Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 4/3/2006 3:51:29 AM EDT
Would any one know the width of the MI 10 inch free float handguards? Measured a Larue and it's 2 inches wide. I don't want to go thicker than that.
Link Posted: 4/3/2006 8:19:56 AM EDT
Link Posted: 4/3/2006 9:39:10 PM EDT
Thanks glock24. Width is also 2 inches.
Link Posted: 4/4/2006 7:56:11 AM EDT
MI's 2-piece FFHG is heavy like a lead pig.
Link Posted: 4/4/2006 8:46:48 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/4/2006 8:47:40 AM EDT by glock24]

Originally Posted By metroplex:
MI's 2-piece FFHG is heavy like a lead pig.



A lead pig eh?

Deal with opinions or deal with facts.

Here they are straight from MI. All weights are actual, so remember to substract the weight of the delta ring components to calculate an installed weight.

#20- 13.25 oz
#21- 16.3 oz
#22- 23.0 oz

Please compare these weights with the rest of the industry

www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=12&t=172238

Link Posted: 4/4/2006 9:04:51 AM EDT

Originally Posted By glock24:

Originally Posted By metroplex:
MI's 2-piece FFHG is heavy like a lead pig.



A lead pig eh?

Deal with opinions or deal with facts.

Here they are straight from MI. All weights are actual, so remember to substract the weight of the delta ring components to calculate an installed weight.

#20- 13.25 oz
#21- 16.3 oz
#22- 23.0 oz

Please compare these weights with the rest of the industry

www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=12&t=172238




And don't foget to add the weight of the barrel nut & handguard cap.

Installed weights:

#20: 15.4oz (one of the heaviest of the FF handguards, only the SIRs,Abrams, and C-More are heavier)
#21: 18.3oz (only the SIR is heavier - but it's just a hair over the Troy)
#22: 25oz (only the SIR is heavier)



Link Posted: 4/4/2006 9:11:56 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/4/2006 9:14:33 AM EDT by glock24]
Why do you have to add the weight of the barrel nut and handguard cap? These two items already exist on the barrel in its standard configuration. By your logic I should also add the weight of the front sight base.

I guess I'm confused what "installed weight" really means. I thought it was calculated the following way;

(factory rifle + rail system - any removed parts) - factory rifle = installed weight



Link Posted: 4/4/2006 9:21:01 AM EDT

Originally Posted By glock24:
Why do you have to add the weight of the barrel nut and handguard cap? These two items already exist on the barrel in its standard configuration. By your logic I should also add the weight of the front sight base.

I guess I'm confused what "installed weight" really means. I thought it was calculated the following way;

(factory rifle + rail system - any removed parts) - factory rifle = installed weight




Use Forest's spreadsheet on the MD AR15 website. It helps you compare the different weights.

Bottom line: If you are building a lightweight carbine/rifle, don't get the MI 2-piece FFHGs.
Link Posted: 4/4/2006 9:35:56 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/4/2006 9:37:31 AM EDT by glock24]

Bottom line: If you are building a lightweight carbine/rifle, don't get the MI 2-piece FFHGs.

We'll agree to disagree I suppose.

I'm still confused about this "installed weight" measurement. Here's an example, please critique my logic;

#1 - LaRue handguard

Obviously it weighs something. Let's say its actual weight is A ozs. So if I have a factory rifle weighing B ozs, then the easy answer is a LaRue handguard installed on my factory rifle will weigh A+B, right?

Wrong! That's not the whole story. To install the LaRue properly I must remove the following components from my factory rifle;

Delta ring assembly
barrel nut
standard handguards

Therefore the "installed weight" of a Larue handguard is the actual weight of A ozs, minus the factory components I removed.

In the same way, the actual weight of the MI handguards should be the compared against what is removed from the factory configuration, specifically the delta ring assembly and the handguards only.


Link Posted: 4/4/2006 9:37:25 AM EDT

Originally Posted By glock24:
Why do you have to add the weight of the barrel nut and handguard cap? These two items already exist on the barrel in its standard configuration.



Because if you're going to compare apples to oranges you have to make sure they are on the same playing field.

The barrel nut and handguard cap are part of the handguard system. You can't install the MIs w/o the barrel nut.

You CAN install other system (some YHMs and LaRues, and DD for examples) w/o the barrel nut.


By your logic I should also add the weight of the front sight base.

No because you don't need the FSB to install the handguards.

You DO have add the weight of the FSB if you are going to compare barrel weights and such.


I guess I'm confused what "installed weight" really means. I thought it was calculated the following way;

(factory rifle + rail system - any removed parts) - factory rifle = installed weight


No. "Installed Weight" is the weight of all the parts required for an installation.

Weight of Handguard system = Weight of the Handguards + Barrel Nut (if your system needs it) + any other parts

"Any other parts" may or may not include the handguard cap or the delta ring assembly. For systems like the MI/Troy the handguard cap is included - not because it's needed, but because practically nobody removes it - if they were going to do that they might as well get the lighter DD or LaRue systems.
Link Posted: 4/4/2006 9:45:48 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/4/2006 9:51:06 AM EDT by Forest]

Originally Posted By glock24:
Obviously it weighs something. Let's say its actual weight is A ozs. So if I have a factory rifle weighing B ozs, then the easy answer is a LaRue handguard installed on my factory rifle will weigh A+B, right?



You are getting on the right track but you keep wanting to throw the rifle into the equaton.

The rifle doesn't matter. What your LW rifle may weigh will be different from what his HBAR carbine might weigh.

All you want to compare is the weight of the "handguard system". So to estabilsh the weights of the system you need to weight the factory components and add the weight of any other (perhaps standard) parts that will be required.

This is the only way to compare handguards directly, to see if System A is lighter than System B.

And in a direct comparison the MI handguards are one of the heaviest systems out there - period.

If you want light weight there are other systems that do the exact same thing for a lower system weight.

There are other reasons one might consider MI rails (i.e. cost, QC, asthetics etc.) but that is another discussion entirely.
Link Posted: 4/4/2006 10:21:53 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/4/2006 10:22:41 AM EDT by glock24]
Okay, I concede. Your method seems more universal when comparing different systems.

Thanks for the explanation and for keeping the conversation civil.
Link Posted: 4/4/2006 11:02:39 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/4/2006 11:04:10 AM EDT by metroplex]
And so you see the MI 2-piece FFHGs are fairly heavy. They are very affordable and easy to install. But like I said, they're like lead pigs. I considered purchasing them at one point but didn't want to add half a pound to my lightweight carbine buildup.
Link Posted: 4/4/2006 7:09:25 PM EDT
I didn't realize the mid-length MI ffhg weighed in that much. I'll have to put more thought into this.
Link Posted: 4/5/2006 2:21:42 AM EDT

Originally Posted By cibo:
I didn't realize the mid-length MI ffhg weighed in that much. I'll have to put more thought into this.



According to Forest, it's just a hair over the Troy system.
Link Posted: 4/5/2006 2:31:00 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/5/2006 2:35:07 AM EDT by metroplex]

Originally Posted By cibo:
I didn't realize the mid-length MI ffhg weighed in that much. I'll have to put more thought into this.



The Daniel Defense FFHGs are one of the lightest. Their carbine length FFHG weighs 8.5 oz, just 1 oz over the stock CAR shielded handguards. However, the DD's and LaRues aren't the 2-piece FFHGs like the Troy or Sampson or the MI.

Midlength: The DD 9.0 FFHG is 10.5 oz, Troy MRF-MX is 17.5 oz, LaRue is 13 oz.
I couldn't find the Midwest Midlength 2 piece FFHG weight but it should be around the Troy MRF-M/X weight range.
Link Posted: 4/5/2006 11:46:59 PM EDT
glock24 posted that the MI FFHG mid-length is 16.3oz. Thus, making it lighter than the Troy's if they are running at 17.5oz.
Link Posted: 4/6/2006 12:50:51 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/6/2006 1:52:32 AM EDT by metroplex]

Originally Posted By cibo:
glock24 posted that the MI FFHG mid-length is 16.3oz. Thus, making it lighter than the Troy's if they are running at 17.5oz.



Go over what Forest posted regarding handguard weights.

You have to add the steel barrel nut weight since you are re-using that nut with the MI FFHG. MI does not include that figure in their weight data. The MI FFHGs are one of the heaviest ones available, period.
Link Posted: 4/6/2006 3:02:07 AM EDT
If the objective is a light weight carbine, dont use a rail system. You will only add even more weight to it by attaching do-dads to it.

Link Posted: 4/6/2006 3:08:08 AM EDT

Originally Posted By lt557:
If the objective is a light weight carbine, dont use a rail system. You will only add even more weight to it by attaching do-dads to it.




+1

Also, if you're objective is a light carbine, consider not using a detach carry handle and instead use BUIS. That will cut down the weight as well. I was busy trying to figure out why the S&W MP15 Tactical weighed LESS than my 16" M4 build, when the Tactical uses a Troy MRF-CX and I was using standard CAR handguards

If you absolutely need rails, consider the Daniel Defense. It's the lightest of the free floating quad-rail handguards. The non-FF 2-piece RIS/RAS systems are also slightly heavier than the CAR handguards, just as a comparison in case you just need rails and don't care if it FFs.
Link Posted: 4/6/2006 7:33:19 AM EDT

Originally Posted By lt557:
If the objective is a light weight carbine, dont use a rail system. You will only add even more weight to it by attaching do-dads to it.




Depends. Are you attaching do-dads because they look cool - or are you attching them to make your weapon more effiecient? Difference between a toy and a tool.

A DD 7.0 weighs LESS than an M4 hangduard system - and the DD has a rail for your light and a VFG if you were going to use one anyway.

Got a fixed handled upper, but want to use a red-dot? No problem the DD7.0 allows you to mount the optic using a standard mount w/o the additional weight of a goosneck mount (and you can still add a light or your VFG if needed).

The DD allows an M4 to add rails (and FF the barrel at the same time) while actually reducing the weight of the carbine. If I'm adding the gear anyway might as well reduce my baseline weight before adding the do-dads.
Link Posted: 4/6/2006 9:01:28 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Forest:

Originally Posted By glock24:

Originally Posted By metroplex:
MI's 2-piece FFHG is heavy like a lead pig.



A lead pig eh?

Deal with opinions or deal with facts.

Here they are straight from MI. All weights are actual, so remember to substract the weight of the delta ring components to calculate an installed weight.

#20- 13.25 oz
#21- 16.3 oz
#22- 23.0 oz

Please compare these weights with the rest of the industry

www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=12&t=172238




And don't foget to add the weight of the barrel nut & handguard cap.

Installed weights:

#20: 15.4oz (one of the heaviest of the FF handguards, only the SIRs,Abrams, and C-More are heavier)
#21: 18.3oz (only the SIR is heavier - but it's just a hair over the Troy)
#22: 25oz (only the SIR is heavier)






Dont forget that the RAS II weights 13.8 plus the fact that you still have the barrel nut, hanguard cap, and the Delta ring assebly. As soon as the bullets start flying weight wont be an issue.
Link Posted: 4/8/2006 10:46:50 PM EDT
So would it be wise to assume that for value for money, the MI FF would be a good choice given the heavier weight? Given the parameters of weight, slimness of handguard, quality, price, etc. what would be the recommended monolithic looking handguard?
Link Posted: 4/9/2006 5:25:42 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/9/2006 5:27:22 AM EDT by glock24]

Originally Posted By cibo:
So would it be wise to assume that for value for money, the MI FF would be a good choice given the heavier weight? Given the parameters of weight, slimness of handguard, quality, price, etc. what would be the recommended monolithic looking handguard?



Cibo,

You know my opinion by now. Money talks, get the MI. This whole rail system weight discussion is very subjective at best. I mean are you personally worried that your rifle will become so heavy with these few extra ounces that it will significantly affect your ability to shoot it? If so, why?

I'm not trying to be arrogant, but I'm confused as to where to draw the line. I mean how does one measure the point at which a rifle becomes useless because of it's weight? I've never been in the military, but I'm curious what happens with the soldier who gets stuck with the SAW? Does he simply draw the short straw, or is there some statistical calculation the military performs to determine who gets burdened with a few extra pounds? Does anyone have any sources that claim our combat troops have become ineffective because their rifles were too heavy? My guess is, he gets told to "suck it up".

I just don't get it. Granted, I'm glad I'm shooting an aluminum AR versus an M-14, but now we're talking several pounds, not several ounces. Is the goal really to create "tactical tinfoil" out of an AR?

Interestingly, I just built a 6 pound lightweight AR and I feel there is a significant recoil increase. The muzzle jumps higher, and my cheekweld is more disturbed with every shot. Frankly, I consider this more of a problem than the long term fatigue associated with a slightly heavier weapon.

Okay, bring on the criticism . . .



Link Posted: 4/9/2006 5:51:55 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/9/2006 7:22:19 AM EDT by metroplex]

Originally Posted By glock24:

Originally Posted By cibo:
So would it be wise to assume that for value for money, the MI FF would be a good choice given the heavier weight? Given the parameters of weight, slimness of handguard, quality, price, etc. what would be the recommended monolithic looking handguard?



Cibo,

You know my opinion by now. Money talks, get the MI. This whole rail system weight discussion is very subjective at best. I mean are you personally worried that your rifle will become so heavy with these few extra ounces that it will significantly affect your ability to shoot it? If so, why?

I'm not trying to be arrogant, but I'm confused as to where to draw the line. I mean how does one measure the point at which a rifle becomes useless because of it's weight? I've never been in the military, but I'm curious what happens with the soldier who gets stuck with the SAW? Does he simply draw the short straw, or is there some statistical calculation the military performs to determine who gets burdened with a few extra pounds? Does anyone have any sources that claim our combat troops have become ineffective because their rifles were too heavy? My guess is, he gets told to "suck it up".

I just don't get it. Granted, I'm glad I'm shooting an aluminum AR versus an M-14, but now we're talking several pounds, not several ounces. Is the goal really to create "tactical tinfoil" out of an AR?

Interestingly, I just built a 6 pound lightweight AR and I feel there is a significant recoil increase. The muzzle jumps higher, and my cheekweld is more disturbed with every shot. Frankly, I consider this more of a problem than the long term fatigue associated with a slightly heavier weapon.

Okay, bring on the criticism . . .






With all due respect, I have a 24" HBAR AR-15 that weighs 12 lb empty. My new 16" M4 weighs 6.96 lb empty. Please don't lecture to me about how a "few ounces" will feel. Like I said earlier, if this is a lightweight carbine/midlength/rifle setup, DO NOT get the MI handguards. KEYWORD is LIGHTWEIGHT. If you are setting up a varminter or a range gun, get whatever floats your boat. I wanted a lightweight 16" M4 carbine, and I did my research on all the handguard options. I did not really need any rails at all, and Free floating a 16" barrel isn't really worth it for me (minimal accuracy gains if any, refer to the Guns and Ammo test on the S&W MP15). I just stuck with the CAR handguards that came with the barrel. I figure if it isn't accurate, it is mainly because of the shooter and ammo.

Now, if you really really need rails, there are a bunch of options: non-FF 2-piece setups. If you really need to free float and have 4 rails, there are also a bunch of options: 1-piece like LaRue or DD, 2-piece like Troy, Sampson, and Midwest Industries. However, if you wanted lightweight, it narrows the choices down to a select few: Daniel Defense, LaRue, Sampson / Troy. You may want to consider using BUIS instead of a DCH for further weight reduction.

I wanted a lightweight carbine and had a specific goal in mind. Do what you have to do, and post pics!
Link Posted: 4/9/2006 12:55:10 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/9/2006 12:57:30 PM EDT by glock24]


With all due respect, I have a 24" HBAR AR-15 that weighs 12 lb empty. My new 16" M4 weighs 6.96 lb empty. Please don't lecture to me about how a "few ounces" will feel. Like I said earlier, if this is a lightweight carbine/midlength/rifle setup, DO NOT get the MI handguards. KEYWORD is LIGHTWEIGHT. If you are setting up a varminter or a range gun, get whatever floats your boat. I wanted a lightweight 16" M4 carbine, and I did my research on all the handguard options. I did not really need any rails at all, and Free floating a 16" barrel isn't really worth it for me (minimal accuracy gains if any, refer to the Guns and Ammo test on the S&W MP15). I just stuck with the CAR handguards that came with the barrel. I figure if it isn't accurate, it is mainly because of the shooter and ammo.

Now, if you really really need rails, there are a bunch of options: non-FF 2-piece setups. If you really need to free float and have 4 rails, there are also a bunch of options: 1-piece like LaRue or DD, 2-piece like Troy, Sampson, and Midwest Industries. However, if you wanted lightweight, it narrows the choices down to a select few: Daniel Defense, LaRue, Sampson / Troy. You may want to consider using BUIS instead of a DCH for further weight reduction.

I wanted a lightweight carbine and had a specific goal in mind. Do what you have to do, and post pics!



No hard feelings dude, I'm just giving Cibo my personal opinion, and I'm glad you are giving him yours.

From left to right: 6.0lbs, 7.25lbs, 7.75lbs, 11.5lbs




Link Posted: 4/9/2006 6:08:41 PM EDT
glock24,
You are not being arrogant, and your opinion is appreciated and has validity. Metroplex on the other hand, had a specific goal in mind and therefore went with the lightest weight possible. He too is correct. As we all know, diffferent strokes for different folks. As for myself, I already have my lightweight build using a Daniel Defense rail. On this build, I will be using a 14.5" M4 barrel with a carbine gas system, and I want to use a 9" rail to have the gas block hidden underneath. My main concern isn't so much the weight of the handguard, but it's width. Based on glock24's measurement of 2 inches, the MI's width is identical to the Larue, which works for me.

Another question, if I cut my FSB will it fit under the MI FF handguard?
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 2:19:21 AM EDT
Thanks, I'm glad you see both sides of the coin.

It sounds like an interesting design you're trying to create. I've seen a lot of rifle length handguards on carbine length barrels, but never a midlength handguard on a carbine length barrel. I hope a midlength handguard will be long enough to cover the FSB as you intend. Please post pics when you're finished.

Regarding a chopped FSB under an MI, well there is a lot of room beneath the handguard. Especially since it is wide and there are no heat shields to get in the way. My only concern is the connecting collar MI uses at the end of their rail system. It serves to lock the upper and lower half together, but also constricts the diameter at the very end of the system. See the picture. If your FSB is not inside this collar, it will be a problem. I would recommend getting confirmation on where your FSB will be located before considering this rail system.


Link Posted: 4/10/2006 2:43:17 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/10/2006 2:45:00 AM EDT by metroplex]
If you shave the FSB it should fit under the HG. I think you're looking for the same setup as the S&W MP15 Tactical. They essentially use a midlength Troy MRF over a 16" carbine setup with a shaved FSB. They use BUIS (front and rear) for iron sights.
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 6:24:22 PM EDT
Thanks guys. It seems cutting the FSB will work based on your inputs. However, glock24 is right, I forgot about the connecting collar. I'll have to check to see if the FSB will clear that portion.
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 3:23:26 AM EDT
The midlength MI handguard should end in front of the FSB. Keyword is *should*. You may have to take some measurements.
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 4:23:39 AM EDT
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 5:05:18 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/11/2006 5:06:16 AM EDT by metroplex]

Originally Posted By BravoCompanyUSA:

Originally Posted By metroplex:
The midlength MI handguard should end in front of the FSB. Keyword is *should*. You may have to take some measurements.



It does, but the handguard cap could get in the way of the gas block. I would recommend to use the Rifle length for this type of application.



IIRC, the S&W MP15 Tactical uses a Troy MRF-MX, which is like a special version of the Midlength MRF. This MRF-MX measures 10" and covers the gas block. The price is going to be a tad higher, but unless MI has something that works (the rifle length will look kind of goofy and add a serious amount of weight) I'd recommend at least looking at the Troy and the S&W MP15-Tactical if you can find one in your area.

I don't have my that issue of Guns and Ammo handy with me, but I think they used a special shaved gas block (no bayo lug, no sling swivel, no FSB) right under the MRF-MX. Then they used flip up BUIS, and the rails ended forward of the FSB.

Troy MRF-MX:

10" Mid Length Extended for use over low profile gas block

Link Posted: 4/11/2006 10:12:43 AM EDT
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 3:53:30 PM EDT
Would you by any chance have the width measurement across the handguard of the Troy 10" rail? Samson also has a 10" rail, but when I measured the width it was 2 1/4 inches wide.
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 4:26:04 PM EDT
Also, do you have the Troy MRF-MX 10" rail in stock? I don't see it listed on your website.
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 4:31:48 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/11/2006 4:33:08 PM EDT by BravoCompanyUSA]
Top Top