User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 9/4/2005 8:12:08 PM EDT
[#1]
Fragile.
Personally, I like the feel better. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2005 8:12:55 PM EDT
[#2]
First yet me say I like the look of the triangle guards and the feel of them. But they wasn't super tough.hey also was two seporate parts #. There is a upper and lower. You broke a upper and you had to replace it with a Upper. The lower wouldn't work. It was differant. But the A2 with the round style used the same piece for the upper and lower and was made seemily stronger. That should be pretty close for ya. WarDawg
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2005 8:14:47 PM EDT
[#3]
Those were made by Mattel, right?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2005 8:23:35 PM EDT
[#4]
the -A1 I was issued with triangular gaurds didn't have an upper and lower. It was left and right though...... |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2005 8:54:32 PM EDT
[#5]
I hope you are joking and not serious. www.snopes.com is thataway-->> |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2005 9:15:46 PM EDT
[#6]
Yeah, on the A1 style its not an upper and lower, its a left and a right. And they ARE more fragile, plus the little "teeth" can pinch your hand both on top and bottom.
Still look cool though. Gotta add a gratuitous pic or two of my A1 clone...  With the movie that inspired me to build one.  My wife loves it. www.imagestation.com/video/view.html?id=4097033716&dl=1 And why not a video of it in action? WOLVERINES!!!!! (You have to save to your HD before playing it) |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2005 10:04:45 PM EDT
[#7]
I don't know about the strength of A1 handguards, but I've found that after unknowingly dropping an A2 HG on the ground and stepping on it with my 190lbs, they are strong enough to hold the rifle with.
I don't think the A1 HGs I've seen could do the same thing. WIZZO |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2005 10:26:07 PM EDT
[#8]
I think after years of having the same old rifle, the military officials in charge of such things had to come up with something new. I love my triangular SP-1 cause you can use the sawtooth edge of the handguards for cutting firewood or trimming branches to clear your fields of fire.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2005 5:26:48 AM EDT
[#9]
One reason was logistics.
I have a January 1985 issue of Soldier of Fortune magazine with a pretty detailed write up on the Army's “new” M16A2. One reason stated for the newer style HG’s was logistics. Instead of having to stock a LH and RH HG, they simply stocked one half that would fit as either an upper or lower HG. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2005 5:32:56 AM EDT
[#10]
I am guessing here, but I think a little of it has to do with methods for using a tight sling, with a tight sling you slide your week side hand forward or back to adjust elevation. I think the angle in the A1 negated some the ability to do this.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2005 6:47:12 AM EDT
[#11]
Duke,fantastic looking rifle. Are those 2 differant rifles? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2005 7:18:33 AM EDT
[#12]
*twitch* GUL DERN YOU!! *twitch* Now I gotta build an M16A1 clone...GRRR...Also, if you want your rifle to look like the one in We Were Soldiers, ya gotta get a 3 prong FH...  Personally, I think the A1 upper with the birdcage FH looks just wrong...even though it's correct for the M16A1, I still don't like the look  But like I said, that is AWESOME! ETA: What kind of upper is that? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2005 7:53:35 AM EDT
[#13]
Using a tight sling on an M16A1 wa a guarentee your shot group would be two feet to the left. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2005 7:58:59 AM EDT
[#14]
I will take your word on it, my days in service began well after the A2 was the standard A for the Marines. I know the loop sling was taught while the A1 was the standard for the Marines and the Marines didn't like the long range shooting ability of the rifle on the KD course, so as the proponent for the A2 they made allot of changes to make it more KD range friendly, hence my guess that the change in hand guard was influenced more by that than by logistic considerations.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2005 8:21:24 AM EDT
[#15]
Big Bore, Blanco, those are all pics and vid of the same rifle. The only time its ever malfunctioned was caught on film in that vid, and that's because I didn't have my magazine seated all the way, so it wasn't the gun's fault at all. You can hear me grunt as I do the immediate action drill to fix the problem. It even feeds Wolf without complaining. The upper is one of those ex-Air Force issue M16A1 uppers that CDNN Investments is selling for $269.
store.yahoo.com/cdnn/ara1upasusgi.html There ya go. I got mine from CMMG and also grabbed a bolt and carrier from them. So, lets say, after shipping and everything you have $400 in the complete upper. A stripped lower (mines a DPMS lower) runs about $100, and to complete it will run you about another $100. I got the stock set off of a group buy that a buddy found for $30. Actually I had the stock set first and wound up building a rifle based on the stock, pistol grip, and forearm that I had lying around! I got a little discount from CMMG because I didn't need the forearm that came with the upper. All told I'd say I have a little less than $650 in the gun, and it shoots VERY straight! For a lightweight, govt. profile barrel these things are pretty accurate with 55 grain ammo. My wife loves it because its so light and points so easily. Next thing I'm going to do is refinish it with Norrel's Moly Resin. They have a color that is supposed to approximate the old Colt blue-gray phosphate finishes of the 1960s. The lower will still say DPMS on ths side but who cares, it'll still be as close as I need to an M16A1! EDIT: Here I am at the end of the run caught on film. The last target was a bonus target. The zombie terrorist hostage taker had to be shot in the head only. Alot of people hit the hostage in the shoulder because they forgot that at close range you have to aim a little high because of the distance between the iron sight and the bore. I was very chuffed that I remembered, and slotted the bad guy in his right eye twice. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2005 7:37:16 PM EDT
[#16]
Actually, Mattel DID make the hanguards and pretty much all the plastic parts for the M16-A1 (or atleast that is what we were told in my Vietnam History class). |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2005 7:42:52 PM EDT
[#17]
You are so full of shit and you should have you account locked before you cause anyone else anymore stress. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2005 7:47:17 PM EDT
[#18]
Whatever man, that is one of the things i learned in my Vietnam History class by a guy that would know since he was a Cpt. in the Army at the time. And how am I causing anyone stress? By simply stating what I learned in class? Whoopdy fuckin do if you dont agreee. It is a possibillity that Mattel did make the furniture for the M16 back in the day. When dealing with the govt. contract goes to the lowest bidder . Colt didnt make all the .45's back in WWII... |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2005 7:56:11 PM EDT
[#19]
Actually, you were fed incorrect information. Mattel has gone on record saying they had never made any M-16 parts. If you had checked on Snopes, you would have relized that. This has long ago been debunked by people on this site and others. Read this link:www.snopes.com/military/m16.htm This is one of those myths that can never be substaniated because they do not have any root in truth. Much like the 5.56 was designed to wound only so as to force the enemy to tie up resources evacuating wounded. Eugene Stoner and Freemont and Sullivan had no such intentions when they designed the M-16 and never stated such. I too was in the Army and being an O-3 is no guarentee of not reeking of shit intel. Captain is a rank not a level of deification. |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2005 7:57:39 PM EDT
[#20]
tag for tomorrow
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2005 7:58:54 PM EDT
[#21]
I had no idea what snopes was.... Oh well, i guess i was told the wrong shit. There is no real reason to get pissed off though, not saying you are |
||||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2005 8:01:24 PM EDT
[#22]
I am not, I just want to nip this in the bud before someone else buys into an urban legena and starts spreading it around.
Forest fires are easier to put out when small. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2005 8:02:43 PM EDT
[#23]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2005 8:06:32 PM EDT
[#24]
Your attitude is way out of line. You need to go back to you Jr. High class for more "history". I don't have to disagree with you, you are factually wrong. You know, there are about a dozen people on this board that know more about the AR-15 than anyone else in the gun industry, military, or anywhere else. And you are not one of them and I am. Thanks for the thread hijack, moron. |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2005 8:13:25 PM EDT
[#25]
Thats cool, I understand. I am gonna have to start second guessing that guy... he was kin of eccentric
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2005 8:15:04 PM EDT
[#26]
see my post below. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2005 8:19:09 PM EDT
[#27]
Happens all the time. There are a LOT of urban legends and bullshit that get passed around in the military. Your friend/instructor probably believed it, because someone HE trusted told it to him. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2005 8:20:26 PM EDT
[#28]
My attitude was not out of line, i simply stated what i THOUGHT was true. You on the other hand were quick to cut me down instead of actually offering an answer. I dont really care what you know or how you know it or where you recieved your degree. Im sure there are facets of military history that i know and you do not and vice versa, its not the point. We ok? Back to the thread though... The handguards were somewhat brittle. As for the reason they were replaced... i would have to agree when most people said logistical problems |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2005 8:33:46 PM EDT
[#29]
scottryan, that's some funny shit  You blasted whatsthedotonmychst4 on his 9th post... I got it on my 12th... Oh, and hey, I appreciate you not fuckin me up over that mistake I made earlier whew....
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2005 8:40:17 PM EDT
[#30]
Damn, son; how long you 'been on this intarweb thingy? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2005 9:01:42 PM EDT
[#31]
Yes you were/are out of line. You were confident in your bullshit and you got called on it. And now you wont let it go. It is irrelavent that you might know some military info that I don't. This is not a general military dicussion board. This is AR15.com where we discuss the AR15 rifle. Nice try but you are still getting shut down. Why don't you just let it go? |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2005 9:14:48 PM EDT
[#32]
tag for work
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2005 10:02:52 PM EDT
[#33]
I like the triangular handguards except they get somewhat slippery if you got sweaty hands.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/6/2005 4:19:00 AM EDT
[#34]
Most of my time in the Army was with the M16A1. The new handguards came in on the M16A2 along with three other accuracy enhancements - heavier barrel, faster twist, and better rear sight adjustability. I would have to say the handguard switch was more tailored to user friendliness/accuracy than logistics.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/6/2005 5:58:35 AM EDT
[#35]
I can't say why, because I don't know, but I think the round handguards are about 1,000,000 times more comfortable, and seem less likely to break or cut me inadvetently.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/6/2005 11:45:59 AM EDT
[#36]
SCOTTRYAN IS TOTALLY CORRECT-
you were a fucking dipshit and were told once you were wrong by the people you came here to listen to and learn from in the first place!
You were quick to state your "fact" and then try and back it up after being called out once. You were so sure and quick to point out you learned it from an Army captain. After finally getting torn into more, you acknowledge "I am gonna have to start second guessing that guy... he was kin of eccentric" Why were you so quick to stand by his bullshit the first time around? You need to pick your fights based on common sense and decide whether it makes sense first before you throw out a "that was what I was told" as your entire basis for opening your trap. for the rest of you- he started this thread at 9 posts. I think I remember his "earlier" posts and he had to be straightened out with those as well... |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/6/2005 12:05:43 PM EDT
[#37]
Have heard it was simple ecconomics.... For the round handguards you can get away with one mold, that handguard design doesn't care if it's a top or a bottom as it's pefectly interchangable. Crack just one and you can order off or replace it with an identical one. Break an old A1 type handguard shell and you HAVE to replace it with a replacement part that is either a right half or left half. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/6/2005 12:08:10 PM EDT
[#38]
Come on Joe, let it go bro... It looks like Scott took care of it... No need for others to come along and kick whatsthedotonmychst4 while hes down... Back to the topic... |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/6/2005 1:57:35 PM EDT
[#41]
+1. It seems to me that scotty was out of line. The other guy did let it go. You just kept on talking like your the king shit. You say you know more about the M16 than anyone in the gun industry, I say you're an arrogant concieted ass. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/6/2005 2:24:50 PM EDT
[#42]
Schweet...I don't get why but A1's are also REALLY accurate weapons. When I got mine, it was already sighted in and was DEAD ON. Lose the 30 round mag though
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/6/2005 4:32:03 PM EDT
[#43]
Well, in an effort to somewhat try and redeem myself i spent a couple hours trying to find the answer; however, all i could dig up was the fact that the triangular handguards were non interchangeable and the new cross-sectional handguards were interchangeable.... as was stated before, so i guess no new info has come forward so far.
However, I heard from a friend who knew a guy who once served with a guy who knew one of the testing guys over at Aberdeen Proving grounds..... |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/6/2005 4:36:20 PM EDT
[#44]
I will say that I heard that "rumor" too, but never took it seriously. As far as I know Mattel just makes barbies..
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/6/2005 5:11:25 PM EDT
[#45]
The USGI's started the "Mattel" thing during the Vietnam war... It was because of the rifle being light weight, plastic and something new to them... To them it resembled a toy... Mattel had nothing to do with any manufacturing of the AR-15 or M-16 parts... |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/6/2005 5:25:01 PM EDT
[#46]
It wasn't Mattel it was Coleco. There are only six people in the world who know more about plastic furniture than Jesus, Garry Owen and Jerry Seinfeld; and you're not one of them, I am.
You people should be banned before you cause people anymore stress. Lucky for you guys, this is Arfcom, where we discuss the AR15 rifle, and not "who's a prick". |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/6/2005 6:39:38 PM EDT
[#47]
Triangular handguards pluses:
Nice flat base for resting the rifle on Easy to wrap your hand around and grip Minuses: TWO DIFFERENT PARTS to keep up with Fragile-thin fiberglas material chipped and cracked fairly easily Smooth surface got slippery very easily Round hanguards pluses: Flat space in the middle that's good for baricade resting, but pivots easier than the triangle guards Easy to wrap the hand around ROBUST Textured for your pleasure  Uses two each of the same part-a logistician's wet dream. Implementation was for the most part with the M16A2, but in some cases (Air Force, for example) triangle guards on A1s (or even M16s) were replaced by round guards-ever notice that the round handguards fit the triangular plate behind the front sight? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/6/2005 6:57:04 PM EDT
[#48]
No, they did NOT. Mattel has NO fiberglass molding capacity. Mattel can mold nearly any THERMOPLASTIC but they have never made a single gram of THERMOSET molded plastics. And it would be a DUMB idea to make handguards out of any THERMOPLASTIC as it would MELT under the HEAT of a HANDGUARD. But THERMOSETS, like the FIBERGLASS THERMOSET in both the A! and A2 handguards will withstand direct flame until it chars. But it will NEVER melt. And you armchair rangers who HAVE melted handguards need to stop putting Airsoft parts on your firearms.
|
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2005 4:32:46 AM EDT
[#49]
I think whatsthedotonmychst4 got the picture a long time ago, people can stop going off on him. BTW. whatsthedotonmychst4, the reason people were going off on you is not because you were wrong, it was because you were confident about the issue and continuously tried to back it up.
BTW. You guy's forgot to mention that DeWalt makes M16's AND YES I AM JOKING.Sammy 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2005 4:41:24 AM EDT
[#50]
Could we stop the bickering and move along?
Thanks. |
|
|
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.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
