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: 5/26/2002 11:30:55 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/26/2002 11:32:12 PM EDT by Scarecrow]
If you could get a belt fed upper made by a company you trust and that was field reliable for less then 2000$ would you buy one?

I want to see if there is "no market" like I keep hearing from gun companies.

On a side note, it took Mr. Browning 6-9 months to invent the 1919 machine gun and make the finished gun.
Link Posted: 5/27/2002 3:37:43 AM EDT
I think a lot of people would like to get one but the cost would be the prohibitive part to the deal.
Link Posted: 5/27/2002 7:33:46 AM EDT
The whole cost thing even gets worse for me with stupid US import laws and a Canadian dollar getting worse by the second. 2000$ US means 3500$ for me plus import fee's and other giberish.
Link Posted: 5/27/2002 7:37:58 AM EDT
Wouldn't you be limited to five-linked rounds at a time in Canada?
Link Posted: 5/27/2002 9:01:18 AM EDT
Would love to own one, but would take a while to put together that kind of scratch. Still cheaper than a SAW though.
Link Posted: 5/27/2002 9:01:34 AM EDT

I've pretty much given up on that idea. I waited to see the MG34 upper and it came in at well over $3K. I built one of these in a semi instead. Converted it to 8mm and shoot Turk ammo @ $.06 a round.




It satisfies my belt fed need for the time being.

Link Posted: 5/27/2002 11:23:14 AM EDT

Originally Posted By DScott:
Wouldn't you be limited to five-linked rounds at a time in Canada?



The laws don't include disintegrating links, therefore no unless the government decides to clarify their own laws.
Link Posted: 5/27/2002 11:40:05 AM EDT
Robarm was supposed to have this option for their M96, but it never materialized.
Link Posted: 5/27/2002 11:40:39 AM EDT
what ever happened to shrike anyway? ive been hearing about thier upper sence I joined the board 2 years ago!
Link Posted: 5/27/2002 12:10:45 PM EDT

Originally Posted By OregonShooter:
what ever happened to shrike anyway? ive been hearing about thier upper sence I joined the board 2 years ago!



Dead.
Link Posted: 5/27/2002 1:59:53 PM EDT
Hi Waldo,

Dram here, what is the lowdown on using Turk ammo and the conversion you did to your 19?

I heard Turk has beaucoup defects and case splits etc.... how does it run? And have you tried any of the German 8mm that is out there?

If you converted to 8mm from 308... what type of links do you use.

Your help is appreciated.

Dram : )
Link Posted: 5/27/2002 2:15:30 PM EDT
No, not my cup of tea. For around 2 grand I'd rather have a NIB Preban Bushy or an AR 10.
Link Posted: 5/27/2002 3:19:10 PM EDT
I'm with Vinnie, there are better things to spend $2000 on.
Link Posted: 5/27/2002 3:28:58 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/27/2002 3:30:22 PM EDT by glazer1972]
We could have all the EVIL features on this upper!

If we mounted this upper on one of those Kalifornia legal postban fixed mag lowers.

An Assault Weapon is "any semiautomatic weapon that has the ability to accept a detachable magazineand has at least to of the following features: folding or collapsing stock, pistol grip, bayonet lug, Flashhider or threads."
Link Posted: 5/27/2002 3:46:47 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Scarecrow:

Originally Posted By OregonShooter:
what ever happened to shrike anyway? ive been hearing about thier upper sence I joined the board 2 years ago!



Dead.



Not entirely... but I won't reveal my secret, industry insider info at this time. Let's just say that other, more lucrative government contracts came along. Got to go where the bigger money is.
Link Posted: 5/27/2002 4:44:46 PM EDT
Link Posted: 5/28/2002 12:08:42 AM EDT
Ya, I would. Here's the criteria...

Ability to accept belted ammo or mags with minimal to no conversion work (viz, field changable.)
Ability to accept and function with M203/37mm underbarrel attachment.
Ability to use relatively easy-to-find links (NOT Stoner 63 links - I seem to recall they are STILL a pain to find. Correct me if I am wrong...)
Ability to easily mix ammunition types per belt (I anticipate no trouble here.)
Able to carry container for ammunition belt and a link catcher.

Look at the original AR10, and some of the Ciener conversions. I know Ciener has worked up a beltfed, and the old AR10 would feed from belt or box with no trouble. Watch the video that Armalite posted recently...

FFZ
Link Posted: 5/28/2002 4:43:16 AM EDT

Originally Posted By FreeFireZone:
Ya, I would. Here's the criteria...

Ability to accept belted ammo or mags with minimal to no conversion work (viz, field changable.)
Ability to accept and function with M203/37mm underbarrel attachment.
Ability to use relatively easy-to-find links (NOT Stoner 63 links - I seem to recall they are STILL a pain to find. Correct me if I am wrong...)
Ability to easily mix ammunition types per belt (I anticipate no trouble here.)
Able to carry container for ammunition belt and a link catcher.

Look at the original AR10, and some of the Ciener conversions. I know Ciener has worked up a beltfed, and the old AR10 would feed from belt or box with no trouble. Watch the video that Armalite posted recently...

FFZ



ArmaLite has stated that there was PLENTY of trouble with the belt fed AR10.


As for DarkHelmet's "sources", I think he's a lurker over on subguns.com. It's been common knowledge over there for over a year that ARES Defense claims to be working on something that actually pays rather than continuing on the Shrike. I don't claim to be connected to anything, but I do read a lot of stuff and know a few folks in DoD who buy things. The last I heard, the Shrike wasn't dead but there were no firm plans on a start date for production.

I'd shell out as much as $3K for a well made belt fed upper. You semi-auto shooters may not appreciate one as much but blasting with one full auto is the sheeeit. I'm not too fond of a 23lb M60 and I hate cleaning the junky MFerz. The 1919/M37 isn't my cup of tea. I'm not paying $20K+ for an MG34, MG42/74/3. Forget that MG34/M16 setup. I saw an HK21 this weekend and can say for sure that I will NEVER buy one of those. Now I know why Germany stuck with the MG3 instead. Too much recoil, no top cover, action is too short to for belt feed.

If Todd Bailey gets a decent beltfed upper with a chrome lined bore out on the market, I'd give it a try with much fear and trepidation.

If ARES ever gets the ball rolling on the Shrike, then I'd go for one of those too. I'd prefer the Shrike.
Link Posted: 5/28/2002 4:51:27 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Dramborleg


If you converted to 8mm from 308... what type of links do you use.



I use 30-06 links. I haven't had any problems with the Turk ammo other than a dud now and then.
Link Posted: 5/29/2002 9:20:20 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Juggernaut:

Beltfed weapons are included in the ban.

Juggernaut



Your right them d%$# politicians think of everything. I thought I had come up w/ a good Idea. Let me go back to my Laboratory.

I did have a Guns and Ammo Annual at home that had a Belt Fed upper conversion kit in an article. I think it was made by Ciener.
Link Posted: 5/29/2002 4:26:00 PM EDT
No.
A. I only have a semi-auto. If I had that much scratch, I'd have a DIAS or some other registered full auto before the belt feed conversion
B. Belt fed means lots of ammo expenditure. That would suck with a closed bolt weapon. Unless of course it was an open bolt mod as well, like the old Colt LMG
C. No way to swap barrels fast. Even chrome bored, that means lots of cooling time (translation: time to change a magazine out)

Bottomline, given the limitations of the M16 platform, I don't see that any advantages would be conveyed over a magazine fed M16.
That said, I'm so damn poor that even full auto is out of the question for me, so I'm not much of a guy to ask.
Top Top