[Noumenon]

My take on fancy optics is: how well do they work after you take the rifle and throw it on the ground? Optics are for specops and snipers. Iron sights are for riflemen.

[Long Cut]

I lost my tate for scopes when the Tasco 4x I had on my Ruger 10/22 lost its crosshairs after a thirty-round mag was fired through it. I pulled it off and never put another on. Unless you spend $500.00 or more, they're just too fragile and awkward, IMHO.

As for the electronic gear that seems to find its way aboard most rifles nowadays, Murphy's Law applies. Batteries go dead, stuff breaks. If it's there, make it so it can be removed, INSTANTLY, with no reduction in operating performance.

I'll just leave it home or trade it off...

[Woahhs]

Iron sights are for riflemen.

Bump!

[NYFriend]

I always thought the peep sight was about the best sight system for a rifle that you could find. It's faster and more intuitive than open sights (once your trained on them, as opposed to looking at those stupid sight picture diagrams that make it look like your supposed to focus on the rear sight), and you might be able to knock them out of alignment, but not a easy as a scope, they don't break, they don't run out of batteries and they are good enough for the accuracy of any service rifle. They won't let you put three rounds through the same hole at 400 yards, but then again, no factory M16 can do that from a bench rest.

[LibKill]

My take on fancy optics is: how well do they work after you take the rifle and throw it on the ground? Optics are for specops and snipers. Iron sights are for riflemen.

True, too true.

Any equipment that goes into battle must be able to work under extreme abuse.