The FAL Files  

Go Back   The FAL Files > Weapons Discussion > Optics

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old July 30, 2019, 18:19   #1
Medic956
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 82815
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 8
Optic on handguard?

Forgive me if this is addressed (I'm surprised I didn't find a thread from searching), but do any of you know if the VLTOR handguard or the DSA MLOK handguard will hold zero? I'm wanting to mount a red-dot and light with just one part.

If this is addressed elsewhere with some results, please just direct me there.
Medic956 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 31, 2019, 07:32   #2
Medic956
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 82815
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 8
Really? Nobody?
Medic956 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 31, 2019, 08:46   #3
W.E.G.
FAL Files Administrator
Silver Contributor
 
W.E.G.'s Avatar
 
FALaholic #: 1211
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Virginia
Posts: 40,638
Very few folks who buy that sort of gimmicky accessory, and mount it on FAL, have enough experience actually shooting it a lot over any length of time to have an opinion worthy of trust.

A sight mounted on a handguard is only as good as the attachment to the rifle. I would have serious reservations about the reliability of any handguard-mounted sight that relies on attachment to a conventional-configuration FAL barrel.
__________________
.
.
.

Ask me about the Mason-Dixon FAL Collectors Association.
W.E.G. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 31, 2019, 10:33   #4
Medic956
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 82815
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 8
I find it strange that you consider the idea gimmicky, as the ultimak mounts to the barrel and sometimes results in improved accuracy in AKs (which is certainly not common). It's not the same attachment, but running optics on forearms isn't novel or unusual really.
Medic956 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 31, 2019, 11:33   #5
W.E.G.
FAL Files Administrator
Silver Contributor
 
W.E.G.'s Avatar
 
FALaholic #: 1211
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Virginia
Posts: 40,638
It may be "accurate enough" for your application if you are citing usage on an AK as evidence of the utility of the application.

Having seen how these install on a FAL, it wouldn't be suitable for the type of shooting I do that utilizes an optic. But then, even a well-mounted optic on a FAL isn't suitable for my regular flavor of shooting.

If wandering zeros of more than a minute of angle are acceptable, it might work OK for some applications until it vibrates loose.
__________________
.
.
.

Ask me about the Mason-Dixon FAL Collectors Association.
W.E.G. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 31, 2019, 18:22   #6
ByronF
Registered
 
ByronF's Avatar
 
FALaholic #: 630
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: PA
Posts: 4,341
I dont mount optics on floating AR15 rails. Sure wouldnt have any faith in an FAL handguard rail. If you want a 9 pound 7.62 CQB-only rifle (for some reason) it may be OK.

The mechanics just dont get the job done. The best top cover rail mount still leaves something to be desired. Battle rifle precise but nowhere close to MOA.
ByronF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 31, 2019, 19:01   #7
nvcdl
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 1312
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 1,597
I'm planning on testing a red dot on the AIM M-Lok handguard one of these days. It seems to me that it may be a more reliable mounting point then using the dustcover. Eye relief may or may not be the determining factor.

Last edited by nvcdl; August 01, 2019 at 12:02.
nvcdl is online now   Reply With Quote
Old July 31, 2019, 20:30   #8
Medic956
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 82815
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 8
Quote:
Originally Posted by W.E.G. View Post
It may be "accurate enough" for your application if you are citing usage on an AK as evidence of the utility of the application.

Having seen how these install on a FAL, it wouldn't be suitable for the type of shooting I do that utilizes an optic. But then, even a well-mounted optic on a FAL isn't suitable for my regular flavor of shooting.

If wandering zeros of more than a minute of angle are acceptable, it might work OK for some applications until it vibrates loose.
So you've mounted it and it wandered a lot? I'm not looking for precision work, if I was I wouldn't be using a FAL. All I need is about 2-3 MOA (which btw, I can do with my AK rather easily).
Medic956 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 31, 2019, 20:31   #9
Medic956
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 82815
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 8
Quote:
Originally Posted by ByronF View Post
I dont mount optics on floating AR15 rails. Sure wouldnt have any faith in an FAL handguard rail. If you want a 9 pound 7.62 CQB-only rifle (for some reason) it may be OK.

The mechanics just dont get the job done. The best top cover rail mount still leaves something to be desired. Battle rifle precise but nowhere close to MOA.
I'm not an old man, but my eyes like a dot a lot better than irons in anything less than nice bright light. Do you not use a dot past 200?
Medic956 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 31, 2019, 20:46   #10
ByronF
Registered
 
ByronF's Avatar
 
FALaholic #: 630
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: PA
Posts: 4,341
Quote:
Originally Posted by Medic956 View Post
I'm not an old man, but my eyes like a dot a lot better than irons in anything less than nice bright light. Do you not use a dot past 200?
I do use red dot at further ranges sometimes. It works fine if on a solid mount. The FAL hanguard is not a solid mount.. It will work as a 10 MOA CQB optic, I predict. And 10 MOA is OK for CQB.
ByronF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 31, 2019, 20:52   #11
W.E.G.
FAL Files Administrator
Silver Contributor
 
W.E.G.'s Avatar
 
FALaholic #: 1211
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Virginia
Posts: 40,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by Medic956 View Post
So you've mounted it and it wandered a lot?
I never said I ever owned one.

I have seen them. I see how they are mounted. I don't need to own an Amish wagon to know its a primitive tool, with obvious limitations. But, if its your style, I'm OK with you doing what works for you.
__________________
.
.
.

Ask me about the Mason-Dixon FAL Collectors Association.
W.E.G. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 01, 2019, 19:47   #12
tac-40
Moderator
Armed Curmudgeon
 
tac-40's Avatar
 
FALaholic #: 12090
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: SC-Low Country
Posts: 8,390
An FAL dust cover mount, at least one of the good ones, is a pretty solid mount when installed correctly. Way better than a forearm that is fastened at one point and allowed to move everywhere else along its length. I have a para with an ARM railed dust cover mount and it is fine for minute of man out to 300 yards with my EoTech on it. Haven't tried it farther so can't comment there.

A red dot mounted significantly away from the eye will cause the parallax to be more significant in getting and holding a good sight picture and hitting the target. While most RDS companies say there is no parallax on their optics, there really is and it can come into play. I know this because I worked as a government funded contractor a few years back evaluating various RDS optics for law enforcement use and found out that parallax was present in every optic.
__________________
Only 2 defining forces have ever offered to die for you. Jesus Christ and the American Soldier. One died for your soul, the other for your freedom.

Schools uses to start with the "three R's". Reading, writing, and arithmetic. Now they start with the "three D's". Dipshitery, Dumbassery, and Douchebaggery-Retired Bum

If you do in fact have a problem, you have the rest of your life to solve it. How long your life lasts only depends on how well you solve it.
tac-40 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old August 01, 2019, 20:20   #13
NFADLR
Registered
 
NFADLR's Avatar
 
FALaholic #: 7480
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Location thats the question \_(ツ)_/
Posts: 5,549
You admit driving a buckboard with a team of oxen to the waffle hut ohh and brought yo bitch while you at it!!

Dey ain't too great on cobble stone roads either..


Quote:
Originally Posted by W.E.G. View Post
I never said I ever owned one.

I have seen them. I see how they are mounted. I don't need to own an Amish wagon to know its a primitive tool, with obvious limitations. But, if its your style, I'm OK with you doing what works for you.
NFADLR is online now   Reply With Quote
Old August 13, 2019, 20:46   #14
moonbat60
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 17000
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Midwest
Posts: 5,815
Quote:
Originally Posted by tac-40 View Post
An FAL dust cover mount, at least one of the good ones, is a pretty solid mount when installed correctly. Way better than a forearm that is fastened at one point and allowed to move everywhere else along its length. I have a para with an ARM railed dust cover mount and it is fine for minute of man out to 300 yards with my EoTech on it. Haven't tried it farther so can't comment there.

A red dot mounted significantly away from the eye will cause the parallax to be more significant in getting and holding a good sight picture and hitting the target. While most RDS companies say there is no parallax on their optics, there really is and it can come into play. I know this because I worked as a government funded contractor a few years back evaluating various RDS optics for law enforcement use and found out that parallax was present in every optic.
I agree. I only got two guns with optics mounted forward, one being a Marlin 1895 Guide Gun in .45-70 and the other is a Benelli S90 shotgun.
moonbat60 is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 22:07.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©1998-2018 The FAL Files