Lets talk forward assists

**Neko456** · April 2nd, 2012, 09:17 AM

If building a AR and I had the option to omitt the FA, I would not why not have every option to load a round, when you need to. I mean why not some see the glass as half full others half empty.

Enough said though MAK-47 is very reliable I've seen some that were really dirty where they palmed stroked the bolt and it fire another 500 rounds same thing with the FA.

**LastManOut** · April 2nd, 2012, 09:18 AM

I've shot tens of thousands of rounds with an A-1, M-16 in some really crappy conditions and never used the 'forward assist'. I had one F2F from a very dirty weapon, (my fault) and one cook-off. Otherwise the weapon worked as needed.

I do not believe the rifle will fire if the bolt is not fully in-battery requiring the use of the forward assist.

IIRC the purpose for the FA was to correct for the problem of the 'dirty' (cheaper) ammo the military used early against Stoner's design for the system.

**Dasbalddog** · April 2nd, 2012, 09:20 AM

Originally Posted by 41800216

My response to use of the forward assist in this stated situation is that it's still unnecessary, as you can manually push the bolt forward through the ejection port. I was told that the dent in the side of the bolt (as viewable from the ejection port when the bolt is forward) is there for that reason.

I can understand for life-or-death purposes when you're military and deployed, but why do 99% of uppers sold for civilian (plinking) use have it? I'm pretty sure it's just to look cool, but that's just my opinion. I personally think that on a gun being sold outside of military, law enforcement, or contractor/mercenary-style duty, a forward assist is an unneeded accessory.

I also think ARs look better without them, but that's likely because I think they're useless for 99% of people so why even have it.

*edit* seriously, renalp was issued an infraction for that post? It's pretty clear to me that the "dumbass" comment was made in jest, considering the tone of the rest of the line.

Ferrari's are useless for 99% of people who have them.
So?

In your original post, you made allusion to thinking that the FA was capable of firing a bullet and that it was "one of the dumbest if not most dangerous" features of a firearm.

It is not dumb, it has a very real purpose, and as far as I know, when used properly it is not dangerous at all.

Who cares that a civilian isn't likely to use it? Why does it bother you so much? I hope you are not implying that simply because I should not/would not need it, that I shouldn't have it?!

Your buddy hitting it is probably due to cliche and watching of idiots on YouTube, and is almost certainly unwarranted, but the rest of your comments regarding the FA, I view to be certifiably false.

When the day comes I need to silently chamber a round, or shoot a gun till its filthy, I WANT that FA. I hope that day never comes, but like someone else said, I don't ever want to use my Spare tire either.

**41800216** · April 2nd, 2012, 09:22 AM

(I think you're mistaking me for the original poster )

I get your point, but Ferraris are definitely not useless to 99% of owners...lots of people (unfortunately) buy them for the status. Right or wrong (I think wrong), it benefits them in tangible (albeit superficially) and intangible ways every time they drive it or it's involved in a conversation. That's a whole different rant though, I'm stopping myself here as I could go on and on...

My personal dislike for it is that it's nearly impossible to find an upper without it (as a bare upper or as a whole gun). I think it's dumb and have no use for it, so if I were to buy or build another AR, I would want an upper without it. I know I sure as hell will never use it, so why have another set of moving parts to maintain if I will never use it? If I'm really in a tight spot and need to fire rounds, just rack the charging handle and let it slam another bullet in the chamber.

**39flathead** · April 2nd, 2012, 09:46 AM

Originally Posted by 41800216

My response to use of the forward assist in this stated situation is that it's still unnecessary, as you can manually push the bolt forward through the ejection port. I was told that the dent in the side of the bolt (as viewable from the ejection port when the bolt is forward) is there for that reason.

I can understand for life-or-death purposes when you're military and deployed, but why do 99% of uppers sold for civilian (plinking) use have it? I'm pretty sure it's just to look cool, but that's just my opinion. I personally think that on a gun being sold outside of military, law enforcement, or contractor/mercenary-style duty, a forward assist is an unneeded, antiquated accessory. It was implemented decades ago on a gun that kept jamming due to less-than-ideal manufacturing tolerances and being dragged through dirt, mud, sand, water, etc. I highly doubt it's quite necessary on modern guns with modern uses.

I also think ARs look better without them, but that's likely because I think they're useless for 99% of people so why even have it.

*edit* seriously, renalp was issued an infraction for that post? It's pretty clear to me that the "dumbass" comment was made in jest, considering the tone of the rest of the line.

The 99% of uppers have it because those same companies also sell to military and law enforcement.
Why run two different lines when one is just fine.

Also, I wonder if someone in Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada, etc... use the FA on their civilian rifles?

I'm not sure, maybe not, but our climate here in PA is not the same as every other state.
Maybe some of these do in fact get used?

**renalp** · April 2nd, 2012, 09:50 AM

Originally Posted by knight0334

My apologies. Apparently I am the dumbass here in this thread. lol

Knight, you're a d.... Ah, never mind.

>>> LOL <<<<

**QuackXP** · April 2nd, 2012, 09:54 AM

From my understanding of the history of the M16 the FA was a band-aid to address a issue with the early rifles and ammunition. The problem has since been fixed and the FA is virtually obsolete. But from the military point of view why change something that works and its possible under combat conditions that it is still used today, although hopefully not as much.

Any quality rifle that is designed for military or law enforcement will be much closer to the military standards. I recently ordered a Colt not because I want to pretend I am a cop or a soldier. I just wanted quality. I've never heard of a FA causing a problem. So I'm not worried about it.

But as the AR platform gains more popularity for the recreational shooter I foresee there being more rifles like the S&W M&P 15 Sport. These rifles remove things like the FA and the dust guard to help reduce costs for rifles that are just going to be for recreational target use.

That is the beauty of the AR platform. It's so modular if you don't like something about it chances are someone makes a rifle or component that will fit your desires.

**ViperHummel** · April 2nd, 2012, 10:08 AM

Originally Posted by QuackXP

But as the AR platform gains more popularity for the recreational shooter I foresee there being more rifles like the S&W M&P 15 Sport. These rifles remove things like the FA and the dust guard to help reduce costs for rifles that are just going to be for recreational target use.

This right here. It saves weight also. I have nothing against the slick side. In fact, if everything goes to plan (doubtfully!) then I would plan to build and sell lighter weight ARs that are slick sided. I'm not using a polymer lower just to save weight!