I mainly do use the .22 unit now; probably 40- or 50-to-1 in favor of the .22LR, as far as number of rounds fired thru the gun.
Even with the .22 unit, I still almost always shoot it with the suppressor on, to keep the "feel" and handling of the gun constant.
The .22 without the suppressor would more closely simulate the blast of the .223 with suppressor, but at the cost of changing the gun's handling characteristics. IMO, keeping the "feel" of the gun constant is higher priority than keeping the "sound" constant. YMMV.
Since I put the small Leupold 1-4X scope on it, I rarely use the iron sights anymore. They're still use-able, since the scope's on a see-thru ARMS mount, but for longer shooting, the scope's more precise (cranked to 4X), and close-up, the scope's actually quicker to pick up than the irons (at 1X, where it's regularly set). The see-thru mount is really a "just in case" thing; to allow use of the irons if the scope should become damaged.
Really like that little scope; and no battery issues to worry about anymore.
Even with the .22 unit, I still almost always shoot it with the suppressor on, to keep the "feel" and handling of the gun constant.
The .22 without the suppressor would more closely simulate the blast of the .223 with suppressor, but at the cost of changing the gun's handling characteristics. IMO, keeping the "feel" of the gun constant is higher priority than keeping the "sound" constant. YMMV.
Since I put the small Leupold 1-4X scope on it, I rarely use the iron sights anymore. They're still use-able, since the scope's on a see-thru ARMS mount, but for longer shooting, the scope's more precise (cranked to 4X), and close-up, the scope's actually quicker to pick up than the irons (at 1X, where it's regularly set). The see-thru mount is really a "just in case" thing; to allow use of the irons if the scope should become damaged.
Really like that little scope; and no battery issues to worry about anymore.