Holographic sight position?
09-29-2010, 12:05 PM
#1
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Kansas
Posts: 3,913
Holographic sight position?
I recently decided to swap from red dot tube style sights to a holographic sight on one of my Ruger Mark III's, but as I installed it, my fiancee raised a good question that I didn't have an answer to...
Where should the sight be positioned along the barrel? I mounted it as far aft as I could, planning that I'd prefer to have a "larger" field of vision (FOV) through the sight window. Of course, the recticle also appears slightly larger, i.e. covers more of the target. Having the sight to the rear also minimizes the sight jump upon recoil and minimizes how much the recticle will move around within the sight window with changing grip.
But, am I wrong? Should the sight be mounted farther forward? The advantage I would see is that the recticle would appear smaller, covering slightly less of the target, lending itself to more precise aiming. The sight would also track better with the muzzle, so potentially, the recticle would chase the POI better than if the window were mounted further rearward. The disadvantages would be that the FOV is smaller, the recticle will move more dramatically within the window with changing grip, and the sight hop on recoil is higher.
I did a google image search, and it seems like there's a lot of variancies, some are mounted with the window mid barrel, some are mounted with the window far aft.
So what's your opinion? Anyone heard of other reasons to mount the sights either perferentially forward or rearward?
Where should the sight be positioned along the barrel? I mounted it as far aft as I could, planning that I'd prefer to have a "larger" field of vision (FOV) through the sight window. Of course, the recticle also appears slightly larger, i.e. covers more of the target. Having the sight to the rear also minimizes the sight jump upon recoil and minimizes how much the recticle will move around within the sight window with changing grip.
But, am I wrong? Should the sight be mounted farther forward? The advantage I would see is that the recticle would appear smaller, covering slightly less of the target, lending itself to more precise aiming. The sight would also track better with the muzzle, so potentially, the recticle would chase the POI better than if the window were mounted further rearward. The disadvantages would be that the FOV is smaller, the recticle will move more dramatically within the window with changing grip, and the sight hop on recoil is higher.
I did a google image search, and it seems like there's a lot of variancies, some are mounted with the window mid barrel, some are mounted with the window far aft.
So what's your opinion? Anyone heard of other reasons to mount the sights either perferentially forward or rearward?
09-29-2010, 01:25 PM
#2
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location:
Posts: 5,130
Ask the question;
Here you go - Fill this out.
http://www.aimshot.com/contact.php
let's hear back from you........................
Here you go - Fill this out.
http://www.aimshot.com/contact.php
let's hear back from you........................
09-30-2010, 01:09 PM
#3
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Kansas
Posts: 3,913
Just received the tech support reply from Aimshot....
I asked the question for both rifles and handguns, should the sight be mounted close to the rear of a handgun, or near mid-barrel, and should the sight be mounted near the front or rear of the receiver for a rifle like an AR-15.
"On an AR15, I would recommend placing the sight over the receiver if you have a flat top. You can put the sight further forward but I find it to be more difficult to use.
On a pistol, you really dont have too many options so I would say mount it the same way you would mount a regular scope.
At the end of the day, It all boils down to what is comfortable for you. You really wont see too much of a difference in accuracy."
Not much help for my question, but it seems that it's pretty adaptable for shooter's comfort, so the "eye relief" wouldn't necessarily matter as much.
I took my Ruger out yesterday with the sight mounted towards the rear. It's definitely an adjustment to tube style optics, but I like it so far. I'm pretty strongly considering picking up another one for one of my AR-15's, and one for my fiancee's turkey gun. Definitely not as restricting as tube style scopes, but certainly advantageous to iron sights. Not sure why I waited so long to try them out!
I asked the question for both rifles and handguns, should the sight be mounted close to the rear of a handgun, or near mid-barrel, and should the sight be mounted near the front or rear of the receiver for a rifle like an AR-15.
"On an AR15, I would recommend placing the sight over the receiver if you have a flat top. You can put the sight further forward but I find it to be more difficult to use.
On a pistol, you really dont have too many options so I would say mount it the same way you would mount a regular scope.
At the end of the day, It all boils down to what is comfortable for you. You really wont see too much of a difference in accuracy."
Not much help for my question, but it seems that it's pretty adaptable for shooter's comfort, so the "eye relief" wouldn't necessarily matter as much.
I took my Ruger out yesterday with the sight mounted towards the rear. It's definitely an adjustment to tube style optics, but I like it so far. I'm pretty strongly considering picking up another one for one of my AR-15's, and one for my fiancee's turkey gun. Definitely not as restricting as tube style scopes, but certainly advantageous to iron sights. Not sure why I waited so long to try them out!
