Very first AR target grouping

[silverado427 10,715]

Hey OP where you at GSSC Wednesday afternoon.

[MichaelDiggs 29]

16 minutes ago, silverado427 said:

Hey OP where you at GSSC Wednesday afternoon.

Wednesday, no. I was there last week Monday or Tuesday. I also hope to get on range 14 since I live literally 2 minutes away. I really wish they had more hours there. I've never been there before.

[GRIZ 3,369]

On 11/26/2017 at 3:57 PM, High Exposure said:

Iron sights are over rated if you are buying an aimpoint. There are only so many hours in a day and so many rounds Inna case of ammo. Spend your time and money training on what you will use the most. I only cover BUIS briefly and them we zero them, fold them down, and forget them. 

In 15 years of shooting ARs, I've never used irons unless I was zeroing them or training specifically to deploy them.

I agree with Ray Ray on their importance - even though at this point they are vistigial - and all of my rifles have them. I just never use them.

Yes, it is easier to shoot better with an Aimpoint or an optic.  However I only had iron sights in the olden days and they worked well for serious social situations. I don't see any reason to abandon their use.  The optic may be faster on longer range shots but the iron sights are always there.

All of my ARs have an Aimpoint or optic...but they all also have iron sights.  When I shoot them I shoot both sighting systems.

JMO

[High Exposure 5,664]

Griz, you learned on irons - that’s all you had. If irons were the only reliable aiming system we currently had, I’d say spend your time and $$ training irons - but a lot has changed since Vietnam. Irons are adequate they can get the job done, but an RDS can get it done faster, from more positions, and be just as accurate.

If you enlisted today, they’d give you cursory instruction on the irons and give you the Lion’s share of the time and ammo available to spend sharpening your skills with RDS.

[MichaelDiggs 29]

I am going to keep my magpul iron sites on the gun with the Aimpoint. 1/3 cowitness should be exact with that Daniel Defense picatinny mount. Since I'll mostly be using the red dot, do I need to keep the FRONT magpul iron site on? I already have a workbench in my garage, so I need to clear/clean some things out and start working on the metal in there. Can't do it in the kitchen anymore. 

 

Finally got my castle wrench today. It was a little loose and the buffer tube would just barely move if I tried to turn it. Now that I tightened my castle nut the buttstock is a hair shy of being off center. I take it I need to loosen the castle nut and adjust the buttstock for the extra amount of tightening? I never took it all apart (yet) and it felt like the castle nut had a ratcheting click to it or something. And yes, I removed my buttstock to see where the heck Rebel hid the pin. They hid the pin right under the lever that controls how far the stock goes in and out, and they even plugged the hole with black plastic somehow to look exactly like nothing was there. Very slick. I was thinking of pulling out my stock one more notch, but decided to put it back together and wait until my optic and sling comes. Never know when WWIII is going to hit stateside.  

BTY, if you need ammo cans bulkammo has them for $8 each. They are usually $20 a pop.

 

[High Exposure 5,664]

Keep your front sight and your BUIS. Make sure they are zeroed.

Make sure you didn’t tear up the threads on the receiver extension (Commonly called the bufffer tube) when you tightened the castle nut. You may have overtightened it a bit and trashed the threads that keep everything aligned.

Best bet - and what I would do - buy a new mil-spec receiver extension and a Magpul fixed carbine stock. Problem solved.

[GRIZ 3,369]

1 hour ago, High Exposure said:

Griz, you learned on irons - that’s all you had. If irons were the only reliable aiming system we currently had, I’d say spend your time and $$ training irons - but a lot has changed since Vietnam. Irons are adequate they can get the job done, but an RDS can get it done faster, from more positions, and be just as accurate.

If you enlisted today, they’d give you cursory instruction on the irons and give you the Lion’s share of the time and ammo available to spend sharpening your skills with RDS.

I agree RDS are easier to use and probably more accurate than irons.  That's includes people like me using them.  I'm not comdemning them.  I'm no Luddite.

These and stuff like smart munitions makes warfighting more precise

Optics and electronic siting systems have really only been available for mass issue to the troops for the  past 15 years or so.  Their durability and effectiveness has been proven in the Middle East.

There was an incident in the Middle East a few years ago where some thought that Marines had committed some "execurions" due to the number of insurgents that were dead from headshots.  The insurgents were killed by Marines in the firefight.  The Marines had ACOGs.

I guess my point is if you don't learn how to use irons one would think a Garand is a useless POS.  Even Zeke shot my Garand  well

[MichaelDiggs 29]

6 hours ago, High Exposure said:

Keep your front sight and your BUIS. Make sure they are zeroed.

Make sure you didn’t tear up the threads on the receiver extension (Commonly called the bufffer tube) when you tightened the castle nut. You may have overtightened it a bit and trashed the threads that keep everything aligned.

Best bet - and what I would do - buy a new mil-spec receiver extension and a Magpul fixed carbine stock. Problem solved.

I may just take the tube off tomorrow and check it out. I'm a do it / fix it kind of person and pretty good with my hands. Have just about every tool and was aware of the threads so I didn't iron man it. I couldn't find my torque wrench right away, and I'm guessing every tube/receiver has a certain rating. Man, it is time for bed!

Update 

Worked on my buffer tube and stock. Everything was good. The little pin that holds the spring in was different then what I usually see, but got around it. Put a drop of oil on the threads, screwed everything on and back in business. The entire rifle is just springs and pins. Now I want to build one from scratch. Wonder how much less the rifle I have would be. Good night or good morning! 

 

Edited November 28, 2017 by MichaelDiggs

[Zeke 5,504]

9 hours ago, GRIZ said:

  Even Zeke shot my Garand  well

Wut da fu...?

Cuts

[GRIZ 3,369]

1 hour ago, Zeke said:

Wut da fu...?

Cuts

But you did shoot it pretty good.

[silverado427 10,715]

Yo ! did you post a rifle pic 

[Pew Pew Plates 358]

If you run a vortex spitfire AR you don't need back up irons, as a dead battery or fried circuits still leave you a black reticle.  

My opinion on leaving the fixed front sight... I think it's clutter in your sight picture.  Also if you manage a true co-witness, when you go to hold-over beyond 200 yards then you lose sight of your target as it will be behind your front sight post, no?

[Zeke 5,504]

3 hours ago, Pew Pew Plates said:

If you run a vortex spitfire AR you don't need back up irons, as a dead battery or fried circuits still leave you a black reticle.  

My opinion on leaving the fixed front sight... I think it's clutter in your sight picture.  Also if you manage a true co-witness, when you go to hold-over beyond 200 yards then you lose sight of your target as it will be behind your front sight post, no?

Flips on mine and Flips will go on my wife’s. Hers may get a qd scope mount.

 

[High Exposure 5,664]

3 hours ago, Pew Pew Plates said:

My opinion on leaving the fixed front sight... I think it's clutter in your sight picture.  Also if you manage a true co-witness, when you go to hold-over beyond 200 yards then you lose sight of your target as it will be behind your front sight post, no?

I use a lower 1/3 co-witness (which is superior to an absolute co- witness in every way), so that may change things if you are a proponent of an absolute co-witness.

That being said:

1) I don’t even see the front sight tower. When looking through my optic.

2) The front sight tower does not get in the way at longer distances (in shoot RDS our past 300 yards). Think about it, your sight systems are still co-witnessed - optic and irons. If your dot is on target, then aiming through your irons will yield the same sight picture only with the dot in the middle. No obstruction of the target by the tower.

 

[Pew Pew Plates 358]

2 hours ago, High Exposure said:

I use a lower 1/3 co-witness (which is superior to an absolute co- witness in every way), so that may change things if you are a proponent of an absolute co-witness.

That being said:

1) I don’t even see the front sight tower. When looking through my optic.

2) The front sight tower does not get in the way at longer distances (in shoot RDS our past 300 yards). Think about it, your sight systems are still co-witnessed - optic and irons. If your dot is on target, then aiming through your irons will yield the same sight picture only with the dot in the middle. No obstruction of the target by the tower.

 

Genuine question on #2, If I have a 52" hold over at 500 yards, how would a tower not get in the way?  I wind up holding so far over the target I can't possibly believe the tower wouldn't cover the target (again assuming true co-witness with front sight).  Using your example of dot on, irons on, I'd have the tip of the front sight post 52" over my target and the target would be somewhere down the post or in the front sight base.  I shoot a 50/200 zero

[High Exposure 5,664]

4 hours ago, Pew Pew Plates said:

Genuine question on #2, If I have a 52" hold over at 500 yards, how would a tower not get in the way?  I wind up holding so far over the target I can't possibly believe the tower wouldn't cover the target (again assuming true co-witness with front sight).  Using your example of dot on, irons on, I'd have the tip of the front sight post 52" over my target and the target would be somewhere down the post or in the front sight base.  I shoot a 50/200 zero

I also shoot a 50/200 zero. Quick side note - With a 50/200 yard zero, your holdover at 500 yards should be about 36” not 52” which makes this even easier to do.

I don't think you realize how small of a change in muzzle angle you need at 0 yards to create point of aim 52" above your target at 500 yards. You only need to change the angle of the muzzle 0.17 degrees to induce your 52" of difference.

Or think about it this way:

Say you have an Aimpoint T1 with a 2 MOA dot.

At 100 yards, the dot covers two inches, at 200 yards 4 inches, 300 yards 6 inches, 400 yards 8 inches, and at 500 yards your dot covers 10 inches. If you have a 52” holdover, it is only a hair over 5 dots high. Plenty of room in that glass without interference from the front sight tower.

Another way to look at it: 52” is only 4’4”. Think about how much room in your optic a 6’ human takes up at 500 yards. Add about 2/3rds the height of the person over the intended target area for your holdover - again plenty of room before your irons get in the way of your aiming point through the glass

This is not the case with strict iron sight shooting. With iron sights, you are always obscuring everything vertically below your point of aim for your desired point of impact with the sight. That’s how iron sights work. At closer ranges you don't notice the sight obscuring your target because your target appears significantly wider than the front sight post because it is so close. But when you consider that at 500 yards, your front sight post is wider than the shoulders of a man, you can start to see the problems that may arise.

Now, If you are using your co-witnessed sights at the same time ie: irons and red dot aligned on target (and I don't know why on God's green Earth you would do that) then yes, your front sight apparatus will obscure your target when looking through the optic at any distance because - again, to get hits with iron sights you purposefully have to cover up everything below.

This will be true regardless of using BUIS or front sight tower and is one of the reasons I prefer RDS to iron sights.

[silverado427 10,715]

You guy's just totally fuked up the new guy.     OP just practice , Take your time  have fun and don't get frustrated. I shoot 25 yds all the time. I go to R 14 when ever I can. I  love the red dot  for 25-100 yds after that I need a scope.  But that's just me and I'm old and just a average shooter. Here's a pic of my first six shoots yesterday indoors 25 yds. I find the 3m post it notes.  help me group better. imho.   50/200 zero so it shoots low @ 25 yds

[High Exposure 5,664]

I use the 3"X3" post it notes for zeroing. They are great.

[Zeke 5,504]

Note to self; add post-it’s to range bag.

[MichaelDiggs 29]

7 hours ago, silverado427 said:

You guy's just totally fuked up the new guy.     OP just practice , Take your time  have fun and don't get frustrated. I shoot 25 yds all the time. I go to R 14 when ever I can. I  love the red dot  for 25-100 yds after that I need a scope.  But that's just me and I'm old and just a average shooter. Here's a pic of my first six shoots yesterday indoors 25 yds. I find the 3m post it notes.  help me group better. imho.

 

I get it. I can tell and weed out what I should be doing at this time and not. I have good common sense and can figure out who to listen to. The guys with the one sentence posts that I can barely read anyway, I pretty much skip by them. There has been some really good information from a couple guys in here and do appreciate it. Thanks. 

 

[Displaced Texan 11,739]

7 hours ago, High Exposure said:

I use the 3"X3" post it notes for zeroing. They are great.

I’ve used them for years. Great hack to help zero. 

[Eric. 9]

On 11/25/2017 at 4:26 PM, GRIZ said:

Watch your breathing.  Vertical stringing like you have on your target is usually due to breathing. Inhale, exhale 1/2 way, hold it, align sights, shoot.

With all due respect, this is not the best method.  According to the ppl smarter than me, you should shoot at your respiratory pause i.e. after you naturally exhale.

The idea is that you want to release as much tension as possible.  Holding a "half breath" in creates tension.  As you get deeper into it, the respiratory pause position also gives the most consistent body/chest position i.e. the lungs are not expanded inconsistently.  The last bit is prolly not something you need to worry about at this time.

[GRIZ 3,369]

4 hours ago, Eric. said:

With all due respect, this is not the best method.  According to the ppl smarter than me, you should shoot at your respiratory pause i.e. after you naturally exhale.

The idea is that you want to release as much tension as possible.  Holding a "half breath" in creates tension.  As you get deeper into it, the respiratory pause position also gives the most consistent body/chest position i.e. the lungs are not expanded inconsistently.  The last bit is prolly not something you need to worry about at this time.

With all due respect,  waiting for the respiratory pause may not work for everyone.  The problem is timing your sight alignment with the respiratory pause.  If you wait for the pause and take an extra second to align your sights you're holding no breath.  While your brain is telling your diaphragm to contract to get more air in you're overriding that.  That will cause blood pressure to go up and create other tensions.  You really need to time your final sight alignment with the pause

When you use the half breath method I described you are calling the point when you'll hold that half breath.  One would normally feel more comfortable doing that.  You still have air in your lungs and that is more comfortable than having none. When you get used to it your chest position is pretty consistent.

The best recommendation I can give for the method I described is millions of people learned to shoot well using it. Nothe saying it's the best but it definitely has proven it works.

[Eric. 9]

On 12/18/2017 at 10:13 PM, GRIZ said:

With all due respect,  waiting for the respiratory pause may not work for everyone.  The problem is timing your sight alignment with the respiratory pause.  If you wait for the pause and take an extra second to align your sights you're holding no breath.  While your brain is telling your diaphragm to contract to get more air in you're overriding that.  That will cause blood pressure to go up and create other tensions.  You really need to time your final sight alignment with the pause

When you use the half breath method I described you are calling the point when you'll hold that half breath.  One would normally feel more comfortable doing that.  You still have air in your lungs and that is more comfortable than having none. When you get used to it your chest position is pretty consistent.

The best recommendation I can give for the method I described is millions of people learned to shoot well using it. Nothe saying it's the best but it definitely has proven it works.

Just for clarification, when you hit your respiratory pause, you should still have around "1/8 breath" left.  You shouldnt force out every last breath.

 

I dont dispute the old technique.  It works.  Then again, thimgs evolve too.  Kinda like how the old prone position incorporated one leg bent with the knee under your hip.  That evolved into the flat isosceles leg position.

 

I suppose one can just run with whichever they feel is best.

 

Cheers.

[GRIZ 3,369]

6 minutes ago, Eric. said:

Just for clarification, when you hit your respiratory pause, you should still have around "1/8 breath" left.  You shouldnt force out every last breath.

 

I dont dispute the old technique.  It works.  Then again, thimgs evolve too.  Kinda like how the old prone position incorporated one leg bent with the knee under your hip.  That evolved into the flat isosceles leg position.

 

I suppose one can just run with whichever they feel is best.

 

Cheers.

FWIW, I was taught the flat isoceles leg position in basic training in 1967.

I think a lot of things that used to be done get "rediscovered".  Many others and myself were running a M16 wet in 1968.

I've always been an advocate of using what works for you as long as it's safe.

[High Exposure 5,664]

Good luck getting into a stable and low flat isosceles prone position with armor and mags on your chest.

The high knee is where it’s at in kit.

The situations dictates...

Not everyone’s needs or capabilities are the same.

[10X 3,296]

1 hour ago, Eric. said:

I dont dispute the old technique.  It works.  Then again, thimgs evolve too.  Kinda like how the old prone position incorporated one leg bent with the knee under your hip.  That evolved into the flat isosceles leg position.

I don't know that it's the 'old' position.   International shooters (Olympics, World Cup, Pan Am Games) mostly shoot bent leg prone, and I think that's the dominant form you'll see at US competitions like Camp Perry.   I've not seen any trend away from bent leg to isosceles in the precision events.

[Eric. 9]

10 hours ago, 10X said:

I don't know that it's the 'old' position.   International shooters (Olympics, World Cup, Pan Am Games) mostly shoot bent leg prone, and I think that's the dominant form you'll see at US competitions like Camp Perry.   I've not seen any trend away from bent leg to isosceles in the precision events.

Yep, those events, as well as the service rifle guys still use the older method.  The PRS guys(for example) have used the newer method, for years.

[Eric. 9]

11 hours ago, High Exposure said:

Good luck getting into a stable and low flat isosceles prone position with armor and mags on your chest.

The high knee is where it’s at in kit.

The situations dictates...

Not everyone’s needs or capabilities are the same.

This is 100% incorrect.  The military has long adopted the flat, isosceles prone position.

[High Exposure 5,664]

As a guy that regularly shoots in full kit, and has been trained by tier one military guys, I disagree.