Page 11 of 13 FirstFirst ... 910111213 LastLast
Results 151 to 165 of 187
  1. #151
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    8
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    lookin solid.

    Is the compM4 more rock solid than the T1?

  2. #152
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    5,596
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by kanaka View Post
    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.

  3. #153
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    131
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    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

  4. #154
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    606
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Indeed - I'm looking at the Mod3 with RTV Silicone instead of the M84 myself.
    S/F
    "There is no greater calling than to defend the life of a fellow Marine" - LtCol McClane, USMC

  5. #155
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    162
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    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.
    -BC

    "I would never have a 7.62 as my primary home defense weapon. I mean by all means if I'm cleaning a 7.62 and some d-bag busts down my door I'll give him a bad day"

  6. #156
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Downeast Maine
    Posts
    113
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    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.

  7. #157
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    10
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    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.

  8. #158
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    10
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Uglyduck View Post
    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

  9. #159
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    274
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    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.
    -Mitch-

  10. #160
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    10
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Uglyduck View Post
    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

  11. #161
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    131
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    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!
    -Los

    "I like my weapons like I like my women, slightly dirty, and well lubed."

  12. #162
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    10
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    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

  13. #163
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    20
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Stickman View Post
    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.

  14. #164
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    78
    Downloads
    4
    Uploads
    0
    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.

  15. #165
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    24
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    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

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •