PDA

View Full Version : New PSA Upper Half w/ Pictures!



lamarbrog
23 September 2011, 12:07
Today my new Palmetto State Armory upper half arrived. I paid $430. It is the 20" flat top with an FN barrel.
I was never able to find any detailed photographs or information before I ordered, so hopefully this will help people currently shopping.

The packaging was simple, but effective. The upper half arrived completely assembled and undamaged.

The first thing that really caught my attention was how incredibly stiff the charging handle was to pull back. I was a little concerned that something may have been wrong with it. More on this later. (If you're hanging on the edge of your seat, the upper is fine.)

The first thing I wanted to check, based on prior problems I've had with another company (High Standard/Interarms) was that the gas key fasteners were not YFS and that the staking was not field expedient. The staking looks good, and the fasteners are not YFS. The gas key is chrome lined.
http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i190/Lamarbrog/PSA%20Upper%20Half/DSCN0779.jpg

The interior of the carrier is chrome lined, too. The carrier is of the full auto variety.
http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i190/Lamarbrog/PSA%20Upper%20Half/DSCN0784.jpg

It does come with a PSA logo on the side of the carrier, but the etching is very thin and isn't really that prominent. I'm glad of this.
http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i190/Lamarbrog/PSA%20Upper%20Half/DSCN0786.jpg

The upper receiver has a similar mark on the port side. Again, it is thin and really doesn't draw much attention. It's classy.
http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i190/Lamarbrog/PSA%20Upper%20Half/DSCN0789.jpg

The front sight base is F-marked. The pins are tapered.
http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i190/Lamarbrog/PSA%20Upper%20Half/DSCN0790.jpg

The barrel has a FN logo, followed by "MP 5.56 NATO 1/7".
http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i190/Lamarbrog/PSA%20Upper%20Half/DSCN0794.jpg

The rails on the upper receiver are T-marked, and white-filled.
http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i190/Lamarbrog/PSA%20Upper%20Half/DSCN0795.jpg

No idea who did the machining. It does have an Anchor-Harvey Forge mark, though. "M4" is etched into the front of the upper receiver.
http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i190/Lamarbrog/PSA%20Upper%20Half/DSCN0797.jpg

Aside from the identifying marking, the barrel has two other stamps. What appears to be a "U" is near just aft of the front sight base under the handguards. Just fore of the upper receiver is what looks to be a "10"- maybe the year 2010?
http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i190/Lamarbrog/PSA%20Upper%20Half/DSCN0799.jpg
http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i190/Lamarbrog/PSA%20Upper%20Half/DSCN0798.jpg

Standard A2 flash hider, with a crush washer for timing.
http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i190/Lamarbrog/PSA%20Upper%20Half/DSCN0801.jpg

The sling swivel pin could have been flattened a little better- but it will hold. I'll probably flatten it a bit more myself.
http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i190/Lamarbrog/PSA%20Upper%20Half/DSCN0802.jpg

The bore is chromed, and you can see it has M4 feed ramps.
http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i190/Lamarbrog/PSA%20Upper%20Half/DSCN0808.jpg

The handguards have a nice matte texture.
http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i190/Lamarbrog/PSA%20Upper%20Half/DSCN0809.jpg

Just a stock forged charging handle. It's been machined to remove forging flash.
http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i190/Lamarbrog/PSA%20Upper%20Half/DSCN0810.jpg

Fortunately, they didn't mess with it at the lugs like some companies do.
http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i190/Lamarbrog/PSA%20Upper%20Half/DSCN0811.jpg

Black insert- the spring is not the new gold kind. (Probably not necessary on a 20".)
http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i190/Lamarbrog/PSA%20Upper%20Half/DSCN0812.jpg

Any idea what the little "F" on the extractor means?
http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i190/Lamarbrog/PSA%20Upper%20Half/DSCN0813.jpg

They're using the firing pin retaining pin that is cone-shaped at the tip- makes it easy to slip into place. Little details that make me happy...
http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i190/Lamarbrog/PSA%20Upper%20Half/DSCN0814.jpg

The bolt is marked HPT/MPI. This has definitely not been test fired. There's no indication of a round ever having been fired through this rifle.
http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i190/Lamarbrog/PSA%20Upper%20Half/DSCN0815.jpg

Initially the action was extremely stiff when going into and out of battery. At about this point, it would hang up and required considerably force to lock in. I lubed up with some RemOil (It's what I had handy- don't hate.) and worked the action about 50 times and it is about right now. Probably just some stacked tolerances making it a bit tight.
http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i190/Lamarbrog/PSA%20Upper%20Half/DSCN0816.jpg

Round handguard cap. Makes it a pain to get the handguard on since the tabs are the kind that mate with a triangular cap. If I put them both on with the tab outside the circle, there's a gap between the handguard. They both won't fit inside- So they will either cant up, or down. It's purely cosmetic- but still strange.
http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i190/Lamarbrog/PSA%20Upper%20Half/DSCN0818.jpg

Really nice M4 feed ramps. They're not perfectly lined up, but pretty close.
http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i190/Lamarbrog/PSA%20Upper%20Half/DSCN0820.jpg
http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i190/Lamarbrog/PSA%20Upper%20Half/DSCN0827.jpg



I haven't shot it yet, that will probably happen tonight. Overall I'm happy with it. For the price, I definitely can't complain. If I were to change anything- Triangular handguard cap, little more flattening of the sling swivel pin, and I wish the action wasn't so tight locking into battery. All cosmetic things as near as I can tell, without having the chance to test fire it yet.

I'll run a few types of ammo through it this evening and report back on reliability.

Vgex
23 September 2011, 14:32
Thanks. I just ordered a PSA Midlength Dissy upper today. If my experience follows yours, I should be pretty pleased. Please keep us informed.

Thanks again.

Paulo_Santos
23 September 2011, 16:02
Looks nice. Let us know how she shoots.

lamarbrog
23 September 2011, 17:55
Just got back from the "range".

No accuracy report- I only have about 25-30 yards where I can shoot quickly, and light was fading. That said, at that distance it was hitting the random pieces of debris in the berm I was shooting it.

I fired a total of 68 rounds. Not an extensive test firing by any means- as I said, though, light was fading.

Once I got to my little test firing bay, I realized I had left the oil in the house. Racing the setting sun, I grabbed some Penzoil from under the hood of my car, removed the bolt carrier group, and gave it a good dousing. Flung it off, put it back in the rifle, racked it a few times and I was ready to go.

First, a 20 round NHMTG magazine of IMI M855. Not a problem. Locked back on empty.

Next, 20 rounds of that ATI Turkish SS109/M855 stuff, same type of magazine. No issues, locked back on empty.

I finished it off with a Center Industries 30 rounder loaded to 28 rounds with Wolf 55grain. No issues, locked back on empty.

It shot quite mildly- didn't seem over-gassed at all. Not a bit of gas eye, even with the eye protection I was wearing being fairly high-cut.

The lower I put it on for this test firing won't be its permanent home. It has a collapsible stock, with a CAR buffer.

I'll test fire it for accuracy maybe this weekend, if not it'll be next weekend.

Vgex
23 September 2011, 18:07
Thanks for the report!

lamarbrog
24 September 2011, 19:33
I fired it some more tonight for accuracy- about two and a half magazines.

I didn't know if I was exactly at 100meters or not and didn't have a proper rest, so I didn't bother too much with formal targets or anything. Just some cans and stuff set up on a berm.

I fired the first shot and hit dead on. Shot a few more- it is minute-of-OJ-carton at about 100meters, that's for sure, and with Wolf ammo even.

TehLlama
24 September 2011, 22:43
The bolt is marked HPT/MPI. This has definitely not been test fired. There's no indication of a round ever having been fired through this rifle.
http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i190/Lamarbrog/PSA%20Upper%20Half/DSCN0815.jpg


It's been test fired, with a proof round, then magnafluxed. This is the HPT/MPI certification process, and that is a good thing. I am impressed PSA, FN, or whoever took the time to make it that pretty again, but I guess I'm used to LMT BCG's where the brass left on it from test firing is left to show how much extra expense they went through to test that individual bolt.

Specialized Armament
25 September 2011, 15:01
It's been test fired, with a proof round, then magnafluxed. This is the HPT/MPI certification process, and that is a good thing. I am impressed PSA, FN, or whoever took the time to make it that pretty again, but I guess I'm used to LMT BCG's where the brass left on it from test firing is left to show how much extra expense they went through to test that individual bolt.

First, there is nothing to be impressed about. Bolts are proofed and inspected "in the white". That is they are bare steel with no other parts attached. They are cleaned, parkerized and assembled after getting a passing grade. The laser engraved HPT/MPI is part of the marketing "program". The witness marks on the bolt and brass deflector are a result of test firing for function and in the case of Colt, accuracy of the barrel.

I'd like to see a better picture of the barrel extension/upper receiver. It looks like they put a rifle barrel assembly on a carbine upper receiver.

lamarbrog
25 September 2011, 19:24
Specialized Armament:

The feed ramps of the barrel extension are the deeper M4 cuts, to match with the M4 upper receiver. BCM does the same thing. It is not a rifle-type barrel extension.


General Note:

I am not suggesting that it was not HPT and MPI- What I was trying to convey is that it doesn't have the more extensive test firing done that you see on others such as LMT, as was mentioned. If they parkerize after the HPT, as Specialized Armament suggests, that would explain this. All I am trying to say is it doesn't show any obvious signs of being test fired.

bcammons
27 September 2011, 22:16
I have an F marked on the inside of the extractor near the spring of my FN bolt.
Same color spring too.

lamarbrog
28 September 2011, 06:26
Can you see the "F" on mine? Are they the same location? This could be an indicator that PSA is using an FN extractor, which probably means they're using their whole BCG.

An interesting development for sure.

Specialized Armament
28 September 2011, 13:50
This could be an indicator that PSA is using an FN extractor, which probably means they're using their whole BCG.

First I want to say that I hope the upper works flawlessly for the OP for tens of thousands of rounds.

Hasn't it been decided that FN's access to the TDP for the M16 prohibits them from manufacturing ANY M16/M4/AR-15 parts for the commercial market? I am concerned with some of the parts used on the upper receiver group. Rifles and carbines are different weapons and as such, mixing parts is ALWAYS a questionable practice.

Colt & FN rifles:

1. Have NEVER had round hand guard caps. A "real" set of rifle hand guards will not fit that upper.
2. Have NEVER used carbine barrel extensions.
3. Have NEVER used carbine upper receivers.

All of the FN rifle barrels I have seen are marked FNMI. Are the current production military rifle barrels marked with the stylized FN logo or FNMI? FN extractors are "F" marked but I have never seen an FN bolt marked HPT/MPI.

bcammons
28 September 2011, 21:55
Can you see the "F" on mine? Are they the same location? This could be an indicator that PSA is using an FN extractor, which probably means they're using their whole BCG.

An interesting development for sure.

I can barely see yours but I will take a pic of mine and put it up for comparison

http://i1015.photobucket.com/albums/af272/bcammons21/IMG_0301.jpg
http://i1015.photobucket.com/albums/af272/bcammons21/IMG_0297.jpg

Pics of both the bolt markings and extractor markings on my FN bolt.

Im sure that if they were selling them the mil contract barrels and bolts than yes there may be conflict but since these are hammer forged than they are not mil barrels. Could be wrong but thats what i would gather.
As for bolts you can get new FN bolts (like I did) from people selling them on the net.
My bolt also doesnt have any brass markings on it for what its worth.

bcammons
28 September 2011, 22:14
First I want to say that I hope the upper works flawlessly for the OP for tens of thousands of rounds.

Hasn't it been decided that FN's access to the TDP for the M16 prohibits them from manufacturing ANY M16/M4/AR-15 parts for the commercial market? I am concerned with some of the parts used on the upper receiver group. Rifles and carbines are different weapons and as such, mixing parts is ALWAYS a questionable practice.

Colt & FN rifles:

1. Have NEVER had round hand guard caps. A "real" set of rifle hand guards will not fit that upper.
2. Have NEVER used carbine barrel extensions.
3. Have NEVER used carbine upper receivers.

All of the FN rifle barrels I have seen are marked FNMI. Are the current production military rifle barrels marked with the stylized FN logo or FNMI? FN extractors are "F" marked but I have never seen an FN bolt marked HPT/MPI.


Ive seen uppers that people have posted up that are FN marked (their commercial logo).

lamarbrog
29 September 2011, 08:22
Pics of both the bolt markings and extractor markings on my FN bolt.

Im sure that if they were selling them the mil contract barrels and bolts than yes there may be conflict but since these are hammer forged than they are not mil barrels. Could be wrong but thats what i would gather.
As for bolts you can get new FN bolts (like I did) from people selling them on the net.
My bolt also doesnt have any brass markings on it for what its worth.

As best I can tell, your extractor mark is the same as mine... I should have wiped more oil off of mine for the photo, yours photo is much better.

This barrel was not sold to me as being CHF, and there is no indication of that on the barrel.


I have an idea. If FN cannot sell M16 parts for civilian sale- is a bolt that is not HPT and MPI really an M16 bolt? It certainly doesn't meet the specs of an M16 bolt, since that would require it be HPT and MPI, right?

So, perhaps, PSA is buying FN BCGs that are not HPT and MPI, and then having that testing done. This would explain the "F" on the extractor, and explain the different MPI/HPT markings.

The specs of an M16 barrel probably require that the feed ramps be made a certain way- by adding M4 feed ramps to a 20" barrel, it certainly isn't the same as any M16 barrel currently in use. The different stamp is probably for quick identification of which barrels are which.

Just a theory... probably wrong.... but it makes sense to me.

lamarbrog
29 September 2011, 10:29
Rifles and carbines are different weapons and as such, mixing parts is ALWAYS a questionable practice.

Colt & FN rifles:

1. Have NEVER had round hand guard caps. A "real" set of rifle hand guards will not fit that upper.
2. Have NEVER used carbine barrel extensions.
3. Have NEVER used carbine upper receivers.


In this case, I'm not really sure why mixing the parts would be "questionable". To me, it seems that from a logistics standpoint they all ought to be this way. One handguard cap for all rifles and carbines. The handguards that came on mine work with the round hadnguard cap, and are compatible with a triangular one, too. I don't care if it is "accurate" or not- Just because the military does it one way, doesn't mean that's the only way or even the better way. I can't see any valid reason why this shouldn't be the standard way of doing it at this point.

As far as 2 and 3, that's because Colt and FN don't use M4 feed ramps on their uppers. Are you going to argue that M4 feed ramps are going to do anything except improve function?



I'm not sure why we care so much what Colt and FN are doing, unless we are trying to build an exact clone of an M16A4. If we are trying to do that, then it matters. I am looking for functionality, though, not appearances- this appears to functionally be superior.

You don't have to address this- I'd be biased towards Colt, too, if selling their parts was my business. To me, though, it looks like you're grabbing at straws to defend your product based on things that are "different", rather than really looking at what is better.

Specialized Armament
29 September 2011, 10:58
In this case, I'm not really sure why mixing the parts would be "questionable". To me, it seems that from a logistics standpoint they all ought to be this way. One handguard cap for all rifles and carbines. The handguards that came on mine work with the round hadnguard cap, and are compatible with a triangular one, too. I don't care if it is "accurate" or not- Just because the military does it one way, doesn't mean that's the only way or even the better way. I can't see any valid reason why this shouldn't be the standard way of doing it at this point.

As far as 2 and 3, that's because Colt and FN don't use M4 feed ramps on their uppers. Are you going to argue that M4 feed ramps are going to do anything except improve function?



I'm not sure why we care so much what Colt and FN are doing, unless we are trying to build an exact clone of an M16A4. If we are trying to do that, then it matters. I am looking for functionality, though, not appearances- this appears to functionally be superior.

You don't have to address this- I'd be biased towards Colt, too, if selling their parts was my business. To me, though, it looks like you're grabbing at straws to defend your product based on things that are "different", rather than really looking at what is better.

Appearances can be deceiving. Enjoy your upper!

bcammons
29 September 2011, 15:51
As best I can tell, your extractor mark is the same as mine... I should have wiped more oil off of mine for the photo, yours photo is much better.

This barrel was not sold to me as being CHF, and there is no indication of that on the barrel.


I have an idea. If FN cannot sell M16 parts for civilian sale- is a bolt that is not HPT and MPI really an M16 bolt? It certainly doesn't meet the specs of an M16 bolt, since that would require it be HPT and MPI, right?

So, perhaps, PSA is buying FN BCGs that are not HPT and MPI, and then having that testing done. This would explain the "F" on the extractor, and explain the different MPI/HPT markings.

The specs of an M16 barrel probably require that the feed ramps be made a certain way- by adding M4 feed ramps to a 20" barrel, it certainly isn't the same as any M16 barrel currently in use. The different stamp is probably for quick identification of which barrels are which.


Just a theory... probably wrong.... but it makes sense to me.

M4 ramps were added to the M4 because the guns were cycling faster than the mags could feed and they were aiding function.

Anyways, the only FN barrels that Ive seen on PSA's site is the hammer forged type.
Dont know who makes their normal barrels but could be FN.

lamarbrog
29 September 2011, 16:39
PSA Upper, FN Barrel, Not CHF (http://palmettostatearmory.com/2411.php)

Specialized Armament
29 September 2011, 18:43
M4 ramps were added to the M4 because the guns were cycling faster than the mags could feed and they were aiding function.

There a couple of reasons clearance cuts, improperly refered to as feed ramps, were added to upper receivers. While the cuts did improve function, the bolt group "out running" the magazine was not one of them.

Rodman24
29 September 2011, 20:02
There a couple of reasons clearance cuts, improperly refered to as feed ramps, were added to upper receivers. While the cuts did improve function, the bolt group "out running" the magazine was not one of them.

Mark,

Would you mind elaborating on the reasons for the clearance cuts?

Specialized Armament
30 September 2011, 06:45
Mark,

Would you mind elaborating on the reasons for the clearance cuts?

I am putting together some drawings which should help illustrate the purpose of the cuts. I will start a new thread in a couple of days when they are ready.

Eric
30 September 2011, 16:18
I am putting together some drawings which should help illustrate the purpose of the cuts. I will start a new thread in a couple of days when they are ready.
That would be outstanding.
Thanks Mark.

lamarbrog
2 October 2011, 10:08
That would be outstanding.
Thanks Mark.

I'm looking forward to this as well. Ought to be very interesting.