AR Sponsor
Posted: 11/10/2002 7:56:07 PM EDT
| Does anybody know where I can buy a mil-spec M203? Looking for an exact mil-spec replica to mount on my M-4 sometimes, just for fun. Thanks |
|
I think DPMS has just what the doctor ordered: www.shooterstore.com/acb/showdetl.cfm?&DID=90&Product_ID=6687&CATID=494 and the rest of the parts: www.shooterstore.com/acb/showprod.cfm?&DID=90&CATID=494&ObjectGroup_ID=1393 B:) |
|
SAW has Colt M203's - LE only? - www.sawlesales.com Knights Armaments makes them as well, however gov't sales only I believe Randy "Mr. 40mm" Shivak also makes them www.mr40mm.com/page2.html |
|
looked in SGN today and there was a 37mm launcer in there (on a kinda shitty "faxed lookin" ad) anyways with stand alone launchers and launchers for ARs and even SKSs.... Anybody familiar with those? I've been interested inthose myself... What can ya load in those 37mm deals besies a regular flare anyways???(legally of course) Is it legal ot make a "smoke bomb"??? |
| If you want a milspec 40mm M203, I'd go through "Mr 40MM" - I think they run for around $2500 and they are a destructive device. I've seen this dealer at MG shoots and he advertises in Small Arms Review. The M203 is pricey and lots of paperwork though. I'd go with a civilian 37mm version with no restrictions if I just wanted the look of the M203. The overall design of the M203 doesn't really impress me since they break fairly easily - just my Army experience. |
|
J_Smith they are only DDs with the 40mm barrel. The reciever is treated as any other no-nfa reciver. This place offers M79 and M203 recievers and 37mm barrels.. Dont have any experience with them though www.azweapons.com/37_40mMain.html |
Yep. Kinda sux how the weapon I get my screen name from and carried for two and a half years isn't really that great. Oh well, I still like 'em. |
| Thank you for the replys. I guess I'll go with the DPMS. It's mil-spec, but only a replica. I have no need for or want a $2500 NFA M203 replca. I don't think I'll be doing much flare launching. I just want an all metal mil-spec M203 for the look/fun of it. Alot of the non Mil-Spec replica's don't seem to mount corect and you end up with a nastly looking gap between the lower handguard and the replica launcher, at least with the RAS handgaurds. |
break how? I don't recall having problems when I was in. (I was also an armorer) adding: I did see many HE rounds bounce off of targets though! |
| FYI you might want to visit www.37mm.com. Those guys know all about the different brands of 37mm lanuchers - which are good and why. |
Never, I was thinking of getting a 37mm M79  when I get the money, if I can get some better info. |
My own experience has been not so much breakage as malfunctions. Handgrip coming off the barrell during firing. Extractor slipping off the cartridge case, case then stuck in chamber. Safeties that become stuck. All this I've seen on multiple 203's. Maybe ours are old. They are pretty worn on the outside. Maybe we don't care for them properly. But since Joe isn't allowed to do much more than remove the barrell for cleaning,I doubt that's the case. Another problem I encountered was when a small amount of snow got into the weapon, it will stop firing. Before you shout "Keep the snow out of it!", in the Arctic with a couple feet of snow on the ground, occupying a SBF position, snow WILL get in there no matter what. Just my own experiences here, YMMV. |
|
I'll admit the military is quiet a bit more anal as far as deadlining sh#t. I was recently on an arms room team inspecting arms rooms throughout a brigade and deadlined at least a couple hundred M203's. A lot of the minor defects are still deadlines - breech inserts are raised, M203's improperly mounted ( most Armorers can't seem to safety wire them properly or tight enough to the M16 barrel), barrel extensions are loose everywhere - some fall off, not even connected because its simply staked in to the barrel at the factory - a lot of minor problems but which make entire battalions look ate the hell up. Quite a few M203's fail gauging because of bent barrels - probably an operator related problem. Most of the problems are simply neglect with armorers not doing their job or being allowed to do it. Although the M203 is convenient, it was designed to work with a seperate weapons system. If the M203 and M16 had been designed to work together as one system from the start, I think we'd have a much better weapons system. Most of the 45B's I know (Small Arms Repairer) dislike the M203 because of constant damage and abuse to them. I kind of wish we had kept the M-79. Also of interest is the M203 Stand Alone that USAF Special Operations use with a folding or collapsible stock. I have to admit that most of the M203's I've seen are 10-20 years old - even the new "A1" models for the M4 are simply stamped "A1" but are built on an old as hell reciever. I carried an M203 in Kosovo but I still have a love/hate relationship with it - I feel it could have been designed much better. |
|
damn, now I feel real old! this was back in the 80's. for the record, I'm not a big fan of the M203. They are just "OK" in my book. I'd much rather they brought back the M79. in comparison, the M79 had a much wider variety of stuff you could put thru it, where as the M203 was limited by what would fit in it with the action open. That plus the fact that it weighs down the rifle you're using. I carried an M203 on my M16A1 and was quite proficient with it. But again, I think I'd like to have the M79 slung across my back and have a lighter rifle. 
|
AR Sponsor