Reciprocating Ar Bolt?

cannonfire

New member
I've been some forums about the dislikes of the at platform and that I saw a couple of times was the dislike of the placement of the charging handle. That got me thinking is there/has been a company that made/makes an ar with a reciprocating bolt? Even experimental?

Please this not a bash the ar thread, keep it to the reciprocating bolt
 
I might not understand what you're asking, but do you mean a side charging handle?

Fulton Armory makes that.

_DSC0033.1.JPG


_DSC1286.JPG


Mega does, too.

http://megamachineshop.com/armscatalog.php
 
American Spirit Arms. The bolt handle doesn't have to reciprocate. In combat weapons, having something outside the weapon moving means it could catch or impact on a support or rest, causing a stoppage.

Each type of bolt handle has it's good points and bad points, on a recreational shooter, it's a serious upcharge to get a different kind - $150 to $300. Weigh carefully exactly what it does better and if it's even needed. On a long range shooter in competition, a right side bolt handle offers charging with the trigger hand because the off hand is trapped by the shooting jacket and sling. On a combat gun, it's not a high priority, as you don't charge it all that often, and rarely in combat. It's designed to avoid it.

The bolt handle on a self loading weapon is only used to charge it once - the initial loading and chambering being done "inside the wire," if not already in that condition. Combat zones mean weapons are kept loaded at hand, not empty locked in a rack.

From there, the weapon cycles and loads itself. When out of ammo, the bolt is held back, mag inserted, bolt release tripped, the bolt chambers a round, and firing can immediately resume. The charging handle may not be used at all until there is no ammo to be had.

What some people are making of it is when the weapon needs a chamber check, or a malfunction has occurred. Shoot full power ammo, maintain the weapon, it's the magazines or ammo that cause most of the problems, and the charging handle the best solution. That's a very rare situation in combat. Since the soldier is trained to shoot from cover, he can likely take a moment to figure it out. What interferes is a huge adrenaline dump and a lack of experience.

That translates to a highly marketable improvement at a good markup from cost - where you see a lot of the buzz about it. The better answer is what DOD has done to change it - nothing. It's been like that for over 45 years.
 
Having been deployed to Iraq I understand the in the wire paragraph but I thought that that was one of the reasons SOCOM liked the Scar because it allowed for easier malfunction procedures. I like my ad just how it is so I don't find it necessary, just asking if it's been tried and if there was any upside
 
I am not really following the question.

I can refer you to the Robinson Arms XCR that has a non reciprocating left side charging handle I (knob actually)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robinson_Armament_XCR

Reciprocating would men it could cause a lot of issues and solve none that I can see. I am not enough of an engineer to know if it simply has to be part of some firing systems. The XCR got around it, and the location makes operating the gun really nice. I also own an AR, and while I like shooting it, the controls are really about as badly done ergonomically (the XCR on the other hand is easy, intuitive and works for a right handed shooter and I think workable for a left handed shooter.

The XCR charging handle also acts as a forward assist if you felt the need though why anyone would want to further jam a gun I cannot fathom.
 
The OP already said he mis worded his post and meant to say side charging not reciprocating. An AR has a rotating bolt and a reciprocating Bolt Carrier. Reciprocate: to move forward and backward alternately. (Merriam Webster).
BTW, so does the XCR.
 
I looked into it during my AR build, and thought the flavor tasty - a side charging handle that fell ready to hand, didn't require me to break cheek weld, and left my trigger finger alone.

Goes back to why? Bad magazines that jam shouldn't be out on a mission, and full power ammo is used in combat, therefore stoppages are likely induced by debris, environmental contamination, and operator error. It's a closed receiver weapon, little problem with mud jamming it, and the operator actually can reload without using the charging handle as long as the bolt hold open works. Full power ammo cycles the weapon, and good magazine followers lock the bolt back.

The SCAR was an attempt to see if a lot of other concepts proved out, and the added usefulness of the bolt handle wasn't enough when budget time came to the table. The final decision was the SCAR didn't offer enough to buy it vs getting the M4 for free. It doesn't make enough difference in the hands of a trained operator.

It shot the same ammo, used the same control layout except the charging handle, and had the same optics. Piston vs DI. Didn't make the cut. Didn't replace the M4. Racked and likely getting sold off to some third world or used by OPFOR in training.

Side charger + piston = no significant advantage, as determined by acknowledged experts. Yet the discussions continue. :rolleyes:
 
The forward assist is the result of the rear charging handle. With side charging guns the bolt can be forced forward in a pinch. For the recreational shooter, neither device is needed.
 
Goes back to why?
Agreed. I think the reason they are able to sell them at all is "coolness factor". Something different than most people don't have in and AR. Serves no real function that I can see. I suppose for a non combat weapon, there might be a little weight reduction involved since you could do away with the charging handle, forward assist and ejection port cover in trade for a side handle but I doubt that would even be enough to make it worthwhile.
 
For the purpose of chamber checking, I've often wondered whether a small indentation could be made into the side of the BCG that would allow the bolt to be pulled back with a finger. Or perhaps a small nub on the side that could be operated with a fingernail. Either choice might create an imbalanced bolt. Dunno. The old M3 Greasegun was modified by removing the bolt charging assembly completely and drilling a hole in the bolt, appropriately called the "finger hole." The gun became the M3A1. Personally, I don't like "chamber checking" because the bolt may not return as fully into battery as when dropping it initially with the bolt release.
 
That is where the mini14 and similar actions excel in low light, you can easily check if a round is chambered and bolt is locked.
 
I have always thought that a side mounted charging handle is a good thing to have in case of a jam. You would have something to whack with a hammer or boot. At least if it didn't help clear the jam you could at least take out some frustration on it and make yourself feel better.
The reciprocating handle being in the way... What? Never kept us from winning a war.
 
Back
Top