Project Appleseed

At a shoot today we had a student struggle to make a sight adjustment on his Tech Sights.  Myself and other instructors at the event had the understanding that Tech Sights were 5/8 MOA per Click.  After the student made an adjustment the group was too far.  He made an adjustment back and it was too far again.  The student pulled up the instructions online and to our amazement the instructions read "Each Detent is approx. 1/4" at 25 Yards".  That is 1 MOA per Click.  This lined up with the "over adjustments" we were seeing.  Another student on the line also had tech sights and pulled out his instructions and they said the same thing. 

So a heads up, I am not sure of older models are the 5/8 MOA per click, or when the change happened.  Just some knowledge to keep in the back of your head to help out at future events. 

MAHA

Tech sights adjustments are dependent on the pitch of the screw threads. The older ones were 5/8". The newer ones have been listed as 7/8". Interesting to note that now the new/new ones are listed in the instructions as 1". That certainly makes it easier. Thanks for letting everyone know.
CDH

Depends on barrel length.  For 16-inch carbine barrels, and normal stocks (not youth stocks) it's always been ~1 MOA.  For long barrels, it's always been closer to ~5/8 MOA, for 20-22 inch barrels depending somewhat on stock length _and_ barrel length.  (It's the actual physical spacing difference between retina of aiming eye and rear of front post when in position that matters)

The front post thread pitch was exactly the same as the standard AR-15 front post pitch in the past.  I doubt the pitch has changed, but I homestly haven't checked this.  Requiring custom front post threads doesn't seem cost effective to me as an engineer, but I haven't checked any new front posts.  YMMV

There is also a slight difference in the adjustments relative to whether the front post tip is square or round, with 4 or 5 detents, respectively.  Same as for M4/AR-15 front posts, for elevation.  Round gives one a little more accuracy potential, theoretically.

(I derived formulas for all this circa 2014)

-Gary