What in hell were they thinking...

[halfmoonclip]

...with the AR charging handle?
Understand how it came to be; the charging finger inside the carry handle, and it got too hot after some firing.
The CH does keep dirt out of the upper, apparently a concern of Stoner, along with the dust cover over the E-port.
But the charging handle is just a PITA. It can't be operated from the shoulder, like an MP5, or a Scorpion, and those two can be slap charged with their forward op handle.
Yeah, I know, I'm just grousing, and nothing is apt to change at this late date...
Anyway, thoughts? Outrage? Insults?
Moon

 

[TonyAngel]

I like where the charging handle is and how it works. I operate it from the shoulder all of the time. Doesn't give me any problems.

 

[LoonWulf]

...with the AR charging handle?
Understand how it came to be; the charging finger inside the carry handle, and it got too hot after some firing.
The CH does keep dirt out of the upper, apparently a concern of Stoner, along with the dust cover over the E-port.
But the charging handle is just a PITA. It can't be operated from the shoulder, like an MP5, or a Scorpion, and those two can be slap charged with their forward op handle.
Yeah, I know, I'm just grousing, and nothing is apt to change at this late date...
Anyway, thots? Outrage? Insults?
Moon

I dun like it either.........dont know the design history or what they were trying to accomplish, so no opinion as to the why.

 

[12Bravo20]

Another one that has no issues with the AR charging handle. I can operate it with the rifle shouldered just fine. I've been doing so since I was issued my first M16A1 at 17 years old.

 

[troy fairweather]

I've never had a problem, it can be improved but works. Maybe whenever they update them next time they will update some things.

 

[792mauser]

I've no problem with it.
Not ideal and I can see why they changed it. But meh.
I like the folding side handle on my L1A1 better.

 

[Riomouse911]

I needed a slightly larger handle end for me to really get it down. The stock ones were a tad small for me, and the big extended ones snagged on everything, but the mid-sized BCM I find just right.

YMMV.

Stay safe.

 

[someguy2800]

I dislike it but I have no actual problems using it either. Almost all of my AR’s are side charging uppers with fixed reciprocating charging handles on the right side. They are all recreational use only firearms though. For actual combat use I think the stoner design is pretty decent because it’s out of the way and and keeps the upper sealed up and is pretty hard to jam up with debris. I like the design of these non reciprocating left side handle uppers because they keep the upper sealed up, but I am concerned that it would be easy to get sand in it and jam it up.

 

[Pat Riot]

Having never used this design when I was in the Navy (we had M14s) and not really being experienced with ARs until 2012 and later I think my only gripe is the handle of the original design is too small. After installing a BCM Medium charging handle I felt the design was okay with that handle. The original sux.

I would like to try a side charger AR.

 

[herrwalther]

Up until the AR, a lot of military service rifles used reciprocating charging handles like the M1, M14, and AKs. Rifles like the G3 and FAL showed that you can have a handled that doesn't come back with every shot. And frankly, it is easy to teach a shooter when they don't have to worry about a part flying toward their face or hands. Stoner wasn't really fond of putting extra cuts in the design, like a cutout on the left side of the receiver for a charging handle for a right handed shooter. So he stuck it right in the middle at the rear of the receiver that closed itself in operation and was comfortable for right and left handed shooters.

 

[Pat Riot]

Up until the AR, a lot of military service rifles used reciprocating charging handles like the M1, M14, and AKs. Rifles like the G3 and FAL showed that you can have a handled that doesn't come back with every shot. And frankly, it is easy to teach a shooter when they don't have to worry about a part flying toward their face or hands. Stoner wasn't really fond of putting extra cuts in the design, like a cutout on the left side of the receiver for a charging handle for a right handed shooter. So he stuck it right in the middle at the rear of the receiver that closed itself in operation and was comfortable for right and left handed shooters.

You’ll only get hit with it once.

 

[Demi-human]

Yeah, I know, I'm just grousing, and nothing is apt to change at this late date...

But it has. There are many aftermarket solutions. None as elegant and unobtrusive though.
Just large enough to have plenty of leverage, or can be made back piercingly huge for the go fast gorillas, or the epically fumblesome like me.
I can touch my opposite shoulder, and so can use it while down ranging.

Everyone says a 760 is cumbersome and can’t be charged while shouldered. I find this opposite my views too.

 

[halfmoonclip]

Points all.
For those who can run the handle from the shoulder, doesn't your face get in the way?
Moon

 

[greyling22]

The charging handle is such a good design that it has been copied by all subsequent firearms designs...... Oh wait, it hasn't.

As a lefty, I HATE the stock handle. Replacement handles fix the problem, but it's a bad design.

 

[12Bravo20]

Points all.
For those who can run the handle from the shoulder, doesn't your face get in the way?
Moon

Only if you shoot "nose to charging handle".

So yes I can see some having an issue with the charging handle when using a collapsible stock and shooting nose to charging handle. But then again it doesn't take but a second to lift your head up and then lower it back down either.

I got out of the Army before getting issued the M4 (1996) and never had an issue with the M16A1 or M16A2. And most won't shoot neck to handle with an A1 or A2 stock.

Up until the AR, a lot of military service rifles used reciprocating charging handles like the M1, M14, and AKs. Rifles like the G3 and FAL showed that you can have a handled that doesn't come back with every shot. And frankly, it is easy to teach a shooter when they don't have to worry about a part flying toward their face or hands. Stoner wasn't really fond of putting extra cuts in the design, like a cutout on the left side of the receiver for a charging handle for a right handed shooter. So he stuck it right in the middle at the rear of the receiver that closed itself in operation and was comfortable for right and left handed shooters.

I have seen many new soldiers get smacked by the charging handle on the M60 because they forgot to push it forward after charging the weapon. And yes they learn real quick not to make that mistake twice.

 

[jmr40]

It is problematic when optics are mounted, but I can make it work. But the rifle wasn't originally designed to use optics. If you use iron sights, I don't see it as a problem at all.

 

[powermad]

The only time I use the charging handle is when a mag is inserted with a closed BCG and I don't have it shouldered in that instance.
The majority of the time the BCG is locked back and I just hit the button on the side with my thumb.
I do like to be able to run it from either side and not be in the way of my scopes so I went with Radian and have a BCM that will get swapped out eventually.

There are better bolt release levers out there that a bit bigger that I want to try.
https://geissele.com/maritime-bolt-catch.html

 

[someguy2800]

Points all.
For those who can run the handle from the shoulder, doesn't your face get in the way?
Moon

i just lift my face up but keep it shouldered.

 

[Bfh_auto]

It is problematic when optics are mounted, but I can make it work. But the rifle wasn't originally designed to use optics. If you use iron sights, I don't see it as a problem at all.

This was my observation as well. I have thought about a medium charge handle since I run a scope. But it works well enough I haven't wasted the money.

 

[Cowhide Cliff]

An A2 with iron sights is not much issue. It's the M4 with scope that makes it harder with you head in the way. Plus wouldn't you mainly operate the charging handle before you engage anyway? Once in the heat of battle it locks open on an empty mag and you never need the charging handle.

 

[Varminterror]

Points all.
For those who can run the handle from the shoulder, doesn't your face get in the way?
Moon

Lift your chin.

 

[mcb]

Assuming your gun runs then after the initial loading you never have to touch the charging handle again until your ready to unload.

 

[NIGHTLORD40K]

Id prefer a side charger, only because regular AR handles tend to interfere with cheek risers, but either way is fine. Fixed, reciprocating handles like the AK or Garand have never been an issue for me.
I absolutely HATE that sadistic little folding torture device on the G3- my knuckles hurt just thinking about it.

 

[12Bravo20]

Id prefer a side charger, only because regular AR handles tend to interfere with cheek risers, but either way is fine. Fixed, reciprocating handles like the AK or Garand have never been an issue for me.
I absolutely HATE that sadistic little folding torture device on the G3- my knuckles hurt just thinking about it.

I noticed the same thing when shooting the G3 when training with our sister German Engineer battalions.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

...with the AR charging handle?
Understand how it came to be; the charging finger inside the carry handle, and it got too hot after some firing.
The CH does keep dirt out of the upper, apparently a concern of Stoner, along with the dust cover over the E-port.
But the charging handle is just a PITA. It can't be operated from the shoulder, like an MP5, or a Scorpion, and those two can be slap charged with their forward op handle.
Yeah, I know, I'm just grousing, and nothing is apt to change at this late date...
Anyway, thots? Outrage? Insults?
Moon

The design was very good for the initial rifle and the parameters they were addressing at the time. It could be operated easily with either hand, did not reciprocate during firing, was in a very easy to access location, worked as advertised. Now, the latch was only on one side, but the handle design genius of the handle was that it could still be readily operated with either hand, but that the latch was just operated by a different finger depending on the hand working the handle. The only time I have trouble with it is that you can't cycle the handle while sighted. However, I don't usually need to be working the charging handle when I am sighted on target. If I do, it is almost always just to release the BCG and that can be done with the bolt catch/release and done while sighted, right?

Improvements have been made, as noted, over time as applications and such have changed. You can like get extensions for the latch or get an oversized charging handle where the handle and latch are commingled and the handle is/operates the latch. You can get ambidextrous charging handles where the latch is operable from either side. These modifications made it easier to use the charging handle with gloves hands or when using an optic mounted down on the rail, the rail and mount location not existing at the time of the original design (optics went on top of the carry handle). With the popularity of suppressors, you can even buy a charging handle that will help contain any extra gasses that might try to escape out through the charging handle slot.

Points all.
For those who can run the handle from the shoulder, doesn't your face get in the way?
Moon

No, not at all. The ONLY time the charging handle gets in the way (for me, anyway) is when trying to operate it is when I am sighted. Let's face it, if you index your head position with your nose just touching the charging handle and head on the buttstock, you can't cycle the charging handle. With the rifle shouldered, one only need lift or turn their head off of the buttstock a short distance to cycle the handle, then reverse the action to be indexed and sighted anew, ready to fire.