any love/hate for the ergo p93?

AR-15 » Rifles, Uppers, Lowers, Barrels, and more

AR Sponsor:

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - any love/hate for the ergo p93?

Posted: 8/1/2015 4:21:30 PM EDT

These have been around for years but don't seem to see many of them around.

Ever since I changed my hand guard and went from eotech to the vortex my rifle looks very funky chicken to me, so I says, why not go full velociraptor? I've always kind of liked the ergo, but it looked a little to sci fi for tastes. I think it may compliment #5 though.She's a little nose heavy with the new hand guard and that scope isn't exactly light, May add a little balance.

So any first hand experience with these? Would you buy one again? Yes no and why? Any downfalls with this other than the beardman complaints? Do the looks turn you off? I'm on the fence with that one. The ubr is still to expensive for me, I can get the ergo for around $140, and the socom for about $180. Funds are always an issue so the lower priced the better as the current stock and tube would be sold to offset some cost.

And please don't comment on the scope rings, I'm working on getting a proper mount.

Posted: 8/1/2015 5:31:45 PM EDT

[#1]

That stock has always looked very complex to me. As in, I'm an Aggie, so I'm sure someone smarter than I can figure it out, but I can't. I also run plain old two point slings, b/c I can't figure out an adjustable 3 point.

Posted: 8/1/2015 7:20:05 PM EDT

[#2]

I had an original MagPul M93 stock on my rifle and here is my opinion:

Pros:

1) looks "futuristic" and unique

2) solidly built

3) locks-up securely...absolutely no rattle/wobble/etc

Cons:

1) Proprietary receiver extension

2) adjustment lever interferes with shooter's wrist

3) limited sling mounting options (no QD points)

4) a little on the hefty side

5) a pain in the ass to install (the use of shims) and if you lose the extra shims, no one wants the thing.

Like the A.R.M.S. SIR, the M93 was a great thing when it first appeared, but, it has been supplanted by better stuff.

Posted: 8/1/2015 7:39:26 PM EDT

[#3]

I agree about the originals. The newer ones are a little lighter. Do have qd points, and now use a standard castle due to the complaints over the shims. The pic above is the current run from midway.

Tell me about wrist interference. That's the first I've heard that.

They also ship with the buttpad now instead of it costing extra.

Posted: 8/1/2015 7:54:01 PM EDT

[#4]

I guess more specifically, the adjustment interfere in all positions, or just full close? It's the stationary cheek I'm really going for. Are the're any other options besides the ergo, ubr, and socom that are collapsible?

Posted: 8/1/2015 8:07:49 PM EDT

[#5]

When you have the stock collapsed down in a shorter position (CQB), the lever bumps on the wrist. If you open it up, not an issue.

Posted: 8/1/2015 8:41:33 PM EDT

[#6]

Quote History

Quoted:
When you have the stock collapsed down in a shorter position (CQB), the lever bumps on the wrist. If you open it up, not an issue.

View Quote

In the end why'd you get rid of it?, I'm a fickle dude and havnt bought one in all these years cause deep in the back of my Brian I was afraid it would be too......toy like?

Posted: 8/1/2015 9:45:17 PM EDT

[#7]

I've always liked the look of them.
I made the mistake of buying a vltor once

Seriously you better stay clean shaved if you own a stock like that.

Posted: 8/1/2015 9:59:11 PM EDT

[#8]

Quote History

Quoted:
I've always liked the look of them.
I made the mistake of buying a vltor once

Seriously you better stay clean shaved if you own a stock like that.

View Quote

I do, I couldn't grow more than a 5 o shadow on a $1000 bet. Doesn't concern me.

Posted: 8/2/2015 12:48:26 AM EDT

[#9]

Quote History

Quoted:

In the end why'd you get rid of it?, I'm a fickle dude and havnt bought one in all these years cause deep in the back of my Brian I was afraid it would be too......toy like?

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
When you have the stock collapsed down in a shorter position (CQB), the lever bumps on the wrist. If you open it up, not an issue.

In the end why'd you get rid of it?, I'm a fickle dude and havnt bought one in all these years cause deep in the back of my Brian I was afraid it would be too......toy like?

I use my carbine as a HD and training gun, thus, I keep the stock almost fully collapsed. So, the aforementioned issue was a big reason.

Another issue was the fact that the receiver extension (this was back in 2004/2005/2006) was proprietary and you could not really get spares
without buying another stock.

Lastly, the promised accessories (storage/battery compartments, etc) that would have made the stock even more interesting to have, never came to being.

Posted: 8/2/2015 2:27:47 AM EDT

[#10]

I think they were a lot more popular when they first came out and flying the Magpul flag. They were always a little niche, just like the UBR though. You see them on a little bit of everything, but never as ubiquitous as the lighter weight stuff.

Posted: 8/2/2015 7:26:42 AM EDT

[#11]

I did have the Ergo stock a few years back. Very solid and cool looking but a bit on the porky side for my taste.

Posted: 8/2/2015 7:36:03 AM EDT

[#12]

as mentioned the lever kept bumping my wrist, and the stock kept pulling beard hair

replaced it with a bcm stock

Posted: 8/2/2015 1:23:41 PM EDT

[#13]

One other thing...

The M93 was designed before the GWOT (Magpul's documentation for the M93 has a copyright of 2000-2003) and when the GWOT
started, MagPul realized that they needed to produce stocks that used the standard receiver extension. The military was not going to
fiddle with proprietary receiver extensions and and so forth.

Below is a link to the original M93 instructions/documentation. It shows the whole spectrum of stuff (stocks and accessories) that was
to be developed for the M93 stock system:

MagPul M93 installation handout....courtesy of Wilderness Tactical

Posted: 8/2/2015 1:37:42 PM EDT

[#14]

Cool read, did none of the auxiliarys ever make it to production? I wonder if the lower rear is still removable? I could fabricate a mega face smasher . Not injected poly, but aluminum.

Posted: 8/2/2015 3:00:17 PM EDT

[#15]

That thing is obsolete.

I'd go UBR if you want something like that.

I like the new Magpul MOE SL stock better than anything released to date.

Posted: 8/2/2015 3:18:38 PM EDT

[#16]

I have one of the old Magpul M93A stocks, circa 2002 or so I think. I've always liked it, but I'm not sure the design is very relevant anymore. I won't be getting rid of mine anytime soon however. I do wish it had QD sockets on it.

Posted: 8/2/2015 3:19:08 PM EDT

[#17]

Quote History

Quoted: One other thing...

The M93 was designed before the GWOT (Magpul's documentation for the M93 has a copyright of 2000-2003) and when the GWOT
started, MagPul realized that they needed to produce stocks that used the standard receiver extension. The military was not going to
fiddle with proprietary receiver extensions and and so forth.

Below is a link to the original M93 instructions/documentation. It shows the whole spectrum of stuff (stocks and accessories) that was
to be developed for the M93 stock system:

MagPul M93 installation handout....courtesy of Wilderness Tactical

View Quote

Yeah, I was right. That thing IS insanely complex.

Posted: 8/2/2015 4:48:56 PM EDT

[#18]

Quote History

Quoted:
That thing is obsolete.

I'd go UBR if you want something like that.

I like the new Magpul MOE SL stock better than anything released to date.

View Quote

I'd go with the socom before the Ubr, they're just too popular to have a discount anywhere. The socom can be had $180, maybe less. The Ubr seems to hold firm at $225 and up. The ergo, $140. They are all overpriced imo. But that's the game we play. I'd keep my bcm, buts it's loose as hell out of spec and I can't find my original documents to send it back under rma.

Posted: 8/3/2015 7:29:40 AM EDT

[#19]

The Ergo versions are not complicated to install, they bolt right on in two minutes time. The stock has consistent cheek weld with no possibility of pulling out facial hair. The stock is rock solid with one locking lever to adjust length of pull. It does look complicated if you were planning to design and build one from scratch but not to install and use. It also offers one of the longest length of pulls out there for people with long arm reach. It now comes with the rubber pad and quick disconnect sockets on both sides standard, I had to purchase mine separately. I needed mine to add balance to a nose heavy carbine which it did nicely. Just my 2 cents

Posted: 8/3/2015 2:56:40 PM EDT

[#20]

The M93 [and by extension the Ergo] look more complicated than they are/need to be because of the "futuristic" product design.

The exact same mechanical function could easily be achieved in the form-factor of the BCM, and the M93 "evolved" into the UBR, which looks much less like it was put together out of Legos.

Even when they were released, they were the butt of the "robot foot" jokes. Redesigning their appearance for the UBR was probably a good call.

~Augee

Posted: 8/3/2015 3:52:33 PM EDT

[#21]

Quote History

Quoted: The M93 [and by extension the Ergo] look more complicated than they are/need to be because of the "futuristic" product design.

The exact same mechanical function could easily be achieved in the form-factor of the BCM, and the M93 "evolved" into the UBR, which looks much less like it was put together out of Legos.

Even when they were released, they were the butt of the "robot foot" jokes. Redesigning their appearance for the UBR was probably a good call.

~Augee

View Quote

I beg your pardon, sir. That stock looks nothing like it was put together out of Legos. THIS stock looks like it was put together out of Legos:

Posted: 8/3/2015 10:30:24 PM EDT

[#22]

Quote History

Quoted:
I beg your pardon, sir. That stock looks nothing like it was put together out of Legos. THIS stock looks like it was put together out of Legos:

http://www.feinsteingewehrwerke.com/loes/stocks/mk8/mk8Prototype.jpg

View Quote

I try to be a "function over form" guy as much as possible.

But yours looks like you put effort into making Legos look like a stock.

The M93 looks like they put effort into making a stock look like a nine year old made it by attaching random Legos together, with nothing more than a general "robot foot" shape in mind.

~Augee

Posted: 8/3/2015 10:42:19 PM EDT

[#23]

Quote History

Quoted:

I try to be a "function over form" guy as much as possible.

But yours looks like you put effort into making Legos look like a stock.

The M93 looks like they put effort into making a stock look like a nine year old made it by attaching random Legos together, with nothing more than a general "robot foot" shape in mind.

~Augee

View Quote

I was really bored in Kuwait. But it doesn't just look like a stock:

24 x 3" 00 12 ga buck