Posted: 11/12/2014 7:38:17 PM EDT
| Its been a question thats plagued me for a while... I cant help but notice on higher end AR10 rifles such as Knights Armament and Larue Tactical Ar10s that there is no forward assist. Considering that the forward assist was a major evolution in the ar15 platform it would make sense (right?) for military applications to have a forward assist on the AR10 rifle. Ive read reports of marksmen wanting the forward assist to help minimize noise when operating the weapon in close quarters combat where absolute silence was critical. Other brands, such as DPMS and Rock River LAR-8 offer a forward assist. I am a proud owner of a LAR-8 Standard Operator and i find the forward assist a "better to have and not need, than need and not have" feature. So my main question being, why doesn't the manufacturers of AR10 platforms that are SIGNIFICANTLY more expensive than lets say DPMS or Rock River for example, include a forward assist on their rifles? Anyone have any input on that? |
| The forward assist was a major step backward, not a major evolution. It's a useless appendage, if the round won't chamber, eject it and start over. If you're doing a brass check, use your thumb through the ejection port and push against the shelf on the bolt carrier. I won't buy an upper that has one. |
| Don't see the need for one. I'm just a target shooter/hunter, not involved in life and death shooting. Some of those folks might have a valid need, but like the poster above, if the round doesn't chamber I want it out of the gun. I'm not going to try to force it into the chamber. Doesn't make a difference to me if there's one on the gun or not. I've got both, but I've never use it. |
|
I agree with JoshAston, it was not a major step forward. It was nothing. Despite all the silly stories about how or why it was introduced, the fact is it was simply added because the Army wanted it added. By forcing a round to chamber, that does not want to chamber, you potentially can easily turn a simply failure to feed into a much worse malfunction that could require more than a simple 1 second malfunction clearing drill to a serious failure rendering your rifle inoperable. Tap, rack and bang is by far the best way to deal with a failure of the bolt to close as it takes the problem out of the equation. More specifically, to the AR308 or AR10 pattern, the bolt group and buffer spring is bigger and stronger and the added mass coming forward is greater therefore a failure of the bolt to lock is much less.
When I was at basic training (Harmony Church 2012), SPORTS was mentioned very briefly. Despite the fact that malfunctions happened a lot because of the crappy magazines, I never saw anyone utilize SPORTS and I always used tap rack and bang. I never saw cadre nor a Drill Sergeant suggest anyone touch the forward assist. On my own AR, my primary, there is no forward assist and I have never needed it. IMO, the quiet loading thing is BS too. If you know you may have to fire a shot (personal defense, military, LE, hunting purposes), why the hell is your rifle unloaded? Why are you waiting to load it until some thug takes a shot at you? |
|
Quoted:
Don't see the need for one. I'm just a target shooter/hunter, not involved in life and death shooting. Some of those folks might have a valid need, but like the poster above, if the round doesn't chamber I want it out of the gun. I'm not going to try to force it into the chamber. Doesn't make a difference to me if there's one on the gun or not. I've got both, but I've never use it. on my carbine I have needed it in weather below 20f |
| I remember rifle qual on Edson Range, sling shot, brass check, tap the forward assist. I learned it there and on every range stateside and prior to leaving the wire in Iraq, I've always tapped the forward assist. I can remember a time or two where there has been a stubborn round that didn't want to chamber. A good push on that forward assist always solved that. As far as immediate action goes for a malfunction, I agree that Tap Rack Bang is the best course of action. The forward assist is probably a "unnecessary" component as in there is more than one way to skin a cat, but i am sticking to the mind set of better to have and not need... Thanks for your input guys. |
|
Quoted:
on my carbine I have needed it in weather below 20f Quoted:
Quoted:
Don't see the need for one. I'm just a target shooter/hunter, not involved in life and death shooting. Some of those folks might have a valid need, but like the poster above, if the round doesn't chamber I want it out of the gun. I'm not going to try to force it into the chamber. Doesn't make a difference to me if there's one on the gun or not. I've got both, but I've never use it. on my carbine I have needed it in weather below 20f Damn. I had no idea it got that cold in FL. I've shot M16's at well below -30'. Neaver used the FA, but then it was a M16 |
|
Quoted:
The only thing the FA is good for is putting a Gas Vent in! I have it on most of my 5.56 guns, and keep it because of the "rather have and not nee". On my 308's, however, I recently replaced 2 FA's with gas vents and will most likely do the same with several other guns now. |
|
Quoted:
The only thing the FA is good for is putting a Gas Vent in! Quoted for truth - I have them on both of my suppressed ARs. Forward assists are a negative feature in my mind. I've seen stoppages because of them in person, and I've seen pictures of a broken forward assist that rendered the gun useless. |
| I laugh everytime I hear about the use of the FA to minimize noise. First of all, the AR-15 was not meant to ride the bolt carrier to load a round in the chamber. If you want to minimize noise, that is what the safety lever is for. You should already go in hot, and when it is time to shoot, take the safety off. |
| The army wanted to improve the reliability of the M-16 after the first issue due to the jamming issues that were reported in Vietnam most of those issues were due to improper cleaning of the weapons hence the comic book we have all seen on this and some due to the first generation or model, these were some of the first of the high tech guns most of the older guns would run with out much cleaning, there was a lot of improvements made to it during the years and we are still improving them to this day but the army wanted it so they got it and I'm sure that to this day it still saves a life or two due to a chambering problem and if so great. On a AR 15 that most of us use they are not of much use I know I don't drop my rifle in the mud or dirt or have I ever used it. I have five, three 223 one 300 BLK and one LR 308 and they all have them funny thing is the bolt on my LR doesn't even have the teeth on it. When production of AR 15 first started the same forgings that the military used and were made in the same plants so why change the as some customers wanted it and others bought them any way as they had no choice me I like the looks of them. |