Jump to content

Saiga 12 Converted... but can't decide on sights!


Recommended Posts

Hey Everyone, I know their are a billion opinions on which sights are good to get, but I'd appreciate some input. I'm having a tough time deciding on what sights to get for my gun.

 

I was thinking of just getting the magpul gen 2 flip up sights... the HK ones are just too pricey..

 

I'd also consider a red dot sight, but with batteries, but I think it would weigh more than the flip up sights.. as my gun is already very heavy with the chaos hand rails.. that being said, I'm not ruling it out.

 

Thanks again!

post-45757-0-20730100-1360116274_thumb.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

The total cost of a Titan rail + Hk sights is really going to break my balls but I most likely will end up with that configuration. The chaos rails look great and probably the easiest way to mount those particular sights. Im with you on weight though, I feel like my gun would be good for doing bench presses as it is and a rail set up is really going to tip the scale.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The total cost of a Titan rail + Hk sights is really going to break my balls but I most likely will end up with that configuration. The chaos rails look great and probably the easiest way to mount those particular sights. Im with you on weight though, I feel like my gun would be good for doing bench presses as it is and a rail set up is really going to tip the scale.

 

Right it is insanely heavy now.. when I compare it to my AR15.. it is night and day. The rails look awesome but you pay the price with the weight... tack on a fully loaded mag and its heavy! I guess I need to hit the gym.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd also like to recommend that vertical grip I got (VISM Vertical Grip w/ Built In Led Flashlight & Red Laser VAQVGFLR).. it is about 10 ounces, has a storage compartment, the light is 120 lumens.. and it has a laser that is directly below the light vertically. It is also quick detach.

 

I think it is awesome... although I haven't really used vertical grips before, I am definitely pleased with this one.

 

The light is extremely bright.. and would most definitely temporarily blind someone at close range... I almost bought another one that did not have the red laser that was aluminum and had a 150 lumens light (can't imagine how bright that would be), but the laser was important. One thing that was important to me was that the laser be mounted vertically below or above the light, and not off to the side. I know it doesn't matter a WHOLE lot with a shotgun but still..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Chaos rails are designed to accommodate their HK sights. I bought my extended rail with them. I think it's just an Allen screw. I used those as backup, and have a Burris Fastfire III red dot which Im quite happy with.

Edited by Turbo.M777
Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for the replies guys.. I'm going to go with the HK sights.

 

Maybe you should reconsider that decision.

 

I recommend the red dot. As back up sights you can get attachable iron sights of your choice, co-witnessed if you prefer. The reason for a Red Dot sight is it faster has given the US Military (and other world militaries) faster target acquisition time against an enemy using iron sights. Seconds count for a self-defense or offensive weapon.

 

The below report is cut and pasted from another forum:

Unfortunately target graphic was not available.

 

29 December 2010

PRELIMINARY REPORT OF THE COMPARATIVE PISTOL PROJECT

By James E. Ryan, D.P.A.

Associate Professor of Criminal Justice

Department of Justice Studies and Sociology

Norwich University

Northfield, Vermont 05663

 

This report summarizes the findings of the “Comparative Pistol Project” conducted on 28 and 29 September, 2010. This report is organized as a description of five (5) figures that depict the descriptive statistics compiled by the author. A more extensive and detailed report will follow. The figures depict the results of a comparison of the effectiveness of conventional iron pistol sights and Trijicon’s “Red Dot Optic. The project consisted of four (4) stages of fire and the analyses included information both on the number of “hits on paper” and the accuracy of hits.

FIGURE 1: HITS BY STAGE

Figure 1 illustrates the percentage of shots that hit an International Defensive Pistol Association (IDPA) standard target (“hits on paper”) by sight type and shooting stage;

 

Stage 1- 15 yard slow fire-

 

75 percent of the shots fired with iron sights hit the target;

98 Percent of the shots fired with the red dot optic hit the target;

 

Stage 2 – 5 yard rapid engagement-

 

95 percent of the shots with iron sights hit the target

99 percent of the shots with the red dot optic hit the target

 

Stage 3- 10 yard rapid engagement

 

81 percent of the shots with iron sights hit the target

96 percent of the shots with the red dot optic hit the target

 

Stage 4 – 10 yard multiple threat

 

77 percent of the shots with iron sights hit the target

94 percent of the shots with the red dot optic hit the target

 

The following four figures depict hits by “zone.” Zone 1 is the center mass of the IDPA target. Zone 2 refers to the inner octagon of the target. Zone 3 refers to hits on the target outside of Zones 3 and 2.

 

FIGURE 2 – STAGE 1- HITS BY ZONE

 

Figure 2 illustrates the percentage of hits by zone and type of sight used

 

Iron sights- 30% of shots hit zone 1

43 % of shots hit zone 2

27 % of shots hit zone 3

 

Red dot optic – 57 % of shots hit zone 1

30 % of shots hit zone 2

13 % of shots hit zone 3

 

FIGURE 3- STAGE 2- HITS BY ZONE

 

Figure 3 illustrates the percentage of hits by zone and type of sight used

 

Iron sights- 59% of shots hit zone 1

27% of shots hit zone 2

14% of shots hit zone 3

 

Red dot optic- 74% of shots hit zone 1

23% of shots hit zone 2

3 % of shots hit zone 3

 

FIGURE 4- STAGE 3- HITS BY ZONE

 

Figure 4 illustrates the percentage of hits by zone and type of sights used

 

Iron sights- 30% of shots hit zone 1

50% of shots hit zone 2

20% of shots hit zone 3

 

Red dot optic- 46% of shots hit zone 1

42% of shots hit zone 2

12% of shots hit zone 3

 

FIGURE 5-STAGE 4-HITS BY ZONE

 

Figure 5 illustrates the percentage of hits by zone and type of sights used

 

Iron sights- 30% of shots hit zone 1

46% of shots hit zone 2

24% of shots hit zone 3

 

Red dot optic- 44% of shots hit zone 1

47% of shots hit zone 2

9 % of shots hit zone 3

 

(IMO) If this is true for the pistol it can be logically applied to the shotgun and battle rifle.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

From the Chaos website... "These sights are bolt on mounted and require a tapped 8-32 hole for front sight and a 6-32 tapped hole for rear."

 

I would go to a well stocked hardware store, and just by some in different lengths (they are cheap). The only thing you would need to determine is what type of head the screw needs to have.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't know if it'd fit w/ your big ol can up front, but a krebs front sight uses an AR post, which you can replace with a night sight like the XS Big or Small sight. That and a good light on the forend makes a formidable HD gun. http://forum.saiga-12.com/index.php?/topic/71873-any-ideas-on-night-sights/

 

I have a stock Krebs ghost ring in back, which is quick and painless. Having needed my S12 at night, I immediately knew I'd upgrade that to a 2-dot night ring, too, to get faster sight alignment.

 

HK sights are clearly the best looking, but they're not shotgun sights. They're rifle sights. Form over function. 1000's of S12 owners disagree, tho. Good luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for the replies guys.. I'm going to go with the HK sights.

 

Maybe you should reconsider that decision.

 

I recommend the red dot. As back up sights you can get attachable iron sights of your choice, co-witnessed if you prefer. The reason for a Red Dot sight is it faster has given the US Military (and other world militaries) faster target acquisition time against an enemy using iron sights. Seconds count for a self-defense or offensive weapon.

 

The below report is cut and pasted from another forum:

Unfortunately target graphic was not available.

 

29 December 2010

PRELIMINARY REPORT OF THE COMPARATIVE PISTOL PROJECT

By James E. Ryan, D.P.A.

Associate Professor of Criminal Justice

Department of Justice Studies and Sociology

Norwich University

Northfield, Vermont 05663

 

This report summarizes the findings of the “Comparative Pistol Project” conducted on 28 and 29 September, 2010. This report is organized as a description of five (5) figures that depict the descriptive statistics compiled by the author. A more extensive and detailed report will follow. The figures depict the results of a comparison of the effectiveness of conventional iron pistol sights and Trijicon’s “Red Dot Optic. The project consisted of four (4) stages of fire and the analyses included information both on the number of “hits on paper” and the accuracy of hits.

FIGURE 1: HITS BY STAGE

Figure 1 illustrates the percentage of shots that hit an International Defensive Pistol Association (IDPA) standard target (“hits on paper”) by sight type and shooting stage;

 

Stage 1- 15 yard slow fire-

 

75 percent of the shots fired with iron sights hit the target;

98 Percent of the shots fired with the red dot optic hit the target;

 

Stage 2 – 5 yard rapid engagement-

 

95 percent of the shots with iron sights hit the target

99 percent of the shots with the red dot optic hit the target

 

Stage 3- 10 yard rapid engagement

 

81 percent of the shots with iron sights hit the target

96 percent of the shots with the red dot optic hit the target

 

Stage 4 – 10 yard multiple threat

 

77 percent of the shots with iron sights hit the target

94 percent of the shots with the red dot optic hit the target

 

The following four figures depict hits by “zone.” Zone 1 is the center mass of the IDPA target. Zone 2 refers to the inner octagon of the target. Zone 3 refers to hits on the target outside of Zones 3 and 2.

 

FIGURE 2 – STAGE 1- HITS BY ZONE

 

Figure 2 illustrates the percentage of hits by zone and type of sight used

 

Iron sights- 30% of shots hit zone 1

43 % of shots hit zone 2

27 % of shots hit zone 3

 

Red dot optic – 57 % of shots hit zone 1

30 % of shots hit zone 2

13 % of shots hit zone 3

 

FIGURE 3- STAGE 2- HITS BY ZONE

 

Figure 3 illustrates the percentage of hits by zone and type of sight used

 

Iron sights- 59% of shots hit zone 1

27% of shots hit zone 2

14% of shots hit zone 3

 

Red dot optic- 74% of shots hit zone 1

23% of shots hit zone 2

3 % of shots hit zone 3

 

FIGURE 4- STAGE 3- HITS BY ZONE

 

Figure 4 illustrates the percentage of hits by zone and type of sights used

 

Iron sights- 30% of shots hit zone 1

50% of shots hit zone 2

20% of shots hit zone 3

 

Red dot optic- 46% of shots hit zone 1

42% of shots hit zone 2

12% of shots hit zone 3

 

FIGURE 5-STAGE 4-HITS BY ZONE

 

Figure 5 illustrates the percentage of hits by zone and type of sights used

 

Iron sights- 30% of shots hit zone 1

46% of shots hit zone 2

24% of shots hit zone 3

 

Red dot optic- 44% of shots hit zone 1

47% of shots hit zone 2

9 % of shots hit zone 3

 

(IMO) If this is true for the pistol it can be logically applied to the shotgun and battle rifle.

 

The army released a datamining study of firefights a year or two ago that said roughly that any optic resulted in about 4 times as good shooting as irons at almost any range in battle. This was true even if the user was not trained on it. I don't have a link to give you the actual study, and don't expect you to take my word for it, but I suppose knowing it exists might make it easier to find.

 

It would also follow to me that any large rear objective optic that starts with low magnification and smooth zoom will result in better performance across the board than tiny optics that are hard to see through. i.e. fixed high magnification as many of the combloc hand-me-down optics that must have been a major factor in the data in the studies. Considering that many recent conflicts are in 3rd world countries using shoddy old tech stuff, you know that many of the firefights that were included in the study were using much less effective optics than modern countries use or even most recreational shooters. A few of the surplus combloc optics I have tried had quality glass but were very small feild of view and were extremely unforgiving about parallax and eye relief The experience was reminiscent of using BB gun scopes. However any distance shooting would still be improved even with old tech glass like this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Chatbox

    Load More
    You don't have permission to chat.
×
×
  • Create New...