Irons Vs. Optics

[dannyb89]

Ok, so here it is.. The irons vs. optics debate (again / continued). I've got an LR308 that I've had a scope (3x9x40), 2 reflex sights which broke due to recoil during rapid fire (ncstar and sightmark), and finally I now have a set of fixed Troy battle sights that are absolutely awesome! Of the sights I've had on this rifle, the irons are by far my favorite. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate a nice optic, but there's nothing like lining up the irons on a Garand and squeezing the trigger! So there's my two cents, what does everyone else think?

 

[msr]

There's no denying the appeal of optics and they certainly have their strengths, but unless you're shorting at a target over 300 yards I personally would use irons. At the very least you should train with irons and have fun with optics, IMO.

 

[Cerberus]

Anyone should be able to hit a 1'x6' target out to at least 200 rather consistently without the aid of optics.

 

[rockhopper46038]

Learn irons. They rarely break. Then, if you like optics, have at it.

 

[bradw266]

Iron sights first, then optics for longer distance.

 

[doglb]

Have to agree with everyone Irons First!
If you want to add optics later, thats your choice! However Irons will serve you well! If you choose optics, spend the extra money the first time and buy something of quality!

 

[1022]

I will not buy a gun that does not have good irons on it. They are just more fun than optics to me.

 

[RBrianHarless]

I have five long guns. Only one has a scope on it. It is also the least used rifle. I love iron sights. You do not have to worry about getting them readjusted if they get bumped. My kids were all taught with iron sights.

Don't get me wrong cause I am not knocking anyone who chooses to put an optic on their rifle. I just choose to keep mine simple with the iron sights.

 

[nipprdog]

I've had a scope (3x9x40)

What brand, and model?

 

[william]

Use the irons til you can afford a good optic...no more ncstar and sightmark. You get what you pay for!

 

[LEaSH]

I don't have any real optics in use - yet.

As I get older I might have to get something for tired eyes. In the meantime, I'll eat my carrots.

 

[figley]

Good iron sights are an essential, but to realize the true value and potential of .308, a quality magnified optic is really not optional.

Quit buying crap optics.

The Troy iron sights you have, probably cost more than all your "scopes" put together. I see, you have realized that they are worth it. Garand rifles were made in a time when telescopic manufacturing technology was nowhere near as precise, and inexpensive, as it is today. Maybe the M1A platform is more your speed.

One reason I haven't bought a 7.62 OBR yet, is that after paying for the rifle, there may not be $1000 left in the budget for optics. I see no sense in owning the rifle without an optic that sufficiently complements it.

This thread is not about the optics vs. irons debate. This thread is about the fact that cheap optics suck, and break, so you have convinced yourself that iron sights are great for a .308 rifle, with an effective range of 800m.

 

[bmbutch]

I use both, mostly iron sights on shorter barrels (<18) and optics on 18 or plus. I normally get a much bigger rush shooting iron sights well. I'm far from an expert, just my current setups.

 

[Bonez87]

I agree that you should practice with and get very good with your irons but I also Like a good quality RDS or Holographic Sight. If you get a quality optic like an Aimpoint, Eotech or Acog you should have any problems.

 

[mkbar80]

Use the irons til you can afford a good optic...no more ncstar and sightmark. You get what you pay for!

Good iron sights are an essential, but to realize the true value and potential of .308, a quality magnified optic is really not optional.

Quit buying crap optics.

The Troy iron sights you have, probably cost more than all your "scopes" put together. I see, you have realized that they are worth it. Garand rifles were made in a time when telescopic manufacturing technology was nowhere near as precise, and inexpensive, as it is today. Maybe the M1A platform is more your speed.

One reason I haven't bought a 7.62 OBR yet, is that after paying for the rifle, there may not be $1000 left in the budget for optics. I see no sense in owning the rifle without an optic that sufficiently complements it.

This thread is not about the optics vs. irons debate. This thread is about the fact that cheap optics suck, and break, so you have convinced yourself that iron sights are great for a .308 rifle, with an effective range of 800m.

What they said....

 

[dannyb89]

What brand, and model?

Can't remember the model, but the scope was a Simmons. The rifle was dead on with it, I just didn't shoot it that much since the furthest I can normall shoot is 150 yards. The irons just turned out to be a lot more fun!

 

[dannyb89]

Use the irons til you can afford a good optic...no more ncstar and sightmark. You get what you pay for!

Yeah I found that out the hard way! Funny thing is, the last time I was in a gun shop, a 14 year old kid bought an eotech because "it's cool because it's what they have on Modern Warfare"... Kinda crazy.

 

[Notavictim646]

I have a RRA UTE2 midlength AR. The rear sight is an integral part of the upper, but there is still a rail. I have an aimpoint that is mounted so as to allow for co-witnessing. It is not possible to add magnification to the optic, but the red dot is super intuitive and followups are really fast because there is no need to line up the sights. Kinda best of both worlds I guess.

 

[rugertoter]

Ok, so here it is.. The irons vs. optics debate (again / continued). I've got an LR308 that I've had a scope (3x9x40), 2 reflex sights which broke due to recoil during rapid fire (ncstar and sightmark), and finally I now have a set of fixed Troy battle sights that are absolutely awesome! Of the sights I've had on this rifle, the irons are by far my favorite. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate a nice optic, but there's nothing like lining up the irons on a Garand and squeezing the trigger! So there's my two cents, what does everyone else think?

Both have their place, but if you take a bad spill down a hill there is a good chance your scope will be thrown off zero. I like scopes more now that I am starting to get the "getting a little older" eyes, but I still have a couple of rifles that I will not scope because the iron sights are just so darn good. Unless my rifle were to take a serious hit of some kind, they will probably always be pretty much on at all times. JMHO.

 

[U.S. Patriot]

I'll admit I'm not a big fan of optics, except on long range rifles. Iron sights get the job done and it's one less thing to fail.