View Full Version : Question on removable carry handles
Are detachable carry handles identical across the board or are the rear sights different for rifles and carbines?
Eurodriver
06-28-19, 09:06
The milspec carry handles are identical.
However there are so many shitty companies making them there are undoubtedly some intentional (and unintentional) variances floating around.
Yeah, I've seen the $8.99 Chinese versions on eBay.
Build quality aside, aren't there 6/3 and 8/3 elevation drums, for carbines and rifles respectively? Or am I mistaken?
EDIT- After a quick check, It seems 8/3 drums are for A2 uppers, 6/3 drums are for removable handles.
Carry on.
I'm just going off memory here but I think on some "commercial" detachable carry handles, when it's bottomed out on elevation, the rear sight housing sits lower relative to the actual handle part than on a milspec one. More akin to the "8/3" position on an A2 carry handle rear sight
I think it has something to do with commercial AR makers originally rolling out rifles with flattop uppers but without "F"-height FSBs...which was a practice that was more common some years back. I think non-F FSBs are now the exception.
At the USAMU we found no less than four different .mil rear sight height shelves -- all legit issue weapons between ours and the Fort Benning student weapons pool.
Build quality aside, aren't there 6/3 and 8/3 elevation drums, for carbines and rifles respectively? Or am I mistaken?
EDIT- After a quick check, It seems 8/3 drums are for A2 uppers, 6/3 drums are for removable handles.
Carry on.
THIS... is what the OP was asking about if I read correctly. And yeah... I'd like to have a rifle CH for some applications.
But since the elevation tracks so poorly with the ammo I shoot (NOT M855), it really doesn't make a diff to me which CH I have.
Build quality aside, aren't there 6/3 and 8/3 elevation drums, for carbines and rifles respectively? Or am I mistaken?
EDIT- After a quick check, It seems 8/3 drums are for A2 uppers, 6/3 drums are for removable handles.
Carry on.
IIRC, detachable carry handles whether for a carbine or rifle all use the 3/6 elevation drum. The 3/8 elevation drum is to long and will protrude out of the bottom of the detachable carry handle. It would require a hole to be machined in the upper receiver under the elevation drum.
NYH1.
At the USAMU we found no less than four different .mil rear sight height shelves -- all legit issue weapons between ours and the Fort Benning student weapons pool.
Molon post mentions variations in the apertures also.
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?64051-Iron-Sight-Apertures
Heads up on carry handles: Standard Manufacturing has one made in USA, $40 plus $10 shipping. I needed one for a 15-22 conversion and it turned out to be first class. Identical to the Colt on my 6920 and in a different orbit from the $25 airsoft junk.
IIRC, detachable carry handles whether for a carbine or rifle all use the 3/6 elevation drum. The 3/8 elevation drum is to long and will protrude out of the bottom of the detachable carry handle. It would require a hole to be machined in the upper receiver under the elevation drum.
NYH1.
Like this:
https://www.keystoneaccuracy.com/image/126930055.jpg
Like this:
https://www.keystoneaccuracy.com/image/126930055.jpg
That's it. Is that yours sin?
NYH1.
No, but John Scanlon in Pennsylvania will do it for you.
I think Rock River sells a handle with a higher shelf for the 8/3 stalk they call their National Match model. See how much higher the top of the protective ears sit in relation to the rear of the handle top?
http://i274.photobucket.com/albums/jj265/tjtorborg/Carry%20Handles/RRA_NM_Carry_Handle-1.jpg
It's interesting that Leapers UTG is selling a "made in the USA" carry handle that seems to be getting almost universally good reviews. Seems to be available all over the Internet. Normally I would associate this brand with Airsoft junk, but I've heard that they're trying to break into the AR component market:
https://www.opticsplanet.com/leapers-utg-pro-us-made-mil-spec-7075t6-forged-carry-handle-sight.html
Eurodriver
06-29-19, 11:56
Like this:
https://www.keystoneaccuracy.com/image/126930055.jpg
Now we're getting into some really cool stuff.
Chinese junk aside, I wonder how many US companies actually manufacture these? And then they're branded under various other names.
Dr. Bullseye
06-29-19, 13:06
The A2 carry handle wiggles loose with those big screws, the windage dial pops off under hard use, the military says don't carry with the carry handle, it is heavy. I had three of these before I gave up. The fixed carry handle at least looks functional since it is solidly attached and has the A1 dial. Why not just get a modern replacement like Daniel Defense of Scalarworks if you want the carry handle pattern?
I cut the thumb knobs off my detachable carry handles, shortened the screws and use locktited nuts instead. A bit lower profile. I'm not concerned about quick detach capability in this case.
I also did it with another carry handle I had cut into just a rear sight, and an LMT rear sight as well.
The A2 carry handle wiggles loose with those big screws, the windage dial pops off under hard use, the military says don't carry with the carry handle, it is heavy. I had three of these before I gave up. The fixed carry handle at least looks functional since it is solidly attached and has the A1 dial. Why not just get a modern replacement like Daniel Defense of Scalarworks if you want the carry handle pattern?
I run a lot of carry handles and have never had any of those issues. :confused:
The A2-type rear drum has been in use for over three decades. Haven't heard of any significant durability issues with it.
The A2-type rear drum has been in use for over three decades. Haven't heard of any significant durability issues with it.
Same here. I could see aftermarket carry handles sucking. But Colt/BCM handles have always been solid for me.
bloodlord77
06-29-19, 22:14
If I'm not mistaken, I had some random CS guy at Bushmaster tell me that the detachable carry handle I had on an old Patrolman Carbine would not work with an "F" marked fsp unless I changed out the post.
RobertTheTexan
06-29-19, 23:14
I cut the thumb knobs off my detachable carry handles, shortened the screws and use locktited nuts instead. A bit lower profile. I'm not concerned about quick detach capability in this case.
I also did it with another carry handle I had cut into just a rear sight, and an LMT rear sight as well.
I’ve seen this on a couPle AR’s before, but not a lot. Guys cut down the handle for the rear sight. One looked pretty well done, the other looked like it was done by a blind dude with a hacksaw. You have a pic by chance?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Something like this?
https://www.northwestfirearms.com/attachments/290281/
Honestly, unless you are doing some larpy clone; carry handles are super pointless
And if you ARE doing a larpy build then they are pointless as well as lame
Something like this?
https://www.northwestfirearms.com/attachments/290281/
Yep. Although mine ended up slightly more rounded off in front during the cutting process. As mentioned above I also cut the thumb knobs off mine, cut the screw down a bit and use a nut instead.
http://i.imgur.com/8S3I8z6.jpg
A2 sights are probably overkill on a carbine, but I kind of like them anyway.
Honestly, unless you are doing some larpy clone; carry handles are super pointless
And if you ARE doing a larpy build then they are pointless as well as lame
Sounds reasonable, but (for whatever reason) they seem to be selling briskly. Maybe they have that old time charm :D
I’ve seen this on a couPle AR’s before, but not a lot. Guys cut down the handle for the rear sight. One looked pretty well done, the other looked like it was done by a blind dude with a hacksaw. You have a pic by chance?
The cut down carry handle is the most durable rear sight by mile.
One looked pretty well done, the other looked like it was done by a blind dude with a hacksaw.
Blind dude with a dremel here! And finished with a black sharpie to gild the lilly. :cool:
https://i.imgur.com/WO4BdAv.jpg
The below review is from TOS, same title as above. I have used several of these rear sights on builds but haven't actually shot one:
https://www.shootingillustrated.com/articles/2018/3/28/first-look-utg-ar-15-super-slim-iron-sights/
Here is the review:
> Precision CNC Machined 6061-T6 Aircraft Aluminum Base with Steel A2 Sight Assembly
> Slim and Lightweight Profile with a Durable Wear Resistant Matte Black Finish
> Tool-free Windage and Elevation Adjustment with Dual Apertures Ideal for a Variety of Different Scencarios
> Utilizes a Single Locking Torx Screw and Square-shaped Integral Recoil Stop for a Secure Zero Hold and Return to Zero on MIL-STD-1913 Picatinny Rails
First of all I was skeptical buying this. We all know how crappy offbrand/cheap carry handles/sights are. Most are cast and made out of pot metal, painted instead anodized, and have terrible tolerances/machining. I was impressed with their folding BUIS for the money. Those BUIS are now being OEMed by other companies, including Springfield Armory.
I'm going to compare this product with a forged Cardinal Forge, Cut Down Carry Handle.
Machining and Finish: Finish and machining is on par with Strike Industries products. I'm very impressed with this, their non USA products have come a long way. This rear sight is made in Taiwan (Same with Strike Industries as well).
The finish is very similar to what is used on billet lowers, that kind of sleek, smooth, black anodizing. (Think New Frontier Armory/Joebob's Spartan Lowers), or the finish that Strike Industries uses for their aluminum products.
In my opinion the finish on the UTG seems like it would of held up alot better than the Cardinal Forge sight. But to be fair cardinal forge sights/carry handles have always had the worst finish/anodizing out of the carry handles out there.
Windage and Elevation: Windage and elevation is tactile and positive. Seems even better than my cardinal forge. No issues with the Aperture, the peep holes are machined properly. Cheaper sights often have burrs or improperly drilled holes. It appears that the sight assembly/wings are made out of steel and phosphated while the body is CNC 6061-T1 Aluminum.
In Comparison: Old school forged carry handles are also steel. As for "chopped" carry handles from the factory, new LMT rear BUIS have alluminum wings. Also the bodies of newer LMT rear sights are cast. The old ones were pretty much bomb proof.
So this new UTG Sight should fall in the middle as far as durability goes (Forged>Billet>Cast)
The CNC machining actually looks cleaner than the forged carry handle/sight. The tolerances are also tighter. The sight housing doesn't have as much play as my cardinal forge does (as it should)
Mounting: The rear sight is mounted using a Torx Screw, and the mounting hardware is actually very nice. On the plus side there isn't an annoying thumb screw sticking out. The recoil stop is also an improvement over a carry handle's standard round bolt.
I smacked it around a bit with a filled up water bottle. The Sight didn't come loose, snap in half, or come unmounted like other cheap overseas sights would. (Aero Precision Sights mounting hardware seems to explode just from looking at them funny )
Tolerances: Everything looks spot on, comparing it to an actual forged carry handle, it looks like you could use a forged aperature housing/aperature in this sight's body. Some cheap sight manufacturers do not use milspec hardware on their sights. Some don't use roll pins and proper set screws. This UTG sight appears to be milspec in that regard.
Overall: This seems like a good alternative to chopping a carry handle, and it only runs $35. I paid about $40 for a used carry handle, and spend a few hours chopping, filing, sanding, and refinishing my cardinal forge sight. OCD really took over to make it look decent. Time equals money and this would work just as well.
The quality and materials are spot on.
If you don't need an A2 sight, there is always the DD1.5. It's just nice having a low profile A2 option that isn't made out of pot metal.
Also it seems fairly streamlined and light weight. Whats neat is that it also sits flush with the back of a reciever.
If you hate everything made outside the U.S.A, this sight isn't for you sorry. UTG is stepping up their game and I am very impressed.
The below review is from TOS, same title as above. I have used several of these rear sights on builds but haven't actually shot one:.....
I had seen those around online and they look appealing, I just have some major bias against anything UTG. Although to be fair I too have heard some of their recent offerings are quite a step up from their previous products.
Dr. Bullseye
06-30-19, 13:28
The UTG rear has a much more solid attachment method than the mil spec. It would be nicer with an A1 windage dial but with the more fine adjustments of the A2.
Leapers UTG may have indeed upped their game, but I think it may be a while before they're thought of as a legit component manufacturer.
Bravo Company sells a variety of rear sights that accomplish what the cut down carry handle does.
Bravo Company sells a variety of rear sights that accomplish what the cut down carry handle does.
The only elevation adjustable rear sight I've seen there is LMT's, and I've never seen it in stock (cause I would have bought it). Please enlighten us.
I have no expirience with or opinion on the UTG sight, but "I smacked it around a bit with a filled up water bottle." seems like a low bar for durability to me.
Andy
I have no expirience with or opinion on the UTG sight, but "I smacked it around a bit with a filled up water bottle." seems like a low bar for durability to me.
Andy
LOL. That's combat proving methodology.
Andy - I took one of mine into the shop and attacked it with my 5lb shorty sledge. It broke. To be sure I was being fair I got my service rifle out and beat my WOA pinned NM carrying handle with the sledge, it also broke and the receiver is screwed.
I kinda wish I would have used a water bottle.
:sarcastic:
The only elevation adjustable rear sight I've seen there is LMT's, and I've never seen it in stock (cause I would have bought it). Please enlighten us.
I think RRA still makes one and it attaches with hex screws
I think RRA still makes one and it attaches with hex screws
They do. It's pretty pricey though. I think over $100.
It's also 6061 vs the 7075 that I believe milspec carry handles are made of.
I don't know which the LMTs are made out of.
They do. It's pretty pricey though. I think over $100.
It's also 6061 vs the 7075 that I believe milspec carry handles are made of.
I don't know which the LMTs are made out of.
Interesting stuff. I try to choose 7000 series stuff when I can.
I had one on my favorite rifle from 2010-15, no issues. It got shot a bunch, rained on, went swimming, even went for a ride in a 1950. Held zero.
Picked up a surplus one at Knob Creek in 2017 for $20 the degritted, cut down, and Alumi black on the cut. Stuck an old LLSS aperture in it I found there the next year.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.