https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6UxSE7J2hM0
interesting and useful or just wierd
>>35068711
>incompatible with LAW buffer tube folder
godammit
>>35068711
Seems like a lot of liability for not that much gain. Neat toy though.
>>35068771
You wouldn't gain much considering how far rearward the folded barrel protrudes.
>>35068711
dont really see the point in this since you can just separate the two receivers
Its novel, but you can replicate the effect on any AR by just taking the lower off. Alternatives dont hurt though.
>>35068951
The point is, like most AR stuff, to separate gucci AR parts buyers from their money.
>>35068947
like i give a fuck, when it can all be combined with pic related for a goddamn origami AR
>>35068771
Well, there's Dead Foot's MCS folder.
>>35068711
I also enjoy getting crap in my chamber
>>35068998
>>35068711
just buy a longer bag ffs
>>35068998
Get a folding suppressor, folding barrel, and folding stock so you can build your ARcordion
this makes it 100% more fuckable
>>35070601
>Dead Foot's MCS folder.
ohhh snap I totally forgot about that, its perfect
>>35072173
you know whats up
>>35068771
can't you just convert either of these to go the other way?
>>35072774
not really
>>35068711
it seems cool but I think the leo takedown seems better
>>35068951
Which you then have to reassemble before shooting. This is also shorter overall
>>35068771
>>35072811
>fug
>boss, we keep trying but we can't get the folding buffer to work
>then fold the other fucking end
>>35076951
Non slab sides might have a problem folding the other way. The forward assist was, indeed, a bad idea.
I tried to ask /arg/ about this a month or so back and all they said was fake and gay.
>>35068711
If I need to cram an ar-15 into a small space and don't care that I can't use it until I assemble it, I would just modify the package/case/backpack to hold the separate upper and lower receivers.
Now, if they took this and did something similar to a bullpup rifle, that might be interesting.
>>35077043
>The forward assist was, indeed, a bad idea.
Engineers disagree
>>35077084
>expects a hive of idiocy where Nick "Business Casual" McMantits hangs out to be useful at all
Your fault.
>>35077135
Great on paper; bad in practice.
>>35077135
1. Engineers are stupid.
2. People who actually use the gun agree with 1.
The forward assist is called the make-the-problem-worse button for a reason.
>>35077149
>>35077150
Proofs
>>35077155
Find me even one fucking time in the history of mankind it was better to hit the shitbutton instead of Tap-Rack-Bang. It exists for no fucking reason and was greenlit by the same pile of fuckheads that said "if it NEEDED a chrome bore stoner would have already GIVEN IT one."
>>35077155
http://www.gunsandammo.com/tactical/ga-perspectives-need-ar-15-forward-assist/
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2011/11/foghorn/ask-foghorn-what-does-a-forward-assist-do/
http://weaponsman.com/?p=329
https://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/2016/12/14/rifleman-qa-why-have-a-forward-assist/
I mean these are all articles I don't know what kind of source you're expecting when the rifle is still clearly manufactured with it...
Have you ever used your forward assist? I havent.
On the other hand, when shooter in video related thinks the forward assist is the right thing to use he ends up with an exploding gun.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oh1lyMyejpI
>>35077196
Wasn't enough to conquer a bee either :^)
https://youtu.be/uFg4n5FKRcY