Back to irons.

[Rhodes1968 1,638]

Been thinking this over lot lately and discussing it with a couple recently made friends that migrated from Eastern Europe a few years back. They think its a bit odd the compulsion the Americans have about mounting scopes on AKs though after letting them shoot mine they understand it but still think its odd. Surprisingly this was the first x39 they ever used having been issued 5.45s. The recoil surprised them a bit so I let them shoot the 308 and the jaws dropped. But I digress. They pointed out very strongly that in combat and training that rifle takes a real beating and showed me how (they used their own rifles wasn't lending mine for that) and I just cringed, a scope or red dot would have to be very high quality or a PSO to take that. Now that is just their and now my opinion.

 

We live a at great time for options in sighting and so thought a thread on the subject may lend some info for all of us perhaps if people are interested. The more I hang with these guys the more I agree with them, MBRs are meant for irons and very few people have whats needed to be effective snipers and use scopes. Here my contribution hope you guys will offer yours;

 

I like a rear aperture sight even though mud may have to pushed out from time to time. I see nothing better than the Krebs that retains the elevation system from the AK. Krebs Range Report

Krebs is telling me the 1000M is the one for Saiga anyone know different?

 

For the front sight a low light stripe-post from XS more accurate than the big dot and still easy to see and fast to use.

 

So any interest perusing this matter? Lot more I can add but rather hear from you guys.

Edited January 28, 2010 by Nailbomb
Removed links to Non-Buisness members

[swells08 128]

Been thinking this over lot lately and discussing it with a couple recently made friends that migrated from Eastern Europe a few years back. They think its a bit odd the compulsion the Americans have about mounting scopes on AKs though after letting them shoot mine they understand it but still think its odd. Surprisingly this was the first x39 they ever used having been issued 5.45s. The recoil surprised them a bit so I let them shoot the 308 and the jaws dropped. But I digress. They pointed out very strongly that in combat and training that rifle takes a real beating and showed me how (they used their own rifles wasn't lending mine for that) and I just cringed, a scope or red dot would have to be very high quality or a PSO to take that. Now that is just their and now my opinion.

 

We live a at great time for options in sighting and so thought a thread on the subject may lend some info for all of us perhaps if people are interested. The more I hang with these guys the more I agree with them, MBRs are meant for irons and very few people have whats needed to be effective snipers and use scopes. Here my contribution hope you guys will offer yours;

 

I like a rear aperture sight even though mud may have to pushed out from time to time. I see nothing better than the Krebs that retains the elevation system from the AK. Krebs Range Report

Krebs is telling me the 1000M is the one for Saiga anyone know different?

 

For the front sight a low light stripe-post from XS more accurate than the big dot and still easy to see and fast to use.

 

So any interest perusing this matter? Lot more I can add but rather hear from you guys.

 

I have toyed with optics, but have decided to stay iron as well for similar reasons. I feel if I were to shoot past 3-400 yards it might be useful until that point my eye and irons are sighted in to hit center mass targets to 350 ish. If a SHTF scenario where real urban combat would not always allow for optics. If someone was that far I probably would rather not have them know I am there. But most battles occur within a 300-800 or less range.

[Lone Star Arms 2,047]

First let me start from the standpoint that this is primarily and S12 board and then progress to the discussion of 7.62 x 39.

 

I have optical sites, and iron sites for my S12. Optics like red dots or Eotechs are completely unnecessary for an S12. The factory iron sights are perfectly adequate for a rapid fire scattergun. Krebs sights are better. An Eotech or red dot is overkill. It looks bitchin' but there's no other reason to have one on a shotgun.

 

My friend Bounce and I went out to shoot his old Romy 7.62 x 39 (with iron sights) a few weeks ago. We were consistently nailing COM shots from the bench at 200 yards with old Egyptian ammo and nary a stray. I took a few shots from the shoulder and hit every time. Both of us like to shoot, but neither make pretenses of being accomplished marksmen, and a 200 yard COM shot with a 7.62 AK and iron sights is well within the capabilities of that weapon.

 

A 7.62 x 39 AK is a general purpose weapon and was not designed to be a sniper rifle with pinpoint accuracy. If you like a scope, by all means bolt one on, but it is by no means a necessity to get the weapon to do anything it is not designed to do with iron sights.

 

WS

[photoshooter 5]

I have several rifles that I've determined will remain "iron only". I have a few different low cost optics that can move from rifle to rifle but I've been putting much greater effort into finding good iron sights.

For my AKs I've looked at the Krebs sight mentioned above. I've also been considering a Mojo MicroClick rear peep sight or Tech Sights. They all seem like good solutions. I'm leaning toward the Mojo. For the front I'd love to pick up a tritium post but that's low priority for now.

Edited January 28, 2010 by Nailbomb
Remove Links to non-Buisness members

[chevyman097 2,579]

I am and allways will be a huge fan of simple iron sights. Only scope I have is on my sks and its just one of those chinese spotter scopes, Ive seen them called anyway, I can still use the irons by just looking under the scope. Its mounted rather high.

 

I have never had any issues hitting my targets any less accurate vs people using scopes at the same distances. Then again Im not sniping. I dont see myself being in a sittuation where I need to shoot sniper distances. Allthough I have been entertaining the idea of getting a PSL and I would have to scope it! lol because lets be honest, they are just awesome.

[elvis christ 451]

For the most part, I really dig iron sights on a 7.62X39 gun. But recently, I've been toying with the idea of building a saiga with an Ultimak with a Aimpoint mounted on it. I don't know why, other than I want to.

[jimdigriz 580]

For the most part, I really dig iron sights on a 7.62X39 gun. But recently, I've been toying with the idea of building a saiga with an Ultimak with a Aimpoint mounted on it. I don't know why, other than I want to.

 

I had that setup, but found it rather easy to burn my fingers after having shot a bit. It is very solid though, and gives a great sight picture.

[jimdigriz 580]

They pointed out very strongly that in combat and training that rifle takes a real beating and showed me how (they used their own rifles wasn't lending mine for that) and I just cringed, a scope or red dot would have to be very high quality or a PSO to take that. Now that is just their and now my opinion.

 

They're right, but this is not so much an argument in my view for iron sights only, as for

1) Buying a rugged optic, such as an Aimpoint, or a Russian milspec optic

2) Having an option for quick return to iron sights. Quick release, or un-occluded iron sights (for instance, PK-AS allows use of iron sights without having to remove the optic).

3) Training with iron sights. Enough said.

 

I'm working on my iron sights skills, but I find that the Aimpoint Micro I have gives me both the greatest accuracy and the most speed. It will be my first option.

 

I like a rear aperture sight even though mud may have to pushed out from time to time. I see nothing better than the Krebs that retains the elevation system from the AK.

...Krebs is telling me the 1000M is the one for Saiga anyone know different?

 

I ordered mine last week. (And yes, 1000M is correct). The Krebs is the simplest aperture sight option for the AK. I had the Tech Sights, but they're best used on a rifle that is iron-sighted only. That is, they don't allow a low rise side mounted optic, or an Ultimak-mounted one.

 

Can't wait to see how they fare this week at the range.

 

Jim

[Rhodes1968 1,638]

One thing I forget to add, I must recommend to avoid any rear sight replacement that does not incorporate the AKs built in ballistics compensator on the x39, You lose so much of what MK designed into it, Battle Zero, fast range changes, easy zero. Mojo comes to mind as does the Tech Sight system, there are more but they are easy to spot lacking the teeth on the sight. Of course for flatter shooting rounds like the 22cals or 308 its less of an issue but even there you would be glad to have it functional.

[Rhodes1968 1,638]

They pointed out very strongly that in combat and training that rifle takes a real beating and showed me how (they used their own rifles wasn't lending mine for that) and I just cringed, a scope or red dot would have to be very high quality or a PSO to take that. Now that is just their and now my opinion.

 

They're right, but this is not so much an argument in my view for iron sights only, as for

1) Buying a rugged optic, such as an Aimpoint, or a Russian milspec optic

2) Having an option for quick return to iron sights. Quick release, or un-occluded iron sights (for instance, PK-AS allows use of iron sights without having to remove the optic).

3) Training with iron sights. Enough said.

 

I'm working on my iron sights skills, but I find that the Aimpoint Micro I have gives me both the greatest accuracy and the most speed. It will be my first option.

 

I like a rear aperture sight even though mud may have to pushed out from time to time. I see nothing better than the Krebs that retains the elevation system from the AK.

...Krebs is telling me the 1000M is the one for Saiga anyone know different?

 

I ordered mine last week. (And yes, 1000M is correct). The Krebs is the simplest aperture sight option for the AK. I had the Tech Sights, but they're best used on a rifle that is iron-sighted only. That is, they don't allow a low rise side mounted optic, or an Ultimak-mounted one.

 

Can't wait to see how they fare this week at the range.

 

Jim

 

Well the TS also loses the BC I mention above its just so important.

Let us know how your range test goes, the more I look the more I find the combo of Krebs Custom and XS stripe-post keep coming up as excellent.

Edited January 27, 2010 by Rhodes1968

[Frankyoz 15]

I love iron sights and always have felt optics are a crutch or fancy do-dad being a Marine and being taught to shoot out too 500yrds with irons also, helped formed this biased opinion as well as never being issued a optic till my last deployment a Trijicon lol. So my opinion is stated before I continue. Optics have their place and so do red dots that being said these rifles do not highly benifit froma magnified optic we all know this. I also beleive that with a peep rear sight it makes these a little more difficult with follow ups due to the recoil and losing the picture. Anyway I do beleive that red dots and holographics are a decent choice for the range these rifles were designed for and make target aquisition quick and are a great option for those of us with lesser eyesight than the rest. All that being said my Saiga came with a 3-5 scope and is a fun novelty but I am more accurate with irons than the scope. Although I will say for the cool look factor the scope has an edge in making the rifle look "serious" lol cheers!

[Rhodes1968 1,638]

I have several rifles that I've determined will remain "iron only". I have a few different low cost optics that can move from rifle to rifle but I've been putting much greater effort into finding good iron sights.

For my AKs I've looked at the Krebs sight mentioned above. I've also been considering a Mojo MicroClick rear peep sight or Tech Sights. They all seem like good solutions. I'm leaning toward the Mojo. For the front I'd love to pick up a tritium post but that's low priority for now.

 

A lot of people have problems with the Micro-Click as it isnt very rugged and will tend to "pop up" during recoil on many rifles. Losing ballistics compensation also not an improvement. The Krebs is better made IMHO.

[Rhodes1968 1,638]

I love iron sights and always have felt optics are a crutch or fancy do-dad being a Marine and being taught to shoot out too 500yrds with irons also, helped formed this biased opinion as well as never being issued a optic till my last deployment a Trijicon lol. So my opinion is stated before I continue. Optics have their place and so do red dots that being said these rifles do not highly benifit froma magnified optic we all know this. I also beleive that with a peep rear sight it makes these a little more difficult with follow ups due to the recoil and losing the picture. Anyway I do beleive that red dots and holographics are a decent choice for the range these rifles were designed for and make target aquisition quick and are a great option for those of us with lesser eyesight than the rest. All that being said my Saiga came with a 3-5 scope and is a fun novelty but I am more accurate with irons than the scope. Although I will say for the cool look factor the scope has an edge in making the rifle look "serious" lol cheers!

 

For a different round the scope makes more sense, no problem with one that allows quick disconnect and back to irons, Ive found co-witness to mount WAY too high for good cheek weld even with a pad and affect accuracy badly at some ranges. Now on my 308 I do have a scope side mounted and it can be removed in five seconds and reinstalled without changing zero. But that's a flat shooting round compared to the x39. The longer I deal with this the more convinced I am that aperture irons just make so much sense on the x39.

[Azrial 1,091]

The red dots are about speed, not accuracy. I like them on a rifle and they are seeing good service in the Middle East. I do not mean this as a negative, but frankly the Europeans don't have a lot to teach us about practical riflemanship or how to fight a war. But, they are entitled to an opinion.

Edited January 27, 2010 by Azrial

[Frankyoz 15]

I love iron sights and always have felt optics are a crutch or fancy do-dad being a Marine and being taught to shoot out too 500yrds with irons also, helped formed this biased opinion as well as never being issued a optic till my last deployment a Trijicon lol. So my opinion is stated before I continue. Optics have their place and so do red dots that being said these rifles do not highly benifit froma magnified optic we all know this. I also beleive that with a peep rear sight it makes these a little more difficult with follow ups due to the recoil and losing the picture. Anyway I do beleive that red dots and holographics are a decent choice for the range these rifles were designed for and make target aquisition quick and are a great option for those of us with lesser eyesight than the rest. All that being said my Saiga came with a 3-5 scope and is a fun novelty but I am more accurate with irons than the scope. Although I will say for the cool look factor the scope has an edge in making the rifle look "serious" lol cheers!

 

For a different round the scope makes more sense, no problem with one that allows quick disconnect and back to irons, Ive found co-witness to mount WAY too high for good cheek weld even with a pad and affect accuracy badly at some ranges. Now on my 308 I do have a scope side mounted and it can be removed in five seconds and reinstalled without changing zero. But that's a flat shooting round compared to the x39. The longer I deal with this the more convinced I am that aperture irons just make so much sense on the x39.

 

I agree completely with what is available and the overall accuracy of the 7.62 your options are limited every time I remove my scope I know it has to be dialed in again upon re-installing it. Also with the cheek weld this issue for me is a little bit diffrent. I have a PO 3.5 on mine and can get away with having a good distance of distance from the scope. I also have a DPH skeleton stock it works good for me combined with that particular scope. However depending on your optic this will play a signifigant role in the use. I can still use my irons with my scope and do so for close work.

[photoshooter 5]

A lot of people have problems with the Micro-Click as it isnt very rugged and will tend to "pop up" during recoil on many rifles. Losing ballistics compensation also not an improvement. The Krebs is better made IMHO.

 

Good info, much appreciated. I'll look more closely at the Krebs sight.

[Rhodes1968 1,638]

The red dots are about speed, not accuracy. I like them on a rifle and they are seeing good service in the Middle East. I do not mean this as a negative, but frankly the Europeans don't have a lot to teach us about practical riflemanship or how to fight a war. But, they are entitled to an opinion.

 

Of course its going to be faster and if you get a high dollar unit spending several hundred dollars or more on a red dot or other 0x system then its going to be fairly durable. But that isnt what happens very often from what I have seen of peoples AKs here. I am more than willing to give up a tad of speed for a ton of reliability and BC on a battle rifle, of course not everyone agrees but still irons must be discussed and explore our options.

 

Some clarification, not much of the discussion applies to the 5.45 as they shoot extremely flat compared to the x39 making zero and BC much easier and much less an issue. The folks I mentioned from Europe just have practical experience taking the 5.45 AK into combat and have helped me understand some general things about the rifle. Of course they claimed no experience with 30cal, ballistics and recoil being the only real difference but a large one. The mindset between US and Europe is going to be different of course but they have been using the AK for three generations or more and on that subject they do have something to teach.

 

You are exactly correct on the difference between an American Rifleman and European, they don't have that tradition and right to own firearms we enjoy. These guys had never even fired a 308 Saiga before, but they know a lot about carrying an AK into combat and what to expect it to endure just as a lot of us know what its like to tote that 223 Stoner.

[TR Young 175]

I have optical sites, and iron sites for my S12. Optics like red dots or Eotechs are completely unnecessary for an S12. The factory iron sights are perfectly adequate for a rapid fire scattergun. Krebs sights are better. An Eotech or red dot is overkill. It looks bitchin' but there's no other reason to have one on a shotgun...

I agree for the most part, unless someone wants to deer hunt with slugs. Then I'd have to disagree. I want to be sure that when I tap a deer that my optics are good enough that I can pinpoint the head or heart/lungs.

 

However, if it's just going to be used as a typical scattergun/home defense tool, then I'd say no meaningful optics are really necessary.

[Rhodes1968 1,638]

So to get things back on track anyone want to share what they know on the current irons available and their results?

[jimdigriz 580]

So to get things back on track anyone want to share what they know on the current irons available and their results?

 

I got tight and consistent groups with the Tech Sights, when I had them. They're a good product, but, in addition to the drawback I mentioned previously, the dust cover is difficult to mount and unmount, and it rattles somewhat. Not a deal-killer, but annoying.

[leadslinger 37]

A lot of people have problems with the Micro-Click as it isn't very rugged and will tend to "pop up" during recoil on many rifles. Losing ballistics compensation also not an improvement. The Krebs is better made IMHO.

 

Rhodes 1968 elaborate on the down side of the MOJO. I had an old set that i have been sighting in at the range. I haven't tried them in a rapid fire session yet. Glad to find out that the XS post sight is a good combo. I was giving that one a long look. Its going to be my next buy.

 

Those MOJO micro's ultra accurate with my Swedish Mauser M96. I haven't found a 300 or longer range near. I would love to see what my Swed could do without the scope (just for shits and giggles) cause i am dead on with the MOJO's.

[Rhodes1968 1,638]

So to get things back on track anyone want to share what they know on the current irons available and their results?

 

I got tight and consistent groups with the Tech Sights, when I had them. They're a good product, but, in addition to the drawback I mentioned previously, the dust cover is difficult to mount and unmount, and it rattles somewhat. Not a deal-killer, but annoying.

 

Thanks Ive seen that mentioned before by a couple of people. No system is perfect but anything that slows down field striping is not very acceptable to me on a MBR.

[jimdigriz 580]

Thanks Ive seen that mentioned before by a couple of people. No system is perfect but anything that slows down field striping is not very acceptable to me on a MBR.

 

Yea, that bothered me too. It is possible to get a case stuck in the receiver, in which case you would need to rapidly remove the dust cover to shake it out.

[Rhodes1968 1,638]

A lot of people have problems with the Micro-Click as it isn't very rugged and will tend to "pop up" during recoil on many rifles. Losing ballistics compensation also not an improvement. The Krebs is better made IMHO.

 

Rhodes 1968 elaborate on the down side of the MOJO. I had an old set that i have been sighting in at the range. I haven't tried them in a rapid fire session yet. Glad to find out that the XS post sight is a good combo. I was giving that one a long look. Its going to be my next buy.

 

Those MOJO micro's ultra accurate with my Swedish Mauser M96. I haven't found a 300 or longer range near. I would love to see what my Swed could do without the scope (just for shits and giggles) cause i am dead on with the MOJO's.

 

Ive only dealt with the AK Mojo beginning with the Micro-Click and then the Original design. They are accurate and for use with a target rifle would have no issue with them. What I discovered on mine was the length between pins and front where the spring exerts pressure is a bit short lessening the pressure from the spring allowing it to pop up. The Mosin is favorably reviewed as is the Mauser. I found I really missed being able to set range with ease in addition to having to push the sight back down after each shot even after reforming the spring to increase pressure. In the field I kept having dirt get into the mechanism and would have to clean it out with canned air(this stuff is great in the field BTW) to adjust as I was afraid I would damage the sight.

 

The combo I like is the Krebs Custom aperture and XS stripe-post. Sight picture is good in any light and its fast to re-target. No so much sold on the XS Express that comes with front and rear. Anyone have one?

[leadslinger 37]

A lot of people have problems with the Micro-Click as it isn't very rugged and will tend to "pop up" during recoil on many rifles. Losing ballistics compensation also not an improvement. The Krebs is better made IMHO.

 

Rhodes 1968 elaborate on the down side of the MOJO. I had an old set that i have been sighting in at the range. I haven't tried them in a rapid fire session yet. Glad to find out that the XS post sight is a good combo. I was giving that one a long look. Its going to be my next buy.

 

Those MOJO micro's ultra accurate with my Swedish Mauser M96. I haven't found a 300 or longer range near. I would love to see what my Swed could do without the scope (just for shits and giggles) cause i am dead on with the MOJO's.

 

Ive only dealt with the AK Mojo beginning with the Micro-Click and then the Original design. They are accurate and for use with a target rifle would have no issue with them. What I discovered on mine was the length between pins and front where the spring exerts pressure is a bit short lessening the pressure from the spring allowing it to pop up. The Mosin is favorably reviewed as is the Mauser. I found I really missed being able to set range with ease in addition to having to push the sight back down after each shot even after reforming the spring to increase pressure. In the field I kept having dirt get into the mechanism and would have to clean it out with canned air(this stuff is great in the field BTW) to adjust as I was afraid I would damage the sight.

 

The combo I like is the Krebs Custom aperture and XS stripe-post. Sight picture is good in any light and its fast to re-target. No so much sold on the XS Express that comes with front and rear. Anyone have one?

Hmmmmm looks like i am going to add the krebs to xs stripe-post purchase. I really like the peep rear set up for all my rifles. this is also on my list for the S12. KREBS CUSTOM SAIGA-12 COMBAT SHOTGUN SIGHTS

CATALOG NUMBER 17

[jimdigriz 580]

Just mounted my Krebs on the rifle. Great sight picture. The big advantage of aperture sights is the auto-centering the brain and eye does in the circle. What always bothered me about normal AK sights is having to be conscious to line up the top of the post on the same horizontal level as the two sides of the notch, which is especially hard for me when I focus my eyes on the post and the notch goes blurry.

 

The "Fullerized" rear sight ought to be mentioned though. They seem to love it over at the Warrior Talk forum. It's a standard AK rear sight that has the notch opened up somewhat, and the outside edges curved down, thus supposedly naturally focusing the eyes to the notch. I don't think I explained it well, but it is another option, and a cheaper one (~$39).

Edited January 28, 2010 by Jim Digriz

[Rhodes1968 1,638]

Found some posts from guys training Iraqi troops using the x39. They insist on 20M (~22yd) zero to give the 100M zero (1 setting). If you must doing the same at 25 yards is perfectly fine, the error induced is minimal. 50M (50 yd close enough) is also mentioned in several places for 100M zero and is completely valid and a bit more accurate.Finding trajectory information on this round isn't the easiest thing with so much utter crap out there. I've seen so many piss poor charts, tables, and graphs that completely contradict each other and even themselves. Im sick of looking at them. Most bad ones are produced by AR guys, surprise surprise.

 

Now why is it so important to retain the BC of the rear site. From these rough calculations it can be seen how much correction is being made by the RSB.

 

1 Setting - Zero @ 100M

2 Setting - +7 in. @ 200M

3 Setting - +24 in. @ 300M

And so forth.

 

The Battle Zero keeps the round, theory goes, inside the kill zone on a man sized target out to 300M more or less. These are not exact numbers but guides as even the RSBs vary from rifle to rifle slightly and there's going to be a good bit of difference from the load of the round and bullet design. My point is with good zero and keeping that RSB compensation our irons will be much more accurate and enjoyable. If you find a mistake please post I would appreciate it.

 

Now how to get all these ranges to use the metric system.

Edited January 28, 2010 by Rhodes1968

[photoshooter 5]

Hey Rhodes, I did some more research and I'm really liking the Krebs/XS Stripe combo. I think I'm gonna go for that solution, thanks for the recommendations. I'll probably try the MicroClick later too since I do have several rifles to outfit. A web search turned up positive feedback on both for the most part. The Krebs looks like a solid piece so I'll give it a whirl.

[jimdigriz 580]

Can someone who has the XS white stripe tell us whether the post is wider than the factory post?

 

Thanks.

[photoshooter 5]

Also another question on the XS stripe;

 

is the tritium tube visible from only one side of the post? If so it would require a full turn to make any adjustments.