AR15 W/Triangular Handguards: Yes or No

[bmcgilvray]

A friend gave me a batch of current gun rags to peruse. He told me not to bother, saying "it's all AR15, all the time". He was right. I'm "plumb wore out" with the AR15. I've had a Colt SP1 since about 1984 but don't currently play with it very often, in part because I've overdosed on hearing about AR's. Do have a question for the Forum readership who dabble in things AR15.

Is there anyone out there besides me who actually likes the triangular handguard?

I'm sure I like it because it's what I'm accustomed to using. Even in the limited high-power competition use I've made of the AR15 I like the old style triangular handguard. It sits firmly in my left hand when I'm shooting sitting or prone. It's easy for me to grasp when shooting the rifle casually in the off-hand position. The 20-round magazine sits in my left hand when shooting standing slow-fire stages in competition.

Any who offer an opinion please elaborate on the reason for your preference or why the triangular handguard was abandoned. I've never seen anything related to handguard styles in print. This latest vertical fore grip really blows my little pea-brain. Can't see the advantage in it at all.

I'm certain I'll find that I'm an old fogey with wierd hands. The triangular handguard is history for some good reason.

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[OPFOR]

I cut my teeth on the triangular handguard, but haven't used it in forever. It offered no benefit to me as an infantryman that I ever noticed. The circular ones just feel and look "right" now, and the triangular ones look "wrong."

As for the vertical grip - it took me a while to warm to it, too. But after a while, I really took a shine to them for CQB style shooting - they're quick and easy to access, put your hands in the same position each time, and allow excellent recoil control when doing rapid fire (double-triple-quadruple taps and such). They also allow easier "swings" from target to target, when engaging multiple BGs at relatively close range. Not a factor on the "high power" range, but definitely a factor on the "two-way" range... :)

[aus71383]

When I'm shooting rifle qual, I like an M16A2. It is comfortable, light, and makes nice smacking noises when you're doing close order drill. I also like the option of being able to mount whatever is needed - in the Marines I've been issued a butt-load of crap and had it all strapped to my handguards. It was a bit ridiculous but SOP. I think the rifle probably weighed 12 pounds. ACOG, Surefire M961, PEQ2, vertical foregrip....It was hard to find a place to put your hands on the rail, so the VFG really came in handy. I do like it for close range shooting as well - fast recovery, easy swinging like OpFor said.

I just recently ordered my first AR and I got it with a rail. If I buy another I'll probably get it with the old plastic ones though.

Austin

[HotGuns]

I voted against.

I've owned them both and used them both. I always thought that the triangular guard looked awful ugly.

I've been told that it is actually more efficient as it cools the barrel due to the shape, but that didnt make up for the ugly factor.

[jhh3rd]

I think the triangle guards are left right specific, while the round guards are interchangeable top or bottom and front to rear.

[Erich]

Hey, amigo!

Seeing a triangular handguard takes me right back to being a kid - but I'd rather have the modern ones on a gun.

[AZ Husker]

I love them! That's what I qualified with and carried in the Army. My favorite Colt has the new round ones, but I miss the old style.

[Ram Rod]

I voted against the triangular hand guards. I wouldn't exactly say they are less useful, but sort of out-dated and I believe heavier. Takes me back to my Corps days. Just guessing they were flat on the bottom for using a rest?

[Dunmaglas]

I take no issue against the triangular guards, while I also have none against the round ones, though I don't find them QUITE as stable as the flat bottom of the old style for shooting sitting and prone. The vertical grip is an addition of practicality. In addition to the reasons mentioned by OPFOR above, it is more comfortable to hold for long periods. When carrying the rifle for a long time, one is holding the rifle in your hand in a way more natural for the wrist; more neutral--less twisted around. Your wrist won't so soon develop the stiffness and some pain that can come from toting a weapon palm-up for a long time. Any infantry (or any folks) with long march experience with both horizontal and vertical grips that can attest to this?

[OD*]

Is there anyone out there besides me who actually likes the triangular handguard?

Yes.

But I like 'em both.

[HotGuns]

I dont see a triangular open forked flashider on that first one.

[OD*]

I dont see a triangular open forked flashider on that first one.

That's because it's a 1982 model SP-1 and not a pre-1980.

[HotGuns]

I had one like it except it had the 3 pronger. I sold it to a friend of mine to coyote hunt with while he was driving around on his tractor. The coyotes just ignored that old John Deer Tractor and he would just stand up an whack em whenever he saw one. He killed a semi truck load of them.

When the Assault Weapons bill passed, he sold it to a collector for 1200 bucks. That for a gun that original price was 360 bucks.

[aus71383]

Wow I just realized you were talking about M16/A1 type handguards. Now I'm extra glad I voted "you're all washed up"!!! Those things are from 40 years ago! How do you even take them off? I have no idea.

Austin

[OD*]

Wow I just realized you were talking about M16/A1 type handguards. Now I'm extra glad I voted "you're all washed up"!!! Those things are from 40 years ago! How do you even take them off? I have no idea.

Austin

The same way you take off the "new" round style.