Strike Industries charging handle

[Straight Shooter]

Pardon me jumping in. SI at least says: "Not rated for suppressors and /or full auto fire. Not for use on SBRs or pistol length barrels (<14.5")" This implies that the detent doesn't hold nearly as well as a regular latch. Also I there are reports of the leaf spring breaking or weakening, and unlike a sheared latch roll pin there doesn't appear to be a simple repair.

Thanks for that info....anyone else has any Id like to hear it.

[ColtSeavers]

Also I there are reports of the leaf spring breaking or weakening, and unlike a sheared latch roll pin there doesn't appear to be a simple repair.

That leaf spring looks far easier to replace and deal with than a sheared roll pin and splayed charging handle.

[jackblack73]

I personally wouldn't want that leaf spring rubbing on and wearing down my receiver.

[ColtSeavers]

I personally wouldn't want that leaf spring rubbing on and wearing down my receiver.

As opposed to a latch rubbing off the outside of it?

[Straight Shooter]

Ive seen a rifles with the area where the latch locks onto very worn..even Vickers has a video of him shooting and the Ch keeps unlocking and moving. So- my question is this: When that area, where the latch locks onto becomes very worn, how is that repaired?

[Hammer_Man]

Strike Industries is a form over function, gimmicky parts manufacturer. On top of that most of their stuff is made over seas. If you want a quality charging handle with a large extended latch look at BCM.

[js8588]

Pardon me jumping in. SI at least says: "Not rated for suppressors and /or full auto fire. Not for use on SBRs or pistol length barrels (<14.5")" This implies that the detent doesn't hold nearly as well as a regular latch. Also I there are reports of the leaf spring breaking or weakening, and unlike a sheared latch roll pin there doesn't appear to be a simple repair.

This is exactly why & it's a problem with all "latchless" designs.

[Duffy]

Conventional CH's latch wears the rear of the latch pocket on the upper (the butt stock side) as it goes in, but never on its way out (since the latch is rotated out of the pocket when the user pulls on the latch and the CH back). With a latchless, it wears on both sides of the pocket and there isn't any way to stop the wear, only reduce it, so it was just a matter of time and before the pocket's edge is worn down gradually to nothing.

Different for the sake of being different is meaningless. Some excel at this, their warning should be not rated for duty, defense and any serious use.

[ColtSeavers]

Conventional CH's latch wears the rear of the latch pocket on the upper (the butt stock side) as it goes in, but never on its way out (since the latch is rotated out of the pocket when the user pulls on the latch and the CH back). With a latchless, it wears on both sides of the pocket and there isn't any way to stop the wear, only reduce it, so it was just a matter of time and before the pocket's edge is worn down gradually to nothing.

Different for the sake of being different is meaningless. Some excel at this, their warning should be not rated for duty, defense and any serious use.

I think you're confusing one of those ball bearing detent latchless charging handles with the Strike Industries leaf spring latchless charging handle that interfaces with the charging handle insertion recesses(?) inside the upper receiver?

[Disciple]

That leaf spring looks far easier to replace and deal with than a sheared roll pin and splayed charging handle.

Is a replacement available? Making one does not seem trivial.