A latchless handle, at least from Strike Industries, isn’t any wider than a milspec. If you choose something like a Raptor, considered the Gold Standard, that is slightly wider and extremely rugged, your chances of success increase. And, whether you care to accept friendly advice or not, technique and set-up do matter and will net real gains.
I once again pulled these from the safe to compare apples on the same rifle and here’s what I found. More pics to follow.
This set-up, scope is an old Nikon pulled from a muzzleloader for my wife to learn on (she previously shot irons only).
An old Tasco dug out of a box sitting in medium height rings with an RRA AR specific scope mount behind it. Note the difference in height others were attempting to point out. This isn’t to criticize but inform that barring shooting from a mini cap stock that places your cheek on a bare receiver extension, you ought to consider a higher mount. That will in turn provide you some much needed real estate when operating the charging handle and cost roughly the same amount as a replacement CH.
Ammo box for scale in the following pics. I aligned the left edge and my thumb to show width which my iPhone tends to distort. If you look at my thumb and how much of the cartridge pictured on the box is visible you’ll get a rough idea on wider vs same.
Milspec.
Strike. This will be the width of their “Latchless” model (the red portion).
Now measuring the full width including the extended latch.