difficult to lock up a consistent sight picture on my M1A. If you make the peep circular and the hood circular, you can line your sights up nice and even, then just put the front post on the target. Why do people sperg about the M1A having the best irons when considering this glaring weakness?

>>34177931
because the front sight hood just protects the front sight from getting canted or damaged and that particular shape allows the most light in, you're not supposed to aim with the front sight hood anyway so it doesn't seem like that big of a problem to me

File: Stg58 outside.jpg (3MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3264x2448px

You sound like a big dumb faggot OP

>>34177793
Stop posting this thread

>>34177793
Op im pretty sure I've seen G3 style rear sights specially made for FALs. I know that because I too think the original rear sight is Ass

tight apertures have a slight magnifying effect, so who the fuck knows I wasn't there when they made it

File: 20170606165629.jpg (35KB, 810x709px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 810x709px

aperture is useless. shoot with your hand, aim with your faith.

The FAL sight is perfectly fine and it has much more substantial flaws than a sight that's no more obtrusive than anything from that Era or beyond. The camera is also too close on the garand

>>34179993
>why no aim down sights commissar
>THE EMPEROR GUIDES MY HAND

Idiot, move your eye ball closer

File: IMG_2400.jpg (59KB, 550x640px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 550x640px

>>34178040
You may be thinking of the C1A1 sight.