Below is a brief post from Graduate Shootist for your Wednesday reading. No big surprise, gun sales are up following the Colorado shooting. Eerily related, read this article from Maine on a guy that packed a handgun to the new Batman movie and was found owning a variety of assault rifles. Hopefully none of you readers are sketchy people like that reading this article on the Trijicon sight. Blah. I hate reading news like that.
But hey, there is always optimism to be had ….
- Ranger Man
**********************
We all shop for reliable items, balancing features against cost. What follows is a series, examining firearms and related equipment that has proven reliable during constant use in adverse conditions. These are things readily available that you’ll be able to buy for a reasonable price.
We needed an optical sight that would work in all lighting conditions, in cold weather and, if possible, without batteries. Stretching things further, we hoped to accommodate shared users with a generic zero. This last requirement eliminated most scopes due to eye relief and focus issues.
A well-known AR-15 manufacturer graciously loaned me a 16″ M-4 type carbine equipped with a Trijicon Reflex 6.5 MOA dot-sight. I fired several hundred rounds the following week during an urban rifle instructor school. This was long enough ago to be on the front edge of flat-tops and optics. On day #1 the package was viewed with obvious skepticism. Attitudes quickly changed as the week progressed and there were plenty of potential customers by day #5 – including me. Firing from unorthodox positions in rain and darkness, the utilitarian Trijicon really proved its worth.
Since then the optics field has exploded with a plethora of aiming devices priced to meet any budget. Some are hideously expensive and many rely on circuits. However, at a recent firearm instructor seminar a move back to basics was being touted. When things get ugly, KISS is good. If your battery-powered wonder sight refuses to wake up from a long winter nap you’ll need “Plan B”, pronto. That’s sometimes spelled “BUIS”, as in back-up iron sights. So for some, plan B may be the cheaper and more reliable alternative, period.
But not for us; everybody shoots iron-sights differently and constant zero adjustments were an invitation to problems. We procured two Trijicon Reflex 1×24 sights around 13 years ago and tested them extensively (this was in addition to the loaner unit). We then bought 20 more, which have been in regular service for 10+ years. Although they’re not perfect, these sights have met our requirements. In fact, the two oldest units are still going strong. Their Tritium lamps continue to illuminate the 6.5 MOA amber dots, providing a distinct aiming point without any sort of electronics.
What do you prefer for an optic on your rifle?
Graduate Shootist
Trijicon & a lot of others make fantastic sighting systems (most of which I can’t afford). Personally, WRT SHTF, I’m reluctant to rely on anything that requires batteries or any kind of electronics to function. A good fixed-power scope co-witnessed w/iron sights won’t ‘beat’ a holographic scope on its best day, but it’ll be your best friend on your worst day.
I’m with Tim on this one, If it uses batteries it will fail,and when you need it the most. Other than field glasses I don’t use optics at all. See , if it can break ,I’ll find a way. I learned a few things in the infantry. If it can break ,it will. If it has small parts, they’ll get lost. If it won’t work when its dirty , its useless. Batteries die. Things get wet,then leak. All this “gee wiz” stuff is great on the range or in a patrol car , in a modern functioning world. But its not worth a damn if things break down. Ask yourself this ; If I have no repacement parts/mags/batteries, for one year. Can I keep my wepon working? Ray in Ky
Aye that , thats where the KISS principle comes into play ( Keep It Simple Stupid ) I like all that stuff , but sense I dont plan on being a professional sniper , I’ll stick with iron sights and reluctantly a standard scope .
When I look at gear, I alwasy think three ways, function, performance and hard times. Trijicon is a pioneer in its industry and has some great gear, but this is one of those personal preferance things, I dont much like their optics. I prefer the aimpoints and more specificaly the comp M4. IT takes an AA battery and works with NV. ITs good gear and has good features. Trijicon is great gear, I just dont like it very much. At least, not enough to pay thier prices for it.
Thats like anything with the word Blackhawk on it …….strictly marketing ,
Standard toilet paper roll – 50 cents
Blackhawk ” tactical “toilet paper – $5.50
I guarantee that just because it has the word Blackhawk on the label that its going to get your butthole any cleaner than the standard roll .
Which brings me to another marketing ploy a lot of folks are falling for , that is the sales buzz word ” tactical ”
Look folks , its a day pack , its a roll of ass wipe , its a first aid pouch , its a canteen ……………………….nothing more …..nothing “tactical ” about it . Are you a SWAT team leader or a sergeant in the Marine corps directing your squad to take out that bunker ? No ? gear is gear , tactics are directing your force , gear cannot be ” tactical ”
now that we have cleared that up ………on with the article ;)
well, hard to beat BUIS, but, having been “attatched” to Delta teams in Bosnia and Iraq, i learned how to truly use red dot optics, my preference is the Eotech, which is on my M4′s…of course i have BUIS, which are Yankee Hill flip-up’s that are outstanding, which are co-witnessed with the Eotech…realistically, most fire fights are under 100 yds, so a red dot will suit better for CQB than a scope, unless you expect your adversary to stay out a ways…
Meatman24 is right. Most firefights are under 100 metres. The best choice is to practice with both optics and iron sights and become proficient with both. When I was in the service, we trained with the FN C1(.308). Great and indestructable battle rifle but too powerful and heavy for CQ. Then we were issued C-7′s (5.56 – same as the M161A) way lighter than the former but we called it a “poodle shooter”. Lol. If you can’t hit your target with either weapon at 1oo metres with iron sights you shouldn’t be in a firefight. Last resort : Use your weapon as a club instead. :-)
This is the US , whats that in yards ;)
Hey Graduate – Why don’t we stop calling ‘em “assault rifles” – how about “defensive rifles” or simply what they are AK, AR etc.
Jim
or simply semi auto carbines .( most of us dont have a class3 license ) for those that do ……more power to ya .
Utterly indited subject material, Really enjoyed reading.
lol, I don’t have a problem not calling them assault rifles but I just got a RRA 5.56 AR-15 and I still want to call it an M-16 to my friends as what I had in the Army. “Yep, I was shooting my M-16, errr, AR-15 the other day when…”. Thanks for the info on what sight would be best for CQB. When I was in, we only trained in cities on post called MOUT training and not focused as much in CQB at that time so just the iron sight was all we used. Nobody had red dot or any dot on our M-16′s like all of them do now so for us older (served in the 80′s) folks, thanks for teaching us sights for under 100 meters.