At 50yd why bother with scope?

[AManWearingAHat]

I realize what’s available and don’t want them, don’t want removable handle. Not interested in tricked out ARs. Not hard to understand. The less gagits and removable parts the better. In fact really not interested in other than Colt. I’ve had ARs NIB and took dozens on trade. Can only remember firing them to sight in scopes for customers.

Well then enjoy paying mark ups for a roll mark from a company well past its heyday in a configuration that, as others have pointed out, is on the endangered species list.

As to your point, the less gadgets and removable parts the better. The US Military, law enforcement, and the industry leaders beg to differ. Options are pretty great.

My go to will probably be an M1 Carbine. I've run it out to 100 yds and I'm not seeing a need for a dot or a scope. I do have a 4X on a Ruger Mini but that's for >100 yds. I guess, not really sure.

I understand the dot, I have one on a pistol. The problem is the batteries keep dying. They usually last awhile but you just never know when one's going to carp out on you.

Learn to shoot your irons.

Buy a better pistol dot. An RMR will go two years on a battery. An RMR with a lower third Co-witness with suppressor sights is about as good as it gets.

 

[rockquarry]

I realize what’s available and don’t want them, don’t want removable handle. Not interested in tricked out ARs. Not hard to understand. The less gagits and removable parts the better. In fact really not interested in other than Colt. I’ve had ARs NIB and took dozens on trade. Can only remember firing them to sight in scopes for customers.

I agree; your comments make a lot of sense, but many people that are interested in ARs and AR copies are gadget-oriented. That's fine, but there are probably some of them that have never fired an out-of-the-box gun enough to find out how well they work as is.

 

[AManWearingAHat]

I agree; your comments make a lot of sense, but many people that are interested in ARs and AR copies are gadget-oriented. That's fine, but there are probably some of them that have never fired an out-of-the-box gun enough to find out how well they work as is.

They work just fine. I have one I kept in stock configuration just for giggles as a beater rifle. They are just more comfortable and easy to shoot with some upgrades.

 

[Cal44]

With my 70 year old eyes, I'd need a scope if I wanted to keep groups below two feet at 50 yards.

25 yards is about the limit for iron sights unless I'm hunting elephant.

 

[Drm50]

When I went in Army was in basic with M16. Had little respect for it because of bad rep at the time. I had lot of experience with BA 222s and 220s before military. I was surprised of accuracy of M16. We didn’t shoot bullseye, shot pop ups out to 300 meters ( might have been yards ) I think 1st row was 25 meters. They taught us to shoot these by instinct with a rod that fit over sights. I guess optics is personal choice. For me deer hunting where shots are under 100yds and fast and furious the aperture sight is faster for me.

 

[RobertJ.]

The peep sight has been my favorite sighting system since I started shooting. I've got peep sights on all my lever rifles, and that's what I stuck with for my AR. In a SHTF, scenario, I don't foresee any long shots.

If I need to reach waaay out there, I have a scoped .270 Win.

 

[BAM-BAM]

Depends on your age/eyes...... at 14-22 I spent 8 years shooting on rifle teams with iron sights..........three decades shooting ironed sight handguns...

For the past decade or two,at 45+ I've gone scopes or red dots....... Aimpoint PROs or 1.5-4x20 scopes on ARs........

My CZs in .223/5.56 wear 1-4x 20 Leupolds....... great for Penn's Woods.

Fiber-optics are my new best friend on handguns. Wilson has a Amerigloglow "Hackathorn" front sight on his high end Berettas..... that is really nice....
big orange ring around a tritium nightsight.

For SHTF..... shot placement at speed will be the name of the game.

 

[Drm50]

I’m not into any semi auto rifles so I’m not interested in AR with optics.
I have a #3 Ruger 223 with 10x scope and 722 Rem 222 with 10x if I want to shoot varmit at long range.
When I buy any gun I’m buying models that are top of the line and will hold their value. I also only buy what suits me, I could care less what others like.

 

[andy52]

Of the 5 ARs I own only one has a scope, the other 4 have red dots and back up irons. The one with the scope is a full size rifle meant for longer range. The rest are shorter ranging from 8.5 to 16 inches those like the OP I consider CQC guns of 50-100 yds. I personally find red dots to be much faster on target acquisition but like any electronics a red dot can fail and that's the reason for back up irons.

 

[rockquarry]

I've used scoped and unscoped ARs. Both are useful, but even with a scoped gun, I prefer to have an aperture sight and front sight (what they come with is fine) and have them zeroed for 100 yards or thereabouts. As for a scope, a good quality one with a simple and uncluttered crosshair reticle that uses no batteries is a good one for any use I can imagine. I doubt I'd ever shoot an AR beyond 250 yards, so high magnification in a variable or fixed power scope isn't necessary for me, though it be for someone shooting much farther.

 

[cyphertext]

I’m not into any semi auto rifles so I’m not interested in AR with optics.

So why are you here, in a forum dedicated to semi auto rifles, the AR rifle in particular?

 

[Drm50]

It could be as in post #13 that I am interested in buying AR-15, in original form.

 

[rockquarry]

Today new shooters are like check outs in big box stores. They can’t make change for a dollar without the computer cash register. New shooters tend to buy all the bling when they buy the gun. Red dots, reflex, scopes and lasers. They couldn’t shoot without them. A m16 would easily take down 300 meter targets with aperture battle sights.
I’m not into ARs but would like to pick up one similar to M16 because of current social ills. Carry handle, battle sights. Hardly any sold like this. I guess Colt had one for $2300 RVn vets are generally not stupid enough to pay that.

I was looking for a new Colt A4 (20" barrel, fixed stock, carry handle) several years ago and asked a Colt rep why they were so hard to find, being a catalogued item. He said half-jokingly that only old guys want them and Colt makes 50 of the 6920 model for every one A4. Whether or not the "50" was an exaggeration, I don't know, but he did eventually locate an A4. I really like it. I've been shooting it for several years just as it came out of the box. It wasn't anywhere close to $2300, in fact, less than half that.

 

[Drm50]

I was looking for a new Colt A4 (20" barrel, fixed stock, carry handle) several years ago and asked a Colt rep why they were so hard to find, being a catalogued item. He said half-jokingly that only old guys want them and Colt makes 50 of the 6920 model for every one A4. Whether or not the "50" was an exaggeration, I don't know, but he did eventually locate an A4. I really like it. I've been shooting it for several years just as it came out of the box.

I wonder what Colt had against taking old guys money? I have herd many Vets say they would like to have old style AR-15. In fact some would probably never shoot them. Colt is not known for smart decisions the last 30yrs. The $2300 model they thought they were going to sell Vietnam vets didn’t do well. It turned out that at least the receivers were farmed out.

 

[Rastoff]

I wonder what Colt had against taking old guys money?

It has nothing to do with old guys. It has everything to do with capacity and marketability.

The 6920 is popular so, they're going to make far more money from that than they will from the A4. That doesn't mean the A4 is not obtainable. They just don't make as many. They're not hard to find on the internet.

 

[AManWearingAHat]

I think the "old guy" share of the market is rapidly waning as well. Younger generations are, generally, less interested in bone stock AR's and wood and steel. Just the way it is. I'd start looking to cash out on those engraved and short run "collector" firearms sooner rather than later. Almost no one I've talked to in my generations gives a wooden nickel about engraved guns. Unless its an original Tiffany and Co Smith and Wesson, most of those engraved guns you see advertised in the rags I see as the "Precious Memories" figurines of the gun world, but at least they are functional firearms in the end I guess.

 

[vonn]

Interesting posts . You give up around 10% of the energy when using short barrels compared to 20” barrels and AR’s aren’t all that powerful to start with so I prefer rifle length. I can still function with iron but I understand the people who like the dots and scopes.

 

[cyphertext]

I think the "old guy" share of the market is rapidly waning as well. Younger generations are, generally, less interested in bone stock AR's and wood and steel. Just the way it is. I'd start looking to cash out on those engraved and short run "collector" firearms sooner rather than later. Almost no one I've talked to in my generations gives a wooden nickel about engraved guns. Unless its an original Tiffany and Co Smith and Wesson, most of those engraved guns you see advertised in the rags I see as the "Precious Memories" figurines of the gun world, but at least they are functional firearms in the end I guess.

Agree. Most of the young guys are looking for utility, and are very much function over form. Look at the big sellers... Parkerized and matte finishes with polymer stocks and grips. They want reliability and accuracy, at the lowest price point.

When I go to the range, I rarely see revolvers, and most of the semi autos on the line are Glocks. Move down to the rifle range and I see a lot of ARs, sometimes an AK... very rarely do I see a bolt gun unless it is a week before hunting season opens. When I go shoot skeet, rarely do I see O/U guns anymore. Pumps and low cost semi autos rule with the younger guys.

So yes, that Vietnam era configuration is going to be harder to find as it just isn't what sells anymore.

 

[cyphertext]

Interesting posts . You give up around 10% of the energy when using short barrels compared to 20” barrels and AR’s aren’t all that powerful to start with so I prefer rifle length. I can still function with iron but I understand the people who like the dots and scopes.

That's what the AR-10 is for!

 

[rockquarry]

Interesting posts . You give up around 10% of the energy when using short barrels compared to 20” barrels and AR’s aren’t all that powerful to start with so I prefer rifle length. I can still function with iron but I understand the people who like the dots and scopes.

Very true; I'd have to look up my figures, but I've chronographed mostly handloads and the velocity decrease in a 16" barrel is considerable when compared to the velocity of the same load in a 20" barrel. And, yes, the .223 /5.56 in comparison with a game hunting cartridge is not very powerful anyway in a standard length barrel. Granted, it was never designed as a game cartridge.