that’s a good price. i paid $439 shipped for mine.
It’s not that big of a deal. The LOS with A2 irons is about 2.6 inches above the line of bore. Going to tall mounts like the LaRue tall SPR puts the optic at or damn near 3" over. That .4 inch does make a slight difference, but it’s pretty negligable.
I purposely put a folding standard height front sight, and a fixed low profile sight on the rear. The rear requires me to put it at max height to be standard and be mid-way absolute co-witness. I sighted in the front with the rear at MAX HEIGHT.
Now; if i want to lower my rear sight all the way back down to the lowest profile, I can reduce the height by more than .300". I then readjust the front lower to get me back to zero. When I use the optics, I fold the front sight down, and the rear is far enough down that I can use the optics without looking through the rear sight. Is it as low/good as having a true 1/3 co-witness? No, it’s not. But it is low enough that I can have the red dot in the middle of the optics, and see it without looking through the rear sight. That’s good enough for me. Remember; I don’t want iron sights that co-witness. I want iron sights that “Co-EXIST”. I have no desire to look THROUGH a rear iron sight, to match up a red dot to a front sight. What a major waist of time. However; if the battery is dead, I don’t want to have to remove the optics to get the iron sights usable.
Could I have gone with a folding sight in the rear also? Yes. But I already had this rear sight, and I really like it. It’s centered real well, I’ve had it for a long time, I like how I view through it, etc… But I did say that if for some reason this solution isn’t good enough when I get my eotech for this gun, that I might have to look at other options. 1) EOTech riser. 2) Folding rear sight. 3) Quick Disconnect for the EOTech. Probably option 1 or 3.
Anyway, that’s not what this thread started out as. It was about the price of the EOTech i got. But it was nice to have a discussion that remained civil, non-arrogant, or rude. That can sometimes be a problem. It was refreshing to discuss, learn, disagree, etc… and still maintain respect for each other. Rare, but nice. Thanks for all the input and opinions. Mike…
Who makes your rear?
Could you post a pic of your rig?
I’m just interested to actually see what it looks like.
Anyway, if your front sight is at standard height, and you are zeroed, then your rear sight is essentially at standard height, otherwise you would be experiencing severely low POI.
BTW- you are absolutely right, there is a serious thread-drift here. I can cut this thread in two; if you have a preference, let me know via PM.
Sorry to contribute to thread drift, but I am really confused at this point.
Correct me if I am wrong on your givens here:
Folding front sight - Standard 2.6" height over bore
Eotech XPS - Absolute Cowitness mount (Standard 2.6" height over bore for centered viewing)
Fixed Rear sight - I assume that it is designed to work on the Standard 2.6" height over bore.
Now you are saying that you are lowering your rear sight aperature (I assume) by .3" and correspondingly lowering the post (I assume) in your front sight by the same amount to give you the same zero distance so that you can keep the Absolute Cowitness mount and “make it like” a lower 1/3.
Is that what you are talking about?
I don’t know that you can get that much travel out of the sights and still get them to zero, I have never tried that.
My concern is that in lowering your sights you are really going to have to mash your face into the stock to see through them if you are taking them much below the 2.6" sight line.
Will the base of the Eotech be in the way of your sight line that low?
I am also interested in seeing your adjustable rear sight.
I’ve gotten everything I needed to out of the thread. It was mainly for the first day or two, while I still had the chance to cancel my EoTech on order. But we’re beyond that. it will be here Tuesday. The thread can remain open or be closed; it’s all good by me. I appreciate everyone’s input. Oh; the rear sight is a yankee hill. It’s an older model of the 643, but it looks the same.
How do you know that the sight is “lower than standard”?
Wait a second.
I just reread the thread, and I see the disconnect.
1/3 of and inch is a shit-load of adjustment in iron sights, especially in the front sight. What you are seeing as the “tall” position of the rear sight is actually your 600 meter zero if you are zeroed by the military standard on your rear. When there is no gap in the rear sight you have no more downward travel in the rear elevation, and will have to do everything on the front sight, but you will most likely not have enough adjustment.
Can what you are talking about work? Yes, theoretically. But there is a reason that we achieve lower 1/3 cowitness the way we do: it actually works and has a shitload of historical data to support it.
If you want to try to make this work your unique way, rock on, but you will start to introduce conflict into your sighting arraingement.
Have fun.
I have it working currently with a reflex sight; which sits about the same height as the EOTech will. I’ve already said that it’s NOT TRUE 1/3 co-witness. But it is lower than absolute co-witness. It is low enough that the red-dot is in the middle of the screen, without having to look through the rear sight. Is it perfect? No. Will it work? Yes. Will I leave it like that? I don’t know.
Most of my guns are projects. I play and experiment with guns, then I sell them and start another project. I’m on my 3rd Saiga, 4th cetme, and 3rd AK. Will I finish up and sell this AR? Probably not. I like this one too much. Except for iron sights, the eotech, and a vertical grip and laser, it is all stock and I have no desire to change that. For true defensive purposes, I prefer to keep it at the simplest possible. I don’t need quad rails and other things. I have replaced 2 internal parts. I put in a Bravo Company Mod-3 charging handle. I am left handed, so it makes it easier for me to chamber the first round. “I don’t like ambi handles”. I also replaced the buffer with an ST-T2. Not to change ejection, but to smooth out and quiet the recoil. It has done that. Other than that, nothing has been changed. If I sell an AR, it would be my frankenstein.
Maybe I’ll eventually get a Yankee EOTech riser. Maybe I won’t need to. I’ll find out next week once the EOTech arrives. My other red-dots have their own riser built into them, designed specifically for co-exiting. “I don’t like the term Co-Witness, because I’ll NEVER look through iron sights to line up a red dot. That’s a wast of time in my opinion”.
Do you have any problem with getting a good sight picture through your irons now?
I have my Aimpoint setup with a 1/3 mount and I notice a difference when I drop to the 2.6" sightline versus the 2.8 or so sightline of my Aimpoint.
I would have thought you would have to really mash down into the stock to get below the 2.6" to the point of it affecting your ability to center the sights in the aperature.
Maybe I just have chubby cheeks.
If you ever try a lower 1/3 mount (as in a 1.75" mount as opposed to a 1.5" mount), you will wonder where it has been all of your life.:jester:
Actually, the irons aren’t that bad the way they are. I don’t have to crush down much. Probably would have to with a traditional A1 M16 stock, because you are further back. But with the stand T6 type M4 stocks, it’s fine. Then again, the iron sights are only there as a backup. I wouldn’t use them as a primary sight.
Come next week when i get the EOTech, there’s a lot of variables. Distance between the EOtech and the rear sight. The initial height of the EOTech; if it’s much different than my reflex. “I think they’re the same.” Is the screen size different. etc… That is the reason I mentioned in the much earlier post, that I’m not making any decision about the rear sight until I get the EOTech. It might work fine the way I have it now. Maybe it won’t. I’m just not the type of person who buys something because others say I have to. There are those that love spending $125 on a Larue EOTech riser. Is it really any different than the $40 Yankee Hill EOTech riser?.. NO! But they’ll pay more because it’s a quick disconnect, or the extra pici for a magnifier. But for actually raising the Eotech, they both do exactly what they are suppose to. Point is, these are “Toys” for us. What we do to our weapons are 95% “Big boys Toys” and 5% for actual functionality.
And that’s OK. I do the say as everyone else. I just bought my 3rd safe, because I ran out of space for guns. Do I “Need” that many guns? No. In all reality, I probably need 1 of my hunting rifles. “My 7mm mag will shoot any live animal in north america”. Probably 1 shotgun. Probably one home defense wheel gun. 1 Concealed carry. And possibly a 22lr for survival. But I can afford anything I want to buy, ever, so I buy a lot. Nothing wrong with that.
I only bring this up, because this thread definitely drifted beyond the original question of whether $432 was a decent price for a shipped brand new, with warranty EOTech XPS2-0. Maybe I’ll need a riser to make my iron sights work. Maybe I won’t. I just prefer to wait and see if what worked in the past with my other red-dots will work here. If it does; great. if not, i’ll look at my options.
You don’t need to look through your irons when co-witnessing with the eotech. Shooting properly with both eyes open and you just don’t focus on the irons.
It’s like saying the windshield wipers are too distracting to see through the windshield. You don’t focus on them, you just look through them.