Last year it seemed like DD rails were the shiznit.  Now it's all about Larue, Samson, and Troy.

Are the DD rails still "current and serviceable" products?  Are there any significant drawbacks to the DD products when compared to Larue, or is it a matter of preferring chocolate over pecan?

I like my DDs.  The LaRues are superior, due to their tube nut locking feature, but that's not enough for me to wholesale swap out the 4 DD rails systems I run right now.  I was not overly impressed with my Troy/Samson experience, so I personally wouldn't use them, unless I had a barrel with a permanently attached muzzle device, and even then there are other options out there.  YMMV.

If I were doing a new build right now, I'd definitely go LaRue and not look back.

I like the Daniel Defense products, but admit the locking but seems a good idea- especially for those who use a vertical grip (and put torque pressure on the FF rail)

I have never had issues with the DD though so the extra nut may be overdone or simply insurance.

If and when I get going on my 20" project, it is going to b Knights however.

I base this on KAC reputation and the .mil authenticity factor (A4gery project)

DD and LaRue...both great systems.  I have always had great customer service with DD.  LaRue has always treated me fairly and has constantly put out a nice product.  Its a chocolate /vanilla, Ford /Chevy ting.  I like DD rails and LT mounts.

Jim

As long as you chose one of those two FF rail systems, you will come out on top. They are the best.

[email protected]

The locking barrel nut feature of the LaRue is pretty slick and I wish DD had it (or something similar) but I still wouldn't rule out the DD. The DD still has a significant advantage over the LaRue in both weight and width. Width may or may not be an issue depending on a number of things but for any weapon where the final weight is a concern\issue, I would choose the DD over the LaRue. That's my $.02 anyway

Quoted: The locking barrel nut feature of the LaRue is pretty slick and I wish DD had it (or something similar) but I still wouldn't rule out the DD. The DD still has a significant advantage over the LaRue in both weight and width. Width may or may not be an issue depending on a number of things but for any weapon where the final weight is a concern\issue, I would choose the DD over the LaRue. That's my $.02 anyway

Yep, now that I own both I agree with everything written above.  The Larue is FAT (no phat) and putting some Tango Down rail covers on it makes iteven fatter.  I'll try and take some comparison pics tonight when I get home.

Quoted: Yep, now that I own both I agree with everything written above.  The Larue is FAT (no phat) and putting some Tango Down rail covers on it makes iteven fatter.  I'll try and take some comparison pics tonight when I get home.

Have you ever held a KAC RAS? They are rounder and fatter than either the DD or Larue. From what I recall, the DD has a more oval profile than the Larue due to the fact that the lower rail on the DD is taller. The Larue's profile is smaller overall because it's lower rail is short than the DD. I'll be interested to see you pics but I will check mine when I get home. I've got all 3 to compare. My DD has KAC panels on and the Larue on my middie has TD panels.

The LaRue locking nut fixed a problem that wasn't there.  It's like a priest taken Viagra it doesn't make any sense.hile

Tag

Quoted: The LaRue locking nut fixed a problem that wasn't there.  It's like a priest taken Viagra it doesn't make any sense. While the LaRue and DD are very similar in cost and in weight why is everyone so hype on the LaRue Handguards over the DD.

I take it you've never had an RAS get loose before? I have on two different rifles and at least one of them was installed by a very well know and reputable dealer. They absolutely positively did ths install right but 2-3 yrs. later, the bbl nut is loose.

If you don't think the locking tab is worth it, it's only because you haven't need it yet.

DD is better than Larue for my use because its slimmer and lighter.  I have not had any issues with the DD rail coming loose.  Perhaps one day I will and I will retighten it.  The DD is lighter every sinlge day and mounts your side mounted lights closer to center line every single day.  Even if the DD rail became loose it cant cause a malfunction and can be corrected by simply hand tighening the end cap till you can strap wrench the cap at home.  Both are excellent units but to say Larue is superior is simply wrong.  Additional weight and bulk for a feature that may never be needed is not superiority IMO.

Quoted: Quoted: Yep, now that I own both I agree with everything written above.  The Larue is FAT (no phat) and putting some Tango Down rail covers on it makes iteven fatter.  I'll try and take some comparison pics tonight when I get home. Have you ever held a KAC RAS? They are rounder and fatter than either the DD or Larue. From what I recall, the DD has a more oval profile than the Larue due to the fact that the lower rail on the DD is taller. The Larue's profile is smaller overall because it's lower rail is short than the DD. I'll be interested to see you pics but I will check mine when I get home. I've got all 3 to compare. My DD has KAC panels on and the Larue on my middie has TD panels.

I used to own one of the very old RIS actually.  I don't really remember the size of it being that bad, but I didn't own it at the same time as the DD and Larue.

Quoted: Additional weight and bulk for a feature that may never be needed is not superiority IMO.

Can you quantify that weight difference?

Quoted: Quoted: The LaRue locking nut fixed a problem that wasn't there.  It's like a priest taken Viagra it doesn't make any sense. While the LaRue and DD are very similar in cost and in weight why is everyone so hype on the LaRue Handguards over the DD. I take it you've never had an RAS get loose before? I have on two different rifles and at least one of them was installed by a very well know and reputable dealer. They absolutely positively did ths install right but 2-3 yrs. later, the bbl nut is loose. If you don't think the locking tab is worth it, it's only because you haven't need it yet.

The barrel nut does not get loose its just the end cap and it can be retightened by hand in about 2 seconds.  Then you retighten with a strap wrench at home.  Takes about 30 seconds.  If your really paranoid stake your DD cap and its never going to move.

Quoted: The barrel nut does not get loose its just the end cap and it can be retightened by hand in about 2 seconds.  Then you retighten with a strap wrench at home.  Takes about 30 seconds.  If your really paranoid stake your DD cap and its never going to move.

Sorry, you are correct regarding the terminology but from what I have been told from a reliable source, it's not as easy as that. I don't mean to disagree with you but I'm getting conflicting information. I need to check with my source again. More info to follow.

The barrel nut torque is what it is.  With the DD they have two SS pins which insert into the nut holding the rail system in place.  The only way to spin the handguard is if you didn't properly torque the barrel nut.  As far as the collar attaching the rail to the upper, a strap wrench for 19.00 bucks will do the job well.  So long as all is torqued properly, the DD system is as strong as they come.  

LaRue still makes a great system and you cant go wrong with it either, I just prefer the slim feel of the DD.  Is one hands down better than the other....NO.

Jim

Quoted: Quoted: Additional weight and bulk for a feature that may never be needed is not superiority IMO. Can you quantify that weight difference?

DD -
7.0 - 8.5oz
9.0 - 10.5oz
12.0 - 13.1oz

Width = 1.93"

LaRue -
7.0 - 11.5oz
9.0 - 13.2oz
12.0 - 16.5oz

Width = 2.04"

Information from - FAQ: The Big Thread On FF & Railed Forends which is tacked at the top of this forum.

Quoted: Just weighed the LT rails and here are the specs: 7.0 11.1 9.0 13.2 12.0 16.2 The DD 7.0  width is 1.951 and the LT 7.0 width is 1.999. C4

The weights you just posted are so close the weights posted above that the difference is probably just the difference in the scales used.

As far as the width, according to the thread, the width is supposed to be taken at the widest point. I realize the actually rail width is most valid to the discussion here but on both the DD and LaRue, I believe the rail nut is probably the widest point and that may be where those other measurements came from? That and really 1.999 to 2.04 isn't that far off either and could be the difference in calibration of two different tools used as well.

The most valid way to compare would be for somebody to measure and weigh both (DD and LT) with the same tools\scales.

Quoted:   The DD is lighter every sinlge day and mounts your side mounted lights closer to center line every single day.

By Grant's measurements, the La Rue is .048" wider than the DD.


For reference, a dime measures .051".


.048" divided by 2 = .024", that's how much wider the LaRue is on each side of the center line of the bore.

So your flashlight is closer to the center line of the bore by less than half the thickness of a dime.

C4IGrant  are these weights with or without panels?

Also can you elborate on your big negitive that you threw at me?

Quoted: Also can you elborate on your big negitive that you threw at me?

Tube locking nut tightness is a real issue in the real world on real weapons.  The LaRue locking device eliminates this issue completely.

I appreciate that because you know that I have not experience with real weapons in real world situations.hat

I really like both DD and LaRue but when it came time pick one for my mid-length project I went with the LaRue because I really like the locking feature and it was also about $50 less expensive then the DD!

They're both quality products and you can't really lose regardless of which on you choose.

Quoted: I was not overly impressed with my Troy/Samson experience, so I personally wouldn't use them, unless I had a barrel with a permanently attached muzzle device, and even then there are other options out there.  YMMV.

Could you elaborate on this?

Quoted: LaRue... ...was also about $50 less expensive then the DD!

Where were you shopping?
Daniel Defense 9.0 for $275
Larue Tactical 9.0 for $273

and if you have secret squirrel pricing at Brownells the DD is even cheaper

Quoted: Quoted: LaRue... ...was also about $50 less expensive then the DD! Where were you shopping? Daniel Defense 9.0 for $275 Larue Tactical 9.0 for $273 and if you have secret squirrel pricing at Brownells the DD is even cheaper

Not those places but I paid less than that price for my LaRue 9.0...

Quoted: Quoted: I was not overly impressed with my Troy/Samson experience, so I personally wouldn't use them, unless I had a barrel with a permanently attached muzzle device, and even then there are other options out there.  YMMV. Could you elaborate on this?

I had an earlier version and here's the issues I had:

The top rail was uneven with the receiver rail, there was about a 0.050" difference and the Troy sat lower.

Due to the way it is built, with the crossbolts near the barrel nut and supporting aluminum there, 11-rib KAC panels would not lock in on either of the side rails.  They are easily trimmed to allow locking, but that was something I didn't feel like doing.

I have pics somewhere on this site showing both issues.

Additionally, with the version I have, there was some people who could pop their lower rail off while using a FVG.  The locking detent wasn't adequate.  This problem has since been resolved, IIRC.

Both of my issues were minor and wouldn't affect my decision if I needed a continuous rail and had a permenently attached FH, but as of right now I have neither and use other rail systems that better fit my wants/needs.  Even at that, I may lean towards the KAC RAS II for that need, should it ever arise.

I'm by no means saying that the Troy/Samson rails systems are bad or inadequate, I'm just saying they didn't fill my need at the time.  I throw these issues out there because these earlier rail system do show up in shops and on the EE and people should know about them before it becomes a surprise to them.  People seem to think that I like to hammer issues like this, but it's not really that way.  The questions come up weekly and I respond to these as if the person asking the question is a complete newb to make sure they get the whole story.




Cheaf,

There are stories of guys in the field using wire to hold their tube locking nuts in place due to them coming loose.  I've never seen it or heard it first hand, but I can see where it could happen.  When you rely on weapon with your life, little things like that make perfect sense to me.  I don't rely on any of my weapons, but I can recognize a legitimate product enhancement when I see one.  Guys building weapons for the pros (MSTN, G&R, etc.) recognize it and prefer the LaRues for that reason.  YMMV.

While I'm sure this information is available elsewhere, I decided to measure the parts I have to see for myself.

DD
Width 1.94"
Height 2.43"

LT
Width 2.00"
Height 2.11"

Given that the top rails are level with the flattop of the receiver the DD evidently extends down 1/3" further from the barrel.  I did find the measurements interesting in the width since I was always under the impression that the DD was narrower by more than 6/100".

I tend to prefer the DD for the modest weight difference, but it would appear that the width is a non-issue.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Just weighed the LT rails and here are the specs: 7.0 11.1 9.0 13.2 12.0 16.2 The DD 7.0  width is 1.951 and the LT 7.0 width is 1.999. C4 The weights you just posted are so close the weights posted above that the difference is probably just the difference in the scales used. As far as the width, according to the thread, the width is supposed to be taken at the widest point. I realize the actually rail width is most valid to the discussion here but on both the DD and LaRue, I believe the rail nut is probably the widest point and that may be where those other measurements came from? That and really 1.999 to 2.04 isn't that far off either and could be the difference in calibration of two different tools used as well. The most valid way to compare would be for somebody to measure and weigh both (DD and LT) with the same tools\scales. It could be the scales (don't doubt that). Also when someone weighs the DD rails, make sure to do it with the steel barrel nut. C4

Why?  DD offers the aluminum barrel nut... its why I bought it and would NOT buy a steel barrel nut for it.  I wanted the quarter pound lighter weight.  LT does not offer aluminum barrel nuts.  Its a quarter pound heavier.  I would have bought the LT rail instead of the DD if I could not get the aluminum barrel nut.  A quarter pound off my foreend is a quarter pound.  My rifle is still front heavy and I will be reconfiguring my rilfe this year to make it even less front heavy.  The steel barrel nut should not be used to compare LT and DD rails IMO.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: The locking barrel nut feature of the LaRue is pretty slick and I wish DD had it (or something similar) but I still wouldn't rule out the DD. The DD still has a significant advantage over the LaRue in both weight and width. Width may or may not be an issue depending on a number of things but for any weapon where the final weight is a concern\issue, I would choose the DD over the LaRue. That's my $.02 anyway Yep, now that I own both I agree with everything written above.  The Larue is FAT (no phat) and putting some Tango Down rail covers on it makes iteven fatter.  I'll try and take some comparison pics tonight when I get home. The reason that the LT rail is wider than the DD rail is becuase all four of its rail follow the M1913 Picatinny spec. Only the 12 and 6 rails follow it on the DD rail. C4

Everyone should also know this is a 100% non issue.  There is no accessory made that will fit the LT rail that will not fit the DD rail at the 3 or 9 positions.... not ONE!  Well unless you hold your rifle gangsta stlye and put your TD grip on the side of your weapon.  I am sure thats a huge issue to consider.

Quoted: While I'm sure this information is available elsewhere, I decided to measure the parts I have to see for myself. DD Width 1.94" Height 2.43" LT Width 2.00" Height 2.11" Given that the top rails are level with the flattop of the receiver the DD evidently extends down 1/3" further from the barrel.  I did find the measurements interesting in the width since I was always under the impression that the DD was narrower by more than 6/100". I tend to prefer the DD for the modest weight difference, but it would appear that the width is a non-issue.

I feels much slimmer but I guess its the lower rail whichis lower giving that feeling?  Interesting to see how littel difference it is .  I incorrectly assumed the LT would be the same width my KAC FF RAS was and have only hled someone elses LT rail to compare to my DD and judged by feel.  I would not call a quater pound "modest" when it comes to a front heavy rifle like the AR15 though.  Every quarter pound extra onthe front of you r ifle will quickly turn a well balanced rifle into a nose heavy rifle.

Quoted: I feels much slimmer but I guess its the lower rail whichis lower giving that feeling?

I believe you are correct.  It's about the ratio, not the actual dimensions.

Interesting to see how littel difference it is .  I incorrectly assumed the LT would be the same width my KAC FF RAS was and have only hled someone elses LT rail to compare to my DD and judged by feel.

I don't have a KAC rail to measure, but I'll try to find one.  Do you know the reported measurements to compare?

I would not call a quater pound "modest" when it comes to a front heavy rifle like the AR15 though.  Every quarter pound extra onthe front of you r ifle will quickly turn a well balanced rifle into a nose heavy rifle.

Actually the placement of other accessories can change all that pretty dramatically.  A Magpul stock, for instance, weighs more than a Vltor or standard collapsible stock and balances out with a LT rail quite nicely.

Threads like this and being able to resolve these issues for myself are why I built these two rifles.  Neither one shares a single accessory or part.

Quoted: Threads like this and being able to resolve these issues for myself are why I built these two rifles.  Neither one shares a single accessory or part.

I would agree with you there 100%. Forums like this are great to find out what options are availible and to know what makes one peice more (or less) desirable then another but when it gets right down to it, you have to try all the options yourself to see how well they each work for you. In a case like this, you really need to try both (or all three if you are still considering a Troy\Sampson) to make an informed decision.