@IHC53

It’s the Mk16 that comes on the URGI.

Edit: because pic thread and top of page

Lulz!

Fact of the matter is that structurally, you will not ever have a rail system and barrel that cannot be flexed enough to cause contact.

The basic requirements of the drop tests are merely a baseline.

As noted, most of the flex is in the barrel and unless an HBAR is used, that will continue to be an issue.

That being said, some rails deform and damage less on contact during an extreme event.  Partially due to materials used, partially due to amount of material, and partially due to the structure of the material.

I'm going to have to throw out the "confirmation bias" here again, unfortunately.

GS is a true believer in what he does and no one can fault him for that.  It usually takes a true believer to push through good programs that others disregard out of conventional thought processes.

But, that being the case, getting TOO married to ones belief in a system can lead to irrational disregard of certain facts and superior aspects of previous systems.  I believe that is the case here.

If the benchmark is beating the shit out of a rail with a sledge hammer, then yes, all FF rails suck.  But comparatively speaking, especially when viewed in perspective of the established govt. tests and real world use, the MK12 rail might not be able to handle a sledge hammer, but it sure as hell handled more then the URG-I rail ever did.  The MK12 rail may not be "perfect", but it's better than what is currently being touted as the latest and greatest rail since sliced falafel.

In my personal experience, the MK12 style FF RAS systems (in all lengths) suffer from a long term issue that I partially explained above in my reply to VIP3R.  The spot welds do allow some flexation on a fixed area that work hardens and embrittles over time and leads to cracked welds, off axis rails, and rails that "wobble" in the grip.  I happen to have an M4 FF RAS in my possession with this exact issue.

It's a long term integrity issue though.   Short term or high impact events have had minimal (in my experience) structural damage unless it was a VERY severe event (running over FF rails with any kind of military vehicle is generally considered bad form...the more armor on the vehicle, the more severe the foul).

With all of that in mind, there is a basic minimum expectation standard for what kinds of use and abuse equipment should be able to take without too terribly much damage or deformation, as you are clearly already aware of.  At least the MK12 rails met those requirements which is more then we can say for the URG-I rail.

Because he said it was.  By his own accounts he dropped his rifle several times down the mountain and was able to engage after recovering the rifle.  Obviously no mention was made of a rail mounted laser, but read what I said to FREE and understand that it wasn't a comparison of the rails, but rather an example of a real world event that actually happened and could happen again, not a hypothetical extreme.

Don't get wrapped around the axle because you're afraid someone is pissing in your favorite rice bowl here.

Once again, it wasn't about the rail, it was about the event as a real world possibility.  Get with the program.

Marcus Luttrell is a lying piece of shit coward, so why are you guys talking about him in this discussion again?

Just because I started the thread doesn't mean I'm a Mk16 fan boy. My favorite rail system is the RIS II. I don't even OWN a Mk16.

The bottom line is how durable the equipment must be comes down to the end user. That end user is USASOC, citizens, and any other customers. If USASOC didn't spec that a MAWL must remained zeroed after a 5' drop, perhaps it meets their requirements. If a civilian doesn't mount anything but a light to their rail, perhaps it meets their requirements.

I'm trying to be objective as possible about this. At some point, everything is going to fail. Should the Mk16 pass that test? I don't know. Will anything pass that test? I don't know. Is there something fundamentally wrong with the Mk16? I don't know. If the answer to any of these is yes, then there probably should be something done about it.

I too, am a big fan of the DD RIS II system.

Regarding the drop damage and the MAWL, since we know that the majority of the flex is from the barrel and not the rail, I would make an educated guess that the MAWL has minimal input into the damage.  It may exacerbate it slightly, but i'm going to guess that even with it removed, the bulk of the damage would still occur.

The real bottom line is that equipment needs to work and be tested under foreseeable "typical" operating environments. Soldiers are tough on their kit.  Testing needs to reflect this. Lights, lasers, grips, panels, etc. need to be attached and the tests performed.

Ok thanks

I was just thinking the MK16 rail issues were with the cracking and affecting the zero of the IR laser.

No idea. I would hope not.

Like i said, I used the luttrel thing as an example of an extreme event that actually happened, not as an attempt to compare the mk12 rail to the URG-I.

Oh lawd Jesus please help me

Let's keep the thread on topic so it doesn't get locked

This thread is turning

Tell us how you really feel.

Ok it makes sense,
Our military should always have the best gear possible.

We have seen the so called leaked slide, I just assume that was the result of the military testing.

Maybe the leaked slide was just BS, even if said slide was BS were are the actual military testing results?

Just trying to piece this together on the info within this thread.

Could it be this rail had acceptable tolerances for this initial program with hopes any possible issues could be improved upon with a 2.0 version of the MK16?

I am sure Geissle will be more than ready to address these recent questions.

Still think it is one sexy rail

Guys take that subject to GD, not trying to be a dick but this thread is getting much like GD as it is.

I am guilty of this as well.

We need more pics guys

That post was a bit off path but discussion about the URG-I is fine. I wonder if we'll be seeing issued URG-Is soon.

Not sure

USASOC should be running them through the paces by now. My buddy works at the 18B Foreign weapons course at FT Bragg.

He gets to see a lot of new weapons within the SF community, as of last week he hasn't seen anything yet.

If I hear or see anything I will let you know.

Not being used down range either

With the drop test and the rail bending/denting is this only because the MAWL is positioned where the gas block is? Will the rail bend or will the zero shift if a PEQ 15 or DBAL is used? Will the rail bend in the MAWL is not mounted?

It seems like a combo of MAWL, gas block, barrel and rail design.

The MAWL mounted where it is definitely seems to be a big factor. Would it happen with a low profile gas block? Would it happen with a PEQ15? Those are pretty important questions.

Hence why there needs to be a bunch of testing..

Only one person dropped their upper twice with the same laser in the same spot.

We need more science to know whats going on or not going on.

I would disagree.

Since the majority of the movement between the rail and barrel comes from the barrel, my guess would be that barrel flex on impact is the deciding factor.

Not only that but any addition of accessories such as lights, any type of laser, grips, etc. Is going to add mass to the handguard and potentially create issues so even if it were the MAWL, the issue still stands as a valid concern as most troops use accessories of all varieties.

Should the mil issue an edict that the rails be run slick to avoid problems?

Funny thing when I asked him about the URG-I program, he said he had no clue what I was talking about.

I am sure the military did this, no way would they spend thousands of tax payers dollars before doing thorough testing.

Even if for some reason they didn't, I bet it will be tested before being issued to troops.

But they haven't been tested in ANY other scenario.

The MAWL is different than other accessories in that it is 10 oz, cantilever, and robust. It will definitely exacerbate any issues.

IF MAWLs are issued and they cause the rail (as issued) to deform at a reasonable height, it's a problem.

Yeah those initial kits that Combat_Diver has been talking about, those are still supposed to make it out/be issued.

As far as more of the kits being ordered in the future, supposedly there are some hold ups outside the scope of what we've been discussing here.

Oh but they have Pez. Just not by us.

Do 10.3 mk16 pics belong here or just the 14.5?

I would say both. They're both M4A1's by type classification.

I don't doubt a similar thing or different thing could happen with a different laser. Any measured shift has to be verified it's not the laser shifting and comparable M-LOK rails need tested as well.

Thank you

Here’s some from the other day. She hosted an Eotech but I’m digging the LPVO much more. It now doubles as a coyote gun. Yes the strike Eagle is shit, plan to mount a razor on it very soon

Attached File


Attached File


Attached File

Can someone tell me what the actual cost of the SOCOM suppressor with the golden ticket?  Also, is Surefire pretty responsive with the request and shipment to my FFL?  Thanks

$962.50 + tax, shipping, FFL transfer fees and tax stamp.

They were swamped with orders when I placed mine... otherwise, a positive experience. Doing it again, I might have reconsidered the RC2 and saved a few bucks.

I can get another RC2 for $280 cheaper.  With that said, I already own 13 Surefire suppressors.  I’ll probably just pass all together.  Thanks for the info.

Guess I'll go be poor somewhere else then.

Quick question for the people that own the URGI upper. What buffer weight are you running with your rifle? I am using a bcm lower with an h1 buffer and I am getting very sporadic ejection.

I run H2 in 14.5 and H3 in 10.3.  They run great suppressed and unsuppressed.

Super42 spring and buffer (H)

Well I got in trouble for posting a 10.3 urgi showing clearance for using a Recce 5 suppressor....oops on the clone factor.

That's because its a USASOC URG-I thread

H2

Attached File

VLTOR A5-2 and green spring. The -3 w/ green spring that I normally run with my BCM and Noveske would give me occasional failures to lock back on an empty mag.

Well I took my upper out of the safe today in anticipation of finally shooting it this weekend.  Through the rail, I noticed two small rusty "dots" an inch or so rear of the gas block at the 7 o clock and 10 o clock positions.  This is my first carbine length barrel so forgive me if this is a dumb question, but what the hell? Any ideas?

Try using a small brush dipped in CLP to remove those spots.

With very little effort I was able to brush some off; my bigger concern is why there are these imperfections on a brand new barrel in the first place...

Not sure...

First pic looks like a drop of water/sweat hit the barrel.

Second pic looks like the preservative used when sealing the uppers up.
I know when I received my Urg-i I spent a good chunk of time cleaning that stuff up.

Am I clone correct yet? (Full clone URGI)

Not sure, is your rail cracked yet?

Seriously is that the solution? I have the Geissele gas block and will toss it if this is the fix.