Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 9/4/2005 8:08:29 PM EDT
I have never heard if there was a reason. Does anybody know?
Link Posted: 9/4/2005 8:12:08 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/4/2005 8:12:55 PM EDT
First yet me say I like the look of the triangle guards and the feel of them. But they wasn't super tough.hey also was two seporate parts #. There is a upper and lower. You broke a upper and you had to replace it with a Upper. The lower wouldn't work. It was differant. But the A2 with the round style used the same piece for the upper and lower and was made seemily stronger. That should be pretty close for ya. WarDawg
Link Posted: 9/4/2005 8:14:47 PM EDT
Those were made by Mattel, right?
Link Posted: 9/4/2005 8:23:35 PM EDT

Originally Posted By WarDawg:
First yet me say I like the look of the triangle guards and the feel of them. But they wasn't super tough.hey also was two seporate parts #. There is a upper and lower. You broke a upper and you had to replace it with a Upper. The lower wouldn't work. It was differant. But the A2 with the round style used the same piece for the upper and lower and was made seemily stronger. That should be pretty close for ya. WarDawg



the -A1 I was issued with triangular gaurds didn't have an upper and lower. It was left and right though......
Link Posted: 9/4/2005 8:54:32 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/4/2005 9:15:46 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/4/2005 9:18:47 PM EDT by -Duke-Nukem-]
Yeah, on the A1 style its not an upper and lower, its a left and a right. And they ARE more fragile, plus the little "teeth" can pinch your hand both on top and bottom.

Still look cool though. Gotta add a gratuitous pic or two of my A1 clone...



With the movie that inspired me to build one.


My wife loves it.


www.imagestation.com/video/view.html?id=4097033716&dl=1
And why not a video of it in action? WOLVERINES!!!!! (You have to save to your HD before playing it)
Link Posted: 9/4/2005 10:04:45 PM EDT
I don't know about the strength of A1 handguards, but I've found that after unknowingly dropping an A2 HG on the ground and stepping on it with my 190lbs, they are strong enough to hold the rifle with.

I don't think the A1 HGs I've seen could do the same thing.

WIZZO
Link Posted: 9/4/2005 10:26:07 PM EDT
I think after years of having the same old rifle, the military officials in charge of such things had to come up with something new. I love my triangular SP-1 cause you can use the sawtooth edge of the handguards for cutting firewood or trimming branches to clear your fields of fire.
Link Posted: 9/5/2005 5:26:48 AM EDT
One reason was logistics.

I have a January 1985 issue of Soldier of Fortune magazine with a pretty detailed write up on the Army's “new” M16A2. One reason stated for the newer style HG’s was logistics. Instead of having to stock a LH and RH HG, they simply stocked one half that would fit as either an upper or lower HG.
Link Posted: 9/5/2005 5:32:56 AM EDT
I am guessing here, but I think a little of it has to do with methods for using a tight sling, with a tight sling you slide your week side hand forward or back to adjust elevation. I think the angle in the A1 negated some the ability to do this.
Link Posted: 9/5/2005 6:47:12 AM EDT

Originally Posted By -Duke-Nukem-:
Yeah, on the A1 style its not an upper and lower, its a left and a right. And they ARE more fragile, plus the little "teeth" can pinch your hand both on top and bottom.

Still look cool though. Gotta add a gratuitous pic or two of my A1 clone...


img.photobucket.com/albums/v236/MolonLabe/A1clone.jpg
With the movie that inspired me to build one.

img.photobucket.com/albums/v236/MolonLabe/MorganRetro.jpg
My wife loves it.


www.imagestation.com/video/view.html?id=4097033716&dl=1
And why not a video of it in action? WOLVERINES!!!!! (You have to save to your HD before playing it)



Duke,fantastic looking rifle. Are those 2 differant rifles?
Link Posted: 9/5/2005 7:18:33 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/5/2005 7:19:16 AM EDT by Blanco_Diablo]

Originally Posted By -Duke-Nukem-:
Yeah, on the A1 style its not an upper and lower, its a left and a right. And they ARE more fragile, plus the little "teeth" can pinch your hand both on top and bottom.

Still look cool though. Gotta add a gratuitous pic or two of my A1 clone...


img.photobucket.com/albums/v236/MolonLabe/A1clone.jpg
With the movie that inspired me to build one.

img.photobucket.com/albums/v236/MolonLabe/MorganRetro.jpg
My wife loves it.


www.imagestation.com/video/view.html?id=4097033716&dl=1
And why not a video of it in action? WOLVERINES!!!!! (You have to save to your HD before playing it)


*twitch* GUL DERN YOU!! *twitch*

Now I gotta build an M16A1 clone...GRRR...Also, if you want your rifle to look like the one in We Were Soldiers, ya gotta get a 3 prong FH...
Personally, I think the A1 upper with the birdcage FH looks just wrong...even though it's correct for the M16A1, I still don't like the look

But like I said, that is AWESOME!

ETA: What kind of upper is that?
Link Posted: 9/5/2005 7:53:35 AM EDT
Link Posted: 9/5/2005 7:58:59 AM EDT
I will take your word on it, my days in service began well after the A2 was the standard A for the Marines. I know the loop sling was taught while the A1 was the standard for the Marines and the Marines didn't like the long range shooting ability of the rifle on the KD course, so as the proponent for the A2 they made allot of changes to make it more KD range friendly, hence my guess that the change in hand guard was influenced more by that than by logistic considerations.
Link Posted: 9/5/2005 8:21:24 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/5/2005 8:35:37 AM EDT by -Duke-Nukem-]
Big Bore, Blanco, those are all pics and vid of the same rifle. The only time its ever malfunctioned was caught on film in that vid, and that's because I didn't have my magazine seated all the way, so it wasn't the gun's fault at all. You can hear me grunt as I do the immediate action drill to fix the problem. It even feeds Wolf without complaining. The upper is one of those ex-Air Force issue M16A1 uppers that CDNN Investments is selling for $269.

store.yahoo.com/cdnn/ara1upasusgi.html
There ya go.

I got mine from CMMG and also grabbed a bolt and carrier from them. So, lets say, after shipping and everything you have $400 in the complete upper. A stripped lower (mines a DPMS lower) runs about $100, and to complete it will run you about another $100. I got the stock set off of a group buy that a buddy found for $30. Actually I had the stock set first and wound up building a rifle based on the stock, pistol grip, and forearm that I had lying around! I got a little discount from CMMG because I didn't need the forearm that came with the upper. All told I'd say I have a little less than $650 in the gun, and it shoots VERY straight! For a lightweight, govt. profile barrel these things are pretty accurate with 55 grain ammo. My wife loves it because its so light and points so easily.

Next thing I'm going to do is refinish it with Norrel's Moly Resin. They have a color that is supposed to approximate the old Colt blue-gray phosphate finishes of the 1960s. The lower will still say DPMS on ths side but who cares, it'll still be as close as I need to an M16A1!

EDIT: Here I am at the end of the run caught on film. The last target was a bonus target. The zombie terrorist hostage taker had to be shot in the head only. Alot of people hit the hostage in the shoulder because they forgot that at close range you have to aim a little high because of the distance between the iron sight and the bore. I was very chuffed that I remembered, and slotted the bad guy in his right eye twice.

Link Posted: 9/5/2005 7:37:16 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/5/2005 7:45:34 PM EDT by whatsthedotonmychst4]

Originally Posted By HeavyMetal:

Originally Posted By JustinOK34:
Those were made by Mattel, right?



I hope you are joking and not serious.

www.snopes.com is thataway-->>



Actually, Mattel DID make the hanguards and pretty much all the plastic parts for the M16-A1 (or atleast that is what we were told in my Vietnam History class).
Link Posted: 9/5/2005 7:42:52 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/5/2005 7:44:17 PM EDT by scottryan]

Originally Posted By whatsthedotonmychst4:


Actually, Mattel DID make the hanguards and pretty much all the plastic parts for the M16-A1.



You are so full of shit and you should have you account locked before you cause anyone else anymore stress.
Link Posted: 9/5/2005 7:47:17 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/5/2005 7:50:17 PM EDT by whatsthedotonmychst4]

Originally Posted By scottryan:

Originally Posted By whatsthedotonmychst4:


Actually, Mattel DID make the hanguards and pretty much all the plastic parts for the M16-A1.



You are so full of shit and you should have you account locked before you cause anyone else anymore stress.



Whatever man, that is one of the things i learned in my Vietnam History class by a guy that would know since he was a Cpt. in the Army at the time.

And how am I causing anyone stress? By simply stating what I learned in class? Whoopdy fuckin do if you dont agreee.

It is a possibillity that Mattel did make the furniture for the M16 back in the day. When dealing with the govt. contract goes to the lowest bidder . Colt didnt make all the .45's back in WWII...
Link Posted: 9/5/2005 7:56:11 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/5/2005 8:00:00 PM EDT by HeavyMetal]
Link Posted: 9/5/2005 7:57:39 PM EDT
tag for tomorrow
Link Posted: 9/5/2005 7:58:54 PM EDT

Originally Posted By HeavyMetal:

Originally Posted By whatsthedotonmychst4:

Originally Posted By HeavyMetal:

Originally Posted By JustinOK34:
Those were made by Mattel, right?



I hope you are joking and not serious.

www.snopes.com is thataway-->>



Actually, Mattel DID make the hanguards and pretty much all the plastic parts for the M16-A1 (or atleast that is what we were told in my Vietnam History class).



Actually, you were fed incorrect information. Mattel has gone on record saying they had never made any M-16 parts.

If you had checked on Snopes, you would have relized that. This has long ago been debunked by people on this site.

This is one of those myths that can never be substaniated because they do not have any root in truth. Much like the 5.56 was designed to wound only so as to force the enemy to tie up resources evacuating wounded.

Eugene Stoner and Freemont and Sullivan had o such intentions when they designed the M-16 and never stated such.

I too was in the Army and being an O-3 is no guarentee of not reeking of shit intel. Captain is a rank not a level of deification.






I had no idea what snopes was....

Oh well, i guess i was told the wrong shit. There is no real reason to get pissed off though, not saying you are
Link Posted: 9/5/2005 8:01:24 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/5/2005 8:02:43 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/5/2005 8:06:32 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/5/2005 8:11:45 PM EDT by scottryan]

Originally Posted By whatsthedotonmychst4:

Originally Posted By scottryan:

Originally Posted By whatsthedotonmychst4:


Actually, Mattel DID make the hanguards and pretty much all the plastic parts for the M16-A1.



You are so full of shit and you should have you account locked before you cause anyone else anymore stress.



Whatever man, that is one of the things i learned in my Vietnam History class by a guy that would know since he was a Cpt. in the Army at the time.

And how am I causing anyone stress? By simply stating what I learned in class? Whoopdy fuckin do if you dont agreee.

It is a possibillity that Mattel did make the furniture for the M16 back in the day. When dealing with the govt. contract goes to the lowest bidder . Colt didnt make all the .45's back in WWII...



Your attitude is way out of line. You need to go back to you Jr. High class for more "history". I don't have to disagree with you, you are factually wrong.

You know, there are about a dozen people on this board that know more about the AR-15 than anyone else in the gun industry, military, or anywhere else. And you are not one of them and I am.

Thanks for the thread hijack, moron.
Link Posted: 9/5/2005 8:13:25 PM EDT
Thats cool, I understand. I am gonna have to start second guessing that guy... he was kin of eccentric
Link Posted: 9/5/2005 8:15:04 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/5/2005 9:02:13 PM EDT by scottryan]

Originally Posted By whatsthedotonmychst4:
Thats cool, I understand. I am gonna have to start second guessing that guy... he was kin of eccentric



see my post below.
Link Posted: 9/5/2005 8:19:09 PM EDT

Originally Posted By whatsthedotonmychst4:
Thats cool, I understand. I am gonna have to start second guessing that guy... he was kin of eccentric




Happens all the time.

There are a LOT of urban legends and bullshit that get passed around in the military. Your friend/instructor probably believed it, because someone HE trusted told it to him.
Link Posted: 9/5/2005 8:20:26 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/5/2005 8:25:29 PM EDT by whatsthedotonmychst4]

Originally Posted By scottryan:


You are so full of shit and you should have you account locked before you cause anyone else anymore stress.




Your attitude is way out of line. You need to go back to you Jr. High class for more "history". I don't have to disagree with you, you are factually wrong.

You know, there are about a dozen people on this board that know more about the AR-15 than anyone else in the gun industry, military, or anywhere else. And you are not one of them and I am.

Thanks for the thread hijack, moron.



My attitude was not out of line, i simply stated what i THOUGHT was true. You on the other hand were quick to cut me down instead of actually offering an answer.

I dont really care what you know or how you know it or where you recieved your degree. Im sure there are facets of military history that i know and you do not and vice versa, its not the point.

We ok?

Back to the thread though... The handguards were somewhat brittle. As for the reason they were replaced... i would have to agree when most people said logistical problems
Link Posted: 9/5/2005 8:33:46 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/5/2005 8:39:51 PM EDT by theshootersden]

Originally Posted By scottryan:

You are so full of shit and you should have you account locked before you cause anyone else anymore stress.




Originally Posted By scottryan:

Your attitude is way out of line. You need to go back to you Jr. High class for more "history". I don't have to disagree with you, you are factually wrong.

You know, there are about a dozen people on this board that know more about the AR-15 than anyone else in the gun industry, military, or anywhere else. And you are not one of them and I am.

Thanks for the thread hijack, moron.



scottryan, that's some funny shit You blasted whatsthedotonmychst4 on his 9th post... I got it on my 12th... Oh, and hey, I appreciate you not fuckin me up over that mistake I made earlier whew....
Link Posted: 9/5/2005 8:40:17 PM EDT

Originally Posted By whatsthedotonmychst4:
I had no idea what snopes was....



Damn, son; how long you 'been on this intarweb thingy?
Link Posted: 9/5/2005 9:01:42 PM EDT

Originally Posted By whatsthedotonmychst4:

Originally Posted By scottryan:


You are so full of shit and you should have you account locked before you cause anyone else anymore stress.




Your attitude is way out of line. You need to go back to you Jr. High class for more "history". I don't have to disagree with you, you are factually wrong.

You know, there are about a dozen people on this board that know more about the AR-15 than anyone else in the gun industry, military, or anywhere else. And you are not one of them and I am.

Thanks for the thread hijack, moron.



My attitude was not out of line, i simply stated what i THOUGHT was true. You on the other hand were quick to cut me down instead of actually offering an answer.

I dont really care what you know or how you know it or where you recieved your degree. Im sure there are facets of military history that i know and you do not and vice versa, its not the point.

We ok?

Back to the thread though... The handguards were somewhat brittle. As for the reason they were replaced... i would have to agree when most people said logistical problems




Yes you were/are out of line. You were confident in your bullshit and you got called on it. And now you wont let it go.

It is irrelavent that you might know some military info that I don't. This is not a general military dicussion board. This is AR15.com where we discuss the AR15 rifle.

Nice try but you are still getting shut down.

Why don't you just let it go?
Link Posted: 9/5/2005 9:14:48 PM EDT
tag for work
Link Posted: 9/5/2005 10:02:52 PM EDT
I like the triangular handguards except they get somewhat slippery if you got sweaty hands.
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 4:19:00 AM EDT
Most of my time in the Army was with the M16A1. The new handguards came in on the M16A2 along with three other accuracy enhancements - heavier barrel, faster twist, and better rear sight adjustability. I would have to say the handguard switch was more tailored to user friendliness/accuracy than logistics.
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 5:58:35 AM EDT
I can't say why, because I don't know, but I think the round handguards are about 1,000,000 times more comfortable, and seem less likely to break or cut me inadvetently.


Link Posted: 9/6/2005 11:45:59 AM EDT
SCOTTRYAN IS TOTALLY CORRECT-

you were a fucking dipshit and were told once you were wrong by the people you came here to listen to and learn from in the first place!


Whatever man, that is one of the things i learned in my Vietnam History class by a guy that would know since he was a Cpt. in the Army at the time.



You were quick to state your "fact" and then try and back it up after being called out once. You were so sure and quick to point out you learned it from an Army captain.

After finally getting torn into more, you acknowledge "I am gonna have to start second guessing that guy... he was kin of eccentric" Why were you so quick to stand by his bullshit the first time around?

You need to pick your fights based on common sense and decide whether it makes sense first before you throw out a "that was what I was told" as your entire basis for opening your trap.

for the rest of you- he started this thread at 9 posts. I think I remember his "earlier" posts and he had to be straightened out with those as well...
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 12:05:43 PM EDT

Originally Posted By chevyrulez1:
I have never heard if there was a reason. Does anybody know?



Have heard it was simple ecconomics....


For the round handguards you can get away with one mold, that handguard design doesn't care if it's a top or a bottom as it's pefectly interchangable. Crack just one and you can order off or replace it with an identical one.

Break an old A1 type handguard shell and you HAVE to replace it with a replacement part that is either a right half or left half.
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 12:08:10 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/6/2005 12:08:54 PM EDT by theshootersden]

Originally Posted By JosephR:
SCOTTRYAN IS TOTALLY CORRECT-

you were a fucking dipshit and were told once you were wrong by the people you came here to listen to and learn from in the first place!


Whatever man, that is one of the things i learned in my Vietnam History class by a guy that would know since he was a Cpt. in the Army at the time.



You were quick to state your "fact" and then try and back it up after being called out once. You were so sure and quick to point out you learned it from an Army captain.

After finally getting torn into more, you acknowledge "I am gonna have to start second guessing that guy... he was kin of eccentric" Why were you so quick to stand by his bullshit the first time around?

You need to pick your fights based on common sense and decide whether it makes sense first before you throw out a "that was what I was told" as your entire basis for opening your trap.

for the rest of you- he started this thread at 9 posts. I think I remember his "earlier" posts and he had to be straightened out with those as well...



Come on Joe, let it go bro... It looks like Scott took care of it... No need for others to come along and kick whatsthedotonmychst4 while hes down...

Back to the topic...
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 1:15:22 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/6/2005 1:20:12 PM EDT by slider713]
Here's what I read and understood. That guy replied with something he thought was a fact, when it is not true, but not his fault, simply correct him without ...... Scott's quote "You are so full of shit and you should have you account locked before you cause anyone else anymore stress." To me, that was out of line, and after that ball busting, I would have been pissed, even if I was wrong and it happens to us all from time to time. He did let it go, you are the one that kept talking shit. Scott, think before you speak. And Joe, wtf? He might have been wrong, but a dipshit? Cmon bro, not everyone on here is a M16 genious, he doesn't deserve that. I didn't see you guys busting the guys balls that stated the M1 had an upper and lower hand guard. CHILL.
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 1:28:37 PM EDT
Oh and this is my favorite. Quote:"Your attitude is way out of line. You need to go back to you Jr. High class for more "history". I don't have to disagree with you, you are factually wrong.

You know, there are about a dozen people on this board that know more about the AR-15 than anyone else in the gun industry, military, or anywhere else. And you are not one of them and I am.

Thanks for the thread hijack, moron."

Wow, did you invent the fucking gun? I am surprised there is enough space on this site for your ego. lol...
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 1:57:35 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/6/2005 1:57:54 PM EDT by Beefypeanut]

Originally Posted By slider713:
Oh and this is my favorite. Quote:"Your attitude is way out of line. You need to go back to you Jr. High class for more "history". I don't have to disagree with you, you are factually wrong.

You know, there are about a dozen people on this board that know more about the AR-15 than anyone else in the gun industry, military, or anywhere else. And you are not one of them and I am.

Thanks for the thread hijack, moron."

Wow, did you invent the fucking gun? I am surprised there is enough space on this site for your ego. lol...



+1. It seems to me that scotty was out of line. The other guy did let it go. You just kept on talking like your the king shit. You say you know more about the M16 than anyone in the gun industry, I say you're an arrogant concieted ass.
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 2:24:50 PM EDT

Originally Posted By -Duke-Nukem-:
Big Bore, Blanco, those are all pics and vid of the same rifle. The only time its ever malfunctioned was caught on film in that vid, and that's because I didn't have my magazine seated all the way, so it wasn't the gun's fault at all. You can hear me grunt as I do the immediate action drill to fix the problem. It even feeds Wolf without complaining. The upper is one of those ex-Air Force issue M16A1 uppers that CDNN Investments is selling for $269.

store.yahoo.com/cdnn/ara1upasusgi.html
There ya go.

I got mine from CMMG and also grabbed a bolt and carrier from them. So, lets say, after shipping and everything you have $400 in the complete upper. A stripped lower (mines a DPMS lower) runs about $100, and to complete it will run you about another $100. I got the stock set off of a group buy that a buddy found for $30. Actually I had the stock set first and wound up building a rifle based on the stock, pistol grip, and forearm that I had lying around! I got a little discount from CMMG because I didn't need the forearm that came with the upper. All told I'd say I have a little less than $650 in the gun, and it shoots VERY straight! For a lightweight, govt. profile barrel these things are pretty accurate with 55 grain ammo. My wife loves it because its so light and points so easily.

Next thing I'm going to do is refinish it with Norrel's Moly Resin. They have a color that is supposed to approximate the old Colt blue-gray phosphate finishes of the 1960s. The lower will still say DPMS on ths side but who cares, it'll still be as close as I need to an M16A1!

EDIT: Here I am at the end of the run caught on film. The last target was a bonus target. The zombie terrorist hostage taker had to be shot in the head only. Alot of people hit the hostage in the shoulder because they forgot that at close range you have to aim a little high because of the distance between the iron sight and the bore. I was very chuffed that I remembered, and slotted the bad guy in his right eye twice.

img.photobucket.com/albums/v236/MolonLabe/dieyouterr.jpg


Schweet...I don't get why but A1's are also REALLY accurate weapons. When I got mine, it was already sighted in and was DEAD ON. Lose the 30 round mag though
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 4:32:03 PM EDT
Well, in an effort to somewhat try and redeem myself i spent a couple hours trying to find the answer; however, all i could dig up was the fact that the triangular handguards were non interchangeable and the new cross-sectional handguards were interchangeable.... as was stated before, so i guess no new info has come forward so far.

However, I heard from a friend who knew a guy who once served with a guy who knew one of the testing guys over at Aberdeen Proving grounds.....
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 4:36:20 PM EDT
I will say that I heard that "rumor" too, but never took it seriously. As far as I know Mattel just makes barbies..
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 5:11:25 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/6/2005 5:14:10 PM EDT by theshootersden]

Originally Posted By slider713:
I will say that I heard that "rumor" too, but never took it seriously. As far as I know Mattel just makes barbies..



The USGI's started the "Mattel" thing during the Vietnam war... It was because of the rifle being light weight, plastic and something new to them... To them it resembled a toy... Mattel had nothing to do with any manufacturing of the AR-15 or M-16 parts...
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 5:25:01 PM EDT
It wasn't Mattel it was Coleco. There are only six people in the world who know more about plastic furniture than Jesus, Garry Owen and Jerry Seinfeld; and you're not one of them, I am.

You people should be banned before you cause people anymore stress.

Lucky for you guys, this is Arfcom, where we discuss the AR15 rifle, and not "who's a prick".
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 6:39:38 PM EDT
Triangular handguards pluses:
Nice flat base for resting the rifle on
Easy to wrap your hand around and grip

Minuses:
TWO DIFFERENT PARTS to keep up with
Fragile-thin fiberglas material chipped and cracked fairly easily
Smooth surface got slippery very easily

Round hanguards pluses:
Flat space in the middle that's good for baricade resting, but pivots easier than the triangle guards
Easy to wrap the hand around
ROBUST
Textured for your pleasure
Uses two each of the same part-a logistician's wet dream.

Implementation was for the most part with the M16A2, but in some cases (Air Force, for example) triangle guards on A1s (or even M16s) were replaced by round guards-ever notice that the round handguards fit the triangular plate behind the front sight?
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 6:57:04 PM EDT

Originally Posted By whatsthedotonmychst4:

Originally Posted By HeavyMetal:

Originally Posted By JustinOK34:
Those were made by Mattel, right?



I hope you are joking and not serious.

www.snopes.com is thataway-->>



Actually, Mattel DID make the hanguards and pretty much all the plastic parts for the M16-A1 (or atleast that is what we were told in my Vietnam History class).



No, they did NOT. Mattel has NO fiberglass molding capacity. Mattel can mold nearly any THERMOPLASTIC but they have never made a single gram of THERMOSET molded plastics. And it would be a DUMB idea to make handguards out of any THERMOPLASTIC as it would MELT under the HEAT of a HANDGUARD. But THERMOSETS, like the FIBERGLASS THERMOSET in both the A! and A2 handguards will withstand direct flame until it chars. But it will NEVER melt.

And you armchair rangers who HAVE melted handguards need to stop putting Airsoft parts on your firearms.
Link Posted: 9/7/2005 4:32:46 AM EDT
Link Posted: 9/7/2005 4:41:24 AM EDT
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top