How is a carry handle different from an A2?

[Lovesbeer99]

Doesn't an A2 and an A3 with a carry handle have the same rear sights? So why is the A3 Carry handle only rated to 600 yards and the stardard A2 is rated to 800 yards? Is it there a difference in the engineering or is does it have to do with the height of the front sight base?

 

[unwise11]

The A2 is fixed, Not sure about the distance thing. I guess because you will never use iron sights at 800 yards?

 

[Pony Express]

IIRC, "A2" denotes that the carry handle is fixed whereas "A3" denotes a flattop upper with a removable carry handle. Maybe it has something to do with that.


edit: Dang, JD beat me to it

 

[Fumbler]

Most A3s are carbines that weren't intended to be shot that far.

 

[Lovesbeer99]

Ok, but my A3 carry handle is marked 6/3 indicating a 300 yard zero and 600 yard max elivation. The A2 is marked 8/3, so 800 yard max. Is the rear sight assembly different or is it the front sight height that makes the difference?

 

[Z-Michigan]

The overall sight height of an A2 is 2.6" over bore axis. The A3 carry handle setup gets you to 2.8" over bore axis. (both numbers from memory)

Some combination of the higher sight height and possibly less adjustment range in the elevation drum on the detachable carry handle results in less possible adjustment to get out to 700-800 yards, hence the last marking of "6" instead of "8". All going from memory.

 

[Lovesbeer99]

I was leading in that direction but I wasn't sure. I figured since the F marked front base was taller than the standard base it would give less distance.
What I haven't done yet, was count the clicks on the rear sight to see if they are any more or less. Thanks for the feedback.

 

[HorseSoldier]

The M16A2's sights are adjustable out to 800 meters (for an area target . . .), whereas the M4 is only adjustable to 600. I never had an M16A4 issued to me, but it should have a removable carry handle with sights out to 800.

In the civilian market, 16" carbines are the top sellers, and so the manufacturers are concentrating on producing what sells, I suspect.

 

[gdesloge]

This thread caught my eye, because I am interested in ARs that have a "carry handle" vs. the rails. I prefer open sights, and the carry handle seems like a good idea.

Can some others please share their opinions about the integral carry handles?

Thank you,

gd

 

[Z-Michigan]

The original style AR with a permanent carry handle (A1 or A2 type receiver) is great if you only want iron sights. It's slimmer and lighter than adding a carry handle to a flat-top. It also looks better.

 

[gdesloge]

Thanks for the response.

So, the A1- and A2-type receivers have built in carry handles with integral sights? Can the handle or the sights break, so that one must replace the receiver? Is there an advantage to the A3 handle mounted on a rail, other than having the option for scopes and optics on the rail?

Thanks again - this AR terminology is new to me. I am trying to understand the OP question.

gd

 

[Z-Michigan]

the A1- and A2-type receivers have built in carry handles with integral sights?

Yes. However A1 and A2 differ slightly in the design of the handle and rear sight. The A2 is more flexible and is >99% of all such receivers currently made, as well as more recent military issue.

Can the handle or the sights break, so that one must replace the receiver?

In theory I suppose the handle could break, but it's unlikely any other part of the rifle would be salvageable if it got that much abuse. The handle is integral with the receiver and is forged 7075 aluminum on most receivers.

Little sight parts can break also, but are easily replaced. And they don't break very often.

Is there an advantage to the A3 handle mounted on a rail, other than having the option for scopes and optics on the rail?

No, that one advantage is pretty much it. (It is compelling for most buyers however.)

 

[gdesloge]

Thanks, again, Z-M. Great explanation.

Best,

gd

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Ok, but my A3 carry handle is marked 6/3 indicating a 300 yard zero and 600 yard max elivation. The A2 is marked 8/3, so 800 yard max. Is the rear sight assembly different or is it the front sight height that makes the difference?

Neither, the screw that is used for the elevation drum on a detachable carry handle has to be shorter to allow for the mounting hardware. As a result, you can only get 600m of elevation adjustment on a detachable carry handle due to the shorter screw.

I figured since the F marked front base was taller than the standard base it would give less distance.

The F-marked front sight base is the same height as the standard front sight base - both having a height over bore of around 2.6". However, the shoulder where the front sight post is mounted is 0.04" taller. Again, this is a function of screw length. Due to the different sight geometry on the carbines, you can end up adjusting the front sight post until the base of the post is sticking out of the front sight base and the post is a little wobbly. So the F-marked front sight bases just have a hole that is 0.04" deeper.

Is there an advantage to the A3 handle mounted on a rail, other than having the option for scopes and optics on the rail?

Flexibility. Even if you never use optics, there are dozens of different iron sights available for flattop AR15s - H&K drum sights, M1 National Match Sights, and dozens of proprietary designs of every shape and size.

 

[gdesloge]

"Flexibility. Even if you never use optics, there are dozens of different iron sights available for flattop AR15s - H&K drum sights, M1 National Match Sights, and dozens of proprietary designs of every shape and size."

Thank you, also, for the reply.

I hope my questions are "on-topic".

Are the barrels "floated" on the rail models? I think that I read somewhere that the "tube" type front stock/hand guard allows the barrel to float. If so, does this make the rifle more "accurate" than the old-style AR front grip/guard?

Thanks again,

gd

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Are the barrels "floated" on the rail models? I think that I read somewhere that the "tube" type front stock/hand guard allows the barrel to float. If so, does this make the rifle more "accurate" than the old-style AR front grip/guard?

It depends on the model of rail used. Some will float the barrel and others will not. There are also non-railed handguards that float the barrel.

In my experience, a free-floated handguard improved my 5 round groups at 100yds by about 0.5" from a stable position like prone or benched. That experience seems consistent with some of the few other reports I've read trying to quantify how much of a difference free-floated handguards make on an AR15.

 

[juk]

Some rail models do allow for a floated barrel. having a floating barrel will help the most with consistency. The barrel itself dictates the accuracy. Floating the barrel just makes sure that nothing touches the barrel to throw or pull the shots off, which can happen anytime an object (such as standard hand guards) puts pressure on a barrel.

If you've noticed, most modern rifle stocks are either bedded, utilize a pillar system, or are floated. This gives the barrel and action a solid, repeatable mounting solution to the stock. Most manufacturers use these systems to ensure the barrel doesn't come into contact with the stock.

 

[Lovesbeer99]

I called WhiteOak today and Bart Rob is right on. I was planning to save some money by buying a stripped A2 and using the sight off of my carry handle but the the guy at WhiteOak explained the same thing as Bart Robs first post. I considered just using my A3 carry handle set up, but honestly 600 yards is best case with a carry handle and if things are not perfect I might not even get that. With the A2 I have plenty of extra elevation to get me to 600 yards. (Honestly the only time I'll ever actually get there is at Camp Perry. My range is only 300). But that's hardly academic.

I just went ahead and ordered the WhiteOak A2 upper with the pinned rear sights. I already have the barrel, windage adjustable front sight base, and DCM free float tube. Hopefully I can still assemble and shoot this before it gets too cold. Now I have an extra flattop that needs a tube and and a scope. Nothing wrong with a 2nd AR.

 

[WNTFW]

I don't know if any of you noticed, but a detatchable carry handle doesn't function very well as a carry handle . . .

The other thing I did notice is that in a group of carry handles of all the same mfgr. there is some variance in how much play is in the rear sight. Something you may want to look for in buying FTF.