Optic Mount Height Discussion – Absolute Cowitness vs. Lower 1/3 Cowitness



Filed under Uncategorized

8 responses to “Optic Mount Height Discussion – Absolute Cowitness vs. Lower 1/3 Cowitness

  1. Zef

    Good explanation. Thanks!

  2. Josh

    I have my rifle set up with front and rear folding sights. With a ML3 on 1/3 co-witness. And thats what has worked best for me. My problem with absolute is that it really removes the reason to have a red dot or hws. That being if the dot is on target thats pretty much where its gonna hit. You don’t really even need a cheek weld with red dots. But thats just me.

  3. Redchrome

    As always, excellent discussion and points!

    My experience with red dots has been on a shotgun (for which it works beautifully); so my experience with them on rifles is limited to shooting friends’ guns. So take my words for what you paid for them.

    Your points about cheekweld and ergonomics are very good. This is one reason the SCAR and ACR are great — the adjustable cheek riser means it’s easy to go from one sight height to another. I have very high cheekbones and a very long neck; so the only longarms that fit me well have generally been modified or adjusted to fit me. AR15 stock sights are too tall for me to get a proper cheekweld; and the AR15 charging handle location pretty much prevents the use of a cheekpiece. 😦

    Rather than jack up the height of the red dot, on my own rifle I would go for lower sights. (Troy Micros for instance). This would preclude the use of the stock AR fixed front sight; but I think I can live with that.

    A point you did not touch on, is sight height over bore. The higher your sights are, the more you need to offset when shooting at small targets very close; but also the steeper the angle of the bullet’s trajectory as it rises to meet the line of sight (and therefore the steeper the arc). You can make your rifle shoot notably ‘flatter’ by lowering your sight height, which makes it easier to get hits at unknown distances.

    Again, great job, keep up the good work!

  4. jumpthestack

    Excellent breakdown of the definition and pros and cons of each, that would have helped me a lot when I was deciding what to use. I went with a lower third mainly because I don’t like the irons cluttering up my sight picture when I’m using the optic. I have folding BUIS, but I leave them up all the time.

  5. Good job!
    I’m 6-3 and prefer one cheekweld and like the way true co-wit allows me maintain one muscle memory when mounting the gun.

    I started with a Larue fixed BUIS but now run a flip up rear BUIS as it greatly improves FOV for open eyes shooting and transitions.

    Dave Harrington made a comment in a recent class that the fixed BUIS really becomes problem in varied & low light situations. I haven’t ran into that but he’s been in a lot more situations and I’ll take his word for it, thus my new folding rear BUIS setup.

    With true co-wit I also get the FSB leading my eye to where the dot should be when snapping in correctly which is faster IME. I don’t find the FSB alone to be a clutter issue in true co-wit, but it’s a personal thing that people need to try on their own for sure.

  6. ChicagoTex

    is the Aimpoint you’re showing a 2MOA dot or a 4MOA dot?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s