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
Posted: 4/30/2001 5:57:37 PM EDT
I mean don't get me wrong, I understand why a flat top rifle would be better for mounting optics, to some degree, and you can alway's throw on a quick detach carry handle but there's just something reasuring about having those iron sights always at the ready. And permanently attached. That being said, I'm planning on mounting an Aimpoint on my 16" fixed carry handle Bushmaster, any advice on who makes a good mount that's not to awfully expensive?
Link Posted: 4/30/2001 6:04:25 PM EDT
I got a scope mount for my 16" fixed handle bushy sat. at a gun show. It was $10, just the basic see-thru mount. i am very happy with it.
Link Posted: 4/30/2001 6:23:01 PM EDT
I like the profile better with the carry handle. I mounted a cheap $30 scope on the carry handle and it is a lot of fun.
Link Posted: 4/30/2001 6:52:03 PM EDT
I like the carry handle better. My 20" HBAR has a cary handle see through mount and I like the setup. I like having the full utility of the rifle. I don't think the tradeoff of the mounting advantage of the flat top is worth it, if I need that advantage I will use a different rifle. Not saying I am ruling out ever getting an A3, just not for my 2nd or 3rd AR.
Link Posted: 4/30/2001 7:03:22 PM EDT
I have five different uppers for my M16, and every one of them are conventional "fixed" carry handle models. I've got an M16 slick side, an A1, two A2s, and an A1 9mm. I use a Trijicon Reflex II with a carryhandle mount for these. I also think the carryhandle models just look better. -bob
Link Posted: 4/30/2001 7:06:33 PM EDT
I prefer the carry handle, more specifically, the A1. I subscribe to the "KISS" principle, and there is less to potentially go wrong or break with this configuration. A sporting upper for hunting or varminting would be good in flat top configuration, but for combat, the A1 can't be beat for reliability and ruggedness.
Link Posted: 4/30/2001 7:09:05 PM EDT
I have been thinking of mounting an Aimpoint on my carry handle. I like the looks of the goose neck mount.
Link Posted: 4/30/2001 7:09:31 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/30/2001 7:10:34 PM EDT by RamblinWreck]
I kinda like the carry handle - of course, I am a CMP service rifle competitor and am kinda biased against carbines (no such thing as a flattop service RIFLE). But I have two nice Colt M4 uppers - one is a standard flattop and the other is a sweet factory fixed-carry-handle model I got from Dennis Todd last year for a super price ($605 total hot damn whatta deal!). All Colt with the proper feedramps and "4" above the gas tube. I shoot the fixed handle more than the flattop. Thanks, Dennis! [sniper] Edited typos. [BD]
Link Posted: 4/30/2001 8:51:10 PM EDT
carry handle rocks - two of my ar's are set up that way. an a1 and a2. and the set up i'nm building is an a3 but i'm going to keep the handle on with ashleys (carbine set up) steve
Link Posted: 4/30/2001 8:54:39 PM EDT
[ I have found with our tactical rifles, the nobs on the Colt A3 interfere with web gear and get caught in the tactical slings. I had one incident wear the hole damn thing got caught in the bushes, the web gear and the tactical sling. It took me about 30 seconds to untangle the hole mess. Lucky for me our barricaded subject didn't know what he was doing with his shotgun. They should have made the nobs, throw levers instead.
Link Posted: 4/30/2001 8:56:26 PM EDT
Fixed. [BD]
Link Posted: 4/30/2001 9:10:16 PM EDT
Well guys, since I was introduced to the black rifle in the sixties, I've always identified with the carry handle. To me it's not a real m16/ar15 unless it has the carry handle. No offense intended to the flat tops and the variety of items that you can mount. Perhaps the carry handle represents a visible identity that is universally recognized by others. Oh, and for us old duffers, it makes it easier to carry.
Link Posted: 4/30/2001 9:21:35 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/30/2001 9:21:10 PM EDT by HANGFIRE]
Originally Posted By A WARRIOR: They should have made the nobs, throw levers instead.
View Quote
I wish someone would listen to you and provide that for us.
Link Posted: 4/30/2001 9:27:34 PM EDT
Nope, flat tops, unless it a FN or G3 style.
Link Posted: 4/30/2001 9:30:35 PM EDT
YES -- with NM sights installed!
Link Posted: 4/30/2001 9:44:22 PM EDT
I too like to abide by the KISS principle. Either an A1 or A2 for me. If I got a flattop, I'd want some sort of iron sight as a backup (maybe a GG&G flip-up or something just in case). As for a mount, I don't have one yet, but I really like to look of the ARMS #39. I will eventually get one though. There's two rail levels; one for your glass, one for your light. There is also a side rail attachment available. [img]http://www.armsmounts.com/images/prod_39COMBO.gif[/img]
Link Posted: 5/1/2001 11:23:43 AM EDT
All that I have used are carry handle Ars. Haven't had the opportunity to havea flat top yet. I was going to change one of mine for a flat top though. I figured after doing that and putting on a flip up front sight and a rear sight and then optics it would be cost prohibitive. Still waiting, I guess.
Link Posted: 5/1/2001 12:22:34 PM EDT
I shoot NRA Highpower Service Rifle, therfore, a carry handle is a given.
Link Posted: 5/1/2001 1:42:25 PM EDT
I would never get a detachable carry handle. I prefered the fixed and always having the iron sights there. I really dont see to much of an advantage to have a detachable carry hane with the front sight in place. I could be wrong but that is just my prefrance. Six
Link Posted: 5/1/2001 1:55:27 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/1/2001 1:57:01 PM EDT by Imbroglio]
What does that ARMS side rail thing do? The main problem with the cheap carry handle mounts is that the nut that secures it will loosen ever few rounds. A guy I knew bought one for his AR15 and had to stop after every mag to tighten the nut back down or risk having the scope fall off the gun.
Link Posted: 5/1/2001 2:54:15 PM EDT
"Anybody else prefer the fixed carry handle?" Yes. The detachable ones never made sense to me, unless the front is front site is shaved off. Wana see me get flamed? - I like A-1 sights too! I don't like them MORE, just don't think they're any better than [u]regular[/u] A-2s (NM sights are worth every penny). I'll put up with the pain in the a$$ of setting them anytime just to stop the mysterious wandering A-2s, & the A-3 separate handle seems to exacerbate the problem. I might be FOS about this, but I've always suspected that A-1, & A-2 uppers are stronger (more rigid) than A-3s. I think flat-tops DO look good though.
Link Posted: 5/1/2001 2:59:21 PM EDT
Link Posted: 5/1/2001 3:24:19 PM EDT
What does that ARMS side rail thing do? The main problem with the cheap carry handle mounts is that the nut that secures it will loosen ever few rounds. A guy I knew bought one for his AR15 and had to stop after every mag to tighten the nut back down or risk having the scope fall off the gun.
View Quote
I think the side rail is to move your white light to, if you have the upper and lower center rails already loaded with long range glass, ACOG, NV/IR laser, etc. Either that or you can use it to mount a CD player, cup holder, and baby seat. I had that same problem (nut coming unscrewed and mount falling off) with the cheap scope mount I had - eventually tossed the damn thing. I suppose you could use some Loc-tite to really glue the thing down though. ARMS has a pretty good reputation and I think that mount uses some sort of special nut designed not to unscrew so easily. I'm not sure, but I think the Israelis are using a similar mount for their M16A2's and Falcon(?) sight. I saw something in a recent Small Arms Review, but I can't find the issue now.
Link Posted: 5/1/2001 3:46:49 PM EDT
Add me to the class of those who require an A3 due to "service rifle" restrictions. But I wouldn't have an A3 anyway, they just don't look like an AR to me.
Link Posted: 5/1/2001 4:16:26 PM EDT
Link Posted: 5/1/2001 7:33:03 PM EDT
I would NOT want a detachable carry handle; the first thing I thought about when I first saw one was me running across a rice paddy getting shot at and the handle coming off and the rifle dropping into the mud. No thanks.
Link Posted: 5/1/2001 8:17:45 PM EDT
Originally Posted By btip: I would NOT want a detachable carry handle; the first thing I thought about when I first saw one was me running across a rice paddy getting shot at and the handle coming off and the rifle dropping into the mud. No thanks.
View Quote
Not many rice paddys round here!! LOL
Link Posted: 5/2/2001 9:09:44 AM EDT
I was recently reading where the author was actually claiming that the carry handle is a dated feature of the AR15/M16 and is a hazard to safety because when the weapon is carried by the handle it is pointing either forward or backward. In a fuzzy sort of way, I could see the logic of that opinion but I completely disagree with it. I don't many people who are trained to carry an AR15/M16 by the carry handle anyhow. One of my favorite field expedient methods of carrying it while moving quickle is to put my thumb through the carry handle and wrap the rest of my fingers around the front of the magazine well. This method is quick, easy, provides for a firm grip on the weapon, and the weapon is generally pointed in a safe direction. I think that the ruggedness of a carry handle is an absolute must on one's primary AR15. In either A1 or A2 form, it goes right to the heart of the KISS principle. No detachable handles to keep track of, lose, or worry about losing their zero. I do have a couple of flat tops that will eventually be built into dedicated scoped target/varmint rifles, but the good ol' Colt R6550 with the A2 carry handle is what I would fall back on when the chips come down.
Link Posted: 5/2/2001 11:46:22 AM EDT
I mounted an optic on my CAR15A2 with a fixed carry handle, and I couldn't get a good cheek-weld and look thru the scope at the same time. I had to get one of those plastic cheek pad to get my head high enough.
Top Top