PDA

View Full Version : Old vs New-er MABUS



lshapes
4 March 2009, 19:16
Might anyone know if the "newer version" of the MagPul MBUS sight (soon to be released) will be offered with a stock sight (metal) aperture? Will the sight apertures be interchangeable? (Noticed that the "Old" original prototype had stock metal apertures, while the "New" releases have polymer apertures.)
Would like to utilize a tritium 1/2 sight in the MBUS sight body.
Thank you for your input and insight. (No pun intended.)

Stickman
5 March 2009, 00:04
The MBUS is coming with a standard metal FSP for the front, and polymer apertures for the rear.


http://stickman.rainierarms.com/galleries/Magpul%20III/0O2P8254-1028-WEVO.jpg

Army Chief
5 March 2009, 00:38
I realize that these were/are not intended as replacements for the traditional steel/aluminum BUIS, but I suppose my question at this point is this: if these MBUS units prove to be as durable as we suspect that they will be, then why wouldn't they be perfectly-viable replacements for traditional BUIS?

We keep coming back to this notion that the primary argument in favor of the MBUS is one of cost, but that aside, might the MBUS not ultimately beat the others at their own game? It's a next generation design, and (presumably) made of the same stuff that catapaulted the PMAG to the head of the magazine market, so it actually seems like a pretty logical first-up selection in many ways.

AC

Ryo
5 March 2009, 15:23
Even though we know the PMAG is very durable and strong, but it's still breakable. For example I broke the cover of one of my PMAGs :( (Magpul is sending me a replacement :) )

So I don't know how well this will do in the real world environment. There are some section of the BUIS that are thinner which makes it more likely it could break in those locations if stressed out enough from abuse. It would seem to me that Magpul's BUIS would snap apart if abused, but metal BUIS would bend and still be usable. IMHO

Army Chief
5 March 2009, 21:52
Ryo,

I went down much the same path, logic-wise, but I guess I just didn't reach quite the same conclusion: would a bent metal BUIS really be any more useful than a broken polymer one, considering that since neither could be relied upon to direct rounds to point of aim?

I suppose it is largely a question of degree of damage, but my point is/was simply that nothing is indestructable, and given the role of a BUIS, the MBUS is probably just as worthy a choice as any other folder. I don't have a set on hand to base that on, but the early reports are that these things are surprisingly robust.

AC

lshapes
5 March 2009, 23:46
Gentlemen,
Thank you for your replies & opinions.
Stick, I had noticed that the original rear prototype had a metal aperture.
(You mention that the released sight will have a polymer aperture. Could I remove the new polymer aperture & replace with a stock metal AR-15 rear sight?)
Thank you agin for your responses and opinions.
Aloha,
lshapes

Stickman
6 March 2009, 10:00
Could I remove the new polymer aperture & replace with a stock metal AR-15 rear sight?)

lshapes



In theory, it would be possible, I'm not sure how the practical application would pan out.

Dutch
6 March 2009, 10:25
Metal, polymer,plastic BUIS it won't matter give it to a soldier, cop, shooter, over time it will break. Once saw a broken sight on an A2 rifle. Now performing mods I am not sure about as your playing with the design integrity.

Dutch

Stickman
6 March 2009, 10:38
Metal, polymer,plastic BUIS it won't matter give it to a soldier, cop, shooter, over time it will break. Once saw a broken sight on an A2 rifle.

Dutch



... and no one knew how it happened, or admitted they were there? [:D]

Ryo
6 March 2009, 11:49
In theory, it would be possible, I'm not sure how the practical application would pan out.

I would think they would keep it interchangable.. Just for the fact some people want to replace it for glowing sights like Trijicon Tritium sights.

SHIHAN
6 March 2009, 15:12
Even though we know the PMAG is very durable and strong, but it's still breakable. For example I broke the cover of one of my PMAGs :( (Magpul is sending me a replacement :) )

So I don't know how well this will do in the real world environment. There are some section of the BUIS that are thinner which makes it more likely it could break in those locations if stressed out enough from abuse. It would seem to me that Magpul's BUIS would snap apart if abused, but metal BUIS would bend and still be usable. IMHO

Everything is breakable but the sttresses that the PMAG can take are far greater than any USGI mag.

Paulo_Santos
7 March 2009, 13:40
After reading about the Kaboom on BARFCOM in which the PMAG just exploded, I think that may be a problem. Although Kabooms are very rare, so is a pick-up truck repeatedly running over my USGI Mag.[BD][BD][BD]

Generally when a Kaboom happens with a USGI mag, the floor plate just blows out. So each mag has its strengths and negatives.

SHIHAN
7 March 2009, 14:58
With the MBUS I dont think for me there will be any durability problems as i dont run with the sights up and cowitness all of the time. The odds IMHO of them not holding up how I use them I think are pretty small. Also there have been many reports of high end(not a WEVO advertiser) metal ones just exploding with parts all over a few times and I have seen this once.

lshapes
10 March 2009, 00:14
Thank you for your responses & opinions.
Just like Ryo indicated, I was thinking of substituting a tritium sight set in place of the front & rear apertures.
I'm already in posession of an older meprolight set that features a 1/2 sight (top half of sight cut off) the rear sight to provide a wider field of view.
Just need to have the tritium's in there for low light conditions.
Thank you agin for your responses and opinions.
Aloha,
lshapes

Paulo_Santos
10 March 2009, 00:22
Thank you for your responses & opinions.
Just like Ryo indicated, I was thinking of substituting a tritium sight set in place of the front & rear apertures.
I'm already in posession of an older meprolight set that features a 1/2 sight (top half of sight cut off) the rear sight to provide a wider field of view.
Just need to have the tritium's in there for low light conditions.
Thank you agin for your responses and opinions.
Aloha,
lshapes

For an AR, all you really need is the front night sight.

Eric
10 March 2009, 05:31
I'm not really a fan of having a tritium rear iron sight. For me, it's too close to my eye to be useful and is more of a distraction.

Army Chief
10 March 2009, 06:24
Nor am I. In fact, I'm not really tracking on the logic here at all. Low-light environments present target discrimination challenges that are most often overcome with (a) night vision systems, or (b) visible illumination tools.

Tritium sights can tell you where you are aiming, but not who or what you are about to hit, and I'm not just envisioning too many scenarios in which that would be beneficial in a longarm (i.e. deliberate employment) application.

AC

Stickman
10 March 2009, 10:15
For an AR, all you really need is the front night sight.



If I felt a need to add anything, it would only be the front one as a tritium unit, and I doubt I would feel the need. I've seen plenty of guys use them, but none that really felt sold on them after owning them for awhile. The typical reason I heard is that "you use night sights on your pistol, so why wouldn't you use them on your rifle". I don't shoot NTCH with my Glock....

Paulo_Santos
10 March 2009, 10:37
If I felt a need to add anything, it would only be the front one as a tritium unit, and I doubt I would feel the need. I've seen plenty of guys use them, but none that really felt sold on them after owning them for awhile. The typical reason I heard is that "you use night sights on your pistol, so why wouldn't you use them on your rifle". I don't shoot NTCH with my Glock....

I don't have any night sights on my AR's either. The weaponlight does a good job of lighting up the front sight post for me that I don't see the need for a tritium front post.

NTCH with a Glock...that would be cool to see[BD][BD][BD]