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
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 3
Posted: 8/11/2005 2:50:37 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/7/2005 1:16:32 PM EDT by Kevin]
Link Posted: 8/11/2005 2:52:22 PM EDT


Link Posted: 8/11/2005 3:42:33 PM EDT
wow, that looks great.
Link Posted: 8/11/2005 3:57:53 PM EDT

Originally Posted By MSTN:
photos.imageevent.com/smglee/mstn/VltorHG-2.jpg

MORE PIX SOON ...

THIS FOREND IS A RESULT OF THE NAVY'S INTEREST IN A REDESIGN OF THE ORIGINAL ABRAMS MODEL. AS YOU MAY KNOW, VLTOR IS NOW A PART OF ABRAMS. THIS MEANS THE ENGINEERING AND DESIGN TALENTS OF VLOR'S ERIC KINCEL IS NOW A PART OF ABRAMS.

HERE'S WHAT VLTOR REPORTS REGARDING THE FOREND:

"The material is mainly 6061T6, with some critical parts being 7075T6
aluminum. All parts are hard anodized and the finish (tan) is K-G Dark
Earth, baked on.

So far, the Navy has received over 200 units. They just gave us another
contract for another 433 units and they're processing another contract for
160 units."

THE UNIT IS SURPRISNGLY LIGHT AT 16 OUNCES, ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING THE FULL LENGTH TOP RAIL. OF COURSE, TO MAKE AN APPLES-TO-APPLES COMPARISON, WEIGHT WISE, THE WEIGHT OF THE STOCK BARREL NUT SHOULD BE INCLUDED, 1.2 OUNCES.

THE UNIT MOUNTS UP THUSLY - REMOVE THE DELTA RING AND SPRING. THEN ATTACH THE TOP RAIL TO THE RECEIVER VIA TWO HEAVY CROSSBOLT SCREWS.

photos.imageevent.com/smglee/mstn/VltorHG-3.jpg

AS YOU CAN SEE ABOVE, THE LOWER PORTION INSTALLS AT THE REAR AND PIVOTS UP INTO POSITION. THE LOWER PORTION IS QUICKLY, EASILY, YET SECURELY ATTACHED TO THE UPPER PORTION VIA TWO SPRING CLIPS.

photos.imageevent.com/smglee/mstn/VltorHG-4.jpg

photos.imageevent.com/smglee/mstn/VltorHG-5.jpg

NOTE THE FLUSH FIT BETWEEN THE UPPER AND LOWER PORTIONS OF THE HANDGUARD. THERE IS ABSOLUTLEY NO MOVEMENT BETWEEN THESE TWO PARTS. BUT, JUST TO MAKE SURE, THE SCREWS THAT SECURE THE VARIOUS RAILS TO THE FOREND AT THE 3 AND 9 O'CLOCK POSITIONS LOCK BOTH TOGETHER. THE RAIL ASSORTMENT CAN BE SEEN ON THE WHITE CUTTING BOARD UNDER THE VISE THAT MRS. GRANT HAS NOT YET MISSED.



Wes,

Since it appears, you need to "unsrew" the lower portion of the FE for attachment of an M203. I don't see much difference to most KAC offerings (URX etc) and some others. I will call myself ignorant, since I would prefer a Thumper over a M203 anyday. Just too old to retrain in some ways , I guess.

If you can please educate some of us on the benefits. Obiviuos, VLTOR and the original ABRAMS system seem to be viable today, given ALL the other options.
Link Posted: 8/11/2005 5:16:39 PM EDT
Link Posted: 8/11/2005 5:48:22 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/11/2005 5:49:09 PM EDT by AR223]
It does look like the lower part needs to be screwed into the rear.

I think the rear screws are just pivot points: slide the lower forend rear slots into the gaps provided by the screws and then angle it upward for the front tab locks.

Wes, perhaps you can take a pic of the rear portion of the lower forend for us?

One other question for you Wes: how much??
Link Posted: 8/11/2005 5:57:28 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/12/2005 4:48:37 AM EDT by mongo001]
So it is back. I got a feeling from Eric that it was gone forever. It looks interesting.

It even opens up for easy "barrel maintenance".

ETA: I like my receiver rail, so this very likely won't be an option for me.
Link Posted: 8/11/2005 6:09:03 PM EDT
I'm not sure I'm feeling the new version. The required removal of the delta ring makes the assembly look akward. Also, I like the lock up location on the older version better. Although, form follows function and I am also ignorant having never used either. Given the choice between the two I would likely choose the original


Link Posted: 8/11/2005 6:09:35 PM EDT
I'm wondering why the design necessitated the removal of the delta ring. Looks like they could have designed around the delta ring so you could go back to regular handguards if required.
Link Posted: 8/11/2005 6:10:59 PM EDT
It covers the gas block. And it free floats? Be sure you let us know what rear sights work with it.
Link Posted: 8/11/2005 6:35:29 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/12/2005 5:07:32 AM EDT by MSTN]
Link Posted: 8/11/2005 6:58:18 PM EDT
So what exactly is the benefit of this over any other system.
Link Posted: 8/11/2005 6:58:24 PM EDT
How woudl this rail system fit on a rifle with a flat top gas block?
Link Posted: 8/11/2005 7:16:57 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/11/2005 7:19:58 PM EDT by General_Tso]
How's it with heat?
Link Posted: 8/11/2005 7:18:21 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/11/2005 7:19:31 PM EDT by ian187]

Originally Posted By MSTN:
photos.imageevent.com/smglee/mstn/VltorHG-1.jpg

THE TWO AFT SCREWS ARE PIVOT POINTS - THE LOWER RAIL IS NOT SCREWED DOWN IN THE REAR.

THE ELIMINATION OF THE DELTA RING ALLOWS THE TOP RAIL TO BE FULL THICKNESS AT THAT POINT, STRENGTHENING THE FOREND WHERE IT IS MOST LIKELY TO FLEX.

YES, FREE FLOATING. THE FOREND CAP CAN REMAIN INSTALLED.

YES, THE FRONT SIGHT TOWER IS SHROUDED. THIS IS AN IMPORTANT FEATURE, IMO.

LIST PRICE IS $285.95.

REAR SIGHTS THAT WILL WORK:

ARMS
LARUE
KNIGHT'S 300-M OR 600-M
MATECH 600-M
TROY

REAR SIGHTS THAT WILL NOT WORK:

LMT


WES



You are right, of course, about the top rail. You are also right about the front shroud. I really like the design but the absence of anything covering the barrel nut negates the front shroud since nothing is covering the absolute hotest part of the gun. I am one of those types who like to hold the mag well, I have sold off my forward grips because of this. With this set up I would burn myself doing that.

Again, I like the design but I think they are making a mistake by leaving the barrel exposed. Take it for what it is worth since, again, I have never handled either the CASV or the VLTOR.

Link Posted: 8/11/2005 7:57:14 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/12/2005 3:33:17 AM EDT by MSTN]
Link Posted: 8/11/2005 8:01:17 PM EDT
looks like crapola... new wanabe hsld
Link Posted: 8/11/2005 8:36:01 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/11/2005 8:36:21 PM EDT by ian187]

Originally Posted By MSTN:
YOU MOST DEFINITELY WANT TO KEEP YOUR PINK PARTS OFF THE HOT PARTS OF THE GUN.


THE BARREL NUT, HOWEVER, WOULD NOT TEND TO MAKE CONTACT WITH YOUR BODY WITH THE WEAPON SLUNG, AS IT HAS SOME STAND OFF PROVIDED BY THE FOREND PLUS THE LOWER RECEIVER. IT WOULD BE CLOSE, THOUGH, AS IT ALWAYS IS.

THE DESIGN IS AS IT IS IN THIS AREA IN ORDER TO PROVIDE ROOM FOR THE LOWER RAIL TO PIVOT DOWNWARD AND BE REMOVED EASILY.



STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES OF THE SYSTEM ???



PRO:


LIGHT

FREE FLOATING

REMOVABLE BOTTOM RAIL

SIMPLE, STRAIGHTFORWARD, WELL ENGINEERED WITH TOP QUALITY MANUFACTURING IN MATERIALS, FIT, AND FINISH

5 MINUTE INSTALLATION, ONCE DELTA RING AND SPRING ARE REMOVED. ALIGNMENT IS A NO-BRAINER. JUST BOLT THE TOP RAIL TO THE RECEIVER.

DESIGN VERSATILITY - NOTHING SAYS YOU HAVE TO BOLT JUST RAILS TO THESE THREADED POINTS. DEDICATED MOUNTS COULD EASILY BE CREATED. QD SLING POINTS COULD EASILY BE ADDED TO THE RAIL SECTIONS, AS LARUE SHOWED US ALL ALL AT THE SHOT SHOW AND AS P.R.I. NOW OFFERS ON FORENDS.

SHROUDED FRONT SIGHT TOWER.

WORKS WITH MOST EXISTING REAR SIGHTS.

AIMPOINT COMPATIBLE.

4:30 AND 7:30 RAIL OPTIONS - THIS IS REALLY NEAT FOR MOUNTING A WEAPONLIGHT.

AMPLE CONVECTIVE COOLING PROVIDED.

GOOD OPTION FOR FOLKS WHO HAVE PERMANENTLY ATTACHED FLASH SUPPRESSOR.

FAIR PRICE.



CONS:


REQUIRES THE REMOVAL OF THE DELTA RING AND SPRING.

PEQ-2A WILL MOST LIKELY HAVE TO BE MOUNTED ON A SIDE RAIL INSTEAD OF TOP RAIL. (MY CHOICE, ANYWAY - GETS IT OUT OF YOUR FIELD OF VIEW).

EOTECH ON TOP RAIL WILL NOT ALLOW COWITNESSING OF IRON SIGHTS.

FAIRLY WIDE FOREND WITH BOTH SIDE RAILS INSTALLED (BUT EVERYONE USES A VERTICAL GRIP FOR CQB, ANYWAY.).

HIGHER THAN NORMAL CHEEK WELD WITH ACOG ON TOP RAIL.

ONLY COMES IN FLAT BLACK AND FLAT DARK EARTH. COLOR COORDINATING GREEN GUNS

BARREL NUT IS EXPOSED AND WILL BE HOT HOT HOT AFTER RAPID FIRING

LIMITED AVAILABILITY.


WES


WES



I fixed it for you.
Link Posted: 8/11/2005 8:52:01 PM EDT
Interesting, except that I see it as a step back in the evolution & maturation of FF rail systems. The raised rail is a throw back to the days of the ARMS SIR & the Knights RAS II, and it limits one's choice of optics.

Oh... and that exposed barrel nut thing has just gotta go!

Overall, a mildly intriguing but antiquated design IMO.



Link Posted: 8/11/2005 9:17:18 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/11/2005 9:17:33 PM EDT by jar3ds]
reminds me of knights old prototypes of the rasII...

i'm not a fan of unstandardized height rails... the m203 should be banned from the armed forces anyways ...

thanks for the report though!
Link Posted: 8/11/2005 9:34:54 PM EDT
looks like vltor partnered up with Abrams.
Link Posted: 8/11/2005 10:07:01 PM EDT
The only thing I really dont like is there is now way to cowitness EOtech
Link Posted: 8/12/2005 3:27:13 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/12/2005 3:31:17 AM EDT by MSTN]
Link Posted: 8/12/2005 3:49:42 AM EDT
Tag.
Link Posted: 8/12/2005 5:11:33 AM EDT
tag for new pix
Link Posted: 8/12/2005 5:55:15 AM EDT
tag
Link Posted: 8/12/2005 6:30:42 AM EDT
Tag for photo of green version.

Link Posted: 8/12/2005 6:41:18 AM EDT
Tagged.
Link Posted: 8/12/2005 7:16:00 AM EDT

Originally Posted By MSTN:
..
STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES OF THE SYSTEM ???



PRO:


LIGHT

.



Wes,
I'm going to have to argue with you on this one. As you may or may not know I've been tracking the weight of various AR parts and assemblies for a couple of years now. At 16oz + the weight of the barrel nut (which I show as being 2.0 oz not 1.2 - then again what does 0.8oz matter?) makes this unit one of the heaviest Carbine forearm assemblies available.

The only two that are heavier are the SIR #45s (M model is 2oz heavier, C model is 0.7oz heavier).

Even the Troys are significantly lighter (13oz installed weight for the carbine version).

I'll agree this VLTOR unit has some pretty neat features over the other units, but 'light weight' is NOT one of them.
Link Posted: 8/12/2005 9:50:43 AM EDT

Originally Posted By MSTN:
MORE NEWS, HERE, GUYS, FROM THE ABRAMS/VLTOR FOLKS.

THE FOREND IN QUESTION, CALLED THE CASV-EL, WILL BE OFFERED IN OLIVE DRAB, AS WELL. THE OLIVE DRAB AND THE FLAT DARK EARTH WILL BE A WHOPPING $10 MORE, THOUGH. THAT'S A BARGAIN, IF YOU KNOW THE PRICE OF KG-KOTE.

NOW - TRUE CONFESSION - IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE ASSEMBLED WITH THE DELTA RING IN PLACE !!!

WHAT KIND OF DUMBASS AM I, ANYWAY ?!? MAYBE I SHOULD START A POLL ...

WILL WORK UP SOME NEW PIX.

WES



sounds more interesting now
Link Posted: 8/12/2005 10:14:55 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Forest:

Originally Posted By MSTN:
..
STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES OF THE SYSTEM ???



PRO:


LIGHT

.



Wes,
I'm going to have to argue with you on this one. As you may or may not know I've been tracking the weight of various AR parts and assemblies for a couple of years now. At 16oz + the weight of the barrel nut (which I show as being 2.0 oz not 1.2 - then again what does 0.8oz matter?) makes this unit one of the heaviest Carbine forearm assemblies available.

The only two that are heavier are the SIR #45s (M model is 2oz heavier, C model is 0.7oz heavier).

Even the Troys are significantly lighter (13oz installed weight for the carbine version).

I'll agree this VLTOR unit has some pretty neat features over the other units, but 'light weight' is NOT one of them.



I just dont see any advantages at all over the other systems out there, especially for the price.

Its not lighter.

There is nothing new or innovative about it.

It costs more then most units.

I am really not seeing anything special about this unit.
Link Posted: 8/12/2005 10:28:29 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Dace:

I just dont see any advantages at all over the other systems out there, especially for the price.

Its not lighter.

There is nothing new or innovative about it.

It costs more then most units.

I am really not seeing anything special about this unit.



The only advantages I really see is a continuous top rail for scoped applications, and the ability to mount the rails at off angles (which isn't all that significant considering the availability of mounts that do just that).
Link Posted: 8/12/2005 10:32:40 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/12/2005 10:50:51 AM EDT by ColtCommando]
Few pics I found.


Link Posted: 8/12/2005 11:13:14 AM EDT
Link Posted: 8/12/2005 11:50:37 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/12/2005 11:53:56 AM EDT by spider]
Hey, Wes, how does the tan forend color match to the latest Vltor/MagPul stocks ?

Also, how wide is it compared to the Larue?

This may be a better option for me than the Larue forend I just recently purchased - I HATE rail panels.
Link Posted: 8/12/2005 12:05:31 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/12/2005 12:07:12 PM EDT by spider]

Originally Posted By Dace:

I just dont see any advantages at all over the other systems out there, especially for the price.

Its not lighter.

There is nothing new or innovative about it.

It costs more then most units.

I am really not seeing anything special about this unit.



Do you honestly think that NSWC had civvies in mind when this was (re)designed?
Think of it this way. You, as an armorer, have X number of either M-4s or similarly short barreled M-16s on the rack. The operator requests a "FF rail" system that still allows him to utilize a M203 or even a bayonet, & you may or may not have the resources to do a dedicated KAC/DD/LT/etc. full floating forend rail system swap. Enter the SIR, RAS II, & now this forend from Vltor/Abrams.
Slap it on in a matter of minutes & he's ready to go.
We tend to forget that most new tactical products WERE INITIALLY NOT MEANT FOR US.

Rant off.
Link Posted: 8/12/2005 12:20:50 PM EDT

Originally Posted By spider:

Originally Posted By Dace:

I just dont see any advantages at all over the other systems out there, especially for the price.

Its not lighter.

There is nothing new or innovative about it.

It costs more then most units.

I am really not seeing anything special about this unit.



Do you honestly think that NSWC had civvies in mind when this was (re)designed?
Think of it this way. You, as an armorer, have X number of either M-4s or similarly short barreled M-16s on the rack. The operator requests a "FF rail" system that still allows him to utilize a M203 or even a bayonet, & you may or may not have the resources to do a dedicated KAC/DD/LT/etc. full floating forend rail system swap. Enter the SIR, RAS II, & now this forend from Vltor/Abrams.
Slap it on in a matter of minutes & he's ready to go.
We tend to forget that most new tactical products WERE INITIALLY NOT MEANT FOR US.

Rant off.



Thats great for the armorer and the military, they are allowed to compromise to save time and hassles, but we are not armorers. A vendor came on posting about this new product, the product will obviously try to be sold to us. But I among others see no real advantage that this new product has over anything else on the market at all.

We dont own M203's
We have the time to put a rail on.
If you dont have the tools there are other rails that do more then this one

Regardless of the purpose for military application, I dont see any improvement on whats currently on the market for civilian use.

WHo cares what it was originally designed for.
Link Posted: 8/12/2005 12:53:54 PM EDT
Tag for further pics
Link Posted: 8/12/2005 3:40:36 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/12/2005 3:48:17 PM EDT by pcurtis]

Originally Posted By spider:

Originally Posted By Dace:

I just dont see any advantages at all over the other systems out there, especially for the price.

Its not lighter.

There is nothing new or innovative about it.

It costs more then most units.

I am really not seeing anything special about this unit.



Do you honestly think that NSWC had civvies in mind when this was (re)designed?
Think of it this way. You, as an armorer, have X number of either M-4s or similarly short barreled M-16s on the rack. The operator requests a "FF rail" system that still allows him to utilize a M203 or even a bayonet, & you may or may not have the resources to do a dedicated KAC/DD/LT/etc. full floating forend rail system swap. Enter the SIR, RAS II, & now this forend from Vltor/Abrams.
Slap it on in a matter of minutes & he's ready to go.
We tend to forget that most new tactical products WERE INITIALLY NOT MEANT FOR US.

Rant off.


Bingo.. +1

I still beleive in dedicted weapon systems. I want my carbine as light as possible. Hence, my personal prefence for an M79 versus an M203. You carry the same ammo, but only use the weapon required. The added weight is in the noise.(IMHO)

BTW: Wes, thanks for your clarifications.

Link Posted: 8/12/2005 5:06:45 PM EDT
The key features I wanted in the redesign were:
1. Increased bottom half rigidity, previous rails in use don’t hold up well to muzzle strikes ( bottom half rips off the gun).
2. Free float without removal of barrel nut (Operator installed and maintained not Armorer, whole system removable in the field for cleaning ).
3. Full length top rail to accommodate long eye relief optics (TR21).
4. Modular rails with increased positions (4:30, 7:30), also allows for removal of all rail sections the individual operator dos not need, reducing weight and the overall profile.
3. Delivery on time. I have other rails from sources that will remain nameless paid for and on back order, now being 10 months past their promised delivery date with no delivery in sight.


Cowitnessing , I will pass on this argument but not a factor as all my sights are in 100% repeatable zero mounts, with the PEQ2’ s following right along with mount delivery’s in progress.
Out.
2011BLDR


Link Posted: 8/12/2005 5:14:00 PM EDT
Link Posted: 8/12/2005 5:22:39 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/12/2005 5:24:10 PM EDT by MSTN]
Link Posted: 8/12/2005 6:59:05 PM EDT
Link Posted: 8/12/2005 9:23:58 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Hawkeye:

Originally Posted By ian187:
I'm not sure I'm feeling the new version. The required removal of the delta ring makes the assembly look akward. Also, I like the lock up location on the older version better. Although, form follows function and I am also ignorant having never used either. Given the choice between the two I would likely choose the original


img.photobucket.com/albums/v499/NFLTactical/CASV13.jpg



That rifle looks strangely familiar....


Glad to see that they went ahead with the design. Looks good.



I knew you'd like that picture.

Link Posted: 8/13/2005 10:00:48 AM EDT
Link Posted: 8/13/2005 10:05:45 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/13/2005 10:08:07 AM EDT by MSTN]
Link Posted: 8/13/2005 12:59:30 PM EDT
very nice, thanks for the new pix !!
what is the price for the FF kit ?
Link Posted: 8/13/2005 2:01:31 PM EDT
Link Posted: 8/13/2005 4:38:29 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/13/2005 4:45:26 PM EDT by Aubrey]
There may be disadvantages, but I like the 04:30 & 07:30 positions and ability to remove unused rails. Thanks for sharing Wes.

Is there a LaRue Aimpoint mount that will put the irons in the lower 1/3 when mounted on a full-length rail?
Link Posted: 8/13/2005 5:48:36 PM EDT
Link Posted: 8/13/2005 7:34:56 PM EDT
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 3
Top Top