Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 11/7/2003 7:51:20 PM EDT
Woohoo here it is:

The upper is a Cav-Arms 14.5" with a Smith Vortex perm. attached from Adrenaline Arms.
I bought almost all the components from the EE.
Thanks to everyone who helped me put it together:
Thanks
-Cory for the awesome service and upper.
-SMGlee for the EoTech 552

All I need now is a BUIS and Rail System. I plan to mount my Surefire M951P or su6" with vertical foregrip with the EoTech.

So what combination of the two would you choose?
1.ARMS #40a & #58 mod
2. Elusive GG&G FF rail & Chopped CH
3. RAS II and ?
4.Explain?
Link Posted: 11/7/2003 9:07:48 PM EDT
Just a #40...keep it simple and lite.
Link Posted: 11/7/2003 10:45:18 PM EDT
An ARms#40 would do it. I wouldn't go with the RAS II unless you were going to add more stuff.
Link Posted: 11/8/2003 12:22:16 AM EDT
Nice looking rig, glad you like the EOTech.
Link Posted: 11/8/2003 12:24:44 AM EDT
I like the way a SIR looks with a magpul stock. Just gives it that bad-ass machine type look IMO. Very nice rig.
Link Posted: 11/8/2003 4:10:51 AM EDT
Will that EOtech fit behind the hump in a RAS2 with an ARMS 40?
Link Posted: 11/8/2003 5:04:03 AM EDT
I would go with a SIR. #58 MOD would be cool. You could also go with a #50.
Link Posted: 11/8/2003 5:46:54 AM EDT
Get the 40 and a bi-level SIR (51?) so you can put the EOTech out front and keep it on the same axis as the irons.
Link Posted: 11/8/2003 6:05:56 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Delta_3_63: Get the 40 and a bi-level SIR (51?) so you can put the EOTech out front and keep it on the same axis as the irons.
View Quote
That would be the #50. The 51 is for Carry handle receivers.
Link Posted: 11/8/2003 8:26:01 AM EDT
RAS II & Arms #40.
Link Posted: 11/8/2003 8:39:03 AM EDT
No bayo lug? I know the Cav/DPMS uppers were built for their post ban lowers. You obviously have a pre ban lower. I would have went with a 16" pre ban upper so I could have kept access to the barrel threads. I've seen three Smith Vortex flash hiders blossom and crack. I know Smith claims that this was due to bad heat treat on one batch but I don't believe them. They are great flash hiders and look cool but I would never permanently attach one.
Link Posted: 11/8/2003 4:17:51 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/8/2003 4:21:39 PM EDT by FishandShoot]
Originally Posted By innocent_bystander: No bayo lug? I know the Cav/DPMS uppers were built for their post ban lowers. You obviously have a pre ban lower. I would have went with a 16" pre ban upper so I could have kept access to the barrel threads. I've seen three Smith Vortex flash hiders blossom and crack. I know Smith claims that this was due to bad heat treat on one batch but I don't believe them. They are great flash hiders and look cool but I would never permanently attach one.
View Quote
I wanted to go the 14.5" route because I already have another 16" midlength setup. I agree though, having access to the threads would be an added bounus. I've also seen the pics of those "bloomed vortex" suppressors, and the one characteristic I saw they all had in common was that they were the older models with the groove at the end of the prongs. Not to mention there were quite a bit of poorly manufactured knock offs floating around too at fun shows. But newer G5 (see below) and the newest G6 from Smith Ent. don't have these issues. I believe Neil/new-arguy intially had one of the "bloomers" on his 14.5" setup, then it got replaced with the G5 and I don't think he has had a problem since. [url="http://www.hunt101.com/?p=69772&c=500&z=1"][img]http://www.hunt101.com/img/069772.jpg[/img][/url]
Top Top