User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 5/17/2024 2:17:12 PM EST
A2 with adjustable sights or A2 with field sights?
  I think I prefer the field sights on a carbine. These are two recent carbines of mine: A 723-ish and XM4-ish. Both with Colt SOCOM barrels. I actually like the way the little bit of extra barrel weight under the handguards balances them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/17/2024 3:18:44 PM EST
[#1]
Nice builds!
Field sights for me. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/17/2024 3:29:31 PM EST
[#2]
Out of those two I prefer the a2 sights. That being said give me a m4a1 over those.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/17/2024 3:32:20 PM EST
[#3]
Field sights
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/17/2024 3:36:08 PM EST
[#4]
Field sights and light profile barrel (723) for me.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/17/2024 3:44:26 PM EST
[#5]
A2 sights for me.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/17/2024 4:32:42 PM EST
[#6]
The bottom one. I have one, a2 sights. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/17/2024 5:57:12 PM EST
[#7]
727 all the way.
777 even better. A2 |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/17/2024 7:07:01 PM EST
[#8]
I've got a A2 carry handle/ socom build I love but it was built durring the dry times of $899 c7 uppers. Someday I'll convert to field sight orthodoxy.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/17/2024 7:11:03 PM EST
[#9]
I'll admit I think A2s have the best aesthetics. I'm an older millenial, so A2s were what the cool guys carried when I was kid, and an A2 was my first issued rifle. But for a light handy K.I.S.S. carbine, field sights are growing on me. For a 20" rifle I still prefer A2 sights. But at the end of the day this is ARF, so I had to get both.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/17/2024 7:23:38 PM EST
[#10]
Field sights, but I don’t have a strong preference one way or the other.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/17/2024 8:43:16 PM EST
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Field sights and light profile barrel (723) for me. This /\/\/\ Although, I do have examples of both. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/19/2024 7:57:27 AM EST
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This /\/\/\ Although, I do have examples of both. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Field sights and light profile barrel (723) for me. This /\/\/\ Although, I do have examples of both. Stupid light and handy. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/19/2024 1:57:30 PM EST
[#13]
 Field sights and pencil barrels 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/19/2024 8:34:50 PM EST
[#14]
Definitely field sights and pencil barrels
Even better in 733 configuration with the 11.5 barrel. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/20/2024 8:16:15 AM EST
[#15]
I always felt that the A2 sight was silly on a carbine
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/20/2024 10:23:49 AM EST
[#16]
Field sights, BUT with an actual A2 aperture.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/20/2024 11:08:48 AM EST
[#17]
I like the aesthetics of it with the A2 sights. It looks even better with a mid-length
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/20/2024 10:56:46 PM EST
[#18]
I thought you built both so you didn't have to choose.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2024 12:06:46 AM EST
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Field sights, BUT with an actual A2 aperture. I'd rather just have a same-plane choice of large or small apertures. A1 front post is slightly thinner to get a better sight picture. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2024 11:23:49 AM EST
[#20]
I was thinking about it for a long time and I just cannot decide. In 90 percent the field sights are more than sufficient on a carbine, still I like the A2 sights a lot. When they came out I loved them and thought how much more modern they were, but I seldom really needed them.
With the M4 style barrel I like the A2 sights more I'd say, but I also love a thin barreled M723 with field sights. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2024 6:22:42 AM EST
[#21]
All the Above!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2024 5:10:42 AM EST
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I thought you built both so you didn't have to choose. Absolutely. Just always interested in hearing other folks' perspectives. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2024 5:20:36 AM EST
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I always felt that the A2 sight was silly on a carbine Same. And I am not an A2 sight hater. I objectively think they are superior than A1 sights on a full-size service rifle. I just think field sights make more sense on a carbine. One could argue that as carbines replaced full-length rifles as the primary service weapon in the Army there was a benefit to adopting A2 sights for carbines, but the almost simultaneous adoption of flat-tops and optics kind of makes that argument irrelevant. That being said, I 100% think the A2 upper is cooler looking. And, at the end of the day, that is what is most important for larping in gramma's basement. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2024 5:21:10 AM EST
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: All the Above! /thread |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2024 5:34:20 AM EST
[#25]
With the increased use of 75-77 grain bullets it makes more sense.
I could see myself being much more comfortable taking shots at 400+ |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2024 6:56:23 AM EST
[#26]
I like both. When making a 14.5 clone, I'd pick the A2, but nothing wrong with the A1 either.
Nice builds in your pic OP! |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2024 7:30:41 AM EST
[#27]
Quote HistoryWe could be friends  
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2024 8:07:43 AM EST
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: With the increased use of 75-77 grain bullets it makes more sense. I could see myself being much more comfortable taking shots at 400+ 20 yrs ago was shooting a M4A1 with CH in All Army Matches out to 500yds (Mk262 ammo). You can see the white paint on the windage knob for 300yd zero  Attached File |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2024 8:12:20 AM EST
[#29]
Between those 2, the top on with the field sights but I prefer shorter with an M4 stock...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2024 9:13:36 AM EST
[#30]
Quote History@JustDaniel Which red dot / mount is that in the carry handle? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2024 11:59:04 AM EST
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: @JustDaniel Which red dot / mount is that in the carry handle? @Accountant30339 PA SLx 1x prism on their carry handle adapter. I use an acog screw/nut instead of the one that comes with the PA ???? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2024 4:15:42 PM EST
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Nice builds! Field sights for me. I'll take the top one with the bottom one's handguards. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2024 9:19:08 AM EST
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Between those 2, the top on with the field sights but I prefer shorter with an M4 stock... https://i.imgur.com/hsLapqx.jpg 733 is peak pre-flat top. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/26/2024 2:59:22 PM EST
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Field sights, BUT with an actual A2 aperture. This is the winning setup |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/26/2024 3:02:51 PM EST
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Field sights, BUT with an actual A2 aperture. This is the way 14.5” skinny A1 upper ghost ring A2 aperture  Attached File |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/26/2024 3:17:21 PM EST
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This is the way 14.5” skinny A1 upper ghost ring A2 aperture https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/2275/IMG_7170_jpeg-3224137.JPG That looks great. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/26/2024 3:40:58 PM EST
[#37]
when did A1 sights start being called "field sights"?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/26/2024 4:23:58 PM EST
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: when did A1 sights start being called "field sights"? Quote HistoryQuoted: when did A1 sights start being called "field sights"? In the context of "A2" configurations. It's kind of the blurred line in the change of generations. Quoted: Quoted: This is the way 14.5” skinny A1 upper ghost ring A2 aperture https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/2275/IMG_7170_jpeg-3224137.JPG That looks great. In midlength it would be perfect. If you could get those skinny handguards in midlength. And I'd prefer a C7 upper with the bump. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/26/2024 9:05:18 PM EST
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: when did A1 sights start being called "field sights"? Back in the 1980’s. Read the 711 ad copy 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/26/2024 11:50:02 PM EST
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted: In midlength it would be perfect. If you could get those skinny handguards in midlength. And I'd prefer a C7 upper with the bump. Well....then it wouldn't be a Colt 653 clone  
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2024 4:25:13 AM EST
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Well....then it wouldn't be a Colt 653 clone https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3b/US_Army_Rangers_field_excercise.jpg/1024px-US_Army_Rangers_field_excercise.jpg Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: In midlength it would be perfect. If you could get those skinny handguards in midlength. And I'd prefer a C7 upper with the bump. Well....then it wouldn't be a Colt 653 clone https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3b/US_Army_Rangers_field_excercise.jpg/1024px-US_Army_Rangers_field_excercise.jpg Username checks out. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2024 4:30:18 AM EST
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 20 yrs ago was shooting a M4A1 with CH in All Army Matches out to 500yds (Mk262 ammo). You can see the white paint on the windage knob for 300yd zero https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/32677/george_300yd_prone2_JPG-3222123.JPG Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: With the increased use of 75-77 grain bullets it makes more sense. I could see myself being much more comfortable taking shots at 400+ 20 yrs ago was shooting a M4A1 with CH in All Army Matches out to 500yds (Mk262 ammo). You can see the white paint on the windage knob for 300yd zero https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/32677/george_300yd_prone2_JPG-3222123.JPG  90's Special Forces Rifle [CAR15 - Colt 723 - 727 - XM4] to 500yds Practical Accuracy They put an XM4 clone through the paces at 500 yards in this video. This video inspired me to build an XM4 with a SOCOM barrel. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2024 6:42:28 AM EST
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Back in the 1980's. Read the 711 ad copy https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/91277/Colt_Catalog_1-2066724.jpg |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2024 6:52:40 AM EST
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: they also call the 711 an M16A2 You're thinking US military designations. Colt was thinking marketing. The A2 upgrades they advertised were: 1/7 twist A2 pistol grip A2 butt stock and handguard material (improved polymer composition) A2 square front sight post case deflector round forward assist Delta ring Not advertised - A2 lower receiver reinforcement, which you didn't get by default, but some COTS purchases spec'd it in the contract. Colt preferred to exhaust their stockpile of A1 lowers first (even with A2 markings on them). |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2024 8:20:39 AM EST
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This is the way 14.5” skinny A1 upper ghost ring A2 aperture https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/2275/IMG_7170_jpeg-3224137.JPG Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Field sights, BUT with an actual A2 aperture. This is the way 14.5” skinny A1 upper ghost ring A2 aperture https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/2275/IMG_7170_jpeg-3224137.JPG So what zero ranges are people finding work well with an A2 sight aperture in an A1 carry handle upper? It seems to me one could zero the fine peep (within the resolution of the front sight) at 50 / 200ish and take whatever the flatter trajectory yields on the ghost ring. Or, zero the ghost ring at 100, and get a longer range, higher trajectory sub-50 / 200++ on the fine peep. The 5-position A1 front sight post might also come in handy for a little finer resolution on elevation. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2024 8:58:52 AM EST
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That looks great. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2024 9:13:07 AM EST
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: In the context of "A2" configurations. It's kind of the blurred line in the change of generations. In midlength it would be perfect. If you could get those skinny handguards in midlength. And I'd prefer a C7 upper with the bump. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: when did A1 sights start being called "field sights"? In the context of "A2" configurations. It's kind of the blurred line in the change of generations. Quoted: Quoted: This is the way 14.5” skinny A1 upper ghost ring A2 aperture https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/2275/IMG_7170_jpeg-3224137.JPG That looks great. In midlength it would be perfect. If you could get those skinny handguards in midlength. And I'd prefer a C7 upper with the bump.  Attached FileDefinitely has a certain iron sight, KISS, Zen kinda vibe to it. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2024 9:53:11 AM EST
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It seems to me one could zero the fine peep (within the resolution of the front sight) at 50 / 200ish and take whatever the flatter trajectory yields on the ghost ring. Went this route. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2024 9:41:42 PM EST
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Well....then it wouldn't be a Colt 653 clone https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3b/US_Army_Rangers_field_excercise.jpg/1024px-US_Army_Rangers_field_excercise.jpg |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2024 10:05:09 PM EST
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If that Carbine has a Delta ring, wouldn't that make it an early 723? I've seen 653's with either style THE BLACK RIFLE has a pic of a COLT poster from 1970, is shows a delta ring and 14.5" barrel page 287  Attached File |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
