Some AR Pistol Questions

[HGM22]

1. What do you think about a red dot vs. a magnified sight for the AR 15 pistol? Is a red dot better suited to the AR pistol since its pretty much parallax-free and faster? Will a magnified sight be too difficult to use since the pistol isn't as steady as a rifle?

2. How accurate are AR pistols at 50, 100, 200 yards?

3. What is the recoil like on an AR pistol? Would a novice or weak (i.e. elderly woman) shooter have a problem using one?

 

[badkarmamib]

1. I prefer the red dot, as it is easier to pick up the dot on such an unsteady weapon, where you won't be holding it at full extension like a Redhawk.

2. As accurate as an AR rifle, the in-accuracy comes from the shooter, not the firearm per se.

3. Recoil is noticeable, but not unmanageable. This is mostly due to the fact that the "pistol" weighs 6 pounds.

 

[Tirod]

I have a 10.5" AR pistol and it's my primary deer hunting gun now.

Iron sights are more than good enough. The point of the gun is to use it at close range, not extended. I limit my shots to under 80m because the ammo I use for hunting will only carry 1,000 foot pounds out that far. Seeing game in broken woodlands or patchy brush is the bigger issue. Since the short barreled AR was originally designed for close quarters work back in 1965, optical sighting wasn't much needed, and even today isn't.

Accuracy is all about the shooter. The standard barrels are 2 MOA for the most part. Can you hit an 18" center of mass target under 100m? That leaves you being a 6 to 8 MOA shooter and still getting a hit. Good enough.

Recoil of 5.56 is so mild it's was a standard demonstration to shoot the firearm held to the chin in Basic Training. A mouth rest was sold at one time for AR pistols and that video is still up on youtube last I looked for it. No special rests are needed to shoot 5.56, and many shooters can hold and hit 100m targets with nothing more than a cheek rest position. In point of fact, it's easier to get that sight picture because you don't have to tilt your head down to the buffer tube - you hold the gun up to your eye with the cheek rest of your choice. I shoot the pistol with my nose on the charging handle and push out to keep the bouncing reduced. No big deal. Getting hits on a 12" bull at 25m isn't an exercise in difficulty, and it keeps my range happy because I slow down and don't rip off quick strings of shots like the "big boyz" like to do with their stocked lead sprayers.

It's a different technique than a rifle - and the more you try to shoot it like a rifle, the worse it gets. It forces things that aren't needed to be done.

 

[mavracer]

1. I wouldn't say magnification is completely out, the platform is plenty steady for 3X or maybe 4X. I've got a 1X prism sight on my 10.5" 5.56 and it works well but I'm thinking about putting my 3X on it and seeing how it works.
2. they'll shoot similar to an equal quality 16" barreled carbine.
3. recoil is subjective but yeah they're pretty easy to shoot my 86 YO dad has no problems with mine

 

[HGM22]

I guess I should have said "practical accuracy". I'd be surprised if there are many AR 15 guns out there that can't do 4 MOA or better when rested. I was thinking more along the lines of getting hits at 100-200 yards on a steel plate off hand using the cheek weld.

 

[badkarmamib]

I guess I should have said "practical accuracy". I'd be surprised if there are many AR 15 guns out there that can't do 4 MOA or better when rested. I was thinking more along the lines of getting hits at 100-200 yards on a steel plate off hand using the cheek weld.

Again, that is subjective. Good shooters can do it all day long. Me, well, you had me until you added that "-200"...

 

[Gordon]

On my .300 Black 8.5" pistol I put a Burris MTAC 1-4 scope on it and the big red horseshoe is easy to hit with up to 50 yards on a bungee single point sling properly adjusted. If I rest the gun and at 4x I actually got 3" groups at 200 yard range, which blew my mind. I have a Spikes Barking Spider on the end which stabilizes the pistol wobble well FWIW. On my 10" 5.56 upper on same Noveske Diplomat lower I prefer the iron sights with same bungee single point sling plugged into the end of Spikes tube for use off hand.

 

[mavracer]

Haven't shot mine at 200 but with the ease it does soda cans at 50 I can't imagine 10-12" plates would be too difficult.
As Gordon said it works pretty good to have a single point sling adjusted so you pull it out so that the sling is tight against the back of your shoulder.

 

[Zerodefect]

I'd prefer a red dot. My pistol only has irons for now. It's a short range point and shoot type of gun anyways. I liked the redot, but I like light weight with AR pistols more.

 

[cfullgraf]

My 300 BLK AR pistol has a red dot sight in it, no magnification. The gun is more accurate than I am but I can hit 4" plates with regularity out to 50 yards or so.

I do not think I would do precision shooting off hand with it. Fun toy though.

 

[WestKentucky]

I have shot some friends guns and I can see the merits of a low power optic, but only if you can get a good stable stance with it. I'm building one and I intend to run it with a "handle" upper if I can ever get the parts. I keep finding other things higher up the to-do list. I put a big dent in it today though, I ordered everything to finish out the lower. Maybe I can swing an upper soon. Tax time, when my house sells...I can find a good excuse in the future. I just don't see glass doing anything as well as irons, and I certainly don't see glass being as reliable for truck-gun status.

 

[Tirod]

Kyle Lamb had a comment in an American Rifleman article on AR15, and it was that a truck or rough duty AR was better off with irons. The simple fact is that optics don't use shatterproof glass - and the cheaper cellphones don't either. What keeps the lenses from breaking is more due to their small size and the difficulty of striking them directly. However, it's not impossible and the light repair companies overseas have large containers filled with broken optics due to harsh handling in combat. A MK17 gunner in the top of a HMMV leaves his M4 down inside the interior where ammo cans, gear, and humans are bouncing around.

Long distance shooting with a short barreled AR is another matter. 200m doesn't sound very far, but its well beyond the ballistic application. There are anecdotal stories of CQBR equipped soldiers getting hits on the enemy out to 400m but it's well beyond the effective range of a 55 or even 70 gr OTM bullet from a 10.5" barrel. It's certainly far better than a 9mm but it's not how the gun was meant to be used. 10.5" barrels were for close range use from day one and that is exactly what the specifications included when Colt worked on the application back in the early 60's. Nobody intended the XM177 to be used as a general infantryman's field rifle, or meant it for distances measured in hundreds of meters. Thinking an AR pistol can be used for that is ignoring the downrange ballistic impact in foot pounds of force - which is the PRIMARY point of guns and their use. Practical accuracy in combat weapons isn't the point so much, with 18MOA targets any decent marksman should be able to make a hit.

Shortening the barrel means applying the weapon to a specific set of circumstances and recognizing it's limits. It's like the early Browning Hipowers with leaf sights graduated in hundreds of meters - a waste of manufacturing and dead weight on the weapon. Nothing morally wrong with red dots as they do accelerate the shooters ability to put rounds on target, it's when you magnify them that questions are raised using them on a gun meant for CLOSE range work. It's somewhat akin to putting a 6 power scope on a .44 Mag - which some do - but not when it's for self defense under 21 feet.

It's not something I would recommend for use in bear country, either.

 

[mavracer]

.........400m but it's well beyond the effective range of a 55 or even 70 gr OTM bullet from a 10.5" barrel

Where do people come up with this crap, so m855/193 is good to 500 out of a 14.5" M4 but it's only good for CQ when shot from a 10.5" barrel when there's only about 150 fps difference in muzzle velocity.

 

[redbullitt]

I have a 10.5 barrel 300 blk pistol that I am really happy with. I have a set of open sights on it and it shoots just fine. Best of all it falls under my states CCW laws and can be treated just like my carry gun in a vehicle etc. I think of it as a compromise between my pistol and rifle. Lets face it... If I need this gun I would be happy to have it (and if I have it that means I cannot legally have my rifle were I am), and I am 100 percent sure I can use it more effectively in that situation than my carry piece.

Recoil is mild, accuracy with supersonics with my shooting off a field rest (side of vehicle) I can do baseball sized groups at 50 yards pretty easily. Velocity is around 1850 fps with 125g handholds. These are not hot loads, as I have not had time to work anything major up yet. The 110 barnes bullet will be my choice for serious ammo when I can work it up.

A non magnified and low profile red dot would be an excellent addition. Not something as clunky as a big aim point, but one of their small ones would do very well. Happy with my iron sights for now, and I would not consider myself at a disadvantage for anything this gun would ever be used for.

 

[Shawn Dodson]

Where do people come up with this crap, so m855/193 is good to 500 out of a 14.5" M4 but it's only good for CQ when shot from a 10.5" barrel when there's only about 150 fps difference in muzzle velocity.

500 yd from 14.5" bbl? No. More like 75 yd from 14.5" bbl as velocity drops below 2700 fps which is necessary for substantial bullet fragmentation. The shortest bbl for reliable upset at CQB distances is 11.5".

FYI, shortest bbl length for good terminal performance from .300 BLK is 8". If you desire bbl length less than 11.5" then .300 BLK is the best choice, preferrably loaded with Barnes 110gr TTSX.

 

[justice06rr]

Back to the original questions:

1. What do you think about a red dot vs. a magnified sight for the AR 15 pistol? Is a red dot better suited to the AR pistol since its pretty much parallax-free and faster? Will a magnified sight be too difficult to use since the pistol isn't as steady as a rifle?

A red-dot is ideal for shorter range use and faster target acquisition, but a good 1-4x or 1-6x optic can also be a good choice. I've tried both a red dot and a magnified optic on AR pistols and rifles. Its really up to the preference and skill of the user.

2. How accurate are AR pistols at 50, 100, 200 yards?

Depends on the shooter and setup. Both can be equally accurate theoretically given the same variables (same ammo, same bench rest, same shooter, same wind conditions, etc)

3. What is the recoil like on an AR pistol? Would a novice or weak (i.e. elderly woman) shooter have a problem using one?

Recoil is not that much more noticeable and is still quite manageable. Its muzzle rise that you'll notice more than anything, at least from my experience.

 

[mavracer]

500 yd from 14.5" bbl? No. More like 75 yd from 14.5" bbl as velocity drops below 2700 fps which is necessary for substantial bullet fragmentation.

Well you better educate the entire US military cause the "manual" says 500 meters.
And FMJ fragmentation isn't ever reliable as even at full rifle velocity it happens less than 1/2 the time. Besides I have no compulsion to adhere to the Hague convention so I can feed my 10.5" 5.56 with expanding ammo.

 

[Shawn Dodson]

Well you better educate the entire US military cause the "manual" says 500 meters.
And FMJ fragmentation isn't ever reliable as even at full rifle velocity it happens less than 1/2 the time. Besides I have no compulsion to adhere to the Hague convention so I can feed my 10.5" 5.56 with expanding ammo.

The wounding effects of M193 and M855, which is what you specified in your post, are velocity dependent. Wounding effects produced by the synergy between fragmentation and temporary cavitation decrease substantially when velocity drops below 2700 fps.

So, yes, if 150 fps is subtracted from M193 and M855 then its only good for CQB when fired from barrels shorter than 14.5" when rapid incapacitation of a determined adversary is the goal.

 

[mavracer]

The wounding effects of M193 and M855, which is what you specified in your post, are velocity dependent.

Like I said you better tell the US military cause apparently they haven't got the memo that M855 bounces off skin under 2700 fps. shees

 

[Shawn Dodson]

Like I said you better tell the US military cause apparently they haven't got the memo that M855 bounces off skin under 2700 fps. shees

https://www.ar15.com/ammo/project/term_velocity.html

https://www.ar15.com/ammo/project/term_fragrange.html