T-REX said:
mac86951 said:
So the non reciprocating type would be threaded into the charging handle instead of bcg. I think one could mill it, but it might structurally weaken the picatinny rail. I agree that I'd rather not have one reciprocate, but truthfully the bcg in my humble opinion is a better answer reciprocating or not. Since I don't use side charging handles, I have found the BCM gunfighter in medium more than appropriate, or the ambidextrous version, and it doesn't reciprocate.
-Mac
Mac, thanks for your response. Please tell me what the bcg is, I am sure I should know but I can not remember. I looked up the BCB gunfighter it looks like it does not solve the problem for the configuration where the AR is used in the high power rifle match rifle configuration because the adjustable buttstock assembly prevents the use of the standard design charging handle.
Ahh, I get it now. Yes it is tricky as some adjustable cheek pads have a bitch cut out for the charging handle. The bcg is short for bolt carrier group.
There are those that solved this dilemma, and those like that move the scope back and use a pad at a location that allows the charging handle to work, combined with an increase in length of pull. If you are not limited to A2 stock, then you should be allowed something like a White Oak adjustable, or a Fulton armory adjustable butt pad.
Larue has another method as the CTR attachment slides with charging handle, and I believe the LuthAR stock leaves clearance as well.
I apologize to have to give this answer, but if you are shooting high power and are allowed an adjustable stock, there are manufacturers out there who have solved your problem if cheek height/charging handle. I'd recommend the full match stock like White Oak.
-Mac