User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
USA
|
Posted: 12/22/2010 11:21:04 AM EDT
[Last Edit: cas05]
[#1]
Major Vince Jiga was the original contractor that made them at the VERY beginning of the SPR project This upper was built by him, and is the real deal. Sadly he died of cancer in 2009. Upper shipped with a letter of authenticity and test target. It is funny to note both uppers I purchased where shipped to me in 3" pvc pipes. He's joke was that it was harder than a cardboard box.
|
|
|
MS, USA
|
Posted: 12/22/2010 10:20:48 PM EDT
[#2]
Originally Posted By Engineer5:
ADCO is +1 in my book. I've also heard a lot of great things about Kevin at High Caliber Sales. High Caliber Sales is highly recommended in my book. I picked up my Mod 1 upper from him back in April at the Knob Creek show. Class act, very knowledgeable on the matter as well. All I need to complete mine is the suppressor. I mounted a TA-31F ACOG due to the fact that the greatest distance that I can shoot locally where I live is about 4-500 yards max, and just could not see spending that much more $ to get a "correct clone", even though it's good enough for me! 
|
|
|
CO, USA
|
Posted: 12/22/2010 11:02:22 PM EDT
[#3]
What does everyone feel is the most appropriately powered optic for an MK12?
|
|
|
VA, USA
|
Posted: 12/23/2010 2:43:49 AM EDT
[#4]
Originally Posted By Engineer5:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v456/Engineer23/MK%2012%20Mod%200/MK12MOD0001.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v456/Engineer23/MK%2012%20Mod%200/MK12MOD0012.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v456/Engineer23/MK%2012%20Mod%200/OPSInc004.jpg Whats the story with this rifle? The ARMS rail and the PRI does not look "normal". |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/23/2010 9:26:25 AM EDT
[#5]
Originally Posted By west2746:
Originally Posted By Engineer5:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v456/Engineer23/MK%2012%20Mod%200/MK12MOD0001.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v456/Engineer23/MK%2012%20Mod%200/MK12MOD0012.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v456/Engineer23/MK%2012%20Mod%200/OPSInc004.jpg Whats the story with this rifle? The ARMS rail and the PRI does not look "normal". The that older style rail and front sight. The front sight violated some foreign patent so it was redesigned. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/23/2010 9:45:03 AM EDT
[#6]
Originally Posted By Postal0311:
Originally Posted By west2746:
Originally Posted By Engineer5:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v456/Engineer23/MK%2012%20Mod%200/MK12MOD0001.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v456/Engineer23/MK%2012%20Mod%200/MK12MOD0012.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v456/Engineer23/MK%2012%20Mod%200/OPSInc004.jpg Whats the story with this rifle? The ARMS rail and the PRI does not look "normal". The that older style rail and front sight. The front sight violated some foreign patent so it was redesigned. Yes, I tried to create a clone of the earliest version of the Mod0. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/23/2010 11:29:19 AM EDT
[#7]
Originally Posted By oldmanT:
What does everyone feel is the most appropriately powered optic for an MK12? Nightforce 2.5-10 |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/23/2010 12:10:44 PM EDT
[#8]
Originally Posted By mathecb: Yep, thats what I have. the newer 32mm version with Mil/Mil and Zerostop. its fantasticOriginally Posted By oldmanT: What does everyone feel is the most appropriately powered optic for an MK12? Nightforce 2.5-10 |
|
|
|
MT, USA
|
Posted: 12/23/2010 12:47:08 PM EDT
[#9]
My contribution:
Some minor departures from "spec" were: -BCM BCG instead of Colt -Tactics LLC lower -DPMS LPK -A2 stock -Wylde 223 chamber Otherwise, everything is to spec as far as I can tell. Was a fun project to build. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/23/2010 7:56:47 PM EDT
[#10]
Not sure what video this screenshot was taken from but it's a Mod0 for sure.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/23/2010 8:47:53 PM EDT
[#11]
Originally Posted By mathecb:
Originally Posted By oldmanT:
What does everyone feel is the most appropriately powered optic for an MK12? Nightforce 2.5-10 Some are using this as the newer optic but most on the Mod 0 are using.. Leupold Mk4 3.5-10x40mm Illuminated Mil-dot M2 turrets. I am using a MK4 in 4.5-14x40 M1 for mine and like the little extra power. |
|
|
|
VA, USA
|
Posted: 12/24/2010 1:45:19 AM EDT
[#12]
Originally Posted By Engineer5:
Originally Posted By Postal0311:
Originally Posted By west2746:
Originally Posted By Engineer5:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v456/Engineer23/MK%2012%20Mod%200/MK12MOD0001.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v456/Engineer23/MK%2012%20Mod%200/MK12MOD0012.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v456/Engineer23/MK%2012%20Mod%200/OPSInc004.jpg Whats the story with this rifle? The ARMS rail and the PRI does not look "normal". The that older style rail and front sight. The front sight violated some foreign patent so it was redesigned. Yes, I tried to create a clone of the earliest version of the Mod0. Thanks but was talking more of the PRI forearm. The barrel nut looks smaller and the ARM rail doesnt have the cut out for it. I do not recall ever seeing a picture of the PRI forearm with a small barrel nut before. |
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 12/24/2010 9:03:24 AM EDT
[#13]
For you guys that are asking, you're overlooking one source for the MK12 Mod 0 uppers... PRI! The guys that actually MAKE the primary freakin' components sourced for these uppers also offer a complete upper ready to rock. They come with the Ops brake/mount installed and all the correct components. Very nice! Mine shoots like a dream.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/24/2010 9:33:35 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Engineer5]
[#14]
Originally Posted By west2746:
Originally Posted By Engineer5:
Originally Posted By Postal0311:
Originally Posted By west2746:
Originally Posted By Engineer5:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v456/Engineer23/MK%2012%20Mod%200/MK12MOD0001.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v456/Engineer23/MK%2012%20Mod%200/MK12MOD0012.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v456/Engineer23/MK%2012%20Mod%200/OPSInc004.jpg Whats the story with this rifle? The ARMS rail and the PRI does not look "normal". The that older style rail and front sight. The front sight violated some foreign patent so it was redesigned. Yes, I tried to create a clone of the earliest version of the Mod0. Thanks but was talking more of the PRI forearm. The barrel nut looks smaller and the ARM rail doesnt have the cut out for it. I do not recall ever seeing a picture of the PRI forearm with a small barrel nut before. That's exactly how the early ones were made. There are photos around the net. A lot of them were in the old thread that pretty much got trashed............ 
ETA: A few pics of early version at this link |
|
|
|
VA, USA
|
Posted: 12/24/2010 12:09:54 PM EDT
[#15]
Originally Posted By Engineer5:
Originally Posted By west2746:
Originally Posted By Engineer5:
Originally Posted By Postal0311:
Originally Posted By west2746:
Originally Posted By Engineer5:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v456/Engineer23/MK%2012%20Mod%200/MK12MOD0001.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v456/Engineer23/MK%2012%20Mod%200/MK12MOD0012.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v456/Engineer23/MK%2012%20Mod%200/OPSInc004.jpg Whats the story with this rifle? The ARMS rail and the PRI does not look "normal". The that older style rail and front sight. The front sight violated some foreign patent so it was redesigned. Yes, I tried to create a clone of the earliest version of the Mod0. Thanks but was talking more of the PRI forearm. The barrel nut looks smaller and the ARM rail doesnt have the cut out for it. I do not recall ever seeing a picture of the PRI forearm with a small barrel nut before. That's exactly how the early ones were made. There are photos around the net. A lot of them were in the old thread that pretty much got trashed............
ETA: A few pics of early version at this link WOW....I do not know how many times I have looked at those pictures and never noticed that before. Thanks. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/24/2010 2:56:53 PM EDT
[Last Edit: gunnut003]
[#16]
...
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/24/2010 4:15:52 PM EDT
[#17]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/25/2010 2:00:58 PM EDT
[#18]
Did anyone find out why the old thread disappeared?
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/25/2010 5:17:09 PM EDT
[#19]
Originally Posted By Matt85:
Did anyone find out why the old thread disappeared? It goes to archive after 100 pages. Team members can access that thread. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/25/2010 5:30:12 PM EDT
[#20]
Originally Posted By Vinesr6:
Originally Posted By Matt85:
Did anyone find out why the old thread disappeared? It goes to archive after 100 pages. Team members can access that thread. The one in the archives is greatly truncated from what it was when it disappeared... |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/25/2010 5:56:00 PM EDT
[#21]
Originally Posted By jdhill:
Originally Posted By Vinesr6:
Originally Posted By Matt85:
Did anyone find out why the old thread disappeared? It goes to archive after 100 pages. Team members can access that thread. The one in the archives is greatly truncated from what it was when it disappeared... Yes, it only shows pages 1-16. |
|
|
|
IN, USA
|
Posted: 12/25/2010 6:57:32 PM EDT
[#22]
 |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/25/2010 9:31:10 PM EDT
[#23]
Originally Posted By Engineer5:
ADCO is +1 in my book. I've also heard a lot of great things about Kevin at High Caliber Sales. Kevin over at high caliber is as good a guy as you can find to deal with. The whole High caliber outfit is a 10/10, on par with Larue, TVNC, AIM etc. I should definitely add that I have not heard a bad thing about any of the vendors, but Kevin is top notch. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/25/2010 9:37:18 PM EDT
[#24]
Originally Posted By crowdlg:
Originally Posted By mathecb:
Originally Posted By oldmanT:
What does everyone feel is the most appropriately powered optic for an MK12? Nightforce 2.5-10 Some are using this as the newer optic but most on the Mod 0 are using.. Leupold Mk4 3.5-10x40mm Illuminated Mil-dot M2 turrets. I am using a MK4 in 4.5-14x40 M1 for mine and like the little extra power. I went mk4 4.5-14x50 M1 TMR illum for mine. I get a Leupold discount which is the only reason I didn't go NF for the glass. I love the mk4 but I have to be honest I think I went with a little to much scope for this build. Its a big scope. I made a classic newb mistake, keep it at or under 10x you'll be fine. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/25/2010 10:44:55 PM EDT
[#25]
Has anybody used the ARMS rail on a Mod1 build, like in this photo? It just looks right for some reason.
|
|
|
|
CA, USA
|
Posted: 12/26/2010 3:03:35 AM EDT
[#26]
Not trying to start a flame war. Respectful question: In terms of military use, is the Mk12 currently the best option?
Most european armies are going to 7.62 semi-autos (mostly AR10 derivatives) for their Designated Marksmen, and for their Snipers going to .338 LM. So, wouldn't it be better for us to follow suit, and replace the M12 with something like the new Brit DM, which is basically an AR10 with a 16" barrel? The main reason being that the 7.62 is so much more powerful than 5.56, thus offering greater lethality, range, and penetration. Or, is there a good reason for retaining the Mk12, even if a rifle of equivalent size with a harder-hitting round is available? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/26/2010 5:02:30 AM EDT
[#27]
Originally Posted By Engineer5:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v456/Engineer23/MK%2012%20Mod%200/MK12MOD0001.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v456/Engineer23/MK%2012%20Mod%200/MK12MOD0012.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v456/Engineer23/MK%2012%20Mod%200/OPSInc004.jpg awesome rifle! maybe a dumb observation, but seems the sling is on backwards... 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/26/2010 6:05:31 AM EDT
[#28]
Originally Posted By Nexus-7:
Not trying to start a flame war. Respectful question: In terms of military use, is the Mk12 currently the best option? Most european armies are going to 7.62 semi-autos (mostly AR10 derivatives) for their Designated Marksmen, and for their Snipers going to .338 LM. So, wouldn't it be better for us to follow suit, and replace the M12 with something like the new Brit DM, which is basically an AR10 with a 16" barrel? The main reason being that the 7.62 is so much more powerful than 5.56, thus offering greater lethality, range, and penetration. Or, is there a good reason for retaining the Mk12, even if a rifle of equivalent size with a harder-hitting round is available? You have to remember what the role of a SDM is: to provide semi-precision fire from 300-500ms against soft skinned targets. 5.56 does fine in its intend role. I know many Marines who have killed men with Mk-12s and SAM-Rs at 700 plus meters without any real issues. The hardest part is actually hitting the target, because it is just plan hard to hit someone at those ranges with the limited exposure they give you. Barrier penetration is not so much an issue because most of the barrier material that will stop a 5.56 will stop a 50 cal, so a 7.62 isn't going to do any better. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/26/2010 8:01:49 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Scare_Crow]
[#29]
In the interest of this thread I'm posting saved pics from the last lost thread.
These are MK12 pics from others. If you see your pics and do not want them up IM me and I'll take them down. All others drool and enjoy. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/26/2010 8:38:56 AM EDT
[#30]
Originally Posted By rlarge10:
Originally Posted By Engineer5:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v456/Engineer23/MK%2012%20Mod%200/MK12MOD0001.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v456/Engineer23/MK%2012%20Mod%200/MK12MOD0012.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v456/Engineer23/MK%2012%20Mod%200/OPSInc004.jpg awesome rifle! maybe a dumb observation, but seems the sling is on backwards... Hell it could be. I just had thrown it on there for a few photos. I don't run it with a sling 'cause it just goes to the range and back. Hope to shoot a few coyotes with it in the next couple of weeks. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/26/2010 11:04:33 AM EDT
[#31]
Originally Posted By Nexus-7:
Not trying to start a flame war. Respectful question: In terms of military use, is the Mk12 currently the best option? Most european armies are going to 7.62 semi-autos (mostly AR10 derivatives) for their Designated Marksmen, and for their Snipers going to .338 LM. So, wouldn't it be better for us to follow suit, and replace the M12 with something like the new Brit DM, which is basically an AR10 with a 16" barrel? The main reason being that the 7.62 is so much more powerful than 5.56, thus offering greater lethality, range, and penetration. Or, is there a good reason for retaining the Mk12, even if a rifle of equivalent size with a harder-hitting round is available? The US Military is still trying to figure this out. The Mk12 is really a rifle for the SOF world, with the SDM-R, SAM-R, M21/25, and M39 playing the role in the rest of the force. The main reason I think there is a desire to stick with 5.56 is commonality in ammunition with the rest of the squad. Some units have dabbled in deploying 7.62 platforms (M110, Mk11, and M14 variant) to DM's with mixed results. Many of the problems appear to stem from supply, maintenance and training issues (particularly with the M14 variants). There is also the cost. Tricking out an M16 is cheaper then fielding a new platform to a limited audience. Now, if the standard infantry round should be 5.56 or 7.62 is an entirely different discussion. As for snipers, the Army (and last I read Navy too) seems to have settled on .300WM as the standard sniper round going forward, and the Marines still sticking the 7.62 for now. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/26/2010 11:47:27 AM EDT
[Last Edit: R0N]
[#32]
Originally Posted By jdhill:
Originally Posted By Nexus-7:
Not trying to start a flame war. Respectful question: In terms of military use, is the Mk12 currently the best option? Most european armies are going to 7.62 semi-autos (mostly AR10 derivatives) for their Designated Marksmen, and for their Snipers going to .338 LM. So, wouldn't it be better for us to follow suit, and replace the M12 with something like the new Brit DM, which is basically an AR10 with a 16" barrel? The main reason being that the 7.62 is so much more powerful than 5.56, thus offering greater lethality, range, and penetration. Or, is there a good reason for retaining the Mk12, even if a rifle of equivalent size with a harder-hitting round is available? The US Military is still trying to figure this out. The Mk12 is really a rifle for the SOF world, with the SDM-R, SAM-R, M21/25, and M39 playing the role in the rest of the force. The main reason I think there is a desire to stick with 5.56 is commonality in ammunition with the rest of the squad. Some units have dabbled in deploying 7.62 platforms (M110, Mk11, and M14 variant) to DM's with mixed results. Many of the problems appear to stem from supply, maintenance and training issues (particularly with the M14 variants). There is also the cost. Tricking out an M16 is cheaper then fielding a new platform to a limited audience. Now, if the standard infantry round should be 5.56 or 7.62 is an entirely different discussion. As for snipers, the Army (and last I read Navy too) seems to have settled on .300WM as the standard sniper round going forward, and the Marines still sticking the 7.62 for now. The Marine Corps went with the Mk12 as an UNS for usage in AFG, following the inability to produce sufficient quantities of SAM-Rs. Right now a replacement is being looked at whether it is more Mk-12s or the M27 is still to be determined. The M39 was only really issued to Marine Corps Security Forces, with a few non-first line units getting them because of not having enough Mk-12s available. Right now the Marine Corps is looking at what caliber the SR-21 will be, the requirement is ability to engage to 1500m with a PIH of 10 percent. Neither the 7.62 or 300 win gives the capability; I believe 338 may get fielded but one of the big concerns is ammo would almost cost as much per year as all the weapon and optics combined. However the 7.62 REPR will be retained with the SSP for usage from 0-800 meters. |
|
|
|
CA, USA
|
Posted: 12/26/2010 12:42:13 PM EDT
[#33]
What does "SSP" stand for?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/26/2010 1:24:40 PM EDT
[#34]
Originally Posted By Nexus-7:
What does "SSP" stand for? Scout Sniper Platoons? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/26/2010 6:50:23 PM EDT
[#35]
Originally Posted By R0N:
The Marine Corps went with the Mk12 as an UNS for usage in AFG, following the inability to produce sufficient quantities of SAM-Rs. Right now a replacement is being looked at whether it is more Mk-12s or the M27 is still to be determined. The M39 was only really issued to Marine Corps Security Forces, with a few non-first line units getting them because of not having enough Mk-12s available. Right now the Marine Corps is looking at what caliber the SR-21 will be, the requirement is ability to engage to 1500m with a PIH of 10 percent. Neither the 7.62 or 300 win gives the capability; I believe 338 may get fielded but one of the big concerns is ammo would almost cost as much per year as all the weapon and optics combined. However the 7.62 REPR will be retained with the SSP for usage from 0-800 meters. Interesting that they would not be able to produce SAM-R's, but would be able to enough Mk12's... was there a particular hold up on the SAM-R's? Not to mention the possibility (likelihood maybe?) of having to re-barrel every year... weren't these some of the things that led NSWC to develop Mk248 Mod 1 .300WM as an alternative to .338L that retained comparable range and accuracy? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/26/2010 7:15:42 PM EDT
[#36]
Originally Posted By jdhill:
Originally Posted By R0N:
The Marine Corps went with the Mk12 as an UNS for usage in AFG, following the inability to produce sufficient quantities of SAM-Rs. Right now a replacement is being looked at whether it is more Mk-12s or the M27 is still to be determined. The M39 was only really issued to Marine Corps Security Forces, with a few non-first line units getting them because of not having enough Mk-12s available. Right now the Marine Corps is looking at what caliber the SR-21 will be, the requirement is ability to engage to 1500m with a PIH of 10 percent. Neither the 7.62 or 300 win gives the capability; I believe 338 may get fielded but one of the big concerns is ammo would almost cost as much per year as all the weapon and optics combined. However the 7.62 REPR will be retained with the SSP for usage from 0-800 meters. Interesting that they would not be able to produce SAM-R's, but would be able to enough Mk12's... was there a particular hold up on the SAM-R's? Not to mention the possibility (likelihood maybe?) of having to re-barrel every year... weren't these some of the things that led NSWC to develop Mk248 Mod 1 .300WM as an alternative to .338L that retained comparable range and accuracy? Probably the flip front sight that had to be fitted/installed at KAC. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/26/2010 8:50:35 PM EDT
[#37]
Originally Posted By jdhill:
Originally Posted By R0N:
The Marine Corps went with the Mk12 as an UNS for usage in AFG, following the inability to produce sufficient quantities of SAM-Rs. Right now a replacement is being looked at whether it is more Mk-12s or the M27 is still to be determined. The M39 was only really issued to Marine Corps Security Forces, with a few non-first line units getting them because of not having enough Mk-12s available. Right now the Marine Corps is looking at what caliber the SR-21 will be, the requirement is ability to engage to 1500m with a PIH of 10 percent. Neither the 7.62 or 300 win gives the capability; I believe 338 may get fielded but one of the big concerns is ammo would almost cost as much per year as all the weapon and optics combined. However the 7.62 REPR will be retained with the SSP for usage from 0-800 meters. Interesting that they would not be able to produce SAM-R's, but would be able to enough Mk12's... was there a particular hold up on the SAM-R's? Not to mention the possibility (likelihood maybe?) of having to re-barrel every year... weren't these some of the things that led NSWC to develop Mk248 Mod 1 .300WM as an alternative to .338L that retained comparable range and accuracy? The SAM-Rs were being built at PWS. PWS could not or did not want to keep up, particularly since the MK12 Mod1 already being produced by NSWC-Crane offered a more or less identical capacity, and was a mature weapon system. No need for them to start building SAM-Rs. It was easier to just get SPRs from Crane. ~Augee |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/26/2010 9:03:23 PM EDT
[#38]
Who's rifles are these? Specs?
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/27/2010 3:08:49 PM EDT
[Last Edit: RTUtah]
[#39]
From the SPR thread:
Originally Posted By KillAgain:
Here's some more MK12 pictures from the clearing of Marjah. Enjoy! 
This is a hide I set up around the 85 northing on the east side of route 605(center of Marjah). None of the area had been cleared to the west and 1/6 was still to our south pushing north. 
What the kids used to call, "a murder hole." 
Scope view. You can see route 605, it runs north to south down the center of Marjah. The naked tree line made the hide close to invisible from the road.  |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 12/28/2010 11:54:42 PM EDT
[#40]
Daniel Defense has a gas block option
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2010 6:10:42 AM EDT
[#41]
Originally Posted By jdhill:
Originally Posted By R0N:
The Marine Corps went with the Mk12 as an UNS for usage in AFG, following the inability to produce sufficient quantities of SAM-Rs. Right now a replacement is being looked at whether it is more Mk-12s or the M27 is still to be determined. The M39 was only really issued to Marine Corps Security Forces, with a few non-first line units getting them because of not having enough Mk-12s available. Right now the Marine Corps is looking at what caliber the SR-21 will be, the requirement is ability to engage to 1500m with a PIH of 10 percent. Neither the 7.62 or 300 win gives the capability; I believe 338 may get fielded but one of the big concerns is ammo would almost cost as much per year as all the weapon and optics combined. However the 7.62 REPR will be retained with the SSP for usage from 0-800 meters. Interesting that they would not be able to produce SAM-R's, but would be able to enough Mk12's... was there a particular hold up on the SAM-R's? Not to mention the possibility (likelihood maybe?) of having to re-barrel every year... weren't these some of the things that led NSWC to develop Mk248 Mod 1 .300WM as an alternative to .338L that retained comparable range and accuracy? PWS is relatively small they have to build and maintain all the M40A3-5 sniper rifles, all the rifles and pistols for the shoot team, and the "MEU-SOC 45s" that are sent back for rebuild. The don't have the through put required to build the several hundred additional rifles and those systems that would come back every year for rebuild. We are seeing a similar problem with the Mk12s, they have been used heavily since the summer of 08 and there is not the life cycle maintenance in place to keep them serviceable. The goal for the the SR21 is replacing the barrel every three thousand rounds, which is two deployment cycles. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/30/2010 12:42:42 AM EDT
[#42]
Anyone running a 1-4x on these rifles? Considering trying a TR24 on my Mod 0, as the longest range I shoot is 300.
|
|
|
|
CA, USA
|
Posted: 1/1/2011 12:37:19 PM EDT
[#43]
Originally Posted By R0N:
We are seeing a similar problem with the Mk12s, they have been used heavily since the summer of 08 and there is not the life cycle maintenance in place to keep them serviceable. What is the main issue with Mk12 servicability? shot-out barrels? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2011 2:03:59 PM EDT
[#44]
Originally Posted By Nexus-7:
Originally Posted By R0N:
We are seeing a similar problem with the Mk12s, they have been used heavily since the summer of 08 and there is not the life cycle maintenance in place to keep them serviceable. What is the main issue with Mk12 servicability? shot-out barrels? They are just generally worn out, many of the deployed battalions report up to 75 percent of their guns being deadlined through a combination of wear and lack of replacement parts. |
|
|
|
CA, USA
|
Posted: 1/1/2011 5:25:30 PM EDT
[#45]
Originally Posted By R0N:
Originally Posted By Nexus-7:
Originally Posted By R0N:
We are seeing a similar problem with the Mk12s, they have been used heavily since the summer of 08 and there is not the life cycle maintenance in place to keep them serviceable. What is the main issue with Mk12 servicability? shot-out barrels? They are just generally worn out, many of the deployed battalions report up to 75 percent of their guns being deadlined through a combination of wear and lack of replacement parts. 75%! Are they Mk12-specific parts going tits-up? Parts commonality with an M4 must be 95% or so. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2011 5:47:05 PM EDT
[Last Edit: R0N]
[#46]
There is actually not a huge float block of parts for M4s or A4s out there. If a gun gauges out or fails a PFI it is normally just evac'd out vice the 2111s doing work on them.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/2/2011 12:14:03 AM EDT
[#47]
Where is everybody finding their KAC FF rails nowadays?
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/2/2011 11:23:50 AM EDT
[#48]
|
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 1/2/2011 11:55:09 AM EDT
[#49]
Beautiful rifles... after reading Lone Survivor I've been jonesing to get my hands on one
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/2/2011 4:37:11 PM EDT
[#50]
Dumb question of the day: Will the ARMS 40 low profile work with the SPR-PEQ?
|
|
|
|
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.
