Thread 64475185

Is the big hole ever actually used in doctrine? From what I understand based on that arfcom thread with one of the guys from the committee it was intended to be used with the A1 tritium front sight night sight, but the night sights were never issued en mass. it also seems odd that the A1 had a night sight option and some contemporary foreign rifles like the galil and famas have night sights and so much of the falklands war and desert storm had night fighting that they never issued night sights for the A2. granted, this of course gets mooted the second illuminated optics get issued en mass

>>64475185 (OP)
Yeah

>en mass
>not once but twice

>>64475185 (OP)
this shit is unusable
a complete waste of metal

maybe on a bazooka but definitely not on a rifle

>>64475185 (OP)
The 0-2? Yes it gets used, at 0-200 meters, it's fantastic for that use.
The A1 sights are trash tier, the first apature is too small, and the second is too big. The front post dissappears under low light or trying to see obscured targets.
>best combat irons
HK diopter.
>best irons period
M16A2.

>>64475185 (OP)
i've seen plenty of people say they weren't trained on it, and just as many say they were trained, and people meeting those either or while in
it seems to be one of those things that just depended on when you were in, where you were in, and who was training you

>>64475229
>t. no guns
you know how I can tell you are no gunz
>The A1 sights are trash tier, the first aperture is too small, and the second is too big.
both apertures on the A1 are the same size and no one uses the 0-200 big hole on the A2 to shoot at less than 300 meters. everyone just uses the 300 meter sight and aims center of mass

>>64475250
no shit hes a noguns, he thinks diopter sights are anything but abysmal

>>64475250
>>64475229
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/AJK_2oKTcN4
there's also the M16A2 army memo that also says both apertures on the A1 sight are the same size

>>64475259
HK diopter sights are my favorite, if you can’t shoot with them that’s a skill issue.

>>64475269
>if you can’t shoot with them
anyone can shoot with them, they're just very shitty is all

its like a plain whitebread ham sandwich without anything else, anyone can eat it, but do you seriously want that to be your every day meal?

>>64475250
>literally proves me right
DUMBASS

>>64475250
>>64475259
>noguns
Wrong, keep being wrong.

I use the big hole

>>64475341
oh no, its clinically retarded ):

>>64475281
>very shitty
>100 meter/low light V
Excellent for close shooting/low light
>200-400
Easily to change and more accurate than the fucktard A1 sights.

I use the square hole

>>64475345
>noooo you're _
>gets proved wrong
>nooooo you're retarded
How the fuck does your brain even work? It must be so smooth it can act as a quantum fucking mirror.

>>64475338
you can't read retard. also see>>64475262
you have no guns and no dick
>>64475341
>no time stamp
>leaf gun
you're a no gunz.
M16A1s have 2 apertures of the same size unless you specifically have one of the models with night sights
https://archive.org/details/milmanual-tm-9-1005-249-10---operators-manual-for-m16-m16a1/page/n49/mode/2up

>>64475355
>just uses the carry handle
>no sights, not front or rear, just square holes
BASED

>>64475185 (OP)
M16A2 based

>>64475356
>It must be so smooth it can act as a quantum fucking mirror.
just you wait till you try shooting my ass, shits gonna bounce off like cum on Teflon

>>64475349
there's less than 3 inches of rise with the 250 yard A1 close sight, retard

>>64475360
I have an A2 but it's a national match hbar

>>64475365
>less than 3 inches of rise
my ex used to tell me that

Combine the peep sight from your flip buis with a 1moa red dot and you have a functional red dot at >200 yards, if you set your dot zero to just below the actual zero.

A lot of hassle when a 1-6 lpvo does all of that in one and more.

>>64475229
Holy shit that was one trash take after another in such a relatively short post, I'm impressed

>>64475358
Cry fucking more, ask yourself why nobody kept the A1 sights.

>>64475365
>shooting 250 with the first apature
No wonder you can't hit shit.

>>64475367
I just went with a Fulton Armory A2 and stuck a Geissele SSA trigger in it. Although the match A2 rabbit hole is always pretty attractive, especially with the free float handguard that looks nearly exactly like a normal A2 but they start to get disgusting heavy

>>64475389
I like that kraut gun but you write like Charles Manson

>>64475229
>at 0-200 meters, it's fantastic for that use.
0-2 aperture is ass in just about any situation.
>The A1 sights are trash tier
Sorry you got filtered
>the first apature is too small, and the second is too big.
What the actual flying fuck are you talking about
>best combat irons HK diopter.
lmfao
>best irons period M16A2.
lmfaaaoooo

I think iron sight Marines weren't even allowed to flip their A2 sights to the big hole until they hit the fleet

>>64475389
no one kept the A1 sights because the marines wanted a sigh that was better for highpower and KD ranges, you no gunz troon

>>64475398
Maybe I am. I was just freehanding without a backer, and really didn't care about neatness.

>>64475404
I shit you not there's documented instances that the aperture was welded in place so they couldn't use the 0-200m aperture, it was that reviled.

>>64475392
the short aperture on the A2 is zeroed for 250 yards retard, it's in the manual
https://archive.org/details/milmanual-tm-9-1005-249-10---operators-manual-for-m16-m16a1/page/n51/mode/2up
>>64475396
yeah my A2 has a fulton lower and compas lake upper with the heavy ass free float "a2" handguard. fucking fulton installed the service rifle Geissele trigger at like max in spec weight for both stages for some reason

>>64475408
how did they zero the guns? wouldn't that fuck with being able to adjust windage?

>>64475399
>noooo the close range/night sight is too big!!!!!!
Dumbass.
>>64475405
The A1 was a garbage sight, so fucking bad that the Marines, the premier fucking rifle users of the US military didn't like it should tell you something.
>A2 sights are too sloppy!
>A2 sights are for KD/Camp Perry!
Pick one you diseased troon.

>>64475408
Kinda silly, desu. I sure hope that the guys in Fallujah were using the 0-200. You can't see shit in low light with the small aperture.

>>64475418
Anon you're talking to a proven liar, if you think irons were welded in place you're legitimately retarded.

>>64475281
>food analogy

>>64475411
I went with Fulton because they were actually the closest to an actual A2 (barring the lower receiver markings) and the Criterion barrels they stick in them have a reputation for accuracy

The Geissele NM trigger always has me curious but I've never seen or gotten to test one before. Something like a 4 pound first stage and 0.5 pound second stage seems like it'd be a really nice trigger that still manages to be safe and idiot proof

>>64475419
no one uses the big hole you tranny and the army memo says the M16A2 only enhanced hit rates past 500 yards on a kd range when no one shoots that far in combat, troon
Paul preferred A1 sights. sounds like you're the no gunz tranny

>>64475419
Cope, you awful-taste-having chimp.

>>64475405
>the marines wanted a sigh

>>64475406
Still like the gun

>>64475434
they installed mine at 6.5 lbs. not even joking. 5lb first stage, 1.5lb second stage. technically in spec. I have a larue 2 stage mbt in my other gun that's lighter. I can't really tell them apart and the larue is much cheaper

>>64475441
>>64475442
>nooooooo
>gets proven wrong
>nooooo
Cope your sight is so shit it got abandoned by literally everyone, even fucking BUIS* uses one or both of the A2 apatures.
COPE.
AND.
SEETHE.
*Except the DD fixed BUIS but I and everyone I know got rid of them.

>>64475443
how was that even confusing, I just missed the t in sight?

>>64475281
Never got the love for the HK sights, from either my '53 or MP5. They're just good for rapidly acquiring a target, everything else they're either meh or just flat out bad at. Would not recommend, put on an optic ASAP.

>>64475442
>calls the A2 shit
>has one
Nani?

>>64475452
look at the pic

>>64475448
I didn't get proven wrong. you literally said the A1 has different sized peeps when both the unmarked an L are the same size, no gunz troon

>>64475453
>they're good for rapid target acquisition
>combat sights
Anon....I.....

>>64475448
You just a silly monkey, broseph.

>>64475445
Larue's reset is not very good with the light spring. Try the Schmid DLC Elite trigger if you want a cheap, light, 2S trigger. 2.5lb first stage and 1lb second stage. Resets to the second stage instead of all the way to the first stage like the Larue.

>>64475464
I have the heavy spring in. my carbine has the larue with the heavy spring and my hbar has the geissele nm trigger

>>64475456
Having guns you shit on just validates you shitting on them. Feels nice. Pic very much related.
>>64475462
Oh honey please don't tell me that's all you think matters, oh no oh nooooooo...

>>64475462
nta
you do realize not every factor of combat is quick reactions, right?
additionally, you also realize they're not the singular sight in this world that can do that either?

>>64475456
Bing exposed to something and finding out it's shit gives you a lot more credibility than someone saying it's shit without every actually having experienced it. Like the retard in this thread shitting on the A1 sights saying they have different sized apertures. You immediately know you can discount his opinions because he has no idea.

>>64475442
>A1 stock on A2
angry manlet detected

>>64475486
This is bait right

>>64475461
>basic bitch AI answer
>The M16A1 rear sight has two aperture sizes: a smaller one for the standard range setting and a larger one for the "L" (long-range) setting
When the most basic AI slop tells you are wrong you know you fucked up.

>>64475229
>A1 sights
>first apature is too small, and the second is too big

>>64475496
it's obvious you're just fucking with us now, well played though

>>64475496
>AI
this is bait. Plus I've literally posted a pic, a manual and a vid

>>64475472
>I have something I hate
This is the equivalent of eating shit, saying it's nasty, and keep eating shit.
>combat sights
Literally 99% of combat shooting is rapid target acquisition anon, that's why combat sights and target sights are two different things.
>>64475473
>not the sole thing
But it's the primary concern for combat shooting. They found out a long time ago that most combat takes place at 200 meters and closer.

Wait. Do people seriously hate the A2 sights?

Few things more amusing than some cocky retard arguing himself into a corner and desperately trying to get himself out of it

All while being anonymous

>>64475509
shid I don't know

>>64475508
>Literally 99% of combat shooting is rapid target acquisition
wow that's crazy, got anything to back up that stat of literal percentages

>>64475497
>>64475502
>>64475504
>actively denying reality now
Keep Fucking crying. I literally measured the L apature as 0.081" and the first position as 0.075" you fucking ding dongs.

>>64475523
no, his cod-ass doesn't lmao

>>64475508
This is what too much youtube and wikipedia does to an impressionable young mind. I hope you grow out of it.

i always thought big hole was for low light and little hole was for high light

>>64475508
Haha poopy taste anon.
>>64475509
I don't hate my A2 sights, I just think they're inferior to the A1's from an infantryman perspective.

>>64475530
>MATech sights
>hates A2 sights
Anon.

>>64475536
you seriously need to look up what fucking clone building is you retard

>>64475529
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/AJK_2oKTcN4
>>64475530
The A2 sight offers more capability at 0 downside.

>>64475538
>defending mindless consoomerism
WEW LAD

This guy is either doing some sustained b8 posting or is actually too young to post here and I'm not sure which is funnier

>>64475509
it's not hate so much as A2 sights have kind of a smallish peep and basically every feature on them is useless outside of a KD range. Like you might as well just have a 1 position aperture without the elevation drum with how they end up getting used

>>64475542
>makes argument
>fails
>makes another argument
>fails
>l-lol look like this guy
This is 100% liberal thinking.

>>64475540
>More capability
Combat isn't a target range, you zero for 25m and call it a day because you're landing center mass all the way out to 300. A1 has less parts and has a simplistic adjustment mechanism that is borderline flush with the carry handle and is resistant to being knocked out of zero. There was literally nothing wrong with the A1 sights.

>>64475546
>A2 sights are useless outside of KD range
>is the template for 99% of BUIS on the market
PICK. FUCKING. ONE.

>>64475525
post vid of measuring

>>64475492
A2 stock is perfect if you're 5'10" - 6'2", it's the same length of pull as having a B5 Sopmod stock at the halfway position. If you're swapping it for an A1 it means you're probably very short or you're 5'10" and wearing very thick body armor

>>64475552
No it isn't. You're still making things up.

>>64475554
No as in you're baiting saying that's an A1 stock. It clearly isn't. The material is visibly different and the sling swivels don't correspond.

>>64475550
Your argument hinges on the idea that A2 sights are less durable, or that it's possible to unknowingly adjust the windage knob. I've never heard of anyone actually having an issue with this irl. Even if there were a few fringe cases, it's still a nonissue. More capability due to the elevation drum and easier to zero if you only have access to 50,100,200 like most civilians (using RIBZ).

>>64475529
the A2 sights were taken off a prototype colt machine gun because the marines like that they had the elevation drum. idk what the intention for the bigger hole was. some M16A1s have night sights and use the bigger aperture for night sights but M16A2s were never really issued with the tritium fight sight night sights so the bigger aperture doesn't really get used.
If you use the Army's data
https://www.scribd.com/document/50874069/M16-M4-data
a 25/300m zero never peaks above 6 inches and the marine 36/300 yard zero never peaks above 4.5 inches so there isn't really a good reason to ever use the 0-200 sight.
according to the A1 army manual the close range 250 meter peep peaks at 3.5 inches and the long range 375 meter peep peaks at 11 inches so there would be a big enough difference to justify using the 250m zero over the longer range peep

>>64475566
>More capability due to the elevation drum
if you'd actually gone through basic when we even bothered with these things you'd laugh at what you're saying

>>64475540
>offers more capability
they don't though. no one uses anything other than the battle sight

>>64475578
FR

A2 sights sound neat on paper for an 11B or if they were being used on an MG like they were originally designed. Ain't nobody making fine adjustments to their irons in the field. You get trained for the 25/300 zero and that's that.

>>64475578
Who cares what happens in basic? They're objectively better, especially for civilians shooting.

>>64475552
cool, most of the A2 features are useless outside of a KD range. it's why you don't see any of those features built into popular red dots

>>64475566
Did anyone else ever use a fucking paint marker to mark their fucking zero our was my Gunny just too galaxy brained?

>>64475589
nigga your noserved ass ain't following

we never, ever used all that fancy shit and it was barely even mentioned because they knew we would never use it or need to use it. if we's talking combat sights who gives a shit how civvies use them. if all that extra capability ain't getting used by a grunt who gives a shit about it, might as well have given him the more retard proof a1 sight that needs a bullet to fuck with and has less shit to bear in mind.

>>64475566
>More capability due to the elevation drum
no one fucking uses that outside of KD ranges
>easier to zero if you only have access to 50,100,200 like most civilians (using RIBZ).
that's really a nonissue because most people would just buy those aim here hit here targets

>>64475589
We're not talking about civilians and it can easily be argued that it's better for someone under combat stress to just have a sight where elevation adjustment is literally just flipping between one or another aperture

>>64475595
I have paint marker on my NM hbar with A2 style sights so I can set the mechanical zero faster and it's easier to count clicks if I get confused

>>64475573
>no reason
Except at..... under 200 meters and low light you fucking troglodyte which is WHAT THEY WERE DESIGNED FOR. Rather than the trash A1 sights which again have a smaller "close" range sight and a larger "long" range sight than the fucking A2 sights. Even the front sight post is better than the A1, as it's the same size as a average human torso at 300 meters and the square profile dosen't vanish as much in combat conditions.

>>64475566
Homey no one was touching that fucking elevation drum on deployment lmfao. Battle zero all day, every day, till the end of days (ie. the CCO and TA01 finally got to us)

>>64475596
No one cares what you retards did in the iron sight era.
>>64475602
You could do that for a rough 25/300, but you would still need to confirm at 300. The range closest to me has 50,100,200 meters. It's easy to just set RIBZ and do 50 then confirm at 200 on the same day. And then I know that the drum will be accurate all the way up.

>>64475607
>A1 sights which again have a smaller "close" range sight and a larger "long" range sight
Why are you arguing about something you've clearly never even seen, let alone used?

>>64475620
>than the A2
Reading comprehension is important anon, as well as reading the whole quote you leftist troon.

>>64475615
>literally confirms what everyone is saying that the A2 sight is good as a target range sight and pointless as a combat sight

>>64475546
>A2 sights have kind of a smallish peep
I never understood this complaint because the A2 rear aperture isn’t any smaller or larger compared to the M1 Garand’s which everyone loves still to this day. I can’t speak on how it fare in combat since I thankfully never fought in a war zone but my father fought with both M16A1 and A2 during the Yugoslav wars and he loved the sights and he preferred it to the A1. Even some of my colleagues that served in the US military never talked shit about the sights.

>>64475624
The A1 apertures are the same size. You're wrong, end of.

>>64475625
>will be accurate all the way up
You retards are the reason why pull cord blinds had to be banned.

>>64475632
>most basic search says otherwise
Sybau.

>>64475604
If you're too stressed out to look at the 4,5,6 on the elevation drum, you're not going to be making shots past 300.
>>64475625
The world doesn't revolve around combat.

>>64475633
and your stupid ass cannot grasp why that shit isn't needed or even fucking used for a groundpounder

stay ignorant, youngun

>>64475607
you wouldn't use the 0-200 meter sight under 200 meters because you are never going to be more than 6 inches high with a 20 inch M16 using a 300 meter sight. there's no fucking reason to use it. it's why literally no one ever uses it, no gunz retard. and both apertures for an M16A1 are the same size unless you have a nigh sight rear sight

>>64475640
>>64475642
>reeeeeeee
>is still wrong
I love meltdowns like this.

>>64475639
You have clearly never been in the military if you don't grasp the concept of revolving around the lowest common denominator in regards to users.

>>64475615
the army guys didn't confirm their far zero. also what scenario do you have in mind where you plan on engaging at 300 meters using irons and not get charged with a felony?

>>64475642
>6 inches high
>cqb distance shooting
You're a fucking moron.

>>64475627
>the A2 rear aperture isn’t any smaller or larger compared to the M1 Garand’s
Is this thread just one big shitpost or something?

>>64475627
>sn’t any smaller or larger compared to the M1 Garand’s
most people haven't used an M1 garand but a lot of people have seen A2 sights on their basic bitch ARs they bought

At what fucking point in combat are you going to be making minute adjustments to your irons for enemies that are staggered out across hundreds of meters? What the fuck is the argument I'm seeing in here?

>>64475639
so you prefer the A2 sights because they are better known distance target range sights?

>>64475657
i don't even know man i like the a2 set up on my guns. i've never shot irons pass 600.
my favorite irons were the magpul pro steel sights, super thin front post very easy

>>64475652
I am talking about the M16A2’s 300m sight. I didn’t clearly state that.

>>64475657
noserveds gonna noserve anon. all shooting to them is on a flat range with known distance targets.

>>64475650
>>64475646
holy fucking know guns, you know the bullet doesn't magically get 6 inches high right? the parable peak is at 175 meter. the bullet will be less than 2 inches high at 50 meter with a 25 meter zero

>>64475627
>my father fought with both M16A1 and A2 during the Yugoslav wars

>>64475657
>what are range markers and sheeeeeit

>>64475640
>>64475647
>>64475649
I thought I made it clear that my argument wasn't that they're better suited for combat or for the lowest IQ grunts.
>>64475660
Yes. No downsides for combat, better for marksmanship.

>>64475657
don't you know? you just wildly guess range and then tell your enemy to wait as you dial in your sights based on the wild ass range guesses

>>64475667
NTa but those are for the MGs and ordinance you absolute troglodyte

>>64475669
>No downsides for combat
More capable of being accidentally adjusted, more complicated to adjust when needed compared to the A1's.

>>64475665
>is so upset you can't even spell simple words anymore
Hey dipshit, the POA/POI of a M16A1/2/3/4 is less than 4" at 7 meters you fucking retard.

>>64475679
>noooooo you can't use them for rifles!!!
Are you fucking serious right now?

>>64475685
at 7 meters you haven't cleared the height over bore parallax yet you fucking no gunz tranny. no fucking iron sight zero is going to make up for that because the bullet hasn't reached the sight height yet you troon

Anyone saying the A2 sight features were handy for a soldier basically outs themselves as not having a clue about what a rifleman actually does. The sights were meant for a prototype machine gun that never really took off, and that's something you'd want to set very specific ranges for so you could most effectively use it in the role a machine gun is intended for. A rifleman not shackled to antiquated mythos needs a very simple one-and-done setting to do what they're needed to do. They gain no real advantage with Perry-style sights.

>>64475687
They literally weren't meant for that you stupid faggot and rifles didn't gain anything from them either. Because they were able to hit center mass from point blank out to their effective range. Idiot.

>>64475541
>mindless consoomerism
In any other instance I'd say you might have a point, but if you're looking specifically to build a clone example of an issued rifle, that's not really sucking the slop straight from the goy straw anon.

Interesting how you guys hate Inrange Karl, but parrot his arguments against A2 sights. A2 sights are GOOD.

A2 Bros not sending their best in this thread, wew

>>64475713
what sort of bullshit argument is this? karl also thinks three point slings are retarded, that doesn't mean I'm going to suddenly think that means they aren't retarded

>>64475713
I want to see Karl ventilated by the US Marshalls for his crimes

>>64475718
A1 is the satanic TRANNY rifle. A2 is the trad THINKING MAN's rifle.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YE-Ak1s5kOA

>>64475732
>>64475713
then why did Paul prefer the A1?

>>64475760
let's not speak ill of a dead man

>>64475770
true

>>64475705
>issued rifle
OK that's really the only exception because I did the same thing (M16A4).

>>64475695
>noooooooo
Keep being fucking wrong, YWNBAW.

>>64475697
>riflemen shouldn't engage past 200 meters
This is how you get platoons pinned by a single PKM.

>>64475695
>7 meters/yards
>hight over bore
>4"
Go set down you fucking child.

>>64475952
I'm a man. you will never be a man and you will never own a gun
>>64475955
I wasn't the one saying 4 inches you dickless retard

>>64476037
>reeeeeee
The POA/POI is exactly 4 inches at 7 meters you absolute child. Meaning you have to hold high 4 inches at 7 meters you fucking clown.
>keeps crying
You fucking lost tranny.

>>64476054
you sound like a nogunz eunuch. probably from some third world nonAmerican country. any poi/poa shift at 7 yards is entirely due to the difference between height over bore from AR sights. there's no way it's fucking 4 inches because the sights aren't that high and no zero and no changing the aperture size is going to change that offset that's caused by the physical height of the sights, you have no penis

>>64475684
>More complicated to adjust
I guess turning a knob is harder than using a tool and fucking about with the little wheel

>>64476084
he's talking about the 2 position flip on the A1. if you were just changing range you only need to flip the A1 sights instead of fucking with a dial. also you need a tool to adjust elevation on the A1 so it's not really different than how you need a tool to adjust elevation and windage on the A1. I'm not sure why they made windage toolless adjustable on the A2

>>64476064
>still wrong about everything
Wew lad.

>>64476117
https://www.scribd.com/document/50874069/M16-M4-data
how is the bullet going to be 4 inches off if the army's on docs say it's 2.5 inches off at 0 meters and a third of an inch off at 25 meters? does it magically go 1.5 inches down before going back up, eunuch?

>>64475229
>The A1 sights are trash tier, the first apature is too small, and the second is too big.
>best irons period
>M16A2
How it can be if A2 aperture is smaller that A1

>>64475552
BUIS start with 200 meters range setting not 300.

>>64476054
>The POA/POI is exactly 4 inches at 7 meters
anons don't know about the negative 300 meter zero

>>64475665
That sort of trajectory isn't optimal for urban combat when plenty of shootings is done inside this range and target can be small (peaking head, fire hole). 200 meters zero is more optimal here, only A2 doesn't have that. It has large hole zeroed to 200 but it isn't accurate for such targets.

>>64476179
the acog solves that. magnified and the come up between 100 and 200 yards is 1 moa so it's like not even really an issue just use the chevron.
it's probably why the marines and some army units apparently, tried use different zeroes. I think the 36 yard zero doesn't peak as high as the army one. like less than 5 inches. One of the reasons Paul seemed to prefer his A1 is because the close aperture puts you only 3.5 inches high at the worst point which is like 2 moa at that range

>>64475341
Best irons ever, right here.

>>64475344
You are a big hole.

>>64475443
>9000 hours in mspaint
Kek.

>>64475552
wrong

>A1 sights bad
the Marines "36 yard zero" is literally the same zero as the A1s 250 meter zero.

First, it was the forward assist, then the charging handle, now this. Are people really incapable of understanding the AR-15?

>>64475566
Minmaxxing needs to end, it's the most pedantically autistic behavior possible

>>64475615
>No one cares what you retards did in the iron sight era
But that's what we're fucking talking about

>>64478535
the m16a2 rear sight features literally went unused outside of KD ranges