AR Sponsor
Posted: 11/1/2024 9:43:38 PM EDT
| What happened to the BRN-9. What else is there that can use a folding pistol brace and not a Law Tactical type folding buffer tube? |
|
Quoted: What happened to the BRN-9. What else is there that can use a folding pistol brace and not a Law Tactical type folding buffer tube? Did you read this thread ?? https://www.ar15.com/forums/AR-15/Backpack-AR-9-that-takes-Glock-mags-/15-787889/ Get a Matador Arms complete build. A little over $1100-1300 Or..... get a Matador arms upper for $550 Then use whatever lower you want for the magazine you want to use.....MP5, Scorpion, Colt SMG, etc. Add a buffer tube receiver cover on the lower with a pictinny rail section. Bolt on AT3 folding butt stock or brace. AND ....Matador Arms has a 15% off sale going as I post this. https://matadorarms.com Or get a CMMG Dissent.....a little over $2300 . |
|
I've got my flame-suit on since I know how most of the people here feel about BCA. But, I just received one of their $250 bufferless uppers and can report that it works flawlessly. This one. https://www.bearcreekarsenal.com/9mm-5-parkerized-m4-barrel-1-10-twist-blow-back-4-sch-nrail-bufferless-upper.html |
|
Quoted: I've got my flame-suit on since I know how most of the people here feel about BCA. But, I just received one of their $250 bufferless uppers and can report that it works flawlessly. This one. https://www.bearcreekarsenal.com/9mm-5-parkerized-m4-barrel-1-10-twist-blow-back-4-sch-nrail-bufferless-upper.html If it works and you're happy with it, that's all that counts! |
|
Quoted: If it works and you're happy with it, that's all that counts! Good to see you around. I have just about every variation of buffer setup AR9 available, including yours, but wanted to see how small of a package I could get without having to use a folder. Had been looking at the Matador version for years, but never dropped the hammer. BCA makes some .22 LR, .22 Magnum, and .17 HMR models that, though not perfect, do work(yes, I do have one of each), so at the price, I decided to try their 9mm buffer-less upper. I installed it onto one of my Glock mag lowers and took it to the range. It functioned perfectly from the first round, feeding aluminum Blazer from an ETS magazine. I can't say how it will work over the long run, but in the meantime, it seems to "do the job". |
|
Quoted: Good to see you around. I have just about every variation of buffer setup AR9 available, including yours, but wanted to see how small of a package I could get without having to use a folder. Had been looking at the Matador version for years, but never dropped the hammer. BCA makes some .22 LR, .22 Magnum, and .17 HMR models that, though not perfect, do work(yes, I do have one of each), so at the price, I decided to try their 9mm buffer-less upper. I installed it onto one of my Glock mag lowers and took it to the range. It functioned perfectly from the first round, feeding aluminum Blazer from an ETS magazine. I can't say how it will work over the long run, but in the meantime, it seems to"do the job". Stop temping me to buy one! The matador is very nice and enjoyable to shoot. I just bought the HB industries folding charging handle and locking charging block to try out. |
|
Quoted:Stop temping me to buy one! The matador is very nice and enjoyable to shoot. I just bought the HB industries folding charging handle and locking charging block to try out. The Matador has several features that the BCA does not. They could be important to someone looking at the two. First, the Matador has a charging handle that is ambidextrous. The BCA can be ordered with one or the other, but can't do both on the same upper. I prefer left side charging, so I ordered the one that has left side charging and right side eject. The other version has charging and eject on the right side and can't be converted without cutting a slot for the charging handle on the left side. The left side charger version can't have the charging handle on the right without cutting a slot on the right side. Either cut could be done without having a mill by using a drill and Dremel, but that would entail some tricky work. Also, the Matador charging handle is non-reciprocating. Secondly, the Matador will work with a variety of magazines, dependent on the lower. I don't know if the BCA bolt is cut to work with a variety of magazine types. I'll get around to trying the BCA with a Colt mag lower and a MEAN Arms mag lower, later. Just checked and the BCA will work with a Juggernaut Tactical lower that has LRBHO. Whether the Matador features are worth double the cost or not, only the end user can decide. They weren't for me. Sorry Blowback9, not!!!  ETA: I just tried the BCA upper on a Spike's Colt mag lower. It appears that it would work with some slight modification to the wings of the feed ramp. The MEAN Arms mag lower won't work without doing something to the magazine, which I'll figure out later. If it ends up not working with the Colt or MEAN Arms mags, it won't matter to me since it works so perfectly with the Glock mag lower. It even fed using Magpul Glock mags, something that I've had trouble with in the past. |
|
Quoted: The Matador has several features that the BCA does not. They could be important to someone looking at the two. First, the Matador has a charging handle that is ambidextrous. The BCA can be ordered with one or the other, but can't do both on the same upper. I prefer left side charging, so I ordered the one that has left side charging and right side eject. The other version has charging and eject on the right side and can't be converted without cutting a slot for the charging handle on the left side. The left side charger version can't have the charging handle on the right without cutting a slot on the right side. Either cut could be done without having a mill by using a drill and Dremel, but that would entail some tricky work. Also, the Matador charging handle is non-reciprocating. Secondly, the Matador will work with a variety of magazines, dependent on the lower. I don't know if the BCA bolt is cut to work with a variety of magazine types. I'll get around to trying the BCA with a Colt mag lower and a MEAN Arms mag lower, later. Just checked and the BCA will work with a Juggernaut Tactical lower that has LRBHO. Whether the Matador features are worth double the cost or not, only the end user can decide. They weren't for me. Sorry Blowback9, not!!! ETA: I just tried the BCA upper on a Spike's Colt mag lower. It appears that it would work with some slight modification to the wings of the feed ramp. The MEAN Arms mag lower won't work without doing something to the magazine, which I'll figure out later. If it ends up not working with the Colt or MEAN Arms mags, it won't matter to me since it works so perfectly with the Glock mag lower. It even fed using Magpul Glock mags, something that I've had trouble with in the past. Curious if their bolt has the same cut geometry as a typical blowback bolt for the fixed ejector in a mag block  Do you happen to have a pic of the bolt face? |
|
Quoted: Curious if their bolt has the same cut geometry as a typical blowback bolt for the fixed ejector in a mag block Do you happen to have a pic of the bolt face? Don't have a pic of the bolt face, but it is definitely cut for a fixed ejector. That's the way my lower is set up. Haven't looked too closely at the extractor, yet, but it appears to be from a 10/22. That would be convenient for users. |
|
Quoted: The Matador has several features that the BCA does not. They could be important to someone looking at the two. First, the Matador has a charging handle that is ambidextrous. The BCA can be ordered with one or the other, but can't do both on the same upper. I prefer left side charging, so I ordered the one that has left side charging and right side eject. The other version has charging and eject on the right side and can't be converted without cutting a slot for the charging handle on the left side. The left side charger version can't have the charging handle on the right without cutting a slot on the right side. Either cut could be done without having a mill by using a drill and Dremel, but that would entail some tricky work. Also, the Matador charging handle is non-reciprocating. Secondly, the Matador will work with a variety of magazines, dependent on the lower. I don't know if the BCA bolt is cut to work with a variety of magazine types. I'll get around to trying the BCA with a Colt mag lower and a MEAN Arms mag lower, later. Just checked and the BCA will work with a Juggernaut Tactical lower that has LRBHO. Whether the Matador features are worth double the cost or not, only the end user can decide. They weren't for me. Sorry Blowback9, not!!! ETA: I just tried the BCA upper on a Spike's Colt mag lower. It appears that it would work with some slight modification to the wings of the feed ramp. The MEAN Arms mag lower won't work without doing something to the magazine, which I'll figure out later. If it ends up not working with the Colt or MEAN Arms mags, it won't matter to me since it works so perfectly with the Glock mag lower. It even fed using Magpul Glock mags, something that I've had trouble with in the past. Did you ever get it to run with the endomags? I’m trying to decide between the bc9 and the mat9. Might be weird but I don’t like the look of the straight mags and I’d rather not buy another lower so I’m a endo guy. Would also be nice to grab an adapter and a Glock drum for fun. What’s the problem? Is it something I could tinker with to fix? I have a bunch of Bear Creek uppers so I know the deal, love my side chargers. |
|
R&D Precision makes a "bufferless" upper that takes a folding stock similar to BCA's. https://www.rdprecisionaz.com/ It looks very similar to BCA's. R&D precision's came first. Their charging handles are on the handguard just fore of the receiver, and can be set up for left or right handed use. |
AR Sponsor