AR and AK sight radius

RT · March 19, 2010, 12:18 PM

Discuss..............

Saiga SGL21
Colt 6920

TargetTerror · March 19, 2010, 12:28 PM

AR has a peep sight MUCH closer to your face, while the AK has a notch sight halfway to your target. The AR sight picture is hands down the winner (at least for me) - easier to see and more accurate to boot.

howwie · March 19, 2010, 02:33 PM

It seems to me the distance between is very similar, but the AR is much closer to your eye. Plus the peep is very easy to use, that being said...I havn't done a long shoot with either. Only shoots within 100-150 yds or so. I have to say the AK suprised me on not being as inaccurate as I've been told. however, I enjoyed the AR sights more just because it seemed more user friendly

DMK · March 19, 2010, 06:46 PM

That's one reason I don't like M4/CAR gas systems on my AR15s.

OTOH, throw a set of Tech Sights on an AK and you have a sight radius that's longer than a rifle length AR15. Add an Ultimak with an Aimpoint and you got something goin' on.

tINY · March 19, 2010, 06:47 PM

Compared to an M14, FAL, or even a Galil, they are both short.

-tINY

Crosshair · March 19, 2010, 08:25 PM

One point that gets missed is that while the factory AR sights are better for long range, the AK sights are better for shorter ranges. So it depends on what you are going to use it for

As has been pointed out, rock solid aftermarket options render the point moot.

B. Lahey · March 19, 2010, 09:02 PM

I have always disliked that sight setup. On a 16" AR like that you have a ton of barrel hanging out there that could be adding to your sight-radius, but it's not because they went with the short gas system, and the front sight/gas doodad is a part of that.

For me it's more about looks, though. It looks weird, like the semiauto 16" barrel Sterling the guy robbed the liquor store with in Robocop.

But are both ok for their intended purpose of short to medium range shooting, and both can be used at longer ranges if the shooter is up to it. I just prefer my ARs in rifle configuration; I don't clear rooms, I shoot at paper.

DMK · March 19, 2010, 09:19 PM

Quote:

One point that gets missed is that while the factory AR sights are better for long range, the AK sights are better for shorter ranges.

How are the AK sights better at short range?

Flip the AR sight to that big ghost ring and it's very quick. Granted, the sight height is high, but I just use the middle of the front sight post at less that 15y or so.

bamaranger · March 21, 2010, 07:39 PM

The side x side pic is most interesting. I did not realize that the radius's were so similar. Usually, when irons v. peeps are discussed, the peep gets a mechanical/geometric advantage because the radius (length) of the sight radius is increased. Not so in the pic comparison. Still, the aperture on the AR/M4 wins hands down on ease of use.

When understood, and used correctly, any aperture/peep is superior to the std leaf and blade iron sights, given equal visibility of each, because one of the focal planes ( or elements) involved in the sight picture is eliminated.

To correctly use a std leaf/blade, the eye (and shooter) must juggle images of the target, the front post, and the rear aperature. Correctly of course, one's focus is on the front sight, and the target and rear blur, BUT...all three elements must be kept in relation to one another.

With a peep, one of these elements is eliminated. The peep is looked "through" not "at", the eye naturally centers the front post, which is kept in focus, and the post is "applied" against the target. Two sight elements instead of three.

In my heady youth, I had no trouble shooting well with peep or irons. Now, I have run smack into "fifty something" and cannot easily juggle the three item sight picture of irons, and actually prefer a peep for that reason. The bad news is, it's only going to get worse.

With a handgun, I can hyper extend my arms and get a usable sight picture, or I can get longer barreled handguns. (or glasses, I suppose). Optics, as in scopes are another option.

On a short carbine, I'm stuck, particularly the mid sighted AK and AR's.

March 19, 2010, 12:18 PM	#1
RT Senior Member Join Date: September 9, 2000 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 2,194	AR and AK sight radius Discuss.............. Saiga SGL21 Colt 6920

March 19, 2010, 12:28 PM	#2
TargetTerror Senior Member Join Date: October 28, 2006 Posts: 424	AR has a peep sight MUCH closer to your face, while the AK has a notch sight halfway to your target. The AR sight picture is hands down the winner (at least for me) - easier to see and more accurate to boot. __________________ Head shots are hard, but nut shots are twice as hard.

March 19, 2010, 02:33 PM	#3
howwie Senior Member Join Date: May 13, 2009 Location: Georgia Posts: 188	It seems to me the distance between is very similar, but the AR is much closer to your eye. Plus the peep is very easy to use, that being said...I havn't done a long shoot with either. Only shoots within 100-150 yds or so. I have to say the AK suprised me on not being as inaccurate as I've been told. however, I enjoyed the AR sights more just because it seemed more user friendly __________________ "Whoever bleeds the least wins."

March 19, 2010, 06:46 PM	#4
DMK Senior Member Join Date: November 18, 2001 Location: Over the hills and far, far away Posts: 3,206	That's one reason I don't like M4/CAR gas systems on my AR15s. OTOH, throw a set of Tech Sights on an AK and you have a sight radius that's longer than a rifle length AR15. Add an Ultimak with an Aimpoint and you got something goin' on. __________________ - Homeland Security begins at home: Support your Second Amendment - www.gunowners.org - www.saf.org - act.nraila.org - www.grnc.org

March 19, 2010, 08:25 PM	#6
Crosshair Senior Member Join Date: December 16, 2004 Location: Grand Forks, ND Posts: 5,333	One point that gets missed is that while the factory AR sights are better for long range, the AK sights are better for shorter ranges. So it depends on what you are going to use it for As has been pointed out, rock solid aftermarket options render the point moot. __________________ I don't carry a gun to go looking for trouble, I carry a gun in case trouble finds me.

March 19, 2010, 06:47 PM	#5
tINY Senior Member Join Date: April 26, 2005 Location: Orygun Posts: 2,589	Compared to an M14, FAL, or even a Galil, they are both short. -tINY

March 19, 2010, 09:02 PM	#7
B. Lahey Senior Member Join Date: March 17, 2008 Location: Indiana Posts: 2,857	I have always disliked that sight setup. On a 16" AR like that you have a ton of barrel hanging out there that could be adding to your sight-radius, but it's not because they went with the short gas system, and the front sight/gas doodad is a part of that. For me it's more about looks, though. It looks weird, like the semiauto 16" barrel Sterling the guy robbed the liquor store with in Robocop. But are both ok for their intended purpose of short to medium range shooting, and both can be used at longer ranges if the shooter is up to it. I just prefer my ARs in rifle configuration; I don't clear rooms, I shoot at paper. __________________ "A human being is primarily a bag for putting food into; the other functions and faculties may be more godlike, but in point of time they come afterwards." -George Orwell

March 21, 2010, 07:39 PM	#9
bamaranger Senior Member Join Date: October 9, 2009 Location: North Alabama Posts: 8,312	Well now........ The side x side pic is most interesting. I did not realize that the radius's were so similar. Usually, when irons v. peeps are discussed, the peep gets a mechanical/geometric advantage because the radius (length) of the sight radius is increased. Not so in the pic comparison. Still, the aperture on the AR/M4 wins hands down on ease of use. When understood, and used correctly, any aperture/peep is superior to the std leaf and blade iron sights, given equal visibility of each, because one of the focal planes ( or elements) involved in the sight picture is eliminated. To correctly use a std leaf/blade, the eye (and shooter) must juggle images of the target, the front post, and the rear aperature. Correctly of course, one's focus is on the front sight, and the target and rear blur, BUT...all three elements must be kept in relation to one another. With a peep, one of these elements is eliminated. The peep is looked "through" not "at", the eye naturally centers the front post, which is kept in focus, and the post is "applied" against the target. Two sight elements instead of three. In my heady youth, I had no trouble shooting well with peep or irons. Now, I have run smack into "fifty something" and cannot easily juggle the three item sight picture of irons, and actually prefer a peep for that reason. The bad news is, it's only going to get worse. With a handgun, I can hyper extend my arms and get a usable sight picture, or I can get longer barreled handguns. (or glasses, I suppose). Optics, as in scopes are another option. On a short carbine, I'm stuck, particularly the mid sighted AK and AR's.