AR15 cary handle? Yes? No? Maybe So?

It's pretty much worthless these days (and probably always has been). I can't think of a time when you would actually carry your rifle using that handle. Optics can be mounted much more easily on a rifle that doesn't have one, and rail mounted iron sights can take over for that job.

I like them as they are an economical back up sight when chopped down. Robust iron sight set up with keeping elevation adjustments.

If you are going to shoot NRA service Rifle, the integral rear sight has a little more elevation travel than on the removable carry handle.
I'm sure I occasionally used the carry handle on the M16A1 I was issued but if I was going anywhere more than a few steps away, the rifle would be slung over my shoulder.

Oh, you mean this carry handle?

I can't think of a time when you would actually carry your rifle using that handle

Click to expand...

I use it all the time.

Why do I like A2s? It puts optics at the perfect height, and you can use your irons with the optic in place.

Both of my AR's are A2:



I'm going to get a flat top upper for mounting my ATN NVRS, because it sits too high on the carry handle, just as it sits too high on any bolt gun. But for normal optics, I find the height perfect.

The flat top with integral picatinny rail is much more verstile.

Useless if you have a sling.

Optics with back up iron sights.

I shoot ARs for recreation and sport. I prefer iron sights. Given that, I would much rather have an A2 reciever than an add-on carry handle.

When I was in the M16s we used had A1 or A2 recievers. I have a couple of BCMs now with flattop receivers and add-on carry handles, but I would rather just have an A2 reciever to start with. I bought those flattops only because that was the only way to get a Gov profile 20" barrel.

On the bright side, at 45 I can shoot the irons fine, but I suppose the flattops may come in handy in a decade or two when I may not be able to do so as I can then add optics.

purpplehaze said:

Useless if you have a sling.

Click to expand...

???

How is there any relation?

In my time in the Army, we were instructed never to carry it by the handle- only between the rear hanguard and receiver. I was told it's not really a handle but is elevated for eye relief to help with a natural point of aim. Also it was to protect the charging handle before it was moved.

I was in the Marine Corps. I've have never carried an M16 or and AR by its carry handle in my life.

There's nothing wrong with the old school design, so long as you only intend to shoot with the iron sights already on the gun, or if you're doing one of the retro builds.

However, the old-school carry handle becomes a massive hindrance when you start looking at using optics on the gun. Flat top guns have the widest array of available options, and it's much, much easier to install a scope on them. All you have to do is slap a Picatinny-compatible scope mount on and you're ready to go.

The number of mounts available for putting a scope on the carry handle are quite limited, and in my opinion, generally look and feel much less solid than a decent Picatinny mount from an outfit like LaRue. They also make it much harder to get a decent cheek weld for the average shooter, since the scope ends up being so much higher than the bore axis of the gun.

Again, while there's nothing out-and-out wrong with a traditional non-removable carry handle, choosing a rifle in that configuration does end up limiting your options for modification down the road.

Based on that, I generally recommend going with a flat-top design.

I was in before they started issuing optics for the M-16. I never carried it by the carry handle. Seemed like a poor design for it. Iron sights on a flat top seemed like it would have been a better idea. But I grew up shooting hunting rifles and shotguns with and without optics. So I never got into the habit of carrying a firearm that way.

I like the iron sights, but I still like a flat top with a detachable carry handle for flexibility.

and it's much, much easier to install a scope on them. All you have to do is slap a Picatinny-compatible scope mount on and you're ready to go.

Click to expand...

All I have to do with the A2 is drop in a carry handle picatinny mount. I use see-through mounts; ARMS, Leupold, CAA Z-rails. They're held firmly in place by the handle itself, with a single knurled nut sucking them down tight. Swapping optics is a snap, too.

I served 40 years ago, we trained and served with the M16, qualified with the iron sights. I still got a few AR10s with the A2 configuration, as for the carry handle, sometimes we used it, usually used both hands for that job. back then, different war, close jungle warfare compared to the current combat conditions.

I think it is Quintessential AR!

Can not help it, to me without it, is like a 1911 with no beavertail or grip safety!

Just part of the platform! I like new flat tops for various optic reasons, but the Old School Handle is ........

My 2 Cents....

Quote:
Why do I like A2s? It puts optics at the perfect height, and you can use your irons with the optic in place.

Click to expand...

Many would disagree with your opinion that an optic mounted that high is perfect. Not to mention how that affects your zeros. And there are many many optics that mount directly to the receiver rail and co-witness with the iron sights.

Many would disagree with your opinion that an optic mounted that high is perfect

Click to expand...

It's all personal preference, but most rifles will have scope centerline 2 to 2-1/2" above the top of the cheek rest with low or medium mounts. Carry handle mounts on the AR put scope centerline at ~ 2-3/4". I find it very comfortable. I don't like having to smash my sheek into the stock to see through the scope. Any flat top AR requires very tall mounts or risers to avoid that.

As for the optic being a little higher above bore centerline? It's just simple math. Being 1/2 to 3/4" higher than it would be on a flat top doesn't make any difference in the real world.

I use my AR-10 for hunting, have never missed a shot on account of the sight height above bore.

This again? Carried the M-16 for a long time in several different countries, starting with Vietnam. The carry handle...ain't. It's OK as a sight platform, but I've learned to love the flat top configuration.

dont see much point in the detachable carry handles plenty of sights that will work without adding the useless handle, if its an a2 where its built into the upper then maybe I could see it being used.

Many would disagree with your opinion that an optic mounted that high is perfect.

Click to expand...

the old-school carry handle becomes a massive hindrance when you start looking at using optics on the gun

Click to expand...

the 1st ar i ever owned was a colt match target rifle. it came with the removable carry handle and after at least a half dozen different setups i ended up with the carry handle back on it and a mount on that.

as a result the ar15's ive bought since have all been a2's with handle mounted optics.

i prefer them that way.