To those of you whom have built on side charging uppers, I see some are reciprocating vs non, what are some pros and cons. I see there are several different designs, (crosshill technologies, gibbz, spartan,mega).

Looks like a rather cool idea, just looking to someone who may have some experience to share.

thanks

Reciprocating can "jump up and bite you" especially if you are the typical AR user who isnt accustomed to having an exterior moving part.


non-reciprocating is slightly more complex to design and build.



Personally, I wont own an AR with a reciprocating CH.  
(one of the many reasons I bought an ACR over a SCAR)

Most quality autoloading firearms use a non-reciprocating handle. An exception that comes to mind is the Uzi and MAC which have the charging handles on top and out of the way for the most part. Aftermarket side chargers for these are non-reciprocating.
A Benelli Super 90 has a reciprocating handle as well now I think about it.

I'd go non-reciprocating as first choice.

I have an Xproducts SCU (side charging upper) for my 9mm AR pistol

it is non reciprocating....thats what i advise going with. idk any fundamental performance differences besides that reciprocating is just a hazard you have to be mindful of and ive met more than a few who got bit hard when they forgot that

doesnt seem worth it....YMMV

like the SCAR?

Here's my $0.02.  TLDR crowd just skip to the bottom.

Non-reciprocating

Pros

handle doesn't move

Don't have to worry about getting "bit" (more on this at the bottom)

Removing bolt from rifle requires no additional steps

Usually the non-recips cover the cutout, so gas is somewhat more contained

Can use standard AR15 BCG (usually)


Cons

Cost to make

More complex

Proprietary CH/port cover design (I.E. don't break it)




Reciprocating


Pros

Simple and cheap

CH can act as forward assist (though I'd just rack and get a fresh round if the first failed to chamber)


Cons

You can get "bit" by it moving or it can poke you in the chest

likely leaves an open hole in the side of the receiver where dirt/dust and gas can get in/escape

Removing the bolt requires you to remove the CH from the bolt first, as such it's one more thing to lose and without it your rifle is useless

Uses modified BCG (basically drilled and tapped for the CH to thread into)



As far as getting "bit" is concerned, frankly on an AR it's a non-issue.  Every side reciprocating AR upper I've seen has the handle on the upper receiver itself.  IDK about you guys but I don't have my off hand anywhere near that when shooting so there's no chance of getting "bit".  If it were up on the hand guard or forwards of the upper receiver you'd have a valid argument (been bit by a SCAR-H once, it's not fun).  


As far as it "poking" you in the chest, I'm not in the habit of forcibly slamming the side of my rifle into my body repeatedly.  Even if you  fall on it it's probably gonna hit a squishy part first, so again it's a non-issue.  I've not got the largest chesticles out there, but I know the SCAR-H CH doesn't even touch my sternum.  An AK's CH however is quite pokey and not fun to have rammed into your sternum.  




TLDR crowd

So in short to re-cap....getting "bit" with a reciprocating CH that's on an AR upper receiver isn't gonna happen unless you deliberately put your hand by the barrel nut area (so if you magwell grip it might happen...but you should stop mag well gripping anyways.).  There are other disadvantages to a reciprocating CH that are IMHO a bigger reason to go with a non-reciprocating if your funds allow for it.  

I have 2 side charge uppers and have not had 1 problem.

I went ahead and ordered a spartan non-reciprocating upper, it appears to be identical to the gibbz. Probably going to build it into a 8.5" .300 blackout pistol upper while I wait for my sbr stamp.

gibbz arms - www.gibbzarms.com/

non-reciprocating and looks good to boot.

planning to build on one of these in the near future.

Yes and HK, plus others.

If price is a concern, the reciprocating will be less expensive. It's up to what you really can live with.

If you chose a reciprocating handle, it should be located on the RHS to be similar to the majority of reciprocating auto loaders. M1A1, AK47 types, Ruger 10/22....now that I really think about it, there are quite a few out there....
That's where the casing ejects so you won't be shooting with it up against a barricade and when your RH is on the trigger it will not be in a position to interfere with the handle. It might not be a bad option now I think about it.  

Non-reciprocating would be best served on the LHS so your off hand can operate the action, assuming your right handed.

I run a young side charger on my spr and it's great for my target gun, but I would never have one on a rifle that would see abuse/trust my life with

If Kalishnikov taught us anything, it's that side-chargers are unreliable and can't handle abuse...

My billet, boutique, screw on charging handle rifle is no ak.  It is a very pretty tack driver.

what's wrong with you people that can't understand that the AK platform was designed to be a side charger from the ground up..

the AR platform was never intended to be a side charger.

sure, you can make an AR into a side charger, yes, if you do everything right, it will work in most applications
it will NOT ever be as reliable as the original stoner design/intent (given the same situation/environment).

now, why dont we get back to the topic, which is discussing the PROs and CONs of an AR redesigned to be a side charger and help the OP make up his mind..

Hickok45's reveiw. This sold me on building the upper
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8aUOdBX3k9U

I like my side charger far more than the standard AR. But I prefer electronic ignition over points

I was leaning very hard towards picking up an ASA or Gibbs non-reciprocating upper for my precision AR.

Then, I got a Bobro QD scope mount.


There's just not enough room to get your fingers moving around in there with those big QD levers.


C'est la vie!