M2 Carbine. Registered receiver, registered trigger bar, or trigger group?

cjsoccer3

Well-known member
Feedback: 1 / 0 / 0
Joined
Oct 21, 2015
Messages
522
Location
Northern Virginia
Hi,

I’m trying to understand what is the most desirable M2 carbine option. It seems like folks prefer registered trigger bars while some think registered trigger groups / guards are more durable over registered receivers. Is one preferable to the other and most durable?

Thank you
 

brenbuilds

UZI Talk Supporter
Feedback: 0 / 0 / 0
Joined
Mar 23, 2019
Messages
208
Location
USA
Registered trigger groups are the most robust. They do not bear much mechanical stress, and are dimensionally simple enough to repair. They can also be swapped into different hosts. Registered receivers can crack or stretch, but it typically takes a higher round count before that can happen. Plainfields seem to be more susceptible to it due to metallurgical reasons. Registered Trips can wear, but can be repaired.
 

Cortland

UZI Talk Supporter
Feedback: 3 / 0 / 0
Joined
May 2, 2005
Messages
491
Location
Suffolk, VA
I have a registered trigger housing and I like the versatility of having different hosts (not too unlike an HK sear or an AR RDIAS). For mine I have a "regular" M1, a reproduction M1A1, and a tacticalized M1 with a Choate folder and an Ultimak picatinny rail + red dot.

You'd have the same versatility with a registered trip, but I agree that the housing is a more robust registered component that you'll never have to worry about.
 

Please Visit our Sister Sites Below

Sister Board - Sturmgewehr Sister Board - MachinegunBoards


Please consider becoming an UZI Talk Supporter
Top