Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 19 of 19

Thread: Impossible question: which FF rail system is the least subject to moving?

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    121
    Feedback Score
    16 (100%)
    I've never messed around with a Hodge or Mega wedge lock rail, but I can attest to the rigidity of the Geissele MK8 and DD RIS II. You can't go wrong with either.
    "I don't just want gun rights... I want individual liberty, a culture of self-reliance....I want the whole bloody thing." - Kim du Toit

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    GA
    Posts
    4,710
    Feedback Score
    23 (100%)
    TonRitz I didn't see that thread. Thanks.
    If you aren't armed when you take a dump in your own home then your opinion on what is a practical daily carry weapon isn't interesting to me.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Tucson, AZ
    Posts
    1,001
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Stickman View Post
    Link to article and testing info please.
    Quote Originally Posted by M4Guru View Post
    Some deflection testing has been done on a few popular hand guards for these purposes, and the Wedge Lock had the least deflection of the ones tested.
    The Geissele is supposedly one of the very few handguards designed for deflection issues when using MFALs.

    Talk about the Geissele starts at 2:10.

    In theory, I would think the URX 4 also has minimal deflection, due to the integrated barrel nut.

    Griffen Armament also makes a handguard that they claim was designed for minimal deflection, though who knows how true their claims are.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ht5BpvOJl8c
    https://www.griffinarmament.com/category-s/1861.htm
    Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.

    老僧三十年前未參禪時、見山是山、見水是水、及至後夾親見知識、有箇入處、見山不是山、見水不是水、而今得箇體歇處、依然見山秪是山、見水秪是水。

    https://www.instagram.com/defaultmp3/

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    452
    Feedback Score
    0
    I went to change my SLR rail on one of my ARs and I thought I was going to have to beat it off. I had to put a strap wrench on it and work it back and forth to get it to start moving. I originally had questions about it but they were all answered when I went to remove one. I have no doubts about it now. All my junk has SLR rails.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    38
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by HMM View Post
    I went to change my SLR rail on one of my ARs and I thought I was going to have to beat it off. I had to put a strap wrench on it and work it back and forth to get it to start moving. I originally had questions about it but they were all answered when I went to remove one. I have no doubts about it now. All my junk has SLR rails.
    I second those comments. SLR is solid stuff with enough versions to make anybody happy.








    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    542
    Feedback Score
    48 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Defaultmp3 View Post
    The Geissele is supposedly one of the very few handguards designed for deflection issues when using MFALs.

    Talk about the Geissele starts at 2:10.

    In theory, I would think the URX 4 also has minimal deflection, due to the integrated barrel nut.

    Griffen Armament also makes a handguard that they claim was designed for minimal deflection, though who knows how true their claims are.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ht5BpvOJl8c
    https://www.griffinarmament.com/category-s/1861.htm
    Filter out all the "f***s" and white noise and there's about 30 good seconds on the geissele rail.

    Can one of you guys who is close to or claim to have "friends" in Geissele tell them to put the rail debate to bed and make a proprietary tongue and groove upper/rail a la the 416 SMR and be done with it.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Florida Gulf Coast
    Posts
    1,432
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)
    I have a pretty good faith that my URX 4 isn't going anywhere, seeing as it's also the barrel nut. You don't see too many properly torqued barrel nuts back off.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    542
    Feedback Score
    48 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Goodtimes View Post
    I have a pretty good faith that my URX 4 isn't going anywhere, seeing as it's also the barrel nut. You don't see too many properly torqued barrel nuts back off.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I would like to think so too. I had the same thought process when I had Marvin Pitts mill/time all of my URX II's and III's so that they would index perfectly with the upper AND not rely solely on the barrel nut. Sadly, every time someone mentions this idea with the URX 4 no one can really step up and say "YES, that's true" or "NO, it's not".

    In this thread and the linked thread, KAC is mentioned numerious times as being a top runner, but which one?... FF RAS? URX I-III? URX 4?

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    5,411
    Feedback Score
    43 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Greg Bell View Post
    TonRitz I didn't see that thread. Thanks.
    Soitenly

    Quote Originally Posted by Defaultmp3 View Post
    In theory, I would think the URX 4 also has minimal deflection, due to the integrated barrel nut.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Goodtimes View Post
    I have a pretty good faith that my URX 4 isn't going anywhere, seeing as it's also the barrel nut. You don't see too many properly torqued barrel nuts back off.

    I've been interested in hear how the URX4 stands in the big scheme of things.
    The simple fact of the matter is this, America has never not been great.
    - Mark Robinson

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •