AR Sponsor
Posted: 11/4/2004 1:15:01 PM EDT
Yes, but the cheesy trigger guard is what is supposed to be on the weapon, and worked well enough while we were all in the military. I think this is one of those things I am going to need to handle for myself to feel the gain. |
|
Bowers Tactical Magpul Trigger Guard Thread on AR15.COM on them Bravo Company Thread and Pics I ordered 2, they are SOLID, look awesome (follow the receiver lines beautifully), and have an improved attachment system over the spring loaded pin. Dave  There are also a few pics throughout the forums and EE |
| I'm from the "couldn't give a shit less what the military uses" crowd. The magpul guards are sweet, and even if they didn't add any funtionality to the rifle, they would be worth the 20 bucks for the aesthetics alone. They fill in the "gap" so the gapper isn't needed, and feel smooth, and quality unlike all the other out of place trigger guards out there. Collecting authentic military weapons is cool i guess, but if something comes along thats better, I buy it. The magpul trigger guard is better in every way possible. |
|
You don't really think the military uses "whats best" and not "whats cheapest" in most cases do you? If that was the case, half the GI's wouldn't be buying civy parts for their rifles in the sandbox, and buying their own body armor in some cases. I'm sure you weren't issued railed forends, weapon lights, lasers, or NV back in the day either, but nonetheless they are all extremely popular now. For that matter, most of us here have plain ole AR15's, not M16's so if people want to be posers, thats fine I guess as well. Personally, i say get what you think looks good and what works good and forget about the "authenticity" BS. Personally, i think the stock trigger guard looks like something you'd find on a pos AK, not a multi thousand dollar quality AR. Definetely won't find that junk stock guard on an y of my builds now that theres a better option.
|
You are certainly entitled to your opinion, I don't fault you for that.  Those of us who have carried (or still do) a weapon have a different way of looking at things. My current weapons aren't text book military, but to ignore what has been proven to work would be ignorant. I am fully aware that most people here shoot for fun, and there is nothing wrong with that, but comments from uninformed people mean very little to me. If you think the military uses things because they are cheaper, you aren't going to be swayed by anything I have to say, nor would I bother to try. |
| well i havent done it before but i am going to try it, and that is, either make my own guard or bend a metal one to the same specs. its real easy to mess with trigger guards. hell i figure if i can reshape a mauser guard, i can make my own from 1/16 to 3/32 in. steel. and get rid of that damn detent. about the most stupid thing i have ever seen in an firearm. think about it guys, an aluminum or plastic trigger guard with an detent? WTF? why just not use steel and get rid of the damn detent to begin with. hell i got an 1/8 drill bit that will do nicely for the other side. lol. |
Stickman is 100% correct. to ignore what has been proven to work is foolish and there is no need to improve upon what has already been. This is why we still use 1903 Springfields instead of M16s. This is why there are No SPRs in use since the stock versions were just fine. No sir, advances like the TA31 will never see widespread military use as the iron sights have worker great for years and anyone who used one in the last 6 years is ignoring what already has been proven to work. BELIEVE IT OR NOT THERE WERE PEOPLE LIKE THIS IN THE 90s. Optics are not for military weapons. Battery powered optics, flashlights and lasers are all useless. Free floating is useless etc... Improvement is a good thing not a bad one. I guess the Magpul stock is a poor adition too eh? |
Magpul stock? What the?? Who would use one of those futuristic looking gizmos? Why would anyone want a stock that does everything a collapsable stock does but with the solidness of a fixed stock? Why do you people need a better cheekweld? They didn't have those in Nam so why do you children need those? lol  Now that you mention it, I wouldn't trade my magpul m93a for anything. Like the trigger guard, it does everything a stocker does but better(well, the magpul stock just plain kicks ass, the trigger guard is only cool ). Plus it looks good with my ARMS 45M forend, which isn't exactly issued to every grunt out there either.  I don't think my 16" barrel, phantom 5c2 FH, or eotech is standard issue for that matter either, lol. But, the stuff kicks ass regardless.Some people just can't and won't admit there IS a better mouse trap for alot of the things out there. I'm sure there's alot of shit out there that are gimmicks, but if it adds aesthetics, or even a smidgeon of funtionality, why not give it a chance before ya knock it? Magpul builds quality shizod, bottom line. If they make it, it has a use, is built like a rock, is backed 100%, and looks great doing it. Maybe I'm just a magpul freak, but i have everything of theirs except the MIAD grip, and I personally wouldn't use anything else. |
AR Sponsor