User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 12/28/2013 11:04:09 AM EDT
[#1]
Just ordered a set for my new build.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/30/2013 5:45:56 PM EDT
[#2]
Got some for my pistol build were easier too install than the pistol grip was,keep in mind I had to use a worn out Torx head screwdriver because my Allen wrenches weren't long enough.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/30/2013 7:23:06 PM EDT
[#3]
I would make the rear take down pin a duplicate of the front pivot pin. At least as far as the shape and size of the head is concerned.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/31/2013 12:16:45 AM EDT
[#4]
My set just came in yesterday in the morning. Installing pins in my HK took me like 2 or 3 minutes max, without removing castle nuts. I reused original detent pins (decided that HK pins most probably are not "crappy"). BAD-EPS look very nice and positively stays in place, but I'm able to push-pull them out without tools. But there is one downside. With HK locking pins removed very slight amount of play between receivers shown up. It is small, but given than HK pins did great job to provide zero play, it still is noticeable. I might decide to go for 50/50 solution, leaving front HK pin to use play reducing feature and rear BAD-EPS pin to have tool-less access to rifle internals.
Overall, BAD-EPS is well though quality piece of stuff and I think this product can fast become de-facto standard on high quality builds. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/31/2013 7:07:33 AM EDT
[#5]
One of the design goals was to keep the take down pin low profile, while providing a more effective surface area for fingers to pinch and pull out. As it is, both pin heads are lower in profile than even the factory pins. If the take down pin had similar profile as the pivot pin, it would stick out more than the factory pin, and though it may not create as much interference as other extended pins and become a hindrance to the operation of the right side selector lever, its presence will be noticeable.
The EPS are designed to do a better job than factory pins, while remaining low profile and out of the way 
Re: tight fit between upper and lower, I don't think it's been proven that a tight fit would benefit accuracy, I quite believe the opposite has been proven (that a tight fit has no bearing on accuracy). I am not certain of the reasons HK wanted the fit to be tight, it could be they're simply being German and just want things done "correctly." A tight fit between the upper and lower was not one of the design goals. We didn't go out of our way to make things loose, the EPS are 0.001 smaller with 0.0005 tolerance in diameter because we have to ensure compatibility with mix and match upper and lower receivers, In our opinion, a tighter than normal fit between the two has no tangible benefit, but could have rather unpleasant consequences if it makes it impossible to field strip the weapon without a tool. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/31/2013 9:37:07 AM EDT
[#6]
I can attest that the rear takedown pin will get in the way if they are extended. I modified YHM pins to give me some clearance. I’ve never had to take my rifle down in a class or out shooting (knock on wood) but I would like to ensure I could take it down with gloves… So far I have noticed how SMOOTH the Battle Arms pins operate… but they are so low profile that I’m not 100% sure I could operate them with gloves on (I have short sausage fingers anyway). I’ve been so impressed with how smooth they are and with my BADASSs that for now they will stay on the rifle until I can abuse them some and make up my mind on what I want to do.
Modified Front/Rear YHM pins… super easy to yank on with gloves, sorta get in the way still, never had smooth in/out 
Battle Arms pins… Not in the way, SUPER smooth operation, waiting to see if my gloves grip them 
would you guys be against a V2 as an extended set? maybe something low profile with a fold down pull tab or a design with selector clearance? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/31/2013 12:49:01 PM EDT
[#7]
You should try it with gloves on, that was also one of the requirements
In order for the pin head to be more usable, something has to be done, as its saucer shape and thin edge aren't conducive in that regard. One can simply enlarge it and give it an hour glass shape, but by doing so it also creates a problem if you have an ambidextrous selector lever on the right side. It's worse if you are a left hand shooter. Instead of making it bigger, we gave the pin head knurling and a flat area to give it more usable grabbing or pinching area, and we made the pin's shaft longer by 0.30", so while the pin head remains flush on the right, when the take down pin is pushed in from the left side, it now sticks out longer for the fingers to grab or pinch in the pulling motion. Unobtrusive when you don't need it, it only sticks out in a useful manner when you want it to 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/31/2013 6:50:07 PM EDT
[#8]
I"m not anti-battle arms... not at all. i just think an extended version might have some "sales." maybe even me... since i'm super mall ninja side charge boy... even on my 300blk.
I look forward to all you guys produce and how it is applicable to me and how i run my rigs. i'm actually going to build a backup... and i have never contemplated that. my current rig is XX,000 round through it without a single "yank" on the side charger. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/31/2013 8:28:36 PM EDT
[#9]
Went ahead and ordered my set.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/31/2013 9:57:01 PM EDT
[#10]
No worries, I didn't think you were anti-BAD, even if you were we'd try to win you over
In my opinion, the factory pins are superior to the extended ones, because they work adequately well, and more importantly, do not interfere with the ambidextrous selector operation. So all along ours were designed with that in mind. The pattern to many problem solving in the AR industry seems to be "make it better by making it bigger." Bigger isn't always better. We try to retain the same size as the items we're replacing, and improve them by better engineering, paying more attention to how our hands and fingers operate them. This school of thought has been put into practice, the latest Battle Arms Dev. lineup, the EMR, will be another product that incorporate surfaces and textures that help the user achieve greater ease with weapon manipulation and control
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/2/2014 12:31:22 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
One of the design goals was to keep the take down pin low profile, while providing a more effective surface area for fingers to pinch and pull out. As it is, both pin heads are lower in profile than even the factory pins. If the take down pin had similar profile as the pivot pin, it would stick out more than the factory pin, and though it may not create as much interference as other extended pins and become a hindrance to the operation of the right side selector lever, its presence will be noticeable. The EPS are designed to do a better job than factory pins, while remaining low profile and out of the way
Re: tight fit between upper and lower, I don't think it's been proven that a tight fit would benefit accuracy, I quite believe the opposite has been proven (that a tight fit has no bearing on accuracy). I am not certain of the reasons HK wanted the fit to be tight, it could be they're simply being German and just want things done "correctly." A tight fit between the upper and lower was not one of the design goals. We didn't go out of our way to make things loose, the EPS are 0.005 smaller in diameter because we have to ensure compatibility with mix and match upper and lower receivers, In our opinion, a tighter than normal fit between the two has no tangible benefit, but could have rather unpleasant consequences if it makes it impossible to field strip the weapon without a tool. I'm sure you met all your design goal. Actually it is amazing that for something as simple as "just set of pins" this set of requirements was defined and met. I do user requirement analysis for a living and now how mutually excluding one to other user requirements usually are. I do not think your pins "introduced" any loosines in my rifle. They just allowed this small amount on play between receivers to show up, while original HK pins with spring loaded balls were just removing it. I actually expected some play to show up, just did not know how much. I know that tight fit do not have mechanical benefit for accuracy, but "all is in the head". Rock solid rifle gives better feedback for user when he goes for maximum accuracy. Civilian HK rifles are designated as "Match Rifle" and made to such spec. They even add screw that enables user to remove any play in stock (added to standard play reducing and adjustable spring loaded ball detents in receiver extension. Actually every rifle HK makes for civilian market must have strong background for hunting or sport (formal target shooting) to get BKA approval. BTW German Army DMR rifle HK G28 (military version of civilian MR308/MR762, that is civilian version of HK417 - it made full circle) also uses same locking pins for tight upper to lower fit. Probably HK wants things done "correctly" on precision rifles. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/2/2014 5:00:49 AM EDT
[#12]
Thank you for sharing your knowledge with us, praises from the praise worthy is an honor indeed
The EPS project started two years ago, back then the goal was the same, but the scope was much narrower, in that it wasn't to be a set but just the take down pin. The pivot pin is easy to remove once the rifle is allowed to pivot, so it wasn't deemed necessary to improve it. Back then, the problem of extended pin's interference had been long identified and marked for elimination. In addition to adding texture and the flat to the take down pin head, the design called for the pin's body to be longer, which would make it stick out further on the left, since it already sticks out a bit, 0.030" was still sufficiently flush with the beefed up reinforcement area for the receiver extension on the receiver. Military moron called out a number (0.030") and it happened to be the magical length to add. The result is the pin is out of the way of both selector levers, the additional 0.030" length's usefulness only shows itself after the user pushes the pin in from the left side into the receiver. The pin head now sticks out 0.030" more on the right side, giving the user's fingers usable pinching space to pull it out. 0.030 is just long enough, and no longer than necessary, to achieve that. HK may not want folks to misinterpret the slight play in their weapon, if it exists, as a flaw, maybe that's all their locking pins are meant to do. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2014 2:10:12 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
HK may not want folks to misinterpret the slight play in their weapon, if it exists, as a flaw, maybe that's all their locking pins are meant to do. Maybe, yet they have it on military issue G28. It was not OTS system, but was developed around MR308 together with German Army. For some reason both HK and Bundeswehr decided locking pins should stay in place. But this is precision rifle (sub-MOA with match ammo and every one is guaranteed not more thatn 1.5MOA with issue ammo). BTW HK pins need tool, because tool-less version would either interfere with ambi safety or be snag risk. I wonder if you could improve on design and make two-in-one: your EPS features with added anti-play feature a'la HK? Up for a challenge? ;) |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2014 3:28:43 PM EDT
[#14]
We would if we can be convinced there's benefit in eliminating the play between the upper and lower
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/5/2014 5:56:57 PM EDT
[#15]
I was going to get to shoot with my pins this week, but that ain't gonna happen.
Is the rear pin head machined to be flat, or should I say not round? Because mine is. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/5/2014 7:16:53 PM EDT
[#16]
It's concave, not convex which is the shape of the factory pin, you sure you didn't install the factory pin back in?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/7/2014 12:59:17 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
We would if we can be convinced there's benefit in eliminating the play between the upper and lower You will see the light. Eventually
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/7/2014 11:41:13 AM EDT
[#18]
Do share
We don't profess to know everything, quite the opposite, and we're always eager to learn new things
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/7/2014 2:27:50 PM EDT
[#19]
I'd pay good money for some pins that removed play from you guys. I hate when I try and make an accurate shot and the upper shifts at the exact wrong moment.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2014 7:54:08 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'd pay good money for some pins that removed play from you guys. I hate when I try and make an accurate shot and the upper shifts at the exact wrong moment. Yes, I hate receivers that wobble. I have a Noveske SPR upper that I paired with a stripped Noveske lower that I built up and paired to it....it wobbles 
Of all the brands I have, I wouldn't have expected to have a problem with the Noveske |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2014 8:11:17 AM EDT
[#21]
I think if you do want to fix the slight play, solutions other than the pins are the way to go. Receiver tensioning screw in the lower being one of them, it's out of the way, and can be adjusted.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2014 1:23:52 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think if you do want to fix the slight play, solutions other than the pins are the way to go. Receiver tensioning screw in the lower being one of them, it's out of the way, and can be adjusted. How hard is it to add something like that to a lower? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2014 2:46:32 PM EDT
[#23]
Just couple of operations when the lower is being machined from the forging.
Our first receivers (to be viewed for the first time at SHOT) do not have it, it was one of the items debated at the time, and we decided to forgo it. To clarify, our lowers can and will have as many features as we want to put on them, but for the first production runs, we just want basic receivers. Very well made but sans mud flaps and whip antennas
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2014 3:45:41 PM EDT
[#24]
But I love stupid giant antennas.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/10/2014 1:16:03 PM EDT
[#25]
Once we have a good handle on the no frills Battle Arms spec receivers, we can start adding features on them. One of which will probably be the tension screw, under consideration are ambidextrous bolt release, captive take down pin detent and spring, A-DAC (from AXTS), our own version of ambidextrous bolt lock / release, etc.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/14/2014 1:58:06 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think if you do want to fix the slight play, solutions other than the pins are the way to go. Receiver tensioning screw in the lower being one of them, it's out of the way, and can be adjusted. I use a accu-wedge in my AR to eliminate "slop" between lower and upper. Provides a tight fit for $4-5 or whatever I paid. Can be modified with a razor blade to get the right fit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/14/2014 4:48:19 AM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I use a accu-wedge in my AR to eliminate "slop" between lower and upper. Provides a tight fit for $4-5 or whatever I paid. Can be modified with a razor blade to get the right fit. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I think if you do want to fix the slight play, solutions other than the pins are the way to go. Receiver tensioning screw in the lower being one of them, it's out of the way, and can be adjusted. I use a accu-wedge in my AR to eliminate "slop" between lower and upper. Provides a tight fit for $4-5 or whatever I paid. Can be modified with a razor blade to get the right fit. $0.05 O-ring on the front lug works better than an accuwedge
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/14/2014 10:39:00 AM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
$0.05 O-ring on the front lug works better than an accuwedge Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I think if you do want to fix the slight play, solutions other than the pins are the way to go. Receiver tensioning screw in the lower being one of them, it's out of the way, and can be adjusted. I use a accu-wedge in my AR to eliminate "slop" between lower and upper. Provides a tight fit for $4-5 or whatever I paid. Can be modified with a razor blade to get the right fit. $0.05 O-ring on the front lug works better than an accuwedge The o-ring works, but have to replace it darn near every time you open the receiver. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/15/2014 4:01:07 AM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
We would if we can be convinced there's benefit in eliminating the play between the upper and lower Quote HistoryQuoted:
We would if we can be convinced there's benefit in eliminating the play between the upper and lower Looks like you already are self-convinced*: Quoted:
Once we have a good handle on the no frills Battle Arms spec receivers, we can start adding features on them. One of which will probably be the tension screw, It is just matter of choosing right way to do that.
I like this feature in pins, because this do not require changes or special features in receiver design and does not use parts that can move, be lost or just wear-off. * - but I intent to write in detail (not spamming your thread, but will let you know) why and where I think there is a benefit, when I will have some more time. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2014 7:48:13 AM EDT
[#30]
I'm ambivalent on the tension screw. I don't like how it achieves its end by pushing against the upper. We might do it because customers ask for it, they don't need to use it just because it's there, but for those that do, they would have the option
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2014 11:47:57 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
A tight fit between the upper and lower was not one of the design goals. We didn't go out of our way to make things loose, the EPS are 0.005 smaller in diameter because we have to ensure compatibility with mix and match upper and lower receivers, In our opinion, a tighter than normal fit between the two has no tangible benefit, but could have rather unpleasant consequences if it makes it impossible to field strip the weapon without a tool. A tight fitting upper and lower is one of those things that matter to me, I dont care if it effects accuracy or not. I want a good fit and finish on rifles that I spent a good bit of money and time on when I build them. I find a tight pin is essencial to make that happen. In some cases a larger than mil spec is needed to tighten up the recievers. I'm bummed that you have decreased the diameter of the pins. While I understand it is only .005", it is enough. I like the design but the decreased diameter will "loosen" up my rifles and that is something that is not OK with me. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2014 1:25:57 PM EDT
[#32]
It was my fault for the incorrect numbers. Ours is about 0.001 smaller, we hold 0.0005 tolerance on the EPS
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/17/2014 4:24:08 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm ambivalent on the tension screw. I don't like how it achieves its end by pushing against the upper. That is why I prefer solution that use pins. In HK version pins (actually spring loaded balls build into pins - pins have relief cut on upper side to allow that) pull upper down to sit tight against lower. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/17/2014 7:25:27 AM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Ours is about 0.001 smaller, we hold 0.0005 tolerance on the EPS
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/17/2014 7:35:09 AM EDT
[#35]
Not to offer up excuses here for doing or not doing something, it is one of the design goals to make ours as compatible as possible with the myriad of uppers and lowers. If we were to make the pins solely for our lower (I'm sure you guys have seen it by now) and upper (to be announced), we keep very tight tolerances and can therefore make the pins just right for OUR upper and lower receivers. When the pins are made to work with the millions of upper and lowers in existence, the parameters are not the same anymore.
We know the milspec diameter and tolerances, when we checked actual pins from mainstream manufacturers, there were enough differences to cause concerns for larger pins. We make our selector centers just long enough to be compatible with receiver thickness up to 0.93 (milspec is around 0.88), with the pins we aimed to achieve wide compatibility as well. To date, we do not have a single instance of the pins being incompatible with any upper and lower mix and match combinations. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/17/2014 7:02:49 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Not to offer up excuses here for doing or not doing something, it is one of the design goals to make ours as compatible as possible with the myriad of uppers and lowers. If we were to make the pins solely for our lower (I'm sure you guys have seen it by now) and upper (to be announced), we keep very tight tolerances and can therefore make the pins just right for OUR upper and lower receivers. When the pins are made to work with the millions of upper and lowers in existence, the parameters are not the same anymore. We know the milspec diameter and tolerances, when we checked actual pins from mainstream manufacturers, there were enough differences to cause concerns for larger pins. We make our selector centers just long enough to be compatible with receiver thickness up to 0.93 (milspec is around 0.88), with the pins we aimed to achieve wide compatibility as well. To date, we do not have a single instance of the pins being incompatible with any upper and lower mix and match combinations. Well after ordering the San Tan Tactical ST-15 lower, BAD-ASS lever, and EPS... once again I am wowed by your products! Those pins were a real surprise... I got them out of brand loyalty but never knew HOW much of a change it would be. Props on putting the detents on the pins to use a punch/bullet for take-down. The BAD-ASS is perfect as always, test fitted it even though I don't have my trigger in yet. Next step - seeing how it all mates up with a POF drop-in trigger and KNS pins. Pics to come once it's installed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/17/2014 9:23:25 PM EDT
[#37]
Thanks Alex, we can't let our customers down
The EPS will be OEM on War Sport ARs, more news to come in this department soon
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/18/2014 7:05:25 AM EDT
[#38]
I ordered a couple of sets from LaRue, they had it for a bit cheaper.
Do you have any idea if they will be getting stock soon, or is there a backlog? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/18/2014 9:36:28 AM EDT
[#39]
There's no back log from us, I'll get in touch with Blair to let them know they're out of stock.
You can find them on Amazon, and here at EE as well, Mike is an ar15.com authorized dealer
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/18/2014 6:46:06 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There's no back log from us, I'll get in touch with Blair to let them know they're out of stock. You can find them on Amazon, and here at EE as well, Mike is an ar15.com authorized dealer Thanks. Who is Mike. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/18/2014 7:18:21 PM EDT
[#41]
Mike is one of our dealers on 15.com.
You can purchase it from Rainier Arms, Rainier Arms was the first dealer / distributor to have it buy it from Rainier Arms When our receivers come out, Rainier Arms will also be the first to have it
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/5/2014 6:10:09 PM EDT
[#42]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/6/2014 5:26:22 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryNo problem Duffy, glad to do it! Glad to see a compay paying attention to detail and making quality products that are meant for and suitable to be put in a fighting rifle. Devin Viergever Www.facebook.com/almosttactical Www.almosttactical.com |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2014 2:51:21 PM EDT
[#44]
Thanks for the pic Defense Marketing Group guys
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2014 2:25:00 PM EDT
[#45]
Any chance of making a lightweight version of these out of either titanium or aluminum? Seems the latest trend is lightweight everything. There are other companies out there making lightweight takedown pins (I won't mention names on this thread out of respect), but I'm torn because I really like the enhanced functionality of the BAD EPS (own 2 sets).
Thanks! |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2014 3:45:08 PM EDT
[#46]
We've been working on LW stuff for a long time now, we're actually quite ahead of the curve. Our long development time is always well used, that we haven't shown any is because it isn't time yet. Our approach to the LW is somewhat different, we can go into greater detail shortly. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2014 1:29:10 PM EDT
[#47]
Definately like what I've seen about the new LW BAD ASS w/Spikes!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2014 2:27:06 PM EDT
[#48]
Lol I was about to say that there were some pics that Tom leaked that validate my comment earlier. By the way, those were prototypes, not the production, Spikes Tactical exclusive version.
Our R&D on LW components started far earlier than that though. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/17/2014 7:24:35 AM EDT
[#49]
Every detail of the EPS has been gone over with typical attention to detail that Battle Arms is known for.
The "bullet guide", or dimple at the tip of the pin, is one such example. We made sure the dimple is big enough not just for a 5.56mm round, but 7.62mm as well, the dimple is just wide enough to accommodate a 9mm round's tip. A 9mm's tip will only partially go into the dimple, but enough of it does to prevent the 9mm round from sliding off easily. Note the slight brass ring inside the dimple, made by the 9mm round. 
Make it too small, the dimple would be a one trick pony with a very narrow focus. Make it too large, a small caliber bullet's tip will have too much room to move about within the dimple. Therefor the dimple is cone shaped, just large enough to be usable with a 9mm, and small enough to mitigate movement when a small caliber's bullet tip is inside
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/17/2014 7:48:51 PM EDT
[#50]
Any ETA on the 308 sets?
|
|
|
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.
