mongo001

OK, before you all scorch me, let me get my story out.


LEGAL DISCLAIMER:  I am in no way associated with POF-USA, ARMS or anyone else.  I am just an AR-15 addict who enjoys building and shooting all sorts of AR uppers and lowers.  This is just one chapter in my continuing saga of AR builds.  At present I have in excess of 20 uppers built and three complete rifles in my safe and this constantly changes as stuff comes in, gets tested and kept or sold.  At present I have a midlength upper in the works based on a Rock River midlength chrome lined barrel with a PRI midlength float tube and I have a SPR Mk 12 Mod 1 in the works as well (just need to get with ADCO, who is 15 min away from me, for the barrel and sights).

Anyway, here's how I ended up with this upper.  I read the long thread on the Predator vs. SIR a while back done by new-arguy.  It was a great review of a couple of products that interested me.  Within days of reading that, along comes a guy named Texan (IIRC) selling a Predator P20 on EE.  Being the curious, hard headed person that I am, I figured I'd give this a try, just to see for myself.  The price wasn't bad ($150 shipped) and at the worst, I'd end up with a railed upper to play with.

The system came disassembled with a lot of nuts/bolts/etc. and I couldn't figure out how to install it.  So I contacted POF-USA via their website to see if I could get installation instructions.  Frank, of POF-USA (have any of you met or heard of Frank???), sends me his phone number and wants me to call him.  I had an older version of their product and Frank and I had a long conversation about his product and improvements he has made since the version I had came out.  At the end of the conversation, Frank offers me a even swap for my older version for a newer version.  He even allows me to chose which model I wanted (full, mid, carbine).  The carbine model seemed to be the most popular, so I asked for the carbine length and had it shipped to me in about two weeks.

The system has sat in my safe for about a three months now and I finally cleared some funds to get a decent barrel for it.  The barrel is a Bushmaster 16" 1/9 HBAR postban barrel.

I just put it together tonight and plan on shooting it soon, this weekend or next.  I plan on running it through its paces to see how it handles.  I AM BY NO MEANS AN AR EXPERT, OTHER THAN KNOWING HOW TO ASSEMBLE/DISASSEMBLE AND SHOOT AR'S, I HAVE VERY LITTLE KNOWLEDGE ON THE REAL LIFE APPLICATIONS OF THESE WEAPONS.  So I figured, knowing I could get flamed to death, I would present this upper to you folks here and ask you what you want to see.  Short of destroying the upper or grossly abusing the components (barrel, receiver, etc.), I'll do whatever you folks want to see.

Ironically, my Aimpoint Comp M2 has an ARMS mount on it and the only BUIS I have available is an ARMS #40, so please excuse me, 3rdtk, it's all I have for now.  I know you probably feel this is sacrilege, but it's all I have to work with.

So here it is.  Any input would be appreciated.  Flaming is welcome, it doesn't bother me a bit.  Thanks.





I don't have a real good handle on the cowitnessing principles, but with the understanding that I have, I tried to take a picture to show you sight alignment with the red dot sight.  It didn't turn out too well and I can try again if someone explains to me what cowitnessing should look like and helps me get the right angle shot.  Here's the pic.



FLAME ON, FELLAS!!!!!!

No flamo here.  It's your money, and thanks for the pics.  I was interested in this system for some time, but didn't go that direction.

Actually that is good looking upper.  did you have to machine the rear section of the rail to get the #40 to fit??

I believe the TD grip will fit the POF handguard.

SMGLee,

No machining required.  That is exactly how the rail system came.  ARMS #40 fit up real nice.  Tango Down grip is on the way from JTAC Supply and I will post pics of it with my Surefire mounted on the rail when it arrives.

JTAC_Supply,

The install was not hard, but I have to say that the rail fits very tightly over the receiver and the barrel nut.  Had to "persuade" it on with a rubber mallet, nothing grossly difficult, just comfortably tight is a good way to put it, I guess.  IMHO, I don't see that there is much room for the rail to move too much, if at all.  The setscrew in the back of the rail, on top of the receiver, is just along for the ride, once again, IMHO.  It feels pretty stable and secure.  I read mention of hanging weights off the system and measuring deflection.  I may try that to see what happens.

Mongo,

That LOOKS pretty cool, actually.  Is it a result of the angle when photographed, or is the POF with rail covers extremely wide?  What would the diameter be with covers attached and how does that compare to other quad rails?

Scot

I agree, it looks like a dam fine upper.

IIRC, I held (but never shot) an upper with an ARMS 45M and that felt somewhat wide.  This also feels pretty wide with the rail covers on it.  Maybe a bit wider than I like, but I haven't shot it yet, so I may get a better feel when I do.  Width is not as much as an issue if you are a vertical grip user IMO.  I've shot both ways an plan on shooting this upper both ways as well.  I may build an ARMS based upper to compare the two, but funds don't allow that right now.  Maybe soon.  Thanks for the input.  I'll get some measurements out on it soon.

Where did you get a 'Midlength" chrome lined barrel Rock River barrel? From RR?...I have been asking them for one and finally gave up...

Cant find one on their site...could you give me their stock number for this...

thanks in advance...

[url]http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=12&t=183493[/url]

I'd like to see what other BUIS's fit the Predator rail...  

You won't get flamed.  Just give your honest opinion on the system.  Even though POF and the Predator got hammered on this site doesn't mean the system can't fill certain rolls for some of our members.  It may not be on the same level as the SIR or RAS but let's be honest, 98% of the board members (me included) could not out-shoot their handguard system.  

I'm looking forward to your review [:)]

Why is your Aimpoint rotated 90 deg.??

No flame, just wondering....

Mike

mr_wilson:

For easier manipulation of the power/brightness knob with the off hand. Had mine set up the same way when I had one; it's a common enough practice that it's even covered in the Aimpoint manual. :-)

Midlength chrome lined barrel...

[url]http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=12&t=183493[/url]

thanks...

mr_wilson,
Thanks for pointing out my mistake on the Aimpoint.  I didn't know there was a "right way".  I bought the Aimpoint with the mount as a unit, and that's the way it came.  Shooter521 makes a good case for leaving it that way.  I'll have to think about it.  Probably leave it.

Onslaught,
Let me know which type of BUIS you would like to see.  If I can clear some funds, I may buy one or two and try them out.  Need some for the personal projects I mentioned in my initial thread, anyway.

Well, since the #40 is "it" in folding BUIS, how 'bout some fixed BUIS?  LMT, chopped CH, etc.

Thanks

mongo,

You might check with Frank about using the Magpul laadder type rail protectors. The hand guard is so efficient at radiating heat, because of its surface area, that these rail protectors are totally sufficient.

Strobe

I am still considering one of these.  The rail is a little high, but that's OK, because I plan on mounting a 1.5-4x Trijicon scope on it with a ARMS #40 BUIS.

strobe,

Funny you should mention that.  The upper sits right now with a set of low profile OD green rail covers on it.  I was wondering how they would hold up to the heat.  Got some FA MG fanatics planning on a big shoot here in Michigan soon and  I am trying to get on board with them and see if I can get some FA action out of this and take some temp readings after each mag or so.  Still trying to contact some people on that.  

I have also been trying to configure a way to hang some weights off the rail with dial indicators mounted on the front, middle and back of the rail to measure deflection at different weights.  Plan on doing this with weights hanging off the bottom rail and hanging of the left or right side.  Will probably mount a laser for reference as well.  Apparently rigidity was an issue with this rail system.

I'll keep you all updated.

mongo001
Thanks for taking the time to give us some pics. It looks good so far and will be interesting to see how it does with your testing.

Edit to add...

How does it feel as far as balance is concerned?

Mongo, here is an idea.  Take the upper and mount it on something in front of some paper.  Make sure it is in a place that you can access it.  Then take a bright light and shine it so the shadow is in sharp contrast.  Mark that with a pencil.  Now hand the weights, and mark it again to check for deflection.  It's crude, but it will give you a baseline of movement.  

Hello Mongo, everyone. I backed into a POF system myself. I traded a scope for it on EE. I didn't have the same trouble as you getting it on. Mine didnt need any "persuation" it just fit nice and snug. I went with this rail precicely because many said it was a little higher. Guess I got a fat head and need a little hight :D I have not shot mine yet either. Soon! My # 40 fit just fine. My burris speed dot sits a little low. I like it to co wit in the lower 1/3. It sits smack dead center. First impressions are positive. Seems very rigid. Heres some pics.
Shane
[img]http://www.1911auto.com/pic/rfl/predator1.jpg[/img]
[img]http://www.1911auto.com/pic/rfl/predator3.jpg[/img]

shane45,

Nice upper, it looks vaguely fimiliar.  When I put the upper together, there was not any real trouble putting it together.  I like my stuff to be tight and this combo was.  "Comfortably tight" is the best way I have found to describe it.

Troy,

Thanks for the co-witnessing lesson.  That is pretty much what I am seeing through my Aimpoint, so co-witnessing is possible with this combo, it appears.


Finally scrounged up 3 dial indicators and will start hanging weights off the rail soon.  Will make some type of spreadsheet to collect data and will post this soon.

Well I just couldn't listen to all the remarks about this handguard I just had to order one and see why they all say it is a POS. Well it came in today and I was really happy with the work. It was a breeze to put it on. I was really intrested to see the side screws and the bottom ones. I read that they pushed against the barrel nut. Well wrong they don't. They are they just to keep it from moving forward and back. When I got it on I wanted to see just how much it would flex and I can't I (I am 6' 260) and I laid the barrel on a step and had the grip on the ground and put almost all my weight on the handguard and it did't flex. I was pretty inpressed. This is rock solid. I think the owner of the Company has got a bad rap on this. I wish there more shops selling a product like this for a reasonable price. I am in no way affiliated and I have never met anyone from POF so this isn't an ad. I just very pleased with mine. I called my brother to tell him what I thought about the rail and to tell him it was BS about it not being very secure. He said he knew. He was at the Indy 1500 and Model 1 sales has some there and he said the same thing about how secure it felt. Heres some pics one is me applying the my weight. Anyone in central Indiana that wants to see it let me know.
[img]http://www.hunt101.com/img/120620.jpg[/img]
[img]http://www.hunt101.com/img/120639.jpg[/img]

co-witness simply means you can either use your irons or your optic without taking off one or the other.  One nice side effect is that if both aiming devices are zeroed the same, your POI of your Aimpoint will be the same as the POI of your irons.  you don't need to line up all three points to shoot, it just works out that way when you use your irons and have the aimpoint on.

So, I have to wonder where newarguy and the rest of the nay sayers are?

I looked at the POF at the 1500 today and liked it much better than the competition.  If I had a little more $$$ I'd have left with one for sure.

It looked to me that Frank and POF have a very nice rail system that cannot get out of alignment like I've seen of at least 2 SIRs.  

So like I said, where are the skeptics now???

What "skeptics". Im not one. But I have been reading. I'm still waiting to hear how they [i]perform[/i] is all. So far a few folks have them and have mounted them. They look good, I agree. But the problems I experienced with mine were not cosmetic.

It is good to see that the POF system left users room to mount a BUIS behind the rail instead of on top of one. That was very smart and answers one of the big problems I found with it.

But so far, no one has really mentioned if it mounts any differently. As I recall, no one said it pushes against the barrel nut (like claybuster mentions). The older model I had pushed against the upper receiver, not the barrel nut. In fact, the POF system I had used its own barrel nut. The problem was with pivoting against the upper and pushing the rail (and in turn anything mounted to it) out of line with the upper. Basically, as you tighten the screws into the system and against the upper, the screws would act as a pivot and the rail would raise slightly. As you loosen the screws, the system would lower. I used a Surefire L77 laser mounted to the forward end of the system to confirm this. As it stood, I couldnt see how the system could ever be in perfect alignment with the upper and felt it could cause serious problems mounting optics.  Especially those optics which mount towards the front end of the system.

Another big problem was rail inconsistent dimentions. Can any of you with the new systems measue the rail dimnetions from the front of the system to the rear with a good set of dial calipers? The rails on the one I had here got larger from the rear of the system to the front. The rear rails were undersized enough so that the ARMS 19s mount could not lock on and slid off the rear.

Hoosier, I tried to post a factual, honest review of a system at the request of board members. Im sorry I could not report that the system was great and everyone should jump on it. The system I received had a lot of issues that I felt were in need of attention. By the provision POF has made for the addition of a rear sight behind the system instead of on top, it seems like attempts are being made to answer some of these issues.

I am not a naysayer or a skeptic. Im a pretty regular guy who likes gear and tries to look at it critically. I hope it turns into a great, affordable system, but aside from the rear sight, no here has responded to any of the other serious issues found with the POF.

PS, so that you dont hijak this thread, can you start another talking about the 2 SIRs coming out of allignment with the upper. I am interested to hear how this may have happened. I think a lot of members might be.

Kevin,

Thanks for allowing me to answer questions on the forum again.


new-arguy (neil),

Hope all is well. I would like to assist you. It's been awhile so maybe you don't remember.
Hope this information helps to inform you of the serious issues you have with the Predator system.

1) The Predator P-4 that I sent to you
had the last slot open to accept a BUIS.
It also had a large angle cut were the BUIS would mount next to.
Please review your pictures.


(Our Predator system with the extended upper rail to the charging handle was first shown at the Shot Show 2004. Your test was before Shot Show 2004).

2)The Predator (P-4) system you tested ONLY used two mounting screws on the top of the
the flat top to attach our rail system to the weapon. Our design is meant to engage full lenght of the rail system and the flat top uppers dovetail.

Of course the rail system would move if you were to loosen the ONLY two mounting screws  that engage the rail system and the flat top uppers dovetails. Remember our design intent is to engage the full lenght of the dovetails.

This is why your test showed movement once the only two mounting screws were loosened and the dovetails didn't engage with each other.

If you were to loosen the mounting screws that attach any rail system to a weapon they would move also. There is nothing preventing the rail system from moving on the weapon at this point.

Your test didn't show us if the other system had the same results using the laser with the mounting screws/system loosen (clamp around barrel).
I'd imagine the laser would move sideways if you were to loosen the other systems mounting screws that attached the rail to the weapon. Mood point with this test data.

3)I'm also trying to understand how a two dovetails engage for over 5 inches would have a alignment affect on optics when engaged with each other? The two mounting screws were meant to engage the dovetails. Once the mounting screws were tighten and the dovetails were engaged the rail system is set to use with optics. Tighten the mounting screws to engage the rail & flat top dovetails would always repeat. That's why picatinny incorporated
the use of a dovetail design. It will always repeat its setup when used.

4)We own a Surefire pistol grip/light combo.
It uses the ARMS #19 throw levers. We haven't experienced any problems with mounting this system to our rail system. We use this setup for our demo's to LEO's.
Maybe we can expand on the throw lever issues.
The ARMS 19 is a throw lever system. The lever engages the rail system were the slot
cut out section of the rail is.

The LaRue system has a little different design.
It engages the on the rail and not the slot cut out section of the rail.

This could be an area of concern, because the mount engages the rail system were the slot is and were the least amount of material is. I have heard of throw lever mounting systems being knocked off of weapons. Your test may have shown this issue.

5) Our design is very light and thin walled as you know and stated in your report. You had many concerns with the strength of the system. I hope the picture of the Predator rails holding a car weighing over 2400lbs showed you how strong our very light and thin walled design is.

I see that Claybusting did his own test on the Predator system. He checked for strenght and flex by standing on it.

Neil, how did you test the the strength of the systems? This was a major concern of your report, but we didn't see any data.
Maybe you can test the unit you have by standing on it like Claybusting, or better yet, do the same test we with by putting a Saturn on it. Please inform us of your results if you do this test.

6) Our light and thin wall design (less material mass), has another benefit. It helps to reduce heat. Your report talked about this but you never showed any test data and the results of both systems. Our rail design is meant to reduce weight, and heat. Our design is able to radiate the heat/air flow wih hand guard covers on the rails in the horizontal and vertical postions.
The VEE cut on the rail for horizontal airflow  and Undercuts were the slots are for vertical airflow.

7) The Predator is a affordable system and retails for almost $170.00 less then the other tested system.


New-arguy Quote:
"I hope it turns into a great, affordable system, but aside from the rear sight, no here has responded to any of the other serious issues found with the POF."


Neil, I hope I was able to answer all your serious issues. Please, Lets let other forum members that have used the system give there input.
I'm sure many members would like to hear view points of other users besides you and I.

Best regards,

Frank
POF-USA

Frank, thanks for coming to answer questions. Im just about to head for work and I wont be home until late this evening, but I would like to get this posted quickly...

If the system hinges on the two screws, and the rails get lefted if you tighten them and lower if you loosen them, how are users able to get the top rail in perfect horizontal alignment with the receiver? As far as I can tell, this will cause problems mounting optics, especially those optics which mount towards the front end like traditional magnified scopes. This is because the front end will be at more of an extreme angle than the rear.

For example, if you tighten the screws and the rail raises just slightly, the rail will not be in line with the upper or barrel. It will be at a slight upward angle. If you mount a scope to that, the scope will also be at an upward angle. If this is in fact the case, it will become more and more problematic as your range increases.

I had mentioned I did not do any durability tests on the systems when I tested because of the two you sent, one was a prize for the FDCC annniversary shoot and the other was to be returned. I was not comfortable running durability tests on gear that did not belong to me. As I mentioned in the previous post a few weeks ago, evenly resting even a heavy object like a car on the rail system is not the type of durability test I was worried about. I was worried about sharp impact. Sort of like how you can evenly wrap your palm around a egg and squeeze but it wont break. But if you give it even a light tap it will crack. Im not saying the POF system is like this, only that I was worried about the durability of the system to endure a sharp knock or being dropped etc.

I mounted my M900 as well, but thats to the 6 o'clock rail out towards the front. My problem was with the 12 o'closk rail at the rear of the system. These rearward rails were underspec and too narrow. Thats why the ARMS #19s mount slid off the rear. This issue may have been covered with the new rails. I dont know I havent seen one. Which is why I was asking someone with one to test it and see.

OK, now I really have to go! [:P]

Let me see if I understand what you are saying.

Your concern is that if the set screw at the rear of the upper is tightened it will cause the POF to raise???

I'm holding one right now and:

1)  There is no movement up and down whatsoever. [i]Edit to acknowledge the 0.011" movement detected by Mongo.[/i]

2)  I just hit the rail 5 times sharply with a rubber mallet and it did not shatter, break, or move.  I'm not willing to slam my preban rifle on the ground but short of that what yould you like to be done to satisfy your notion that this is not a secure and stable platform?

3)  If the rear of the Predator was to raise, which as I inticated it did not, and a scope was mounted it would onl;y serve as to idd elevation to the scope.  (I assume you are familiar with a 20MOA Badger Ordnance base.)  exactly how is this problematic?  Hell, I paid $100 for an Accuracy speaks base just to get the elevation.

As I indicated in my PM I probably shouldn't have called you out as I did.  NYpatriot is actually who I was thinking about.  My appologies.

Seriously, what would you like to see so as to satisfy your lack of trust in this rail?  No, I won't use a cutting torch on it to see if it passes the 15 minute burn test.  ;)  LOL

From the pictures shown and description, the Preditor has to raise up from the screw pushing it away from the top of the receiver.
If there were theaded holes in the top of the receiver, then the Preditor would fasten down to the top of the receiver with srews. But in this case the two screws do push the Preditor rail away from the top of the receiver. There is no way that it can be in real alighnment with the top of the receiver by this prying up to get tightening.
Mike

Just ran the first of my measurement tests on the POF system.

Basically I blocked the upper on some saw horses, not the most stable platform but it will do for this test.

I took out the back setscrew and zero-d the dial indicators.

I then tightened the rear setscrew as tight as I could comfortably handle - did not want to strip out the setscrew.  Total movement was 0.011" - 11 thousandths as shown on the dial below.  I loosened the rear setscrew and the dials returned to zero.  Retightened and back to 0.011".  So the rail does move during the tightening, but is 0.011" even significant?  I don't know.  ALSO NOTE:  This movement was only on the back of the rail.  The middle of the rail showed ZERO movement due to tightening/loosening/tightening of the back setscrew.

Pics attached of my setup.





Was going to run my hanging weights test also, but this setup doesn't seem stable enough to hang alot of weight on.  I was getting movement on the dials, but I have a feeling the sawhorses were as much to blame as anything else.  I had planned to have three dials - (one one each end and one in the middle) - to measure deflection as different weights were hung off the rail, but I may go with only two - (one in the middle and one at the muzzle end) - and use the third to measure deflection of the platform and see if it is moving down due to the weight as well.  Will post results if and when I can get something worth posting.

new-arguy (Neil),

This will be the last time I will answer a post
of yours. I needed to respond to your concerns.

Our updated design mounts to our barrel nut
using a wedge block with bearing surfaces.
We have 3 low head screws that go around the
Predator's barrels nut area. They don't engage the barrel nut. The only purpose they have is to position how far the Predator goes back over the receiver.

Both systems engage the dovetail for alignment and strength when attaching the the rail system to the weapon. The approach was alittle different, but both must engage the flat tops dovetail for alignment and strength.

The Predator also uses two set screws in each mounting screw hole. One set screw is used for attaching the rail to the weapon and a another set screw is used as a mechanical lock on the
set screw. This eliminates the need for loctite, and prevents screws from loosening during use.

The rail systems are different and as you stated before you prefer the ARMS system.
Now lets allow other members communicate about the Predator system. I don't want to hi-jack this post either. IM Mail me with any additional questions you may have regarding our updated system.

Best regards,

Frank
POF-USA

[banghead]

Please Lord, please don't let this thread end up like the last one.

Keep going Mongo, you're doing a great job.  That movement test you did rocks! [headbang]

While I have no plans to purchase a POF I think what you are doing is very important for the majority of the board's members.  By performing an unbiased evaluation on the Predator you are educating the majority of the site members.  Not everyone on this site needs a $400 rail system and by reading your eval some may realize the Predator and others like it will fit their needs and their budgets.

Keep up the good work!

I agree that New-arguy needs to give this company a break. The constant attacks and horse crap POF has endured on this board is a disgrace. All we've done is alienate a good product and potential supporter of this board. Personally, I'm sick of have one or two companies products constantly pushed down my throat by a mere couple of members. Why such interest in flaming the POF? Is it that it strikes a resemblance to the beloved SIR? Is it that it costs substantially less? Do I truely believe that [B]ANY[/B] of us (and I do mean ANY) could "out shoot" the POF? Hell no, not by a long shot. Dam, I've got to buy one now!

How soon some forget, it was the many POF claims of military testing and so forth that turned out to be disgracfull less than honest nonsense promotions.
We all read them and that leopard hasn't change his spots from these new things I read and do not trust. New ARGuy isn't trying to get anyones money, but the leopard is.
Mike

I don't think that NAG(Neil) has been trying to unfairly bash this product.  He's even been really nice interactions with POF.

That being said, the Troy Ind. MRF's are scheduled to start shipping March 22.

If they ship on schedule, I should have one March 23.

The POF sells for $170?

Well, the Troy Ind. MRF sells for $250-280 (carbine, mid and rifle length).

I think it would be wise to wait a few weeks and see if the MRF turns out to be all that they say it will.

The fact that the POF was designed around a gas system that none of my ARs use, bothers me.

If the top rail was lower I'd be interested in it.

Agreed! Independent thought and choosing accessories based on actual need/usage are all too often in short supply around here.

By reading the posts sometimes you would get the impression that folks are skydiving regularly with a slung AR, or executing CQB operations practically every time they enter the front door to their home. LOL [:D]  

I think that the point in seeking this high quality gear is knowing that it will take whatever abuse a civilian would be expected to give it (and then some).

Given the choice between a $170 rail that has some shortcomings and a $250 rail that doesn't, I'll spend the extra money.

One of the reasons that I like AR's is that they are so durable.

And when you start shooting at distance using scopes, slight variations in the rear rail alignment could cause zero problems with a scope.  Remember that 0.011" isn't a lot in a 6" distance, but is more of an issue when you're talking 300+ yards.  (Some math guy will probably jump in here and calculate the error that 0.011" would cause at 300 yards, right?[;)]

Let's wait and see what Troy Ind. gives us next week....

Carnival time is all I can think of, O'l PT BARNUM (AKA FRANK)stikes again, there is one born every minute. LOL
Mike [b][red] 3rdtk how nice of you to join us. this account is now locked. mmk [/red][/b]

eascopper = 3rdtk

Buy what the hell you want.  Sheesh, why does everyone act as if they have a financial stake in what I or anyone else mounts on their rifle.  I had the precious SIR and had issues with it and sold it.  I currently have a PRI on my CAR.  However, i can't see spending $more than I have to for something that is primarily a toy.  I don't know what some of you guys do for a living but I'm not an OP.  

While were on performance issues, why can't I mount my ACOG TA51 on either my SWAN Sleeve S-EX or my ARMS 5?  Do I have to buy a propriatary ARMS quick release mount for every frickin thing I want to mount?  

Say what you want, call me a fool or whatever, Frank has a nice product here.  Anyone looking into a rail system should at least look into it, for themselves, and decide, for them selves, if it will do the job they need.

Personally, I don't want to be in anyone's club.  I know my expectations.  I have very specific needs for my ARs.  I can't see anything that I need the POF to do that it can't deliver.    Is it the perfect platform for every application?  Absolutely not.  But then again if there was such an animal that's all any of us would have.  My brother is 6'2" and 260 pounds.  He couldn't move the thing.  

I have to ask again, what the hell are you guys doing with your ARs that it to meet these mythical requirements?  I can't see anything currently on the market that will withstand the kind of abuse I could throw at it if destroying it or proving that it isn't perfet were my goal.

Actually, without doing some very detailed parallel measurements, which I am pretty sure I am not capable of doing with the present measuring tools I have, the measurement I did ONLY PROVES that there isn't gross movement when tightening up the system as designed.  The ONLY way it proves a misalignment between the rail system and the upper barrel is if you ASSUME a couple of things:

#1 - That the barrel and receiver were in perfect alignment to start with and

#2 - The rail system was installed in perfect alignment and was actually pushed upward 0.011" out of alignment during tightening of the back setscrew.

Without knowing the exact starting point for parallel of the barrel/receiver and the rail system, you don't know if the 0.011" is adding to the problem by increasing the out of parallel problem OR helping the problem by reducing it.

I'll give you that today's machining techniques are pretty good, but if you add up all the tolerances on all the parts that must be machined and aligned in an AR-15/M16 upper, you are going to have parallel misalignment BETWEEN ANY RAIL SYSTEM and the barrel/receiver.  Good machining techniques will minimize this but it will be there.

Also note that if I had an Aimpoint, Trijicon Reflex or whatever mounted near the middle of the rail (where they are normally mounted) while tightening the back setscrew, it would not have moved up or down.  The middle dial didn't move whether or not I tightened or loosened the setscrew.

Just my non-engineer, non-scientist two cents on that.

Thanks

Mongo001
Thank you for your work. From what you state, there is a rise of the rail when tightening. The set screws do push the rail away and out of alignment from the receiver. When it's tightened, it gives no way to know when to stop, that is a problem, because there is no pos. stop. No other mounting device in rings or rails from any maker I have ever seen do that, just the opposite. All others tighten to get alignment to the receiver, by pulling them tight to the receiver, not pushing away into space.
The whole rail ends up sitting on the tip of a set screw, instead of the receiver from what is described and shown.
We have suicide bombers nowadays, so I guess anyone that doesn't want to know what they may be getting, is welcome to be a suicide buyer. LOL
Mike

Huh? [>:/]

I think everyone here knows what they would be getting...a $170 rail system.  No one is arguing the the POF is on the same level as the KAC or SIR, we know it's not.  Since you just registered you obviously missed the last POF thread but in short, POF made a bunch of claims that simply were not true and really shot themselves in the foot.  That is why people are jumping on them now. I was hoping that this thread would turn out different and that people could see the POF for what is and not what POF originally claimed it to be (again, a $170 rail system).  I guess that's not going to happen.

The bottom line is not everyone on this board needs a $400 rail system.  Everyone here may want one but let's face it, some guys can't afford it and most that can will never use it for what it's intended.  

Continuing on with the hanging weights test, I finally found a relatively stable platform to conduct this test with.  About as unscientific as it gets but it allows some data to be collected.





Basically what it comes down to is there IS deflection when a static weight is applied to the rail system.

The numbers I got are:

Weight/Platform def @ muzzle/Rail def @ gas block/Rail def @ barrel nut
20lbs/0.002/0.022/0.007
30lbs/0.005/0.032/0.014
45lbs/0.007/0.046/0.023

I am not sure what this data is worth, but there it is.

How this discussion digressed to suicide bombers is a stretch that even I cannot figure out.

I have no vested interest in this rail system, I am not a combat person and I would not consider this my "SHTF" upper if I were to assemble such an upper.  This upper will likely be for sale after this as that is what I normally do, I buy, build, test and keep or sell, depending on how I like it.  This is an ADEQUATE setup for most and IMHO it could handle quite a bit of rough handling.  Like I have stated time and time before, I am no engineer, but I don't get the feeling that this whole rail system in teetering on one small set screw.

The fact that the middle of the rail did not move upward when tightening the back setscrew leads me to believe that the back portion of the rail may have flexed upward slightly until all clearance between the rail and the receiver was taken up and it stopped, because there was no more clearance.  Its not like there is an adjustment on it, it stops because it cannot go any farther.

Remember, not an engineer, not a scientist, just an AR addict who likes to try things out.

DITTO!



Excellent!  Hopefully someone on a budget will learn this from reading this thread and be able to have a rail system like the rest of us cool guys. [;)]