PDA

View Full Version : Let's build an extreme use AR-15 (UPDATE PAGE 8 & 9)



Stickman
9 February 2009, 20:37
I've been kicking around the idea of building an AR15 for no other purpose than to use as an absolute heavy use/ abuse weapon. I don't mean the gun you take out and shoot fast, I mean an overbuilt AR15 that will stand up to any use or abuse you can realistically put a carbine through.

Think drop testing of components, thing about a carbine that will soak up loads of users worst punishment, and come back for more. Think along the lines of an AR15 that is going to get treated like a conscript treats their AK.


What components would you select, and why? As this project moves along, we will get plenty of pictures of everything, and we will talk about what we chose, why we chose it, and what other options could have filled the bill.

I'm open to just about any idea. This will be a project that should serve as a long standing platform for further testing of assorted components, but to start out, we need a solid base. This will be a total custom platform, no preassembled uppers, or complete weapons.

Everything from lowers, stocks, sights, buffers, uppers, barrels, BCGs, and whatever else you can think of are on the table.



What parts would you chose? What do you want to see used?

Uglyduck
9 February 2009, 21:12
Cav Arms MkII lower. On the basis of simplicity, durability and weight. If the MkIII ever came to fruition that would be my selection, but its not in production.

Army Chief
9 February 2009, 22:04
I suppose some of this depends upon whether we're talking about a from-the-ground-up build, or an adaptation of a production rifle. Stick makes it pretty clear that we're really talking about the former, whereas I would probably be more likely to start with something like a Colt AR6721 (AR-15A3 Tactical Carbine) and go from there.

If we play by the rules, however, I suppose we have to start with the receivers. Assuming a billet lower wouldn't be too much of a boutique selection, I would probably give serious consideration to a Tactical Innovations lower. It appears to be a robust alternative to the norm, though I concede that appearances may be deceiving, and I'm not able to base this upon first-hand experience. It simply strikes me as a worthy contender. Would one of the original (non-Rogue) SMOS lowers work here as well? Likely so -- just haven't seen one in a long, long time.

For an upper, if hard-use is our standard, rather than a specific price point, might we be well-served by a monolithic upper that simplifies some of our other selections later on down the road? Either the LMT MRP or the VLTOR VIS would seem to suffice, though I'm more immediately familiar with the latter -- and if the integrated rail is overkill, there is always the MUR. Either way, I would be somewhat unlikely to go with a standard upper.

Depending upon how far we want to take this, I'd either work with the aforementioned Colt 6721 barrel, or go to a Noveske stainless with a nice full profile. Assuming we give the boys in Grant's Pass the nod here (sort of a no-brainer for me), a mid-length gas system would also seem to suit our purposes well.

On the BUIS front, would a hard-use weapon make best use of something like the LMT cut-down fronts and rears, or are there even more robust choices on the market? Conventional wisdom would seem to favor a more fixed configuration, vice the usual folders, but I've no dog in this particular fight.

True, my starting point is probably running afoul of practicality and affordability standards, but this would be fairly consistent for me, as I rarely concern myself with either. I'm really more of a "best I can find" type of guy.

AC

Audiophiliac
9 February 2009, 23:44
I am starting my first AR build, and although I do not plan on taking it into harms way, or using it as any kind of duty weapon, I am still going to build it as though I were. I research the hell out of stuff before I make decisions. I went with the Tactical Innovations T15BDX lower which I do not regret one bit. The thing is a piece of art that is also built like a tank.

I have a LPK on the way, and thats as far as I have gotten, but I plan on doing the upper on a VIS platform...maybe something built by Noveske or Rainier...Or I will piece it together myself.

Probably a E-Mod or ACS stock, and a Spike's buffer and MIAD will complete the lower.

Army Chief
10 February 2009, 03:00
Sight unseen, I think I would opt for the ACS as well, though this presumes that something like a Sully stock wouldn't actually be better-suited to our stated purposes.

The grip could be a standard A2 or a MIAD -- or better yet, a simple MOE -- but durability concerns would seem to rule out most of the Ergo variants.

Handguard furniture is dependent upon whether or not we went mono/polyithic, whether or not we need a free float capability, and whether or not we intend to hang a lot of superfluous crap from the forend. I'm still thinking MRP/VIS, but if not, I suppose Daniel Defense is an obvious contender. That leaves us with about as many choices as Jelly Belly has flavors of jelly beans, but the Omega seems a decent baseline here; especially if the constant battering results in damage that may ultimately require replacement in the field. I did mention that I would favor mono/polyithic, right? LOL

Can't really speak much to internals, though the Y/M National Match bolt carrier seems to be worthy of closer examination. Also, as a southpaw, I'd probably give serious consideration to a Badger Ordnance ambidextrous charging handle, though I presume the majority here would espouse the idea that a Gas Buster is a more on-point upgrade for a gun such as this.

Since this is an imaginary project to this point, let's presume it should have supressor capability. That would lead me to AAC, and to either the SPR-M4 or M4-2000, depending upon the application. I'm not immediately familiar with the durability characteristics of one versus the other. Either would mandate the use of a Blackout variant, of course.

AC

bigcoastie
10 February 2009, 10:42
Shit I guess I'll start off a template so it's easy to see what the winning components are. Will reply when I have a little more time and thought.

Handguard:
Reason:

Sights:
Reason:

Optic:
Reason:

Grip:
Reason:

Stock:
Reason:

Barrel including length:
Reason:

LPK/Trigger:
Reason:

Buffer:
Reason:

BCG:
Upper Rec:

Reason:
Lower Rec:
Reason:

Magazine:
Reason:

Lights/lasers/etc:
Reason:

Charging Handle:
Reason:

Flash Hider/Comp:
Reason:

Misc Stuff rail covers etc:
Reason:

TehLlama
10 February 2009, 10:44
I think a better framing question would be what type of carbine - a KiSS setup is more immediately conducive to drop testing and the like, but an optic and a light would be very practical to use (as I suspect this rifle will will end up being more of a test bed for your purposes)

I'd omit a suppressor, or at most only use one sparingly: what's the fun in a spousal abuse rifle if you can't run cheap ammunition through it all the time?

If it's gas DI - then a 16" midd fits the bill best. For a piston setup, especially suppressed, then a 12.5" would be more practical. For my interest, seeing just how hard a 16" middy with well-thought out parts can be driven would be of immense informative value to recreational shooters.
Noveske barrel at minimum, with the VLTOR Gas Block (or switchblock if suppressed)

Rail: Lite or RIS-II rail system. Probably with DD or LT rear sight, LMT, POF, or HK styled front sight.
ACS/MIAD/PMag are almost a given.

If workable, Geissele SSA trigger, and LPK with an H buffer - if that (I'm thinking a major test will be feeding it a case of Wolf)

As far as accessories - maybe the profile chosen on your all-purpose setup (T-1/ADM Mt; X600; Bobro VFG) to see how well that setup suits, although I stil see this being a testbed rifle more than anything else.

An ion bonded LMT or BCM carrier would be my choice on experimental parts, although sending in an LMT enhanced carrier to get coated would be a very cool adventure.

Walli
10 February 2009, 10:51
I really like the idea of a hard use AR15! [adore]

The parts I would like to see are:
Trigger: Geissele SSA (Long time test of a two stage trigger that was designed for hard use.)
Bolt: JP/LW High Performance Bolt Assembly (I would really like to see if this bolt will work much longer than a normal Colt bolt)
Bolt Carrier: JP Tactical Operating System (Very smooth carrier, QPQ coated, might help making the gun run longer without enough lube)
Barrel: Noveske N4 Light

The parts I do not care for:
No piston system.

bigcoastie
10 February 2009, 12:58
Handguard: LaRue
Reason: They are a bit heavier than some other options but for pure durability I think they can't be beat. Combine this with a traditional front sight and I think you have a great combination of a solid sight, handguard, and you don’t need a gas block

Sights: F marked front sight Troy Rear (magpul mbus possibly for rear based on Magpul quality)
Reason: I really think for durability you can’t go wrong with a traditional front sight, they stand up to abuse and are as good as any gas block, as for rears I love troy and until I see and use mbus they’ll be the best for me

Optic: ACOG
Reason: No batteries, rugged lifetime warranty if you do find a way to break it

Grip: Tango Down
Reason: Personal preference and I think it’s built damn tough as well

Stock: Vltor Emod
Reason: I love vltor emods for middies and since it's stated that this gun will be loaned out adjustable LOP is a must.

Barrel including length: N4 Chrome lined 16”
Reason: M249 specs Noveske nuff said

LPK/Trigger: Single stage
Reason: preference and simplicity

Upper Rec: Vltor MUR
Reason: It’s beefy to me just feels and looks really solid compared to a standard forged upper

Lower Rec: POF
Reason: I love the precision and the built in trigger guard less things to break I know a trigger guard isn't really a huge issue if broken but why add when you can subtract

Magazine: PMAG
Reason: magpul video with the truck running over it

jvencius
10 February 2009, 13:12
If durability is the main concern, I'd have to go with THIS (http://stores.homestead.com/Laruetactical/Detail.bok?no=29) LaRue fixed BUIS. I realize some folks around here don't think much of Mark or his products but there's something appealing about a sight that would require a sledgehammer and some C-4 to damage.

Army Chief
10 February 2009, 13:29
The LaRue BUIS makes sense to me, as it is a fixed design. I'm not privy to any particular anti-LaRue drama in these parts, but in any event, this is obviously a solid unit, and worthy of consideration.

Not sure where we ever got the idea that a two-stage trigger (Geissele or otherwise) is a good idea for a hard-use gun, but I'll keep my opinions to myself on that one.

Don't much care for the POF lower design -- actually, I find it rather garish -- but would otherwise agree that a billet unit might fit the bill here, as stated above.

Definitely follow the ACOG logic; especially for intermediate distances.

How about a Bobro VFG and a SureFire M600C to round out the railed fixtures?

Concur that PMAGs were/are something of a no-brainer.

Sling recommendations, anyone?

AC

Stickman
10 February 2009, 21:37
Handguard: OPEN
Reason: I can think of pros and cons to a few different ways of each.

Sights: I'm leaning towards folders.
Reason: Its no fun if we cant' break something.

Optic: OPEN
Reason: Optics may change depending on who is shooting, and what shooting is being done.

Grip: OPEN
Reason: I like the idea of finding what will fit most people, I don't care if we break it.

Stock: Adjustable
Reason: The stock will be used with armor most of the time its being fired on MIL or LE ranges. I don't care if we break the stock or receiver extension.

Barrel including length: 16", OPEN.
Reason: I want to be able to loan this out, and not everyone has a SOT or is able to legally own short barrels.

LPK/Trigger: OPEN
Reason: I'm leaning heavily towards the SSA, mainly for personal reasons and wanting to see how much use it can take through dry fire and live fire drills.

Buffer: OPEN
Reason: I prefer to play with some heavies for this one, but am open to which ones.

BCG: OPEN
Reason: I don't mind playing around with this one, any quality BCG should work VERY well.

Upper Rec: OPEN
Reason: Forged, billet, or one piece.... they are all on the table.

Lower Rec: OPEN
Reason: I don't mind breaking a lower receiver.

Magazine: OPEN
Reason: I think this one needs to vary to use different magazines.

Lights/lasers/etc:
Reason:

Charging Handle: OPEN
Reason: As long as its not one of the cheap flexible ones, they should be good to go. Maybe a GB for the increased durability.

Flash Hider/Comp: OPEN
Reason: may or may not want to attach a can

Misc Stuff rail covers etc: OPEN
Reason: Leaning towards XTM panels, but I don't really care either way.





Coastie- Great idea!

Great format, as you can see, I'm open to most ideas. I do want this weapon to be usable while wearing armor, as most of the time its used will be while guys are armored up.

TehLlama
11 February 2009, 18:27
I guess constructively, we need to narrow down what's going to be a fixed part, and what will be test items.

Optics (Magnifiers?)
VFG's (QD if possible)
BUIS (Rail-mounted Fixed, flip-up)
Lights/Lasers (can change between a lightweight, and loaded setup)

Of these, the Bobro VFG and Surefire X600 seem like winners, but some may want to see other stuff.


Items that make sense so far, and seem like 'keep' type items:
Noveske N4 Light Barrel
MUR Upper Receiver
GSSA Trigger
PRI GB Charging Handle
MIAD Pistol Grip - Unless you want to wring out an MOE grip.

If a conventional stock tube is desired, that opens it up to a MOE, CTR, ACS, EMOD, LMT SOPMOD, or anything else that fits a mil-spec extension. ACS or EMOD would seem like the pick. Adjustable LOP is obviously critical, but I think the stock itself will end up being a test item.

Retaining the stock delta assembly is a viable option, if Stock, MOE, Omega, TROY MRF-DI, or similar handguards are going to be tested. This would mean an a-frame FSB...
If this component isn't going to be changing, might as well toss a Daniel Defense Lite rail on for now, and only consider changing that out for a Omega-X rail, imo.

My preference would be a Lite rail over the gas block and running MBUS on this thing, see how they run.

For unsuppressed use, an H buffer is probably the happy medium. Chrome silicon spring, and that should be golden.

A billet lower receiver seems like it would be fine, POF, Tac15BDX would work for sure.

BCG's are a tough one, but a prepped Young chromed BCG would be worth a look, but the above DLC coated options would still interest myself at least - so I'd leave that as an open item.

Magazines - I would like to see Lancer, TangoDown, and CAA's new magazines wrang out on this thing, but obviously E/PMag will be primary sources.

Optics are a tough one... if shooting isn't going to be done past 100m, then a T-1 would suffice. For intermediate range, a TA33 might be ideal, or tossing on a Trijicon Accupoint. There's almost too many options, so I think this needs to be an open item. ACOG makes sense as a general choice, as would a Comp ML3 w/ FTS magnifier, but the list might be a bit large to address.
"Reason: Optics may change depending on who is shooting, and what shooting is being done." Sums that up very well.

JustMatt
12 February 2009, 10:15
I appreciate the template Coastie, saved me some time.

Handguard: DD 9" Lite rail
Reason: Known for quality and durability, at least thats what I have come to conclude while researching handguards for my 1st build. And I like the way it bolts to the upper. Also, it can fit a piston retro fit underneath if one decides to go that way.

Sights: GG&G Spring actuated flip ups.
Reason: It's what I got handy. Want to trade them in for non spring actuated though.

Optic: Aimpoint Comp M4s.
Reason: Durability, battery life and battery availability, obvious CQB ability and ability to add a magnifier for better ranged fire.

Grip: Magpul MIAD
Reason: Durability, custom options and storage.

Stock: Magpul CTR
Reason: It's what I currently have and seems to lock up the good with a very simple action.

Barrel including length: 16" Mid length chrome with M4 cuts. Not sure about brand. Prob gonna be based on availability without sacrificing to much.
Reason: Middle of the ground for compactness, accuracy and velocity.

LPK/Trigger: DPMS or RR
Reason: Quality

Buffertube: Vltor
Reason: Well made.

Buffer: H2
Reason: It's what I run on my current gun and it works good.

BCG: BCM or LMT
Reason: The BCM bcg seems to be well made as well as the LMT

Upper Rec: Vltor MUR
Reason: Overbuilt and nicely made.

Lower Rec: Defensive Edge SLR15 lower
Reason: Ive read good things about it and from what I can tell it's equal to a Noveske or Tactical Innovations lower. 7075 aluminum Mill spec and finished nice.

Magazine: Magpul PMag
Reason: Haven't had a problem yet.

Lights/lasers/etc: Open
Reason:

Charging Handle: Open
Reason:

Flash Hider/Comp: Primary Weapons FSC556
Reason: Compensation ability mixed with good flash suppression and it's not considered a flash suppressor by the BATFE.

Sling: BFG Vickers padded with Cobra buckle.
Reason: Comfort, ease of adjustability and all metal hardware for durability.

Misc Stuff rail covers etc: Magpul XTM or XT
Reason: They work as advertised.

This is my current and 1st build and I want it to be a extreme hard use build. Not that I have any real world reason except for the piece of mind that it won't quit no matter what....I hope.

Stickman
12 February 2009, 13:39
This is my current and 1st build and I want it to be a extreme hard use build. Not that I have any real world reason except for the piece of mind that it won't quit no matter what....I hope.



Matt,

Is that what you are looking to build, or what you would like to see us building to test out, or both? In this thread we are looking to debate pros and cons, and design up a weapon that the Staff here will build, then beat on and torture in horrible ways.

Whatever we build will be treated like an AK, and I don't mind breaking parts to get an idea of how much damage or abuse an AR15 can sustain.


The reason for this is that there seems to be an increasing feeling that the M4 and AR15 variants aren't durable, and overall that the basic gas system is well behind the curve in terms of durability and longevity. I strongly disagree with that idea, and am willing to see if I can break things and prove myself wrong.

JustMatt
12 February 2009, 14:53
Oops, I guess I miss interpreted the post. Sorry Stick. This is my current themed build. I have most of the parts I mentioned except the barrel and gas system. But I think it would make a decent torture test for some top of the line parts.

TehLlama
12 February 2009, 16:27
Well, your goal seems to fall in line pretty well with the target of this exercise.

Which BCG were you looking at trying, Stick?
Will this be fed low end ammunition (will affect buffer choice)
Is budget going to be a consideration if possible (e.g. to demonstrate how affordable an utterly reliable AR-15 can be, or is this a no-expenses spared endurance machine?)
The suppressor provision is the last open question I can think of. I'm assuming QD (so it can be ran on extreme firing schedules if desired, or if placed on the Wolf diet), and the choice would be among the AAC line (M4-2000 or SPR-M4)

Stickman
12 February 2009, 18:03
Well, your goal seems to fall in line pretty well with the target of this exercise.

Which BCG were you looking at trying, Stick? No idea at this point, I think there are a lot of quality ones out there. If someone thinks that one will work better than another, I'm open to it. I've kicked around the idea of the LMT enhanced, but thats just an idea at this point.

Will this be fed low end ammunition (will affect buffer choice)? Its going to be fed everything, with the possible exception of Wolf as I really just don't do much with Wolf ammo. I don't have anything against it, with the exception of disliking that they raised their prices so much.

Is budget going to be a consideration if possible (e.g. to demonstrate how affordable an utterly reliable AR-15 can be, or is this a no-expenses spared endurance machine?) I don't expect this one to be on the cheap side. Actually, it might lean towards the obscene side when you figure in what I want to do with it. Most people don't build a weapon not caring if their parts break. We will be actively encouraging it to happen, at least within realistic means.

The suppressor provision is the last open question I can think of. I'm assuming QD (so it can be ran on extreme firing schedules if desired, or if placed on the Wolf diet), and the choice would be among the AAC line (M4-2000 or SPR-M4) It would be nice to use a can, and the QD would allow us to run a can at times, and pull it as needed. Thats not carved in stone at this point.



Matt- I think its pretty cool that you are making a build along similar lines.

JustMatt
12 February 2009, 21:45
Stick- Me to, i'm interested to see how it will compare to my piston gun. Hopefully I'll get it done soon enough to kinda compare it to your torture test build. Bye the way, all the info from this site is helping me out a lot. Everyone on here seems more apt to provide help and good advice then some other forums.

Army Chief
13 February 2009, 00:36
Well, you can always get plenty of advice on "some other forums," of course; it just doesn't tend to be good advice much of the time. LOL

I suspect we'll have more than a few informal torture test carbines come out of this, but when you consider what a lot of bone-stock military carbines go through, it will be interesting to see to what degree we're able to improve upon the formula by hand-selecting certain components and systems.

Seems like there might be a story behind the story here: what was the genesis for this idea, Stick? It might help us make more informed decisions if we had just a bit more background.

AC

Stickman
13 February 2009, 13:32
Seems like there might be a story behind the story here: what was the genesis for this idea, Stick? It might help us make more informed decisions if we had just a bit more background.

AC


I spent the morning with some senior NCOs discussing weapon and equipment issues, and this project was brought up. They asked the same question. Why work this writeup/ project, when the system has been out for so long.

My answer back to them was to question what the overall thought was when people asked about a durable and reliable weapon. What was the first weapon that jumped into their head, or into the head of their troops. How many people have heard someone say or write online, "If you want durability and reliability, buy an AK".


One of the Sgts pointed out to me that he was recently told of a low speed team that ran convoys, and didn't clean their weapons for months at a time unless they were involved in a shooting engagement. This is not intended to be a slam against guys running convoys, but this is a good example of poor leadership and training. How can these guys come back and complain when they slather a weapon with CLP, then run around with it in the dust for a couple months, let sludge build up and congeal, the bitch about weapon issues?!

Lets talk about my brothers and sisters in Law Enforcement for a bit, as they are certainly not above this issue by any stretch. How many instructors have run a firing qual that everyone has known about for months, and had a cop show up a couple minutes early to tell them that their bolt is frozen shut, and there may or may not be a round in the chamber.... No, the military is not alone in having troops that have low weapons skills. How many LE firearm instructors have seen a weapon or piece of equipment come in broken, and the answer from the officer is "No idea what happened, it just broke".


Certain issues, like the above are going to be beyond the scope of this project. One of the NCOs asked that he be involved, and of course my answer was yes. He mentioned that he assumed that cleaning was going to be a low priority based on our discussion. My reply was that I wanted to keep things as realistic as possible. Any LE or MIL is going to clean their weapon at a certain point, so excluding cleaning is not reasonable in my mind. I don't expect a rigorous cleaning schedule, but it still has to be done at a certain point. We aren't talking white glove inspection here, simply periodic wipe downs, or actual cleanings every thousand rounds. I feel that it is highly unlikely that MIL would be engaging in 1,000 rounds without any form of maintenance, care, or cleaning. For LE, its a moot point, it will never happen.

This brought up the next topic. How much abuse can we give this weapon.... Speaking to guys who I have served with, and who have recently gotten back from desert deployments, I knew this would be something they would be asking. I replied back with a question of my own asking, "Is it possible that a troop might drop a weapon off a HMV"? The immediate answer was yes. My reply was that if its realistic, than do it. If we know it will kill a weapon through intent, don't do it. We don't need someone to run over a carbine with a tracked vehicle to let us know it may cause problems.


Is a quality built AR15 a fragile system that needs to be babied? I think not.

JustMatt
13 February 2009, 15:18
Stick - I hate to keep bringing up LWRC in my post's but SWAT magazine just ran a 10 month torture test article on 3 LWRCI guns that seem's to be in line with what your looking to do. It was a good read and sounds like it could be a good comparison to use being that the piston system's are supposed to be more durable/reliable than the DI system.

Stickman
13 February 2009, 16:16
At this time, we are not able to do piston vs DI gun testing. I believe to do this, you would need a heavy sampling of DI AR15s, and piston weapons from different manufacturers. Then you would need to replicate the same firing sequences and conditions for all weapons, including PCM.

I am aware that piston weapons can be very reliable and durable, but thats part of the problem, many people are starting to think its a must.

JustMatt
13 February 2009, 18:11
I ment it only as a similar test as to what your planning on. More as a reference and comparison. Sorry, should have been more clear.

Stickman
13 February 2009, 18:56
Not a problem at all. [:)]


Back to the original idea, any more thoughts on what components will hold up, and what wouldn't?

TehLlama
13 February 2009, 19:16
Will sling or sling mounting accessories be a part of the component testing?

Either the VCAS Padded Short QD, or MagPul Dynamics would be my top two choices... other opinions?

Paulo_Santos
14 February 2009, 10:48
Will sling or sling mounting accessories be a part of the component testing?

Either the VCAS Padded Short QD, or MagPul Dynamics would be my top two choices... other opinions?

I'm a huge fan of the Vikings V-Tac padded sling. We have them on our patrol rifles.

Paulo_Santos
14 February 2009, 10:51
Stick, if you guys are worried about cleaning and maintenance, just make it a policy that after every range session, you have to clean your weapon before you leave. No excuses. Even if you have to leave for any reason, we have two or three guys help that guys out just to get a decent cleaning.

Paulo_Santos
16 February 2009, 14:52
Handguard: LMT MRP
Reason: I just wanted a system in which I can change the barrel out quickly. It was between the LMT MRP and the XCR.

Sights: Troy fron tand rear BUIS.
Reason: Low profile and I prefer the same plane rear aperature.

Optic: Swarovski Z6i 1x6 illuminated CDi reticle.
Reason: Veratility.

Grip: Magpul Miad.
Reason: I like the ability to use different grips and for the storage.

Stock: Vltor E-Mod.
Reason: Comfortable, affordable, and holds plenty of batteris.

Barrel including length: LMT 16" Piston barrel.
Reason: I always wanted to try thr piston system out. Glad I did. What took me so long????

LPK/Trigger: Bushmaster lower with WOA tuned RRA.
Reason: I love the 2-stage triggers. The WOA tuned RRA is one of the most reliable 2-stage triggers out there. As soon as it craps out, I will replace it with the Geiselle SSA.

Buffer: Regular Carbine Buffer.
Reason: I use whatever buffer it takes to get the brass to eject at the 3-4 o'clock position. In this upper, the regular carbine buffer did it.

BCG: LMT BCG
Reason: That's what came with the upper. If it was a DI, I would use the regular LMT.

Upper Rec: LMT MRP.
Reason: See above.

Lower Rec: Bushmaster.
Reason: Because most lower receivers are pretty much the same.

Magazine: Magpul PMags and C-Products.
Reason: They both work well.

Lights/lasers/etc: Pentagon Stealth light.
Reason: Works great and was affordable.

Charging Handle: Regular.
Reason:

Flash Hider/Comp: FSC556.
Reason: Because I live in NJ and have to have a permanently attached muzzle brake, so I chose the FSC556 because it is the closest brake out there to an A2 flash hider.

Misc Stuff rail covers etc: Grip-Pod.
Reason: I want a bipod that deploys fast and is lightweight. For the way I like to shoot, the Grip-Pod works great.

Uglyduck
16 February 2009, 19:56
Sights:Centurion C4 Diopter sights
Reason: Always at the ready and nothing to fail.

Optic: Aimpoint CompM4s
Reason: Proven reliability and good QC. Battery is prevelant. 2moa dot is versatile.

Grip: Magpul MOE
Reason: Simple design, improved control, and offers some utility. A matter of personal preference really.

Stock: Magpul UBR
Reason: Solid stock feel and cheek weld with an adjustable length of pull. The construction lends it to be a durable piece of kit when locked in any position.

Barrel including length:Noveske 14.5 Afghan, midlength gas sysem
Reason: The 1:7 twist operates well with various bullet weights. The gas system operates closer to rifle length thresholds, which the rifle was originally designed for. Not to mention trusted reputation of accuracy and reliability.

LPK/Trigger: JP Tactical Fire Control System
Reason: Precision without compromising reliability

BCG: JP T.O.S., Tactical Operating System, with Leitner-Wise Defense high performance bolt and extractor
Reason: Constructed of hand polished 416 stainless steel, with no chrome to peel. The bolt is constructed of SAE 9310 steel rather than the mil-spec 8620 which dramatically increases the life expectancy. I've had impeccable performance thus far with mine.

Upper Rec: LMT MRP
Reason: Constructed of one piece of aluminum for strength, reduced number of parts, and ease of maintenance. The monolithic rail provides a stable platform for an optic mounted anywhere on the rail.

Lower Rec: Stubborn Mule SM-15/Larue Stealth Lower, or T15BDX
Reason: Both offer an integrated trigger guard...one less part to fail. In my experience the flared magwell helps with reloads and accepts even the most finicky Pmags. The T15's tension screw also aids in upper/lower mating consistency. Besides, Stick's been meaning to beat one up,this will give him a reason too.

http://us.st12.yimg.com/us.st.yimg.com/I/yhst-94795624551092_2036_1579533

I don't rescind my previous post of the Cav. Arms MkII either. I think its has much to offer although it isn't a traditional receiver. The nylon 6 poly material is significantly lighter than aluminum receivers, it gives excellent corrosion resistance and a durable finish.

Magazine: Pmag
Reason: Its a PMAG...nough said

Flash Hider/Comp: Quickcomp FSC556
Reason: It has a little of all the trimmings...compensator, flash hider,and mounting options for a can

Army Chief
16 February 2009, 22:16
Pardon me if I've missed something along the way, but how is an Afghan barrel compatible with a LMT MRP upper? It was my impression that only the VLTOR VIS allowed the use of standard barrels, whereas the LMT requires proprietary modifications in that regard.

For this reason, among others, I would favor the VIS if a mono-/polyithic upper was to be selected.

AC

Uglyduck
17 February 2009, 06:06
Pardon me if I've missed something along the way, but how is an Afghan barrel compatible with a LMT MRP upper? It was my impression that only the VLTOR VIS allowed the use of standard barrels, whereas the LMT requires proprietary modifications in that regard.

For this reason, among others, I would favor the VIS if a mono-/polyithic upper was to be selected.

AC

You didn't miss a thing! I did! I wasn't very thorough and forgot about their barrel mods. I stand corrected, thanks AC

Paulo_Santos
17 February 2009, 09:51
Pardon me if I've missed something along the way, but how is an Afghan barrel compatible with a LMT MRP upper? It was my impression that only the VLTOR VIS allowed the use of standard barrels, whereas the LMT requires proprietary modifications in that regard.

For this reason, among others, I would favor the VIS if a mono-/polyithic upper was to be selected.

AC


The LMT MRP does use propriertary barrels, but they have such a wide selection now that it no longer a negative against the MRP.

Army Chief
17 February 2009, 10:30
True, but it would remain a discriminator if a Noveske tube were your first choice, which is what I had gleaned from earlier posts. That certainly isn't a criticism of the LMT, but I'm not sure that anyone beats Noveske in the production barrel business.

AC

bigcoastie
17 February 2009, 13:20
So stick when you gonna start putting this bad boy together? And what do you have planned for it once it has been?

Stickman
17 February 2009, 14:41
So stick when you gonna start putting this bad boy together? And what do you have planned for it once it has been?


Right now I am leaning heavily towards a VIS upper. I like the idea of a one piece upper for a piece of equipment that is going to be put into abusive states.

I'm back and forth on using a billet lower. One side of me says it would be fun, especially after listening to people cry about the Sun Devil being "only T-6", and that it can't hold up. Another side of me says to just use a standard forged lower, the more generic the better. I can't help but think that the standard lowers have seen loads of abuse in the military, which makes me lean towards to the billet lower a little more. Thoughts?

For stocks, I really think we need to go with a standard carbine receiver extension. That way guys can try out different stocks if they want. My initial idea was to use a UBR, I'm not sold either way right now. Thoughts?

The trigger is going to be Geiselle, I don't see the point in working with a generic single stage as we are all pretty familiar with them. The Geiselle is supposed to be the most durable, so why not use that and see how it goes. If someone has another reason to drop in something else, I'm happy to listen. I've killed RRA 2 stage triggers, and won't be swayed in that direction...

Magazines will be a mix of everything, including the EMAGs, new TD mags, USGI, PMAGs (30 and 20s), and HK.

Still unsure on the sights.

The pistol grip will be a Magpul MIAD, there really isn't any good reason I can come up with not to. Smaller shooters can swap out the rear section as we will leave it unpinned. A couple people have said that the MOE pistol grip would be a better way to go on a weapon that is expected to get impacted on a regular basis. The idea being that a one piece unit should hold up better than a 3 piece assembly. They might be right.

Slings? I've got piles of slings, so I'm apt to throw several in the carbine case and have guys just use whatever they like best. Slings are easy swap around. Into the mix will go the Gear Sector GS-2P, new Magpul, new ARMS, BFG VCAS, and that should round out the bases pretty well.

For BCG, I'm still wanting to use the LMT enhanced unit. They took a lot of flak early on, and I want to see how it holds up. Lots of good BCG out there, we may as well try something a little extravagant.

Still up in the air on the barrel. I may end up just going with a 16" SS barrel. I am short on ideas, and not sure of other options at this point that I have quick access to.


... and of course, a can of Krylon.

Uglyduck
17 February 2009, 15:29
I think a torture test on a billet receiver would be the way to go. We already know what the forged receivers can do. It would shed some light on the billet vs. forged arguments out there. Stick - on a side note, my Sun Devil wouldn't drop Pmags. Nothing some sandpaper can't fix though. As for the UBR, definitely. I want to see what its made of and if it lives up to expectations.

Stickman
17 February 2009, 15:56
UD,

You want to see the UBR beaten on? I think we can do that. Its not like the UBR isn't adjustable for wearing with armor or clothing. I also haven't seen anyone really do much of anything with the UBR yet. I think most people are afraid to damage a stock which costs that much, which is a shame as I think it will hold up to a world of harsh treatment.

Uglyduck
17 February 2009, 16:07
UD,

You want to see the UBR beaten on? I think we can do that. Its not like the UBR isn't adjustable for wearing with armor or clothing. I also haven't seen anyone really do much of anything with the UBR yet. I think most people are afraid to damage a stock which costs that much, which is a shame as I think it will hold up to a world of harsh treatment.

Exactly...and you're just the man to deliver such a beating

armakraut
17 February 2009, 17:00
First post here, originally emailed this to Rainier and John encouraged me to register.

I'm mainly a knuckle dragging ak shooter, so here are my "make it more like an AK" recommendations. Feel free to make fun of me, I probably deserve it.

Handguard: polymer, military style
Reason: Polymer handguards work and are very durable, good quality ones absorb heat better than an aluminum handguard that mainly holds polymer rail covers. Compared with the AK, AR15's come with a semi-pleasant, semi-integrated vertical grip (mag well). Failing that caveman requirement... a quality drop in replacement rail system would work too.

Sights: fixed front, larue rear
Reason: Larue is simple/easy to install and reinstall, no locktite required. A fixed front is a fixed front.

Optic: older style aimpoint or aimpoint m4
Reason: Stupid-simple optics and durable. Trijicon RMR might be good too, but I haven't seen it in person yet.

Grip: magpule moe & magpul trigger guard
Reason: Better grip than a stock a1 or a2, and very durable/cheap. Magpul's trigger guard is extremely comfortable.

Stock: sully stock (or UBR)
Reason: I know the sully isn't variable, but it doesn't need to be, it's a nice, durable, short stock that is the same length as most people seemingly permanently keep their collapsible stocks at. If nothing else, people bear down on a rifle with a short stock and it increases accuracy, older US military tests with the M16A2 and M4 confirmed this.

Barrel including length: 16 inch midlength
Reason: Anyone can remove/attach the flash hider without getting .gov paperwork, Midlength improves your grip on a carbine if you want a longer, more stable grip. Midlength gastubes are highly available.

Buffer: as needed

Upper Rec: something with a left side charging handle
Reason: The AK is reliable for a lot of reasons, one of them being it's no big deal if you have to manipulate the bolt manually and easily, either by hand, or by boot. IE, springfield stomp.

Lower Receiver, BCG, LPK/trigger: milspec A2
Reason: Cheap and it works.

Magazine: pmag or emag
Reason: Magpul makes the best ar15 mags since... uh, ever.

Lights/lasers/etc: G2 on midwest (or similar) FSB mount
Reason: Cheap, durable, minimal shadow cast

Charging Handle: left side
Reason: MUCH easier to manipulate, failing that either a pri charging handle or a standard handle with a pri latch. If possible, I'll never own an AR15 without some kind of pri "military latch" on it at minimum.

Flash Hider/Comp: A2/vortex/blackout
Reason: Have it your way.

Misc Stuff rail covers etc: colt FSB side sling mount and some kind of plate style rear sling mount, IE DD, midwest, troy etc. QD is nice too. Maybe consider a dissipater style upper.
Reason: The colt sling mount is again a cheap, durable unit that serves its purpose. A plate style attachment (or UBR QD point) improves ergonomics with the sling. If you don't care about a bayonet lug, the dissipater style allows for a much better forward grip. Plus the KAC military rails would drop right in. I usually care about keeping the bayonet lug and traditional FSB arrangement intact. If for no other reason than 99% of other AR's on the planet use the same arrangement, a lot of accessories are made to fit the FSB.

There's something to be said for highly custom, fine tuned instruments. ...and there's something to be said for a rugged, inexpensive, durable instrument that does what it is called on to do.

Here would be something to do. Why not build two "for abuse" AR's? Make one out of the nicest, most expensive, latest & greatest durable components. Make the other as low budget and knuckle dragging as possible.

Regrettably AR15's really aren't set up for left side charging. I think the ability to directly act on the bolt adds a good comfort factor to a weapons operation.

bigcoastie
17 February 2009, 19:17
Any chance you can put a redi-mag on this I want to see if it handles abuse well?

Stickman
17 February 2009, 20:36
Why not build two "for abuse" AR's? Make one out of the nicest, most expensive, latest & greatest durable components. Make the other as low budget and knuckle dragging as possible.

I like the way you think, but finances prevent me from doing this. I had thought about buying an off the shelf Oly Arms, RRA, DPMS, or other basic AR15 to run and duplicate the testing process. I even kicked around the idea of taking one of my current basic carbines and using it, but decided that while I was willing to possibly destroy one weapon or its parts, I wasn't willing to do two.

Besides, I want to build one which isn't going to be destroyed in testing, and I think the standard configurations would fare poorly in drop testing when the stocks/ tubes and handguards were hit.

Army Chief
19 February 2009, 09:21
So, what's the flash-to-bang on this, Stick? Is this something that you're looking to assemble as soon as the parts can be sourced, or are we still largely holding at the "deliberate thought" phase here?

Honestly, the more I think about this, the more I get the sense that we're talking about building a not-too-distant cousin of Noveske's Afghan VIS in some ways. The Afghan doesn't necessarily meet the "build" standard, nor is it a particularly inexpensive end to our means, but that is the direction I'm headed.

When my own mix and match project is complete, the plan is to have an Afghan VIS Switchblock upper riding atop an ACS-equipped MPL A lower.

AC

Custom-X_Sponjah
19 February 2009, 10:59
Exactly...and you're just the man to deliver such a beating

We were running malfunction clearance Drills at a carbine class, well the case had to be yanked out using the butt stock to ground method. The owner of said stock forgot to collapse his UBR and the bottom corner broke off. Everybody's jaws dropped, except the owners cause he didn't see it. He cleared the malfunction and finished out the course of fire. Turns out that the piece just snapped back into place.. The rubber butt pad was a little cut up from the rocks he slammed it against a couple times.

I know personally that the CTR can handle a lot. I wanna see what some CAA and El Cheapo Stocks can handle.. [BD]

Your pretty much right about nobody wanting to "break" their expensive stocks though..

CXS

Oh yea, Id like to see some TROY Diamondhead Rear Sights used and Abused. Folding or Solid.

Stickman
19 February 2009, 11:55
So, what's the flash-to-bang on this, Stick? Is this something that you're looking to assemble as soon as the parts can be sourced, or are we still largely holding at the "deliberate thought" phase here?

Honestly, the more I think about this, the more I get the sense that we're talking about building a not-too-distant cousin of Noveske's Afghan VIS in some ways. The Afghan doesn't necessarily meet the "build" standard, nor is it a particularly inexpensive end to our means, but that is the direction I'm headed.

When my own mix and match project is complete, the plan is to have an Afghan VIS Switchblock upper riding atop an ACS-equipped MPL A lower.

AC



Right now I'm waiting for the VIS to arrive....

armakraut
19 February 2009, 12:17
Is noveske contributing a VIS to the cause?

Custom-X_Sponjah
19 February 2009, 13:04
I'd like to see how this little guy held up..
Seen it at SHOT and It caught my eye.. Ya know, being a lefty and all..

ARMADYNAMICS ACLM, AR-15 Ambidextruous Charging Handle for 5.56

http://www.mountsplus.com/miva/graphics/00000001/aclm-ach-001.gif

http://www.mountsplus.com/miva/merchant.mvc?page=MSP/PROD/AR-15_CHARGING_HANDLES/ACLM-ACH-001

CXS

Stickman
19 February 2009, 14:34
Is noveske contributing a VIS to the cause?



I don't think John has any idea that this project is even going on. To answer your question, no.

Stickman
19 February 2009, 14:40
I'd like to see how this little guy held up..
Seen it at SHOT and It caught my eye.. Ya know, being a lefty and all..

ARMADYNAMICS ACLM, AR-15 Ambidextruous Charging Handle for 5.56

http://www.mountsplus.com/miva/graphics/00000001/aclm-ach-001.gif

http://www.mountsplus.com/miva/merchant.mvc?page=MSP/PROD/AR-15_CHARGING_HANDLES/ACLM-ACH-001

CXS


I can't seem to find any info for that company.

Uglyduck
19 February 2009, 14:55
Stick - it looks like you already had a setup in mind, for the most part,when you initially posted this. Any more details you care to divulge?

Custom-X_Sponjah
19 February 2009, 14:58
I can't seem to find any info for that company.

HUH.. They don't seem to have a website.
I saw this CH at the "Mounting Solutions Plus" Booth..
Here is everything I found on the company...
Looks to be a Garage Style operation, as most companies start out before they make that "One Golden Egg" that jump starts them..


Armament Dynamics Industries Llc (Armadynamics)
10903 W 84th Pl, Arvada, CO 80005-5219

Contact Phone: (303) 868-6314
URL (web address): N/A
Business Category: Mfg Small Arms And Accessories in Arvada, CO
Industry (SIC): Small Arms

Business Information:
This company profile is for the private company Armament Dynamics Industries Llc , located in Arvada, CO. Armadynamics's line of business is mfg small arms and accessories.

Company Name: Armament Dynamics Industries Llc

Address: 10903 W 84th Pl, Arvada, CO 80005-5219
Alt Business Name: Armadynamics
Location Type: Single Location
Est. Annual Sales: $52,000
Est. # of Employees: 1
Est. Empl. at Loc.: 1
Year Started: 2006
State of Incorp: N/A
SIC #Code: 3484
Contact's Name: Thomas T Hoel
Contact's Title: N/A
NAICS: Small Arms Manufacturing


http://www.mwgco.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?page=MWG/PROD/AR-15_Accessories/ACLM-ACH-001

http://www.mountsplus.com/miva/merchant.mvc?page=MSP/PROD/AR-15_CHARGING_HANDLES/ACLM-ACH-001

http://www.mannyusa.com/Firearms_Training/product/ACLM-ACH-001.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yD1rCWy86xE

CXS

Stickman
19 February 2009, 16:09
Stick - it looks like you already had a setup in mind, for the most part,when you initially posted this. Any more details you care to divulge?



I had an idea, but not a setup.

I had wanted an adjustable stock, but was talked into the UBR. The idea of a monothlic upper seemed well agreed to, and the VIS works out better for me than a MRP. No one came up with a reason to go away from the Geiselle trigger or LMT enhanced BCG, so I think we will go with those.

I'm still up in the air on the lower, and barrel..... and sights.

jvencius
19 February 2009, 16:19
I'm still up in the air on ... sights.

If beat-the-snot-out-of-it durability is still the primary focus of this build, I'm sticking with the fixed LaRue BUIS. Whether you like Mark or not, and it's clear that a lot of folks around here don't think much of him, you have to admit that sight is a helluva sturdy piece of hardware and would require quite a bit of motivation to destroy. IMO, "we need to be able to break something" is tacit recognition of that sight's durability and doesn't make much sense nor justify omitting it when this thread is titled "Let's build an extreme use AR15...".

lmmmmm
19 February 2009, 17:35
How will you judge what meets your objective of heavy use/abuse.

By each individual component separately prior to adding it to the build , or as a complete rifle.

Durability tests usually take awhile to gather empirical evidence.

bigcoastie
19 February 2009, 18:07
Stick are you going to be loaning this out and letting people put massive amounts of rounds through it etc. or are you going to be dropping it running it over etc. ? Since I didn't get a response any chance that you'd be willing to run a redi mag system on it to see how it holds up to abuse? Also my vote if you're putting massive rounds through it for barrel would be Noveske N4 chrome lined and any billet lower that has an integrated trigger guard.

Stickman
19 February 2009, 19:09
jvencius,


I've seen no mention of why the LT sight wouldn't work, you've made implications in other threads, and its time to stop. I'm uninterested in the problems that occur on other boards, or the drama that some thrive on.

With the thread derailment over, I agree that a fixed sight platform is often more durable than a folding unit. LMT, LT, and DD all have units that would surely work, and I would hope so as we are talking simply about a fixed rear sight. The problem is that not everyone wants a fixed rear sight.

Durability and usability are two different things, and a fixed sight isn't going to be the answer for every platform. I'm half tempted to use MBUS, just to see how well they hold up.

Stickman
19 February 2009, 20:15
How will you judge what meets your objective of heavy use/abuse.

By each individual component separately prior to adding it to the build , or as a complete rifle.

Durability tests usually take awhile to gather empirical evidence.


This isn't going to be a test conducted in a lab, and because of that, we are going to miss a lot of information that something like the military drop tests would show.

The idea is to document what abuse we can put the weapon through, and give our thoughts as users handle it. There are certainly better ways to conduct full testing, but military scale testing is beyond our means at this point.

Stickman
19 February 2009, 20:19
Stick are you going to be loaning this out and letting people put massive amounts of rounds through it etc. or are you going to be dropping it running it over etc. ? Since I didn't get a response any chance that you'd be willing to run a redi mag system on it to see how it holds up to abuse? Also my vote if you're putting massive rounds through it for barrel would be Noveske N4 chrome lined and any billet lower that has an integrated trigger guard.



Not ignoring your Redimag idea, I'm just not sure what lower we'll be using, and the Redimag won't fit on the billet units.

As of right now, there are LE and MIL guys who have expressed an interest in using the upper aside from the regular guys on the WEVO Staff. Those guys will be given the upper, and will run it on their LE/MIL lowers.

I like the idea of the Noveske barrel, I'm just not sure that John N. has any which aren't spoken for, and I hate to impose on friends.

jmart
19 February 2009, 20:31
This isn't going to be a test conducted in a lab, and because of that, we are going to miss a lot of information that something like the military drop tests would show.

The idea is to document what abuse we can put the weapon through, and give our thoughts as users handle it. There are certainly better ways to conduct full testing, but military scale testing is beyond our means at this point.

How are you defining abuse? High and sustained rates of fire? Ability to withstand rough handling (banging into door thresholds, vehicles doors, sustaining drops, etc.)? All of the above?

And what ranges are you focussing on, 0-50 yds, 0-100 yds, 0-200, any need to reach further out? That would dictate, or could at least heavily influence the optic choice.

Stickman
19 February 2009, 21:40
How are you defining abuse?


Taken from the first post....


Think drop testing of components, thing about a carbine that will soak up loads of users worst punishment, and come back for more. Think along the lines of an AR15 that is going to get treated like a conscript treats their AK.


Different things are going to happen from different users, which is why optics will change around. Its also part of why there isn't a set list of things that will happen, or an order that they will happen in.

Army Chief
19 February 2009, 22:08
A few random thoughts ...

LaRue - Stick covered this already, but it is time to let go of the "some of you don't like Mark" schtick. I've never seen WEVO worship at any particular altar, nor have I even seen anyone -- LaRue included -- openly maligned here. Perhaps this is baggage carried over from someplace else, but we surely don't have any room to store it here.

BUIS - Concur that the new Magpuls would be an ideal choice. Everyone seems to be interested in these, but the one wild card here seems to revolve around how they will hold up because of their polymer construction. Might as well put that to the test along with everything else.

Billet Lower - The more I think about it, the more I like this idea. Tactical Innovations would probably get my money, but if you're interested in Sun Devil, by all means have at it. It would prove most enlightening if a billet actually proved to be less resilient than a conventional forged lower in certain situations.

Redimag - Wouldn't mind seeing this added to the mix if we go with a standard lower, but my interest is largely academic, as the Redimag doesn't really suit my applications. (Given the choice, I would opt for the billet.)

Barrel - If a Noveske is available, I can't see the logic in going with anything else. If not, then I suppose that opens up a parallel discussion. Colt?

VIS - I've already weighed in on that, but I think it is a natural selection for a purpose-built gun. Perhaps we can put the monolithic vs. polyithic debate to rest, once and for all.

Trigger - No contest. I'm a single stage guy myself, but am open to new ideas.

Lights - Any reason why we haven't ventured down this path? A Surefire M600C would probably be my choice here.

Optics - Still wide open ... and dependent upon the range(s) we're optimizing for. I would think a mid-distance gun would prove the most versatile.

AC

armakraut
19 February 2009, 23:05
The only issue I'd see with more expensive triggers, receivers, optics, and lights is that if the rifle is going to be a hard-use ar15/carbine, in the same vein of an AK-47. I don't see a lot of value added on your end by running more expensive accessories/components into the ground when on their best day, they are no more reliable and durable than something that costs 1/4 the price and is still relatively pricey (IE aimpoint M4 vs S&B short dot.)

Army Chief
20 February 2009, 00:34
I wouldn't take issue with that, save to say that we aren't trying to duplicate the AK's cost versus return factor nearly so much as we are trying to dispel some of the more popular notions about the AK versus AR durability question.

If I recall correctly, one of Stick's original premises was simply that he felt the AR was needlessly being handicapped in these kinds of discussions, and the object was to build a hard-use rifle to prove his point. I don't know that we're talking about subjecting the rifle to outright abuse in the typical T&E sense (i.e. throwing it under a bus or packing the receiver full of mud), so much as we are just allowing it to be dropped, tossed about and neglected in the way that Joe Average might handle a typical garden tool.

No matter how we choose to configure it, the AR will inevitably be the more costly (and more refined) rifle, but your observation is on point. Why use an Aimpoint M4S when an earlier generation model will do? Why go with a two-stage trigger when the stock unit is known to offer trouble-free performance? I guess, in that sense, some concessions are being made largely to satisfy a few of our lingering curiousities.

We could rigidly adhere to a more minimalist formula, and to some degree that would be quite logical, but we already know what a stock carbine can take in most respects; the idea here seems to be to build a carbine with selected components that should enhance the AR's inherent durability even further. How much further? I think that is what we're trying to find out.

AC

Uglyduck
20 February 2009, 07:06
Stick - I believe putting the MBUS through the test would answer a lot of questions about them early in their development. Why not discover how they perform? The consensus seems to be to mount the MBUS if you decide on a flip up configuration. A WEVO evaluation would provide a reliable source rather than a joe blow "hit it with a stick" test. This is assuming you decide against using fixed BUIS.

Army Chief
20 February 2009, 07:37
You know what we're missing here, Stick? Photos of little piles of receivers, sights, grips, stocks, barrels, mags, bolts, slings, mounts, flash suppressors, charging handles, selectors, optics, rail panels and triggers that you have laying around for us to choose from. You may not have everything on hand, but I'd be willing to bank that you've got a lot of this stuff just sitting around the bench, calling out your name. LOL

AC

jmart
20 February 2009, 17:37
Stock -- Sully. Solid urethane. Can't get much tougher than that. If you need a tad more pull length, add the optional 1" spacer.

Grip -- Magpul MOE, TD or A2. Just pick whichever one fits your hand best. Why the MOE? It's one piece.

Lower Receiver -- any decent lower will suffice. Just as long as it's machined correctly. I highly doubt a billet lower offers any durability advantages over a forged lower.

FCG -- stock SS. Just as long as the trigger, hammer and disconnector are properly hardened.

Upper receiver -- same as lower, just as long as it's machined properly. Flattop config.

BCG -- BCM, LMT. Because they're properly staked and the metallurgy is good.

Barrel -- Noveske N4. NATO chambered, double chrome lined. Decent, useful contour. 2nd choice -- Denny's Operator. Heavier than an N4, but a good barrel. Both have fixed FSBs, the most durable config available. Operator is a ML gas system, which I think makes more sense in 16" barrels. I know ML gas system 14.5 barrels exist, but I'm just not sure if they are as reliable a carbine length gas system in the shorter barrel.

FH -- Just about any would suffice.

Optic -- if RDS, an Aimpoint that uses a wrap-around ring. Not sure if they are more durable than the M4/T-1 mounting system, but they look like they would be. If magnified optic, a compact ACOG or maybe a Leupold CQT. Both very durable. Mounted in LaRue QR mount system in case access to BUIS is required.

BUIS -- fold down obviously if using ACOG or CQT. Troy, ARMs, MI, I'm not sure one is any sturdier than the other. And the Hahn looks interesting in that it's low profile and it has a unique apperture diameter that kind of splits the difference between the .072 long range app and the short range .200 app. If using Aimpoint, then maybe go with a fixed LaRue. Just about all of these would be goof proof, the main thing would be if you didn't mind the fixed sight, then it's simpler.

Sling mount -- DD burnsed loop system. Again, not sure if more durable than a HK hook or a quick connect pin, but I just think they are less prone to accidental unhooking, snagging, etc.

Light -- a Surefire LED model. Tailcap PB switch, no cables. Because LEDs are more durable than Xenon bulbs, even when mounted in shock isolated bezels. Unless I were operating in an area prone to a lot of fog, then I'd go with Xenon. And because tailcap switches are less hassle than pressure pad switches.

Just my initial thoughts. I'm assuming this is primarily a 0-200 yard paltform, with the ability to reach out a tad farther, but I'd sacrifice longer range performance (i.e., other optics) to gain the durability of what I listed above.

JustMatt
22 February 2009, 07:01
My vote for the lower would go to Defensive Edge's SLR15 forged lower. Reason: it's less expensive than most of the billet lowers i have seen and seems to be top tier for forged lowers. That and I just got one and wanna see how it holds up [:)]

Army Chief
22 February 2009, 07:45
I got the sense that the T-6 Sun Devil was the leading billet candidate, though I could be mistaken. On the other hand, if we're selecting other premium components, why go with a budget receiver?

AC

jmart
22 February 2009, 08:00
Based on Stick's criteria, what advantages would a billet lower provide over a forged lower?

What all does a lower have to do? Hold the upper correctly, hold a mag, hold a FCG, ensure the BCG tracks straight through the back end and doesn't bind. In my mind, what separates one lower from another is whether or not it's machined correctly, but I don't consider one mfg method any better or worse than another, given the same alloys.

Army Chief
22 February 2009, 08:11
I'm with you, brother -- I'm just referring to some of Stick's earlier comments when we were starting all of this off. He mentioned that it might be interesting to see if the T-6 is as much of a long-term risk as some seemed to be suggesting.

AC

m24shooter
22 February 2009, 08:24
I know personally that the CTR can handle a lot. I wanna see what some CAA and El Cheapo Stocks can handle.. [BD]

Your pretty much right about nobody wanting to "break" their expensive stocks though..
I like this idea. I've got a CTR that I might be willing to abuse. May have a VLTOR too.

Uglyduck
22 February 2009, 09:56
I can't help but think that the standard lowers have seen loads of abuse in the military, which makes me lean towards to the billet lower a little more.

+1

Stickman
22 February 2009, 12:06
I'm with you, brother -- I'm just referring to some of Stick's earlier comments when we were starting all of this off. He mentioned that it might be interesting to see if the T-6 is as much of a long-term risk as some seemed to be suggesting.

AC


My understanding is that the original M16/ AR15 lowers were 6061, and that they were later changed to 7075. I don't think there is any doubt that the 7 series is higher quality, but I do have question as to whether it will make a substantial difference.

Sullys lower would be a good candidate as well, I ran into him at SHOT and talked to him a bit. I should touch base with him again. Sullys forged lower is a little different, which would be the main reason to stray from traditional forging if we didn't go billet.

TehLlama
22 February 2009, 12:41
I like the shift towards the VIS upper - I agree that it's a keeper, especially paired with the Noveske barrel.

Lower - only remaining reason I can see to go with a forget unit would be if mission dictates a redi-mag setup - that's on you, Stick. If a RediMag is a required item, then forged is fine. Otherwise, my preference will be towards a TI or SD lower, with ArmyChief on that one.

Abusing a UBR stock would be of special interest to me, but I can't help but think that the flexibility of this platform to test what works and what doesn't with a mil-spec stock extension is almost too good to pass up. I'm sure that proving the UBR can handle abuse would be aworthwhile venture, but I'm comparbly curious about how the ACS, EMOD, CTR, MOE, MOD, and other stocks would stack up.

As far as BCG - my final suggestion would be an IonBond coated BCM unit (or if you can get an LMT Enhanced or standard LMT unit coated with the DLC job) - Denny carries them from time to time, and I think it would be a supreme quality test of those BCG's to see how much abuse these can handle.
Alternative would be trying to get ahold of a Young BCG and have it diamondblack (not sure on difference from the DLC IonBond coating) from MSTN.


ArmyChief brought up a good question with weaponlights - obviously the X600 as a go-to, but maybe consider an E2D LED light as a means of testing the various flashlight mounts. Both are comparable lights and will no doubt handle any abuse, but the mounting 'restrictions' posed by the X600 might pose a minor limitation for some shooters.

MBUS are still my preference for sights, although maybe running a set of TROY or DD/LMT/LT fixed sights for a while with an Aimpoint would be worth a shot too - I would just prefer that flip-up sights be used since it's already been concluded that a variety of optics will be used, presumably to include variable and fixed zoom optics.


My last question is on lubricant used - I'm assuming you'll run your preferred whenever possible (EWL/Slip2k), and whatever else gets used is okay as long as proper PM/cleaning gets applied?

Enough drunken rambling... thanks, can't wait to see how this comes out, Stick.

Uglyduck
22 February 2009, 14:48
My vote for the lower would go to Defensive Edge's SLR15 forged lower. Reason: it's less expensive than most of the billet lowers i have seen and seems to be top tier for forged lowers. That and I just got one and wanna see how it holds up [:)]

Sully certainly has a top shelf lower...I completely overlooked them. [bash] Definitely add it to the list of candidates!

Stickman
25 February 2009, 18:00
TehLlama,

Not sure if you saw the new item release, but the "Fail Zero" Bolt Carrier Group came in today, and they are making some pretty big claims about a no lube finish. There is only one way to find out how well it will or won't work, so we will see what happens with it.



http://www.failzero.com/


http://stickman.rainierarms.com/galleries/WeaponEvolution.com/IMG_8359%20A%201028%20WEVO.jpg


http://stickman.rainierarms.com/galleries/WeaponEvolution.com/IMG_8363%201028%20WEVO%20copy.jpg

louie
25 February 2009, 19:20
My .02 on the topic...

Why not a Krieger H-bar, or even the Krieger Varmatch barrels? Wouldn't a heavy barrel hold up better to heat and 'drop-test' conditions, than a 'light' barrel? (Assuming overall weight is not an issue. (The Varmatch can be fluted.))

I don't like the idea of an FSB, but prefer a low-profile gas block, preferably covered with a FF tube. I just don't like the idea of an exposed gas block, or in this case an FSB. I've seen FSB's bent, twisted, and cracked, from some rough treatment, so a protected gas block seems reasonable, IMHO.

As for the rest of the parts that have been listed in this thread, I see more 'personal preference,' than functionality or durability. A decent, durable stock would be one part that I would consider vital to Stick's 'project rifle.' A2's just don't hold up, especially in cold climates.

TehLlama
26 February 2009, 15:11
TehLlama,

Not sure if you saw the new item release, but the "Fail Zero" Bolt Carrier Group came in today, and they are making some pretty big claims about a no lube finish. There is only one way to find out how well it will or won't work, so we will see what happens with it.


I was reading about these a week or so back on M4C - right after my last post - great looking setup, but I'm not fully understanding the need for the coated hammer unless a stock hammer (or similarly executed aftermarket unit) might pose a risk of damaging the coating on the lower face of the BCG - any thoughts?
I'd definitely love to see one of those put through its paces, and I'm really excited you were able to get a hold of one.


As far as practical carbines are concerned, I think HBar has gone the way of the dodo, along with the .223 chambers commonly associated with that barrel profile and type. These are fantastic for any type of low volume firing (varminting, match shooting, long range), but if the carbine is going to be stress tested with the barrel at cooking element temperatures, the Noveske Mk0 chambers is the tightest I'd consider. The heavier barrels would heat up slower, which is desirable, but the weight penalty (especially considering that this will likely wear a VFG, Light, and other accessories at all times) makes a medium contour more attractive all around.

Stick - if you're willing to abuse a UBR, I'd be all for it, especially if an ACOG is a likely optic choice, but as stated above, ACS/EMOD/CTR are still up there.

Uglyduck
6 March 2009, 21:49
Stick - are you still collecting parts for this build?

Stickman
6 March 2009, 23:39
Stick - are you still collecting parts for this build?



Yes, I'm waiting on the VIS right now, though I guess I could build up the lower.

armakraut
6 March 2009, 23:40
Are you going with a magpul UBR for the stock?

Stickman
6 March 2009, 23:42
Yes, we are going to trash a UBR.

armakraut
6 March 2009, 23:49
I'd personally never trash a rifle... so I had the gunsmith do the driving last time.

http://i319.photobucket.com/albums/mm448/armakraut/old%20firearms/torture_test_1.jpg

http://i319.photobucket.com/albums/mm448/armakraut/old%20firearms/torture_test_4.jpg

http://i319.photobucket.com/albums/mm448/armakraut/old%20firearms/torturetest13.jpg

ballistic
7 March 2009, 03:45
How about discussing some protocols for "extreme use" testing?

Some possible categories of extreme use/abuse to start us off:

PM/Lubrication Intervals
Drop Testing
Sand/Dirt/Mud/Water Immersion
Drag Tests ;)
Sustained Rapid Fire & Mag Dumps

Uglyduck
8 March 2009, 13:34
Yes, we are going to trash a UBR.[:D]

Is your mind made up at this piont Stick? I'd like to know what the final configuration is, if thats the case.


I'd personally never trash a rifle... so I had the gunsmith do the driving last time. LMAO, now thats funny!

TehLlama
8 March 2009, 13:43
My best whack at what final config might be:

T15BDX Billet Lower
UBR (LMT H-Buff)
MIAD (MOE?)
CMT LPK
GSSA Trigger
FailZero BCG
VLTOR VIS2(a?) Upper
Noveske 16.1" Recon CL Barrel (G6A2 or Blackout hider?)
PRI Gas Buster CH
MBUS Sights
SF X600/X300 Weaponlight
Bobro VFG
Ergo/MagPul/TD/DD Rail Covers (mix?)
PMag/EMag/other (Lancer, CAA, TD, CMMG, HK)

From what I've read above, there's only 4 question marks left.

Stickman
8 March 2009, 19:11
My best whack at what final config might be:

T15BDX Billet Lower- Probably a Sun Devil to check the 6 series complaints
UBR (LMT H-Buff)- Tungsten buffer from Spikes Tactical
MIAD (MOE?)- MOE
CMT LPK- LPKs are all the same to me as long as they are in spec
GSSA Trigger- Yes indeed.
FailZero BCG- Yes
VLTOR VIS2(a?) Upper- 10" VIS, waiting for it to arrive
Noveske 16.1" Recon CL Barrel (G6A2 or Blackout hider?)- No answer on barrel yet
PRI Gas Buster CH- yes
MBUS Sights- I am fairly certain the answer is yes.
SF X600/X300 Weaponlight- Whatever lights testers want to use
Bobro VFG- Mix of different ones
Ergo/MagPul/TD/DD Rail Covers (mix?)- XTMs plus whatever anyone wants who is a tester
PMag/EMag/other (Lancer, CAA, TD, CMMG, HK)- Any and all mags

From what I've read above, there's only 4 question marks left.

Slings will also be whatever the users want, I've got a bunch of different ones for them to use.

Uglyduck
8 March 2009, 19:42
Tungsten buffer from Spikes Tactical [:D]

103m 95g
8 March 2009, 20:14
Maybe I missed it but, have you guys considered the type of ammo to be used,
quality vs. steel cased vs. brass cased vs. "battle field pick" up for this extreme use build.

Stickman
8 March 2009, 22:26
Maybe I missed it but, have you guys considered the type of ammo to be used,
quality vs. steel cased vs. brass cased vs. "battle field pick" up for this extreme use build.


Ammo used will vary depending on who is shooting it.

TehLlama
9 March 2009, 04:30
Would I be correct in assuming that it'll have a Car buffer in the case for times it will be fed known wimpy ammo/for troubleshooting shortstroking?

Stickman
9 March 2009, 15:03
I'm not worried about the buffers, if it becomes an issue, any of the guys can drop in a lighter version as needed. [:)]

Stickman
9 March 2009, 15:10
Fail Zero recently requested their BCGs back (2 had been supplied), but now is leaving one with us and requesting the other back. I'm unsure of the reasoning at this point, but if for some reason they suddenly need the other BCG back, we will drop their part and switch over to a LMT enhanced BCG.

rob_s
11 March 2009, 18:33
New Colt LE lower with .154" dia FCG pins and a BCM midlength 16" upper (http://www.bravocompanyusa.com/BCM-16-Mid-Length-Upper-Receiver-Group-p/bcm-urg-mid-16.htm) with the BCG from the Colt. Just stating that so that when I say "factory" below you know that if it's in the lower I mean Colt, and if in the upper I mean BCM

Handguard: Cavarms C8 (http://www.cavalryarms.com/C8.html)
Reason: Not much else available in midlength, and no use for rails

Sights: factory front, Troy rear (http://store.troyind.com/ProductDetails.asp?ProductCode=SSIG-FBS-R0BT-0)
Reason: I'd most likely run the rear in the up position, but having it foldable allows for flexibility if others are shooting it, or if I want to add a magnifier

Optic: Aimpoint M4S (http://www.aimpoint.com/products/aimpoint_product_lines/aimpoint_compm4_and_compm4s)
Reason: watching the demos with Freddie Blish toss the M4 all over creation and keep on working is very convincing. The T-1 might be a close second, but the M4 is really designed to be bomb-proof and I have come to like the 2 MOA dots.

Grip: Magpul MOE (http://www.magpul.com/catalog/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=78_125&products_id=286)
Reason: Less moving parts than the MIAD. I do wish it had a built-in gapper, but I get that they want to sell you their trigger guard too so that's unlikely to happen. I'd just run the little rubber gapper anyway, just to rebel on the marketing scheme.

Stock: Magpul CTR (http://www.magpul.com/catalog/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=70_73_110&products_id=234)
Reason: I was tempted to go for the MOE here too, but adding the friction lock may be a good thing, and having the added flexibility of the QD sling mount is certainly not a bad thing.

Barrel including length: factory BCM 16" midlength
Reason: I haven't bought in completely to the whole "lighter recoil pulse" and all that jazz, but I do know from personal experience that if I want to mount the light directly to the handguards I need the miglength.

LPK/Trigger: factory
Reason: why mess with perfection? I'd give the SSA (http://adcofirearms.com/itemdetails_.cfm?inventorynumber=2411) consideration but until I had 10k rounds on one I wouldn't consider it truly "hard use".

Buffer: factory H (if it will run)
Reason: a midlength gas may not run with the H from the Colt lower, and if it doesn't I'd hav

BCG: factory Colt
Reason: best you can buy, no gimics, trinkets, funky profiles, silly coatings, etc.

Upper Rec: factory BCM
Reason: in this day and age the upper and lower are the least critical elements if they come from a quality company to begin with. billet is for toys.

Lower Rec: factory Colt
Reason: in this day and age the upper and lower are the least critical elements if they come from a quality company to begin with. billet is for toys.

Magazine: BCM D&H w/ magpul followers (http://www.bravocompanyusa.com/AR-15-Magazines-p/magazines%20dh%20gt30mf.htm) and ranger plates (http://www.magpul.com/catalog/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=80_96&products_id=199)
Reason: they work, and work well, with no added bulk, no drop free issues, etc.

Lights/lasers/etc: Surefire X300 (http://www.surefire.com/maxexp/main.pl?pgm=co_disp&func=displ&strfnbr=6&prrfnbr=24462&sesent=0,0&search_id=1304450) on handguards
Reason: Quick detach, can function as carbine light, pistol light, or even handheld. Reasonably priced, bright enough for 99% of use, etc.

Charging Handle: factory Colt
Reason: no reason to change

Flash Hider/Comp: factory BCM A2
Reason: the flash hider craze has gotten just silly, and gone well past silly frankly.

Misc Stuff rail covers etc: no real need
Reason: every part you add is one more part to break. simplicity is your friend.

ryanm
15 March 2009, 05:55
As far as BUIS, wouldn't the C4 Diopter or a POF front site with LMT rear be more durable?

I have yet to break a flip up, but figured if this thing is going to get dropped repeatedly that might be an issue.

Stick, if you still want a ZeroFail to test with, I have one coming from Rainier. I can have my dealer mail it to you. I'm curious to see how they stand up as well.

medicine calf
15 March 2009, 06:48
A few random thoughts ...


BUIS - Concur that the new Magpuls would be an ideal choice. Everyone seems to be interested in these, but the one wild card here seems to revolve around how they will hold up because of their polymer construction. Might as well put that to the test along with everything else.

AC


They've probably improved its durability since the prototype rear that appeared flopping up and down in their video.






Trigger - No contest. I'm a single stage guy myself, but am open to new ideas.


The transition from the stock milspec trigger to an SSA is seamless. The SSA's first stage is relatively short, and terminates in clearly defined positive stop at the second stage. The trigger on my 6920 has about 1/16" less over travel, than the length of my SSA's first stage.

For quick first shots, I cannot detect the first stage of the SSA.

ryanm
15 March 2009, 07:03
As far as the LPK, I've only seen DPMS, Bushmaster, and High Standard. I think there may be a partial Colt kit out there, but I'm not sure it's a complete LPK.

Is there a better/higher grade option available? I may buy one of the Colt kits that Brownells sells to see what's actually in the kit.

I know I can single buy the colt parts from Brownells, but most are out of stock as are all of their other parts kits.

Also, ACE SOCOM stocks are advertised as being 6x stronger than a standard A2 stock/buffer tube.

The POF Sniper stock looks very strong as well

Handguard: PRI Free Float Forearm
Reason: 1 piece tube, I hear they are hard to install correctly. Pinned gas block required if deviating from FSP, PRI block most likely candidate.

Sights: POF front, LMT rear
Reason: POF front is a solid chunk of iron, LMT rear--trying to avoid a flip up mechanims. Not sure if the FSP was a standardized requirement for this build.

Optic: Not sure on this one, to me if this is an added component and deviates from the Zero fail capability of the weapon system. If an Optic is required as part of the build, I'd have to say S&B short dot with a LaRue mount
Reason: Combat proven durability--still not something I would ever think about dropping down the stairs. If this thing is going to be run over by a truck, might as well stick a walmart optic on here to be destroyed.

Grip: Hogue pistol, Bobro short vertical fore-grip on PRI rail
Reason: Hogue is rubberized, Bobro is small and lessons the leverage placed on the rail during hard impacts. A longer grip increases the potential for failure at the mount when dropped.

Stock: ACE SOCOM short
Reason: Advertised as being the strongest on the market, very simplistic desgin

Barrel including length: 16" Noveske with Midlength gas sytem
Reason: Advertised as a very durable chrome lined barrel

LPK/Trigger: Geissele DMR Trigger with Colt Lower Parts
Reason: Geissele performance, Colt is probably best possible LP option that I am aware of

Buffer: Carbine or H
Reason: Depends on weapon peformance, not sure how much the FailZero BCG weighs.

BCG: FailZero, see if EXO really does what they claim
Upper Rec: FailZero, see above

Lower Rec: POF Gen III
Reason: Very solid construction

Magazine: Brownells USGI with magpul followers
Reason: Proven durability, if plastic breaks--its broken, when metal bends--it can be bent back.

Lights/lasers/etc:None
Reason: design to follow KISS concept

Charging Handle: PRI Gas Buster
Reason: Very solid construction

Flash Hider/Comp: AAC SPR4/1000
Reason: Possible use with their Can, not sure if thats part of the build req.

Misc Stuff rail covers etc:
Reason: Magpul Rail ladders for all unused rail surface to keep railes intact during hard testing

Stickman
15 March 2009, 09:16
As far as BUIS, wouldn't the C4 Diopter or a POF front site with LMT rear be more durable?

I have yet to break a flip up, but figured if this thing is going to get dropped repeatedly that might be an issue.

Stick, if you still want a ZeroFail to test with, I have one coming from Rainier. I can have my dealer mail it to you. I'm curious to see how they stand up as well.


Ryan,

I appreciate the offer, but the company did leave one with us, and it will be used for the bulk of this test.

JustMatt
15 March 2009, 16:39
Stick, I know your probably set on the Giessele trigger but I've seen some adds for Wilson Combat's drop in trigger and it looks to be pretty solid. Any chance of you guys using that one? Also, for a charging handle how about the Ambi charging handle from Armadynamics. Seems like it would be a perfect opportunity to put it to the test.

federalist22
23 March 2009, 17:59
I'm new here, but I throw this one out there:

Charging Handle: Anything with a Badger Tac Latch
Reason: nice to grab with left hand; add Norgon ambi-mag release for more left hand function that does not require you to take your right hand off the pistol grip (I use the Badger and Norgon components and I am also looking at adding a Wilson Combat Extended Oversize Bolt Release to make everything nice and accessible on that left side of the platform.

Stickman
23 March 2009, 18:14
F22,

Welcome to the board, and being new here has nothing do to with the quality of a post, so don't worry about that.

I've always liked the PRI latch over many of the longer variants. I know a few guys who have snagged gear on the larger latches, but I also have a SF friend who just came back from a tour using one, and he loved it.

TehLlama
23 March 2009, 18:18
Is there a chance of the newer PRI variant with the cuts on the lever, or sticking with the tried-and-true GB handle?

The Norgon ambi-catch is a great piece of gear, but it can be problematic for some right-handed users when it comes to getting caught on gear and surreptitiously releasing the magazine at the worst time.


::ETA:: most of the SAM-R and SPR's of ours I've seen do indeed have the norgon catch. My experience is limited to use on personal weapons, and a few experiences with it hanging up on different gear. The newer billet lowers seem designed to accommodate this, and are built up more around the left side of the catch, but on older lowers I'd see this potentially being an issue.

If indeed Stick's going to run the TDX-15 lower, then I'd say hell yes to the Norgon catch, since it's got a raised surface right around there, and since a stated intention is to be efficient for multiple users, this fits!

federalist22
23 March 2009, 18:20
F22,

Welcome to the board, and being new here has nothing do to with the quality of a post, so don't worry about that.

I've always liked the PRI latch over many of the longer variants. I know a few guys who have snagged gear on the larger latches, but I also have a SF friend who just came back from a tour using one, and he loved it.
I considered the PRI latch at one time, but I like the Badger. I can see how it could get snagged, but at the same time I like the size because it's easy to hook the side of your index finger on and pull, even if you have something in your hand or your hand is in a fist.

Any feedback on the Wilson bolt release?

federalist22
23 March 2009, 18:22
Is there a chance of the newer PRI variant with the cuts on the lever, or sticking with the tried-and-true GB handle?

The Norgon ambi-catch is a great piece of gear, but it can be problematic for some right-handed users when it comes to getting caught on gear and surreptitiously releasing the magazine at the worst time.
I can under stand that, but the Norgon does not stick out very much at all. I heard the Marines at Quantico are swapping most of their mag releases out for the Norgon now. I got mine from the smith that makes them here in Virginia.

Stickman
21 April 2009, 15:13
Here is a quick update, the last of the parts are expected to be here this week. Not everything was something I had laying around the stick compound, though I can say that I certainly wish that I did!


The plan currently is to shoot pictures of everything so we have images showing what is used, as opposed to just a straight forward list. While I think most people would be happy with the list, there is a group of people who will look at this and feel cheated if I don't (someone has nicely pointed that out to me already).

Stickman
28 April 2009, 13:54
Parts are all in, I've test fitted the upper, and everything fits nicely. Once I get a day off, I'll be able to assemble everything properly, and we can get started.




ETA- I'll see if I can shoot a quick picture today.

TehLlama
28 April 2009, 17:05
Yay! New thread with pictures, yay!

I feel a disturbance in the force; as if millions of keyboards cried out, and were drowned in puddles of drool. I fear Stick made another picture thread.

Stickman
28 April 2009, 17:47
Here is the rough layout. The upper is dialed in the way it will be in testing, but the optic will vary throughout the testing.

If the MBUS sights are destroyed, we will replicate the impact or activity that caused them to fail with Troy Sights, mainly because Troy is viewed as a standard by many people. I have new Troy sights which will be used for this, not my older broken one.

The lower will not be a M16 lower, as this would create problems in loaning it out for testing to other people involved in the testing. I need to switch out the lower receiver (SunDevil) to wear a MOE grip, and UBR (or carbine stock).



Below is a quick snapshot of where we are...

http://stickman.rainierarms.com/galleries/AAC/IMG_8855%20A%201028%20WEVO%20Stick.jpg

armakraut
28 April 2009, 21:45
Pretty good looking as is.

What's the length on that new magpul stock from the closed position like that photograph?

Stickman
28 April 2009, 22:32
Pretty good looking as is.

What's the length on that new magpul stock from the closed position like that photograph?




Its about an inch longer than a CTR when I put them next to each other.

SKULL
28 April 2009, 22:39
looks really good stick..

any news on when the new Magpul ACS stock is available?

ryanm
30 April 2009, 12:33
I wish I could get my hands on that Amodel AC flash hider without the suppressor. They don't sell individually and Iowa isn't a suppressor friendly state. :(

Stickman
30 April 2009, 13:13
I wish I could get my hands on that Amodel AC flash hider without the suppressor. They don't sell individually and Iowa isn't a suppressor friendly state. :(


Are you looking just for the AAC FS? If so, they are available.


http://stickman.rainierarms.com/galleries/AAC/IMG_4166%201028%20Stick.jpg

ryanm
5 May 2009, 15:45
Yep, thats what I'm looking for--can you point me in the right direction as far as vendor? Thanks!

OUTLAW-ONE
6 May 2009, 16:44
Yep, thats what I'm looking for--can you point me in the right direction as far as vendor? Thanks!

call Mike at 770-925-9988 x 101. They are in stock, I just ordered a 3 prong blackout.

Mute
6 May 2009, 21:33
Hey stick,

Which mount are you using there for the Aimpoint?

Stickman
6 May 2009, 21:34
Hey stick,

Which mount are you using there for the Aimpoint?


Its the Bobro mount.

Mute
6 May 2009, 21:43
Thanks!

jp0319
9 May 2009, 07:08
Ok assuming money and parts availability are NO object the following are the parts I would choose to build with based upon sticks original guidance. Oh and the default reason for all the parts is (best part IMHO)

Handguard: Larue

Sights: LMT BUIS Front and rear
Reason:most robust on the market

Optic: Aimpoint Comp M4S with Larue Mount
Reason:Built like a tank long battery life nuff said

Grip:Magpul Maid

Stock: VLTOR EMOD

Barrel including length: Noveskie 14.5 Afghan
Reason:Noveskie quality 249 double chrome lining

LPK/Trigger:4.5 lb JP trigger pack
Reason:I like single stage triggers my only other alternative would be the standard trigger issued in the M4 as far as reliability the standard would be the best

Buffer: No preference I know there are a ton out there and I really dont have a lot of knowledge on them or why you would go with one over the other I always use what comes with my rifle

BCG:BCM or LMT enhanced BCG probibly NP3 coated for better lubricity

Upper Rec:VLTOR MUR
Reason:Robust

Lower Rec:Larue Billet Lower
Reason:Larue, Integrated trigger guard, Larue, did I mention that already [:)]

Magazine:Magpul Pmag

Lights/lasers/etc:Surefire M600c

Charging Handle: PRI Gas Buster

Flash Hider/Comp:Surefire FA556-212

Misc Stuff rail covers etc:Magpul XTM

Stickman
9 May 2009, 09:29
jp0319,

Unless something has changed recently, Larue Tactical doesn't make a lower as they don't have the proper license for it. I don't blame them one bit for not wanting to jump into the weapon manufacturing side of things, its a lot heavier on the paperwork side of things, and having SMOS do the work for them makes a lot of sense. Making your own lowers and weapons is a big deal, and even Magpul opted to do their lowers through Noveske Rifleworks because of all the aggravation associated with it.

Back to the original comment, if we had a SMOS lower, I would look at using it, though I don't really think they are all that much different than other billet lowers that are out there. POF and Sun Devil are two of the earlier companies that were using billet lowers, and we may be using one of them.



Good layout ideas, I think we are pretty close to final components right now.

jp0319
9 May 2009, 19:06
jp0319,

Unless something has changed recently, Larue Tactical doesn't make a lower as they don't have the proper license for it. I don't blame them one bit for not wanting to jump into the weapon manufacturing side of things, its a lot heavier on the paperwork side of things, and having SMOS do the work for them makes a lot of sense. Making your own lowers and weapons is a big deal, and even Magpul opted to do their lowers through Noveske Rifleworks because of all the aggravation associated with it.

Back to the original comment, if we had a SMOS lower, I would look at using it, though I don't really think they are all that much different than other billet lowers that are out there. POF and Sun Devil are two of the earlier companies that were using billet lowers, and we may be using one of them.



Good layout ideas, I think we are pretty close to final components right now.

Stick
They do make lowers the problem is that they will only sell them to you if you have purcchased a larue stealth upper or have one on order, thats why I caviat with if money and AVAILABILITY were not an issue [:)] those would be my personal choices

rockm4
10 May 2009, 16:07
Shit I guess I'll start off a template so it's easy to see what the winning components are. Will reply when I have a little more time and thought.

Handguard:Troy mrc 11 in.
Reason: thicker alum. than others on the market, not wimpy.

Sights: Troy buis both front & rear
Reason: service,less parts to fail & ease of use.

Optic: Aimpoint ML3 2 mil. dot. hens dolt 2.5 mag poboy both in larue mounts.
Reason:Ease of use and fits my needs.

Grip: Magpull MIAD.
Reason: fits my hand better than the others Ive tryrd.

Stock: Magpull CRT.
Reason:

Barrel including length: CMMG M 10 bull @ 1'' & 3.1 lbs.
Reason: I hate lite weight barrels, to fast to heat up and lose poi.

LPK/Trigger: CMT.
Reason: No worries about failure.

Buffer: H1
Reason:It works well with my set up, less bounce, less beating of the tube.

BCG: CMT
Upper Rec: VLTOR MUR-1

Reason:Personal preference ,No wimpy parts.
Lower Rec: DPMS
Reason: Its one that I had . probably will buy a tactical invitations billet.
Magazine: 25 P-MAGS
Reason: Durability, ease of use.

Lights/lasers/etc: S/F m900 b
Reason: I like it & it had a good price, $150.00 new.

Charging Handle: CMT
Reason: no reason for a fancy expensive one.

Flash Hider/Comp:PWS FS556.
Reason: No muzzle climb 0.

Misc Stuff rail covers etc:Magpull XTR, Larue / harris bipod, Troy SPS, KNS anti-rotational pin set Gen II.
Reason: This set up works for me and is dependable and only 11 lbs. Lite compared to the m-60 I use to carry with an xm177e1 as backup.

Stickman
10 May 2009, 20:24
Here is the completed upper....


http://stickman.rainierarms.com/galleries/Vltor/0O2P8817%201028%20Stick.jpg

nthwsthntr
16 May 2009, 02:50
Handguard: DD Lite 9.0 (not the Omega – I want my free floating hand guard in one pc, not two.)
Reason: Lite and durable

Sights: Any well machined flip up…
Reason: I’m with Stickman on this one – optics may change per shooter and task.

Optic: Trijicon ACOG
Reason: A. I love the one I have B. What bigcoastie said hits nuts on.

Grip: Magpul MIAD
Reason: Comfort, adjustability and durability

Stock: Magpul UBR
Reason: That stock if SOLID.

Barrel including length: Sabre Defense/ Shilen / Lothar Walter 18” SPR
Reason: Extended range/capabilities and still quick enough to use in tight quarters.

LPK/Trigger: JP Fire Control System 4-4.5 #’s
Reason: JP’s are well made and if we’re gonna beat the hell outta this thing I wouldn’t want a modular or a “drop in” trigger group. If something breaks in the field I can fix it if I’ve brought backup.

Buffer: As per the buffer…Open, but probably on the heavier side/ As per the spring…def CS spring.
Reason: CS springs are duty rated for 500,000 compression cycles at maximum performance.

BCG: Fail Zero w/ exo coat
Reason: 50,000 lube-free rounds on AR-15’s.

Upper Rec: Vltor Mur
Reason: I’m a fan of milled parts and Vltor has slightly thicker walls.

Lower Rec: Either Tactical Innovations T15 BDX or POF 415 G3
Reason: Milled and Ext. finger flares

Magazine: Magpul
Reason: If I can drive over it and it still functions…nuff said.

Lights/lasers/etc: Debatable
Reason: I don’t like too much stuff hangin off my weapon…just more weight and more stuff to break.

Charging Handle: Open w/ bias: milled w/ Tac Latch G2
Reason: Note: I would be prone to go with a PRI Gas Buster IF we’re suppressed or short barreled if not…I don’t believe it makes a difference.

Flash Hider/Comp: Tromix Shark Break
Reason: When I stick it in your leg and twist…you’ll squeal and then tell me what I want to hear.

Misc Stuff rail covers etc: DD Ladders
Reason: Comfort

Gas Piston System: Yes or No: Yes – Adams Arms
Reason: A. I wanna see how durable they really are. This is a test right? B. I believe…I am not sure, that they are easier to work on in the field. C. LWRC is over priced. D. TNW is still relatively new.

jp0319
16 May 2009, 11:29
I can't seem to find any info for that company.

Larue Markets an identical version of this

Stickman
16 May 2009, 11:57
Larue Markets an identical version of this


I give up, what out of the 9 pages are you quoting me from? I have no context or idea what you are referring to.

zukiii
26 May 2009, 08:47
quick question stick...

will the aac spr mount install w/out any problems on a lightweight barrel? i know that the mount covers up a small portion of the barrel and i didnt know if it would cause a problem because of the smaller barrel profile.

thanks

Audiophiliac
26 May 2009, 21:04
Stick, after going back and browsing all the pages in the thread, I have failed to put together a defined list of what ended up in the built rifle. I know you said you would not publish a "list", but maybe it would be a good idea to post at least something in the first post of the thread as a quick reference? Otherwise, I would appreciate a list PMed to me just to satisfy my own curiosities. :) Thanks! Looks good!

Stickman
26 May 2009, 21:28
quick question stick...

will the aac spr mount install w/out any problems on a lightweight barrel? i know that the mount covers up a small portion of the barrel and i didnt know if it would cause a problem because of the smaller barrel profile.

thanks



I'm not sure, I haven't tried one myself. While it would engage the threads without any problem, it would create a gap between the thinner barrel and FS.

Stickman
26 May 2009, 21:31
Stick, after going back and browsing all the pages in the thread, I have failed to put together a defined list of what ended up in the built rifle. I know you said you would not publish a "list", but maybe it would be a good idea to post at least something in the first post of the thread as a quick reference? Otherwise, I would appreciate a list PMed to me just to satisfy my own curiosities. :) Thanks! Looks good!


I think thats a good idea. I need to gather up a final item listing, and come up with the whats and whys. Not everything will be perfect for everyone, and I'm more than willing to admit that not everything is perfect in my own eyes. What I do think we ended up with is a highly effective, and well laid out carbine. The next part will be seeing how well it stands up to a beating.

jp0319
28 May 2009, 07:52
I can't seem to find any info for that company.


I give up, what out of the 9 pages are you quoting me from? I have no context or idea what you are referring to.

I am sorry stick, some times I post a reply on something I read on page 1 when a thread is 9 deep my bad, I was quoting page 4 post 49 I believe. about the charging handle. You said you were not familiar with the company who supposedly made that charging handle. I was just saying that Larue Markets an Identical charging handle to the one pictured. That was all, again I apoligize.

joffe
28 May 2009, 08:06
Just click the little orange icons next to the name and it will bring you to the quoted post.

New fangled forum internets stuff.. [BD]

LittleLebowski
29 May 2009, 07:23
One of the Sgts pointed out to me that he was recently told of a low
speed team that ran convoys, and didn't clean their weapons for months
at a time unless they were involved in a shooting engagement. This is
not intended to be a slam against guys running convoys, but this is a
good example of poor leadership and training. How can these guys come
back and complain when they slather a weapon with CLP, then run around
with it in the dust for a couple months, let sludge build up and
congeal, the bitch about weapon issues?!

Painful truth in this quote from Stick that many soldiers will not admit to.

Great project, Stick.

Stickman
29 May 2009, 07:27
LL,

Check your PM when you get a chance.

Uglyduck
1 July 2009, 14:50
Anything new Stick?

Stickman
4 July 2009, 16:43
Anything new Stick?


The upper is out currently being shot by someone else. It may be awhile before I find a UBR for this, so I figured we could get started with the upper and go from there.

TheLandlord
22 July 2009, 08:20
Stick: What LPK did you go with for the build?

dragonfly
22 July 2009, 16:55
What barrel was used in the end?

Maybe a final rifle specout?

Stickman
22 July 2009, 21:54
The barrel is a Noveske N4 light barrel, its a 16" midlength. The upper is a Noveske/ Vltor VIS.

The lower is still not completed, and the upper is being passed around between individuals currently. The consensus seemed to be that the lower should wear a UBR, and all of the UBRs I have are preproduction models. I don't feel it would be right to do testing with a non-production piece as it would not represent what other people would be getting.

The Fire Control Group (FCG) is the Geiselle SSA, and the lower that its seen most of its time with be has been a Noveske FA lower wearing the Magpul ACS stock.



Here is a picture of how I have been shooting it, other shooters are using their lowers for right now. When things get finalized, the weapon will be sprayed FDE.

This project has taken longer than I had originally thought, but thats how things go sometimes. This will be a long term test, so a slow start won't effect the overall picture.


http://stickman.rainierarms.com/galleries/Magpul%204/IMG_9612%201024%20stick.jpg

dragonfly
22 July 2009, 23:37
Thanks for the update.

How did you acquire an N4 barrel? I was not aware they were available for purchase, rather only the N4 SS barrels.

P.S. ACS: drool.

puffy93
22 July 2009, 23:44
Thanks for the update.

How did you acquire an N4 barrel? I was not aware they were available for purchase, rather only the N4 SS barrels.
http://dragonfly-media.com/_img/toolbox/sig/dfmini.png

P.S. ACS: drool.

You can get them from Grant at G&R tactical but it has to be with an upper reciever. I think.

Stickman
23 July 2009, 06:01
Thanks for the update.

How did you acquire an N4 barrel?

P.S. ACS: drool.


When I'm not playing city cop, I have positive interaction on a regular basis with many of the manufacturers in the weapon community.

Army Chief
23 July 2009, 06:30
Understatement of the year, there.

On the other hand, Stick does as much or more for these manufacturers than they do for him, so it is definitely a two-way street.

I've learned to stop asking questions and just enjoy the magic. :)

AC

rav3nwulfe
11 August 2009, 20:38
I've enjoyed reading this thread, it was stimulating to the brain. I think you came to some good conclusions. I am interested to see what happens with the MBUSs since I have them on my AR and have kinda wondered about their durability, unwilling to throw mine around to see the result. Oh, and I finally registered, so hooyah to my first post. Great site.

Stickman
11 August 2009, 21:46
I've enjoyed reading this thread, it was stimulating to the brain. I think you came to some good conclusions. I am interested to see what happens with the MBUSs since I have them on my AR and have kinda wondered about their durability, unwilling to throw mine around to see the result. Oh, and I finally registered, so hooyah to my first post. Great site.



Welcome to the board, if you haven't checked out the below thread, its probably my favorite. Feel free to join it, I think as a board, everyone who has contributed has done a great job of providing info that will be a resource for others.


http://www.weaponevolution.com/forum/showthread.php?t=817


As far as the MBUS are concerned, I'm currently using them on my duty weapon, so that should give an idea of how much faith I have in them.

Rated21R
12 August 2009, 08:57
I will be following this thread for a while as I am looking to build a heavy use AR (seeing as I will probably on have one for quite some time) an want it to last. Good info here. Thanks.

Stickman
12 August 2009, 13:11
Testing is moving along nicely with this project. At this point, its only the upper thats being put through its paces. It should be going to military ranges next. Unfortunately, the BCG that we are testing is a semi-auto, so that rules out FA testing at this point.

No problems of any kind noted so far. The Fail Zero BCG has surprised a lot of us, I had thought the coating would be hype, but it really does run well.

ryanm
12 August 2009, 15:54
Stick

Do you know if the ACS will be released in bulk or limited run? Will this be the new UBR in terms of unobtanium or are they going to flood with ACS?

I'm glad to hear the FZ BCG is running well!

Stickman
12 August 2009, 17:18
Stick

Do you know if the ACS will be released in bulk or limited run? Will this be the new UBR in terms of unobtanium or are they going to flood with ACS?

I'm glad to hear the FZ BCG is running well!



The ACS has been released , and its easier manufacturing ensure that it should be MUCH more available than the UBR.

armakraut
12 August 2009, 18:46
It would be cool if magpul did a fixed UBR like the sully stock that comes standard in an 8'' configuration, but would also accept buttpad extensions.

kanaka
11 September 2009, 01:13
lookin solid.

Is the compM4 more rock solid than the T1?

Stickman
19 September 2009, 14:05
lookin solid.

Is the compM4 more rock solid than the T1?


Good question, and I'm not sure. The CompM4 is obviously larger, but I don't know whether that translates into a more protected electronics package or not.

mlosi762
25 September 2009, 07:17
Know you're running with the PRI latch, but have you looked into the BCM Gunfighter latch for it? Built pretty solid, and about half the $$$ of the PRI

TehLlama
25 September 2009, 11:45
Indeed - I'm looking at the Mod3 with RTV Silicone instead of the M84 myself.

bigcoastie
25 September 2009, 12:37
The Bravo Gunfighter is a pretty sweet charging handle I went w/ the mod 4 and couldn't have been happier, I was running a badger tac latch on one of the three and replaced all of mine w/ mod 4's now.

adrenaline151
25 September 2009, 15:41
I've been using a PRI GB for a couple of years, and got to try out a Gunfighter Mod 4 a few days ago. I have one on order and the PRI is going into the spare parts drawer. I like the PRI fine, and it's much better than a standard CH, but since I added the BAD lever, it feels like it's adding a lot of torque to the GB when I'm pushing up on the BAD to lock the bolt back, and I'm not pushing hard. I tried the same maneuver with the gunfighter and no problem. I didn't think I'd feel a CH that I would say felt more rugged than the GB, but the gunfighter does, to me.

Bryant
26 September 2009, 23:15
You can't build an AR as reliable as an AK. To do so would require a complete change to the system that currently is not on the market. To be close it would be a hybrid concept.

Bryant
27 September 2009, 10:23
Not to be impolite or a sharpshooter but I think that's the belief the WEVO staff intends to dispell by conducting this project


I was an AK guy long before I got into AR's and remained an AK guy even after being indoctrinated in the military. If anything the service helped to solidify my original belief in the simplicity of the AK system. I've built my fair share of AR's but have not seen one run as reliable as the most basic of AK rifles. I am a firm believer in the piston variant AR systems, however to truly design an AR as reliable as an AK it would take monumental design changes to the current system as a whole.

First the bolt would have to be reduced to a maximum three lug system, the extractor widened by nearly half as much more and undercut such that it gained full retention of the casing groove. The bolt itself would have the cam pin diameter cut by at least a third similar to some of the Knight's upgrades, in order to strengthen the bolt. The return system would have to utilize a captured spring assembly similar to an FN Para 50:63, since the buttstock tube is one of the weakest links on the AR rifle. The gas system would have to be a short stroke independent piston stabilized in a gas piston tube with an adjustable gas system- again similar to a FAL or even a SIG style system. The bolt carrier would have to have sand cuts added similar to an L1A1 to allow debris to clear the channel. The barrel would have to be a hammer forged chrome lined machine gun grade barrel which luckily exists in the Noveske line. Pretty much by the time you finished the project you would no longer have an AR but instead have an XCR or SIG 556 style rifle.

Now if you want to truly test the AR then you would conduct the same trials that some of the Com block countries conducted when they adopted the AK design. I truly don't believe an AR could stand up to that amount of abuse but it would be interesting. Drag the rifle 5 kilometers to the range behind a truck (Soviet), drop it off a 4 story building (Soviet), run over it high speed with a truck (Soviet), bury it in a creek bed for a month by accident (N. Viet Kong), bury the rifle in the snow in negative -40 degree temps (Alaska State HWY Patrol), freeze the rifle in ice (Swiss military), run 89K rounds without stoppage only to finally stop the testing due to a sheared extractor with four crushed shell casings laying in the back of the receiver (Yugo), run the rifle over 300K rounds (Bulgarian milled/Arsenal museum), and the final test would be to use the weapon in sixty years of combat (type 1 and type 2 Soviet rifles found in Afghanistan). Now those tests of course would be the extreme end of the reliability spectrum that one could hope to achieve but I hope it would humble anyone who honestly believes they could build an AR as reliable as an AK- it simply isn't possible.

However a piston has proven to be four times more reliable than DI as the military has shown with some of their sand testing. However despite the piston upgrade, I have not owned a piston AR that could be fed a steady diet of Russian surplus without the occasional FTE or FTF. If a system only functions on high end newly manufactured brass cased ammo, then it still wouldn't be fair to compare it to an AK system that has never even seen such fancy brass casing in it's lifetime of use. Basically, building an AR as reliable as an AK is a monumental task.

B [:)]

Uglyduck
27 September 2009, 11:26
I didn't like the context of my OP Bryant thats why I removed it. I should've been more direct and asked if that was an opinion formulated from experience or not. Thanks for your followup post and clarification on your stance. And to be clear I'm not an AK guy and don't own one so this thread is educational for me.

Bryant
29 September 2009, 09:18
I didn't like the context of my OP Bryant thats why I removed it. I should've been more direct and asked if that was an opinion formulated from experience or not. Thanks for your followup post and clarification on your stance. And to be clear I'm not an AK guy and don't own one so this thread is educational for me.


I have an LMT piston AR that runs beautifully. At times I've ran 3K rounds between cleaning. However I've also seen it choke on cheap Russian ammo and seen it have random malfunctions. To me the piston AR is about as reliable of an AR as you are going to find. However it is still an AR. I've owned dozens of AK's and now only about six, however of the ones I've owned- I've only seen a handful of malfunctions in over a decade. AK's are just tough ass weapons, even the HK 91 choked in the sub -40 degree temps when the Alaska State Hwy Patrol was testing for certain rifles to be used as their primary rifle- yet HK's are known to be extremely reliable.

I'm not knocking the AR design, it is extremely versatile, accurate, and ergonomic. Hell I've owned'/built about a dozen AR's, built about a dozen FAL's, owned HK's, M1A variants, and many AK's over the years. All have strength's and weaknesses.

The AK's strength is simply it's a rugged little machine and it would take a hell of a design team to build an AR equally reliable. Most of us would never fight in negative -40 degree temps, fire 89K rounds through a stamped AK rifle, fight for six decades of combat, run over our rifles with a truck, or ever drop it off a building. So really, the AK's reliability is somewhat pointless.

B

mlosi762
29 September 2009, 09:47
Valid points all. To compare an AR to an AK is like comparing apples and oranges, or cats and dogs. I think the whole point of this discussion/project is to come up with the most reliable, hard running, AR possible.

There's no argument that an AK is inherently more reliable. Hell, one could open it up, pour some super glue, throw in some sand, rocks, drop a dog turd in it, then pitch it in the ocean, and it would still work. Like some have said, it's designed to require minimal maintenance. However, you average AK is crap in comparison to an AR's accuracy and versatility.

As someone who has first hand experience with an AR fighting against the elements of the "baby powder" dust of the middle east, I would rather go into combat with a well maintained M4 than an AK any day.

But alas, it's what I've been trained on and developed muscle memory with, so I'm comfortable with the platform. If I was fighting for the other side, and used the "pray and spray" tactics, I guess I would opt for the AK.

Will an AR ever be capable of extreme reliability close to AK standards? Doubtful. But damned if we don't try and push the platform to extreme limits. I think there is enough collective knowledge and technical knowhow on this forum to give it one hell of a shot. Cheers!

Bryant
29 September 2009, 14:36
In all honesty, if I was going into a dusty, sandy type place- I'd take either a Polish or Russian 5.56 AK outfitted with an Aimpoint and a handguard rail system. If I was forced to take an M16, then I'd take an M4 with a piston set up, preferably an LMT or Colt, with a free float rail, and an Aimpoint. Either would be a trustworthy rifle. The AK having the edge for reliablity, the AR having the edge for ergonomics, and both equally being sub 2MOA weapons. I really don't see how you could go wrong with either one.

To "custom up" the AR, I would go with a Colt or LMT M4, DD Omega piston rail, Gen II ARES GSR-35, Aimpoint 2MOA M3 or M4, CMT buttstock, Bobro front grip, Tango Down pistol grip, Wilderness Giles/Aug style two point tactical sling, and maybe some QD swivels.

The AK101 or Polish Beryl would be outfitted with an Aimpoint 2MOA M3 or M4, Kreb's adjustable peep aperture rear sight, MidWest railed handguards, Bobro front grip, and in addition with the AK 101- a Molot Ultima Low Profile Picatinny rail mount.


B

fmkenner
18 October 2009, 02:53
Testing is moving along nicely with this project. At this point, its only the upper thats being put through its paces. It should be going to military ranges next. Unfortunately, the BCG that we are testing is a semi-auto, so that rules out FA testing at this point.

No problems of any kind noted so far. The Fail Zero BCG has surprised a lot of us, I had thought the coating would be hype, but it really does run well.

I'm interested to see if the Fail Zero BCG is worth the money. Do you have any final opions yet? I've often find what is too good to be true usually is.

Gator
21 October 2009, 22:48
Handguard: DD Mk18
Reason: Very rigid mounting and 2pc design makes it easily serviceable.

Sights: TROY
Reason: Heard nothing but good about them.

Optic: Micro T-1 on Larue
Reason: Great optic, small enough to leave room for possible magnifier.

Grip: MIAD
Reason: Tough, very Ergonomic and easily customizable to fit user's needs.

VFG: TD Stubby
Reason: All I need as I do not grip the whole thing and is very solid.

Stock: Milspec CTR
Reason: Simple and I think the guarded release lever + lock feature are important. Also has the QD option should you later decide to go that route.

Barrel including length: Noveske Recce
Reason: Same as others have said -- Hammer Forged; M249 steel and Chrome

LPK/Trigger: Colt FA
Reason: Good machining = great fit, finish, and function. No bursts -- too crowded plus you have your finger for that.

Buffer: H, or H2 if the weapon allows it.
Reason: I want to maximize the efficiency of the mid-length system.

BCG: BCM
Reason: it's BCM :) although I would like to see the Failzero tested.

Upper Rec: Larue Stealth
Reason: It's billet and basically a beefed up version of the standard forged but at the same time, not overly beefy. Reinforced where it counts if you will.

Lower Rec: No auto billets so Colt, Noveske or any top tier FA lower.
Reason: FOr peace of mind -- I know they all probably use the same CAD file but atleast they have better QC.

Magazine: PMAG
Reason: Most reliable to date.

Lights/lasers/etc: Surefire G2Z
Reason: Simple and I know it wont slip off in the event of a fall or maybe even sustained FA fire.

Charging Handle: BCM Gunfighter
Reason: FOr the reinforcements

Flash Hider/Comp: Knights QD
Reason: Simplicity of the A2 with the benefit of a drop in suppressor.

Misc Stuff rail covers etc: Magpul Ladder
Reason: Low profile and good fit

Misc Stuff rail covers etc: Magpul enhanced trigger guard
Reason: for glove use.

gunnut284
22 October 2009, 02:14
Handguard: Larue
Reason: Haven't seen anything I liked better.

Sights: Open
Reason: Troy, Magpul or even YHM QDS would probably be fine.

Optic: ACOG in Larue mount
Reason: Durable

Grip: MIAD or MOE
Reason: Fit me best

VFG: Larue FUG (or TD Stubby in QD if available)
Reason: Sometimes I remove it for certain applications.

Stock: UBR
Reason: Solid, durable. I might be open to the ACS I just haven't played with one.

Barrel including length: 16" medium contour SS mid gas melonite
Reason: good combo of durability and accuracy

LPK/Trigger: Colt/Geisselle SSA
Reason: Sweet feel and good rep

Buffer: open
Reason: probably H

BCG: Open
Reason: as long as it is good quality

Upper Rec: Mega Billet
Reason: Mega makes impressive stuff

Lower Rec: Mega billet
Reason: same as upper (though most quality forged upper/lower combos would be fine too).

Magazine: open
Reason: I'll probably use several types though mainly PMags

Lights/lasers/etc: Surefire 6P LED in Larue
Reason: Simple

Charging Handle: BCM Gunfighter or PRI GB
Reason: stronger than standard

Flash Hider/Comp: open
Reason: depends on what suppressor I went with (maybe a Surefire brake)

Rail covers etc: open
Reason: something low profile

Misc Stuff: Magpul enhanced trigger guard
Reason: smooth in front edge of grip

TheLandlord
25 October 2009, 08:55
The gas system would have to be a short stroke independent piston stabilized in a gas piston tube with an adjustable gas system- again similar to a FAL or even a SIG style system.


Bryant, doesn't this describe the SR-556?

markm
22 January 2010, 18:19
Its the Bobro mount.


That's a good looking mount. It's sorta half cantilevered out.

markm
23 January 2010, 14:54
Testing is moving along nicely with this project. At this point, its only the upper thats being put through its paces.

Send that upper on down to AZ and I can take it on a desert combat training mission. ;)

B4RAZ
5 April 2010, 06:53
Hey guys, I know im coming in a little late here, but how about trying a Spikes Tactical nickel boron plated BCG? This looks like it should be a very durable piece of equipment.

Aragorn
5 April 2010, 07:01
The Spike's nickel boron is almost the exact same as the Failzero BCG that is already being used. The Failzero should give you a very good impression of how both perform.

Boss Hogg
11 April 2010, 17:46
Here are my humble suggestions.

Barrel: 16" BCM mid or 14.5" Daniel Defense mid, hammer forged
FH: AAC Blackout (pinned on the 14.5") Great flash suppression. No comps or brakes. They don't hide flash and if you're worried about 5.56 recoil, hit the gym. YHM Phantom if you want to keep cost down
Rail: LaRue, or if you like round tubes, Blackheart International's new 12".
BCG: Fail Zero lives up to the hype. I can't believe how clean it runs.
Charging handle: BCM Gunfighter
Upper: Vltor MUR, or BCM if you want to keep cost down
Optic: Still young, but I like the EOTech XPS. For a magnified optic, TA11H "horseshoe" ACOG. For budget optic, the new Nikon M-223 series sounds great.
Rail panels: Knights
Vertical foregrip: LaRue FUG

Lower:
Stock: Vltor iMod. Can't beat the value or cheek weld
Sling: VCAS or VTAC- whoever wins the grudge match
Grip: Colt A2 or if you want something slightly different the Stark grip.
Trigger: Geissele SSA, or whatever trigger feels best to you.

Tom in Texas
23 May 2010, 12:34
Just bought a Geissele trigger.. was easy to install and feels nice..Also.. Bill Geissele was fantastic about calling me to talk me through one issue i was having while installing.. (On a Saturday)

Highly recommend this trigger and company..

if you dont have a geissele 2 stage trigger... GET ONE

Essayons
20 June 2010, 09:43
I've been kicking around the idea of building an AR15 for no other purpose than to use as an absolute heavy use/ abuse weapon. I don't mean the gun you take out and shoot fast, I mean an overbuilt AR15 that will stand up to any use or abuse you can realistically put a carbine through.

Think drop testing of components, thing about a carbine that will soak up loads of users worst punishment, and come back for more. Think along the lines of an AR15 that is going to get treated like a conscript treats their AK.


What components would you select, and why? As this project moves along, we will get plenty of pictures of everything, and we will talk about what we chose, why we chose it, and what other options could have filled the bill.

I'm open to just about any idea. This will be a project that should serve as a long standing platform for further testing of assorted components, but to start out, we need a solid base. This will be a total custom platform, no preassembled uppers, or complete weapons.

Everything from lowers, stocks, sights, buffers, uppers, barrels, BCGs, and whatever else you can think of are on the table.



What parts would you chose? What do you want to see used?







I'd start with a good chrome lined CHF barrel--probably tne Noveske N4--for long-term durability and abuse resistance.

I'd use a 7075-T6 upper with some extra material where it may help (e.g. VLTOR's MUR or Larue's Stealth)--we're building for hard use, not light weight.

I'd use the best bolt carrier group I could get my hands on. It's been a while since I read up on bolts and carriers, but a mil-spec M16 bolt carrier group--maybe with one of the "enhanced" 9310 bolts--with the latest and greatest Ion-Bond or Tennifer/Diamond Black type surface treatments. The LMT Enhanced BCG is another option.

The receiver extension seems like one of the weak links in the system, so I'd use a thicker one. I'd probably use Magpul UBR to get the Entry Receiver Extension tube) with a heavy buffer--maybe Spikes. I'd probably use a CS buffer spring. Something more idiot proof than the UBR would be required for the conscripts, though, IMO.

I have a POF P415 Gen III 7075-T6 billet lower. It's even beefier than the current USGI lower and fully ambidextrous. I'd use a White Oak LPK w/o trigger or hammer and a Geiselle SSA or SFA trigger--I've uses the White Oak/Geiselle SSA combo on several builds and am totally satisfied.

Rail-wise, I don't know. I have a VIS, which is a good upper and rail, but it's heavy. It does allow you to clean the outside of the barrel easily (as does Colt's new monolithic upper), but I've wondered about the lack of ventilation holes under the barrel.

ucrt
22 June 2010, 12:16
Testing is moving along nicely with this project. At this point, its only the upper thats being put through its paces. It should be going to military ranges next. Unfortunately, the BCG that we are testing is a semi-auto, so that rules out FA testing at this point.

No problems of any kind noted so far. The Fail Zero BCG has surprised a lot of us, I had thought the coating would be hype, but it really does run well.

------------------------------------------

Very informative thread. Any updates on the testing?

.

Stickman
22 June 2010, 16:45
UCRT,

Chugging along, but nothing ultra exciting to update with. The Fail Zero BCG runs very well, and it appears to have a effect on the rest of the testing. The carbine, specifically the upper just goes and goes.

MoxyDave
24 June 2010, 22:20
I am very pleased to read good things about the FailZero parts. That is really exciting technology.

Darkop
6 November 2010, 21:05
Nothing posted since 24 June. Any updates on round count. Did the upper ever get a lower? If the upper needs cold weather testing let me know.

Until that day,
Darkop

LRB45
30 December 2010, 05:57
The Fail Zero BCG sounds like a good one especially for ease of cleaning and if lubed would be slick as snot. However if any one ever frequents the Lightfighter forum, they would shoot you down for using it.

I know I'm happy with my LMT BCG but in the future for another build the FZ would be considered if money wasn't so tight.

Awesome forum you guys have here also.

Paulo_Santos
30 December 2010, 08:35
I've been following this thread and this is what I have settled on for me.

Sights: ARMS #71 or the Magpul GenII MBUS
Reason: Not willing to spend $200+ on a BACK UP, when the ARMS/Magpul are durable enough.

Optic: Multiple Optics in QD Mounts.
CQB Optic: EOTech XPS with the ACCUCAM mount. I'd get the EXPS, but it sits up too high for me.
Multi-Purpose Optic: TA33 ACOG with Green Horseshoe Reticle in a QD Mount, preforably Bobro. I prefer the TA33 over a 1x4 or a red dot with magnifier because the ACOG pretty much does everything that the others do, but it is lighter.
Variable Scope: SWFA 3x9 if I didn't need illumination or the IOR 2.5x10 illuminated FFP scope. Both in QD Mounts. I like both of these scopes because they are FFP, have the matching Mil reticle/Mil turrets, and they are affordable compared to other scopes in their class.
Reason: I tried the do everything optics such as the 1x4/1x6 and the red dots with the magnifier and they were all compromise optics.

Grip: MIAD.
Reason: Like the different grips and the trigger guard.

VFG: Grip-Pod LE.
Reason: Affordable, tough, light, and great for shooting in the prone.

Stock: Vltor I-Mod or E-Mod.
Reason: Very comfortable, affordable, and great for us living in the Commy States because they are easy to pin and you can cover up the pin.

Barrel: LMT MRP 16" Chrome line Midlength. Could also get the LMT MRP 16" SS barrel if I wanted more accuracy.
Reason: Very accurate and good weight. Could always reprofile if need.

Trigger: Geisselle SSA.
Reason: The best combat 2-stage available.

Buffer/Spring: Superior Shooting Spring and the heaviest buffer that will cycle the weakest loads.
Reason: Been running this set-up for years and works great.

Upper: Monolithic Upper. I prefer the LMT CQB MRP because it is convenient for me and I can use the LMT Piston Conversion, but I also like the Mega with the QD attachment points.
Reason: Monolithic upper are the way to go. Since I prefer to have FF Handguards, I prefer the Monolithic Uppers because they are the stiffest and I prefer to run the front and rear BUIS, so I don't have to worry about alignment issues.

Lower: Any quality lower.
Reason: They are basically all the same quality.

Magazines: Magpul Windowed.
Reason: They are the best.

Lights: Surefire G2 LED, preforably in a QD Mount.
Reason: Affordable and works.

Flash Hider/Comp: BattleComp or the FSC556 (Smith Vortex if I could have one.)
Reason: Since I live in NJ, I can only have Muzzle brakes, so the above two are my top choices because they aren't as obnoxious as others.

Rail covers: Tangodown.
Reason: Have been using them for years.

usmcvet
15 January 2011, 12:22
I'm building it right now. Colt A1 slick side upper. BCM 11.5" bbl with fixed fsb. The rear sight will have a CSACT Aperture and the FSP will be tritium. MOE handguards. A BFG uwl sling attachment with a BFG padded two point sling. X300 Light on the MOE. The lower will be a Sully fixed stock. I would use a DD or Noveske lower and a DD or G&R tactical LPK. I would have an H/H2 buffer. I like the MOE pistol grip and trigger guard. A stack of 30 PMags to go with it. There is not much to break and I've eliminated a bunch of moving parts. The only thing requiring batteries is the light and I will have two spare in the pistol grip. I will add either a Vortex or AAC flash hider to the gun.

HeavyDuty
15 January 2011, 13:15
I think my current build in progress may meet the spirit of "extreme use", at least as I interpret it. My goal is a simple, lightweight, durable weapon that will be my main go-to for just about anything - classes, recreational shooting, home defense, SHTF - whatever. It's getting there, hopefully it will be shootable in a month or two as budget allows. It's a 16" midlength.

Sights: Fixed FSB and Hahn Precision folding rear.
Reason: I much prefer a fixed front for durability; I've found the Hahn Precision rear to be just about the perfect BUIS for my tastes because it has an A1 style windage adjustment (no worries about inadvertent windage changes), positive spring detents up and down, a well-designed attachment method and a very low profile - it's pretty much bombproof.

Optic: Aimpoint ML3 in a LaRue LT-150 mount.
Reason: Exceptional durability and battery life; the LaRue mount is extremely well designed and manufactured, plus it includes storage for a backup battery.

Grip: Magpul MOE.
Reason: Simple, and it fits my hand well.

Stock: Magpul ACS.
Reason: I've pretty much standardized on the ACS for most of my weapons. The cheek weld and balance are good for me, plus it appears to be extremely durable. I also like the storage compartment - at a minimum I keep a broken shell extractor tucked into mine. I'd like to see if I can find a multi-piece cleaning rod that would stow in one of the battery compartments, too.

Barrel: Daniel Defense 16" lightweight profile midlength.
Reason: Light, chrome lined, hammer forged. I've had good luck with DD barrels. I decided to go 16" over 14.5" for more flexibility down the road in muzzle devices.

Trigger: Currently RRA, but I'm considering changing to one of the Spike's coated trigger kits.
Reason: I want to stick to a milspec design, and the Spike's is getting good reviews.

Buffer/Spring: Vltor A5 receiver extension and standard buffer with a Colt rifle spring.
Reason: I'm intrigued by the reports from users of the A5 and want in. There seems to be a real benefit to the design.

Upper: Daniel Defense A4 with a BCM Gunfighter Mod 5 charging handle and BCM BCG.
Reason: Well made in spec upper; also because it came attached to my chosen barrel. (I actually bought a complete upper for once in my life.) I'm a convert to the small latch Gunfighter due to my experiences with it on one of my carbines; the BCM BCG is a gold standard component and I saw no reason to try anything different this time.

Lower: AGP Arms.
Reason: A really nicely machined, well finished lower that doesn't have cartoony rollmarks (a pet peeve of mine). Also because they will do customized engraving; I have several with custom serial number, custom caliber markings and no FA position (an issue in this silly state.)

Magazines: Magpul Maglevel PMags.
Reason: As good as it gets, inexpensive.

Lights: Surefire G2 LED in a Innovative Weapons Components MOE side mount.
Reason: Decent quality light, well designed lightweight mount that puts the light where I need it without the use of pressure switches.

Flash Hider/Comp: Micor 1N7.
Reason: I prefer closed end muzzle devices; the Micor seems to be a good balance between flash suppression, compensation (even though it's not really a comp), price and weight. This choice may change over time and is one of the reasons I finally decided to go 16" instead of 14.5'.

Handguard: MOE midlength
Reason: No need for a rail; I prefer the hand feel of the MOE.

Slinging: Boonie Packer 2P-TQA with one of the new IWC 2 to 1 Point Tri-Glides and either a Noveske QD endplate and an IWC handguard mount or a Magpul ASAP and a IWC handguard mount, still deciding.
Reason: I like my Boonie Packer slings and see no reason to change. I'm torn between mounts; at the moment, I have an ASAP mounted but may change to QD. In my opinion QD finally became an option for me with Earl's release of the 2 to 1 Point Tri-Glide, I really like being able to convert my two points to single point as needed.

UWone77
13 August 2011, 04:17
Stick was nice enough to let me have this upper for a little shooting. I'll be shooting it dry with just the Fail Zero, and see how many rounds it takes until I see a stoppage. I'll post any important updates periodically.

JohnnyRambo
1 October 2011, 11:45
Handguard: Daniel Defense Lite Rail
Reason: Securely attaches to receiver, very little chance of coming loose

Sights: REAR: ARMS 40-L Rear Low Profile flip up / FRONT : KAC Micro adjustable front flip up
Reason: ARMS rear has a height over bore notch for close quarters to account for height over bore. KAC front is easily adjustable and does not require a tool.

Optic: Aimpoint Comp M3 2moa or Aimpoint Micro T-1
Reason: Reliability! Both are my top choices. Each has it's own advantage. T-1 is very light and low profile but has a 4moa dot. Comp M3 has a 2moa option which covers less of the target if shooting at a distance and allows for slightly better accuracy. Both are NVG compatible.

Grip: Magpul MOE / MOE Plus
Reason: Excellent design and has a secure storage compartment inside with different options on core inserts custom made for spare parts or batteries. The tang in the rear allows the shooters hand to rest a little farther back while gripping to naturally allow the index finger pad to rest comfortably on the trigger face without having to bend your finger too much.

Stock: VLTOR IMOD - STANDARD Milspec Version
Reason: Textured rubber pad has excellent traction and shape which allows the user to go from low ready to on target position with ease. Q/D Socket built in, removable storage (battery etc..) compartments on the sides. Overall best design on the market today. This is the only stock that I like better than the LMT Sopmod.

Barrel including length: Centurion Arms 16" Hammer Forged Barrel
Reason: Machine gun grade chrome lining. Custom contour profile to reduce weight. Will last several times longer than a standard barrel.

LPK/Trigger: Daniel Defense LPK
Reason: Made by DD to highest standards possible. Not a repackaged lpk like most sell. Made entirely in house by DD.

Upgraded Trigger: Wilson Combat TTU drop in trigger
Reason: Installs very easily, well designed, and has a super light reset so you can shoot very quickly. In the right hands it sounds like full auto when rapid fired.

Buffer: Spikes Tactical ST-2 Heavy Buffer
Reason: Billet aluminum body with tungsten powder and milspec bumper

BCG: LMT F/A bcg
Reason: The definition of MIL SPEC. No gimmics, no useless coatings, just time tested reliability.

Upper Rec: Mega Machine LLC
Reason: When mated with a Mega lower receiver there is a very tight lockup between the two. No wiggle!

Lower Rec: Mega Machine LLC
Reason: Precision made of billet 7075 aluminum to very exact tolerances, anodizing done above and beyond industry standards, flared magwell for easy mag insertion, textured grip surface at front exterior of magwell. When mated with a matching Mega upper receiver there is virtually no wiggle. And if mated with another manufacturer, there is a friction screw to assist in a snug lock up between the upper and lower receivers.

Magazine: Magpul Pmag - Maglevel Version / Gen 2
Reason: Reliability. Has a window so you can check your remaining capacity.

Lights/lasers/etc: Surefire M720V Raid
Reason: Fully adjustable white and IR light, reliable, compact design. Can be mounted at the 6'oclock position on a rail to get most even light dispersion when going around corners in the dark. Does not require lenses that can be lost or damaged to achieve IR, simply turn the bezel to choose IR or White light for mission requirements.

Charging Handle: Bravo Company Model 4 - Medium
Reason: Most advanced design to avoid twisting or snapping the latch. Perfect sized latch with great texture. Excellent design and well though out engineering.

Muzzle Brake/Comp: Battlecomp 1.0 / 2.0
Reason: Manages recoil very well if you want to put a lot of rounds on target quickly.

Flash Hider: Smith Vortex
Reason: It works! Simple design and reduces flash very well

Misc Stuff rail covers etc: Magpul XTM Rail Panels
Reason: Easy to customize to almost any size rail. Different colors can be used together to achieve a camo pattern if desired. Easy to remove with the tip of a bullet.

cooleststud
13 October 2011, 12:36
http://www.flickr.com/photos/cooleststud/6240443593/in/photostream

After a lot of research and deciding to spend a lot of money, I decided on the Specter DR Elcan 1.5 x 6 sight.
This sight can handle anything, and it does. After I got it I took it to Afghanistan where it worked flawlessly.

Why I love it..... As simply stated on the web site...
The Specter DR multi-function combat day sight is a revolutionary optical design that combines the best of close combat and precision fire ranging features into a single, low profile dual-field-of view (DFOV) sight. The Specter DR 1.5-6x dual role sight gives machine gun operators and designated marksmen a sweeping 1.5x view of the battlefield for target acquisition, then allows instant switching to 6x for accurate, long range precision fire and suppression.
Situational awareness in both magnifications is improved with wider viewing angles and unmatched light transmission in low light conditions.

Basically...
: Can be used as a red dot site by having the ability to illuminate a red dot or the entire crosshair reticle.
: The sight's 6x magnification is great to use like an ACOG.
: Switches instantly from close combat (1.5x) to telescopic (6x) in less than 1 second and the illumination works in both positions.
: The crosshairs are etched into the glass
: Integrated back-up iron sights are bore sighted to scope
: Waterproof at 66 feet for 2 hours minimum
: Shockproof to 450 g's
: Battery lasts for 300 hrs minimum at maximum brightness
Downside ?? I don't think so but other may. It does weigh a bit at 700g (1.54 lbs)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/cooleststud/6240745557/in/photostream
http://www.flickr.com/photos/cooleststud/6241261200/in/photostream
http://www.flickr.com/photos/cooleststud/6240444243/in/photostream
http://www.flickr.com/photos/cooleststud/6240445795/in/photostream
http://www.flickr.com/photos/cooleststud/6240961958/in/photostream
For full specs you can go to http://www.elcansightingsystems.com/products/dual_role_sights.php

BlackCrow
14 November 2011, 18:32
I prefer a Noveske N4 forged lower & upper with this set up 6.8SPC Arnold Dew Custom piston upper 16" Green Mountain match barrel with comp/brake
Daniel Defense Quad rail, Vltor E mod stock w/pad magpul grip, troy sights ,aim point M4 comp,Surefire M952V-T w/infrared this is a very solid platform for home and combat duty!!

travk1234
13 February 2012, 18:57
I guess this is as good a thread as any for my first post.

This is my setup. My overall reasoning behind my build, based on price point, use, and cool factor (you all know, you do it).

Handguard: MI 12" freefloat rail
Reason: Freefloat, plenty of rail space, and allows me to use my arm fully locked out.

Sights: Matech rear, MBUS front
Reason: Matech was a item left over from my Army days, and free. The MBUS was a inexpensive and works well as a backup.

Optic: EOTech 557 with Aimpoint 3x Magnifier on Larue flip mount
Reason: The EOTech I used on my M4 while I was deployed, It was a personal Item that my COC allowed me to use. Same goes for the magnifier. The Larue mount was bought after the mount I had gave out.

Grip: Magpul MOE
Reason: comfort and stippled for more texture. Plus has spare AA batteries inside.

Stock: Magpul MOE
Reason: Light weight alternative to the SOPMOD 1 stock. Not having a lock doesnt bother me. But my beard still gets pulled out every now and again.

Barrel including length: 16" YHM fluted.
Reason: Price, although it is a 1/9 twist, It stabilizes everything I will reload and be able to get my hands on readily. New barrel is in the works. Looking at the Rainier Arms 1/8 twist

LPK/Trigger: Geissele SSA
Reason: No reasoning needed is there?

Buffer: Simple carbine length buffer
Reason: ain't broke don't fix it.

BCG: BCM
Reason: Better quality

Upper Rec: Spikes
Reason: Works the same as any other upper I have ever used.

Lower Rec: Spikes
Reason: Same as above

Magazine: USGI
Reason: because I have 80+ new in package in a foot locker next to the reloading bench.

Lights/lasers/etc: Surefire 6P series
Reason: Works well, but isn't to bright to "splash" on the white walls during bumps in the night. Possibly moving to a TLR1s like on my carry pistol in the future.

Charging Handle: BCM Gunfighter Mod3
Reason: Better grip, sturdier, reminds me that I still have feeling in my hands when it pinches me.

Flash Hider/Comp: YHM Comp
Reason: HUGE difference from the birdcage. I actually love it and cant beat it for $35

Misc Stuff rail covers etc: KAC rail covers from Army. Magpul AFG
Reason:

Steeles
15 December 2012, 14:43
As I'm approaching starting my own general purpose build I'm curious how this one came out and has been running? any updates from the hard use crowd?