Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Looking to add a top rail system to my new M4 to mount a T1 with Larue mount.

In reviewing previous threads I noted the reciever rail on the M4 is not really spec Picatinny and has caused some issues with mounts.

According to the Sidearmor site, their rail system is "Mil-spec" but in reality it is not. The KZ site says "Picatinny" but again our members say it is not to "Spec".

Kip at Carriercomp was working on a true spec short rail for the reciever but I have not heard any updates since November/December.

I would appreciate input from members as to my options on a rail system or should I just add the T1 to the factory rail?

Posted

I've posted with pictures showing the damage to my T1 LaRue mount - not a problem with the mount per se, just not enough surface area on the Benelli mount - don't know how they got that past the military but that's another story.

 

Reached out to Kip several times w/o success

Posted

Even though the SideArmor and Mesa Tactical top rails are out of true spec, they will not damage your mount when properly installed. The factory rail will destroy your mount in short order. I tried to contact Kip today for an update, but he is not answering and his mail box is full.

Posted

I just looked at the FTT handle. It weighs 16 grams roughly. The factory handle weighs 12.5 grams.

 

For comparison, the GG&G handle weighs 24.5 grams and the Design Concepts handle weighs either 7.5 or 8.5 gram (I forget off the top of my head).

 

This is a case where lighter weight is superior. The lighter your Bolt Carrier Group is, the faster it will cycle. Stock weight should be the target goal for oversized handles. Lighter than stock is better though.

 

You wouldn't think a small weight difference would matter, but it was obvious when switching between the GG&G and the Design Concepts. You could feel the weapon cycling more sluggishly. We hope Kip's will be under stock weight also.

Posted
I just looked at the FTT handle. It weighs 16 grams roughly. The factory handle weighs 12.5 grams.

 

For comparison, the GG&G handle weighs 24.5 grams and the Design Concepts handle weighs either 7.5 or 8.5 gram (I forget off the top of my head).

 

This is a case where lighter weight is superior. The lighter your Bolt Carrier Group is, the faster it will cycle. Stock weight should be the target goal for oversized handles. Lighter than stock is better though.

 

You wouldn't think a small weight difference would matter, but it was obvious when switching between the GG&G and the Design Concepts. You could feel the weapon cycling more sluggishly. We hope Kip's will be under stock weight also.

 

Good Info, I originally wanted a titanium charging handle from Brownells but is was discontinued so I bought the steel DMW, nice piece but like you said a bit heavy, so I kept looking and just cam across the FFT.

 

What is Design concepts web site, as I remember that is the one that was discontinued from brownells for the M4.

 

NEWGUNNER.

Posted
NewGunner - Design Concepts appears to be out of business - send them emails which kicked back; phone, as I recall, is disconnected and I think their web site is no longer

 

So I guess that leaves us with FFT for now :)

Posted

Unobtainium said the owner was in Afghanistan taking pictures of fauna or something.

 

I'd stick with stock until Kip gets it together or if you can find someone selling their Design Concepts unit. Good luck with this though, people weren't selling for even 100 dollars. I need a second one or a similar model for my OD green M4.

Posted (edited)

I'm gonna order the FFT Ti knob - 3.4 grams difference? Pfft. A nonissue. Whoever pointed out the link to the knob, thanks.

 

FWIW, I've run a heavier steel charging handle for YEARS and not even a glitch. And I shoot a LOT. Thousands and thousands of rounds through my M4. So I'm not worried about it.

Edited by h.bowman

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...