Does anyone actually use the forward assist on an AR? I've noticed that some of the lower end AR's don't even come with the forward assist anymore. Does having the FA add any value to the gun?

Better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it.

The lower end ones don't come with it because they are just that...lower end.

__________________
'Merica!

It's really a military type accessory. Its intentions are to force the chamber all the way forward if bolt wont go on its own. That's due to very dirty guns or dirty conditions (dirt, gunpowder, sand, etc.) Not really necessary for the hobbyist, or people that really take care of their weapons and clean them on the regular. Life and death situations, it could be a life saver. Far as value, maybe, maybe not.

This should be interesting.

__________________
-John

You mean the low end ARs like the Sport? The low end one that has the same bolt and carrier group as the rest of the M&P line? The low end one that has the Melonited barrel? The low end one that has the same lower as the M&P 15T? And in the case of the older Sports, the low end one that has the 1:8 twist with 5R rifling, the same barrel as found on the M&P 15T? Is that the lower end one that you are disparaging, or is it some other one?

And if not having a forward assist makes an AR lower end, someone should let Les Baer know... they've been turning out a lot of low end guns.

I think because written communication lacks non-verbal cues maybe just maybe the phrase "low end" is misinterpreted. I hope that this is the case here. The rifles that omit the forward assist eliminate material and manufacturing cost, and pass that savings onto the consumer. They are on the "low end" of the price range. Price isn't always directly proportional to quality.

Jackrabbit000, I have an AR with a forward assist. I've never had to use it. Even if I had a chambering issue on the range, I still wouldn't use it. On a one way range, I have the luxury of time. I can take the time to assess, diagnose, and remedy the problem. A forward assist can potentially make a problem worse.

__________________
-John

I could probably introduce you to some folks that might disagree with that statement.

I've assisted multiple AR shooters at the range who decided that pounding on the forward assist was the solution for chambering a bad reload. Had to butt stroke the AR to eject the cartridge. Had there been no FA, they wouldn't have jammed up their AR.

__________________
Stu

The forward assist was not on the original rifle design from Stoner. Forward assist is an Army holdover from the M1 Garand and M14 days. On those weapons, there is an operating rod that allow you to push the bolt forward. In the AR, the charging handle only pulls the bolt to the rear, and can move independently from the bolt.

Arguments are made for and against. One popular argument for a FA is that if you ride the charging handle forward to silently close the bolt, you need the FA to ensure the bolt is fully forward and closed. The counter argument is that the scallop cut out in the bolt is there so that you can use your thumb to push the bolt forward. Inevitably, someone will argue that you can't do that when the bolt is hot... well, if the bolt is hot, I have been shooting, which really negates the need to be silent in my mind.

The military training used SPORTS in training on the M16. If you had a problem with the firearm you were supposed to

Slap gently upward on the magazine to ensure that it is fully seated and that the magazine follower is not jammed.

Pull the charging handle fully to the rear

Observe the ejection of a live round or expended cartridge. If cartridge is not ejected, perform remedial action

Release the charging handle; do not ride it forward.

Tap the forward assist assembly to ensure that the bolt is closed.

Shoot

Notice that even with this method, the FA is not used to ram a stuck cartridge home. If you follow SPORTS, that cartridge that failed to load has been ejected. If not, you are in deep doo doo. In my opinion, if your weapon fails to load again when the charging handle is released, it is time for remedial action, not a tap on the forward assist. Many shooting classes no longer teach the tap on the forward assist and go directly to remedial action when the firearm fails to load after clearing the initial stoppage.

Yes Sir, just what he said. Trying to force a round that didn't want to chamber to start with makes no sense, yet there are people that think if you do that, the situation will be self healing. It's just a band aid.

As to value, only if it is of value to the buyer. For the buyer with no interest in such things, it's just an extra, not an option used to increase the price.

__________________
SFC, US Army, Retired

Just a question.

How many other firearms have such a device?

Yeah, I have a Bushmaster AR-15 equipped with the device. Shot all kinds of ammo including the steel case Russian.

Have never needed to used it.

I can't answer "How many" but I can give a few examples.

M1 Garand
M14
M1 Carbine
M16
M4
AK 47
SKS
Ruger Mini 14
Ruger Mini 30
Ruger 10/22

Essentially any firearm that has an operating rod or charging handle that is connected directly to the bolt, and can move the bolt in both a forward and rearward movement. On the AR, the charging handle moves the bolt rearward, and the FA moves it forward.

Long time handgun shooter. But only been playing with AR's for a few years.
But the forward assist always seemed like a strange device to me. The bolt doesn't go all the way to battery because a round is jammed part way into the chamber. So, I want to use the forward assist to jammed it in tighter ?

A friend of mine got a mr15 T like mine his had the assist mine didn't I heard they were California compliant with them
We are both in NJ

That's not the purpose of the forward assist. Theoretically, the AR's bolt carrier can become sluggish, due to a number of reasons (think combat environment), and fail to allow the bolt to completely seat a round in the chamber. When this occurs the forward assist is used to bump the carrier forward which fully closes the bolt and seats the round (contrary to the beliefs of some, you're not going to be able to do this with a thumb- the scallop on the bolt carrier is there to operate the dust cover, not for manually advancing the bolt with a digit of the hand).

Used this way, it is a wonderful device. Obviously, when used to jam a jam even further, it's not so wonderful. The forward assist is one of those things with which the operator really needs to know what he is doing.

__________________
SWHF #448

Did anyone let Eugene Stoner know that? You know, the guy that designed the rifle and the scallop in the bolt?

If you are not able to push the bolt forward with your thumb, then you are going to have to give it more than a light tap on the forward assist as well. Just make sure to wear shooting gloves, as the bolt does get hot.

Where did you get a M&P 15T that does not have a forward assist? To my knowledge, the Sport is the only rifle in the M&P line without a forward assist.

Did you buy the rifle new? If not, it is possible that the previous owner had a Sport and put a quad rail with flip up sights to make it look like a 15T.

I'm not sure I understand your objection here. Furthermore, the scallop is on the bolt carrier, not the bolt. As explained, it exists to operate the dust cover. Anyone familiar with the mechanics of the AR understands this. That some have found, after the fact, that they might, in certain ideal circumstances (dry ungloved hands, a cold dry bolt carrier, and only if one's thumb is small enough to fit in the ejection port), be able to utilize the scallop to attain a purchase with a thumb in order to move the BCG forward, is only incidental. The notion that the scallop exists in order to manipulate the BCG with a thumb is one of those internet myths that just won't die, apparently.

The forward assist generates much more force than can be applied with a thumb alongside the bolt carrier, even in the best of conditions.

__________________
SWHF #448

The objection is that Eugene Stoner designed the rifle without the forward assist as it exists today. The first M16s brought into the military were purchased by the Air Force, and they did not have the forward assist. The statement that Eugene Stoner advised to put your thumb in the scallop on the bolt carrier and push forward to close the bolt has been around a lot longer than the internet. (yes, earlier I said bolt... while technically not correct, everyone on here knew what I meant... kinda like buffer tube vs receiver extension.)



You are correct, however, that much force is not necessary in a properly functioning rifle. If your action has become so sluggish that you have to use the the forward assist to seat a round, you have an issue that needs to be resolved.

No one has said Stoner wanted a forward assist, but this is beside the point. The issue we're discussing is the scallop on the bolt carrier. You initially seemed to have a problem with my explanation that the scallop doesn't exist to act as a thumb-operated forward assist but rather it's there in order to operate the ejection port cover. Again, use of the scallop to move the BCG forward is only coincidental and secondary to the primary reason the scallop exists, which is, of course, to allow for manually closing and automatic opening of the port cover.

In short, Stoner didn't scallop the bolt carrier for forward assisting. That it might possibly be used that way is only something that was figured out afterwards.

The internet myth I'm referring to is as follows (you can Google and find dozens, if not hundreds, of takes on this theme): "Ya see that thumb-shaped cutout on the side of your bolt? Why ya think it's shaped like a thumb? That's put there for you to use as a forward assist, the way Stoner designed it!"

...which is simply not true. That "thumb-shaped cutout" is for the port cover.

__________________
SWHF #448

I agree with this. The scallop was there before the forward assist requirement came forward. It was most likely an after thought of Stoner's to use the scallop to push the bolt carrier forward, in an attempt to over ride the objection of the Army.

My initial objection was that it appeared that you were saying that the scallop could not be used in that fashion. Sorry I wasn't clear...

No problem. Sure, the scallop can be used that way, but it's hardly ideal. For one thing, bigger guys like me can barely fit a thumb in the ejection port, let alone generate any real forward force on the BCG. Add the possibility of gloves, heat, lube, etc. and it just ain't happening.

__________________
SWHF #448

I had a friend who served a few tours in the sandbox and says he never used his. That being said he did says he was glad it was there and did see others use it to seat rounds on occasion.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

Not just low end AR, are without the forward assist. There are quite a few expensive custom made competition rifles that don't have a forward assist. It is considered unnecessary except in an extreme military environment, or for people too busy to occasionally clean their chambers.

Charging is a noisy event. If keeping things quite is required, ride the charge handle forward and then use the FA. Light click rather than a loud smack might just come in handy.

The original AR rifle did not have the forward assist. For the most part, if a round will not chamber, I am not interested in forcing it into the chamber. Under that circumstance, I want it out of the chamber.

Was out in the bitter cold the other day and had to use it more than once, had the wrong buffer in the rifle, and the wrong lube on it as well. Forward assist was used more than once until we figured out what was going on. Changed the buffer, relubed the gun with much thinner oil and it performed flawless. I usually shoot 5.56, that day we were shooting .223. So yes the forward assist can save your *****, if need be.

I don't use the FA, or try to use my thumb, but you could with gloves... But this goes back to my post on SPORTS. If your bolt doesn't go into battery and you do the slap, pull, observe, release, and it still doesn't go into battery, it is time to identify the problem and correct it through remedial action.

As -db- pointed out too, the operator needs to understand what is going on with the firearm. If the action is sluggish, due to 400 rounds already fired in a dust storm and the enemy is still firing at you, bump the assist. If you are shooting paper at the range, stop and figure out what is causing the issue.

I'll grab the popcorn.

__________________
THIS WE'LL DEFEND ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

I think you're onto something. I hunted (local,100 miles) high and low for the M&P-15T when I first got into MSR's. My "lazy arse" wanted an already free floated barrel and didn't want to go through all the hastle of changing everything out. Little did I know then,how easy & fun it is AND very adictive (to say the least) to change anything out. Anyway,I NEVER found a 15T with out a FA and dust cover.

__________________
THIS WE'LL DEFEND ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

This topic always the most debating topic for the MP AR version. I would like to have the dust cover more than the FA. Well my Sport has none. And no problem so far after I decorated it into the "ninja Mall" AR15

__________________
S&W M&P Sport | Ruger SR1911

If he did build one with a forward assist, would it cost more...or less?

If you understand why they were put there in the first place, you can decide whether you need one or not.

How many Les Baer AR's are used in extreme conditions?

__________________
'Merica!

I have never needed to use one on an AR... now, I have needed to use them on M16s and M4s. Your local range is not the same as crawling around in the dirt.

No, the original M16 as designed by Eugene Stoner did not have a forward assist. When the M16A1 was adopted, it did. The A1 was an improvement over the original design based on lessons learned in Vietnam.

__________________
Proud anachronism

Bought it new this past December from a local gun shop in Southern NJ the boss for the button is there but that's all

22 years in the military shooting the M16A1. I don't recall ever needing the FA. The dust cover seems like a good idea tho.

I can't ever recall using the FA during my time in the military. For those who think it's important to have one I'd say that you'll have much bigger issues to worry about if you're in a situation where having a FA matters.

Not to put words in your mouth, but if keeping things quiet is required (whether in hunting or in combat), there ought to already be a live round in the chamber. The only light click should be the trigger.

If you are saying "low end" from a cost perspective, then fine... but from your statements, I read it to be a quality perspective.

I think I have a quite a good understanding in why they were put there in the first place. In fact, I explained it in this very thread. Not only did I explain why they are there from a history stand point, I explained how they are used in military training.

The Les Baer ARs are used in the same conditions that S&W or any other civilian rifle is used in... LEO use, three gun, HD. Are you saying that the Les Baer doesn't need the FA due to the conditions it is used in? On the Les Baer AR, the FA is actually optional, you can get it with or without.

You shouldn't climb up into the stand with a round in the chamber, per your hunter safety training. But this is where you can force the bolt closed with your thumb.

I get to my stand at least an hour before legal shooting hours anyway.

If I were in a stand, I would charge the rifle after I got situated up there.

From a hunting perspective, I was thinking Coyotes. Around here, there's no need for a stand. You just get off the tractor and shoot them in the field. We can't hunt deer in my state with an AR-15, unless it's chambered for .450 bushmaster. Bizarre, I know.

I would have to go back to the history books, but I believe the carry handle was added prior to the Army fielding the XM16E1. However, most of those lessons learned were ammunition related. In any case, a lot of good men were lost...

Didn't think coyotes... don't really hunt them, just shoot them due to the cattle being on the lease.

I don't use the AR for deer either, I use it for hogs. I'll typically get in a stand for the hogs though. Gets me up off the ground and allows me to see them in the hay field and the wheat field.

You, sir, are a prophet..... I need numbers for tonight's lotto.

cyphertext

Thanks for much good information - appreciated.

__________________
NRA

There really isn`t any argument over the FA...If you want to pay for it be my guest...I happen to think not...It isn`t needed to make the gun function so I don`t want to pay for it...That goes for the dust cover to and the silly trigger guard...The sport is exactly what I want....My Sport is the 10th AR I've owned and the only one I now have and I couldn`t be happier not only does it run perfect it wasn't a bundle of money...I'll be purchasing another Sport and build it into a different looking gun soon..

I hear ya. My 2nd AR-15, the one right after the Sport, was one I assembled myself. Between the craziness I did to my 15-Sport and building one, I don't see myself buying another AR type firearm.

Time to try something different: IWI Tavor or a Sig 556Xi.

__________________
-John

Not to add fuel but wasn't the dust cover omitted from the Stoner orginial design? Meaning the FA and DC where added after the scallop.

I think the notion that "if Mr. Stoner didn't include it in the original design, it's (not needed/worthless/icing on the cake, etc)" is kinda silly. The things added to later editions are IMPROVEMENTS that were added due to real world experience. It's not like some guys said "let's throw a bunch of needless **** on the rifle for no reason". I mean Stoner designed the gun to never be cleaned, are any of you operating your rifle like that?

I do think it's a good idea to have a way to help close the BCG and fully seat a round. Only a fool is going to cause problems for themselves with a FA (such as making a jam worse) and would end up with operational issues with or without it.

I understand that AR15's aren't generally used in the same situations as M16/M4's and a FA likely isn't "neccessary" for the everyday shooter. Not wanting to pay for one and accepting the gun without the improvement is one thing, but to be against improvements on a design is another.

__________________
686/M&P9 Pro/M&P15X/M&P15-22

*Sigh*

M16 : Documentary on the M16 Assault Rifle - YouTube

Now this one, at 15:25 into it the man himself expresses his incredulity that the M16 was issued without a cleaning kit.

M-16 vs AK-47 - YouTube

What you have to put into context is the politics and procurement of the time. WW2 just ended, officers and generals came from that time. They were used to 30 caliber, wood and steel. Every branch of the armed services procured it's own firearms to different standards.

Enter Robert McNamera. Harvard MBA. He served in WW2 in the office of statistical control. He analyzed efficiency and effectiveness of bombing runs. Eventually he becomes the CEO of Ford Motor Company. He then is tapped to serve as Secretary of Defense under Kennedy and Johnson.

You get a progressive administration embracing the "space age" and emerging computing technology. You add in a Secretary of Defense that comes from the business world that wants to streamline the DoD procurement process to be more financially efficient. You have a guy and his "whiz kid" team who run things by the numbers.

You have two philosophically opposed groups going at each other. Both were right, both were wrong.

McNamera and his team ran by spreadsheet. .223 ammunition is less expensive to produce than 30 caliber. Soldiers can carry more rounds. More rounds = more chances at killing enemies. Their error was in trying to make the rifle as inexpensive as possible, against Eugene Stoner's design.

• No Chrome Line Bore
• Ball powder instead of cleaner stick powder
• It's space age! No need to clean it. No need to spend extra on cleaning supplies and training.

Rifles jamming? Well let's just add a forward assist, no need to clean.

The old military establishment wanted the rifle to fail, they wanted the procurement process that McNamera mandated to fail. I'm willing to bet that military leaders didn't speak up as all of the changes go against firearms common sense.

All of this and more went into the design evolution of the M16/AR15. It wasn't just a Eugene Stoner design. The political and military industrial complex of the day had as much sway into what got issued.

__________________
-John

I might be wrong, but I think the ejection port cover was there in the original design. It was on the Air Force slick sided rifles that I have seen.

To all you gentlemen who have served our country I thank you.For the way you have provided information in this thread and debated the differences of opinions without becoming abusive or hostile I also thank you.There is a lot of wisdom provided here by men who have depended on this rifle.A friend of mine did a year at Bien Hoa and has told me his rifle never gave him a problem.He has never gotten into specific details and I don't ask but he didn't just carry the weapon around,it was well used.Kept him alive.a lot of great knowledge in this thread.Thanks

__________________
I'm just here for the guns.