[QuarterBoreGunner]

Thinking about a conversation I had a few months back with an older friend of mine that was in the British Army back when they were still using FALs. His drill instructor told them never to use the carry handle ‘It’s not a PURSE laddie!’.

IIRC the original Eugene Stoner design for the M16 had the charging handle vertical on top of the receiver and the carry handle was to protect it. But why does the current model still have it? Wouldn’t a flat top design, like what I call the A3 receiver, with the removable carry handle be better? But instead of having the rear sight on the handle, integrate it into the upper receiver like a permanent ARMS flip up type sight.

Has any US Military service anywhere ever had a trooper carry his rifle by the carry handle?

[Hkmp5sd]

Because John Wayne carried it that way in The Green Beret. :)

[BigG]

The AR15 is a straight line design so the sights have to be elevated for a person to shoulder and sight it normally. Maybe we will start cloning short necked Quasimodo soldiers to fire flat tops?

I used to carry my M16 with the handle.

[Omaha-BeenGlockin]

Just taking a stab at it----with the way the buffer assembly works---going into that straight stock----you need some way to raise the sights up because the stock doesn't bend downward like most rifles---so why not put handle on those raised sights??

Just guessing here.

[Jeff White]

BigG has the right answer. The straight line stock design requires the sights to be raised so that you can use them with the weapon shouldered.

Look at the AK series, the stocks have a drop to them and the sights are on the receiver.

Even backup sights and flip up front sights are close to the same height as the original sights. You have to use a spacer if you mount your Aimpoint directly on the flattop.

Jeff

[QuarterBoreGunner]

I get the straight line action, and I understand why the rear sight has to be the height it is, my actual question is 'why still on a carry handle?' Why not just integrate it into the upper receiver and do away with the forward portion of the carry handle. I'm picturing in my head something like a permanent ARMS #40 flip up rear sight or a #38 with the integrated rail.

[Hkmp5sd]

'why still on a carry handle?'

I think the answer to that is tradition. The carry handle has been part of the M16/AR15 for over 40 years. Everyone is familiar with it and some people prefer that "look" over a flattop. It is similar to the bayonet lug on preban ARs. Why did they keep making civilian AR15s with the bayonet lug when it is not used on 99.99999% of the ARs that have it?

[uglygun]

Carry handle is just kinda "bonus" stuff after having the sights raised to be useable with a comfortable cheek weld.

But flattops are coming into service, the Marine Corp just adopted the M16 A4 to replace aging A2s. It's likely that a lot of detachable carry handles will see use for those not special enough to deservedly get optics.

[QuarterBoreGunner]

Tradition. Ok; I'll buy that, I suppose the US military, like any other gigantic corporation, responds to change slowly.

I was just wondering if there were a logistical reason for it.

[bad_dad_brad]

I like the way it looks - cool - that evil black rifle thing - and still futuristic after decades of use.

I do use it as something extra to hang on to when handling, and will carry it that way on occasion.

It is somewhat a tradition thing, but I think it is also a platform for a very rugged battle sight system.

If I want a flat top, I will get a new upper.

[gun-fucious]

thats no carry handle
its an extended sight rail and gooseneck mounting platform

[Andrew Wyatt]

the carry handle keeps brush and crap from snagging on the front of the sight tower.

[Master Blaster]

I like my carry handle, its not an Ar /M-16 without it.

:D