Rather than riding on the RAS-II vs Troy, I'm opening a new topic
http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=12&t=245717

LaRue comes highly rated and endorsed wholly by Wes (MSTN). LaRue is single piece FF, while Samson/Troy are two piece FF.

Based on your actual experience , how's a LaRue considered better or less versus Samson MRFS or Troy MRF?  

Personally, I like the looks of Troy/Samson on having a continuous top rail -- looking more like a LMT-MRP.

two different set-ups.

same but different



read this thread and see if that doesnt answer you question

I reviewed back the BIG Post as well as all the related posts, and came up with these understanding :

LARUE -
http://www.laruetactical.com/lt/handguards.html
- one-tube design with three (or five to include the screws) associated parts to lock it in place.
- hg cap, front sight, muzzle device has to be removed for tube installation
- existing delta ring and 'traditional' barrel nut is not used, new barrel nut is supplied
- has an anti-roll indexing device to lock the tube with the larue barrel nut to avoid spinning.
- allen screw on both sides fixes the indexing device with the nut (in front-rear / horizontal lock)
- anti-roll indexing device is firmly fixed to the front of the upper receiver and also indexed to the gas tube.
- knurled ring locks the barrel nut in its place. (vertical lock)

TROY  and possibly SAMSON {as they were similarly designed}
http://www.militarymorons.com/weapons/ar.uppers.html  
see the section going into the bottom
- two-section rail : upper three-quarters and lower quarter rail, fixed together by clamp secured thru four allen screws
- hg cap, front sight, muzzle device NEED NOT be removed for tube installation
- existing delta ring is not used but 'traditional' barrel nut is retained
- upper rail is fixed on top of the barrel nut, and clamp secures it in place.
- two anti-rotation tabs on the clamp prevents spinning of upper tube
- lower "rail" is secured thru a spring-loaded detent on the clamp as well as tabs between the upper and lower rail.

GET BOTH !!!!

Quoted: THE PERSON DOING THE LARUE FOREND INSTALLATION DETERMINES THE FOREND'S CORRECT ALIGNMENT WITH THE RECEIVER.   WITH THE TROY DESIGN, THE PERSON WHO INSTALLED THE BARREL NUT/DELTA RING ASSEMBLY DETERMINES THE TROY FOREND'S CORRECT ALIGNMENT WITH THE RECEIVER. WES GRANT M.S.T.N.

i have found out that its basically up to the end position of the barrel nut on either installs.

Quoted: I reviewed back the BIG Post as well as all the related posts, and came up with these understanding : LARUE - http://www.laruetactical.com/lt/handguards.html - one-tube design with three (or five to include the screws) associated parts to lock it in place. - hg cap, front sight, muzzle device has to be removed for tube installation - existing delta ring and 'traditional' barrel nut is not used, new barrel nut is supplied - has an anti-roll indexing device to lock the tube with the larue barrel nut to avoid spinning. - allen screw on both sides fixes the indexing device with the nut (in front-rear / horizontal lock) - anti-roll indexing device is firmly fixed to the front of the upper receiver and also indexed to the gas tube. - knurled ring locks the barrel nut in its place. (vertical lock) TROY  and possibly SAMSON {as they were similarly designed} http://www.militarymorons.com/weapons/ar.uppers.html   see the section going into the bottom - two-section rail : upper three-quarters and lower quarter rail, fixed together by clamp secured thru four allen screws - hg cap, front sight, muzzle device NEED NOT be removed for tube installation - existing delta ring is not used but 'traditional' barrel nut is retained - upper rail is fixed on top of the barrel nut, and clamp secures it in place. - two anti-rotation tabs on the clamp prevents spinning of upper tube - lower "rail" is secured thru a spring-loaded detent on the clamp as well as tabs between the upper and lower rail.

sounds like you really did your homework so which one do you feel suits your needs? which one do you prefer to deal with if your installing yourself?

It all depends because the LaRue once installed is fairly permanent if you want to replace a mess up gas tube you have to remove the FSB which is a pain in the ass!  I go with Troy MRF-C

Quoted: GET BOTH !!!!

No thanks.   This one's an easy choice, hands down.  

Quoted: It all depends because the LaRue once installed is fairly permanent if you want to replace a mess up gas tube you have to remove the FSB which is a pain in the ass!  I go with Troy MRF-C

though there are occasional stubborn fsb pins i have rarely messed up any gas tube. and once the fsb is removed once they're not gonna be hard the second time.



anyways after you have installed the larue what reason would you have to remove it?

Quoted: Quoted: GET BOTH !!!! No thanks.   This one's an easy choice, hands down.

TROY ?

Get the Larue....because that's what I got


Bomber

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: GET BOTH !!!! No thanks.   This one's an easy choice, hands down.   TROY ?

Uhm, ya, but no, at least not in my house.

Quoted: sounds like you really did your homeworkhich

Yeah, I wish it was as easy as red and blue h.gif

-- another thing to consider MX 10.0-inches looks very good to me LaRue would come out lighter (installed) on any other configurations.

The original Troy MRF-C prototype had two pins that engaged the notches on the barrel nut.  That was not for stability but to align the rail.

It was found that there was enough space in the notches to properly install and align the barrel nut, yet have it slightly off center.  This caused misalignment of the rail system and required retorquing of the barrel nut to properly align the rail (similar to KAC, DD, LaRue, and all other FF rail installs).

After hearing about the problem I had with the prototype and with feedback from AR15.com, Troy eliminated the alignment pins for the MRF Mod-1's.  This simply required the user to do the alignment of the rail (no big deal).  AFAIK, Troy did not use the pins through the Mod-4's (of which I had two earlier this year).

Both Wes and Denny have mentioned that Troy MRF's again engage the notches in the barrel nut.  Has Troy changed the design and went back to alignment pins?

Corey

PS  Both the Troy and LaRue are excellent rail systems.  They each have their strong points however, and the user needs to decide their priorities.

Quoted: Quoted: The original Troy MRF-C prototype had two pins that engaged the notches on the barrel nut.  That was not for stability but to align the rail. It was found that there was enough space in the notches to properly install and align the barrel nut, yet have it slightly off center.  This caused misalignment of the rail system and required retorquing of the barrel nut to properly align the rail (similar to KAC, DD, LaRue, and all other FF rail installs). After hearing about the problem I had with the prototype and with feedback from AR15.com, Troy eliminated the alignment pins for the MRF Mod-1's.  This simply required the user to do the alignment of the rail (no big deal).  AFAIK, Troy did not use the pins through the Mod-4's (of which I had two earlier this year). Both Wes and Denny have mentioned that Troy MRF's again engage the notches in the barrel nut.  Has Troy changed the design and went back to alignment pins? Corey PS  Both the Troy and LaRue are excellent rail systems.  They each have their strong points however, and the user needs to decide their priorities. No Troy has not returned to the pins.  There are ribs in the upper rail that engage the barrel nuts.  There are a number of these ridges a few degrees apart that allow the installer to align the upper rail with the top of the receiver.  Once you have it aligned just tighten down the bottom clamp and the rail system is securely clamped around the barrel nut. Denny

Huh.  Just when I thought I've been through those things left, right and upside down.  Learn something new every day!

Thanks Denny.

Corey

tag

Ok, I'm going through this dilemma too, I just ordered my RRA lower and I'm having the RRA upper custom made.  The thing is, I don't know what rail system to go with, and I'm not sure if I live around around anyone that can do the LaRue fore end, which is honestly the one I want, preferably the 9" rail and have the front sight removed and changed to a low profile gas block (also LaRue).  The Troy sounds decent after reading this and seeing the pics but I'd still prefer the LaRue.  Any suggestions?

Damon

Quoted: Any suggestions?

Ask yourself a few questions.

- Do you need a continuous top rail?

- Do you want to be able to remove your handguard for bbl maintenance?

- Do you think a 2 piece railed handguard is as sturdy as a one piece?

- Do you have a permanently attached flash suppressor?

- Do you ever want to hold the railed handguard like a traditional handguard and not use the vertical grip (assuming you're going to use one)?

- Is the weight of the railed handguard something you want to consider?

Once you can nail down your needs and I mean really nail them down, the choice will be obvious.

- Do you need a continuous top rail?
advantage: Troy. But would I mount a high power optic with one ring on the rail? hmmm...

- Do you want to be able to remove your handguard for bbl maintenance?
advantage: Troy.

- Do you think a 2 piece railed handguard is as sturdy as a one piece?
advantage: LaRue?

- Do you ever want to hold the railed handguard like a traditional handguard and not use the vertical grip (assuming you're going to use one)?
Please elaborate the relevance? Will this be another 'sturdy'-ness issue for the lower rail?

- Is the weight of the railed handguard something you want to consider?
advantage: LaRue would be about 2oz lighter installed

I think I can see where my choice is going...OR DO I

Quoted: - Do you ever want to hold the railed handguard like a traditional handguard and not use the vertical grip (assuming you're going to use one)? Please elaborate the relevance? Will this be another 'sturdy'-ness issue for the lower rail?

Well, I wasn't posing the questions to you but rather the person who's question I quoted, Sindervhit.

In answer to your question, the relevance is the profile of the railed handguard. The Larue's diameter is smaller than the Troy which some folks prefer when using a railed handguard in a traditional manner.

Nevertheless, it seems that in answering the questions, you have answered your own.

Quoted:
Quoted:
Any suggestions?
Ask yourself a few questions.

- Do you need a continuous top rail?
Not necessarily, but I do like the look of the Troy...and the LaRue ring mount lol

- Do you want to be able to remove your handguard for bbl maintenance?
Never really thought about it, I suppose it would be  handy, but I never really needed to in the Army either.

- Do you think a 2 piece railed handguard is as sturdy as a one piece?
I'd have to say no, and from what I've read the LaRue is rock solid once it's mounted too.

- Do you have a permanently attached flash suppressor?
It will be permanent, but I'm still up in the air on the style too, it will be a stainless barrell, 15" without the FH

- Do you ever want to hold the railed handguard like a traditional handguard and not use the vertical grip (assuming you're going to use one)?
Probably while I'm zeroing, yes.

- Is the weight of the railed handguard something you want to consider?
Nah, I'm not a wuss

Once you can nail down your needs and I mean really nail them down, the choice will be obvious.
Umm...ok...so LaRue, right?

I think it is obvious that a two piece is more than strong enough, as the military require it. The Wt. and pounding that an M203 produces, also required two piece handguads to support  the launcher  by the new free float handguads, for one. The other is ease of maintinance, getting all the crud out that builds up after a time, thus needs as good an access as possible.
Jack

Quoted: Quoted: - Do you ever want to hold the railed handguard like a traditional handguard and not use the vertical grip (assuming you're going to use one)? Please elaborate the relevance? Will this be another 'sturdy'-ness issue for the lower rail? In answer to your question, the relevance is the profile of the railed handguard. The Larue's diameter is smaller than the Troy which some folks prefer when using a railed handguard in a traditional manner. Nevertheless, it seems that in answering the questions, you have answered your own. hr

hadI thought you're referring on how a VFG puts additional pressure on the lower rails, especially when used during 'stressful' situations.

Quoted:
Samson MRFS
Two piece, so it does not require barrel disassembly once you remove the delta ring and spring.
Continuous top rail so you can mount an optic anywhere.

+1

Quoted: I think it is obvious that a two piece is more than strong enough, as the military require it. The Wt. and pounding that an M203 produces, also required two piece handguads to support  the launcher  by the new free float handguads, for one. The other is ease of maintinance, getting all the crud out that builds up after a time, thus needs as good an access as possible. Jack

Good to see you back, Jack!

Corey

Quoted: We had somewhat different trains of thought. I thought you're referring on how a VFG puts additional pressure on the lower rails, especially when used during 'stressful' situations.

Good point, but yes I wasn't thinking of that because I only yse one piece rail systems.

Taggage, as I am teetering on the whole dilemma of what rail system to go with myself.  

Barrel maintenance????  Garden hose.................compressed air...............what else is needed????


Adding:  Arguing that having a continuous rail for optics flexibility and also arguing that removal is easier is a self defeating argument.  If you were relying on the continuous rail for optics mounting and you then regularly remove it for "barrel maintenance", your return to zero is null and void.

Quoted: Quoted: Barrel maintenance????  Garden hose.................compressed air...............what else is needed???? Adding:  Arguing that having a continuous rail for optics flexibility and also arguing that removal is easier is a self defeating argument.  If you were relying on the continuous rail for optics mounting and you then regularly remove it for "barrel maintenance", your return to zero is null and void. It is two different arguments I am with you, Mongo, on not removing the system for regular maintenance. I bolt the lower rail on and leave it on. So, the continuous rail for optics is only valid  in my case. Unless, I only remove the bottom rail. Then zero would not be affected at all. I like the two piece system because it is easier to install, I don't care about how easy it comes off. 3rdtk was talking about regular disassembly of the rail system for barrel maintenance and cleaning. But, he never mentioned mounting optics.  That was me. So there is one more good thing about the two piece systems. More options.

I'm not picking on any one person with my statement, as there are many that list the same advantages for the Troy/Samson.  For those unwilling or unable to remove either a muzzle device and/or a FSB, they are a great choice.  Just have realistic expectations on what you are getting, that's all.  Except for monolithic rails, I'll probably never be sold on anything other than receiver mounted optics.  YMMV.

A while back I recieved a used AR with a Samson rail on the front.   I looked at it very carefully and dis-assembled and re-assembled it.  I like the locking screw on the bottom that can be used to bolt the 2 halves solidly together.  I will not argue that a 1 piece system may be stronger than a 2 piece.   I am not planning on mounting optics on the front rail, nor will I fight the fact that zeroing may be a problem with it.  To me, it's an accessory rail.  Things like vertical grips, lights, and illuminators should be mounted there.  My current build is a 14.5" with a pinned F/S.  My choices are to either send out the barrel and have the F/S removed along with the sight, then a 1 piece FF forend put on, followed by the sight and F/S being replaced....OR....Put a 2 piece system on it like the Samson/Troy.   Yes, I realise I could go with a non FF rail if I wanted.  This is America (for most of us (not picking on anybody else)).  We get what we want, when we want it, and as much as we want of it.  SO I selected the Samson over the Troy because of the additional locking capabilities that the halves can utilize together, thus making it a stronger piece when fully assembled.

I talked with Rob from TalonArms about some of the precise factors of the Samson rails in comparison to others.  We talked about weight, sturdyness, ease of application, rail match up and other things.  I can only say this....Rob was extremely open and informative.  He was not trying to get me to buy his product but the product that would best fit my needs.  He openly stated that if I wanted "X" or "Y" I would have to visit other vendors.  He also gave some vendor options for me to pick those items from.  Rob isn't one to feel that his product is the only good product and if you don't buy his, you are buying junk.  I buy my parts from who treats me with respect, who takes care of me, who is honest, and obviously who has what I am looking for.  If I don't think somebody is being straight with me I will spend more money with somebody else who is true to me.

I bought another Samson today along with some other items.  The Samson rail will hold accessories (my optics go on my flat top reciever).  I have a pinned F/S and I felt this was a very good route for me to follow.   I already have one Samson and I can say I am not upset with it at all.  Everyone out there has some valid points and discussions like this are great places for people to air out thier feelings and input as long as they are not just morons who aren't open to objectivity.  

I'll post pics when I finish my build.  

Quoted: Quoted: Actually it has nothing to do with the Armorers. It is just a bad ideal to split the rings (whether on a TROY or Samson). C4 If they were off by 12" at 100, that was an installation problem.   For all of you guys out there just reading through this, I will leave you with some very wise words from a very wise man. You are free to do as you wish, but make sure your decision is based on something more than conjecture or Errornet chatter. Pat Rogers

The fact that the Troy or Samsons have nothing to get them back to exactly where they were initially installed gives me a gut reaction that anything is possible and 12MOA shift doesn't really surprise me.

While testing a POF system, I had a shift of 0.010" by loosening one of the mounting setscrews.  This small change resulted in a 3" POI change at 25yds - YES, THAT'S A 3" CHANGE OF POI AT 25YDS.

So you decide, as Pat says - should you trust everything you read on the errornet????

Added the pic I said I would:

FWIW....

I have a Colt MT6731 that has a Leupold Vari-XII 3-9 on it.  Originally it was mounted in Leupold rings on top of an el'cheapo B-Square riser (all of this being on the upper receiver).  The rifle produced one 3 shot group that was 5/8" at 100 yards and would consistently do sub-1" 3-5 shot groups at that same range.

At one point I switched to ARMS #22 rings and mounted one ring on a Troy MRF.  I was no longer able shoot sub-1" groups with it.

When LaRue came out with their outstanding SPR mount, I had pretty much figured out that I need to go back to my upper receiver mount and plunked down the money for the mount.  With the SPR mount putting the scope back on the upper receiver, I am now able to shoot sub-1" groups again.

YMMV.

Corey

PS  I had also heard that rails heat up differently than the upper receiver and that might be part of what is causing these accuracy problems.  It makes sense to me.  But my rule now is to keep optics on the upper receiver.  I dunno what I would do with an MRP or MRS, but it doesn't matter because I don't have either.

EDITED to add that nothing here should be taken as an indictment of Troy MRF's.  Understanding that one of the trade-offs with them is that they are easier to install but potentially less stable than a LaRue.  For me now looking at rail systems as "accessory mounts" (i.e., no optics) it doesn't matter.

That being said, here is the current configuration of the MT6731 I mentioned above:

If the rail is tight and does not move, the only thing I would think that would cause a zero shift would be uneven heating and expansion (due to heat) between the rail and the receiver.  That and perhaps that ARMS mounts were used.  

My Troy MRF-CX does not have alignment pins--it is now 1 year old.  

It is rock solid and will not move, even after I tried moving it with a VFG.  

I did have to take a dremel to the rail because it was contacting the handguard nut--bad design or bad machining, I have no idea.  Other than that, the rail is very nice.  It does look slighly purple however.  

I'd probably go Samson for another M-4 type rifle, and Larue for an SPR-type rifle.  

What does Samson rail have thay Troy doesn't? My 1-yr old Troy MRF-C has the Allen head screw on the bottom rail next the push in lock.

I would loke to change over to LaRue 7.0 or DD rail. is DD rail that the military use's and what you can buy is there any different's in them?

Quoted: What does Samson rail have thay Troy doesn't? My 1-yr old Troy MRF-C has the Allen head screw on the bottom rail next the push in lock.

It sounds like you have the third generation of MRF.

They dropped the set screw on Mod-4.

Corey

PS  Mods 1 through 3 were actually manufactured by Samson I believe.  So the Mod-3 was where Troy and Samson split, with each adding their own improvements and moving on to Mods 4+.