MountainRaven
06-20-12, 20:15
Seriously toying with the idea of building a vintage or 'retro' style AR. As I prefer all of my firearms to be fighting arms, first and foremost....
What are the relative merits and demerits of the NDS-32 upper receiver with the charging handle located under the carry handle? I have never used a weapon system with a charging handle located at the top of the receiver and protected by a 'carry handle', so I can only guess.
I would imagine that the ability to charge the weapon from the shoulder would be a strength of the design. I understand that an ACOG or other optical sight cannot be attached to the NDS-32 upper, while the more 'modern' uppers ('M16', 'M16A1', 'C7') do allow this. I also understand that the design was abandoned due to excessive heat accumulating on the charging handle (I cannot imagine that it's any worse than an Ultimak gas tube) and problems with the then issue arctic gloves. Finally, the M16/A1/C7 uppers allow for a commonality of training with the much, much, much more common AR-15s on the market, with the A1 and C7 uppers holding a slight, possible edge over the 'M16' upper due to the forward assist.
Particularly for those who have owned one or used one, what is your opinion of the design? Is it just a novelty or is it perfectly viable for a defensive carbine?
(I should note: This weapon is not and will hopefully never go to Afghanistan. It will be a back-up/parts-donor AR, as well as an iron-sighted plinker/training gun.)
Thanks!
What are the relative merits and demerits of the NDS-32 upper receiver with the charging handle located under the carry handle? I have never used a weapon system with a charging handle located at the top of the receiver and protected by a 'carry handle', so I can only guess.
I would imagine that the ability to charge the weapon from the shoulder would be a strength of the design. I understand that an ACOG or other optical sight cannot be attached to the NDS-32 upper, while the more 'modern' uppers ('M16', 'M16A1', 'C7') do allow this. I also understand that the design was abandoned due to excessive heat accumulating on the charging handle (I cannot imagine that it's any worse than an Ultimak gas tube) and problems with the then issue arctic gloves. Finally, the M16/A1/C7 uppers allow for a commonality of training with the much, much, much more common AR-15s on the market, with the A1 and C7 uppers holding a slight, possible edge over the 'M16' upper due to the forward assist.
Particularly for those who have owned one or used one, what is your opinion of the design? Is it just a novelty or is it perfectly viable for a defensive carbine?
(I should note: This weapon is not and will hopefully never go to Afghanistan. It will be a back-up/parts-donor AR, as well as an iron-sighted plinker/training gun.)
Thanks!