Originally Posted by
KEW8338
True
Overly complicated slings: I think this is self explanatory
QD sling points: These things are absolutely prone to failure. Common problems:
1) Poor coating that is prone to corrosion. Sweat, salt water can cause these to rust, resulting in the detents to catch or bind.
2) Poor QC resulting in slightly out of spec parts
3) Poor material, resulting in them wearing out
4) They usually are not marked with a name brand on them, so it can be hard to tell quality brands from not quality brands
5) This is an additional mechanism that is susceptible to dust fouling
6) Why? What is the reasoning for creating a point of failure on your rifle? What does a QD sling get me? The ability to break away from the gun if I fall in water? Ill buy that. Storage limitations? One sling, multiple rifles?
There are reasons QDs are legit. However, if you dont need it, why have it?
Things mounted forward of the rail: I use the front end of the rail as a bumper when I fall off things to try to protect everything else mounted on the rail.
Super bright lights: There is this thing, about wanting all the lumens, so you can see farther and reach out farther. I dont buy that logic in a combative rifle sense. For hunting, sure.
Offset red dots: The normal red dot is coming off the right hand side of the gun for a right handed shooter. This is the side of the rifle, that when slung to the front, is going to get a serious beating. You have out a part, extruding to take all that impact. I would also rather devote my time to training on the main optic than having to work multiple sighting systems. Which I think is another stupid thing.
Eta:
Folding stocks on guns that don't need folding stocks: If you are required for storage purposes to fold the gun. Then yes, they are cool. If you are putting a primo on reliability and durability. Throwing a hinge into the middle of the operating system, is not the way to do that. When you have to have a special plunger, to make the system work, that is not adding to the reliability and durability department. If you pay enough mind to resiliency to use back up irons, but then put a hinge in your gun. I dont understand that.
Even on guns where the stock is not part of the operating system, folding stocks rarely seem to go well.
High mounts: I have covered this in previous threads. IIRC Wake, you were at a JDC LVPO course where you were having undiagnosed scope shadow issues with a high mount.
Bungee cord suppressor covers: They generally lack the friction and grab to deal with recoil so they almost always end up flying straight off or getting the end blown off.
Ambi safeties: I grip the pistol grip high, ambi safety will almost always bury itself in my firing hand knuckle. Most guys I know, who are chasing performance, grip the gun that way.
Worrying about weight: I like lightweight stuff. But I dont usually define things by weight. I define things by what I need them to do, then make weight savings. The amount of lightweight rifles that have excessive plastic parts not removed, excess sling taped up, excess tape used to tape the sling, all makes me laugh.
Pencil barrels: They have yet to perform to a degree of acceptable performance on harsh firing schedules. This has been well documented.