Which looks best, and why ?

[Cupid]

[Greatguns]

I thought you said you sold your Yugo 2 hours after you shot it, what's up with that?

[Cupid]

I thought you said you sold your Yugo 2 hours after you shot it, what's up with that?

I took the pic before I sold it.

Which looks the best and why ?

[carls sks]

i prefer my sks's all original (just a personal preference).

[Cupid]

i prefer my sks's all original (just a personal preference).

Which looks best and why ?

[Larry D.]

OK, I'll bite.

The Yugo for me.
I think if there's to be an optic, it needs to be somewhere along the receiver.

I never quite got the knack of the scout scope.

[Cupid]

OK, I'll bite.

The Yugo for me.
I think if there's to be an optic, it needs to be somewhere along the receiver.

I never quite got the knack of the scout scope.

Why ?


It's not a scout scope

[Justin Hell]

I would go with the Yugo, I kind of like the scout scope look, and I have both my T53 and an SKS using that type of scoping. I do have a red dot to swap out with my LER scope...but I haven't really tried it.

I also think it looks more at home with how it is mounted on the Yugo with all the grenade stuff up front anyway. More balanced appearing?
The regular Type 56 would look better to me without the red dot at all.

[Larry D.]

OK, I'll bite.

The Yugo for me.
I think if there's to be an optic, it needs to be somewhere along the receiver.

I never quite got the knack of the scout scope.

Why ?


It's not a scout scope

I could have said scout scope style mount, but I didn't feel like typing that much.
I would have thought it obvious to everyone that it's not a real, actual, honest to God scout scope, but there we are.

[Cupid]

I would go with the Yugo, I kind of like the scout scope look, and I have both my T53 and an SKS using that type of scoping. I do have a red dot to swap out with my LER scope...but I haven't really tried it.

I also think it looks more at home with how it is mounted on the Yugo with all the grenade stuff up front anyway. More balanced appearing?
The regular Type 56 would look better to me without the red dot at all.

Aesthetics then.

[Bubbazinetti]

What difference does it make on how it looks?You're the one shooting it.Use what's best for you.Purists will never agree with you on asthetics.

[Cupid]

What difference does it make on how it looks?You're the one shooting it.Use what's best for you.Purists will never agree with you on asthetics.

I will agree with anyone who says an SKS looks better without a red dot. It's my opinion that they look terrible no matter where you stick them.

I'm just trying to understand the reasoning behind the widespread hate of the red dot behind the front sight despite the obvious advantages.

[Greatguns]

Okay Mick, to be serious, cause I was just joking around with you.

The reason, traditionally, optics have always been back on the receiver, or mounted on a free floating Hand guard is to keep it away from barrel whip which can destroy said optics. The reason it works somewhat for you on the SKS platform is because the SKS barrel is set in a tension style mount as opposed to the free float that many/most long guns are set in. Tension mounted barrels display less barrel whip so therefore optics mounted forward like yours can survive for a time.
Therefore, based on that, I would never mount an optic of any kind forward like that on any long gun.

Secondary reason why is I think it just plain looks stupid.

[Cupid]

Double post

[Cupid]

 Tension mounted barrels display less barrel whip so therefore optics mounted forward like yours can survive for a time.

How long is " a time " ?

Secondary reason why is I think it just plain looks stupid.

If it looks stupid but works it's not stupid 

[Greatguns]

I will agree with anyone who says an SKS looks better without a red dot. It's my opinion that they look terrible no matter where you stick them.

I'm just trying to understand the reasoning behind the widespread hate of the red dot behind the front sight despite the obvious advantages.

Okay, following up on this post.
First; you by your own admission are saying that, as concerns aesthetics, that red dots look terrible on an SKS. Therefore we are all apparently agreed on that point.
Second; You, on your other post about this topic, stated that due to not having any magnification it didn't matter where the red dot was mounted. With that being the case then there is really no "obvious advantages" to it being mounted way up front at the FSB.
Causing the rifle to be more front heavy is not an advantage.
If you are nearsighted it may be too far away to see the dot clearly.
And, as mentioned, out on the barrel like that is harder on the optic and, even buying a cheap one, if you have to keep replacing it then it is biting into your wallet.
That makes being farsighted the only advantage I can think of.

All that makes mounting a red dot out at the end of the barrel very minutely advantageous, and that only for those who require that advantage. To whit, if it works for you then great, but don't be so arrogant to think that everyone else has to love it just because you do.

[Cupid]

Okay, following up on this post.
First; you by your own admission are saying that, as concerns aesthetics, that red dots look terrible on an SKS. Therefore we are all apparently agreed on that point.
Second; You, on your other post about this topic, stated that due to not having any magnification it didn't matter where the red dot was mounted. With that being the case then there is really no "obvious advantages" to it being mounted way up front at the FSB.

The obvious advantages are that nothing on the rifle is hindered in any way, the iron sights can still be used. + you have the option of using the red dot.

Causing the rifle to be more front heavy is not an advantage.

3.7 oz is unnoticeable.

If you are nearsighted it may be too far away to see the dot clearly.

If you can not see the dot clearly you have the option of increasing the intensity.    That option in not a possibility with the iron sight which is even further away.

And, as mentioned, out on the barrel like that is harder on the optic and, even buying a cheap one, if you have to keep replacing it then it is biting into your wallet.
That makes being farsighted the only advantage I can think of.

That red dot is the cheapest available, it cost $27 including shipping,  over 1000 rounds later  and it's still working perfectly. When it eventually stops working ( as they all do )  I will just mount the spare one I bought when I found they were good value.

All that makes mounting a red dot out at the end of the barrel very minutely advantageous, and that only for those who require that advantage. To whit, if it works for you then great, but don't be so arrogant to think that everyone else has to love it just because you do.

I'm hardly being arrogant, I'm being helpful to the uneducated.  

I already know well that everyone else does not love it, but I have never met anyone else who has tried it so it's not really surprising.

[carls sks]

i prefer my sks's all original (just a personal preference).

Which looks best and why ? the Yugo because the red/dot just looks weird located there.

[Bob_The_Student]

Just curious Cupid are you selling or did you design the mount or have any interest in that mount? I'm asking because since you joined you been really keen on talking about that setup. If so,  I don't care and it would make more sense otherwise I don't understand why you keep asking why people like or don't like it. Multiple people have stated their opinion on it so...

My personal thought is if you're happy with your setups that is the ONLY thing that should matter.

[Cupid]

i prefer my sks's all original (just a personal preference).

Which looks best and why ? the Yugo because the red/dot just looks weird located there.

I guess unconventional does look weird. lol