TexasCHLforum.com

jsenner wrote: ↑Tue Jul 24, 2018 8:04 am Where did you get them?

There was a run of Chinese fakes of these exact sights a while ago and they were VERY well faked,

...

- all of them had those pins walk out like that.

jsenner wrote: ↑Tue Jul 24, 2018 8:04 am Where did you get them?

There was a run of Chinese fakes of these exact sights a while ago and they were VERY well faked, you couldn't tell them apart packaging and all. They all had a very common problem, those pins would work out of the body. The springs in the sights were ever so slightly lighter in color as well.

I've had to replace half a dozen of them on different guns for folks that got the fakes - all of them had those pins walk out like that.

C-dub wrote: ↑Tue Jul 24, 2018 9:10 am

The Annoyed Man wrote: ↑Tue Jul 24, 2018 9:01 am

Pawpaw wrote: ↑Tue Jul 24, 2018 8:49 am

Maxwell wrote: ↑Tue Jul 24, 2018 7:23 am Speaking of sights:
Why is the line-of-sight on modern AR sights so far above the receiver/Barrel line?
Wouldn't they be more accurate if lower and more in line with the barrel?

Because the rifle uses an in-line stock, the sights have to be raised or you won't be able to get your eye behind them. The in-line stock, aside from being necessary to the design's function, does a lot to mitigate muzzle rise. If the stock had a drop to it, like a traditionally stocked rifle, the sights can be mounted lower, but muzzle rise increases.

The higher sights do not affect accuracy. Failing to keep the rifle level when firing will throw the sights & bore out of vertical alignment, resulting in less than optimal results.

What he said.

What they said.

Accuracy depends on the rifle, the shooter, and whether or not the sights are correctly "sighted". Not location of the sights. That's my non-expert humble opinion and it's worth what you paid for it.