Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
User Panel

Page AR-15 » AR Discussions
AR Sponsor: bravocompany
Page / 2
Next Page Arrow Left
Link Posted: 8/4/2003 12:09:41 PM EDT
[#1]
BTW, anyone know why no one made/makes an upper with an integral rear sight and no carry handle?  
View Quote


Look at my first post.  Rock River Arms.
Link Posted: 8/4/2003 1:24:02 PM EDT
[#2]
Quoted:
anyone know why no one made/makes an upper with an integral rear sight and no carry handle?  
View Quote


Because you couldn't mount a scope (magnifying optic) at the proper height w/o the sights getting in the way.  Its not an issue with the 1x type sights (Aimpoint, EOTech, Reflex).

That's why those of use with magnified optics prefer the ARMS #40 (keeps the sight out of the way when using the scope at the proper 2.6" Height over Bore).
Link Posted: 8/4/2003 1:27:46 PM EDT
[#3]
Quoted:
While on a road march at Ft.Benning during Basic Training a guy was seen to be carrying his M-16A1 by the dreaded carry handle. One of the Drill Sergeants sauntered up to him and loudly asked "What do you think that is, a f***ing carry handle?" I'm not sure there was ever an answer to that question, but the point was made.


I think that on the new M4's and A4's the detachable carry handle is pointless. First off, it's difficult to get your hand through the damn thing due to the decreased space. Secondly, the upper receiver should have an INTEGRAL rear sight (like a Daewoo or Galil) with rail space in front of it to mount optics. BTW, anyone know why no one made/makes an upper with an integral rear sight and no carry handle?  
View Quote


RRA UTE:

[url]http://www.rockriverarms.com/rra_le_a2_tactical_car.htm[/url]
Link Posted: 8/5/2003 3:51:10 AM EDT
[#4]
Here's something no one has come up with yet;

When going through thick brush, like Southeast Asia, the foilage will deflect and/or slide off the carry handle rather than snag on the rear sight.  It also provides protection for the rear sight should you drop it.  You can also mount the old PVS-4 starlight scope or other carry handle mount to it.  Its actually a good idea once you think of it.  Take a rifle like the HK G-3 and imagine dropping it on the rear sight-it would be ruined-smashed!  With the M-16 you have that carrying handle and those protective blades to absorbed the crash!  Stoner was a brilliant!
Link Posted: 8/5/2003 4:11:15 AM EDT
[#5]
Quoted:
Here's something no one has come up with yet;

When going through thick brush, like Southeast Asia, the foilage will deflect and/or slide off the carry handle rather than snag on the rear sight.  It also provides protection for the rear sight should you drop it.  You can also mount the old PVS-4 starlight scope or other carry handle mount to it.  Its actually a good idea once you think of it.  Take a rifle like the HK G-3 and imagine dropping it on the rear sight-it would be ruined-smashed!  With the M-16 you have that carrying handle and those protective blades to absorbed the crash!  Stoner was a brilliant!
View Quote


Exactly! That is what I was getting at back on page one when I said, "Why have a stubby rear sight mount when you can make something practical..."
Link Posted: 8/5/2003 5:26:25 AM EDT
[#6]
Quoted:
like others said, it was the origional location for the charging handle. See Pic.

[url]http://www.armalite.com/sales/specials/ar10BWholeLarge.jpg[/url]
View Quote


aaahhhhhhhh, that answers one of my childhood questions.  I grew up during the VN war and always wondered what that "trigger" was in the carry handle on "old" M-16's.  Interesting location for it, but I think the current one makes more sense.  I love ar15.com!
Link Posted: 8/5/2003 6:30:49 AM EDT
[#7]
I like the carrying handle.  I've been yelled at for carrying it by the carrying handle, but then again the Army yells at you for lots of stupid things.  From my limited experience, the Army was more interested in whether your boots were polished to the highest standard than whether you could be an effective soldier.

I'd never carry the rifle by the handle in an immediate danger situation but the handle is handy to have on a long hump when you switch your rifle's position around to avoid fatigue.

And I think the reason it exists to begin with is as others said to raise the sight plane for "in-line" sights.
Link Posted: 8/7/2003 10:06:15 AM EDT
[#8]
Quoted:
like others said, it was the origional location for the charging handle. See Pic.

[url]http://www.armalite.com/sales/specials/ar10BWholeLarge.jpg[/url]
View Quote


The AR-10A had the carry handle but the cocking lever was on the side of the rifle like the ar-108b.
Link Posted: 8/9/2003 11:33:16 AM EDT
[#9]
SO I CAN RUN LIKE HELL!!AND NOT DROP MY RIFLE
WHEN SOME BAD GUY'S ARE TRYING TO SHOOT ME IN
THE "ASS"HA!!
PAPA62
Link Posted: 8/9/2003 3:43:56 PM EDT
[#10]
Back when I had my AR, I found the carry handle convenient for pulling the rifle out of the safe. Other than that, carrying it that way just looks kind of gay. But with an ARMS A2 rail attached, the knob prevents you from sticking your hand in there, so it's all good.
Link Posted: 8/9/2003 3:45:40 PM EDT
[#11]
I propose we change the name of the "carry handle" (which it isn't, technically) to something more accurate, such as "receiver arch". Suggestions welcome.
Page / 2
Next Page Arrow Left
Page AR-15 » AR Discussions
AR Sponsor: bravocompany
Close Join Our Mail List to Stay Up To Date! Win a FREE Membership!

Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!

You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.


By signing up you agree to our User Agreement. *Must have a registered ARFCOM account to win.
Top Top