AR Sponsor
|
Originally Posted By imdBman:
I am building a shooter based on the URG-I. I will probably use the DD barrel and Mk16 HG. Everything else I will source elsewhere. The barrel is the only critical piece for a shooter. The Mk 16 is unique to the URG so I will wait for it while I slowly acquire the other pieces. Mine will not be a true clone. Took me 7 years to build my SPR type. Besides I am sure eventually CD will have mutt builds with a mix of Blk II and URG-I.  CD |
De Oppresso Liber
Iraq: 91,03,04,05,06,08,09,15&16'
Afganistan: 09,10,11',14'&17'
Iraq: 91,03,04,05,06,08,09,15&16'
Afganistan: 09,10,11',14'&17'
|
Originally Posted By Hammer7242:
This URG thing has me confused First it was said Brownells ones would have Warcomps, then it was pulled back to SF3P. Then secret sauce special barrels, which the USASOC barrels are not, they are normal 4150. Then another product release and no delivery date on the horizon. What is going on? Also, I don't get why they can't just sell the rails and charging handles as a package. That would satisfy folks that want those for what they are, and those that want clone correct guns. If it isn't Colt or FN uppers and bolts, and the wrong gas blocks, it isn't correct. I get that the outsourced barrel and flash suppressor may have an increased cost to them, but why bother then? That means time assembling, pinning and welding which take lots of time, more people to do work, packaging, and more. I bet they would be able to make the same margins or more and save a lotta time selling just the rail and charging handle. The Brownells URGs don't make any business sense - is Geissele tone deaf to the market or something? At these prices, what does it offer me a Knights upper doesn't? @Sagmill - Please release just the rail and ACH! Listen to people here they are all saying the same thing! -hammer |
|
Originally Posted By Vapor-Trail:
Hope they offer in black eventually https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/35055/26866443_579908155686162_1572002341513592832_n-447197.JPG |
Jesus came to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable. - My Pastor
|
Originally Posted By SpyHawk: The block II quad-rail is a brick compared to the Mk16 handguard. I bet it is nearly half a pound lighter on paper, and noticeably faster in the handling characteristics. |
Jesus came to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable. - My Pastor
|
Originally Posted By JJREA: I also thought block II's were socom barrels and this is going to be a govt' profile. Lighter rail, lighter barrel. I would think it's going to be a lot lighter. CD |
De Oppresso Liber
Iraq: 91,03,04,05,06,08,09,15&16'
Afganistan: 09,10,11',14'&17'
Iraq: 91,03,04,05,06,08,09,15&16'
Afganistan: 09,10,11',14'&17'
| Ahhh.. For some reason I actually thought the Block II's w/o the FSB's were socom barrels too. So it (the urg) will probably be a bit lighter than those and a lot lighter than a BII with the FSB..... |
Jesus came to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable. - My Pastor
|
Originally Posted By JJREA:
Ahhh.. For some reason I actually thought the Block II's w/o the FSB's were socom barrels too. So it (the urg) will probably be a bit lighter than those and a lot lighter than a BII with the FSB.....  CD |
De Oppresso Liber
Iraq: 91,03,04,05,06,08,09,15&16'
Afganistan: 09,10,11',14'&17'
Iraq: 91,03,04,05,06,08,09,15&16'
Afganistan: 09,10,11',14'&17'
|
Originally Posted By SpyHawk:
Don't forget the grenade launcher :) Originally Posted By SpyHawk:
Originally Posted By Combat_Diver: Yes, Until you and the light, laser, optic, can and kitchen sink........... CD The heavier variable optics will make up for the weight difference IMO. |
|
Originally Posted By Combat_Diver: Depends on the DD M4A1 RIS II rail is used. The non FSB one's should be Govt profile. The FSB ones just went onto the existing M4A1 and most of those already had SOCOM profiles. I believe the URGI will be a Govt profile for 14.5" with a mid length gas. CD |
|
Originally Posted By h00n: Really? Non-FSP Block II is gov't profile? Attached File Attached File Attached File Attached File CD |
De Oppresso Liber
Iraq: 91,03,04,05,06,08,09,15&16'
Afganistan: 09,10,11',14'&17'
Iraq: 91,03,04,05,06,08,09,15&16'
Afganistan: 09,10,11',14'&17'
|
Originally Posted By Combat_Diver: Yes, Until you and the light, laser, optic, can and kitchen sink........... CD 
|
Jesus came to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable. - My Pastor
|
Originally Posted By Combat_Diver:
The 14.5" bbls we'll be getting are new mid length gas so new to USASOC. The 10.3" will be the same as before. But again all speculation until I get to field them. CD I mean it's a CHF 14.5" mid length barrel, right? |
|
Originally Posted By Combat_Diver: Barrels from Crane CD Also, for the new USASOC equipment, a close friend has been working closely with the suppliers on this deal, and also working to learn what and when some items can be commercially available. I can confirm what has been said before, the barrels are standard DD mid-length with Mk12 gas blocks. The charging handle is a little different from what is sold commercially, and it will likely be a longer wait that Brownells would have you imagine for the psudo-clone to be sold. And, no, neither the 4-prong nor the Mk16 rail will be sold anytime soon by itself, and yes, it is possible to see a slightly different version of the clone available later in the year, with slightly more accurate build-out, but not final. |
|
Originally Posted By barrelnutz:
So, Crane is shipping Gov't profile barrels that had FSB attached for new Block II uppers? Is this a recent pic and thing? I guess I am a little surprised that a) they are not using SOCOM barrels, and b) they are not using virgin barrels. I am not saying that crazier things haven't happened, but this one seems odd. How long has that been going on? Also, for the new USASOC equipment, a close friend has been working closely with the suppliers on this deal, and also working to learn what and when some items can be commercially available. I can confirm what has been said before, the barrels are standard DD mid-length with Mk12 gas blocks. The charging handle is a little different from what is sold commercially, and it will likely be a longer wait that Brownells would have you imagine for the psudo-clone to be sold. And, no, neither the 4-prong nor the Mk16 rail will be sold anytime soon by itself, and yes, it is possible to see a slightly different version of the clone available later in the year, with slightly more accurate build-out, but not final. Originally Posted By barrelnutz:
Originally Posted By Combat_Diver: Barrels from Crane CD Also, for the new USASOC equipment, a close friend has been working closely with the suppliers on this deal, and also working to learn what and when some items can be commercially available. I can confirm what has been said before, the barrels are standard DD mid-length with Mk12 gas blocks. The charging handle is a little different from what is sold commercially, and it will likely be a longer wait that Brownells would have you imagine for the psudo-clone to be sold. And, no, neither the 4-prong nor the Mk16 rail will be sold anytime soon by itself, and yes, it is possible to see a slightly different version of the clone available later in the year, with slightly more accurate build-out, but not final. |
|
Originally Posted By GS5414:
The Bravos are seeing increased use these days. That particular photo, as noted by someone else a page back, was from a USMC test where the B5 stock was specified from the beginning. I can confirm that, because I was the guy who did it. S/F 
|
Colt the rifles and super sport the motorcycles
|
Originally Posted By barrelnutz: So, Crane is shipping Gov't profile barrels that had FSB attached for new Block II uppers? Is this a recent pic and thing? I guess I am a little surprised that a) they are not using SOCOM barrels, and b) they are not using virgin barrels. I am not saying that crazier things haven't happened, but this one seems odd. How long has that been going on? Also, for the new USASOC equipment, a close friend has been working closely with the suppliers on this deal, and also working to learn what and when some items can be commercially available. I can confirm what has been said before, the barrels are standard DD mid-length with Mk12 gas blocks. The charging handle is a little different from what is sold commercially, and it will likely be a longer wait that Brownells would have you imagine for the psudo-clone to be sold. And, no, neither the 4-prong nor the Mk16 rail will be sold anytime soon by itself, and yes, it is possible to see a slightly different version of the clone available later in the year, with slightly more accurate build-out, but not final. |
"Shut up, internet!"
-Steve Fisher
-Steve Fisher
|
Originally Posted By SirSqueeboo:
What’s different about the CH? Originally Posted By SirSqueeboo:
Originally Posted By barrelnutz: So, Crane is shipping Gov't profile barrels that had FSB attached for new Block II uppers? Is this a recent pic and thing? I guess I am a little surprised that a) they are not using SOCOM barrels, and b) they are not using virgin barrels. I am not saying that crazier things haven't happened, but this one seems odd. How long has that been going on? Also, for the new USASOC equipment, a close friend has been working closely with the suppliers on this deal, and also working to learn what and when some items can be commercially available. I can confirm what has been said before, the barrels are standard DD mid-length with Mk12 gas blocks. The charging handle is a little different from what is sold commercially, and it will likely be a longer wait that Brownells would have you imagine for the psudo-clone to be sold. And, no, neither the 4-prong nor the Mk16 rail will be sold anytime soon by itself, and yes, it is possible to see a slightly different version of the clone available later in the year, with slightly more accurate build-out, but not final. |
|
Originally Posted By pezboytate: It's been going on since Block II began. Short story: All new production M4A1s started having SOCOM barrels so everyone assumed all Block IIs also had SOCOM barrels. The non FSP RIS II URGs are built from parts, not complete rifles. Originally Posted By pezboytate: It's been going on since Block II began. Short story: All new production M4A1s started having SOCOM barrels so everyone assumed all Block IIs also had SOCOM barrels. The non FSP RIS II URGs are built from parts, not complete rifles. Originally Posted By barrelnutz: So, Crane is shipping Gov't profile barrels that had FSB attached for new Block II uppers? Is this a recent pic and thing? I guess I am a little surprised that a) they are not using SOCOM barrels, and b) they are not using virgin barrels. I am not saying that crazier things haven't happened, but this one seems odd. How long has that been going on? . Technical Repair Standard has always shown Govt profile barrels and NSN, never SOCOM bbls.CD |
De Oppresso Liber
Iraq: 91,03,04,05,06,08,09,15&16'
Afganistan: 09,10,11',14'&17'
Iraq: 91,03,04,05,06,08,09,15&16'
Afganistan: 09,10,11',14'&17'
|
Originally Posted By GS5414:
The Bravos are seeing increased use these days. That particular photo, as noted by someone else a page back, was from a USMC test where the B5 stock was specified from the beginning. I can confirm that, because I was the guy who did it. S/F Only pic I have of it: 
|
Jesus came to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable. - My Pastor
|
Originally Posted By 871JZ:
Still lost on what's special about the new barrel. From everything I've read, it seems there's nothing special about it. Just a run of the mill 14.5" midlength gas DD barrel. What am I missing? CHF isn't new to military small arms, but it is new to the issued M4A1, as is the mid length gas system. So that's my guess. |
Colt the rifles and super sport the motorcycles
|
Originally Posted By JJREA:
Interesting. Thank you. All of a sudden mine doesn't seem so stupid. LOL..... What a poser I am. But mine has a factory camo job. Not just coyote. Only pic I have of it: https://i.imgur.com/lYsSPwg.jpg Originally Posted By JJREA:
Originally Posted By GS5414:
The Bravos are seeing increased use these days. That particular photo, as noted by someone else a page back, was from a USMC test where the B5 stock was specified from the beginning. I can confirm that, because I was the guy who did it. S/F Only pic I have of it: https://i.imgur.com/lYsSPwg.jpg
|
Colt the rifles and super sport the motorcycles
|
Originally Posted By MILSPEC556:
Is that tactical-casual, or let my kids dress me today?
If you want to destroy my sweater wo wo wo wo woh, pull this thread as I walk away...... |
Jesus came to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable. - My Pastor
|
Originally Posted By JJREA:
You could practically wear a chest rig with several mags under that sweater and nobody would even know.......
If you want to destroy my sweater wo wo wo wo woh, pull this thread as I walk away...... Originally Posted By JJREA:
Originally Posted By MILSPEC556:
Is that tactical-casual, or let my kids dress me today?
If you want to destroy my sweater wo wo wo wo woh, pull this thread as I walk away......
A plate carrier or vest at the range I can do, but the ones that look like a walking Point Blank or Team Wendy ad get me. 
|
Colt the rifles and super sport the motorcycles
|
Originally Posted By MILSPEC556:
The more time that goes by the more I think it's just CHF and mid length that's the "secret sauce" CHF isn't new to military small arms, but it is new to the issued M4A1, as is the mid length gas system. So that's my guess. Originally Posted By MILSPEC556:
Is that tactical-casual, or let my kids dress me today? 
|
|
Originally Posted By 871JZ:
Yeah, that's what it seems like. Nothing new or "special" about a CHF midlength barrel. I was hoping for some kind of notable or worthwhile change. I don't remember who first started the "special sauce" rumor about the barrel. Originally Posted By 871JZ:
Originally Posted By MILSPEC556:
The more time that goes by the more I think it's just CHF and mid length that's the "secret sauce" CHF isn't new to military small arms, but it is new to the issued M4A1, as is the mid length gas system. So that's my guess. Originally Posted By MILSPEC556:
Is that tactical-casual, or let my kids dress me today? As for the special sauce comment, I think it was on another forum. Pretty sure @sdrake100 saw it wherever it was originally posted ETA beat like a rented mule.
|
Colt the rifles and super sport the motorcycles
|
Originally Posted By MILSPEC556:
Who knows I could be wrong, but i just feel like it would've been out there by now, and also feel like some certain people would view CHF middy as special sauce for the issued M4A1. As for the special sauce comment, I think it was on another forum. Pretty sure @sdrake100 saw it wherever it was originally posted ETA beat like a rented mule. |
|
Originally Posted By SpyHawk:
To a certain extent, I don't really see this as anything ground breaking. Just the .mil will start catching up to the commercial market in terms of technology level. 14.5 middy CHF has been an option for us for years. It's just that it's new to the Army. Don't get me wrong, it's a sweet upper, but the price is out of line. The only thing that most of us are really after is the MK16 handguard. We can easily aquire the rest of the parts ourselves and assemble an upper that is actually clone correct for much less. Even if you went for the stripped version, you're still paying $1k for a $75 upper, a $250 barrel, and a $300 handguard. Factor in the charging handle, gas block, and gas tube and it's only another $160. That's like $700 worth of parts for a grand. Not to mention you could get these parts off the EE and probably knock another $150-200 off that $800. Sucks the rail not being available is the catch and why it's priced so high. Kind of like a "gotcha" type thing because it's the only way to get it. |
|
Originally Posted By SpyHawk:
To a certain extent, I don't really see this as anything ground breaking. Just the .mil will start catching up to the commercial market in terms of technology level. 14.5 middy CHF has been an option for us for years. It's just that it's new to the Army. |
|
Originally Posted By samuse: Most of us have moved on from that already. Who even buys new gov't profile barrel anymore? I haven't bought one in over five years, don't own one now. 
|
|
Originally Posted By StevieJ309:
Bill Geissele started the "special sauce" thing when he unveiled the URG-I during that livestream. The DD barrels have been doing very well in Govt testing over other military barrels and I was curious why. So we analyzed one and I saw that the barrel contained not an insignificant amount of nickel which 4140 and 4150 do not. Also a very clean steel. To me this added nickel indicated a different steel composition than off the shelf gun grade barrel steel and I assumed that this was special to DD. I made this comment before looking at some other analysis of late Colt barrels and they also have nickel in them. So I am retracting my special sauce comment. DD just has a darn good, well made barrel. |
|
Originally Posted By sagmill: Guys I have to take ownership here of this. The DD barrels have been doing very well in Govt testing over other military barrels and I was curious why. So we analyzed one and I saw that the barrel contained not an insignificant amount of nickel which 4140 and 4150 do not. Also a very clean steel. To me this added nickel indicated a different steel composition than off the shelf gun grade barrel steel and I assumed that this was special to DD. I made this comment before looking at some other analysis of late Colt barrels and they also have nickel in them. So I am retracting my special sauce comment. DD just has a darn good, well made barrel. |
|
Originally Posted By sagmill:
Guys I have to take ownership here of this. The DD barrels have been doing very well in Govt testing over other military barrels and I was curious why. So we analyzed one and I saw that the barrel contained not an insignificant amount of nickel which 4140 and 4150 do not. Also a very clean steel. To me this added nickel indicated a different steel composition than off the shelf gun grade barrel steel and I assumed that this was special to DD. I made this comment before looking at some other analysis of late Colt barrels and they also have nickel in them. So I am retracting my special sauce comment. DD just has a darn good, well made barrel. Originally Posted By sagmill:
Originally Posted By StevieJ309:
Bill Geissele started the "special sauce" thing when he unveiled the URG-I during that livestream. The DD barrels have been doing very well in Govt testing over other military barrels and I was curious why. So we analyzed one and I saw that the barrel contained not an insignificant amount of nickel which 4140 and 4150 do not. Also a very clean steel. To me this added nickel indicated a different steel composition than off the shelf gun grade barrel steel and I assumed that this was special to DD. I made this comment before looking at some other analysis of late Colt barrels and they also have nickel in them. So I am retracting my special sauce comment. DD just has a darn good, well made barrel. 
Any way you could clear up which muzzle device will be on the Brownells URG-I? We still don't know if SF3P or Warcomp.
I think we narrowed down SF4P for the USASOC issued URG-I though. |
Colt the rifles and super sport the motorcycles
|
Originally Posted By sagmill: Guys I have to take ownership here of this. The DD barrels have been doing very well in Govt testing over other military barrels and I was curious why. So we analyzed one and I saw that the barrel contained not an insignificant amount of nickel which 4140 and 4150 do not. Also a very clean steel. To me this added nickel indicated a different steel composition than off the shelf gun grade barrel steel and I assumed that this was special to DD. I made this comment before looking at some other analysis of late Colt barrels and they also have nickel in them. So I am retracting my special sauce comment. DD just has a darn good, well made barrel. First off I would like to thank you for offering the MK16 rails on a complete upper to the public. I for one appreciate the fact that you did, so thank you. Many here have pre-ordered their uppers from Brownells and are excited to get them. But if the purpose of the upper is to be as near-clone correct as possible, wouldn't it be better and easier to do if the uppers shipped with the correct DD MK12 gas block? Even if the G gas block is nicer? I think a lot of the fence-sitters here would join in on the pre-order if the uppers used the DD block. What do you think? Best Regards |
|
Originally Posted By MILSPEC556:
Thanks for chiming in Bill
Any way you could clear up which muzzle device will be on the Brownells URG-I? We still don't know if SF3P or Warcomp.
I think we narrowed down SF4P for the USASOC issued URG-I though. Originally Posted By MILSPEC556:
Originally Posted By sagmill:
Originally Posted By StevieJ309:
Bill Geissele started the "special sauce" thing when he unveiled the URG-I during that livestream. The DD barrels have been doing very well in Govt testing over other military barrels and I was curious why. So we analyzed one and I saw that the barrel contained not an insignificant amount of nickel which 4140 and 4150 do not. Also a very clean steel. To me this added nickel indicated a different steel composition than off the shelf gun grade barrel steel and I assumed that this was special to DD. I made this comment before looking at some other analysis of late Colt barrels and they also have nickel in them. So I am retracting my special sauce comment. DD just has a darn good, well made barrel.
Any way you could clear up which muzzle device will be on the Brownells URG-I? We still don't know if SF3P or Warcomp.
I think we narrowed down SF4P for the USASOC issued URG-I though. The Warcomp thing is our mistake and confusion with the info we had from the beginning. |
|
Originally Posted By Vapor-Trail:
Hi Bill. First off I would like to thank you for offering the MK16 rails on a complete upper to the public. I for one appreciate the fact that you did, so thank you. Many here have pre-ordered their uppers from Brownells and are excited to get them. But if the purpose of the upper is to be as near-clone correct as possible, wouldn't it be better and easier to do if the uppers shipped with the correct DD MK12 gas block? Even if the G gas block is nicer? I think a lot of the fence-sitters here would join in on the pre-order if the uppers used the DD block. What do you think? Best Regards Originally Posted By Vapor-Trail:
Originally Posted By sagmill: Guys I have to take ownership here of this. The DD barrels have been doing very well in Govt testing over other military barrels and I was curious why. So we analyzed one and I saw that the barrel contained not an insignificant amount of nickel which 4140 and 4150 do not. Also a very clean steel. To me this added nickel indicated a different steel composition than off the shelf gun grade barrel steel and I assumed that this was special to DD. I made this comment before looking at some other analysis of late Colt barrels and they also have nickel in them. So I am retracting my special sauce comment. DD just has a darn good, well made barrel. First off I would like to thank you for offering the MK16 rails on a complete upper to the public. I for one appreciate the fact that you did, so thank you. Many here have pre-ordered their uppers from Brownells and are excited to get them. But if the purpose of the upper is to be as near-clone correct as possible, wouldn't it be better and easier to do if the uppers shipped with the correct DD MK12 gas block? Even if the G gas block is nicer? I think a lot of the fence-sitters here would join in on the pre-order if the uppers used the DD block. What do you think? Best Regards |
|
Originally Posted By sagmill:
Vapor I see your point. I just figured that the next revision of our Super Gas Block in nitrided 17-4 stainless would be preferred over a chrome-moly one. Also a bomb proof cross pin instead of just set screws. Let me look into it. Originally Posted By sagmill:
Originally Posted By Vapor-Trail:
Originally Posted By sagmill: Guys I have to take ownership here of this. The DD barrels have been doing very well in Govt testing over other military barrels and I was curious why. So we analyzed one and I saw that the barrel contained not an insignificant amount of nickel which 4140 and 4150 do not. Also a very clean steel. To me this added nickel indicated a different steel composition than off the shelf gun grade barrel steel and I assumed that this was special to DD. I made this comment before looking at some other analysis of late Colt barrels and they also have nickel in them. So I am retracting my special sauce comment. DD just has a darn good, well made barrel. First off I would like to thank you for offering the MK16 rails on a complete upper to the public. I for one appreciate the fact that you did, so thank you. Many here have pre-ordered their uppers from Brownells and are excited to get them. But if the purpose of the upper is to be as near-clone correct as possible, wouldn't it be better and easier to do if the uppers shipped with the correct DD MK12 gas block? Even if the G gas block is nicer? I think a lot of the fence-sitters here would join in on the pre-order if the uppers used the DD block. What do you think? Best Regards
|
|
Originally Posted By StevieJ309: Thanks for chiming in here, Bill. There's no doubt that your new SGB will be bomb-proof, but unfortunately when it comes to cloning you'll see that legitimate upgrades in functionality will virtually always be cast aside in favor of what's "clone correct". We're an odd bunch like that. We are mostly cloners here. We are not ashamed. |
|
Originally Posted By imdBman:
Odd Man Out here. I will gladly use the G gas block when I can buy the MK16 rail independantly. |
AR Sponsor