Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 8/19/2004 4:50:57 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/19/2004 4:51:11 PM EST by easy610]
Don't see as many dealers listing them anymore on EE.

Considering one for my mid-length RRA...
Link Posted: 8/19/2004 4:55:37 PM EST
More like obsolescent and too expensive. There are cheaper, lighter, alternatives out there of high quality.

JMHO.



Lonny
Link Posted: 8/19/2004 5:00:59 PM EST
Hmmm. Well what would be a good suggestion for the mid-length AR?
Link Posted: 8/19/2004 5:12:28 PM EST
Link Posted: 8/19/2004 5:46:23 PM EST

Have A.R.M.S. fore ends gone "out of vogue"?


The SIR system isn't the newest-on-the-block, so on this discussion board it's "out of vogue".

I guarantee you that there are plenty of SIR owners out there that get a kick out of these threads, and aren't getting rid of their SIR's anytime soon.

I personally don't have the money to buy every new product that comes out, and my SIR's are still working just fine for me, despite what is said here on AR15.com.


Originally Posted By Troy:
While the SIR systems are still excellent solutions in some situations, they have a few disadvantages (weight, bulk, and cost, for example). With more people choosing a railed forend at the start of their rifle build, instead of retrofitting an existing rifle, many of the other offerings make more sense to a lot of folks.

-Troy



Yes, I agree that SIR systems ARE still excellent solutions.


Chris
Link Posted: 8/19/2004 6:34:15 PM EST
Link Posted: 8/19/2004 6:38:27 PM EST
i like my sir but once you try something like the RAS. DD. Troy. they are just so much better imho
Link Posted: 8/19/2004 6:48:03 PM EST

Originally Posted By easy610:
Hmmm. Well what would be a good suggestion for the mid-length AR?




Daniel Defense 9.0 is an option:






Semper Fi
Jeff
Link Posted: 8/19/2004 7:03:13 PM EST
I disagree that Troy, KAC or DD are necessarily better systems than SIR. They are jsut different solutions to the problem.

I like the fact that SIR attaches to the reciever by the top rail as well as the yoke, which more widely distributes the load within the system. And there is no doubt in my mind the SIR has better heat dissipation. The fact that it can be installed,serviced and maintained by the user with a coin, a screw driver and a small tube of loctite is a big advantage. THe end result is 4-6oz extra weight depending on the product it is compared to.


Instead of worrying how much a product is being talked about, read the spec and make your own assessment.
Link Posted: 8/19/2004 7:25:38 PM EST
The biggest downside to the SIR, IMHO, is the fact that it raises your upper receiver rail.
Link Posted: 8/19/2004 7:30:43 PM EST
Link Posted: 8/19/2004 7:43:10 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/19/2004 7:46:02 PM EST by Sharpshot]

Originally Posted By greentips:
II like the fact that SIR attaches to the reciever by the top rail as well as the yoke, which more widely distributes the load within the system. And there is no doubt in my mind the SIR has better heat dissipation. The fact that it can be installed,serviced and maintained by the user with a coin, a screw driver and a small tube of loctite is a big advantage. THe end result is 4-6oz extra weight depending on the product it is compared to.



very good points.


Originally Posted By fizassist:
The biggest downside to the SIR, IMHO, is the fact that it raises your upper receiver rail.



that is not always a "downside" but can be a good thing, like in my case. I can mount my Aimpoint mount directly on top the SIR without the need for an extra riser/mount that you would need if you were mounting directly on the flattop.


edited for spelling
Link Posted: 8/19/2004 7:56:31 PM EST
Having had both, i prefer the DD FF to the SIR, by a wide margin. KISS, noo screws or anything on the DD>
Link Posted: 8/19/2004 10:13:08 PM EST

Originally Posted By Sharpshot:

Originally Posted By fizassist:
The biggest downside to the SIR, IMHO, is the fact that it raises your upper receiver rail.



that is not always a "downside" but can be a good thing, like in my case. I can mount my Aimpoint mount directly on top the SIR without the need for an extra riser/mount that you would need if you were mounting directly on the flattop.


edited for spelling



Same with me, the raised receiver rail is a non-issue.

My permanently attached muzzle brakes are another reason the SIR system works so well for me.


Chris
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 3:51:30 AM EST

Originally Posted By Sharpshot:

Originally Posted By fizassist:
The biggest downside to the SIR, IMHO, is the fact that it raises your upper receiver rail.



that is not always a "downside" but can be a good thing, like in my case. I can mount my Aimpoint mount directly on top the SIR without the need for an extra riser/mount that you would need if you were mounting directly on the flattop.



My argument is that it reduces flexibility. You can always add a spacer to a flattop; you can't remove a spacer from the SIR. I've owned one, and it's a nice handguard; it's just not as flexible as I would like for a carbine.
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 4:03:59 AM EST
Weight, bulk, raised upper receiver rail and price will all eventually put the SIR system in the Dinosaur category.
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 4:11:43 AM EST
I would get another SIR if I found a good deal on one but with the new Troys and LaRue HG on the market it had better be one hell of a good deal!
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 6:00:06 AM EST

Originally Posted By AKM:
Weight, bulk, raised upper receiver rail and price will all eventually put the SIR system in the Dinosaur category.



I retain the SIR becasue of the raised rail . It works a bit better with goggles and make shooting with ACOG faster. And the KAC RAS FF is actually wider than the slim line SIR.
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 6:05:09 AM EST

Originally Posted By fizassist:

Originally Posted By Sharpshot:

Originally Posted By fizassist:
The biggest downside to the SIR, IMHO, is the fact that it raises your upper receiver rail.



that is not always a "downside" but can be a good thing, like in my case. I can mount my Aimpoint mount directly on top the SIR without the need for an extra riser/mount that you would need if you were mounting directly on the flattop.



My argument is that it reduces flexibility. You can always add a spacer to a flattop; you can't remove a spacer from the SIR. I've owned one, and it's a nice handguard; it's just not as flexible as I would like for a carbine.



If I ever need to use a gas mask on a regular basis, I will put a spacer on top of the SIR to give me more clearance. Awhile ago I was acutally thinking of buiding an AR optiimized for chemical environment.....
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 6:37:15 AM EST
[Last Edit: 8/20/2004 6:38:38 AM EST by Stainless]

Originally Posted By easy610:
Don't see as many dealers listing them anymore on EE.

Considering one for my mid-length RRA...




Like, ohhh my god, like, those things are like SOOOO last year. I mean REAHLLLYY, like where have you been, cause I was like totally talking to Sha-nae-nae, and she was all like, "What are you buying?" And I was all like "SOOOO, NOT a sir." I mean, like, think of your image, like really, like what would people say if they saw you with one. I mean, like, I would just die. fer shure.

S

Link Posted: 8/20/2004 6:42:34 AM EST
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 7:23:32 AM EST
Totally rad reply there Stainless.
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 7:34:49 AM EST

Originally Posted By Stainless:

Originally Posted By easy610:
Don't see as many dealers listing them anymore on EE.

Considering one for my mid-length RRA...




Like, ohhh my god, like, those things are like SOOOO last year. I mean REAHLLLYY, like where have you been, cause I was like totally talking to Sha-nae-nae, and she was all like, "What are you buying?" And I was all like "SOOOO, NOT a sir." I mean, like, think of your image, like really, like what would people say if they saw you with one. I mean, like, I would just die. fer shure.

S




At the risk of being flamed I think this quote sort of sums up this board a little Last year the SIR was the shit as was all ARMS gear and this year ARMS seems to be basically shit.

That was funny as hell though
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 10:22:43 AM EST
Alot of good opinions and some good humor as well! Where else can you have this much fun talking about rifles!! Yee Haw!

Thanks to all.

Link Posted: 8/20/2004 10:35:21 AM EST
I didn't like it when it came out, I didn't like the ones I handled/shot, and I don't like it now.

How's that for trendy? Hell, up until a month or so ago I still had an original RIS that I'd had for years that I bought used off of.... I dunno, somebody here.

I'm on the brink of doing a post 9/14 celebratory M4, but it most certainly won't have a SIR. Either a Daniel Defense, M4 RAS, or a new Larue. I really like the slimness of the DD though, even if I don't like the price.
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 10:43:52 AM EST
[Last Edit: 8/20/2004 10:45:11 AM EST by gus]
I'm keeping my old M4 RAS. I don't really need a FF rail since I won't be mounting optics, tightening up real tight with a sling, or shooting in matches with my M4gery. I doubt it will ever get fired at ranges much more than 100 yards, and for a vertical grip and flashlight mount, it works perfectly. In fact, I recently bought another one (cheap too!) for my M16.

I keep clothes longer than most folks too...
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 10:56:40 AM EST

Originally Posted By norman74:
I didn't like it when it came out, I didn't like the ones I handled/shot, and I don't like it now.

How's that for trendy? Hell, up until a month or so ago I still had an original RIS that I'd had for years that I bought used off of.... I dunno, somebody here.

I'm on the brink of doing a post 9/14 celebratory M4, but it most certainly won't have a SIR. Either a Daniel Defense, M4 RAS, or a new Larue. I really like the slimness of the DD though, even if I don't like the price.



Really? Please tell us how you REALLY feel! lol.

Guess thats why there are so many variants of all kinds of rifles and equipment. Everyone has their opinions/likes/dis-likes!

Cheers!
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 11:08:57 AM EST

Originally Posted By fizassist:

Originally Posted By Sharpshot:

Originally Posted By fizassist:
The biggest downside to the SIR, IMHO, is the fact that it raises your upper receiver rail.



that is not always a "downside" but can be a good thing, like in my case. I can mount my Aimpoint mount directly on top the SIR without the need for an extra riser/mount that you would need if you were mounting directly on the flattop.



My argument is that it reduces flexibility. You can always add a spacer to a flattop; you can't remove a spacer from the SIR. I've owned one, and it's a nice handguard; it's just not as flexible as I would like for a carbine.



While not owning (or handling ) a SIR, I have a question about this...

If you own a SIR and mount a optical sight to it that does not require a spacer, why would you want to add/remove a spacer if you do not need it?

Does the ACOG/EoTech need a spacer on a SIR?

I have the full spacer on my flattop. If I never change the optic (Aimpoint) why would I remove it? I can see replacing the whole mount if I get a different style optic.

Link Posted: 8/20/2004 12:09:23 PM EST

Originally Posted By CB1:

Originally Posted By fizassist:
My argument is that it reduces flexibility. You can always add a spacer to a flattop; you can't remove a spacer from the SIR. I've owned one, and it's a nice handguard; it's just not as flexible as I would like for a carbine.



While not owning (or handling ) a SIR, I have a question about this...

If you own a SIR and mount a optical sight to it that does not require a spacer, why would you want to add/remove a spacer if you do not need it?

Does the ACOG/EoTech need a spacer on a SIR?

I have the full spacer on my flattop. If I never change the optic (Aimpoint) why would I remove it? I can see replacing the whole mount if I get a different style optic.



Some optics do not require (or permit) a spacer to be present. An EoTech would be one example. If you sit it on an ARMS rail, you can't see the irons, period. The same is true for many cantilever aimpoint mounts. I think an ACOG on an ARMS rail would be too high for my taste, too.
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 12:42:35 PM EST

Originally Posted By fizassist:
Some optics do not require (or permit) a spacer to be present. An EoTech would be one example. If you sit it on an ARMS rail, you can't see the irons, period.



Not neccessarily. That's why ARMS makes #50 SIR. It's EOTech-friendly and allows perfect co-witness.
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 12:43:07 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/20/2004 12:44:48 PM EST by easy610]



Some optics do not require (or permit) a spacer to be present. An EoTech would be one example. If you sit it on an ARMS rail, you can't see the irons, period. The same is true for many cantilever aimpoint mounts. I think an ACOG on an ARMS rail would be too high for my taste, too.



Well...actually the bi-level fixes this problem/concern. EoTech and bi-level work great with #40.

Cheers!


****Oops! SharpShooter stated this already!****
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 1:34:31 PM EST

Originally Posted By JBritt:

Originally Posted By Stainless:

Originally Posted By easy610:
Don't see as many dealers listing them anymore on EE.

Considering one for my mid-length RRA...




Like, ohhh my god, like, those things are like SOOOO last year. I mean REAHLLLYY, like where have you been, cause I was like totally talking to Sha-nae-nae, and she was all like, "What are you buying?" And I was all like "SOOOO, NOT a sir." I mean, like, think of your image, like really, like what would people say if they saw you with one. I mean, like, I would just die. fer shure.

S




At the risk of being flamed I think this quote sort of sums up this board a little Last year the SIR was the shit as was all ARMS gear and this year ARMS seems to be basically shit.

That was funny as hell though



[eric cartman on Springer] WHAT-EVAHH, WHAT-EVAHH, I do what I waunt, I do what I waunt![/eric cartman on springer]

You's gots to be all-up-ins da LaRue shiznit. Das how you be rollin' wit da big dawgs. U try and pull some-tin in ma hood wit shit what ain't no LaRue?... SHEEEEIIIT, I's be pulling my gat on yo' ass, beouch! We be bringing it STROUNG up in Hereee. You's best respect dat... foo.

S
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 1:43:17 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/20/2004 1:43:45 PM EST by Lon_Moer]

Originally Posted By AKM:
Weight, bulk, raised upper receiver rail and price will all eventually put the SIR system in the Dinosaur category.


Where's 3rdtrk Jack ??
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 1:50:25 PM EST
I'd like to see ARMS, or maybe somebody like Rich at Magpul, come out with some new lower half handguards that are designed with different contours for different uses.


If anyone has seen the Badger Ordinance freefloat tube you are familiar with it's squared off design which is likely very friendly for shooting from sandbags or from a rest such as a shooting/back pack. What I'd like to see for the ARMS SIR is a similar shape put into the lower handguard half so that if that is the majority of shooting you expect to do then all you have to do is remove the lower section and install the squared off piece.

Also would be nice to have a nice rounded off lower handguard piece that can install to give a more comfortable hold for offhand shooting. Hell, a person could even include a Steyr or HK91 style folding bipod into a lower handguard unit if they were clever enough, heavy? Sure, but not much more so than a seperate bipod.


All part of the modular design that was what I first invisioned for the SIR when I laid eyes on it.


I also like the MONDO long top rail for mounting flexibility, similar is offered by other multi rail freefloat tubes but I personally like the way the ARMS mounts along the receiver rather than the barrel extension.


I just ordered off the behemoth for my 20inch AR10 A4, can't wait to get it installed. Also dying to see if the accuracy improves or atleast stays nice and consistent with less dispersion in group size as the barrel heats up. When cold it's a solid MOA rifle as is now but hopefully it will become a rock solid MOA performer whether hot or cold once the SIR is installed. Also considering some nice optic combinations for the AR10, dependant on if the AW ban sunsets permitting me to finally put a vortex flash suppressor on the rifle allowing me to fully exploit the combination of optics I am considering.
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 2:05:16 PM EST
I had 46 SIR but replaced with single shielded M4 handguards;

1.SIR elavates the top rail (non-issue for the Aimpoint users like me though, but it does add weight)
2.Relatively heavy compared to other handguards

However I liked it though because it had smooth profile with 40 (same company, duh ) and because I didnt need to put rail covers. But this in the end bothered me because adding the selective rail on the handguard meant accessories will be farther apart from the bore axis. I have small hands and sometimes it was harder to reach around.

If money was no object I'd like M4/M5 ras on my AR15s because I dont' think free floating is that necessary on my standard rifles and they still maintain the stock look. Also they come off easily for maintenance, cleaning, etc.
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 3:13:35 PM EST

Originally Posted By easy610:



Some optics do not require (or permit) a spacer to be present. An EoTech would be one example. If you sit it on an ARMS rail, you can't see the irons, period. The same is true for many cantilever aimpoint mounts. I think an ACOG on an ARMS rail would be too high for my taste, too.



Well...actually the bi-level fixes this problem/concern. EoTech and bi-level work great with #40.

Cheers!

****Oops! SharpShooter stated this already!****



It still doesn't address the ACOG (or a magnified optic with a large objective), which sits at the perfect height (for me) in the TA50 mount. You can't forward-mount an ACOG. The SIR has the inherent limitation that there's a non-removable hunk of metal sitting on the upper receiver that people might not want to use. It's extra mass, and it takes up space. If you like it, that's great. It's a cute idea. I'm saying there are many more flexible choices out there.
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 3:23:00 PM EST
Yes they are out of vogue. They are too heavy, too bulkly and too expensive. There is a lot of better options.
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 3:26:01 PM EST
I have my fourth SIR sytem on its way as we type it is for my new AR10A4C . Yes I bought it from the EE. Some like it, some dont, like everything else on this planet.
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 3:26:48 PM EST
i am not a huge fan of arms forends, never was, knights is another story
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 3:29:08 PM EST
i love mine! it gives the weapon that look that soccer moms dont want their kids seeing
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 4:00:14 PM EST
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 4:09:14 PM EST
Watch out, Hawkeye. Although you so very eloquently stated what I was unable to, your defense of anything deemed inferior to the beloved latest fad gear will get people saying that you just have gear envy or that you don't have the money to afford the good stuff.



I just had to bow out of another thread and there I vowed to stay out of the A.R.M.S. vs LaRue debate: for those that keep track of these things, I'm not defending one or the other here. I'm just stating that taking a position against the new hotness here lately is akin to admitting you're a communist working for Feinstein.
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 4:09:59 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/20/2004 4:12:22 PM EST by sgtstinger]



Originally Posted By uglygun:
I'd like to see ARMS, or maybe somebody like Rich at Magpul, come out with some new lower half handguards that are designed with different contours for different uses.





Link Posted: 8/20/2004 4:13:53 PM EST
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 4:18:45 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/20/2004 4:25:52 PM EST by uglygun]

Originally Posted By sgtstinger:



Originally Posted By uglygun:
I'd like to see ARMS, or maybe somebody like Rich at Magpul, come out with some new lower half handguards that are designed with different contours for different uses.









What, you like that concept?

That's truely the first thing I thought of the very first time I saw the handguard system. Probably giving away a decent idea here that could make some decent money but I don't exactly want to get into injection molding or R&D on such a thing.


But the idea has merit. Making a set of useable interchangable lower halves could probably managed by a person talented with fiberglass and bedding princples.
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 4:37:45 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/20/2004 4:52:45 PM EST by sgtstinger]

Originally Posted By uglygun:

Originally Posted By sgtstinger:



Originally Posted By uglygun:
I'd like to see ARMS, or maybe somebody like Rich at Magpul, come out with some new lower half handguards that are designed with different contours for different uses.









What, you like that concept?

That's truely the first thing I thought of the very first time I saw the handguard system. Probably giving away a decent idea here that could make some decent money but I don't exactly want to get into injection molding or R&D on such a thing.


But the idea has merit. Making a set of useable interchangable lower halves could probably managed by a person talented with fiberglass and bedding princples.




Yes, I think the concept has a great deal of merit.

Rich @ Magpul already has prototypes of different mission-oriented interchangeable tailpieces for the M93 series Mod-Stocks. I've seen pictures of them. Why not do the same thing for front-ends? Just another step to keep making the AR system more modular and adaptable to changing missions.
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 5:18:58 PM EST

Originally Posted By Hawkeye:
I see lots of folks who once were just in LOVE with SIR's, who now dont like them. If you changed your mind, then fine. Just say you found something you like better, and more accurately suits your needs. But let not go slamming something as crap (as I have seen done around here at times) just because its not the latest and greatest wabe that everyone wants.



For every guy that trashed the gear because he wants what's "in vogue", there is some guy that won't change because he's stubborn and refuses to admit that there is now something better available.

As I said elsewhere, I never liked the SIR from day one. I had a RIS until recently, and now I think I may just go with a RAS. I'm putting together a post 9/14 gun, and the basic rail system like the DD or the new Larue are going to serve my purposes quite well. In actuality, the YHM 2-piece would probably work just fine.
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 5:52:19 PM EST

Originally Posted By Hawkeye:
I was just discussing this very subject on the phone with someone the other night. I remember 2 years ago, SIR's could not be had, due to the demand. I can look back and see the tide flow with new systems. First, the rave was SIRS's and RAS II's. Then DD's took of last year. Now, the demand is raging for Troy and Larue rails.
Now, I have no problem with someone finding something they like better and making a change. But, be honest about it. I see lots of folks who once were just in LOVE with SIR's, who now dont like them. If you changed your mind, then fine. Just say you found something you like better, and more accurately suits your needs. But let not go slamming something as crap (as I have seen done around here at times) just because its not the latest and greatest wabe that everyone wants. I waited a LONG time to get a railed forearm. I was still using standard handguards when probably 85% of the folks on here had a rail system. I've tried lots of them. For me, the SIR's still fit my needs better than anything else currently on the market.
Keep in mind, as far as I am concerned, You are prettym uch guaranteed to get a quality piece of equipment, from Knights, Daniel Defense, Troy, Arms, or Larue. They are all good companies.




Also remember that the KAC rail systems were even harder to obtain during this same time frame (I for one believe that this is what led to the SIR systems becoming so popular at this time)!

I for one was never (and to this day are even less) impressed with the SIR system overall! Why on earth would you want to add that much extra weight and Bulk to your AR?

To me the strength of the AR/M series has always been its handability (lightweight) and accuracy.

Why compromise that when lighter/less bulky systems maintaining standard upper rail heights are available at much lower costs?

BTW, for those who say that the SIR system is not a bulky system because it only utilizes the rails "YOU" may chose to install WITH NO PANELS, I ask you this......If the SIR's concept is modularity (like every other rail system available), why do you have to mount rails in the first place???
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 7:02:52 PM EST
The slim line bi-level #50 is only about 4.5oz more than the RAS. THat's less than 1/2lb.
That's the price you have to pay if you want easy installation while maintaing a strong lockup system. Any other systems , other than Troy, requires the removal of the FSB. Removal of the FSB voids the factory warranty of a rifle and it requires more tools. If an SIR is damaged and needs to be reaplace, at least for the C, it just has to be removed and a new one can be installed. Worst, put the old RAS or plastic handguard. Hell,I can do it in the restroom if I need to. All is done with a screw drive (multi-tool), a coin and locktite. No need to bring out the hammer, steel punch, gas tube wrench....... only if you use other FF rail system.

I do agree that the SIR add weight to the AR but so do all rail systems. It is just another decision in life, you get something while trading off some other things. Whatever that is higher up on the priority list.




Originally Posted By AKM:

Also remember that the KAC rail systems were even harder to obtain during this same time frame (I for one believe that this is what led to the SIR systems becoming so popular at this time)!

I for one was never (and to this day are even less) impressed with the SIR system overall! Why on earth would you want to add that much extra weight and Bulk to your AR?

To me the strength of the AR/M series has always been its handability (lightweight) and accuracy.

Why compromise that when lighter/less bulky systems maintaining standard upper rail heights are available at much lower costs?

BTW, for those who say that the SIR system is not a bulky system because it only utilizes the rails "YOU" may chose to install WITH NO PANELS, I ask you this......If the SIR's concept is modularity (like every other rail system available), why do you have to mount rails in the first place???

Link Posted: 8/20/2004 9:37:54 PM EST
Nothing wrong here (but really wants to pose with Mcgrubb's new LaRue M4 build)



Link Posted: 8/20/2004 9:51:35 PM EST
Get both.

Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top