A note on the Matech: The "line" on the elevation scale is for zeroing the 20" barrel M16A4 rifle at 25 meters. For a 14.5" carbine, use the "300" setting for zeroing at 25 meters. The same applies to the KAC sight.
When setting up a combat zero on a 20" M16A2/3/4, we zeroed at 25 meters with rear sight set to 350m. This would set point blank range for 5.56mm NATO from 0 - 300 meters. With the 14.5" M4, the terminal ballistics for the same ammunition is a bit different. Zero on a 25m target is with the sight set to 300m. The 20" M16A1 sights were different and zero was done at 25m with the rear set to 300m. All of them set the effective point blank range from 0-300m. In general, until the advent of the red dot and ACOG, you set the rear peep sight to 300m and left it there as you'd be within roughly 8" vertically from the aim point from 0-300m, which was considered the effective *combat* range of the rifle -- which is not the maximum effective range. A number of studies from Korean War onward showed engagement of enemy combatants by an infantry solder with a rifle very rarely exceeded 300m. Trying to aim and hit enemy combatants while they're shooting at you and shelling you is a bit more hectic than laying prone on a range.
@@Kosher_Slider Yup -- range targets aren't trying to kill you -- nor are they maneuvering to achieve tactical advantage -- something the range LARPers and Practical Shooting Sports dudes forget (or conveniently ignore). if you aim for center of mass in thorax and hit within 6 inches or so of it, that shot should be a severe wound, if not a "kill" for an enemy combatant not wearing a Level IV ballistic vest. Even with Level IV protection, it's going to put the hurt on with rib cage damage. That's the thing often ignored in the UA-cam ballistic vest videos. May prevent penetration, but it doesn't prevent the blunt force trauma.
@@Sparks68would that be the case with 5.56? Especially at range? Would it have enough energy to cause any meaningful blunt force trauma? The military seems to be moving away from it for line troops.
@@poolee77 Blunt force trauma? It's LETHAL well past 500 meters unless an adversary is wearing Level VI armor -- which is very heavy, quite uncomfortable and very hot in warm weather -- and yes it causes blunt force trauma. Soldiers don't wear it unless they must. Guerillas and insurgents don't have or use it. The issue beyond 500 meters is bullet drop and adjusting aim. The US Army has been repeatedly toying with alleged "future" rifles, all of which have been one failure after another. The current one being evaluated is too expensive, too complex, and heavier with fewer rounds in the basic load. I predict another failure.
@@Sparks68 no shit, I’m talking about 5.56mm hitting a level IV plate. I don’t think it would have much energy to do much blunt force trauma like you mentioned in a previous comment. I’m not talking about the lethality of 5.56 on soft targets.
I have the Ma Tech rear sight. Mine is Army issue. I was impressed with it because it zeroed very easily at the 25 meter and qualified with it before installing my own ACOG 4X32. This was an advantage to my Joes because it can be co-witnessed with the Aimpoint M68 red dot Close Combat Optics. Before I left Iraq on my last combat tour I managed to get one out of supply before they put all their stuff into the conex for shipment back home. Fantastic sight to battle zero with and shooting steel with my Bushy M4. Now I want to find the Marine KAC. For a long time I thought the Marines were using Ma Tech BUIS on their M16A4s. Now I have to get one for those long range steel targets I want to bust caps on!! Oh yeah!!!
Used Matech in the Army and bought KAC front and rear for personal use. I like KAC becayse it is smaller and fits under more types of optics, can range in smaller increments.
Army here. nothing but Matechs in the armory. Still a little ingenious backup sight. so user intuitive with the easy range adjustments. Just wish it wasn't spring assisted and was more like the KAC. Would be perfect. No springs to wear out. AFAIK, the Matech and KAC are the only BUIS that can do elevation and windage. So mad props to those engineers for doing the wild math to get that elevation adjustments.
One thing that I think is worth mentioning is that with the matech they do have a life span in that the detent that holds the sight down will wear out and the sight will stay in the up position. That was a problem with the rifles we had when I was in the service.
Marine here! The front KAC sight you show is non-existent in the Marine Corps. Like most branches we have a fixed front sight post on our M4's however, where you will see an aftermarket front sight post is on the Marine Corps M27 IAR (or HK-416 for you civilian folk) however the IAR has a KAC M4 Front Sight, which is different from the video's KAC Folding Micro Front Sight!
@@CB-ux5xc agreed Actually those look like older pre Remington guns. Probably not bad guns at all. Nothing fancy sure, but not what they let out these days
@Dan Mojave If you're referring to me, you might be interested to know that I've been shooting now for close to 65 years, and odds are pretty good that I was shooting one of numerous Colt AR-15 variants since before you were born.
I have several of both and they're awesome. I use Midwest Industries and Magpul Pro also along with the dreaded Troy but KAC amd Matech are by far my favorite. They also look the best, too so there's that.
I have the Army issue MaTech (not the commercial varient with the white lettering on the gates) and it's great, 200-600 meter markers for use with M855.
@@nickl5816 you want to sell me one ? :( lol it’s all good if you can’t. But could you look at eBay right now and let me know if the NEW multiple being sold by one seller are real? They’re selling used ones which look real but they’re also selling “new ones” for $99. Bag doesn’t look sealed but idk lol used ones are $89 so I’d rather spend 10 extra for a new one at that point lol
I own many of both and like both. These two are the only ones I run and use. To my knowledge they are the only ones that have adjustments and settings for distance.
I had a matech in the USMC actually. Don't know if it was unit acquired cots gear as we had tons in the armory but still a great sight. I have a set that I use on my 10.5 home defense pistol with a troy front hk battle sight. I have never seen the KAC.
Had one KAC for a long time, just now putting it on something. I didn’t know which arrow to line the range number up with. I thought it may be the downward arrow on the front.. Thanks for the video!
I’ve thought about drilling out the MaTech aperture and threading the hole to accept screw-in aperture sized to get me a deeper sight picture for better accuracy. Of course that’s not the best idea for a BUIS concept.
@@audreymota8423 I don't know about Lee, but my armory had matechs only until early this year. I never had the KAC set until currently. Checked into unit in 2016.
Just curious if you have ever looked at the LMT L8N rear sight. It is very similar to the kac 600m micro and scar rear sight in that it has two apertures and a distance drum.
the fact elevation indicator is on the side and not visible in rear where your shooting eye has visual of it bothers me a lot. are the peep sizes for matech and kac both the same? i heard therese a micro kac with adjustable wind and a standard size whats the difference betwen the two or is micro same thing just more compact? how come marines didnt just use the army matech?
I have troys hk and mbus pros and if I had to use them without an optic n actually use them as a sight I'd go w the troys but the magpul pros are tiny n sit low under 1-6 scopes
Aye bro i know this video is old but is there any way you make a video showing how to use the kac rear incrementally? Like targets of various ranges? I zero’d for 50 yards on the 2 does that line up with the other numbers in terms of zero?
No. The Matech is supposed to be zeroed on the Zero Line between 3-400M mark at a range of 25m. From there it should be zeroed out to 600m, in theory. Idk if the ranges line up if zeroed at 50m.
If I wanna do an absolute co-witness with a red dot the mbus is terrible. It pretty much blocks out everything in my sight picture. That’s why this is appealing to me. If the rear sight could just be a little thinner and still have the elevation adjustments it would be even better
Does that line on your buttstock grab at beard hairs? Im considering changing my B5 to a very similar Magpul one with storage compartments, but they have separation lines, and im wondering if they grab face hairs.
Rustoleum camo series rattle can and natural stencils. Theres a how-to video on our channel from a couple years back. If you search 'AR15 camo paint' you'll find it.
Us jarheads used the matech too. I was issued one on a late oif deployment on cots gear. I still have one as well. The sight is fragile though like you said. The knights is a superior unit however. Id just never pay 150 for a single buis. Either are just awesome when you match it up to a troy hk battlesight.
MAANG, 2020, whole state got brand new FN M4A1s, all equipped with the Matech sights. Even if the Army copied that KAC sights, but shittier, like we do with everything else, it'd still be better than the Matech. It's too easy to knock the Matech out of the right range. Big 'ole windage knob also bother me when I charge my weapon.
Highjak86, Have you had any issues with the Matech mount screw digging into the upper inside the picatinny groove? Took mine off my upper the other day and found the threads dug into the top of the receiver, I also checked another one of my rifles with this sight and it seems tor really beat up the rails. Is this from over tightening the sight (threads aren't stripped) or is it just the nature of the beast? Also does the KAC micro rear mount without scratching up the rails? Im thinking of purchasing one to replace the matechs I own. Thanks!
What qd mount is your scope on? Not the acog, the other... Ive been debating qd vs non qd and brands. Has it been good? Im not looking to take the optic off once zeroed, more of if it goes down, ease of removal. There seems to be pros and cons with all mounts.
Scott Fennell just be careful there good buis but later down the line the spring will get loose. And since the military use these to phase out the carry handle. And the multiple rotations it’s not hard to believe that the springs life wore faster than most for MAtech
@@stevenstovall4491 I'm not saying the MATECH is my first choice of iron sights, but in my entire career in the infantry from Basic on up, I never had a single issue as stated above. I'm not saying they are perfect but I never saw any issues with them either.
They still have those rear sights in the army and they are still garbage, the retention holding the rear sight down wears out quick and the sight ends up staying deployed
I had a matech on my M4.. I hated it. I was never in combat, but we just zeroed for 300m and left it there. I can't imagine an M4 being very combat capable past that with iron sights, but I'm also not an expert Idk.
very nice site, also very good advice in reference to authentic vs. clone. list today's scam artist it took a lot out of authenticity and Trust. a simple comparison would be an authentic Indian Arrowhead verses some knucklehead manufacturing them with a Dremel kit. like I said it destroys Trust and authenticity. sincerely...
Did you make those rifles look like shit? On purpose?? Holio fuck... I've got some old wore out shit I'll sell you... If that's your bag. 😂🤣 Matech is the better of the two sights... Sand and dust will wreck the adjustment design of the KAC...
If your gonna have your weapons look worn fune...but its better to do it in combat so your gun changes with you and grows with you when your baptised in fire....just a recommendation hahaha good video though
What did you do to your rifle? I'ts all tan painted and looks terrible. Why do these guys play dressup?? Ok....I'm going to paint my rifle green just to be difficult here. That way, I'll be a little like you guys, you know, getting 40% of what it's worth at the local gunshow, when I sell, because it's all F'd UP.
A note on the Matech: The "line" on the elevation scale is for zeroing the 20" barrel M16A4 rifle at 25 meters. For a 14.5" carbine, use the "300" setting for zeroing at 25 meters.
The same applies to the KAC sight.
When setting up a combat zero on a 20" M16A2/3/4, we zeroed at 25 meters with rear sight set to 350m. This would set point blank range for 5.56mm NATO from 0 - 300 meters. With the 14.5" M4, the terminal ballistics for the same ammunition is a bit different. Zero on a 25m target is with the sight set to 300m. The 20" M16A1 sights were different and zero was done at 25m with the rear set to 300m. All of them set the effective point blank range from 0-300m. In general, until the advent of the red dot and ACOG, you set the rear peep sight to 300m and left it there as you'd be within roughly 8" vertically from the aim point from 0-300m, which was considered the effective *combat* range of the rifle -- which is not the maximum effective range. A number of studies from Korean War onward showed engagement of enemy combatants by an infantry solder with a rifle very rarely exceeded 300m. Trying to aim and hit enemy combatants while they're shooting at you and shelling you is a bit more hectic than laying prone on a range.
Yeah, paper doesn’t usually shoot back.
@@Kosher_Slider Yup -- range targets aren't trying to kill you -- nor are they maneuvering to achieve tactical advantage -- something the range LARPers and Practical Shooting Sports dudes forget (or conveniently ignore). if you aim for center of mass in thorax and hit within 6 inches or so of it, that shot should be a severe wound, if not a "kill" for an enemy combatant not wearing a Level IV ballistic vest. Even with Level IV protection, it's going to put the hurt on with rib cage damage. That's the thing often ignored in the UA-cam ballistic vest videos. May prevent penetration, but it doesn't prevent the blunt force trauma.
@@Sparks68would that be the case with 5.56? Especially at range? Would it have enough energy to cause any meaningful blunt force trauma?
The military seems to be moving away from it for line troops.
@@poolee77 Blunt force trauma? It's LETHAL well past 500 meters unless an adversary is wearing Level VI armor -- which is very heavy, quite uncomfortable and very hot in warm weather -- and yes it causes blunt force trauma. Soldiers don't wear it unless they must. Guerillas and insurgents don't have or use it. The issue beyond 500 meters is bullet drop and adjusting aim. The US Army has been repeatedly toying with alleged "future" rifles, all of which have been one failure after another. The current one being evaluated is too expensive, too complex, and heavier with fewer rounds in the basic load. I predict another failure.
@@Sparks68 no shit, I’m talking about 5.56mm hitting a level IV plate. I don’t think it would have much energy to do much blunt force trauma like you mentioned in a previous comment. I’m not talking about the lethality of 5.56 on soft targets.
I have the Ma Tech rear sight. Mine is Army issue. I was impressed with it because it zeroed very easily at the 25 meter and qualified with it before installing my own ACOG 4X32. This was an advantage to my Joes because it can be co-witnessed with the Aimpoint M68 red dot Close Combat Optics. Before I left Iraq on my last combat tour I managed to get one out of supply before they put all their stuff into the conex for shipment back home. Fantastic sight to battle zero with and shooting steel with my Bushy M4. Now I want to find the Marine KAC. For a long time I thought the Marines were using Ma Tech BUIS on their M16A4s. Now I have to get one for those long range steel targets I want to bust caps on!! Oh yeah!!!
Had a KAC on my rifle the whole time while in the corps from 2015-2019 0341 3/6!!!
hell yeah bro C 1/6 0341
Did you ever find 3/6s missing rifles lol
Used Matech in the Army and bought KAC front and rear for personal use. I like KAC becayse it is smaller and fits under more types of optics, can range in smaller increments.
What kind of optic won't fit over a Matech?
@@opmike343surprisingly a lot. The base is awfully bulky compared to pretty much everything else.
Army here. nothing but Matechs in the armory. Still a little ingenious backup sight. so user intuitive with the easy range adjustments. Just wish it wasn't spring assisted and was more like the KAC. Would be perfect. No springs to wear out.
AFAIK, the Matech and KAC are the only BUIS that can do elevation and windage. So mad props to those engineers for doing the wild math to get that elevation adjustments.
Ya, main issue I've seen with the Matech was the sight not clicking down. Not a huge deal if it's under an ACOG though.
One thing that I think is worth mentioning is that with the matech they do have a life span in that the detent that holds the sight down will wear out and the sight will stay in the up position. That was a problem with the rifles we had when I was in the service.
Tape it down.
@13R^D I have seen several pair of Matechs where the locking nub on the rear sight post wore out and it would not stay in the down position...
Stfu Carter. A kid that's never served 20+ years like some of us. Keep quiet and sit down child.
Marine here! The front KAC sight you show is non-existent in the Marine Corps. Like most branches we have a fixed front sight post on our M4's however, where you will see an aftermarket front sight post is on the Marine Corps M27 IAR (or HK-416 for you civilian folk) however the IAR has a KAC M4 Front Sight, which is different from the video's KAC Folding Micro Front Sight!
Good info
I've seen the M27s front sight break. Had to use a rubber band on it. Would not recommend the KAC M4 flip up front sight.
LOL, those rifles look like you store them strapped to your engine block!
They are DPMS Panther ARs. I would beat the crap out of them too. They are very inexpensive and you buy something like this as a first or second gun.
Just typical camo spray paint job. Simple and effective. Redo it when it wears off
@@CB-ux5xc agreed
Actually those look like older pre Remington guns. Probably not bad guns at all. Nothing fancy sure, but not what they let out these days
@Dan Mojave If you're referring to me, you might be interested to know that I've been shooting now for close to 65 years, and odds are pretty good that I was shooting one of numerous Colt AR-15 variants since before you were born.
@@GetMeThere1 Somebody take their grandpa home
I'm so glad you did this video. I'll PM you with my pics.
I have several of both and they're awesome. I use Midwest Industries and Magpul Pro also along with the dreaded Troy but KAC amd Matech are by far my favorite. They also look the best, too so there's that.
Thanks for the video!
I have the Army issue MaTech (not the commercial varient with the white lettering on the gates) and it's great, 200-600 meter markers for use with M855.
Got a used KAC rear on ebay for 55 bucks. It was USMC surplus and that adds a certain cool factor for me. Good vid
I honestly do not recall KAC buis in my stint.
I highly doubt that. More than likely a fake at that price.
@@CB-ux5xc that was the going rate a few years ago before cloners drove up prices. I have 3 or 4 and they're definitely real lol
@@nickl5816 you want to sell me one ? :( lol it’s all good if you can’t. But could you look at eBay right now and let me know if the NEW multiple being sold by one seller are real? They’re selling used ones which look real but they’re also selling “new ones” for $99. Bag doesn’t look sealed but idk lol used ones are $89 so I’d rather spend 10 extra for a new one at that point lol
@@angelulloa717 they're real, I'd opt for the new one so you get the card that tells you how to zero it
I love using iron sights. I try to use them as much as possible.
I own many of both and like both. These two are the only ones I run and use. To my knowledge they are the only ones that have adjustments and settings for distance.
Wow, nice backup sights!
Marine here 94-98 still had M16s we shot in yards! Differently like the old school sights!
I had a matech in the USMC actually. Don't know if it was unit acquired cots gear as we had tons in the armory but still a great sight. I have a set that I use on my 10.5 home defense pistol with a troy front hk battle sight. I have never seen the KAC.
Also saw only matechs in my unit. Was about to comment that
Had one KAC for a long time, just now putting it on something. I didn’t know which arrow to line the range number up with. I thought it may be the downward arrow on the front.. Thanks for the video!
Didn't know you served brother, thumbs up.
Love that flat trigger!!!
Painted to look worn, thats pretty POG
Nice looking BUIS!
I’ve thought about drilling out the MaTech aperture and threading the hole to accept screw-in aperture sized to get me a deeper sight picture for better accuracy. Of course that’s not the best idea for a BUIS concept.
I’m 20 years of combat in the desert there is not ONE single case of a soldier having his optic fail and going to BUIS.
when i went through basic my Ma Tech was so worn it wouldn't stay down. It gave me a very bad first impression of them tbh. I just bought the KAC one.
Both of these sights work perfectly on all my AR's/
Great comparison brother. I wanted a set of these, but the cost pushed me towards the Troy Industries fixed front and rear.
I user the KAC on two of my rifles and prefer it to most others.
I know this a old video but what charging hand is that on the rifle with the MaTech sight??
I'm a marine and we used the ma techs
Lee Holmes bullshit
@@audreymota8423 I don't know about Lee, but my armory had matechs only until early this year. I never had the KAC set until currently. Checked into unit in 2016.
Had kac as early as 13 in my unit. Never saw ma techs ever
How are these holding up
Just curious if you have ever looked at the LMT L8N rear sight. It is very similar to the kac 600m micro and scar rear sight in that it has two apertures and a distance drum.
the fact elevation indicator is on the side and not visible in rear where your shooting eye has visual of it bothers me a lot. are the peep sizes for matech and kac both the same? i heard therese a micro kac with adjustable wind and a standard size whats the difference betwen the two or is micro same thing just more compact? how come marines didnt just use the army matech?
I have troys hk and mbus pros and if I had to use them without an optic n actually use them as a sight I'd go w the troys but the magpul pros are tiny n sit low under 1-6 scopes
What did you use to paint your front sight post?
I have used white out or a silver sharpie. Anything you can see is fine
Army still issuing Matech. Just issued a new M4 with matech.
Aye bro i know this video is old but is there any way you make a video showing how to use the kac rear incrementally? Like targets of various ranges? I zero’d for 50 yards on the 2 does that line up with the other numbers in terms of zero?
No. The Matech is supposed to be zeroed on the Zero Line between 3-400M mark at a range of 25m. From there it should be zeroed out to 600m, in theory. Idk if the ranges line up if zeroed at 50m.
If I wanna do an absolute co-witness with a red dot the mbus is terrible. It pretty much blocks out everything in my sight picture. That’s why this is appealing to me. If the rear sight could just be a little thinner and still have the elevation adjustments it would be even better
EBay has the KAC rear micros from $49 to 75 range. Most are used with USMC edition marked.
Simply not true.
@@CB-ux5xc picked up a brand new genuine Kac micro for $60 off eBay 6 months ago.
These are really not needed unless you are doing a clone build. Magpul and Daniel Defense make better back up iron sights and are more affordable
Does that line on your buttstock grab at beard hairs? Im considering changing my B5 to a very similar Magpul one with storage compartments, but they have separation lines, and im wondering if they grab face hairs.
nice video man
I liked my matech because it was easy to adjust with gloves on
What scope level is that?
How did you do your paint job on your AR-15's?
Rustoleum camo series rattle can and natural stencils. Theres a how-to video on our channel from a couple years back. If you search 'AR15 camo paint' you'll find it.
Love the paint job on these rifles. Damn you bring back memories!
Us jarheads used the matech too. I was issued one on a late oif deployment on cots gear. I still have one as well. The sight is fragile though like you said. The knights is a superior unit however. Id just never pay 150 for a single buis. Either are just awesome when you match it up to a troy hk battlesight.
My windage adjustment knob doesn't move when folding the sights..I'm wondering if something is up with yours
MAANG, 2020, whole state got brand new FN M4A1s, all equipped with the Matech sights.
Even if the Army copied that KAC sights, but shittier, like we do with everything else, it'd still be better than the Matech.
It's too easy to knock the Matech out of the right range. Big 'ole windage knob also bother me when I charge my weapon.
Highjak86, Have you had any issues with the Matech mount screw digging into the upper inside the picatinny groove? Took mine off my upper the other day and found the threads dug into the top of the receiver, I also checked another one of my rifles with this sight and it seems tor really beat up the rails. Is this from over tightening the sight (threads aren't stripped) or is it just the nature of the beast? Also does the KAC micro rear mount without scratching up the rails? Im thinking of purchasing one to replace the matechs I own. Thanks!
I have never had that issue.
What qd mount is your scope on? Not the acog, the other... Ive been debating qd vs non qd and brands. Has it been good? Im not looking to take the optic off once zeroed, more of if it goes down, ease of removal. There seems to be pros and cons with all mounts.
LaRue LT104. Great mount.
Do you know - whether aperture size on KAC is rather equals to Matech's?
I want to build a spr ar15 with the new trijicon 1-8x. Do you prefer a 16 or 18" barrel?
Who makes the bubble level on the KAC BUIS AR
Matech is ass. I wish the army never went with them. would loose zero, would fail to stay in the down position, and the lever would always shift!!
wut? never had issues with the matech sight. just wish they werent pushup spring activated.
DanOfTheWild time has it when the spring get losen over time. Same thing happened to me. Not a fan of the MA tech sight. Because of that issue.
I never had an issue with them
Scott Fennell just be careful there good buis but later down the line the spring will get loose. And since the military use these to phase out the carry handle. And the multiple rotations it’s not hard to believe that the springs life wore faster than most for MAtech
@@stevenstovall4491 I'm not saying the MATECH is my first choice of iron sights, but in my entire career in the infantry from Basic on up, I never had a single issue as stated above. I'm not saying they are perfect but I never saw any issues with them either.
Air Force also issues MaTechs.
The Air Force uses Matech, at least where I'm at & Aimpoint M68 red dots.
Anyone know the difference between kac micro and standard flip ups for front and rear is there a hight difference
That KAC rear sight, it appears to be smashing and denting in the ARs upper just forward of charge handle on top rail
The line is for m16 zero, m4 you zero at 200.
Never seen those sights in the marine corps. We had acogs with no backup sights. But I got out in 2016
Diggin the matech for a mk18 build I'm doin.
They still have those rear sights in the army and they are still garbage, the retention holding the rear sight down wears out quick and the sight ends up staying deployed
Got the kac used for 45,in good shape. Got the matech brand new for $35. They have went down in price lately.
Agreed a lot of fake ones and we have seen them. Airsoft $30 sights. Fact kids.
Marines use both
I had a matech on my M4.. I hated it. I was never in combat, but we just zeroed for 300m and left it there. I can't imagine an M4 being very combat capable past that with iron sights, but I'm also not an expert Idk.
Definitely not an expert
@@madstan8948 very useful and constructive input. Thanks.
@@b.vo. no problem
9:07 am I the only one hearing it
What
Close that GD dust cover so I don't have to see that dirty bcg. 😊
Man that’s like choosing between Hillary and Bernie fuck these things. Respectfully.
lmao!
Top 3 worst paint jobs I've ever seen on a rifle. It looks like you wiped you ass with your rifles, then put a satin clear coated over the shit.
very nice site, also very good advice in reference to authentic vs. clone. list today's scam artist it took a lot out of authenticity and Trust. a simple comparison would be an authentic Indian Arrowhead verses some knucklehead manufacturing them with a Dremel kit. like I said it destroys Trust and authenticity. sincerely...
Did you make those rifles look like shit? On purpose?? Holio fuck... I've got some old wore out shit I'll sell you... If that's your bag. 😂🤣
Matech is the better of the two sights... Sand and dust will wreck the adjustment design of the KAC...
If your gonna have your weapons look worn fune...but its better to do it in combat so your gun changes with you and grows with you when your baptised in fire....just a recommendation hahaha good video though
Did you bring your weapon back JRG?
What did you do to your rifle? I'ts all tan painted and looks terrible.
Why do these guys play dressup??
Ok....I'm going to paint my rifle green just to be difficult here. That way, I'll be a little like you guys, you know, getting 40% of what it's worth at the local gunshow, when I sell, because it's all F'd UP.
what was your mos?
I want to build a spr ar15 with the new trijicon 1-8x. Do you prefer a 16 or 18" barrel?