User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 8/28/2014 8:46:35 PM EST
[#1]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By StealthGuy:
I honestly don't understand the whole port size shitfest. That's about last on my cloneliess(new word) list. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By StealthGuy:
Originally Posted By lancecriminal86:
Originally Posted By cmcflex:
Originally Posted By lancecriminal86:
At one point, I remember a battle on gas port size regarding .08~something on the DD barrels being "non-spec", and that legit Colt's barrels were .07~something. I got into an interdasting exchange on Gunnit regarding the Specialized Armament and Colt's involvement in the development, and indicating that after Crane went from the cut M4 barrels with the .070 gas port, Colt's guys eventually did more testing and upped the gas port on their 10.3" barrels. I had thought the argument here was that the Mil barrels had a smaller port because they were intended for NATO ammo and suppressed use, while civvie barrels like the DD had a larger port to allow use of trash .223 ammo like Wolf. I haven't tracked this thread as much lately thanks to children and $$$, can anyone remind me whether the legit 10.3" barrels increased gas port size later on? Any of our inside-source armorers able to measure a current-issue 10.3" port? I mentioned one data point earlier in this thread: I recently added a RIS II to my spare CQBR upper, installing a Badger Ordnance Mk12 gas manifold on my SAW MK18BA (10.3 barrel assembly). I do not have calipers but have various drill bits. I was able to fit a 5/64" bit into the gas port, which puts it roughly at 0.078". Certainly not the 0.070 cited by the one PowerPoint, which incidentally is all the info we have. Doing some reading on TOS, a fellow was making claims that gas port alone will not determine how over/under gassed a system will be. Rather, it depends on the relationship between gas port and chamber dimensions. Those issues are beyond pay grade (wrong field), but I figured I would pass that along. It seems that the SAW barrels can be tamed with just a H3 buffer (per Ken's recommendation), which I find more attractive than dealing with adjustable gas manifolds and varying springs, which seems to be how people are handling their DD barrels. ETA: it has also been said that Ken specs his barrels from Colt. Maybe the armorer that posts in this thread can measure the port on a "legit" barrel that is issued. Otherwise, I don't think we will ever know the answer to your question.  Yeah, like I said I got into it with someone on Reddit who alluded to SAW and Colt's upping the port size past the .070 after their own testing, and that the guy from SAW had designed the H3 while he was at Colt's for that purpose. Basically the statement was that Crane's .070 estimate wasn't enough, and that behind the scenes after that Powerpoint Colt's upped the port size further and I would assume presented Crane with their findings/testing. It makes sense to me that if Colt's did more testing and told Crane "this port size and buffer will work better", Crane might have gone with their suggestion. I just remember that it was a big argument about the DD barrels being frowned upon due to port size, when it may be possible they are the legit port size. Granted, the purist would still want a cut or factory Colt's, but it was interesting to me nonetheless! I'm gathering all of this for the day I can rebuild my 12.5" to a more spec configuration. I honestly don't understand the whole port size shitfest. That's about last on my cloneliess(new word) list. First off, the idea that port size has anything to do with "clone correctness" is absurd. I have yet to hear anyone arguing for or against a port size based on what is "clone correct" But, lancecriminal86, you are pretty much correctly remembering the facts. I don't know where this guy got his data about Colt eventually upping the port size, but as far as I know that's no true in any way. You can still find plenty of documents that are fairly recent that support the gas port is still spec'd at .070. But yes, when Crane did their testing for the 10.3" barrel, the port size was increased to .070 so that they would run reliably. However, this was done with the constraint of known NATO ammo that's typically loaded a bit hotter than crap .223 that the civi market has a lot of access to. So when DD, Noveske, LMT, etc… did their own ~10" barrels, they each did their own testing and decided on their own gas port size. Most manufacturers landing somewhere in the .07 - .078 range, and that seems to be plenty reliable. DD on the other hand went way above that, with some 10.3" barrels going up to .086. (Some docs even show .089) In my opinion, and many others, this is WAY too far, and makes for a significantly over gassed carbine. The gun recoils really sharp, it's harder to keep "on target" for follow-up shots, and it significantly increases parts wear. The argument is that it "insures reliability", that the gun would still run just fine being super dirty and with cheap steel ammo. BUT, most people don't have any issues with their Noveske and LMT barrels in that regard. Not to mention, not all of us run steel case ammo, so having a port size optimized for it seems unnecessary. Personally, I just don't find it fun to shoot. I have 2 cut down barrels with .07X gas ports and one DD barrel. Anytime I shoot them together I absolutely hate the DD barreled gun, it's just so sharp and unpleasant compared to the other ones. I would compare it to the difference in shooting a standard 6920 and then shooting an SR-15. It's very noticeable. FWIW, my DD barrel ends up ejecting brass at around 2 to 3 o'clock. I have no idea what SAW is doing to their barrels, they may indeed by opening the port up. I've heard there is a "reliability package" that they offer, and it may be indeed part of that. I wouldn't know, I've never bought one of their barrels. But I can say with almost certainty that the .mil barrels are still using the spec and it hasn't changed. IMO, you basically have 4 options when looking to get a Mk 18 style barrel 1. DD 10.3. Clone correct 10.3 size, reliable, but way over gassed and unpleasant to shoot. 2. Colt 10.3 from SAW. Clone correct size, reliable, and optimized gas port. But super expensive. 3. 10.5 size from Noveske, LMT, PSA, etc… Reliable, usually good price, optimized gas port, but not clone correct size. 4. Standard carbine gas length barrel from any manufacturer, cut down and gas port opened up to your own spec. #4 is the option that I choose because I like the 10.3 size, I like having a smooth running gun, and I don't like paying $500+ for a barrel that I plan to run a lot of ammo through very fast. That said, any of the options are good. And there are many people with DD barrels who are plenty happy with them. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 2:37:21 AM EST
[#2]
|
|
|
|
LA, USA
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 2:53:56 AM EST
[#3]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TinyCrumb:
First off, the idea that port size has anything to do with "clone correctness" is absurd. I have yet to hear anyone arguing for or against a port size based on what is "clone correct" But, lancecriminal86, you are pretty much correctly remembering the facts. I don't know where this guy got his data about Colt eventually upping the port size, but as far as I know that's no true in any way. You can still find plenty of documents that are fairly recent that support the gas port is still spec'd at .070. But yes, when Crane did their testing for the 10.3" barrel, the port size was increased to .070 so that they would run reliably. However, this was done with the constraint of known NATO ammo that's typically loaded a bit hotter than crap .223 that the civi market has a lot of access to. So when DD, Noveske, LMT, etc… did their own ~10" barrels, they each did their own testing and decided on their own gas port size. Most manufacturers landing somewhere in the .07 - .078 range, and that seems to be plenty reliable. DD on the other hand went way above that, with some 10.3" barrels going up to .086. (Some docs even show .089) In my opinion, and many others, this is WAY too far, and makes for a significantly over gassed carbine. The gun recoils really sharp, it's harder to keep "on target" for follow-up shots, and it significantly increases parts wear. The argument is that it "insures reliability", that the gun would still run just fine being super dirty and with cheap steel ammo. BUT, most people don't have any issues with their Noveske and LMT barrels in that regard. Not to mention, not all of us run steel case ammo, so having a port size optimized for it seems unnecessary. Personally, I just don't find it fun to shoot. I have 2 cut down barrels with .07X gas ports and one DD barrel. Anytime I shoot them together I absolutely hate the DD barreled gun, it's just so sharp and unpleasant compared to the other ones. I would compare it to the difference in shooting a standard 6920 and then shooting an SR-15. It's very noticeable. FWIW, my DD barrel ends up ejecting brass at around 2 to 3 o'clock. I have no idea what SAW is doing to their barrels, they may indeed by opening the port up. I've heard there is a "reliability package" that they offer, and it may be indeed part of that. I wouldn't know, I've never bought one of their barrels. But I can say with almost certainty that the .mil barrels are still using the spec and it hasn't changed. IMO, you basically have 4 options when looking to get a Mk 18 style barrel 1. DD 10.3. Clone correct 10.3 size, reliable, but way over gassed and unpleasant to shoot. 2. Colt 10.3 from SAW. Clone correct size, reliable, and optimized gas port. But super expensive. 3. 10.5 size from Noveske, LMT, PSA, etc… Reliable, usually good price, optimized gas port, but not clone correct size. 4. Standard carbine gas length barrel from any manufacturer, cut down and gas port opened up to your own spec. #4 is the option that I choose because I like the 10.3 size, I like having a smooth running gun, and I don't like paying $500+ for a barrel that I plan to run a lot of ammo through very fast. That said, any of the options are good. And there are many people with DD barrels who are plenty happy with them. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TinyCrumb:
Originally Posted By StealthGuy:
Originally Posted By lancecriminal86:
Originally Posted By cmcflex:
Originally Posted By lancecriminal86:
At one point, I remember a battle on gas port size regarding .08~something on the DD barrels being "non-spec", and that legit Colt's barrels were .07~something. I got into an interdasting exchange on Gunnit regarding the Specialized Armament and Colt's involvement in the development, and indicating that after Crane went from the cut M4 barrels with the .070 gas port, Colt's guys eventually did more testing and upped the gas port on their 10.3" barrels. I had thought the argument here was that the Mil barrels had a smaller port because they were intended for NATO ammo and suppressed use, while civvie barrels like the DD had a larger port to allow use of trash .223 ammo like Wolf. I haven't tracked this thread as much lately thanks to children and $$$, can anyone remind me whether the legit 10.3" barrels increased gas port size later on? Any of our inside-source armorers able to measure a current-issue 10.3" port? I mentioned one data point earlier in this thread: I recently added a RIS II to my spare CQBR upper, installing a Badger Ordnance Mk12 gas manifold on my SAW MK18BA (10.3 barrel assembly). I do not have calipers but have various drill bits. I was able to fit a 5/64" bit into the gas port, which puts it roughly at 0.078". Certainly not the 0.070 cited by the one PowerPoint, which incidentally is all the info we have. Doing some reading on TOS, a fellow was making claims that gas port alone will not determine how over/under gassed a system will be. Rather, it depends on the relationship between gas port and chamber dimensions. Those issues are beyond pay grade (wrong field), but I figured I would pass that along. It seems that the SAW barrels can be tamed with just a H3 buffer (per Ken's recommendation), which I find more attractive than dealing with adjustable gas manifolds and varying springs, which seems to be how people are handling their DD barrels. ETA: it has also been said that Ken specs his barrels from Colt. Maybe the armorer that posts in this thread can measure the port on a "legit" barrel that is issued. Otherwise, I don't think we will ever know the answer to your question. Yeah, like I said I got into it with someone on Reddit who alluded to SAW and Colt's upping the port size past the .070 after their own testing, and that the guy from SAW had designed the H3 while he was at Colt's for that purpose. Basically the statement was that Crane's .070 estimate wasn't enough, and that behind the scenes after that Powerpoint Colt's upped the port size further and I would assume presented Crane with their findings/testing. It makes sense to me that if Colt's did more testing and told Crane "this port size and buffer will work better", Crane might have gone with their suggestion. I just remember that it was a big argument about the DD barrels being frowned upon due to port size, when it may be possible they are the legit port size. Granted, the purist would still want a cut or factory Colt's, but it was interesting to me nonetheless! I'm gathering all of this for the day I can rebuild my 12.5" to a more spec configuration. I honestly don't understand the whole port size shitfest. That's about last on my cloneliess(new word) list. First off, the idea that port size has anything to do with "clone correctness" is absurd. I have yet to hear anyone arguing for or against a port size based on what is "clone correct" But, lancecriminal86, you are pretty much correctly remembering the facts. I don't know where this guy got his data about Colt eventually upping the port size, but as far as I know that's no true in any way. You can still find plenty of documents that are fairly recent that support the gas port is still spec'd at .070. But yes, when Crane did their testing for the 10.3" barrel, the port size was increased to .070 so that they would run reliably. However, this was done with the constraint of known NATO ammo that's typically loaded a bit hotter than crap .223 that the civi market has a lot of access to. So when DD, Noveske, LMT, etc… did their own ~10" barrels, they each did their own testing and decided on their own gas port size. Most manufacturers landing somewhere in the .07 - .078 range, and that seems to be plenty reliable. DD on the other hand went way above that, with some 10.3" barrels going up to .086. (Some docs even show .089) In my opinion, and many others, this is WAY too far, and makes for a significantly over gassed carbine. The gun recoils really sharp, it's harder to keep "on target" for follow-up shots, and it significantly increases parts wear. The argument is that it "insures reliability", that the gun would still run just fine being super dirty and with cheap steel ammo. BUT, most people don't have any issues with their Noveske and LMT barrels in that regard. Not to mention, not all of us run steel case ammo, so having a port size optimized for it seems unnecessary. Personally, I just don't find it fun to shoot. I have 2 cut down barrels with .07X gas ports and one DD barrel. Anytime I shoot them together I absolutely hate the DD barreled gun, it's just so sharp and unpleasant compared to the other ones. I would compare it to the difference in shooting a standard 6920 and then shooting an SR-15. It's very noticeable. FWIW, my DD barrel ends up ejecting brass at around 2 to 3 o'clock. I have no idea what SAW is doing to their barrels, they may indeed by opening the port up. I've heard there is a "reliability package" that they offer, and it may be indeed part of that. I wouldn't know, I've never bought one of their barrels. But I can say with almost certainty that the .mil barrels are still using the spec and it hasn't changed. IMO, you basically have 4 options when looking to get a Mk 18 style barrel 1. DD 10.3. Clone correct 10.3 size, reliable, but way over gassed and unpleasant to shoot. 2. Colt 10.3 from SAW. Clone correct size, reliable, and optimized gas port. But super expensive. 3. 10.5 size from Noveske, LMT, PSA, etc… Reliable, usually good price, optimized gas port, but not clone correct size. 4. Standard carbine gas length barrel from any manufacturer, cut down and gas port opened up to your own spec. #4 is the option that I choose because I like the 10.3 size, I like having a smooth running gun, and I don't like paying $500+ for a barrel that I plan to run a lot of ammo through very fast. That said, any of the options are good. And there are many people with DD barrels who are plenty happy with them. Excellent post. I want to do a 10.3 w/ FSB + thread-on suppressor. Any idea on which gas port size to start with? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 6:32:30 AM EST
[Last Edit: Advance]
[#4]
I swear, just when I think this build is finished I find a better more clone correct part. Received the M4A1 lower yesterday at 5:30 PM, had the Form 1 eFiled by 8:00 PM and it is headed off to IDENT this morning... If things go like the last one, I should have my stamp in 18 days...
 EDIT: How ironic... Just received approval on my Colt M4 CARBINE marked lower. I'll post better pics as time allows.   |
|
|
|
UT, USA
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 4:10:28 PM EST
[Last Edit: poser_pilot6]
[#5]
Quote HistoryWhat is that helmet rail attachment device that the ear pro is hooked to? Edit - not the rail itself, the device that appears to attach to the rail and the ear pro. |
|
|
ME, USA
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 4:11:02 PM EST
[#6]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By PFran42:
I swear, just when I think this build is finished I find a better more clone correct part. Received the M4A1 lower yesterday at 5:30 PM, had the Form 1 eFiled by 8:00 PM and it is headed off to IDENT this morning... If things go like the last one, I should have my stamp in 18 days... https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-_fdJF_SAQSI/VABjhlRZLYI/AAAAAAABGJE/h6TsMRD2UIs/w1872-h1385-no/M4A1%2BLower.jpg EDIT: How ironic... Just received approval on my Colt M4 CARBINE marked lower. I'll post better pics as time allows. https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-lDTJYyU1xfw/U-Zd_FOxuGI/AAAAAAABASY/vXq2Hr_QJHM/w1478-h985-no/DSC_0180.JPG https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-OuPgWNsebbo/U-ZkQ5Iz23I/AAAAAAABAp8/jKTdgOKAGjE/w1478-h985-no/DSC_0192.JPG Holy shit. That's damn beautiful. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 4:22:59 PM EST
[#7]
Yea Pfran that is looking nice!
That M4a1 receiver is looking nice as well 
One day I wont live 15 minutes from where those are made, or even in the same state, and then I'll be able to have one 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 4:36:04 PM EST
[#8]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By PFran42:
I swear, just when I think this build is finished I find a better more clone correct part. Received the M4A1 lower yesterday at 5:30 PM, had the Form 1 eFiled by 8:00 PM and it is headed off to IDENT this morning... If things go like the last one, I should have my stamp in 18 days... https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-_fdJF_SAQSI/VABjhlRZLYI/AAAAAAABGJE/h6TsMRD2UIs/w1872-h1385-no/M4A1%2BLower.jpg EDIT: How ironic... Just received approval on my Colt M4 CARBINE marked lower. I'll post better pics as time allows. https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-lDTJYyU1xfw/U-Zd_FOxuGI/AAAAAAABASY/vXq2Hr_QJHM/w1478-h985-no/DSC_0180.JPG https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-OuPgWNsebbo/U-ZkQ5Iz23I/AAAAAAABAp8/jKTdgOKAGjE/w1478-h985-no/DSC_0192.JPG So you had your stamp approved for an sbr within weeks??! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 4:53:15 PM EST
[#9]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Slovpeter: So you had your stamp approved for an sbr within weeks??! Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Slovpeter: Originally Posted By PFran42: I swear, just when I think this build is finished I find a better more clone correct part. Received the M4A1 lower yesterday at 5:30 PM, had the Form 1 eFiled by 8:00 PM and it is headed off to IDENT this morning... If things go like the last one, I should have my stamp in 18 days... https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-_fdJF_SAQSI/VABjhlRZLYI/AAAAAAABGJE/h6TsMRD2UIs/w1872-h1385-no/M4A1%2BLower.jpg EDIT: How ironic... Just received approval on my Colt M4 CARBINE marked lower. I'll post better pics as time allows. https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-lDTJYyU1xfw/U-Zd_FOxuGI/AAAAAAABASY/vXq2Hr_QJHM/w1478-h985-no/DSC_0180.JPG https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-OuPgWNsebbo/U-ZkQ5Iz23I/AAAAAAABAp8/jKTdgOKAGjE/w1478-h985-no/DSC_0192.JPG So you had your stamp approved for an sbr within weeks??! 17 days sir.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 5:23:37 PM EST
[#10]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By PFran42:
17 days sir. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By PFran42:
Originally Posted By Slovpeter:
Originally Posted By PFran42:
I swear, just when I think this build is finished I find a better more clone correct part. Received the M4A1 lower yesterday at 5:30 PM, had the Form 1 eFiled by 8:00 PM and it is headed off to IDENT this morning... If things go like the last one, I should have my stamp in 18 days... https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-_fdJF_SAQSI/VABjhlRZLYI/AAAAAAABGJE/h6TsMRD2UIs/w1872-h1385-no/M4A1%2BLower.jpg EDIT: How ironic... Just received approval on my Colt M4 CARBINE marked lower. I'll post better pics as time allows. https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-lDTJYyU1xfw/U-Zd_FOxuGI/AAAAAAABASY/vXq2Hr_QJHM/w1478-h985-no/DSC_0180.JPG https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-OuPgWNsebbo/U-ZkQ5Iz23I/AAAAAAABAp8/jKTdgOKAGjE/w1478-h985-no/DSC_0192.JPG So you had your stamp approved for an sbr within weeks??! 17 days sir. Damn. |
|
|
|
NY, USA
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 5:56:17 PM EST
[#11]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By poser_pilot6:
What is that helmet rail attachment device that the ear pro is hooked to? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By poser_pilot6:
What is that helmet rail attachment device that the ear pro is hooked to? The rails come standard on the Ops Core FAST helmet. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 6:03:36 PM EST
[Last Edit: Slovpeter]
[#12]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By PFran42:
17 days sir. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By PFran42:
Originally Posted By Slovpeter:
Originally Posted By PFran42:
I swear, just when I think this build is finished I find a better more clone correct part. Received the M4A1 lower yesterday at 5:30 PM, had the Form 1 eFiled by 8:00 PM and it is headed off to IDENT this morning... If things go like the last one, I should have my stamp in 18 days... https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-_fdJF_SAQSI/VABjhlRZLYI/AAAAAAABGJE/h6TsMRD2UIs/w1872-h1385-no/M4A1%2BLower.jpg EDIT: How ironic... Just received approval on my Colt M4 CARBINE marked lower. I'll post better pics as time allows. https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-lDTJYyU1xfw/U-Zd_FOxuGI/AAAAAAABASY/vXq2Hr_QJHM/w1478-h985-no/DSC_0180.JPG https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-OuPgWNsebbo/U-ZkQ5Iz23I/AAAAAAABAp8/jKTdgOKAGjE/w1478-h985-no/DSC_0192.JPG So you had your stamp approved for an sbr within weeks??! 17 days sir. Holy hell! I was planning on getting the mk18 pistol by might just buy the sbr if the form wait is only 2 and half weeks. Anyone else having these results? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 6:18:22 PM EST
[#13]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Slovpeter:
Holy hell! I was planning on getting the mk18 pistol by might just buy the sbr if the form wait is only 2 and half weeks. Anyone else having these results? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Slovpeter:
Originally Posted By PFran42:
Originally Posted By Slovpeter:
Originally Posted By PFran42:
I swear, just when I think this build is finished I find a better more clone correct part. Received the M4A1 lower yesterday at 5:30 PM, had the Form 1 eFiled by 8:00 PM and it is headed off to IDENT this morning... If things go like the last one, I should have my stamp in 18 days... https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-_fdJF_SAQSI/VABjhlRZLYI/AAAAAAABGJE/h6TsMRD2UIs/w1872-h1385-no/M4A1%2BLower.jpg EDIT: How ironic... Just received approval on my Colt M4 CARBINE marked lower. I'll post better pics as time allows. https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-lDTJYyU1xfw/U-Zd_FOxuGI/AAAAAAABASY/vXq2Hr_QJHM/w1478-h985-no/DSC_0180.JPG https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-OuPgWNsebbo/U-ZkQ5Iz23I/AAAAAAABAp8/jKTdgOKAGjE/w1478-h985-no/DSC_0192.JPG So you had your stamp approved for an sbr within weeks??! 17 days sir. Holy hell! I was planning on getting the mk18 pistol by might just buy the sbr if the form wait is only 2 and half weeks. Anyone else having these results? Form 1 is the quick approval. That means non factory SBRs/suppressors -- those require form 4s. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 6:37:07 PM EST
[#14]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By PFran42:
I swear, just when I think this build is finished I find a better more clone correct part. Received the M4A1 lower yesterday at 5:30 PM, had the Form 1 eFiled by 8:00 PM and it is headed off to IDENT this morning... If things go like the last one, I should have my stamp in 18 days... https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-_fdJF_SAQSI/VABjhlRZLYI/AAAAAAABGJE/h6TsMRD2UIs/w1872-h1385-no/M4A1%2BLower.jpg EDIT: How ironic... Just received approval on my Colt M4 CARBINE marked lower. I'll post better pics as time allows. https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-lDTJYyU1xfw/U-Zd_FOxuGI/AAAAAAABASY/vXq2Hr_QJHM/w1478-h985-no/DSC_0180.JPG https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-OuPgWNsebbo/U-ZkQ5Iz23I/AAAAAAABAp8/jKTdgOKAGjE/w1478-h985-no/DSC_0192.JPG Well done, looks cooler than that AXTS thing you posted lol |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 6:41:05 PM EST
[Last Edit: Advance]
[#15]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By sweatpants: Well done, looks cooler than that AXTS thing you posted lol Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By sweatpants: Originally Posted By PFran42: I swear, just when I think this build is finished I find a better more clone correct part. Received the M4A1 lower yesterday at 5:30 PM, had the Form 1 eFiled by 8:00 PM and it is headed off to IDENT this morning... If things go like the last one, I should have my stamp in 18 days... https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-_fdJF_SAQSI/VABjhlRZLYI/AAAAAAABGJE/h6TsMRD2UIs/w1872-h1385-no/M4A1%2BLower.jpg EDIT: How ironic... Just received approval on my Colt M4 CARBINE marked lower. I'll post better pics as time allows. https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-lDTJYyU1xfw/U-Zd_FOxuGI/AAAAAAABASY/vXq2Hr_QJHM/w1478-h985-no/DSC_0180.JPG https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-OuPgWNsebbo/U-ZkQ5Iz23I/AAAAAAABAp8/jKTdgOKAGjE/w1478-h985-no/DSC_0192.JPG Well done, looks cooler than that AXTS thing you posted lol Thanks! You remember? I got my ass handed to me for that. Edit: Got the good camera out and was able to snap a few good natural light pics. I'll post them along with details shortly.          |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 7:38:35 PM EST
[#18]
To be honest, since it took over two years to find the parts and build, I'm going to gently stoke it and wipe it with baby diapers for a little while.
As soon as the stamp comes back on the M4A1lower, this lower will become the "throw it down the driveway" CQBR and I will take great pleasure in violating it with Krylon. The Beater will also get the SU-231A and will get used and abused.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 8:16:08 PM EST
[#20]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By osha:
Form 1 is the quick approval. That means non factory SBRs/suppressors -- those require form 4s. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By osha:
Originally Posted By Slovpeter:
Originally Posted By PFran42:
Originally Posted By Slovpeter:
Originally Posted By PFran42:
I swear, just when I think this build is finished I find a better more clone correct part. Received the M4A1 lower yesterday at 5:30 PM, had the Form 1 eFiled by 8:00 PM and it is headed off to IDENT this morning... If things go like the last one, I should have my stamp in 18 days... https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-_fdJF_SAQSI/VABjhlRZLYI/AAAAAAABGJE/h6TsMRD2UIs/w1872-h1385-no/M4A1%2BLower.jpg EDIT: How ironic... Just received approval on my Colt M4 CARBINE marked lower. I'll post better pics as time allows. https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-lDTJYyU1xfw/U-Zd_FOxuGI/AAAAAAABASY/vXq2Hr_QJHM/w1478-h985-no/DSC_0180.JPG https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-OuPgWNsebbo/U-ZkQ5Iz23I/AAAAAAABAp8/jKTdgOKAGjE/w1478-h985-no/DSC_0192.JPG So you had your stamp approved for an sbr within weeks??! 17 days sir. Holy hell! I was planning on getting the mk18 pistol by might just buy the sbr if the form wait is only 2 and half weeks. Anyone else having these results? Form 1 is the quick approval. That means non factory SBRs/suppressors -- those require form 4s. So engraving the receiver via form 1 is faster than form 4 sbrs which are taco fry and already NFA listed? I'm not sure if that's correct. I just googled it and I'm still a bit confused haha. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 8:22:13 PM EST
[#21]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Slovpeter:
So engraving the receiver via form 1 is faster than form 4 sbrs which are taco fry and already NFA listed? I'm not sure if that's correct. I just googled it and I'm still a bit confused haha. The Form 1 can be done through e file....if you have a trust. An efiled form 1 is taking less than a month right now. A paper form 1 is taking in the 4-6 month range. A form 4 can only be done on paper currently.....those are still taking in the 6+ month range. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 8:38:39 PM EST
[Last Edit: Advance]
[#22]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AZJBT: Where did you get the serial number thingy? Ebay:    |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 8:41:34 PM EST
[#23]
Great pics PFran, lookin' good
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 8:42:54 PM EST
[Last Edit: Slovpeter]
[#24]
So I could order the dd mk18 pistol, get a trust established, and then eform 1? Holy crap.
Also on the serial marking pfran just posted, is that the serial number you used for engraving or is that just for looks? As you can tell I'm probably lookin stupid. I'm new to this NFA thing and I'm learning as I go, and looking at some stickies. |
|
|
|
IN, USA
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 8:46:26 PM EST
[#25]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Slovpeter:
So I could order the dd mk18 pistol, get a trust established, and then eform 1? Holy crap. Also on the serial marking pfran just posted, is that the serial number you used for engraving or is that just for looks? As you can tell I'm probably lookin stupid. I'm new to this NFA thing and I'm learning as I go, and looking at some stickies. His is for looks. |
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 10:17:49 PM EST
[Last Edit: Slaytanic]
[#26]
Took the Block II and its sidekick to the range today. Zeroed in the the DDMK18 and shot the X out of the X Ring on the first shot with the Sig P226 MK25. Edit: Page ownage and i can't get the picture to show up
|
|
|
UT, USA
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 10:24:53 PM EST
[Last Edit: poser_pilot6]
[#27]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Trapezoid:
The rails come standard on the Ops Core FAST helmet. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Trapezoid:
Originally Posted By poser_pilot6:
What is that helmet rail attachment device that the ear pro is hooked to? The rails come standard on the Ops Core FAST helmet. I'm familiar. I'm asking about the thing attached to the rail. ETA - 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 11:31:43 PM EST
[#29]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By poser_pilot6:
I'm familiar. I'm asking about the thing attached to the rail. ETA - http://i.imgur.com/KmlFSLe.png?1 http://i.imgur.com/UsDgrj3.png?1 Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By poser_pilot6:
Originally Posted By Trapezoid:
Originally Posted By poser_pilot6:
What is that helmet rail attachment device that the ear pro is hooked to? The rails come standard on the Ops Core FAST helmet. I'm familiar. I'm asking about the thing attached to the rail. ETA - http://i.imgur.com/KmlFSLe.png?1 http://i.imgur.com/UsDgrj3.png?1 ARC peltor adapters? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2014 7:29:19 AM EST
[#32]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TinyCrumb: All that work to get the right parts and you have that stock on there.  Good looking build tho! Thanks! What is wrong with the stock? Should it be a black LMT Gen 1? LMT Enhanced SOPMOD - Gen 1 - FDE (without QD adapter)  LMT Enhanced SOPMOD - Gen 1 - Black  Unrelated: SU-231A Mounted  |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2014 7:31:43 AM EST
[#33]
On another note...
That eForm 1 I filed yesterday for the new M4A1 lower I just picked up, got approved this morning. You read that right... 1 day approval! I bet they semi-batched it in with the other eForm 1s I had in the system.
|
|
|
|
OH, USA
|
Posted: 8/30/2014 8:05:59 AM EST
[#34]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By PFran42:
On another note... That eForm 1 I filed yesterday for the new M4A1 lower I just picked up, got approved this morning. You read that right... 1 day approval! I bet they semi-batched it in with the other eForm 1s I had in the system. 1 day approval? What in the hell?! |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2014 8:13:52 AM EST
[Last Edit: Advance]
[#35]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By HunterKiller86: 1 day approval? What in the hell?! Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By HunterKiller86: Originally Posted By PFran42: On another note... That eForm 1 I filed yesterday for the new M4A1 lower I just picked up, got approved this morning. You read that right... 1 day approval! I bet they semi-batched it in with the other eForm 1s I had in the system. 1 day approval? What in the hell?! Actually, I misspoke. It took two days.  |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2014 8:14:22 AM EST
[#36]
Now if only all of our socom cans came off that fast.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2014 8:23:11 AM EST
[Last Edit: compuvette]
[#37]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ECPrevatte:
Now if only all of our socom cans came off that fast. No kidding! ETA- I wonder how many Surefire cans this thread has sold? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2014 8:44:43 AM EST
[#38]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ECPrevatte:
Now if only all of our socom cans came off that fast. QFT I have 8 stamps pending and my surefire is what I'm most excited about.... Well that and my SBS |
|
|
|
TN, USA
|
Posted: 8/30/2014 9:31:03 AM EST
[Last Edit: NateDS2K]
[#39]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By PFran42:
Thanks! What is wrong with the stock? Should it be a black LMT Gen 1? LMT Enhanced SOPMOD - Gen 1 - FDE (without QD adapter) https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-Xso-DbM7WYo/VAHAOLJjdKI/AAAAAAABG0U/l3JoS9Ay1Wo/w2238-h1000-no/DSC_0065.JPG LMT Enhanced SOPMOD - Gen 1 - Black https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-yD3Je7t4LjM/VAHCvMOzcjI/AAAAAAABG1w/Pm90vAVrpn0/w2238-h901-no/DSC_0059.JPG Unrelated: SU-231A Mounted https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-5T94OswTrHI/VAHCZEA_tkI/AAAAAAABG08/od9a711WUIQ/w2238-h1194-no/DSC_0068.JPG Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By PFran42:
Originally Posted By TinyCrumb: All that work to get the right parts and you have that stock on there.
Good looking build tho! Thanks! What is wrong with the stock? Should it be a black LMT Gen 1? LMT Enhanced SOPMOD - Gen 1 - FDE (without QD adapter) https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-Xso-DbM7WYo/VAHAOLJjdKI/AAAAAAABG0U/l3JoS9Ay1Wo/w2238-h1000-no/DSC_0065.JPG LMT Enhanced SOPMOD - Gen 1 - Black https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-yD3Je7t4LjM/VAHCvMOzcjI/AAAAAAABG1w/Pm90vAVrpn0/w2238-h901-no/DSC_0059.JPG Unrelated: SU-231A Mounted https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-5T94OswTrHI/VAHCZEA_tkI/AAAAAAABG08/od9a711WUIQ/w2238-h1194-no/DSC_0068.JPG Nothing wrong with the FDE SOPMOD. This is hands down my favorite CQBR so far. Now just flip the front sight around... 
|
|
|
IN, USA
|
Posted: 8/30/2014 10:08:25 AM EST
[#40]
My guess is the Gen 2 vs Gen 1. The non-QD model is what's most commonly (never seen the Gen 2) issued.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2014 10:09:07 AM EST
[#41]
Ok Fran, time to hit the rattle can.
Solid build man. I am jealous of the 4P. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2014 10:27:33 AM EST
[#42]
|
|
|
|
NY, USA
|
Posted: 8/30/2014 11:50:04 AM EST
[#43]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By poser_pilot6:
I'm familiar. I'm asking about the thing attached to the rail. ETA - http://i.imgur.com/KmlFSLe.png?1 http://i.imgur.com/UsDgrj3.png?1 Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By poser_pilot6:
Originally Posted By Trapezoid:
Originally Posted By poser_pilot6:
What is that helmet rail attachment device that the ear pro is hooked to? The rails come standard on the Ops Core FAST helmet. I'm familiar. I'm asking about the thing attached to the rail. ETA - http://i.imgur.com/KmlFSLe.png?1 http://i.imgur.com/UsDgrj3.png?1 Ah gotcha. Those are Peltor ARC adaptors, made for the Comtac series of headsets. I believe they are also compatible with peltor's line of electronic ear pro but I may be misinformed on that. |
|
|
TN, USA
|
Posted: 8/30/2014 11:55:22 AM EST
[Last Edit: NateDS2K]
[#44]
"In the wild" shot of an FDE SOPMOD stock on a CQBR |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2014 11:58:18 AM EST
[#45]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By PFran42:
Actually, I misspoke. It took two days. https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-Sgy-AZt-rug/VAHOdUMeHbI/AAAAAAABG2s/sS8pANIl5z4/w429-h752-no/m4a1_approved.PNG Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By PFran42:
Originally Posted By HunterKiller86:
Originally Posted By PFran42:
On another note... That eForm 1 I filed yesterday for the new M4A1 lower I just picked up, got approved this morning. You read that right... 1 day approval! I bet they semi-batched it in with the other eForm 1s I had in the system. 1 day approval? What in the hell?! Actually, I misspoke. It took two days. https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-Sgy-AZt-rug/VAHOdUMeHbI/AAAAAAABG2s/sS8pANIl5z4/w429-h752-no/m4a1_approved.PNG Dang! I think it's about time for me to eForm 1 some more lowers. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2014 12:06:05 PM EST
[Last Edit: TinyCrumb]
[#46]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By PFran42:
Thanks! What is wrong with the stock? Should it be a black LMT Gen 1? LMT Enhanced SOPMOD - Gen 1 - FDE (without QD adapter) https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-Xso-DbM7WYo/VAHAOLJjdKI/AAAAAAABG0U/l3JoS9Ay1Wo/w2238-h1000-no/DSC_0065.JPG LMT Enhanced SOPMOD - Gen 1 - Black https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-yD3Je7t4LjM/VAHCvMOzcjI/AAAAAAABG1w/Pm90vAVrpn0/w2238-h901-no/DSC_0059.JPG Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By PFran42:
Originally Posted By TinyCrumb: All that work to get the right parts and you have that stock on there.
Good looking build tho! Thanks! What is wrong with the stock? Should it be a black LMT Gen 1? LMT Enhanced SOPMOD - Gen 1 - FDE (without QD adapter) https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-Xso-DbM7WYo/VAHAOLJjdKI/AAAAAAABG0U/l3JoS9Ay1Wo/w2238-h1000-no/DSC_0065.JPG LMT Enhanced SOPMOD - Gen 1 - Black https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-yD3Je7t4LjM/VAHCvMOzcjI/AAAAAAABG1w/Pm90vAVrpn0/w2238-h901-no/DSC_0059.JPG Haha, yeah, just giving you shit about the gen 2 stock. There's *some* reports of them being seen in the wild, but I know you're not a "seen in the wild" kinda guy. There's also been some pretty credible evidence that black is the only color issued in this particular sector. But tan are common enough, just make sure it's a Gen 1. Now… what's up with that selector?  (See, I'm not gonna let you get away that easy)
And also ditch those silly ladders. |
|
|
|
AFG
|
Posted: 8/30/2014 12:11:01 PM EST
[#47]
FERFRANS CRD on MK18!....
|
|
|
IN, USA
|
Posted: 8/30/2014 12:20:35 PM EST
[#48]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Stukas87:
FERFRANS CRD on MK18!.... http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j292/stukas87/DSC02230_zps7b5fa3a4.jpg MRD mount Black or FDE on that Elcan? |
|
|
AFG
|
Posted: 8/30/2014 12:30:24 PM EST
[Last Edit: Stukas87]
[#49]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Tmender03:
MRD mount Black or FDE on that Elcan? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Tmender03:
Originally Posted By Stukas87:
FERFRANS CRD on MK18!.... http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j292/stukas87/DSC02230_zps7b5fa3a4.jpg MRD mount Black or FDE on that Elcan? 
Same MK18 (at the bottom) from here: Defense Review AR/M4 MODS |
|
|
OH, USA
|
Posted: 8/30/2014 1:56:59 PM EST
[#50]
My humble submission.
High Caliber Sales upper Elcan 1-4 w/ Insight MRDS Surefire Socom muzzle brake Surefire 7.62 mini Surefire m300 w/ HSP thorntail sbr mount Kac micro rear and taupe front TD qd stubby vfg Rock river lower B5 sopmod stock magpul sling Cqd sling mount I know its not clone correct so be gentle on me. PSA: never add up how much your mk18 would cost to replace. Especially in the presence of your wife. Haha 
|
|
|
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.
