UTG or Surefire quad rail

[leadslinger 37]

christcorp....glad you reposted your question. After i posted my last response i started thinking the same thing. The barrel really isn't free floating. The other attachment point (gas tube) really isn't a hard attachment point (for lack of better term) as the gas tube probably flexes with the barrel. It may actually hinder with the barrel whip by create more downward force or make the barrel stiffer with the gas piston in place . I any event i don't know if the UTG would have that much of an effect.

 

I hope others will way in. Maybe we should start another post asking for more information.

[Snuffy Smith 0]

christcorp....glad you reposted your question. After i posted my last response i started thinking the same thing. The barrel really isn't free floating. The other attachment point (gas tube) really isn't a hard attachment point (for lack of better term) as the gas tube probably flexes with the barrel. It may actually hinder with the barrel whip by create more downward force or make the barrel stiffer with the gas piston in place . I any event i don't know if the UTG would have that much of an effect.

 

I hope others will way in. Maybe we should start another post asking for more information.

 

Okay guys, I'll rephrase my previous statement. The forend/hand guard is free floating away from the barrel/ barrel system. Does it help? Here's a review that asked the same question:

http://www.rifleshoo...0804/index.html

 

Bottom line...I sighted in my scope with the SGM. After installing the UTG, I had to add 60 clicks of up elevation to correct the POI. I did not change my scope setup. That suggest to me that the UTG is pulling the barrel upward because of the force applied to the bottom of the barrel behind the collar and in front of the receiver. Again, If you like the UTG, that's fine. I'm happy for ya.

 

Also, here's the guy from Perfect Union.He's using the Tapco Intrafuse forend, which is free floating away from the barrel. I have both, but I like the SGM better.

http://www.perfectun...ead.php?t=72144

 

Furthermore, I shoot tactical and bench rest. I do not require or expect the same kind of accuracy from tactical as bench rest. If you're only interested in battlefield accuracy, that'll work! "Across the Pond", our battlefield accuracy with a M16 was 3 inches or less at 33 meters (approx. 40 yds). When shooting tactical, I'm only interested in keeping all 30 rounds (double tap) on a 8x11 target at 50 yds, 75yds, and 100 yds from a kneeling or standing position. I usually shoot tactical pistol with a center target at 15 yds and two targets at 25 yds to the right and left of the center targe at about 10-15 yds apart (again double tap). IMHO, the tactical is of greater importance than bench rest. Your opinion may differ.

Edited July 18, 2010 by Snuffy Smith

[leadslinger 37]

Snuffy,

 

 

I just read through the thread again and i think we were all misunderstanding you. I get it you are referring to the fact that the UTG actually rests on the barrel and when you bench shoot it could be putting upward pressure on the barrel.... Man how long did that take ti sink in!!!

 

 

The SGM hand guard attaches the same as the OEM and may put some upward pressure upon bench shooting but not directly on the barrel itself.

 

I figured the adjustments to the POI as the elevation difference of the bottom of each of the front hand guards is significant.

 

This weekend i was able to shoot some really super tight groups with the 7.62 and my Krebs peep with XS 24/7 front post and UTG front hand guard.

 

I also put some decent groups in with the .223 and OEM stock sights and front hand guard. I will eventually switch the stock sights to the Krebs peep and XS 24/7 front post as my eyes seem to relax and acquire these better.

 

 

I am really looking at the UTG as i will never need the top rail and would like to drop the weight. My next concerns are the heat dissipation and melting of the hand guard under rapid fire (something i almost never do). Still i don't want to worry about the front hand guard at the wrong time using sustained fire.

 

 

I think i need to start a new thread on the comparisons.

 

thanks and sorry for the misunderstanding.

Edited July 19, 2010 by leadslinger

[Snuffy Smith 0]

Snuffy,

 

 

I just read through the thread again and i think we were all misunderstanding you. I get it you are referring to the fact that the UTG actually rests on the barrel and when you bench shoot it could be putting upward pressure on the barrel.... Man how long did that take ti sink in!!!

 

 

The SGM hand guard attaches the same as the OEM and may put some upward pressure upon bench shooting but not directly on the barrel itself.

 

Leadslinger,

 

The OEM (Russian) forend, Tapco Intrafuse forend, and SGM forend are all free floating, i.e., they do not touch the barrel. Also, DPH has a free floating forend. All are suspended from the pins on the barrel collar and attached to the receiver. The UTG is like a vise. It's putting pressure on the gas tube collar, gas tube and the barrel at two points from below. Bench shooting has nothing to do with the pressure. It's putting pressure on the barrel while sitting in a corner. That's not a good thing. My concern is that the pressure is such that you're pulling the barrel upward. This will not only affect accuracy, but it'll put a flat spot in your barrel over time. Again, I'm not trying to talk anyone out of the UTG. Let the buyer beware!

 

For accuracy, the least amount of interference with the barrel is a good thing. I'd say an absolute must!

 

PS: Leadslinger, I read your post again. Yep, the OEM (Russian) hand guard and SGM hand guard put pressure on the barrel/gas tube collar pins, not directly on the barrel. The UTG has pressure directly on the collar, tube, and barrel. Is it excessive? Quoting Jimmy Buffet: "I don't know and Idon't care!" It'll not go back on my rifle. The adjustment of POI had nothing to do with the difference in height of the SGM and UTG. My scope is mounted at the side bracket, which is separate from the UTG or SGM rail. Thus, I was extremely alarmed at the need of 60 clicks of adjustment to correct POI. Also, the accuracy went into the toilet. Everyone must decide for himself or herself.

Edited July 18, 2010 by Snuffy Smith

[leadslinger 37]

Snuffy,,

 

what is your take on the SGM vs. the tapco intrafuse front hand guard? The DPH is was out of my budget.

 

again my concerns are the heat dissipation and melting of the hand guard under rapid fire. do either have heat shield?

 

I have heard that the SGM has the edge but not having had the either in front of me I am always trying to gain as much info as possible.

 

thanks in advance.

 

Paul

Edited July 19, 2010 by leadslinger

[Snuffy Smith 0]

Snuffy,,

 

I have heard that the SGM has the edge but not having had the either in front of me I am always trying to gain as much info as possible.

 

thanks in advance.

 

Paul

 

 

You heard right! Floyd has responded to any polymer concerns. He's a materials engineer.

[vintagedude88 16]

I have the SGM rail and my scope is mounted on a UTG side mount. I did notice that my elevation settings had to change a few clicks from when I had the factory handguards but it wasn't too much.

[Infernil 0]

Snuffy,,

 

what is your take on the SGM vs. the tapco intrafuse front hand guard? The DPH is was out of my budget.

 

again my concerns are the heat dissipation and melting of the hand guard under rapid fire. do either have heat shield?

 

I have heard that the SGM has the edge but not having had the either in front of me I am always trying to gain as much info as possible.

 

thanks in advance.

 

Paul

 

I personally like the tapco intrafuse. After popping 100 rounds in 2 min. Almost no heat on the hand guard. The hand guard is also rock solid on the gun. The best part is they are about 40 bucks and they also count as a u.s compliance part.