Nolo
Member
Meh, I still think it's ugly as Hell.
What about the receivers that are made for cocking handles? The ones with the slot?
What about the receivers that are made for cocking handles? The ones with the slot?
First AR, No Forward Assist
- Thread starter Nolo
- Start date
- Status
Jorg Nysgerrig
Member
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2006
- Messages
- 7,822
You know, maybe it's because I've actually shot ARs quite a bit over the years rather than just looking pictures on the internet, but I can't say that I've ever paid much attention to the how the forward assist impacted the "lines" of the rifle.
But, if you want to go out of your way to make sure your first AR is pretty enough for you, knock yourself out.
But, if you want to go out of your way to make sure your first AR is pretty enough for you, knock yourself out.
Nolo
Member
That post had a bit of edge to it, didn't it, Jorg?
If you feel like getting me a rifle and taking me shooting every weekend, then you can make comments on how I only look at pictures on the internet.
I'm not a mall-ninja wannabe. I love shooting, and, in the end, forward assist or not, I still love to shoot.
If, in the end, I find that cost prohibits me from getting a rifle without a forward assist, then I may get one with a forward assist. It's just an aesthetic thing, it's not like I'm going into combat in Fallujah or anything.
If you feel like getting me a rifle and taking me shooting every weekend, then you can make comments on how I only look at pictures on the internet.
I'm not a mall-ninja wannabe. I love shooting, and, in the end, forward assist or not, I still love to shoot.
If, in the end, I find that cost prohibits me from getting a rifle without a forward assist, then I may get one with a forward assist. It's just an aesthetic thing, it's not like I'm going into combat in Fallujah or anything.
I can give you a good reason for having a forward assist if you are interested.
I won't allow a bolt to slam shut on an empty chamber, I feel this does the barrel extension and the bolt no good.
After cleaning or chamber inspection I let the bolt down under control and final seat it with the forward assist.
Like them or not, the forward assist does have a reason for existing.
I won't allow a bolt to slam shut on an empty chamber, I feel this does the barrel extension and the bolt no good.
After cleaning or chamber inspection I let the bolt down under control and final seat it with the forward assist.
Like them or not, the forward assist does have a reason for existing.
HorseSoldier
Member
I've never used the FA to close the bolt on a sticky round, but I use it every single time I go to the range, repeatedly, to close the bolt during a deliberate load after verifying there's actually a round in the chamber.
I've only ever handled one in rea life that had the side cocking handle cut. It memory serves me correctly the cocking handle could serve as a forward assist if needed, but since the knob was a spring loaded folder it might be a little less easy to manipulate under stress compared to the standard FA button.
Nolo
Member
Sure the FA does. And I really have no problem with it. I just think it's ugly. I also happen to think safeties and selectors are ugly, and they certainly have a reason for existing.
HorseSoldier, I was thinking of one with a fixed cocking handle, the way the AK has been doing it for years.
HorseSoldier, I was thinking of one with a fixed cocking handle, the way the AK has been doing it for years.
Zach S
Member
Nodakspud.com had slick side upper for around $125 last time I looked. Its an upper with all small parts installed, you still need the bbl, bbl nut, and BCG.
The DPMS slick side (lo pro) upper will not accept a port door, and the rail is "slightly higher" than a standard A3 upper. "Slightly higher" is the spec provided by the DMPS website, and I have no idea how much higher they consider "slightly higher."
I agree that the FA is ugly, but so is the brunton bump, which is required as I am wrong handed, and the rest of the rifle, being made out of plastic and anodized aluminum.
If I wanted a pretty 5.56, I'd get a Mini 14. Blued steel, wood stock. Far from ugly IMO.
The DPMS slick side (lo pro) upper will not accept a port door, and the rail is "slightly higher" than a standard A3 upper. "Slightly higher" is the spec provided by the DMPS website, and I have no idea how much higher they consider "slightly higher."
I agree that the FA is ugly, but so is the brunton bump, which is required as I am wrong handed, and the rest of the rifle, being made out of plastic and anodized aluminum.
If I wanted a pretty 5.56, I'd get a Mini 14. Blued steel, wood stock. Far from ugly IMO.
Nolo
Member
What about a non-AR 5.56 rifle? Golani semis? AK clones? What is their accuracy like in .223?
- Status
