Question about HK MR223

[Leibermuster]

I know from personal experience that the front sight doesn't rest on the barrel.
Here's a HK416 photo from heckler-koch.com but the barrel/flipped down sight relationship is the same on the MR223. There is a small gap.

I know that, i own the rifle, i just don't really like the front sight or rear that much.

 

[scottm]

I know that, i own the rifle, i just don't really like the front sight or rear that much.

I like and own the HK rear diopter sight and folding front sight but to each their own. Here they are on my MR223 with the old V2 grip. The V3 grip is much better in my opinion but that's another topic:

A fairly recent option is the Troy BattleSight Set Micro ( http://store.troyind.com/Micro_BattleSights_p/ssig-iar-smbt-00.htm ) which is lower than their standard M4 sights to work with the higher top rail of the HK416 etc.

On a HK416:

They are considerably cheaper than the HK sights. They do still have the HK style post and ring on the front sight. If that's what bothers you, these won't work either.

 

[blaxsun]

But the LMT is in both of those and the 416/223 are not...?

Yes, because the prohibited list pre-dates the HK416/MR223. The AR lower is the part that's restricted, so for an HK416 (which uses a standard AR lower) it would always be restricted - regardless of barrel length. One could make the argument that the HK MR223 isn't an AR variant because you can't use the MR223 upper with an AR lower or the MR223 lower with an AR upper (for all intents and purposes, it's "AR-like") - so I'm not confident you'd prevail, though.