Are quad rails dead?

Damn_Yankee

Damn_Yankee

"Now go away, or I shall taunt you a second time"
2A Bourbon Hound 2024
Supporting Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2016
Messages
2,312
Location
Lincolnton, NC
Rating - 100%
80   0   0
With all the newer slim hand guard options out there now, are quad rails on there way out? Looking through the AR pic thread I don't see a whole lot of them.
 
Last edited:
Damn_Yankee said:
With all the newer slim hand guard options out there now, are quad rails on there way out? Looking through the AR pic thread I don't see a whole lot of them.
Click to expand...
Yep. Don't need all the extra real estate to put stuff on your guns these days. However my one son is into paintball and they seem to be all the rage among up and coming mall ninjas that play paintball.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk
 
Seems like quad rails might be making a comeback, BCM just released their new QRF line of quad rails.
 
I think this looks pretty badass.
jxX3SZv.jpg
 
Last edited:
I need ergo comfort and drivability. I don't need laser, lights, rangefinders, night vision, anti aircraft, front sights, or anything else on my rail.

I do need a QD point and the flexibility to mount a light easily if needed. That's it. So, QR's have a bunch of stuff I don't need, and extra weight I don't want after spending money to make rifle lightweight.
I only use mine for fun and matches.

If I were a military man, I would expect to have different needs and uses, so would have a different opinion I imagine.

Edit: plus I have girly hands like Climerman, lol.
 
Last edited:
My stuff is older and is quad. I did have one M-Lok until a guy wanted it more than me. It was okay but I really could not tell the weight difference between it and a DD quad on a carbine. For quads you can add or move stuff quick since you don’t have to add or move the M-Lok rail pieces. Quads to me are simpler and not having the extra nuts and bolts needed to mount the rail pieces one less point for failure be it human error on the install or material defect. For the M-Lok it is not a cheese grater and doesn’t need the ladder covers for comfort and snag resistance. To me I am not in any rush to swap out my cheese grater.
 
Just like everything else, things go in and out of fashion. Black rifles, glocks, and range memberships have replaced golf clubs and greens fees for the under 40 white-collar crowd, and a lot of them care about their guns being fashionable just as much as they care about them being functional, even if they won't admit it. We've all seen it. Those immaculate guns with all the name brand go-fast parts, who's round count and photo count are about the same. Its the gun equivalent of the trailer-queen show car that looks fast but gets 5 miles put on it a year.

Nothing wrong with it... this world needs all types... but I think that's what drives a lot of trends with AR accessories.

I've never messed around with quad rails, because I've never had a need for one. Most of my guns wear plastic magpul furniture because its more rigid than the standard round handguards and allows me to add an angled foregrip.

Did buy an upper with an mlock rail on it recently, but just because I wanted a free floated barrel for my AR10 build and PSA had a good price on it. I like it, but I would have bougt quad rail or keymod for the same price too. I didn't care what it looked like.
 
Last edited:
Quads are now mostly a niche for those who like/want military clone builds. And that niche will probably stick around for as long as the military finds value in quads (though even .mil is looking to move to M-Lok for some units).

The broader market has moved away for reasons already mentioned - weight and comfort, and now there is a suitable replacement standard for 1913/picatinny for the sides and bottom of the handguard (when non-quad tubular handguards first came out, e.g., Troy, Midwest Industries, etc., there was no standard accessory attachment mechanism, which limited market penetration), namely M-Lok.
 
Last edited:
drypowder said:
Quads are now mostly a niche for those who like/want military clone builds. And that niche will probably stick around for as long as the military finds value in quads (though even .mil is looking to move to M-Lok for some units).

The broader market has moved away for reasons already mentioned - weight and comfort, and now there is a suitable replacement standard for 1913/picatinny for the sides and bottom of the handguard (when non-quad tubular handguards first came out, e.g., Troy, Midwest Industries, etc., there was no standard accessory attachment mechanism, which limited market penetration), namely M-Lok.
Click to expand...

I know USSOCOM has tested KMR vs M-Lok; as I understand they have some niche rifles they may use the M-Lok on but otherwise staying with Picatinny on the issue M4s until the KAC/P&S contracts and supply runs dry. There is a metric crap-ton of KAC RIS/RAS (and even the unicorn DD RIS II) in inventory, so just because of that I don't see the military going away from them anytime soon. But when they do, I fully believe they will look to M-Lok.

To be fair, I like Picatinny. I like KMR. I like M-Lok. I have no preference.
 
Chuckman said:
I know USSOCOM has tested KMR vs M-Lok; as I understand they have some niche rifles they may use the M-Lok on but otherwise staying with Picatinny on the issue M4s until the KAC/P&S contracts and supply runs dry. There is a metric crap-ton of KAC RIS/RAS (and even the unicorn DD RIS II) in inventory, so just because of that I don't see the military going away from them anytime soon. But when they do, I fully believe they will look to M-Lok.

To be fair, I like Picatinny. I like KMR. I like M-Lok. I have no preference.
Click to expand...


This!

I am tired of overweight mouth breathing mall ninjas or gun range bubbas (pick your poison) telling me how my KMR rail is going to fail. The only failure they need to be worried about is heart failure.
 
I still like them for that .mil look. Kinda want an extended FSP model to reconfigure my 16".

I believe USMC selected M-lok for accessory rails, SOCOM picked it, think the chassis on the latest army sniper rifle wears it. The Canucks went with it. Seems to be the way they're going for junk other than aiming devices.

Anytime you can save weight and maintain enough strength it's better, and no one can argue the ergos.

Sent from my SM-G360V using Tapatalk
 
  • Like
Reactions: NKD
They were but they're making a comeback. Cross Machine Tool is coming out with some based off their new handguards. Other companies are doing the same. What's old is new again.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
 
I have optics and thats it. I did put a small 'addition' on my troy rail to mount a surefire light, but have only mounted it a few times.
I like the feel of the rail, not so much the quad rail. Its just my personal preference.
 
Chuckman said:
I have to admit, I do get a kick out of guys who complain "they (pic rails) are too heavy" but carry a 50-pound gut, or wear a war belt that has 30# of stuff. The weight complaint is non-issue. Now add a light, laser, blah blah blah....yeah, you add weight.
Click to expand...
And a 20lbs in a backpack with hydration bladder.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HMP
If I want a ".mil look" I'm going old school ribbed plastic and F-posts. I never liked quads. For a minute I had a couple for lack of attachment options but covered them with ladders or covers. Don't care about the weight. I never needed that much real estate to hang crap and I don't like to grip a cheese grater when shooting my rifle.
 
My M&P 15x came with one, I have no plans to replace it, have afg2 on it.
 
Last edited:
I am actually going to put a quad rail on my go to rifle. I guess i like a carbine lenth quad rail with a stubby vert grip with a hand stop. I tried a longer slimmer rail for a while, it just did not do all that much for me.
 
Throw me a 416 or a Mk18 any day and I’ll rock that bitch like it’s nothins business
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom