View Full Version : Alternative for close-range precision shots w/AR?
April 9, 2000, 05:49 PM
Regarding the 2.5" holdover with the AR family, I believe I've read in the past something about canting the rifle 45 degrees outboard and sighting along the barrel to eliminate the holdover for extreme closeup, quick precision shots.
For reference, I was at a 3-gun match which utilized the AR, and several shots were within 7 yards but needed shots within the relatively small head A zone, no COM A's because of obscured targets.
Can anyone elaborate on this technique, and its use, or if it's considered a bad technique, please let me know.
I've never practiced it, but would like to know if it has any merit within the 10 yard line or should you just mentally make the 2.5 inch holdover with the sights?
April 9, 2000, 07:20 PM
what you are refering to is line of sight line of bore.as you get in closer than 7 yards it will be neccesarry to hold about 2 inches above line of target. it is because of the extreamly high sights on the ar15 that causes this.it is much less of a problem with the mini14 and the m1a rifles out there.one salution is to get a flat top ar15 and remove the sights and install the trijicon relex sight but i belive this would not be allowed in the three gun matches.it is best used for the homeowner or the police gunney.
April 9, 2000, 07:42 PM
Even with the Reflex sight you will have to hold over at close range. You will probably want to set this up so that the dot sits over the front sight. Therefore, nothing is gained as far as the hold over is concerned. Optics are certainly allowed in 3-gun matches.
April 9, 2000, 09:15 PM
gunmart: Thanks for the info but as my post relates, I know what holdover is. The sighting in method I use requires a 2.5" (the diff. between point of aim and point of impact with AR's)holdover within 10 yards/ 1" low at 25 yds. And yes, I also realize that a different rifle, i.e., one with sights closer to the bore, would negate this problem. However, I'm requesting information specifically on the technique I wrote of in my post - canting the rifle so as to sight down the barrel, eliminating the sights (or finding some point of reference along the barrel to use as a rudimentary sight) and negating the holdover problem at very close range.
Again, has anyone heard of this tech. or have any experience with it?
April 9, 2000, 10:15 PM
sounds more like point shooting to me.jim cirriollo uses a simular method as where he uses the rear of the slide to serve i guess as a sight.it seems to work ok in bad lighting where you can not find the front sight.have you tried this tecnique out that you spoke of.?if so how did it work.?i think we all are looking for somthing that works.
April 9, 2000, 10:21 PM
when the reflex is mounted direcly to the receiver and not to the carry handle there is no need for holdover.i have mine mounted directly and find inside 7 yards only about 1/2 inch deviation at most.i also find no problem in hitting the A zone of the idpa target inside 7 yards with my standard ar-15.where i do seem to have a problem hitting the A zone with my standard ar 15 is at 400 yards.ime thinks ill work some on that though.
sorry for the sarcasm but some of these threads really get to me.
April 11, 2000, 02:43 PM
EricO: To answer your question I have only heard briefly of the canting technique to avoid the holdover. In my opinion there isn't much on the side of the rifle to index on, so I dunno how well it will work. It might be a good emergency aiming method if you want to aim at a short range sorta precise target but you still want to see what the bad guy is doing instead of blocking your view of him by the 2.5" high hold. Obviously that's a "real" application as opposed to a 3-gun match.
I myself practice getting good at aiming for the holdover point knowing that it's different as range changes.
Again just my opinion but one sighting method only per firearm seems the simplest way to go, whether it be reflex, iron sights, Aimpoint, Leupold, etc. I know in theory you can use iron sights with some dot scopes and such but in practice it takes a significant amount of time to decide "uhhhh, can't find the dot, durn, batteries must be busted. I'll use the iron sight, now where is that thing? huhh, it isn't high visibility red like the dot, there it is, now where do I want to aim?" (preceding thought pattern in less than one second).
So in summary, I'd stick with the sight you already have, and whatever you decide, if it works for you, have at it!
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.