A better AR front sight ???
- Thread starter fmj50
- Start date
Marquezj16
New member
I'm confused as to what is your question? Are you asking if the sight you have is better than a standard sight? Or are you asking if there are better sights than the one you have?
Marquezj16
New member
They look after market - My M&P 15-22 came with removable front sight on the handguard. And the ones he has looks like HK style sights and the rear sights are removable carry handles.
Last edited:
Marquezj16
New member
@ fmj50 - they looks nice. How's their performance? Are they easier to acquire targets? More accurate?
Reply
Sorry, Yes I was just asking for your opinions.
Yes, I fired 2 AR 15s one with standard and one with this new design and found them to be more accurate ( better sight picture) and faster target aquisition.
There was a local Ploice nstructor at the range next to me and he found the same.
If any of you are in the Denver area, and have military training, I would love to have you try this sight out and give me an opinion.
This is my first rapid fire ( 100 rds./min.) test target, 8" target at 100 yards off a bipod.
Sorry, Yes I was just asking for your opinions.
Yes, I fired 2 AR 15s one with standard and one with this new design and found them to be more accurate ( better sight picture) and faster target aquisition.
There was a local Ploice nstructor at the range next to me and he found the same.
If any of you are in the Denver area, and have military training, I would love to have you try this sight out and give me an opinion.
This is my first rapid fire ( 100 rds./min.) test target, 8" target at 100 yards off a bipod.
8 inches from any AR isn't acceptable, no way, no how.
Looking at the target I'm gonna say the front sight has nothing to do with it.
Front sights on an AR need to be ridgid, Most are. That also have to be adjustable for elevation. You'll do most of your sight elevation changes from the rear sight but still need to get "some" elevation from the front sight.
Example. I sight my AR in at 200, click all the way to 600 on the rear sight. When I move to 1000 yards, I use my 600 yard zero and turn the front sight down 4 full revolutions down.
Many times on the old 'A1 or SP1 style, the front sight was bent so you got windage changes. You could live with it and make the windage changes or you could stick the sight in the lathe and true it up.
Front sight thickness is up to the individual. I like mine to be (when looking at the target the same thickness as the NRA 200 yard High Power target. Ideally I like the rear appature to be about 3 mm.
Now looking at the target I see several possibilities, 1: your not looking at the front sight (it should be dark and crisp, rear sight and target should be fuzzy). 2: You don't have a good position, with a good natural point of aim, including poor cheek weld, 3: Poor follow through. 4: The bipod isn't working for you.
Notice how all the shots are to the left, That by it self tells you you don't have a natural point of aim, You point the rifle in the direction of the target, mussle it until its where is suppose to be, then as you fire, you relax and that forces the rounds to the left. May have to do with the bipod not allowing you to keep your NPI.
The large group shows me you're not looking at the front sight.
This of course is just a guess from looking at the target, without watching you shoot.
I like the ideal you are asking to set down with someone to help you. Nothing beats a good coach.
I don't live in the Denver area but about 3.5 hours north (Newcastle WY). If you're willing to donate a weekend (or a couple days during the week) and come up to here, I'll spend the time working with you.
If you're willing to do that, I'll bet you lunch, you'll shoot a lot better groups at the end of the week end. I'm not the best shooter by a long shot, but I have coached the AK NG Service Rifle team for a good many years.
If you leave your bi pod home, it wouldnt' break my heart,
This is an ideal what a 100 yard iron sighted AR should look like, this was shot rapid fire, sling unsupported. To give you an ideal of the group size, the scoring rings are 1/2 inch apart.
Don't worry about the front sight cause I don't think its the problem.
Looking at the target I'm gonna say the front sight has nothing to do with it.
Front sights on an AR need to be ridgid, Most are. That also have to be adjustable for elevation. You'll do most of your sight elevation changes from the rear sight but still need to get "some" elevation from the front sight.
Example. I sight my AR in at 200, click all the way to 600 on the rear sight. When I move to 1000 yards, I use my 600 yard zero and turn the front sight down 4 full revolutions down.
Many times on the old 'A1 or SP1 style, the front sight was bent so you got windage changes. You could live with it and make the windage changes or you could stick the sight in the lathe and true it up.
Front sight thickness is up to the individual. I like mine to be (when looking at the target the same thickness as the NRA 200 yard High Power target. Ideally I like the rear appature to be about 3 mm.
Now looking at the target I see several possibilities, 1: your not looking at the front sight (it should be dark and crisp, rear sight and target should be fuzzy). 2: You don't have a good position, with a good natural point of aim, including poor cheek weld, 3: Poor follow through. 4: The bipod isn't working for you.
Notice how all the shots are to the left, That by it self tells you you don't have a natural point of aim, You point the rifle in the direction of the target, mussle it until its where is suppose to be, then as you fire, you relax and that forces the rounds to the left. May have to do with the bipod not allowing you to keep your NPI.
The large group shows me you're not looking at the front sight.
This of course is just a guess from looking at the target, without watching you shoot.
I like the ideal you are asking to set down with someone to help you. Nothing beats a good coach.
I don't live in the Denver area but about 3.5 hours north (Newcastle WY). If you're willing to donate a weekend (or a couple days during the week) and come up to here, I'll spend the time working with you.
If you're willing to do that, I'll bet you lunch, you'll shoot a lot better groups at the end of the week end. I'm not the best shooter by a long shot, but I have coached the AK NG Service Rifle team for a good many years.
If you leave your bi pod home, it wouldnt' break my heart,
This is an ideal what a 100 yard iron sighted AR should look like, this was shot rapid fire, sling unsupported. To give you an ideal of the group size, the scoring rings are 1/2 inch apart.
Don't worry about the front sight cause I don't think its the problem.
kraigwy
Now that is an opinion !!!, Thank You
> I am in no way even close to your qualifications, I am impressed !!
> The black on the target is 8", the group measures about 4.5"
> The front sight post is M6x.75 so any AK/SKS post will work, and it is adjustable for elevation.
>Do you happen to know the post thickness of NRA 200 ?, I'd like to know.
> Yes, I am sure I could use some coaching to say the least.
> Due to severe spinal stynosis in several places, I can't stand and shoot anymore, but I am again impressed with your target / group from a sling.
> I have a small business now, trying to keep busy, and this is a new product I am looking in to.
I have shot many military rifles / carbines, and when I started shooting front hooded post sights with rear apertures, the front protected blade was just second rate to me. By my research, most militarys throughout the world have used this except the US up until recently with the new EBRM14T, which now has a front hooded post.
>|> What I really want is someone of your knowledge to try this sight out and give me an honest evaluation.
I have heard, but not verified, that Eugene Stoner wanted a front hooded post sight on the M16, but the military decided that since the 1903 through the M14 that it didn't make sense to change what everyone was used to in the middle of the Viet nam war.
> Is there any way I can get the gun to you for testing the sight, and returned to me with an evaluation, since my physical conditions would make it real hard to get to you. ??
Thanks for this valuable info., looking forward to hearing back.
Damon / true shot technologies
Now that is an opinion !!!, Thank You
> I am in no way even close to your qualifications, I am impressed !!
> The black on the target is 8", the group measures about 4.5"
> The front sight post is M6x.75 so any AK/SKS post will work, and it is adjustable for elevation.
>Do you happen to know the post thickness of NRA 200 ?, I'd like to know.
> Yes, I am sure I could use some coaching to say the least.
> Due to severe spinal stynosis in several places, I can't stand and shoot anymore, but I am again impressed with your target / group from a sling.
> I have a small business now, trying to keep busy, and this is a new product I am looking in to.
I have shot many military rifles / carbines, and when I started shooting front hooded post sights with rear apertures, the front protected blade was just second rate to me. By my research, most militarys throughout the world have used this except the US up until recently with the new EBRM14T, which now has a front hooded post.
>|> What I really want is someone of your knowledge to try this sight out and give me an honest evaluation.
I have heard, but not verified, that Eugene Stoner wanted a front hooded post sight on the M16, but the military decided that since the 1903 through the M14 that it didn't make sense to change what everyone was used to in the middle of the Viet nam war.
> Is there any way I can get the gun to you for testing the sight, and returned to me with an evaluation, since my physical conditions would make it real hard to get to you. ??
Thanks for this valuable info., looking forward to hearing back.
Damon / true shot technologies
L_Killkenny
New member
Want better AND FASTER? It's called a low powered scope.
LK
LK
A front sight width of .0625 will be dern close. But this is what works for me, some people like a narrower front sight. It's what works best for you. .
I have no ideal of the legalities of sending a rifle to someone so they can try it out. I'm assuming a FFL would be involved, but I don't know. Someone else would have to chime in on that.
As to the front sight. I really don't think it matters, Square would be better.
I've never seen the need for a hooded sight, but I also don't see the where it would hurt anything.
Basically any post (assuming you can get your elevation correct) will work. Aperture sights front and back are the most accurate
Excluding the '03a3s, our military rifles have "ears" protecting the front sight post. I've used M16/ARs since I was handed one when I hit the ground in Vietnam in 1967. Never seen a front sight damages in normal use.
I've only had problems with "ears" on my 1917 Enfield. For some weird reason, when I snap shoot, I have to be careful to get on the front sight instead of one if the 1917's ears. I've never had that problem with any of my other rifles, M1 Carbine, '03a3, Garand, ARs, M1A. Just the 1917. Weird huh?
Don't get hung up on my posted group, I shoot better in a setting rapid fire position then I do from a sandbagged bench. When I get on my hind legs, its a completely different story cause I'm too lazy to practice any more. I posted that to show the capabilities of the ARs.
reply
Kraig, thanks again, and Thank You for Your Service !!!
I am having posts made to .060, s/b getting them soon.
If you are interested in doing this, I'll talk to my FFL and see what's involved.
If he can & you want to, I'll pay shipping both ways.
All I know is from an "open sights" standpoint, I belive this sight is faster and gives a better sight picture thereby making it more accurate.
There is a physical aspect too. This type of sight actually forces your eye to the target, theres a whole explanation on my website. trueshottechnologies.com
I assume that's why Stoner and most other military weapons use it / HK / Sig / AK / M249 / RPD/K / Galil / FN Scar / even the Hi Point carbine.
I guess I'm like most, I want the best for the best military, the USA.
As far as " a low powered scope", I don't believe any of us should be without iron sight proficiency. I was told Marines must qualify the first 2 rounds on irons before being issed any optics.
Obviously, a scope is more accurate, or an Acog, etc., but if they break you better have BUIS and be good with them, I think most will agree.
Anyway, Kraig, let me know & I will call my FFL, and thanks again.
Kraig, thanks again, and Thank You for Your Service !!!
I am having posts made to .060, s/b getting them soon.
If you are interested in doing this, I'll talk to my FFL and see what's involved.
If he can & you want to, I'll pay shipping both ways.
All I know is from an "open sights" standpoint, I belive this sight is faster and gives a better sight picture thereby making it more accurate.
There is a physical aspect too. This type of sight actually forces your eye to the target, theres a whole explanation on my website. trueshottechnologies.com
I assume that's why Stoner and most other military weapons use it / HK / Sig / AK / M249 / RPD/K / Galil / FN Scar / even the Hi Point carbine.
I guess I'm like most, I want the best for the best military, the USA.
As far as " a low powered scope", I don't believe any of us should be without iron sight proficiency. I was told Marines must qualify the first 2 rounds on irons before being issed any optics.
Obviously, a scope is more accurate, or an Acog, etc., but if they break you better have BUIS and be good with them, I think most will agree.
Anyway, Kraig, let me know & I will call my FFL, and thanks again.
If you want me to do it, I will give you an HONEST test and evaluation.
Here is another ideal, "Uppers" aren't covered by ATF (assuming they are 16 in barrels), meaning no FFL cost involved. If you want to send your upper, I would put it on one of my lowers, we are after all looking at the sights.
Accuracy in the AR is in the Upper, and assuming a good trigger, the lower dosn't get involved.
That group @ 100 yds freehand rapid w/ peep sights - I'd have to see it to believe it.
I don't suck at shooting rifles. I may be a poor shot campared to you. But... your "100 yd peep sight " photo above is bull****. Most bench / scope guys can't do that group. The internet is a great place to tell lies.
That's not "freehand" its the setting rapid position. Want to see it, come for a visit. Cleaned 200 yard rapid fire targets are quite common in High Power Setting Rapid Positions. Especielly now with todays ARs.
If fact that stage is won by X count, not whether its cleanned or not.
That isn't a 200 yard RF target reduced to 100 yards, its the 600 yard target reduced. (Hence the smaller scoring rings).
Now "freehand" (I'm assuming you mean standing) is a different ball game, I can't now, nor have I ever been able to clean a standing target. As I said, now I'm worse. Since I got my Distingushed Badge I don't take it serious, and frankly I'm too lazy to put in the work Off Hand Shooting requires.
Setting rapid is another matter all together. It has always been my best position, and its the one I use in sighting in my hunting rifles.
Setting Rapid and Small Bore English Matchs are two types of matches (or stages) you better clean if you want to place in any of those type postitions.
Check some NRA High Power Match bullitens and see how many winners DON'T clean the 200 yard rapid stage.
Edited to give the 200 yard rapid fire match results from 2011 National Matches at Camp Perry. (all with iron sights)
http://www.nrahq.org/compete/natpdf/cp442-11.pdf
Last edited:
Yet there are palma shooters that shoot that or better all the time. Kraig is in no way BSing, and to call him out is rather ridiculous. And while thats a great open sighted group which i couldn't do open sighted. Saying it's impossible with a scope/bench? What world do you live in? No offense but this just makes no sense.
Hell i did this with what little to no skill i have on a bipod and rear rest. 2 shots to the right are fouling, then 9 shots in the hole, 2 flyers at 100yds.
Oh here is a group @ 1000yds that david tubb shot with his 6xc. Do a little research before you try to bash someone, especially as reputable as Kraig.
Last edited: