Spare my friend this mistake

[Mars attacks...]

I'll stick with my SCAR and the BCM charging handles I use. Thanks.

[Duffy]

Posted this on TOS. A new idea or product needs to be better, not just different.

For the problems it's supposed to solve, it brings problems of its own, which tips the scale to the negative.

I don't know how it's better than a conventional ambidextrous charging handle, the T shaped handle is easy to use and hard to screw up. Replacing the T handle with what amounts to a cheek piece would give the user less positive, and slip-prone surface area, whereas the T shaped handle is pretty hard for your fingers to lose grip of.

Since it is a cheek piece, regardless of its other function as a charging handle, it changes the dynamic between the shooter and his optics. I'm perfectly happy with my optics the way they're set up, putting a cheek piece there would mess that all up. If your optics are so high that it requires a cheek piece, then this isn't a bad solution, though I'd just get proper mount or rings to address that.

Lastly, it changes the manual of arms. While we can't always let that stop us from creating new products, the pros need to outweigh the cons, to the point that what you gain is so great as to make the negatives negligible.

I like new products and ideas, we're in the business of making things that make weapon systems more user friendly. We're always mindful of the aforementioned scale. If what the new product brings to the table is drowned out by its negatives, the compromises aren't worth making, and there's little point in bringing it to the market, since the part it's supposed to replace is actually superior to the new product.

[Live2Gun]

Looks tacti-cool, but, I see issues arising like mentioned with mud, water, sweat, etc. I could also see it being bent upwards and/or snapped off, plus debree getting under it causing issues as well. Not to mention far less positive control.

"Seems like a solution looking for a problem to me..." <-- This.

These were my first thoughts as well. Looks like it would get very slick. I sure don't wear gloves every time I shoot. Also you can see it flex pretty bad in the video. This is probably the dumbest thing I've seen for the AR.

[Jpoe88]

Did you have to talk him out of a POS $500 AR too?

easy there trigger lol

its kinda cool, but I cant see it being any more practical than a standard CH. and at that, Id rather just use the plain ole CH that they come with.

its cool in the sense of "Huh, never thought of that. Cool idea for sales. Literally for sales. I'm sure they will sell the hell out of them, and end up in the safe of thousands of folks kinda like bump stocks and all that jazz"

What if while the bolt is held open, it slides back and the shooter positions his cheek weld, hits the BAD and looses his beard?

[badness]

Posted this on TOS. A new idea or product needs to be better, not just different.

For the problems it's supposed to solve, it brings problems of its own, which tips the scale to the negative.

I don't know how it's better than a conventional ambidextrous charging handle, the T shaped handle is easy to use and hard to screw up. Replacing the T handle with what amounts to a cheek piece would give the user less positive, and slip-prone surface area, whereas the T shaped handle is pretty hard for your fingers to lose grip of.

Since it is a cheek piece, regardless of its other function as a charging handle, it changes the dynamic between the shooter and his optics. I'm perfectly happy with my optics the way they're set up, putting a cheek piece there would mess that all up. If your optics are so high that it requires a cheek piece, then this isn't a bad solution, though I'd just get proper mount or rings to address that.

Lastly, it changes the manual of arms. While we can't always let that stop us from creating new products, the pros need to outweigh the cons, to the point that what you gain is so great as to make the negatives negligible.

I like new products and ideas, we're in the business of making things that make weapon systems more user friendly. We're always mindful of the aforementioned scale. If what the new product brings to the table is drowned out by its negatives, the compromises aren't worth making, and there's little point in bringing it to the market, since the part it's supposed to replace is actually superior to the new product.

good post. Wonder where i've heard that before.

[Livefreeordie92]

This is right up there with the Dragon Head muzzle devices and the Skull shaped lower receivers. Next it will be an entire AR shaped like the "shocker" symbol with a dust cover saying "two in the pinky and one in the stinky". Mall ninjas be loosing their minds over this stuff.

So you're telling me that you wouldn't spend $80 to put this on the end of your rifle?

[Livefreeordie92]

The people you see buying this gimmicky crap are usually the ones who will invest more into a charging handle or a drop in trigger than their optic.

[bloodlord77]

It's kinda like tits on a bull. 😂

[wingspar]

I haven’t shot my AR much since I put a scope on it, but was shooting paper at 100 yards the other day and realized the stock charging handle was kind of difficult to reach with the scope on the rifle. After going thru this thread, I ordered a BCM Mod 4 Charging Handle.

That video was a good sales pitch for the uneducated. Rickety looking gadget.

[TheNegativeOne]

So you're telling me that you wouldn't spend $80 to put this on the end of your rifle?

Thats sweet, who makes those? I was thinking of cerakoting my rifle green anyway that would be the icing on the cake!