[PoorKnight]

Put together my lower over the weekend and installed the MR 556 upper kit. I have the HKey 9 inch handguard on mine and was attaching rails, foregrips, bipods etc and I've decided this HKey rail has to go. I's prefer a quad rail or something like the Geissele rail. I could do keymod as my other ARs have keymod. I've had stuff come loose from both keymod and mlok under heavy use hog hunting at night getting in & out of trucks and changing what is set up on the rifle - quad rails or rails that screw on seem to be the best bet for me. Recommendations appreciated. I'm leaning toward the Geissele rail right now although the price on the HKParts DMR quad rail is very attractive but haven't had any experience with their stuff.

 

[Tarheel]

I feel like the Geissele rail really makes an MR. They're expensive, but they're the best. I like the CIM slim Quadrail as well although I'm not sure about the quality.

HK MR762 A1 / 417 15.0" Slim Quad Handguard - CIM TACTICAL

 

[dwillHK]

I had the Geissele on my MR556, but swapped it out for a 13" Strike Industries SLICK rail. Lighter, slimmer, and cheaper than the Geissele.

SLICK Handguard for HK416 MR556 Walther HK416 D145RS 9", 11", 13" - RIFLE - Products

AFAIK, the CIM Tactical rails are only for the MR762.

 

[Augee]

At the risk of sounding like a blathering fanboy:

"Geissele all the things."

In addition to simply being one of the best feeling rails to hold, even in comparison to other Geissele rails and other HK416/MR556 rails, the Geissele is probably one of the strongest, most rigid rails out there for any weapon, and is machined from 7075 aluminum, instead of 6061 like most other rail systems, making it fantastic for installing things like laser aiming modules, and with some ingenuity, it allows for some of the lowest profile mounting of accessories that I've ever seen.

~Augee

 

[Deadwing]

Geissele. While i don't have an MR556 (yet), when i do, it will be getting a Geissele rail. I have his rails on multiple AR15s and they are the best i've used.

 

[Username]

Geissele on one, and the original FFRS quad rail on another is what I have. The one that has the Geissele on it originally had that HKey rail on it and I couldn't replace it fast enough. I am still thinking about replacing the FFRS on my other one but am not 100% sure about it yet.

 

[bermise]

I like the HK extended rail

https://www.hkparts.net/shop/pc/viewPrd.asp?idproduct=17680&idcategory=0

 

[RegularGuy461969]

I like the RAHG. I have HK, Geiselle and RAHG hand guards. I've decided to use the RAHGs for 2 of my 416/556 hybrids and a spare 416 upper. On the other, a 416 14.5" upper I'm leaving it with the HK quad rail as an "old school" set up. I'm going to put an AIMPOINT M4s on it with a 3x magnifier.

So I've got a long black RAHG on my 20" upper. I have 2 small RAL8000 RAHGs on two 10.4" uppers and then I'm sitting on one small black RAHG in case I decide to put it on the 14.5" upper one day.

Also, use loctite (blue) on your attachments so they don't fall off no matter if pic rail, mlok, hkey, etc... . I'm far from a professional with this stuff and even I do that.

Good Luck and don't get caught in analysis paralysis;-)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[mr223a1]

Geissele, hands down. The only downside I can come up with, is the lack of support for major universal interface system and very few proprietary accessories. That being said, the handguard was originally conceived at the time when neither of the now well established interface standards has become popular. Now, with the Geissele CSASS M-LOK handguard, there's a good chance we may see an upgrade of the Geissele HK Super Modular Rail to M-LOK at some point in the future, especially if one standard becomes dominant in the market. And I don't expect KeyMod to ever become that standard anyway.

 

[Augee]

A lot of folks have brought up the Geissele rails non-compatibility with "standard" attachment systems, however not a lot of folks have really been able to answer for me what exactly it is that they want to mount to the Geissele that cannot already be done with a little bit of ingenuity.

So far, I've attached lights, bipods, handstops, VFGs, even the TNVC TAPS, all directly to the SMR, sling mounts are built in (though I recognize that some might prefer other options or locations). Others have attached covers and other items to them without much problem as well. To be fair, some of those items required simple modifications, but never more than what could accomplished with simple hand tools and perhaps a trip to the hardware store for extra screws.

I also say this as someone who has long since stated, and believes that full rails are still the most practical option for military weapons, and I'm not necessarily "against" an M-LOK version of the rail being made or anyone preferring it, I'm honestly just trying to think of what items it is that folks want to direct mount to the handguard that can't already that is available in a KeyMod or M-LOK configuration. I suppose if you want a particular brand of something, that might be an issue and it might be made in M-LOK or KeyMod only.

Beyond that, and having handled Geissele's MK 8 rails, as well as the CSASS mock-up, I love Geissele stuff, so don't misinterpret this as a slam--but I do feel that the M-LOK rails are ergonomically inferior to the curved cross-section of the current SMR/MK 1 format rails, due to the flat planes that are required for both KeyMod and M-LOK. This is, of course, obviously a very personal opinion, but I do think that the 416 SMR fits and feels much better in the hand than the M-LOK handguard on the CSASS.

Finally, I don't pretend to have any inside knowledge of the exact requirements for which the 416 SMR was designed or why the requirements were what they were, but I believe that it was specified that it should have "hard" mounting points for rail sections, and not a "negative" mounting footprint--while KeyMod and M-LOK might not have been around, PCAPs, VTAC, and other mounting systems did already exist. Moreover, Geissele just recently did a custom run of SR-25 handguards for "somebody" that specified a MK 1-style attachment system, despite the fact that they were already producing M-LOK rails.

Given the fact that Geissele's HK rail production and availability seems to be almost entirely driven by contract production, and the fact that "someone" still prefers the MK 1-style attachment system, and given how small the commercial HK aftermarket handguard market is, I don't know that I necessarily see them making an M-LOK 416 rail, considering that the CSASS and HK416 SMR are being driven by completely different customers with completely different requirements, with little to no overlap in platforms.

IMHO, your best bet of seeing an M-LOK 416 SMR might be if and when the Marine Corps decides they might try to upgrade the M27 and its handguard, and even then, there's no guarantee that it would be an M-LOK interface.

Again, I love Geissele stuff, but considering that they pretty much have said that they don't even bother to do commercial runs of the 416 SMR until they have a contract order, at which time they make some for commercial sale as well, and the huge number of other projects, requirements, and products that they have, I just don't see them investing in the tens of dozens of M-LOK 416 SMRs they might eventually sell without a contract requirement coming down for one.

But, then again, I've been wrong before. Just the sense that I get at the moment. Maybe if HK really did ramp up domestic production of an MR556, and it became a much more common weapon on the commercial market, things might change. Not holding my breath, though, and as I said, even if there was an M-LOK version available, I think I'd still prefer the "OG" 416 SMR, if only for the superior "hand-feel."

~Augee

 

[PoorKnight]

Thanks everyone for the advice! Just bought a Geissele 14.5 inch rail, black.

 

[mr223a1]

A lot of folks have brought up the Geissele rails non-compatibility with "standard" attachment systems, however not a lot of folks have really been able to answer for me what exactly it is that they want to mount to the Geissele that cannot already be done with a little bit of ingenuity.

No matter how we wrap it, from a practical point of view the absence of universal interface system is a disadvantage. And it's not as much about ingenuity as it is about modularity, convenience and weight savings, or lack thereof. For example, to install a RRS SOAR Rifle Mount (in this instance the NATO Picatinny Dovetail Adapter, RRS item code: NATO-DVTL) on the Geissele SMR, one has to install a proprietary M1913 accessory rail section (Geissele item number: 02-212HK) along the length of the rail first, whereas both M-LOK Adapter Plate (RRS item code: BMLOK-60) and KeyMod Adapter Plate (RRS item code: BKMOD-60) can be mounted to their corresponding interfaces directly. The same goes for offset 3 and 9 o'clock light mounts, QD sling mounts and many other accessories. BTW, there's unfortunately no way to install the Geissele's own 45° Quick Detach Swivel Mount (Geissele item number: 05-255) on the Geissele SMR HK. So much for ingenuity, unless of course dremeling is ingenious ... Couldn't help myself, sorry.

 

[Augee]

<snip>

This conversation feels familiar. Were you having this same argument a while back on ARF about M-LOK 416 rails?

I don't mean that as a dig, but if you are, I'm fairly certain based on that conversation that we're probably just not going to come to an agreement on this matter.

You've identified a tripod mount as your object example of why M-LOK is needed. Which is fine, but in terms of the hierarchy of priorities I have with 5.56MM carbines, tripods are not high. This doesn't matter, though, I know you could find more examples of specific items that might fit M-LOK or KeyMod, but required a rail adapter on the Geissele system, that's not the point.

My point is about capabilities. Your point is about specific products. For example, 3 o'clock or 9 o'clock offset light mounts. Yeah... I can't think of one that directly interfaces with the Geissele... but I don't really care, because I could direct mount my light, at least with a Scout footprint, which most (but again, I admit, not all) offset light mounts are for anyways, at 1, 3, 5, 6, 7, 9, or 11 o'clock if I wanted. We can go round and round about this example or that example, the point is, I don't find myself in any way disadvantaged by not having an M-LOK, or "universally" compatible interface in terms of getting and using the capabilities I want out of the handguard/rifle. The things you're talking about are inconveniences, not disadvantages, and they're inconveniences that apparently affect you, and I'm sure, with no irony, some other people--but not me, and apparently some other people as well because I'm not the only one who is seemingly satisfied with the current 416 SMR.

To me, whether you want to call it "disadvantage" or "inconvenience" would be to have a more uncomfortable rail to hold--solely to accommodate an attachment system I don't want or need. Very personal, opinion, etc.--but I prefer the ergonomics of the non-"universal interface" options to those that do use them.

I'll say what I've said before. I'm not against them making an M-LOK 416 rail, I'm all for Geissele all the things.

I simply don't see it as necessary or of any advantage personally, nor do I see any reason for Geissele to pursue it from a practical, business standpoint unless a) a contract request is made, or b) MR556 sales miraculously explode in the U.S. domestic market.

::shrug::

We don't have to agree. I sincerely hope you have an opportunity to purchase an M-LOK 416 SMR one day if that's what you want. Even if one were available, I would continue to purchase the "OG" for as long as it was available, which probably means for as long as bigger customers than I continue to order it that way.

~Augee

 

[Brad4065]

Thanks everyone for the advice! Just bought a Geissele 14.5 inch rail, black.

QUICK....SEND IT BACK!!!!! REFUND....REFUND..... You really need to go RAHG

In the morning, you'll thank me.

I have both....and the RAHG is the best, in feel, function and I think weight...but I really have not weighed them both.

 

[mr223a1]

This conversation feels familiar. Were you having this same argument a while back on ARF about M-LOK 416 rails?

No, I did not. As a matter of fact, I don't spend a lot of time on other boards. And it's a discussion rather than an argument, at least that's how I see it.

You've identified a tripod mount as your object example of why M-LOK is needed. Which is fine, but in terms of the hierarchy of priorities I have with 5.56MM carbines, tripods are not high.

Tripod is just an example, not the number one priority in my book either; pretty useful for varminting, though.

My point is about capabilities. Your point is about specific products.

My point is not as much about specific products as it is about modularity, which actually translates into more capabilities. And that's precisely what Weaver, Picatinny, Keymod, M-LOK - or any other universal interface system for that matter - is all about.

We can go round and round about this example or that example, the point is, I don't find myself in any way disadvantaged by not having an M-LOK, or "universally" compatible interface in terms of getting and using the capabilities I want out of the handguard/rifle.

But you do have Picatinny rails on your rifles, don't you? Technically, Picatinny is a universal rail interface system. And I suppose - no irony intended - you do use them for mounting BUIS, RDS, optics, DBALs and what have you.

The things you're talking about are inconveniences, not disadvantages, and they're inconveniences that apparently affect you, and I'm sure, with no irony, some other people--but not me, and apparently some other people as well because I'm not the only one who is seemingly satisfied with the current 416 SMR.


To me, whether you want to call it "disadvantage" or "inconvenience" would be to have a more uncomfortable rail to hold--solely to accommodate an attachment system I don't want or need. Very personal, opinion, etc.--but I prefer the ergonomics of the non-"universal interface" options to those that do use them.

Semantics aside, I can see where you're coming from on this and it's a valid point.

I'll say what I've said before. I'm not against them making an M-LOK 416 rail, I'm all for Geissele all the things.

So am I.

I sincerely hope you have an opportunity to purchase an M-LOK 416 SMR one day if that's what you want.

Thanks. And the CSASS rail too. I want them all LOL ...

 

[RegularGuy461969]

QUICK....SEND IT BACK!!!!! REFUND....REFUND..... You really need to go RAHG View attachment 90122

In the morning, you'll thank me.

I have both....and the RAHG is the best, in feel, function and I think weight...but I really have not weighed them both.

Finally, someone else talking some sense:530:

But each to his own.

 

[Augee]

No, I did not. As a matter of fact, I don't spend a lot of time on other boards. And it's a discussion rather than an argument, at least that's how I see it.

Sorry for the confusion, must've been thinking about someone else, then--there was a guy getting salty on AR15.com a while back because not everyone agreed with him that an M-LOK 416 rail must happen now, and we were all stupid for liking the current rail better than the theoretical M-LOK rail, naturally it deteriorated, and no conclusions were reached that anyone agreed to, hahaha.

Really at the end of the day is that my hope is almost always that there are enough options to satisfy individual users' needs--but I personally have not felt myself missing out in any way because the 416 SMR lacks a "standardized" mounting system (minus the rails that are common to all) for accessories on the sides of the handguard, everything I've wanted on there, and a couple things I've just tried for ****s and giggles has fit, and I love the way it feels, more than any other HK handguard I've tried, and I've tried or held most of the "big name" ones.

Then again, I am also not "bought in" to either M-LOK or KeyMod on any other system either, so there's no frustration for me associated with having something that mounts to everything else (or several other things), but not to this one--I can see how someone who has already "standardized" to some extent on M-LOK might want to have as many different things be compatible as possible, but if you have not and don't really plan to, it's less of an issue.

~Augee