I seem to be completely unable to get a usable cheek weld on an AR15. Taking an A2 stock and A2 style sights as a standard, the sight axis is about 1/4" to 3/8" too high for me to use. Switch to the ubiquitous collapsible carbine stock that everyone and their dog seems to have on ARs these days, and it is even worse. And so the spiffy, expensive red dot sights that are all the rage (EoTech, Aimpoint, ACOG) which are all set up for the same sight axis as the A2 are equally unusable.
Is it just me? Am I missing something? Can anyone really get a cheek weld on an AR? By contrast, the iron sights on a Garand, M14, M1 Carbine, and a Mini14 (among others) all offer good usable cheek welds for me. Perhaps not perfect, but good and usable in a proper rifleman's sort of way.
Obviously the height of the stock comb is limited by the charging handle. But why are the sights so tall?
Well, you need to answer a couple of questions here.
Does your upper receiver have a fixed carry handle, like an M16A2, or does it have a detachable carry handle (AKA flat top receiver) like an M16A4 or M4?
I will tell you that the EO Tech (reflective sight), Aimpoint (red dot) and ACOG (AR specific scope) are all different from each other. Yes, they're all pretty expensive too. I've got an Aimpoint Comp M4 (on the gf's AR) and an ACOG (on my AR). Hers is A2 style (fixed handle), the optic mounts on a cantilever, in front of the carry handle. Mine is A4/M4 style (flat top) and mounts on the upper's rail.
Here's an EO Tech on a cantilever mount on an M16A2 type (fixed carry handle) upper.
(http://www.nafan.com/hosted/graphics/supplementary/eotech/9-bc-cam.jpg)
And, I will say you end up using a lower portion of your cheek than with an M1 or M14 clone, in my experience. The alternative to that is to get a raised cheek piece to put on the stock, or just build it up some temporarily.
No it's not you, that's one of the downsides of the AR platform - Especially as it does not lend itself well to alteration in the area of comb height. The trick here, isn't a perfect cheek weld. It's consistency that matters. Most people will index their nose on the charging handle and place their cheek against the stock. Do it the same way, every time.
With practice, this will become instinctive and with the mild recoil, keeping this position should not take much effort.
With iron sights, I put my nose against the charging handle. Learned it that way in the Army. Haven't heard of anything better. As a matter of fact, I took a step yesterday to make my M4 a full length A4 and return to what I know. Less "tacti-kewl" and more "practi-kewl".
Quote from: Nickle on January 19, 2014, 06:58:04 PM
Well, you need to answer a couple of questions here.
Does your upper receiver have a fixed carry handle, like an M16A2, or does it have a detachable carry handle (AKA flat top receiver) like an M16A4 or M4?
It doesn't really matter, does it? The sight axis for an A2 style fixed handle/sight and an A4 style removable handle/sight are exactly the same. They also use the same fixed front sight.
Setting that aside, it's not really my own AR that I'm concerned about. It is all AR-15s- specifically, when a student brings along their AR-15/M4gery (or a S&W 15-22 or similar), how do you teach them to shoot with a repeatable cheek weld on a rifle that doesn't allow one?
On my own rifles, I've fixed the issue- Magpul PRS on one, low scope rings on the other. But neither of those are options can I easily offer to a student who's having trouble getting a consistent shooting position.
QuoteThe alternative to that is to get a raised cheek piece to put on the stock, or just build it up some temporarily.
Can that be made to work with the charging handle? I'm all about breaking out the pipe insulation and cling wrap, but you do have to be able to load the chamber....
Does it matter? Fixed carry handle to flat top that is.
Yes, it does, by about 2 inches in height.
Seriously speaking, you're talking about mounting the optics on top of the carry handle on the fixed carry handle, and on top of the receiver on the flat top. On the flat top, you leave the detachable handle off when using optics. Smart folks that have been around mount their optics, then add a back up sight behind them that folds. Mine is a MA Tech.
This is very similar to what I have right now (I don't do the forward vertical grip. That's flat top, and it has the same back up sight.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a7/M4A1_ACOG.jpg)
This is an ACOG on a carry handle. Check the height difference. Cheek weld is near impossible here.
(http://emptormaven.com/img/ar-15.jpg)
And, you really can't put an ACOG on a cantilever and make it work right. Red dots are OK though.
As to the cheekpiece, like this. https://www.google.com/search?q=ar+cheek+riser (https://www.google.com/search?q=ar+cheek+riser)
Ah, i see what you mean. I hadn't even considered mounting an optic atop a carry handle.
I meant that fixed handle sights, removable handle sights, and ACOG/EoTech/etc on an A4/M4 rail all share the same height sight axis. There isn't really much in the way of an option to mount a sight system lower than that axis (other than a small objective scope on short rings). Mounting a sight on a carry handle would make a bad setup worse.
I thought the detachable carry handle sights were a mm or two higher. The F marked front sight post is slightly higher to go with flat top receivers.
Typical AR sights are 1.5" above the rail on a flat top. Some 1.25" rings may be the answer on your own rifle.
For a student, since we can't build up the cheekweld due to the charging handle, teach nose to charging handle. Also, if they place their jaw against the side of the stock and slide their face down, that will build up the maximum chipmunk cheek for better cheekweld.
I put on one of these. http://www.amazon.com/Command-Arms-Saddle-collapsible-stocks/dp/B001T6HOQC/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1390225225&sr=8-1&keywords=caa+cheek+rest (http://www.amazon.com/Command-Arms-Saddle-collapsible-stocks/dp/B001T6HOQC/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1390225225&sr=8-1&keywords=caa+cheek+rest)
I have not shot an AR with one of those on it. A buddy has one and I tried shouldering it one day. I could not find a good, solid comfortable cheek weld. In fact, it felt like I was laying my head on the stock and trying to look at the back of the carrying handle. YEMV.
The answer to your original question of "Why are the sights so tall?" is, as you pointed out, so the charging handle can clear the buffer tube (receiver extension) and allow folks to get a good sight picture with proper cheek weld. There's no way to put your face lower than that tube like you would on the previously developed rifles. As such, the sights were raised so they'd be in alignment with the shooter's eye while his cheek was resting on the stock.
If you look at pictures of the early M-16 designs you'll see the charging handle was, in fact, inside the carry handle. As such, the sights had to be over it.
Another benefit to higher sights is an increased maximum point blank range (or battle sight zero). All of those things contributed to higher sights.
What does that mean for us?
Well, the military doesn't mess around with building up anyone's cheekweld on the standard M-16s. You simply ground your nose to that charging handle and make it go bang. Some of us may have to smoosh down a little lower, some of us may have to rise up some. But, with the face that close to the rear sight, it's almost impossible to not be high enough.
The issue most shooters have at events is their face is nowhere near that charging handle. That's the first issue to fix. They need to have their nose grounded to it. "But slim, that's not comfortable and I can't get into a good position like that. I can't see through my sights if my nose is way up there. It hurts. I don't like that 'clang' sound it makes. I'm tired. It's cold. Whaa waaaa waaaaaa." :slap: Tell them to shut up and color.
The next issue is many of the tacticool folks don't have the proper sighting systems on their rifles and they're mismatched. (I wish I had a dollar for every time someone showed up with a sight mounted backwards!) They compound this by insisting to use the 0-2 peep or the dot on brightest setting, top line of their BDC, etc.
It's almost always worth the time to personally inspect each AR shooter's equipment and make sure everything lines up and they also understand the concept of shooting at 25 meters is like 300 on an AR. They should be using their 300 meter sight settings. "But slim, we're only shooting at 25 and that's going to throw off my BDC." Or, even better, "But I can see through the bigger hole a lot better."
When they're using fancy scopes, regardless of the height, it's still possible to get a good, repeatable cheekweld even without building up the comb. It's as simple as putting a "kisser button" on their stock somewhere. Take a piece of tape or bandaid or whatever and have them wiggle their head around until they find the spot that's good for their sight alignment. Place the tape at the corner of their lips/cheek so they can feel the right spot and go to it every single time. That's a field-expedient way for them to get repeatability. We should encourage them to find a good aftermarket alternative like the cheek risers or PRS stocks or whatever on their own time after the event.
I run an ACOG on top of my carry handle and the only adjustment I have to make is raising my face up a bit.
I'll tell you folks, what slim just mentioned is right.
When those "tacticool" folks start wanting to go all oddball and stuff, just mention they can do it the tacticool way and miss frequently or the Appleseed way and hit frequently.
And don't forget to tell them the US Army does it the same way Appleseed does. That's who we learned it from, and we use it because it works.
The Army does use 300 meter sight settings at 25. That includes the rear sight aperture too. And, that includes the "high speed, low drag" units too. I retired from one of them, 3/172nd Mountain Infantry. I frequently got tapped to teach marksmanship.
All good stuff,
Your experience in the field, will help you answer this for yourself.
Aftermath says bury your nose and keep a consistant sight picture with SHF's and check touches where ever.
The cheek riser helps a lot my wife has a Tapco.Great Ergo. ..:..
Nose to charging handle. It doesn't have to be jammed on the charging handle but it does need to be 100% repeatable. You will likely find the the relation of your nose to the charging handle changes with position. That is OK. Don't worry about it. But for a given position it should feel the same every time. Some shooters are almost top lip to charging handle in offhand.
Attached is an article about offhand shooting by the Army Marksmanship Unit. Notice the check weld in the second and 3rd photos. You can click on them to get larger versions. The entire purpose of "cheek weld" is to center the eye behind the rear sight. Your cheek position is always determined by centering your eye behind the sight, not the other way around.
http://www.odcmp.org/1007/default.asp?page=USAMU_STANDING
By the way Brandon Green knows a thing or two about shooting. He is 2013 National Champion in Across the Course Highpower (200, 300, and 600 yards), with a score of 2384 and 126x.
Good luck.
LaRue makes a RISR that fits on the top of a Magpul stock. I have one but the spring was a bit stiff & made it pretty tough to charge the weapon. I bought it because I also have an ACOG with an RMR mounted on top. It's move of a chin weld using that optic. Let me know if you're ever around Indy and you can try it.
The tip of my nose is actually past the charging handle for iron sights. With the right diameter scope and riser, I have been able to get a solid cheek weld with optics on both A2 and collapsible stocks on my A3 (flat top) style rifles.
Quote from: AFTERMATH on January 19, 2014, 07:30:58 PM
No it's not you, that's one of the downsides of the AR platform - Especially as it does not lend itself well to alteration in the area of comb height. The trick here, isn't a perfect cheek weld. It's consistency that matters. Most people will index their nose on the charging handle and place their cheek against the stock. Do it the same way, every time.
With practice, this will become instinctive and with the mild recoil, keeping this position should not take much effort.
This is exactly what I do.
A possible problem with the cheek riser is that when used on a collapsible stock, you'll reach a point where the stock is so short that the riser will block the charging handle. Works ok if the stock is fully deployed. I specifically refer to magpul MOE stock with the magpul riser.
aj
Use a riser if you really need it. But the warning about blocking the charging handle is a real one with AR15's.
Remember the whole object is to have a repeatable position that centers the eye behind the rear sight or scope. That's it. Repeatable and eye centered.
Now get to dryfiring in standing, sitting. and prone. You should be dryfiring 10 good shots (at least) for every live shot. It is a good method to learn if you are serious about it.
Had the same observations. Traditional rifle stock 3/4" too low, not designed for a scope at all. AR's at about 1/4" too low. Cheek pads interfere with the charging handle.
Solution: Replaced with FN Scar 17. Only 200 rnds through it, but I believe it is a superior rifle. No dirty gas/carbon build up in critical bolt area. Charging handle is ambidextrous, so it can be put on the "right" side for AS sling positions. Easier to clean (almost unnecessary), take down. Simple barrel to receiver separation. Best semi-auto money can buy, IMO. Best iron sights I've ever seen. Makes an AR a C&R !!! ( **) Did I tip any sacred cows ?)
Anybody else got a 17? What do ya' think?
Nothing wrong with the SCAR's operation. On the other had, the stock sights certainly leave something to be desired (in my opinion all Euro weapons need better irons). To me the look like and tend to function like the sights I use as backup irons on my scoped carbine. If your intention is to use them as backup irons, I would have no issue at all. If your intention is to use them as your primary sighting system,. I would argue that the 1.5 moa per click is a bit gross for the rifleman.
From the Gunblog review:
"The SCAR 17s rear sight is zeroed out of the factory for 25/300 meters with the elevation drum set to 3. Its recommended by FNH to zero the rifle for yourself by adjusting the front sight post only, leaving the rear sight with the settings from the factory. This will allow a shooter to only adjust the rear sight to make changes based on the shooting situation or the range of your target. Each click of the rear drum is equal to 1.5 MOA (minute of angle) and there are two clicks per number on the drum, so each number is equal to a 3 MOA adjustment. Although using that math of 3 moa per range adjustment isn't exactly sniper precise, it's adequate/accurate enough to use it effectively if needed--I'm sure all the ballistics gurus are calculating a typical .308 drop parallel with the sight adjustments to see if my math is correct."
Then again, I recently got rid of my all GI (NM barrel and sights) M1A in favor of an AR10, because the AR's are proving more accurate out to 1000 yards.