/k/ - Weapons

>Are Sig MCXs memes?

In what sense? As far as external piston sporting rifles go they're pretty good, but external piston not-an-ARs (HK 416, SIG 516, etc) are memes in and of themselves. They don't do a whole lot to increase reliability, it's just a security blanket for "lel rifle shits in its mouth" memers.

>>586857

Purely as a rifle it's good, but I think it (along with the trijicon sights usually) are usually overpriced for what you get, which is basically a cousin of a AR. If you have the dosh to blow though there isn't a reason to not enjoy it though.

Do it. Nothing wrong with them. Just pricey.

>>586860

What kind of optics are comparable to a trijicon 4x then?

>>586877

>How are Beretta ARX rifles

All I've heard is that they're bulky and fat. I don't know anyone that bought one after fingerfucking it, but the bult was the main reason.

>PTR 32

Good guns and the action is still retardedly violent(due to being delayed blowback), they have the paddle mag release, the lack of it being the biggest detractor when it comes to the other variants.

No real downsides at all, from what I've heard.

I've been thinking about a PTR 32. I've come to the point I've probably got enough good guns and should buy more ammunition or better optics and shit, but I don't like the AK all that much and a Germanesque 7.62x39 would be nice to add to my PTR-91 and C93.

Arguably the best, some would say, because the 7.62X39 is closest to the 8mm Kurz the original father of the family was intended for in 1945. But, its another almost thousand dollars, plus I'm still mad at PTR for sending me a 91 with canted front sight tower. Are they better now in that regard?

>>586887

>the lack of it being the biggest detractor when it comes to the other variants

My PTR 91 GI has both a paddle and button release

>>586914

And that was added within recent years. A lot of PTR-91s in circulation still don't have it.

>>586870

A decent primary arms 1-4x or something similar would likely do the same work for a few hundo cheaper, but as previously said, there's nothing wrong with trij quality.

>>586921

Trijicon's claim to fame is 1) being hella light compared to the competition 2) the fiber optic lighting shit they patented. If the price premium on the Accupoint is "worth" those features to you then go ahead, if not grab yourself a Vortex or Primary Arms sight.

>>586871

I've heard about this, no idea how it's unrestricted but uses regular AR parts.

Can you explain it for me because I see nothing anywhere on how it works.

>>586887

>>586877

ARX-100 owner here, The gun is thicc and the piston assembly makes it rather front-heavy, though seeing that the entire thing is a plastic shell, it would be difficult to balance. As for the trigger, its stiff, but has a very clean break with no sponge. The only thing people who handle my rifle complain about is that the folding stock is a bit short. But its less of an issue if you hold it squared off like an AK. The no-pin takedown and quick change pencil barrels are nice features too, ambidextrous gimmicks aside.

>>587109

Receiver sets are about $100 flat.

Should be cheap enough to pull off.

>>587112

Instead of using pins to keep the upper and lower together, the upper slides on to the lower and has a screw.

>>586857

The gen 1 model had a plastic recoil spring guide which snapped a lot, the gen 2 ones are now made of aluminium I think, so they're fine now.

Tbh, as far as .223 AR-based piston rifles are concerned, it's one of the better ones mechanically, it actually has a new BCG design to deal with the piston instead of just slapping on a solid gas key which gets peened by the piston over time and leads to carrier tilt due to the off-centre nature of simple gas key meme piston BCGs.

It's also light as fuck and has a folding stock, so that's neat.

>>586871

Don't you guys have an unrestricted AR-18 coming out some time soon too?

>>587249

You summed it up pretty well. I'd like to add that the MCX also has replaceable steel inserts on the areas that wear due to BCG tilt. It's a pretty clever design tbh, but the way I see it all these neat engineering tricks are only necessary to solve problems that were created by slapping a piston on the gun in the first place. It's good if you really, really want an AR-18/SCAR hybrid with a folding stock for some reason.

>>587284

Learn what your drop is buddy. You got a good scope even without the BDC

>>587284

>.308

Gotta wait for the MCX-MR to come out and buy that too, goy

>>587253

I thought the replaceable steel parts were up front in the cam pin track and stuff, nothing to do with carrier tilt, right?

sage for doublepost

>>587307

You're probably more correct, I'm going off half-remembered facts from shit I read two years ago back when I was thinking about buying one of these.

>>587284

>>587284

damn, how rich are you?

>>587315

Dunno about everyone else but I get to a point when I am saving where I have enough money to buy what I want but can't bring myself to spend the money.

>>587311

Time-preference, or "buy once, cry once." Even poorfags can own nice guns if they put money aside and wait for sales instead of jumping on the first Maverick 88 they see, and they save money in the long run because they won't feel a need to upgrade the expensive shit, and it lasts longer to boot. Source: Am relatively poorfag college student with a 2.5K AR build.

>>587317

Does that restraint go away when you look at a Tavor or a Deagle? If so I might have some bad news for you.

>>586877

>8-900

>200 or so more than a midrange AR15

What do you consider midrange? PSA is like 420+lower and they're the lower end of mid.

>>587323

>lower end of mid

PSA is a gamble, Anon. Above Anderson in quality, but just barely.

>>587318

>>587315

I do, but Sig has inconsistent pricing

I got a very fine p229 SAS for $550 in December, then $350 for a P320. Used the savings to get .357 Sig barrels for both guns in addition to the .40 and Trijicon night sights for the p320.

Now $1600 for that gun…just feels overpriced. I like Sig a lot, even with the (((Cohen)))) induced QC issues as of late, but I wouldn't drop 1600 on that rifle. Piston guns feel like a deliberate kiking, as if the kikes are taking advantage of the paranoia surrounding DI.

>>587327

>PSA

because they source their parts from different places, you can say that there isn't no one "PSA." It's just different sourcing.

In my experience, at least their stainless barrels are shit. I had terrible accuracy out of their one stainless barrel I tried.

Their receivers are fine.

Their NB bcg are fine.

buffers are kinda shitty, very noisy, which is the average really.

rails are good

gas tubes are pretty shit, readily melt. They supposed to, but I always hated that Stoner idea of letting the gas tube go to shit.

anyhow if I had 1600 I'd probably dump it on a 20" build. 16" barrels aggravate me, the 14.7 meme makes me want to kill people.

>>587323

>midrange

Colt

never go for the mid-range because it's always the most overpriced. You're getting something mildly better than the low-end but at a far, far greater cost.

Either go low-end or high-end. The middle is pure kikery.

>>587331

>Either go low-end or high-end. The middle is pure kikery.

Well if you define the midrange as Colt, of course that's going to be true. A better definition of midrange for an AR is a 6-9 hundred Frankenrifle. Source decent parts from good companies–Aero Precision, Toolcraft, Ballistic Advantage, Odinworks, Faxon, etc.–and you have the sweet spot of AR builds for bang for your buck: No-frills, but good accuracy and durable enough for most purposes. A "milspec+" trigger like the ALG would make it into a build like this most likely, but no fancy drop-in triggers. Furniture and lower parts are similarly "milspec+", with a few minor upgrades here and there: maybe an ambi safety, maybe a stock with storage area, you get the idea. You can get a very fine rifle in the midrange category.

>>587336

If weren't not including the optic/sights in the price, you can get a lot of rifle for 6-9 hundred

>130+transfer: CAV-15 lower

>64 for aero upper (80 if you want the no forward assist version)

>166 for Faxon barrel

>30 for Brownells lower parts kit

>20ish for carbine buffer+weight

>15 for gas tube

>-10 from coupon code on brownells

>30 for gas block

>85 for JMT saber with anti-walk pins

>80 for PSA premium BCG+charging handle*

Then just add a muzzle device (4+ bucks) and handguard. Either 350 for the carbon fiber featherweight, or 160 for Aero ATLAS-S if saving 200 bucks is worth a few extra ounces and more heat transfer is worth (and if you combine that with the gas block you get 20 dollars off on Brownells.). You're under 800 bucks with all that, and I'm not sure how you can improve it.

*You can pick up a Brownells for roughly the same price when they go on sale. I'm just doing current sales.

>>587346

Did you think you could hide the fact that you made a WWSD ripoff build by throwing out some of the more expensive parts? :^)

Your list is good, although you're overpaying for the Faxon CF tube–Smokes Composites has an MLok tube that's both lighter and ~$60 cheaper, and Brigand Arms has a tube that's even lighter, provided you're okay with a proprietary mounting system.

>>587412

>Did you think you could hide the fact that you made a WWSD ripoff build by throwing out some of the more expensive parts?

No, I just did that because it's a "high end" AR build that isn't (just) throwing some company's expensive gimmick part on the rifle. Really the only part that's unique to that is the CAV-15 lower, and the only alternative for a lower is arguing which of the twenty thousand furniture options is better.

>>587323

I was thinking ruger and smith for about $600-$700 on sales for $500 sure but these are the more common numbers I see I like PSA I consider them very cost effective and would put them up against the rugers and s&w rifles but for a rifle that's pre-built get one and and go I'd get the others since I have better access to said rifles and won't have to pay for shipping assuming a special deal is not on

>>586887

>>586945

Thanks I was considering this rifle as "my not an AR raifu". Fatness aside the trigger was what got me scratching my head and since I don't see much issue I'll just chalk it up to people being spoiled by fancy AR triggers not like I'd know, the best triggers I've felt were on my shotgun, pistols, and savage mark 2. Not exactly tacticool roof top nog shooters. Like I said definitely on my list but probably after the PTR

>>587311

I just saved for a Shit and Wesson 686+ coming out of gun jail in a few days. Not exactly mind blowing but just a few weeks ago I dropped saved shekels on trijicon mro also. That's about 1300 right there.

>>587472

sweet

can't say it doesn't look fine

>>587336

>Ballistic Advantage, Odinworks, Faxon

maybe I'm a small guy, but those barrel guys I'd consider high-end.

I'm not sure I'd consider builds as fitting into this hierarchy. You can build a 1,000 gun that shoots just as well as the most elite AR's. That's what I did tbh. Two $1100 ar-15's.

>>587575

>maybe I'm a small guy, but those barrel guys I'd consider high-end.

You can get Faxon barrels for like 160, less if they're on sale.

>>587576

yeah but that's like super clearance 16 inch govt' kind of stuff, not really the average.

What do you consider high-end barrels?

>>587588

Krieger, Criterion, McGowan, and Shilen are what I'd call "high end" barrel manufacturers. Faxon's Match Series can be considered either the upper end of midrange or the lower end of highend.

>>589900

>cuckcuckgo

>>589900

Neat concept, don't even know if the polaks have them issued yet.

>>589939

looks awesome to me and I trust Faxon. It's usually a pain in the ass to get 7.62x39 going in a non-AK. Putting the whole system in one receiver that can added so quickly is an easy sell. Price point is steep, but that's to be expected.

>>589900

bear in mind that it's been renamed to "grot", so you'll probably get better search results when using this name which is fucking retarded, grot means arrowhead why the fuck call your gun like this, call it a fucking ballista, crossbow or some shit, not an arrowhead

it's slowly getting introduced, I've got a friend in polish OT (which is the wannabe national guard, de facto weekend soldiers that get paid way less) and one of his unit's companies will get supplied with them

one of the articles I've checked did mention a contract for 53k rifles and the factory is just starting the full production

so hang in there, you might get one some day

>>586857

>not an AR-15

>looks like an AR-15

I like how gun manufacturers have completely given up. Everything's either an AK or an AR-15 and there are AR-15s that look like AKs and AKs that look like AR-15s and AR-15s that use AK mags and fire Soviet ammo and AKs that use STANAG mags and fire NATO ammo.

Why can't we get guns that aren't an ARs? It's like the fucking Mauser all over again.

>>590322

Because then people will call you a special snowflake for not wanting the blessed form of Kalashnikov or Stoner. And god forbid you want a handgun that isn't a Glock or Beretta-type.

What about custom ar pattern rifles for calibers such as 7mm rem mag and 300 wins mag?

>>590350

Eh, snowflake AR-10s are still ARs. The AR platform is a Barbie doll–you can accessorize everything you want, get all the components matched just right to complement each other, and you can build the rifle of your dreams–but no matter how unique it is it's still called Barbie underneath all of that.

>>590348

>A bit confused by that last one.

Ignore that part, I just picked the first 'common' handgun that came to mind other than glocks.

>Walther, CZ, Springfield, S&W, etc., all have their not-a-Glock, I can't think of any not-a-92s.

I was thinking the CZ75, but now that I actually look into it that doesn't seem to be the case. Oh well, handguns aren't my avenue of specialty.

>>590408

Yeah, the CZ is a near-clone of the Hi-power more than anything else.

>>587472

Hope you're not retarded enough to store a rife in the barracks.

>>589958

I got the 308 version for 1600 off Atlantic firearms, it has almost zero recoil less than my LMT MWS or SCAR

>>590558

>Stoner 63a died for this.

I will never not be mad

>>590558

If I remember right, the Stoner 63 had a similar affect on troops as the M14 - it was a pain in the dick to clean in the field and the people who were issued it either didn't bring it into fighting or used it only because they didn't have anything to drop it for.

Feast your tits on this. Canucks doing something nice for once.

What's a solid AK to buy if I'm looking to buy once?

>>598504

Arsenal is the only one left, and they're expensive as hell for an AK.

>>586858

ar15s aren't reliable though, just look at pretty much every military trial ever. they have far more malfunctions than pretty much every other assault rifle out there.

but i understand where you're coming from, being a poorfag with massive need for post-purchase rationalization

>>600562

There is a small difference but it's obvious you never shot one in your life, piston or DI.

>>600455

Hey what kind of optic is that?

What good rifles in 7.62x39mm does /k/ recommend? Rifles for getting shit done, not "customizability", unless it actually allows to make something good. Ak is an obvious choice, but is there something that can be improved more easily? AR in x39 sounds great, with easily swappable calibers and tinkering, but there seems to be some reliability issues, both with the round and the platform in general(at least due to complaints in this thread on the latter). Does PTR have nay issues?

How do the new augs compare to the old besides the optic?

>>600633

Get a Yamaha if you can.

>>600633

the AR DI system sucks dick for steel ammo, which is the only ammo realistically available for 7.62x39. Steel is just harder to cycle and that's why you need the big AK piston to rip it out, or a blowback.

>>600633

VZ 58 or Type 84 would be my guess, but good luck getting the last one if you aren't a chink or their colonies.

>>600633

AK would be your best bet, although if you want something different for the sake of difference the PTR is worth considering. Not substantially better or worse than the AK, but it's variety. You're right that the AR and 7.62x39 don't really mix—if you want that kind of performance out of an AR, .300 memeout is much less of a hassle. Maybe an ARAK-21 if you really want quick change barrels and the like, but you're still dealing with AR-pattern 7.62 magazines, which have reliability issues.

>>600719

I'm more interested in something more comfortable to handle and use than AK, AR's modability is more of a bonus, but i want a finished solution in the end. What problems does PTR have? Reliability, dirt, gasses in the mechanism, more wear on multiple parts? How are controls?

How does vz58 compare to an AK? The controls seem nicer and there is better scope mount. I'm worried about how the rifle would handle some shtf scenario.

>>600804

And what about PTRs? They seem to have the nicest controls and scope mount, aside from lack of VZs open bolt on empty mag.Also looks closest to AR of all 3

>>600781

VZ's are lighter than both AK's and AR's. They're a delight because some of them come pre tapped and drilled for a side mount. The only downside to them is some of the surplus strikers tend to be fragile like china.

>>600781

>>600806

PTRs are plenty reliable, but for a given set of circumstances—the nature of delayed blowback makes it more sensitive to different loadings. It also mangles casings something awful, but as you'll likely be shooting mostly steel I doubt that matters too much to you.

>>589900

>MSBS

It is on market in Poland already. Cost around 8k PLN. Civilian version is named "Grot S16 FB-M1"

Clip on which guys are unpacking delivery:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llMtVrhZcNE

>>586952

Waiting for them to do the revised variant. When they came out, they were like 1800, so you got a heck of a deal, nigga.

>>608647

Last I checked, they gave up on trying to import it to the US.

>>600574

>small difference

Have you read the US army test data?

>>589939

Uses meme mags and the ejection port is massive and doesn't seal very well. The CMMG Mutant looks better.

>>586877

Didn't know PTR32 was a thing, and now I want one. H&K sexiness while being compatible with my existing ammo cache. Think it's close enough to the original to mount the old wood furniture?

>>600633

Robinson XCR. The operating system is usually described as AK-like though its actually closer to the FNC and especially the M249), monolithic upper, and a variety of quick-interchange calibers (5.56x45, 7.62x39, 5.45x39, 6x45, 300 blackout, 6.8spc, 6.5 grendel, 224 valkyrie).

>>600864

It is missing a dial to be a tasco, although it could an earlier model without the branding.

>>609060

You've sold me on it. Saving money now.

>>609061

>anything Turkish

>good

Even if it's the second coming of Christ, I wouldn't want one on principle.

>>609082

>on principle

Better not be using any of those Russian and Chinese commie guns, mapleman.

>>609085

I have far greater animosity towards Turks than I do Soviets or Chinks. Everyone accepts how shitty the Ruskies and Chinks were/are, but no one seems to care about the roaches.

Besides, Soviet weaponry is perfectly ok to buy, it no longer funds communism.

>>609099

Only if you smuggle FALs and G3s up here.

>>608754

>meme mags

I'm confused, to the best of my knowledge it uses standard AR mags.

>>609127

meant for >>609061

>>589900

gross

>why poland why

>replacing the based beyrl with a cucked failure gun (acr clone)

>>609085

Russians are based and chinks are nowhere near as fucking disgusting animals like turks are

>>600455

Do you want some more guns with those mags, bruh?

>>608734

If true that's be a damn shame, but the most recent stuff I can find says Radom are still trying to import. Still, I wouldn't be surprised if plans just fell through