User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 9/28/2011 12:18:07 AM EST
[#1]
I've seen it plenty, but I don't condone it.
For guys who just carry it around the fob, it probably works just fine with the M4 stock. You should've asked them what M4 feedramps were. You would've gotten a whole lot of 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2011 12:19:19 AM EST
[#2]
Canadians run something similar with the later C7's.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2011 12:26:11 AM EST
[#3]
I thought the M4 ramps were "needed" because of the carbine length gas system, not the carbine buffer.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2011 12:47:21 AM EST
[#4]
Quoted:
I thought the M4 ramps were "needed" because of the carbine length gas system, not the carbine buffer. No we went for years without them. It's an update. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2011 2:02:42 AM EST
[#5]
Quoted: Canadians run something similar with the later C7's. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2011 2:12:59 AM EST
[#6]
IIRC the USMC is going in this direction with the A4. RustedAce carried one in Iraq for his deployment w/o issue.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2011 2:21:58 AM EST
[#7]
Its OK now, Big Army gave it the nod.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2011 2:27:54 AM EST
[#8]
First saw this with 3d ID weapons back in '05 in Iraq. Most recently saw it at Bagram on some of the folks walking around there. They were Army, didn't catch the patch, but their kit was pretty well worn, so they weren't fobbits.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2011 2:49:33 AM EST
[#9]
Quoted:
I've seen it plenty, but I don't condone it. For guys who just carry it around the fob, it probably works just fine with the M4 stock. You should've asked them what M4 feedramps were. You would've gotten a whole lot of
Why? The Canadian's carry the M4 style stock as standard on their 20" guns. If you wear body armor they really help. For shooters that are smaller in stature they really help. And it helps leverage the weight of the gun back to the body instead of away from it. Who knows, they may even actually adopt the A5 kit. As proposed. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2011 2:56:41 AM EST
[#10]
One local agency does this. They are Colt 20" HBAR's with A2 uppers. They added the standard M4 stocks.
The rifles are real mutts. Colt uppers, Colt lowers, and RRA commercial stock kits. They didn't run well at first. They had trouble with bolt bounce. The bolt would chamber a round, and then bounce out of battery. Pull the trigger nothing happens. As I understand it, this was solved with an H buffer and a new buffer spring. This is part of why the A5 kit is so appealing. The gun works like it has a fixed stock on it, but has all the versatility of an M4 stocked rifle. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2011 3:31:43 AM EST
[#11]
Quoted:
Quoted:
I've seen it plenty, but I don't condone it. For guys who just carry it around the fob, it probably works just fine with the M4 stock. You should've asked them what M4 feedramps were. You would've gotten a whole lot of
Why? The Canadian's carry the M4 style stock as standard on their 20" guns. If you wear body armor they really help. For shooters that are smaller in stature they really help. And it helps leverage the weight of the gun back to the body instead of away from it. Who knows, they may even actually adopt the A5 kit. As proposed. http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4101/4895174208_bde489f7f4_z.jpg That is sexy and may just end up being my next build 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2011 3:59:50 AM EST
[#12]
Quoted:
One local agency does this. They are Colt 20" HBAR's with A2 uppers. They added the standard M4 stocks. http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6134/6191426889_5b49ae4107_z.jpg The rifles are real mutts. Colt uppers, Colt lowers, and RRA commercial stock kits. They didn't run well at first. They had trouble with bolt bounce. The bolt would chamber a round, and then bounce out of battery. Pull the trigger nothing happens. As I understand it, this was solved with an H buffer and a new buffer spring. This is part of why the A5 kit is so appealing. The gun works like it has a fixed stock on it, but has all the versatility of an M4 stocked rifle. This is exactly how my local PD has their AR's configured. I've spoke with the chief about it a number of times and no complaints. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2011 5:15:38 AM EST
[#13]
Not a fan.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2011 5:40:20 AM EST
[#14]
Had an M16A4 in '06 in the Anbar with an M4 stock. Never had a problem, worked really well with the armor. I've heard of others having a problem, but that was not my experience. I really liked it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2011 6:01:01 AM EST
[#15]
Quoted: Quoted: I thought the M4 ramps were "needed" because of the carbine length gas system, not the carbine buffer. No we went for years without them. It's an update. I guess I could have worded that better. I put needed in quotes as most believe M4 ramps aren't required, but are beneficial to carbine gas systems, especially when using longer/heavier projectiles. I don't see why an M16 would need M4 ramps, regardless of the stock/buffer configuration, as it shuoldn't experience the feeding problems caused by higher gas pressure and bcg cycle time. That being said, there would really be no downside to having a rifle with M4 ramps, but it isn't needed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2011 6:53:13 AM EST
[#16]
My A4 clone worked great on my friends M16 with m4 stock and we blasted my c-mag multiple times with no issues (and no feed ramps)
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/7/2011 8:18:51 AM EST
[#17]
My mistake - turns out they were A2's:
(Ignore the camera date) Gig 'em, backbencher |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/7/2011 8:37:43 AM EST
[#18]
Makes sense to me. The A2 stock must be a bitch to use when you're wearing all kinds of body armor; having some adjustment would probably be a real good thing.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/7/2011 8:51:09 AM EST
[#19]
Quoted:
My mistake - turns out they were A2's: http://i231.photobucket.com/albums/ee312/ghbowling/Tallil/EditedIMAG0055.jpg http://i231.photobucket.com/albums/ee312/ghbowling/Tallil/IMAG0054.jpg http://i231.photobucket.com/albums/ee312/ghbowling/Tallil/IMAG0056.jpg (Ignore the camera date) Gig 'em, backbencher A2 or A4, it doesn't matter, they can have they shorty stock. But have to be returned to their original condition if they are going to be turned in. I guess there is a MWO out there for them now to be converted. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/7/2011 8:54:29 AM EST
[#20]
From the A2 forum:
Quoted:
Just did some research in it, including looking through the JUNE 2010 dated -10 for the M4/M16 weapon system. The stocks are issued as "kits" and should supposedly include a heavier buffer noted by the -10 as "not for use in M4/M4A1." It's supposed to be a heavier "H6" buffer. Would be interesting to see how it's marked if other users can get photos or at least take a look at them. Guess I've been behind the power-curve of keeping track of developments on this one. What a failure. 
The NSN is: NSN 1005-01-569-6938: STOCK,GUN,SHOULDER ~Augee |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/7/2011 8:55:54 AM EST
[#21]
Quoted:
Quoted:
I've seen it plenty, but I don't condone it. For guys who just carry it around the fob, it probably works just fine with the M4 stock. You should've asked them what M4 feedramps were. You would've gotten a whole lot of
Why? The Canadian's carry the M4 style stock as standard on their 20" guns. If you wear body armor they really help. For shooters that are smaller in stature they really help. And it helps leverage the weight of the gun back to the body instead of away from it. Who knows, they may even actually adopt the A5 kit. As proposed. http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4101/4895174208_bde489f7f4_z.jpg isnt the carbine buffer/spring finnicky with the 20" uppers? which explains why VLTOR made the A5 Quoted:
From the A2 forum: Quoted:
Just did some research in it, including looking through the JUNE 2010 dated -10 for the M4/M16 weapon system. The stocks are issued as "kits" and should supposedly include a heavier buffer noted by the -10 as "not for use in M4/M4A1." It's supposed to be a heavier "H6" buffer. Would be interesting to see how it's marked if other users can get photos or at least take a look at them. Guess I've been behind the power-curve of keeping track of developments on this one. What a failure.
The NSN is: NSN 1005-01-569-6938: STOCK,GUN,SHOULDER ~Augee nice find, honestly id much rather have the A5 system than a standard carbine system for a 20" |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/7/2011 9:02:41 AM EST
[#22]
Quoted:
I've seen it plenty, but I don't condone it. For guys who just carry it around the fob, it probably works just fine with the M4 stock. You should've asked them what M4 feedramps were. You would've gotten a whole lot of
A rifle length gas system with carbine buffer system is still a smoother cycling more reliable system that a carbine gas system with carbine buffer system. The gun originally designed to work as Rifle Gas + Rifle Buffer. Rifle Gas system has less pressure than carbine. The rifle buffer is heavier and has a longer spring. The carbine system has a shorter, higher pressure gas system, with a light buffer and shorter spring. This is why they have a higher cyclic, and timing issues can happen from the magazine spring not pushing the cartridges up fast enough for the bolt to feed them. M4 feed ramps exist to deal with this timing issue and worn out mag springs. Why do you think all these heavy buffer exist for carbine systems? A rifle gas system is not going to experience similar timing issues unless the springs are all worn out. It will cycle faster than a rifle buffer system, but its not going to cycle too fast to feed reliably, nor will it cycle slower than a rifle buffer system. I have tens of thousands of rounds through rifle gas system uppers on carbine buffer systems, some of that in full auto. I used to work for Cav Arms and all CAV-15 MKII receivers used carbine buffer systems. It was never an issue. The A5 system mentioned above has more benefit on a Carbine or Mid system where it helps slow down bolt speed from the higher pressure gas system. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/7/2011 9:12:19 AM EST
[#23]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I've seen it plenty, but I don't condone it. For guys who just carry it around the fob, it probably works just fine with the M4 stock. You should've asked them what M4 feedramps were. You would've gotten a whole lot of
Why? The Canadian's carry the M4 style stock as standard on their 20" guns. If you wear body armor they really help. For shooters that are smaller in stature they really help. And it helps leverage the weight of the gun back to the body instead of away from it. Who knows, they may even actually adopt the A5 kit. As proposed. http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4101/4895174208_bde489f7f4_z.jpg That is sexy and may just end up being my next build Yep. I dont own an AR anymore but come next year this WILL be my next AR! |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/7/2011 9:35:04 AM EST
[#24]
Quoted:
Quoted:
I've seen it plenty, but I don't condone it. For guys who just carry it around the fob, it probably works just fine with the M4 stock. You should've asked them what M4 feedramps were. You would've gotten a whole lot of
A rifle length gas system with carbine buffer system is still a smoother cycling more reliable system that a carbine gas system with carbine buffer system. The gun originally designed to work as Rifle Gas + Rifle Buffer. Rifle Gas system has less pressure than carbine. The rifle buffer is heavier and has a longer spring. The carbine system has a shorter, higher pressure gas system, with a light buffer and shorter spring. This is why they have a higher cyclic, and timing issues can happen from the magazine spring not pushing the cartridges up fast enough for the bolt to feed them. M4 feed ramps exist to deal with this timing issue and worn out mag springs. Why do you think all these heavy buffer exist for carbine systems? A rifle gas system is not going to experience similar timing issues unless the springs are all worn out. It will cycle faster than a rifle buffer system, but its not going to cycle too fast to feed reliably, nor will it cycle slower than a rifle buffer system. I have tens of thousands of rounds through rifle gas system uppers on carbine buffer systems, some of that in full auto. I used to work for Cav Arms and all CAV-15 MKII receivers used carbine buffer systems. It was never an issue. The A5 system mentioned above has more benefit on a Carbine or Mid system where it helps slow down bolt speed from the higher pressure gas system. well the A5 system was designed for the M16, it basically makes the M16 have the same buffer/spring as the A2 but in a collapsable package, its a very nice system, i love mine |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/7/2011 2:31:06 PM EST
[#25]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I've seen it plenty, but I don't condone it. For guys who just carry it around the fob, it probably works just fine with the M4 stock. You should've asked them what M4 feedramps were. You would've gotten a whole lot of
Why? The Canadian's carry the M4 style stock as standard on their 20" guns. If you wear body armor they really help. For shooters that are smaller in stature they really help. And it helps leverage the weight of the gun back to the body instead of away from it. Who knows, they may even actually adopt the A5 kit. As proposed. http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4101/4895174208_bde489f7f4_z.jpg That is sexy and may just end up being my next build Yep. I dont own an AR anymore but come next year this WILL be my next AR! The M5 RAS makes the rifle nose heavy. Hang stuff on the rails and it gets worse. The weight of the EMOD really balances the gun nicely. And is very pointable. The extra length is great for monkey arms like mine, but being able to close it up, gives shorter shooters more leverage to hold that heavy muzzle up. Especially with a 203 underneath. The agency guns I showed above have now gone to an H buffer to increase reliability. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/7/2011 3:04:35 PM EST
[#26]
I've got two 20" ARs (one with an A2 FSB & one a low-profile FSB) with UBR stocks that run 100% that way. Best of both worlds IMO.
My .02 |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/7/2011 3:21:59 PM EST
[#27]
I had tried my USGI M16A2 Colt 20" upper half (without M4 feedramps) on my four carbine lowers below, all with H buffers, works fine with my surplus 55gr & 62gr ammo and PMAGs.
Carbine lowers: Colt SP6920 with factory buffer tube & M4 stock Colt 6721 with factory buffer tube & Vltor IMOD stock Colt 6721 with Vltor buffer tube & EMOD stock LMT Defender 2000 with factory buffer tube & Magpul CTR stock |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/7/2011 3:24:59 PM EST
[#28]
Quoted:
snip Why? The Canadian's carry the M4 style stock as standard on their 20" guns. If you wear body armor they really help. For shooters that are smaller in stature they really help. And it helps leverage the weight of the gun back to the body instead of away from it. Who knows, they may even actually adopt the A5 kit. As proposed.
I like this. From Colt Canada's website: 
C7A2 |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/7/2011 4:48:04 PM EST
[#29]
I'm not a big fan of carbine stocks on 20" rifles, it just doesn't look right.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/7/2011 5:34:33 PM EST
[#30]
Quoted:
I'm not a big fan of carbine stocks on 20" rifles, it just doesn't look right. I think the intended audience will appreciate the adjustable LOP just fine. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/7/2011 5:43:42 PM EST
[#31]
Quoted:
Makes sense to me. The A2 stock must be a bitch to use when you're wearing all kinds of body armor; having some adjustment would probably be a real good thing. Yep; I'm 5'5". I would have LOVED an adjustable buttstock. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/7/2011 5:49:32 PM EST
[#32]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Makes sense to me. The A2 stock must be a bitch to use when you're wearing all kinds of body armor; having some adjustment would probably be a real good thing. Yep; I'm 5'5". I would have LOVED an adjustable buttstock. Hell, I'm 6'4", and I hate the A2 stock length. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/7/2011 5:50:45 PM EST
[#33]
When I went through Army BCT at Ft Jackson they had m16's like this with the collapsible stocks for the females to use. Made it easier for them to shoot with full battle rattle on.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/7/2011 6:00:52 PM EST
[#34]
Quoted:
When I went through Army BCT at Ft Jackson they had m16's like this with the collapsible stocks for the females to use. Made it easier for them to shoot with full battle rattle on. Females? Hell i woulda asked for one too |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/7/2011 6:08:51 PM EST
[#35]
Quoted:
I'm not a big fan of carbine stocks on 20" rifles, it just doesn't look right. I think the intended audience doesnt care much for looks, marine corps asked. Ltor to develop the A5 not to make their rifles look cooler but to make a better system |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/8/2011 1:01:02 PM EST
[#36]
This pic was taken at Ft. Jackson, SC last month....
. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/8/2011 2:11:42 PM EST
[#37]
We got the Army fielded kits before I deployed and had the stocks switched out. Despite being authorized, you wouldn't believe the noise generated trying to get it done.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/8/2011 3:33:00 PM EST
[#38]
Quoted:
Quoted:
snip Why? The Canadian's carry the M4 style stock as standard on their 20" guns. If you wear body armor they really help. For shooters that are smaller in stature they really help. And it helps leverage the weight of the gun back to the body instead of away from it. Who knows, they may even actually adopt the A5 kit. As proposed. http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4101/4895174208_bde489f7f4_z.jpg I like this. From Colt Canada's website: http://www.coltcanada.com/Images/c7-annot.gif C7A2 With either a new Elcan, or a traditional ACOG the A5 is a sexy looking beast. Of course I can't afford one...... |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/8/2011 3:43:04 PM EST
[#39]
Never had a problem with the collapsible stock on the C7A2 and it makes things much easier with armour.
Not a huge fan of the Elcan C79. I have a Spectre DR on my pers weapon and love it but not much chance of seeing that becoming GI. I can dream though. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/8/2011 5:06:16 PM EST
[#40]
Quoted:
Canadians run something similar with the later C7's. That's what I've seen. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/8/2011 10:25:48 PM EST
[#41]
There is a MWO (Military Work Order) that allows armorers or DS Armament shops to install a collapsible stock kit on any M16. Our unit for example has converted about 1/2 of our M16A2s over to the collapsible stock.
It is a conversion kit that comes with a heavier buffer (don't know the exact weight off hand). After the conversion, the Armorer must retain the A2 stock so the weapon can be restored to its standard configuration. There is also this neat little item that I posted in the .mil forum not too long ago that states that the magpul UBR is an authorized modification. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/8/2011 11:35:42 PM EST
[#42]
Quoted:
There is a MWO (Military Work Order) that allows armorers or DS Armament shops to install a collapsible stock kit on any M16. Our unit for example has converted about 1/2 of our M16A2s over to the collapsible stock. It is a conversion kit that comes with a heavier buffer (don't know the exact weight off hand). After the conversion, the Armorer must retain the A2 stock so the weapon can be restored to its standard configuration. There is also this neat little item that I posted in the .mil forum not too long ago that states that the magpul UBR is an authorized modification. http://i229.photobucket.com/albums/ee225/rwkelly/PSHybrid.jpg I find it both amusing and great to see that the DOD still uses comic books for weapons training and upkeep. Oh yeah, here is my A5 type rifle 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/9/2011 2:07:28 AM EST
[#43]
Quoted:
I've seen it plenty, but I don't condone it. For guys who just carry it around the fob, it probably works just fine with the M4 stock. You should've asked them what M4 feedramps were. You would've gotten a whole lot of
I bet so too... but M4 feedramps have more to do with the high cyclic rate associated with the carbine length gas system than the butt stock arrangement (though the buffer type DOES matter, of course). I agree that using the M4-style buttstock is not advisable, though. If you want a telestock on an M16, the Vltor A5 stock is advised. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/9/2011 2:10:05 AM EST
[#44]
Quoted:
Makes sense to me. The A2 stock must be a bitch to use when you're wearing all kinds of body armor; having some adjustment would probably be a real good thing. Yeah, I've seen picture of Marines carrying them in all kinds of weird ways due to body armor and trying to get proper eye relief with the RCO. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/9/2011 2:15:46 AM EST
[#45]
Quoted:
There is a MWO (Military Work Order) that allows armorers or DS Armament shops to install a collapsible stock kit on any M16. Our unit for example has converted about 1/2 of our M16A2s over to the collapsible stock. It is a conversion kit that comes with a heavier buffer (don't know the exact weight off hand). After the conversion, the Armorer must retain the A2 stock so the weapon can be restored to its standard configuration. There is also this neat little item that I posted in the .mil forum not too long ago that states that the magpul UBR is an authorized modification. http://i229.photobucket.com/albums/ee225/rwkelly/PSHybrid.jpg That looks like a UBR..... |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/9/2011 2:18:30 AM EST
[#46]
Quoted:
Quoted:
There is a MWO (Military Work Order) that allows armorers or DS Armament shops to install a collapsible stock kit on any M16. Our unit for example has converted about 1/2 of our M16A2s over to the collapsible stock. It is a conversion kit that comes with a heavier buffer (don't know the exact weight off hand). After the conversion, the Armorer must retain the A2 stock so the weapon can be restored to its standard configuration. There is also this neat little item that I posted in the .mil forum not too long ago that states that the magpul UBR is an authorized modification. http://i229.photobucket.com/albums/ee225/rwkelly/PSHybrid.jpg That looks like a UBR..... 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/9/2011 2:20:44 AM EST
[#47]
Quoted:
Quoted:
I've seen it plenty, but I don't condone it. For guys who just carry it around the fob, it probably works just fine with the M4 stock. You should've asked them what M4 feedramps were. You would've gotten a whole lot of
I bet so too... but M4 feedramps have more to do with the high cyclic rate associated with the carbine length gas system than the butt stock arrangement (though the buffer type DOES matter, of course). I agree that using the M4-style buttstock is not advisable, though. If you want a telestock on an M16, the Vltor A5 stock is advised. There is a TACOM approved stock solution similar to the A5 from what I understand. They're not just slapping M4 stock kits on these things. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/9/2011 2:46:46 AM EST
[#48]
Quoted:
Quoted:
There is a MWO (Military Work Order) that allows armorers or DS Armament shops to install a collapsible stock kit on any M16. Our unit for example has converted about 1/2 of our M16A2s over to the collapsible stock. It is a conversion kit that comes with a heavier buffer (don't know the exact weight off hand). After the conversion, the Armorer must retain the A2 stock so the weapon can be restored to its standard configuration. There is also this neat little item that I posted in the .mil forum not too long ago that states that the magpul UBR is an authorized modification. http://i229.photobucket.com/albums/ee225/rwkelly/PSHybrid.jpg That looks like a UBR..... It is a UBR. The cheek weld on the UBR is hard to beat. Consistent through all positions. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/9/2011 3:39:15 AM EST
[#49]
The drawing was wrong. The NSN listed for the collapsible buttstock kit with the drawing of the UBR is for the standard kit with M4 buttstock and "H6" buffer.
~Augee |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/9/2011 4:42:56 AM EST
[#50]
Quoted:
The drawing was wrong. The NSN listed for the collapsible buttstock kit with the drawing of the UBR is for the standard kit with M4 buttstock and "H6" buffer. ~Augee That may be the case. I looked up the NSN in Fedlog, but it didn't have a picture and the nomenclature is pretty nondescript. I wonder if someone at PS Magazine is having a little fun... |
|
|
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.
