PDA

View Full Version : Rear Sight Recommendations: Carry Handle or ?


nephrodoc
07-11-2013, 12:27 PM
My AR build is slowly coming together. Looking for a rear sight to go with my Spikes Tactical 16 inch upper with an A2 front sight.

I am not planning on an optic any time soon. Considering a carry handle rear sight, but seems rare these days. It has been about 20 years since shooting an AR, and i see things have changed.

Would you guys recommend a carry handle rear sight or another rear sight to consider?

Sicarius
07-11-2013, 1:44 PM
if you are going for irons, it is hard to beat a carry handle for the price and functionality. Check ar15.com's equipment exchange. There are variances for the carry handles so be sure to get the right one for your front sight. The F marked front sights are a tad taller which is why.
Kevin

JackRydden224
07-11-2013, 1:45 PM
iTac Defense diopter sights. You'll love it. It works just like HK rear sights.

nitroxdiver
07-11-2013, 2:03 PM
LMT also makes what amounts to a cut down carry handle sight. Offers the full adjustability of the carry handle, but provides room in front of it for future mounting of a red dot if you ever desire.
http://www.rainierarms.com/?page=shop/detail&product_id=265


Sent from classified location using Tapatalk.

milotrain
07-11-2013, 2:07 PM
NM hoods, multiple apertures, 1/4 MOA clicks, enough elevation for 600+ yards. Done (http://www.whiteoakarmament.com/xcart/product.php?productid=17720&cat=278&page=1).

IPSICK
07-11-2013, 2:26 PM
LMT also makes what amounts to a cut down carry handle sight. Offers the full adjustability of the carry handle, but provides room in front of it for future mounting of a red dot if you ever desire.
http://www.rainierarms.com/?page=shop/detail&product_id=265


Sent from classified location using Tapatalk.

I like this idea better than the carry handle but hate the price.

CK_32
07-11-2013, 2:34 PM
If your not running an optic go carry handle


I want to do another build just to have a carry handle. Most guys on here MUST have an optic reason you dont see anyone. "Not as cool"

I personally love the classic carry handle look.

Sicarius
07-11-2013, 2:35 PM
I have a cut down carry handle with a red dot and it really gets in the way of the sight picture even at 1/3 cowitness. I did it because it was a cheapie carbine I just threw together with spare parts. I would sway somebody from getting the the LMT if they plan on using both IMO.
Kevin

kkp
07-11-2013, 4:01 PM
I don't see the point of the carry handle other than the "classic look". I mean, who on earth would carry a rifle that way, after all? Talk about unsafe!

brianm767
07-11-2013, 7:36 PM
I prefer the carry handle.

Speaking of carrying the rifle by the handle, my buddy at work, a retired Marine said if a Marine was ever caught carrying their M16/M4 by the handle, they caught major s#!t for it, to include "what the hell is wrong with you, do you think your in the Army?

Dave07997S
07-11-2013, 8:02 PM
I prefer the carry handle.

Speaking of carrying the rifle by the handle, my buddy at work, a retired Marine said if a Marine was ever caught carrying their M16/M4 by the handle, they caught major s#!t for it, to include "what the hell is wrong with you, do you think your in the Army?

Same thing in the Army...the carrying handle was not for carrying it...

Dave

smittty
07-11-2013, 8:06 PM
DD A1.5 rear sight is my favorite. Clean, simple, reliable.

Lucky Scott
07-11-2013, 8:09 PM
Just saw a carry handle with sight in the for sale section for 50 bucks. I like the carry handle look also, but just have never put one on an AR yet. Maybe the next one......
I just picked up an inexpensive rear sight for 16 bucks today from a calgunner.
It looks like it will work just fine, and the price is great.

kkp
07-11-2013, 8:45 PM
Same thing in the Army...the carrying handle was not for carrying it...

Dave

Exactly! So... Why! What is it people like about it?

Sights without carrying handles work just as well, AND leave room for [entirely optional] optics. And can cost less. And since you're not supposed to actually CARRY it... Why?

Does not compute, unless you're trying to recreate a certain look, at the cost of some flexibility of configuration.

brianm767
07-11-2013, 9:09 PM
Exactly! So... Why! What is it people like about it?

Sights without carrying handles work just as well, AND leave room for [entirely optional] optics. And can cost less. And since you're not supposed to actually CARRY it... Why?

Does not compute, unless you're trying to recreate a certain look, at the cost of some flexibility of configuration.

For me, yes, it's just the look, just like for me, a SKS or AK should have wood furniture on it, a race track should be a clay dirt track oval and a fire engine should be red.

milotrain
07-11-2013, 9:50 PM
I've got my old carry handle lying around if you want it. I bought that white oak and it's very nice but not so necessary if you are not dialing elevation and windage all over the place.

nephrodoc
07-12-2013, 6:50 AM
Thanks for the input. I like that DD 1.5 rear sight, will give it a closer look.

And yes, carry handles are not for carrying.

Super Chicken
07-12-2013, 7:44 AM
Having seen plenty of pictures from the Vietnam war of grunts actually using the carrying handle, does any one know when it became taboo in the Military?

nitroxdiver
07-12-2013, 7:44 AM
Neph,
The DD is a real solid fixed elevation sight. Great for a set and forget 50yd or whatever you prefer zero. However, if your goal is a bit more precision and you want the ability to dial in elevation adjustments for different distances, them the carry handle or cut down carry handle LMT would be more appropriate since the DD only has click adjustable windage(utilizing a tool or bullet tip). To dial in more or less elevation with the DD, you have to adjust your front sight post.


Sent from classified location using Tapatalk.

HK Dave
07-12-2013, 7:53 AM
From what I recall, the carry handle was originally designed to protect the charging handle that was located on top of the rifle.

Since picatinny rails didn't exist back then, maybe Stoner didn't see a reason to redesign the rear sight system when he moved the charging handle to the rear?

With the advent of pic rails... I think the carry handle is a step backwards in technology.

jkody
07-12-2013, 8:36 AM
Why not get a Troy flip up rear sight. They are durable and then you would be optics ready for when you decide later on to get an optical sight.

kkp
07-12-2013, 11:05 AM
Having seen plenty of pictures from the Vietnam war of grunts actually using the carrying handle, does any one know when it became taboo in the Military?

I don't know the exact date, but it seems fairly obvious when you look at the carry position, using the handle. How is that safe? Guns should generally be pointed up or down when carrying, not pointed directly forward (or back). Possibly it was never really intended for carrying, from day one. (although it does seem like a silly design feature if that's the case)

Lugiahua
07-12-2013, 11:18 AM
Well, firearm safety wasn't viewed as important as today...

Dhena81
07-12-2013, 12:34 PM
My vote goes for either a carry handle, LMT rear sight, or KAC 0-600 which can all be had for cheap in the our FS section. I picked up 2 brand new KAC 0-600 sights for less than one new a couple of months ago.

I like those choices for the option for elevation adjustment depending on your zero and ranges fired it might not matter to you. But I like the option I also like to run with the small aperture like anything though YMMV. I used to run fixed sights all the time with a 1/3 co-witness and the dot never was in the way for me. I actually prefer always having at the least the front sight always up or fixed because it helps me acquire the dot quicker and keep it more centered when in awkward positions.

Dave07997S
07-12-2013, 4:31 PM
Having seen plenty of pictures from the Vietnam war of grunts actually using the carrying handle, does any one know when it became taboo in the Military?

It was more of a complacency issue...

Dave

Super Chicken
07-15-2013, 4:49 PM
Thanks for the response guys, on the carry handle use.

HK DAVE you have a good point about Stoners original charging handle placement and the redesign.

OP sorry for the thread jack,

Cheers

nephrodoc
07-15-2013, 7:50 PM
I like the LMT sight but seems to be sold out everywhere. DPMS makes a similar model, but does not look as nice as the LMT. I am guessing its going to be carry handle for now.

nitroxdiver
07-16-2013, 2:20 PM
Nephro, many folks cut the actual carry handle down themselves. Just throwing it out there if you really like the LMT but can't find one. A hack saw and some aluma-black should do the trick. The original ones were cut down by NSWC Crane division for use on team rifles with forward mounted RDS.


Sent from classified location using Tapatalk.

frankm
07-16-2013, 2:25 PM
A carry handle is quite sturdy. You could drop it on the ground and not mess up your zero or sights.

DBADRAT
07-16-2013, 2:45 PM
carry handle sites. they also make optics for the CH that allows you to use the iron sites or the optics. it will get you going and you can add the optics latter.

jarhead714
07-16-2013, 3:00 PM
A carry handle is quite sturdy. You could drop it on the ground and not mess up your zero or sights.

Exactly! Complete protection.

metalliman545
07-16-2013, 3:55 PM
Same thing in the Army...the carrying handle was not for carrying it...

Dave

its a rifle, not a purse lol