Lupo

Yup. The only practical difference should be that the "triangular" pin resists rotation, and the round aftermarket versions don't. My guess is that the Brownell's page will be corrected to list the present version of the titanium pin as for the M1, not the M4 (as on the packaging label). Stay tuned.

Rob, there is no real "twist" needed to insert the M4 handle. The twisting sensation happens as a consequence of the "triangular groove" cut into the tip. Hmm, I guess a picture is needed to explain this (clickity clickity clickity... done!): At left is the tip of the factory M4 handle; at right is a version that is "cut" through the plane of the grooves. This shows how the grooves form a triangle (cut highlighted in red). With the spring-driven catch on the far right, you can see that rotating the pin will cause the "tips" of the triangle to push the catch back against the spring the most. Hence the "natural" orientation of the pin is with the catch at the center of one of the three triangular faces (the spring is most relaxed at those points). If you made a similar cut through the tip of the aftermarket handle in question, the red area would be circular; this means it rotates freely with no preferential orientation. In this case the only pressure you feel when inserting/extracting is along the axis of the pin (the "friction fit" you referred to). The reason that twisting seems to help when removing the factory handle is because you are using rotation to push the catch away until the pin clears it at or near one of the triangle tips. Rotating the aftermarket handle has no effect on the catch, so "twisting" has no effect during the installation or extraction of the handle. The other assertion I made, that the factory grooves are probably stronger (all else being equal) is based on the observation that the equivalent red circle is smaller in area than the triangle; the circular version has less "meat" at the thinnest section. I hope everybody is paying attention, there will be a quiz at the end of this discussion...

I have ordered one; have also found that my Eotech is a bit too low for my old stiff neck. Thanks for the recommendation.

Hey Rob, I don't own an M1 so I can't compare the lockup of the handle, but it engages the M4 catch just fine from the backside with the bolt removed: The catch is just a captive round-headed pin with a spring, held in place with a roll-pin (see left photo). The tip snaps in and holds well; the titanium seems to hold up. I would prefer the triangular groove (as in the factory handle) for resistance to rotation and probably added strength. I'll post pictures of the modified handle after surgery. Aww shucks, M1014, we were just fooling around, didn't mean any harm... what kid can resist titanium?

I've moved the discussion about the titanium bolt handle at Brownell's out to a separate topic, where it belongs at this location [ 06-24-2006, 09:41 PM: Message edited by: Lupo ]

Many of you have been salivating over the titanium bolt handle for the M4 on the Brownell's website. And I don't blame you. The link is here . The problem is that this handle doesn't fit the M4. I spoke with Brownell's and the manufacturer, Progressive Machine and Tool. The maker says they never represented this part as fitting anything but the M1, and the label on the plastic bag containing the part does indeed confirm this. He said that Brownell's told him they thought a handle for the M1 would fit the M4. The Brownell's technical support guy disavowed any knowledge of the M4, but conceded that they may need to modify their website. As of Friday, June 23, this hasn't happened; so I'm here to inject a note of caution. Note that the picture of the handle on the Brownell's website doesn't really illustrate the handle accurately, as does that on the manufacturer's website and the picture shown below. There's a flat section that's supposed to keep the handle from rotating which is "missing" from the Brownell's photo. This picture shows the factory M4 handle next to the oversize titanium handle. First, let me say that the titanium handle is beautifully executed, and the manufacturer obviously knows how to create high-quality parts; it just doesn't fit my M4. The pin on this unit isn't long enough to engage the catch in the bolt assembly; as indicated in the photo, the length of the pin on the titanium unit is about 0.9 inches, whereas the pin on the factory handle inserts to about 1 inch to engage the catch inside the bolt. As you can see from the picture, the flat section on the titanium handle is on one side of the pin only, rather than both. This is presumably to allow the handle to reach the back of the slot in the receiver, but the side-effect is that, when forward, the handle could rotate during handling such that it would potentially collide with the receiver while firing (assuming the pin was long enough to engage the catch in the bolt). I'm not comfortable with this at all. Let's let the manufacturer and Brownell's work this confusion out. In the meantime, I suggest that you hold off on ordering this part for your M4 (as represented), since it won't fit. As for me, I'm going to turn off the flat on the lathe and make this into the first titanium handle that really does fit the M4...

One of the online sources that recently had a small supply of the M4 +2 extension tubes is Cal's Sporting Armory at http://www.calssportingarmory.com/. Look under Benelli, accessories, factory magazine extensions. I wouldn't hold my breath though. Supply vs. Demand = $$. And in this case it means "sold out." I keep hearing people express dislike for the contrasting finish on the Nodakspud extension, but the color is roughly about the same as the factory limiter tube (which is more black than the gun, at least on mine). The spud extender is shinier, though. Mine (steel) works great, but I'd shed it in an instant for a full-length tube.

Guns, yes. Wallpaper, no....

Well, Jakjakman, I'm a sucker for anything made out of titanium. I'm tempted to just turn off the projection on the lathe and, if it leaves me enough length to recut the indent, to redo it with the triangular grooves. I'm not sure I like the flat plate method for restricting rotation, since this design puts the flat all on one side of the axis of the handle. This means that, when forward, the handle can still rotate freely through 180+ degrees (I've confirmed this with the handle inserted but not latched). If I pull it back into the narrow slot behind the ejection port, will I have to wrestle with it if the flat is pointing straight up, and collides with the shoulder/transition in the receiver slot? Was this really thought through and tested with hands-on trials? Brothers, there is a quiet and benevolent wisdom in the factory parts made by Benelli. Add-ons are one thing (I pimp out my M4 shamelessly), but it makes sense to view replacement/upgrade parts with a skeptical eye. Will share with the group whatever I learn from vendor/manufacturer. For $59.99 the thing should be ready to rock-n-roll out of the box.

Okay, just received the titanium charging handle from Brownell's and.... it doesn't fit my M4. The part number on the baggy is the same as the one on the website that is represented there as fitting the M4 (100-002-565). However, it only mentions the M1 on both the Brownell's label and that of the manufacturer, Progressive Machine and Tool (http://www.progressivemachine.net). The picture on Brownell's website doesn't show the flat projection at the base of the pin; you can see what I'm talking about at the manufacturer's website. Apparently this flat portion is there to keep the handle from rotating. With this flat area, the pin is too short to snap into place; you can feel the tip just starting to engage the catch. Operator error would seem ruled out by the simplicity of installation.... other than not being able to use the thing, it looks very well-made. Does anybody know if the M1 and M4 charging handles should be compatible? If not, the problem is probably Brownell's. I'll start with Brownell's on Monday and work my way up to the manufacturer for answers.

E-mail sent; looking forward to retiring the (worthy) nodakspud....