Home AR-15 Saga of the AR15 Forward Assist: A Solution Searching for a Problem

Saga of the AR15 Forward Assist: A Solution Searching for a Problem

10
25

Cool Forgotten Weapons merch!

In 1963, the US Army set out to purchase 85,000 AR-15 rifles as a one-time procurement to hold the infantry through until final adoption of the expected Project SPIW rifle. Where the previous Air Force purchases of the AR-15 had been simple over-the-counter transactions with Colt, the scale of this new contract prompted Robert McNamara to set up a committee to standardize the rifle requirements of all four service branches. One of the disputed items was the addition of a manual bolt closure device.

The Air Force, having tested the AR-15 for several years by this point, saw no need for such a device. The Army, however, insisted that it was necessary both as a confidence-building feature for the infantryman and because it might in some situation solve a malfunction. Today, let’s discuss the sequence of events that led to the eventual January 1964 adoption of the now-familiar plunger type bolt closure device.

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, social media, internet forums. etc.

25 COMMENTS

  1. Recently did a bunch of cold weather shooting. (-25F) shooting with a bunch of different ar set ups. Some suppressed, others not. Some with very high round count and some brand new. High end to low end. I used the forward assist almost every Mag. First time I’ve ever needed it.

  2. At the range the forward assist on my AR actually did work to make it fire once. Of course it worked a lot better once I popped the pin and realized the buffer spring retainer was too low and my buffer spring was protruding into the receiver, hanging up and causing rounds to not chamber. But if I was under fire by the Viet Cong I might have been able to get off at least that one shot.

  3. I love how ridiculous the concept was. They basically insisted on having a fUtUrIsTiC charging handle, and were so intent on it that they invent a new part to make production and maintenance slightly more complex. More like a forward insist.

  4. It doesnt work very well ,better to recycle the bolt to dump the jamb .
    This is one of the biggest issues with the AR . WITH th e bolt half way forward it is very hsrd to seperate the reciever from the lower to pull the bolt out . You must assemble your cleaninrod then slam it repeatedly down the bore while being shot at .
    They denied all of the issues with the AR 's

  5. Fantastic, beautiful video! Many thanks Ian.
    I am not especially fan of firearms and I am working in a very different engineering field. But the way you describe the process of making decision on engineering is so nicely applicable to anything I am doing, and I think to all human beings are doing. Yes, we all end up a little bit frustrated when we love the thing and so wish to tend to some level of beauty and perfection. But to me it is the ultimate beauty to show that no one can reach that level of perfection, no matter what energy, talent and resources are being put in, but that such does exist as God shows us everyday. Make the thing working as decentlyy as possible is far enough as far we are concerned. You are doing it so nicely, that's much enjoyable!

  6. My understanding was that the M16 was forced on the army by a Secretary of Defense directive. Even the dumbest general would not approve a rifle that did not have an exposed bolt that could be jammed forward by hand if round does not completely slide into the chamber. In reality if you are forced to use the FA(forward assist) then you are really screwed. In a combat situation if the M4/16 does fire you pull the charging handle and eject the round and chamber a new. If it still doesn't fire then you check for double feed and try the FA to seat the round. M4/16 works, but if you get a handful of sand and mud into the open bolt are, you are F'd and will have to clean it. Hope no one is shooting at you during this. If army wanted a smaller lighter weapon they could have made new M1 Carbines or used a Mini14 or Mini23 all great designs and lighter than and M14. M4/16 works but is clumsy design.

  7. I was concerned my first AR15 build was overgassed due to the brass ejection pattern, until I realized that everyone talking about said pattern was using a gun with a forward assist and brass deflector. My gun runs great, brass just flies behind me at about 5 o'clock since there's no deflector

  8. I had an m16a2 and a4 that didn’t want to seat that first round sometimes. People would say no no it’s just how you pull the charging handle…I dunno man if you pull it all the way and crisp release and it’s lubed and clean and stops just short of home…

  9. Isn’t it a solution that could create a problem? If the brass won’t seat properly naturally you shouldn’t force it . Just pull the charging handle again if it doesn’t seat 2 round in a row clean the chamber

  10. I'm a Marine who was an aircraft mechanic while I was in, so not a combat mos. In boot camp I had 0 issues with my M16A4. We also kept them incredibly clean during boot camp. In combat training. MCT I had all kinds of jambs with my M16A4. We also used a lot of blanks and those are known to foul guns, but nonetheless live fire or blank fire. I had to use the forward assist many times to keep the gun going considering we couldn't keep the rifles clean. And I never made the jam worse with the forward assist. It always kept the gun running.

Leave a Reply