AR Sponsor
Posted: 12/17/2013 10:25:47 AM EDT
| Smart or not smart? |
|
Quoted:
mainly it's the first thing i want to grab when carrying Considering you're not even supposed to use the "carry handle" as a "carry handle" I would say "no". 
The A1 and A2 receivers only had the "carry handle" because it protected the finger cocking lever in the original AR10 designs. When it was decided the cocking-slot was a risk for too much dirt or FOD for military acceptance and they went to the T-charging handle over the rear of the receiver extension/buffer tube/stock, the "carry handle" stayed partly out of inertia, partly because it was somewhat stronger and protected the rear sight tower a bit, and there were already some scope mounts for the design. I know the FAL has an honest-to-God carry handle, but I'm unclear as to why or when someone in combat would ever need to carry their rifle like a suitcase.  I was never in the military, but it's my understanding that the Drill Instructors of every service would smoke you if caught carrying an AR/M16 family rifle that way.
|
|
Quoted:
Considering you're not even supposed to use the "carry handle" as a "carry handle" I would say "no".
The A1 and A2 receivers only had the "carry handle" because it protected the finger cocking lever in the original AR10 designs. When it was decided the cocking-slot was a risk for too much dirt or FOD for military acceptance and they went to the T-charging handle over the rear of the receiver extension/buffer tube/stock, the "carry handle" stayed partly out of inertia, partly because it was somewhat stronger and protected the rear sight tower a bit, and there were already some scope mounts for the design. Quoted:
Quoted:
mainly it's the first thing i want to grab when carrying Considering you're not even supposed to use the "carry handle" as a "carry handle" I would say "no".
The A1 and A2 receivers only had the "carry handle" because it protected the finger cocking lever in the original AR10 designs. When it was decided the cocking-slot was a risk for too much dirt or FOD for military acceptance and they went to the T-charging handle over the rear of the receiver extension/buffer tube/stock, the "carry handle" stayed partly out of inertia, partly because it was somewhat stronger and protected the rear sight tower a bit, and there were already some scope mounts for the design. This. "Carry handles" are not carry handles. |
|
First thing I grab is either hand guard or pistol grip. Logic dictates to me I am grabbing my rifle to use it not carry it and if I am carrying it I am slinging and hands still go to corresponding spot on rifle where I shot from.
AR's are not handbags/purses/european man purse for those of you who have them.... they are rifles. |
| Ok I'll be the dissenting opinion here... Scopes are relatively heavy, and keeping them in perfect, repeatable allignment requires strong rings. Because I trust my rings and the construction of my Leupy VX-R I pick the rifle up with it all the time. I dont "carry" it with it, but feel no aversion to lifting the weight of the rifle using the scope. I'm thinking that there is far more g-force applied by heavier-caliber weapons that my rings and scope were designed for, so lifting the AR (even with the pig mine is) with it doesn't scare me in the least. If I had ever experienced a POI shift or anything that gave me an indication this was bad I'd (of course) avoid doing this, but you picking my rifle up by the scope will not get a reaction out of me. I'm not going to grab it and jog with it like that, habitually it's a lift-then-sling affair, but still, no issues personally whatsoever. |
|
Quoted:
I received one of these as a present, why would anyone buy a man one of these...FOR-THE-LOVE-OF-GOD!!! Quoted:
Quoted:
european man purse I received one of these as a present, why would anyone buy a man one of these...FOR-THE-LOVE-OF-GOD!!! Maybe they are trying to tell you something...? 
|
|
I dont even use the "carry handle: as a carry handle.
While the scope might be tough enough, and the mount as well... the problem co,es from the lack of good purchase for your grip. You are more likely to drop the weapon. Also the fact that you could unknowingly bump the turrets if they are target type. |
|
Quoted:
Considering you're not even supposed to use the "carry handle" as a "carry handle" I would say "no".
The A1 and A2 receivers only had the "carry handle" because it protected the finger cocking lever in the original AR10 designs. When it was decided the cocking-slot was a risk for too much dirt or FOD for military acceptance and they went to the T-charging handle over the rear of the receiver extension/buffer tube/stock, the "carry handle" stayed partly out of inertia, partly because it was somewhat stronger and protected the rear sight tower a bit, and there were already some scope mounts for the design. I know the FAL has an honest-to-God carry handle, but I'm unclear as to why or when someone in combat would ever need to carry their rifle like a suitcase. I was never in the military, but it's my understanding that the Drill Instructors of every service would smoke you if caught carrying an AR/M16 family rifle that way.
Quoted:
Quoted:
mainly it's the first thing i want to grab when carrying Considering you're not even supposed to use the "carry handle" as a "carry handle" I would say "no".
The A1 and A2 receivers only had the "carry handle" because it protected the finger cocking lever in the original AR10 designs. When it was decided the cocking-slot was a risk for too much dirt or FOD for military acceptance and they went to the T-charging handle over the rear of the receiver extension/buffer tube/stock, the "carry handle" stayed partly out of inertia, partly because it was somewhat stronger and protected the rear sight tower a bit, and there were already some scope mounts for the design. I know the FAL has an honest-to-God carry handle, but I'm unclear as to why or when someone in combat would ever need to carry their rifle like a suitcase. I was never in the military, but it's my understanding that the Drill Instructors of every service would smoke you if caught carrying an AR/M16 family rifle that way.
Quote from one of my Basic Training Drill Sergeants- "Hey Private, does that weapon say Samsonite on it anywhere?" Private searches every inch of the rifle for the next 2 minutes. "No Drill sergeant!" "Then stop carrying it like a freaking suitcase!!" 
|
|
Quoted: Quote from one of my Basic Training Drill Sergeants- "Hey Private, does that weapon say Samsonite on it anywhere?" Private searches every inch of the rifle for the next 2 minutes. "No Drill sergeant!" "Then stop carrying it like a freaking suitcase!!" Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: mainly it's the first thing i want to grab when carrying Considering you're not even supposed to use the "carry handle" as a "carry handle" I would say "no". The A1 and A2 receivers only had the "carry handle" because it protected the finger cocking lever in the original AR10 designs. When it was decided the cocking-slot was a risk for too much dirt or FOD for military acceptance and they went to the T-charging handle over the rear of the receiver extension/buffer tube/stock, the "carry handle" stayed partly out of inertia, partly because it was somewhat stronger and protected the rear sight tower a bit, and there were already some scope mounts for the design. I know the FAL has an honest-to-God carry handle, but I'm unclear as to why or when someone in combat would ever need to carry their rifle like a suitcase. I was never in the military, but it's my understanding that the Drill Instructors of every service would smoke you if caught carrying an AR/M16 family rifle that way. Quote from one of my Basic Training Drill Sergeants- "Hey Private, does that weapon say Samsonite on it anywhere?" Private searches every inch of the rifle for the next 2 minutes. "No Drill sergeant!" "Then stop carrying it like a freaking suitcase!!"  "Samsonite! I was WAY off." |
AR Sponsor