User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 9/7/2020 7:42:48 AM EST
[#1]
For a Naval gun, the Mk18 Mod 0 used either a M16A1 or M4A1 lower. Some had the Crane Anchor as shown in picture above but not all did. Mk18 Mod 1's (block II) used M4A1 lowers and crossed out the M4A1 to add NAVY 18-1
 Attached File Attached File Attached File Attached File Attached FileCD |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2020 7:47:59 AM EST
[Last Edit: Combat_Diver]
[#2]
SF gun didn't issue any Mk18 Mod 0s with FSB. SF guns were all Colt M4A1 marked. ODA's never got any M4 with burst. Always been M4A1 with auto. Upper Receiver Group either with a 10.3" or 14.5" and DD RIS II rail would have a M4A1 lower. Some replacement guns have been seen in Group Support Battalion that used either a Colt or FN M4 lower converted to M4A1 standard however.
 Attached File Attached FileCD |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2020 7:52:02 AM EST
[#3]
Would an LT104 work to keep the rail true to the upper during assembly?
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2020 7:52:31 AM EST
[#4]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Combat_Diver:SF guns were all Colt M4A1 marked. CD Thank you for the confirmation and pics. And thank you for all your years of service. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2020 9:44:53 AM EST
[#5]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Zakk_Wylde_470: Would an LT104 work to keep the rail true to the upper during assembly? I've used LT mounts to do so in the past. Also, a carry handle will work. Or a straight edge. 
|
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 9/7/2020 10:10:22 AM EST
[#6]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Zakk_Wylde_470: Would an LT104 work to keep the rail true to the upper during assembly? I’ve always used the optic. Eotech or Elcan. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2020 11:43:18 AM EST
[#7]
Originally Posted By SecretSquirell: I've used LT mounts to do so in the past. Also, a carry handle will work. Or a straight edge. iunderstoodthatreference.gif Originally Posted By StealthGuy: I’ve always used the optic. Eotech or Elcan. I can see an Elcan working but the EXPS3-0 definitely seems too short. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2020 2:07:41 PM EST
[#8]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Zakk_Wylde_470: iunderstoodthatreference.gif I can see an Elcan working but the EXPS3-0 definitely seems too short. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Zakk_Wylde_470: Originally Posted By SecretSquirell: I've used LT mounts to do so in the past. Also, a carry handle will work. Or a straight edge. iunderstoodthatreference.gif Originally Posted By StealthGuy: I’ve always used the optic. Eotech or Elcan. I can see an Elcan working but the EXPS3-0 definitely seems too short. Nah, the EXPS bridges just enough to do the job. I've been using them for a while to align when building/rebuilding and it works nicely. Granted, I've never tried cranking down the bolts unevenly or anything, but it always keeps it aligned if you cross torque evenly. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2020 2:22:12 PM EST
[#9]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By krdt: Nah, the EXPS bridges just enough to do the job. I've been using them for a while to align when building/rebuilding and it works nicely. Granted, I've never tried cranking down the bolts unevenly or anything, but it always keeps it aligned if you cross torque evenly. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By krdt: Originally Posted By Zakk_Wylde_470: Originally Posted By SecretSquirell: I've used LT mounts to do so in the past. Also, a carry handle will work. Or a straight edge. iunderstoodthatreference.gif Originally Posted By StealthGuy: I’ve always used the optic. Eotech or Elcan. I can see an Elcan working but the EXPS3-0 definitely seems too short. Nah, the EXPS bridges just enough to do the job. I've been using them for a while to align when building/rebuilding and it works nicely. Granted, I've never tried cranking down the bolts unevenly or anything, but it always keeps it aligned if you cross torque evenly. Excellent, looks like I have plenty of options to do the job "good enough" 
|
|
|
|
VA, USA
|
Posted: 9/7/2020 2:22:49 PM EST
[#10]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By krdt: Nah, the EXPS bridges just enough to do the job. I've been using them for a while to align when building/rebuilding and it works nicely. Granted, I've never tried cranking down the bolts unevenly or anything, but it always keeps it aligned if you cross torque evenly. I bought one of these cheap risers from the local gun show years ago and use it to align all my uppers. it was like $5 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2020 3:48:42 PM EST
[#11]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Zakk_Wylde_470: Excellent, looks like I have plenty of options to do the job "good enough" Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Zakk_Wylde_470: Originally Posted By krdt: Originally Posted By Zakk_Wylde_470: Originally Posted By SecretSquirell: I've used LT mounts to do so in the past. Also, a carry handle will work. Or a straight edge. iunderstoodthatreference.gif Originally Posted By StealthGuy: I’ve always used the optic. Eotech or Elcan. I can see an Elcan working but the EXPS3-0 definitely seems too short. Nah, the EXPS bridges just enough to do the job. I've been using them for a while to align when building/rebuilding and it works nicely. Granted, I've never tried cranking down the bolts unevenly or anything, but it always keeps it aligned if you cross torque evenly. Excellent, looks like I have plenty of options to do the job "good enough" It's pretty easy to verify it's centered with a few quick caliper measurements if you want to be certain. |
|
|
|
MN, USA
|
Posted: 9/7/2020 3:59:10 PM EST
[#12]
Hey guys,
I have searched for an answer to this question with no clear results: In regards to the Tango Down Stubby VFG (non-QD) what is the proper mounting orientation? The grip is not perfectly round, has TD.com markings on one side and a protrusion/hump on the other side. Based on people's pics, i've seen it mounted 50/50, "TD.com" markings to the right and/or left side of the rife. I have tried both ways and to me, feel-wise, makes no difference. Thanks for any insight. I'm just wondering if there's a standard or recommended way to mounting the grip. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2020 4:42:13 PM EST
[#13]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By inkedpatrol: Hey guys, I have searched for an answer to this question with no clear results: In regards to the Tango Down Stubby VFG (non-QD) what is the proper mounting orientation? The grip is not perfectly round, has TD.com markings on one side and a protrusion/hump on the other side. Based on people's pics, i've seen it mounted 50/50, "TD.com" markings to the right and/or left side of the rife. I have tried both ways and to me, feel-wise, makes no difference. Thanks for any insight. I'm just wondering if there's a standard or recommended way to mounting the grip. Whatever is most comfortable. On the QD version, TD orients the markings and locking mechanism on the right (assuming you're gripping with your left hand), which would argue for that being the "intended" orientation. That's also how I prefer it; I find having the tapered hump facing into your palm to be the most comfortable/natural position for a C clamp grip. That said, it's a matter of preference. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2020 4:43:03 PM EST
[#14]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By inkedpatrol: Hey guys, I have searched for an answer to this question with no clear results: In regards to the Tango Down Stubby VFG (non-QD) what is the proper mounting orientation? The grip is not perfectly round, has TD.com markings on one side and a protrusion/hump on the other side. Based on people's pics, i've seen it mounted 50/50, "TD.com" markings to the right and/or left side of the rife. I have tried both ways and to me, feel-wise, makes no difference. Thanks for any insight. I'm just wondering if there's a standard or recommended way to mounting the grip. It's a vertical grip, not shuttle re-entry calculations. 
|
|
|
|
MN, USA
|
Posted: 9/7/2020 5:29:02 PM EST
[#15]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By krdt: Whatever is most comfortable. On the QD version, TD orients the markings and locking mechanism on the right (assuming you're gripping with your left hand), which would argue for that being the "intended" orientation. That's also how I prefer it; I find having the tapered hump facing into your palm to be the most comfortable/natural position for a C clamp grip. That said, it's a matter of preference. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By krdt: Originally Posted By inkedpatrol: Hey guys, I have searched for an answer to this question with no clear results: In regards to the Tango Down Stubby VFG (non-QD) what is the proper mounting orientation? The grip is not perfectly round, has TD.com markings on one side and a protrusion/hump on the other side. Based on people's pics, i've seen it mounted 50/50, "TD.com" markings to the right and/or left side of the rife. I have tried both ways and to me, feel-wise, makes no difference. Thanks for any insight. I'm just wondering if there's a standard or recommended way to mounting the grip. Whatever is most comfortable. On the QD version, TD orients the markings and locking mechanism on the right (assuming you're gripping with your left hand), which would argue for that being the "intended" orientation. That's also how I prefer it; I find having the tapered hump facing into your palm to be the most comfortable/natural position for a C clamp grip. That said, it's a matter of preference. I actually went through the same thought process as you, even though I don't have the QD version. Therefore, my non QD stubby has been mounted with TD markings to the right as well. Thanks for the insight. |
|
|
MN, USA
|
Posted: 9/7/2020 6:43:19 PM EST
[#16]
Here's another question I have been unable to find definitive answers to:
For my fellow clone history nerds, this question is regarding the MK18 MOD0: (i'm aware of the varying nomenclature pertaining to MK18s vs CQBRs) Is an "old school" gray Colt M16A1 lower "correct" or kosher for a retro MK18 MOD0? I ask because I know the CQBR as well as the SPR were fielded as upper options prior to CRANE taking over and issuing them as complete weapons. When CRANE did so, they fitted the CQBR and SPR uppers onto surplus M16A1 lowers. I have seen plenty of images of M16A1 lowers fitted with "CQBR" uppers as well as "SPR" uppers. Some of the "SPR" references I have seen are mounted on gray colored M16A1 lowers. I have even seen a "SPR" upper mounted to a late-60's slab-side M16A1 lower. So the question remains, could a completed MK18 MOD0 ever have come on a gray colored M16A1 lower receiver? Thanks in advance for any insight! |
|
|
VA, USA
|
Posted: 9/7/2020 6:50:02 PM EST
[#17]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By SecretSquirell: It's a vertical grip, not shuttle re-entry calculations. It’s not? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2020 6:56:28 PM EST
[#18]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By inkedpatrol: Here's another question I have been unable to find definitive answers to: For my fellow clone history nerds, this question is regarding the MK18 MOD0: (i'm aware of the varying nomenclature pertaining to MK18s vs CQBRs) Is an "old school" gray Colt M16A1 lower "correct" or kosher for a retro MK18 MOD0? I ask because I know the CQBR as well as the SPR were fielded as upper options prior to CRANE taking over and issuing them as complete weapons. When CRANE did so, they fitted the CQBR and SPR uppers onto surplus M16A1 lowers. I have seen plenty of images of M16A1 lowers fitted with "CQBR" uppers as well as "SPR" uppers. Some of the "SPR" references I have seen are mounted on gray colored M16A1 lowers. I have even seen a "SPR" upper mounted to a late-60's slab-side M16A1 lower. So the question remains, could a completed MK18 MOD0 ever have come on a gray colored M16A1 lower receiver? Thanks in advance for any insight! Are you implying you own a full auto m16a1 lower? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2020 7:50:38 PM EST
[#19]
Lol guess I should stay in here instead of the other thread, with the rest of you too-short barrel guys.
 Attached File |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2020 8:07:00 PM EST
[#20]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Soopreme: It’s not? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Soopreme: Originally Posted By SecretSquirell: It's a vertical grip, not shuttle re-entry calculations. It’s not? I suppose one could make it be so.
|
|
|
|
MN, USA
|
Posted: 9/7/2020 8:23:16 PM EST
[#21]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By wissota4: Are you implying you own a full auto m16a1 lower? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By wissota4: Originally Posted By inkedpatrol: Here's another question I have been unable to find definitive answers to: For my fellow clone history nerds, this question is regarding the MK18 MOD0: (i'm aware of the varying nomenclature pertaining to MK18s vs CQBRs) Is an "old school" gray Colt M16A1 lower "correct" or kosher for a retro MK18 MOD0? I ask because I know the CQBR as well as the SPR were fielded as upper options prior to CRANE taking over and issuing them as complete weapons. When CRANE did so, they fitted the CQBR and SPR uppers onto surplus M16A1 lowers. I have seen plenty of images of M16A1 lowers fitted with "CQBR" uppers as well as "SPR" uppers. Some of the "SPR" references I have seen are mounted on gray colored M16A1 lowers. I have even seen a "SPR" upper mounted to a late-60's slab-side M16A1 lower. So the question remains, could a completed MK18 MOD0 ever have come on a gray colored M16A1 lower receiver? Thanks in advance for any insight! Are you implying you own a full auto m16a1 lower? I wish it was full auto... I have a Colt re-issue gray M16A1 that I want to use for a MK18 MOD0 build. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2020 8:53:52 PM EST
[Last Edit: krdt]
[#22]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By UndrGrndPrdcts: Lol guess I should stay in here instead of the other thread, with the rest of you too-short barrel guys. https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/261626/20200907_204746_jpg-1582080.JPG I was very sad to discover 10.3s aren't real SBRs or effective beyond 50m (or outdoors, apparently)... :(. Then there is Andro Corp on Instagram arguing that DD 10.3s don't have .070" gas ports because they couldn't possibly cycle or lock back unsuppressed if they did. Nevermind I've measured 4 of them, or that I've got plenty of video doing exactly that with Wolf WPA 55gr. Even did it after going 3k+ without cleaning, lol. Hell, I have no trouble getting 20.5gr WC844 and 842 powder-puff reloads to cycle unsuppressed on .070" ported 10.3s (which makes Wolf WPA look like full power 5.56 in comparison). Bustin' myths is a dirty job, but someone has to do it :\. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2020 9:00:59 PM EST
[#23]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By krdt: I was very sad to discover 10.3s aren't real SBRs or effective beyond 50m (or outdoors, apparently)... :(. Then there is Andro Corp on Instagram arguing that DD 10.3s don't have .070" gas ports because they couldn't possibly cycle or lock back unsuppressed if they did. Nevermind I've measured 4 of them, or that I've got plenty of video doing exactly that with Wolf WPA 55gr. Even did it after going 3k+ without cleaning, lol. Hell, I have no trouble getting 20.5gr WC844 and 842 powder-puff reloads to cycle unsuppressed on .070" ported 10.3s (which makes Wolf WPA look like full power 5.56 in comparison). Bustin' myths is a dirty job, but someone has to do it :\. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By krdt: Originally Posted By UndrGrndPrdcts: Lol guess I should stay in here instead of the other thread, with the rest of you too-short barrel guys. https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/261626/20200907_204746_jpg-1582080.JPG I was very sad to discover 10.3s aren't real SBRs or effective beyond 50m (or outdoors, apparently)... :(. Then there is Andro Corp on Instagram arguing that DD 10.3s don't have .070" gas ports because they couldn't possibly cycle or lock back unsuppressed if they did. Nevermind I've measured 4 of them, or that I've got plenty of video doing exactly that with Wolf WPA 55gr. Even did it after going 3k+ without cleaning, lol. Hell, I have no trouble getting 20.5gr WC844 and 842 powder-puff reloads to cycle unsuppressed on .070" ported 10.3s (which makes Wolf WPA look like full power 5.56 in comparison). Bustin' myths is a dirty job, but someone has to do it :\. They also tried to argue with me that their barrel was "dead balls" 10.3" and justified it by saying that if it were any shorter a direct-thread suppressor wouldn't work
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2020 9:03:14 PM EST
[#24]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By krdt: I was very sad to discover 10.3s aren't real SBRs or effective beyond 50m (or outdoors, apparently)... :(. Then there is Andro Corp on Instagram arguing that DD 10.3s don't have .070" gas ports because they couldn't possibly cycle or lock back unsuppressed if they did. Nevermind I've measured 4 of them, or that I've got plenty of video doing exactly that with Wolf WPA 55gr. Even did it after going 3k+ without cleaning, lol. Hell, I have no trouble getting 20.5gr WC844 and 842 powder-puff reloads to cycle unsuppressed on .070" ported 10.3s (which makes Wolf WPA look like full power 5.56 in comparison). Bustin' myths is a dirty job, but someone has to do it :\. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By krdt: Originally Posted By UndrGrndPrdcts: Lol guess I should stay in here instead of the other thread, with the rest of you too-short barrel guys. https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/261626/20200907_204746_jpg-1582080.JPG I was very sad to discover 10.3s aren't real SBRs or effective beyond 50m (or outdoors, apparently)... :(. Then there is Andro Corp on Instagram arguing that DD 10.3s don't have .070" gas ports because they couldn't possibly cycle or lock back unsuppressed if they did. Nevermind I've measured 4 of them, or that I've got plenty of video doing exactly that with Wolf WPA 55gr. Even did it after going 3k+ without cleaning, lol. Hell, I have no trouble getting 20.5gr WC844 and 842 powder-puff reloads to cycle unsuppressed on .070" ported 10.3s (which makes Wolf WPA look like full power 5.56 in comparison). Bustin' myths is a dirty job, but someone has to do it :\. I have an older 10.3" DD Mk18 Mod 1 SBR (maybe 2014/2015 time frame?) and I haven't had an issue with it. Then again I don't know what gas port size it has and I don't even have the tools to check anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2020 9:11:31 PM EST
[#25]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By krdt: I was very sad to discover 10.3s aren't real SBRs or effective beyond 50m (or outdoors, apparently)... :(. Lol, I saw post that too. Nuke the thread guys, 1300+ page thread is a bunch of lies. |
|
|
|
MN, USA
|
Posted: 9/7/2020 9:21:42 PM EST
[#26]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By inkedpatrol: Here's another question I have been unable to find definitive answers to: For my fellow clone history nerds, this question is regarding the MK18 MOD0: (i'm aware of the varying nomenclature pertaining to MK18s vs CQBRs) Is an "old school" gray Colt M16A1 lower "correct" or kosher for a retro MK18 MOD0? I ask because I know the CQBR as well as the SPR were fielded as upper options prior to CRANE taking over and issuing them as complete weapons. When CRANE did so, they fitted the CQBR and SPR uppers onto surplus M16A1 lowers. I have seen plenty of images of M16A1 lowers fitted with "CQBR" uppers as well as "SPR" uppers. Some of the "SPR" references I have seen are mounted on gray colored M16A1 lowers. I have even seen a "SPR" upper mounted to a late-60's slab-side M16A1 lower. So the question remains, could a completed MK18 MOD0 ever have come on a gray colored M16A1 lower receiver? Thanks in advance for any insight! Bump |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2020 9:32:36 PM EST
[#27]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By krdt: I was very sad to discover 10.3s aren't real SBRs or effective beyond 50m (or outdoors, apparently)... :(. Then there is Andro Corp on Instagram arguing that DD 10.3s don't have .070" gas ports because they couldn't possibly cycle or lock back unsuppressed if they did. Nevermind I've measured 4 of them, or that I've got plenty of video doing exactly that with Wolf WPA 55gr. Even did it after going 3k+ without cleaning, lol. Hell, I have no trouble getting 20.5gr WC844 and 842 powder-puff reloads to cycle unsuppressed on .070" ported 10.3s (which makes Wolf WPA look like full power 5.56 in comparison). Bustin' myths is a dirty job, but someone has to do it :\. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By krdt: Originally Posted By UndrGrndPrdcts: Lol guess I should stay in here instead of the other thread, with the rest of you too-short barrel guys. https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/261626/20200907_204746_jpg-1582080.JPG I was very sad to discover 10.3s aren't real SBRs or effective beyond 50m (or outdoors, apparently)... :(. Then there is Andro Corp on Instagram arguing that DD 10.3s don't have .070" gas ports because they couldn't possibly cycle or lock back unsuppressed if they did. Nevermind I've measured 4 of them, or that I've got plenty of video doing exactly that with Wolf WPA 55gr. Even did it after going 3k+ without cleaning, lol. Hell, I have no trouble getting 20.5gr WC844 and 842 powder-puff reloads to cycle unsuppressed on .070" ported 10.3s (which makes Wolf WPA look like full power 5.56 in comparison). Bustin' myths is a dirty job, but someone has to do it :\. Yea and I guess all the various sf guys still using them aren't faring so well 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2020 9:36:05 PM EST
[#28]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 2Keylows: There is so much variation and not enough consistency within groups/units, its difficult to come up with a set list for Lpvo. Alot of what your seeing is just an individual dude wanting more kick than a standard Elcan/other issued optic. https://i.imgur.com/odhfo0w.jpg https://i.imgur.com/pZRSiHA.jpg https://i.imgur.com/erD7x3E.jpg https://i.imgur.com/ouSFscO.jpg https://i.imgur.com/PmwDguw.jpg https://i.imgur.com/EvNAuDd.jpg https://i.imgur.com/txdxBOK.jpg There getting harder to tell apart. Airsofters ruin everything. https://i.imgur.com/tnShXlG.jpg Now I'm wondering if it would be totally idiotic to put a NF 2.5-10x24 on my MK18... the NX8 seems to get a lot of bad press - too many compromises to get it that small/that light - eyebox seems to be the main issue. ATACR 1-8x is the fix, apparently, but at double the cost :). Not that the x24 eyebox is great either I suppose. Still a used 2.5-10x24 comes in kinda close to Razor pricing really, getting a bit more long end, giving up 1x of course. I'm leaning towards the Razor TBH... just trying to look at all options before laying out the cash :). |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2020 9:55:21 PM EST
[#29]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By UndrGrndPrdcts: Lol guess I should stay in here instead of the other thread, with the rest of you too-short barrel guys. https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/261626/20200907_204746_jpg-1582080.JPG Wtf are you talking about? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2020 10:06:32 PM EST
[#30]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By inkedpatrol: I wish it was full auto... I have a Colt re-issue gray M16A1 that I want to use for a MK18 MOD0 build. Go for it. However, all the M16A1 lowers that I've seen were blackened ie refinished. CD |
|
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 9/7/2020 10:07:52 PM EST
[#31]
Y'all gonna fuck around and make me post my block 3 in here. Don't tempt me
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2020 10:08:57 PM EST
[#32]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Spooled: Y'all gonna fuck around and make me post my block 3 in here. Don't tempt me 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2020 10:32:53 PM EST
[#33]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 78Staff: Now I'm wondering if it would be totally idiotic to put a NF 2.5-10x24 on my MK18... the NX8 seems to get a lot of bad press - too many compromises to get it that small/that light - eyebox seems to be the main issue. ATACR 1-8x is the fix, apparently, but at double the cost :). Not that the x24 eyebox is great either I suppose. Still a used 2.5-10x24 comes in kinda close to Razor pricing really, getting a bit more long end, giving up 1x of course. I'm leaning towards the Razor TBH... just trying to look at all options before laying out the cash :). Wouldn't be a bad idea lol.  Admittedly, I used to be on the bandwagon of throwing shade at Nx8's. The comments about eyebox are overblown and most likely stem from dude's not actually using the optic mounted on a rifle. (I'm guilty of it.) I've used/sold both a Kahles K16i and Razor 1-6 E in favor of an NX8. There is truth that the NX8's eyebox/1x capability is slightly "lower" compared to the Kahles/Razor offerings, but as you mentioned there are some trade offs getting a scope with a smaller footprint on a rifle. The NX8 is 100% usable and pairs very well with a 10.3 offering. Razors are awesome. Just keep in mind about the weight penalty. 17oz to 21oz doesn't sound alot on paper, but if your adding lights/lasers/suppressors you'll feel the difference on the rifle. (Keep in mind that is without a quality mount) |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2020 10:43:25 PM EST
[#34]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By wissota4: Wtf are you talking about? Lol. I think he's referencing another thread where a poster mentions 10.3s only being effective at 50-75 yards. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2020 10:44:26 PM EST
[#35]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By wissota4: Wtf are you talking about? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By wissota4: Originally Posted By UndrGrndPrdcts: Lol guess I should stay in here instead of the other thread, with the rest of you too-short barrel guys. https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/261626/20200907_204746_jpg-1582080.JPG Wtf are you talking about? Probably in reference to the “SHTF rifle” thread drama. |
|
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 9/8/2020 12:15:17 AM EST
[#36]
Any leads on DD or colt 10.3 barrels
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/8/2020 2:20:51 AM EST
[#37]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/8/2020 3:15:13 AM EST
[#38]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By brodband8: Found something interesting today. One of my mk18 RIS IIs has a mk18 FSP part number. https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/283538/119010331_612266773016461_63245894951930-1582538.JPG Ran through the wrong marking line 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/8/2020 7:02:43 AM EST
[#39]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By mmmboats: Probably in reference to the “SHTF rifle” thread drama. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By mmmboats: Originally Posted By wissota4: Originally Posted By UndrGrndPrdcts: Lol guess I should stay in here instead of the other thread, with the rest of you too-short barrel guys. https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/261626/20200907_204746_jpg-1582080.JPG Wtf are you talking about? Probably in reference to the “SHTF rifle” thread drama. Yep posted my go-to rifle and heads exploded that its unusable past 50 yards and a bad choice for shtf
|
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 9/8/2020 8:34:01 AM EST
[#40]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Spooled: Y'all gonna fuck around and make me post my block 3 in here. Don't tempt me No balls.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/8/2020 9:29:33 AM EST
[Last Edit: M4AZ]
[#41]
MAKETHEPICTHREADAPICTHREADAGAIN2020
                                                           |
|
|
|
VA, USA
|
Posted: 9/8/2020 9:33:21 AM EST
[#42]
I LIKE PICTURES
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/8/2020 9:37:02 AM EST
[#43]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Conner378: 30lb rifle
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/8/2020 10:59:08 AM EST
[#44]
Pic thread again? This was more of a.....rip eachothers heads off over the wrong bolt catch roll pin thread in its early days.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/8/2020 11:39:04 AM EST
[#45]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By MILSPEC556: Pic thread again? This was more of a.....rip eachothers heads off over the wrong bolt catch roll pin thread in its early days. And talking about taking it in the can.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/8/2020 12:16:44 PM EST
[#46]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Zakk_Wylde_470: 30lb rifle Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Zakk_Wylde_470: Originally Posted By Conner378: https://i.postimg.cc/sfpyM1CS/0-B1-AC3-AD-5-FDC-46-C2-A310-5-B72327-ED5-CE.jpg 30lb rifle Something isn’t aligned correctly... |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 9/8/2020 1:38:40 PM EST
[#48]
dat A.R.M.S. #40
 put one on my block II and - I LIKE IT |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/8/2020 2:01:31 PM EST
[#49]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By mban2: Something isn’t aligned correctly... Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By mban2: Originally Posted By Zakk_Wylde_470: Originally Posted By Conner378: https://i.postimg.cc/sfpyM1CS/0-B1-AC3-AD-5-FDC-46-C2-A310-5-B72327-ED5-CE.jpg 30lb rifle Something isn’t aligned correctly... Yeah, the guy's back after he gets done with a patrol
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/8/2020 3:56:21 PM EST
[Last Edit: Advance]
[#50]
Nice M84 on EE for $60.
EDIT: Never mind. It is for a .308. |
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
Attached File
Attached File