Have read in various places about the upgrades that CRANE has done to the M4 rifles, specifically the bolt/carrier, but they haven't said what these upgrades are. Does anyone know?

Also, understand that the Canadian C7/C8 have various things modified as well. Anyone know what these might be?

Anyone???

http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2001smallarms/taylor.pdf

This is old but will give you a good idea about it.

I went to the link (too bad the graphics look like they were prepared on PAINT.)

I would like to know why I am seeing what looks like a folding front sight post on the CQBR when the only pictures of operators using them have shown standard sight posts.  

I also see one of the phantom pics of a CQBR with Sound suppressor attached.  I have seen pics from CRANE of 10.5inch guns with M4 QD's attached but I have heard from KAC employees that the M4 QD was never designed with that in mind and that it may be a poor decision (regarding unburned powder blasting the baffles and excessive heat and pressure) I think the setup sounds perfect (light compact and quiet) but was hoping to find out more information on how it effected suppressor life.

That grenade launcher looks like one of the original design competitors tested during the Vietnam War (I think Bell might have made it) but it's pistol grip really looks earily reminisent of that early design.    

I know that Oly has been deeply involved in this project upgrade for years. They (Crane)have evaluated bolts, upper and lowers from Oly, as well as barrels, all utilizing the Maxhard process and different materials.

I have a friend that works at Crane, and the general concensus is that Oly's Maxhard is the real deal. Trouble is, the government doesn't trust anybody to be the only one to have such new tchnology. They are currently seeking to "reverse engineer" the Maxhard process, but have been unable to do so, and Oly's owner refuses to give it up! The best parts is that the process is not even patented! My guys at Oly tell me that the owner will NEVER patent the process because to patent it, you have to tell people how it is done, and when this happens people will them tweak it just enough to create a new "formula", and then recreate the process as a "new" idea. Smart cookies over there...

The other problem is that it is just an on-going process. One of the initial problems was the breaking of M4 bolts. Oly's Maxhard bolt has resolved this issue (withstood a 9,000+ round full-auto sustained fire torture test), but then the next weakest link braks and then you have to upgrade that part too.

On and on and on.... it will never end.

HHHmmmmm!  Me wonders!!!!

My guess is that Maxhard is neither new nor revolutionary, and was simply "borrowed" from another industry where no one's looking. Maybe. [;D]

Man, I remember having to load those 9600 round magazines... talk about your sore thumb!

Nickel Boron will be the finish of the future, especially for the military. Yes, there may be better finished for strength, but Nickel Boron is what everyone wants.

ls

New finishes are nice but what about any bolt mods?

LMT submitted their bolt/carrier design to the SOPMOD 2.  Wes At [url]www.mstn.biz[/url] have the same exact bolt carrier combo for 300 bills.  it is very interesting what they did to the bolt and the carrier.  I am definitely looking to pick up two and several bolts for spare parts.

Theres a little bit of a bolt mod discussion going on over here if you haven't seen it:
[url]http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=118&t=164707[/url]

SMGLee!  Is this LMT bolt something they are actively selling/advertising?  I had heard nothing about it but am quite interested in one for my SBR project Wes is helping with.  Any info would be great!  Take care!

Green0

That pdf link is very old. It was actually created before any of the items pictured existed.

The cut and paste quality graphics are probably only what the program managers envisioned the final products would look like.

As you can see their rendition of the SPR looks nothing like the current version(s).

As for the CQBR, It is my belief/assumption that the current fielded version (seen in photos etc) is only a stop-gap model until the finalized version is suitable for fielding.

My best guess is that most or all SOPMOD BLK II
variants will use the OPS Inc MB/Suppressor combo replacing the KAC.

OPS inc already has a compact model for SBR's that would probably work well.

>>>>>>>>DISCLAIMER<<<<<<<<<<

Of course this is all speculation (as with all of my posts on this topic, as I have nothing to do with NAVSEA or Crane)

Cal

I don't think so.. OPS INC cans are either all SS or SS tubing with a INconel baffle stack.  That design is definitely weaker than the KAC design which uses Inconel baffles, inconel tubing and a inconel sleeve to support the tubing.

Most Ops Inc use has been on sniper rifles.  The KAC units are built for abuse and can take 500-600rds of continuous auto fire I doubt a Ops Inc can will take it and deliver a similar DB reduction.

I do believe the Army will continue to use the Ops INc cans on Sniper weapons as they are used by operators who don't plan on using much (if any) full auto fire.

While I cannot verify of what, or how the OPS Inc Suppressors are constructed, it would seem they are quite tolerant of moderate to heavy automatic fire.

http://opsinc.us/video.php

See also SILENCERS, select 5.56/.223 dia products. They seem to have every version needed.

Calvin

I've seen a lot of mag dump videos but Coastal .223 cans will take 100+ rds of auto fire (enough to make a beta c mag video). I just think the only reason the KAC suppressor exists is that it is obviously more durable (and able to withstand the kind of abuse a Seal or Delta operator will throw at it.)

I agree however,

If you go to the product description they claim that their 5.56 cans "meets SOPMOD objectives of 30,000 rounds during various firing schedules"

I would assume they are telling the truth as they already have had several govt contracts.

Calvin