AR Sponsor
Posted: 1/10/2012 4:54:26 PM EDT
|
I like Vltor products. They are great people to deal with, and I have never experienced anything less. I really like the looks of the CASV, and am interested. However, I have read where some have bad issues with them rattling, being loose, popping apart, and such. Has anybody ever had any of these issues???
I would really like to hear from owners, and would love to see some pics as well, as to get a few ideas for this system. Thanks, L2B |
|
I have run the CASV-EL on two rifles in the past. Note I say past. I really like the CASV-EL but it does add consideralble weight to the rifle. In the same price range the DD Omega rail offers similar performance and is a FF rail with a lower weight penalty.
The other beef I had with the CASV was the issue of mouniting a BUIS and and RDS on it. It is a no go with a Eotech. You cant get a BUIS to cowitness using the CASV and an Eotech. You can with an Aimpoint with a LOW mount. I never had them pop apart or rattle or anthing like that. IMHO the CASV-EL is over built and rock solid. It is also VERY comfortable to use without rail panels. Not many FF rails offer that. The weight was an issue for me with no performace increase so I sold mine once. Got a wild hair and got another later in life. Realized why I sold the first one and sold the second. It does look cool but if that is what you are into get it. It is your $ after all. |
|
They are built like a tank, and proven in combat.(navy eod use them)
You wont have any rattle or popping apart(maybe on very old and abused ones) The issues with them is they increase height over bore and only certain buis fit them. That said they are incredible rails |
|
Guys, than you very much for your responses! I appreciate it. How exactly does that rail mount, other than the top rail? I hear what you guys are saying, but are they really "built like a tank"? Weight doesn't bother me terribly, I'm not small by any means, and I probably won't be toting it 10 miles a day. LOL. Also, what buis are you guys using on them, for the rear? What mount would be needed for an Aimpoint? I realize that they may not co-witness, but I don't care that much. Thanks again for the help!
@Medicfrost, how many does that make for you? |
|
Quoted:
Guys, than you very much for your responses! I appreciate it. How exactly does that rail mount, other than the top rail? I hear what you guys are saying, but are they really "built like a tank"? Weight doesn't bother me terribly, I'm not small by any means, and I probably won't be toting it 10 miles a day. LOL. Also, what buis are you guys using on them, for the rear? What mount would be needed for an Aimpoint? I realize that they may not co-witness, but I don't care that much. Thanks again for the help! @Medicfrost, how many does that make for you? +1 for being a tank. I switched my whole upper out for a PredatAR upper but before I did no complaints here. The weight really isn't that bad if you only add the rails where you need them. Problem with that is the lack of positive tactile feedback on your grip... so before I changed out I was planning on slapping some grip tape on there. I ran it with the rails creating a grip point and handstops though up until then and i loved it. As far as durability... I would rather smack someone across the head with the CASV instead of the stock... and the stock is rock solid. I used a Troy rear, but supposedly you can run it with MBUS with a bit of modification to them. It mounts to your top rail in a sort of clamp rail... you can see in my picture that the upper is NiB coated so you can see where the upper ends and the rail begins. Also it is connected to the delta ring... then the bottom is hooked into the top half with metal tabs in the front and hooks in the back. It is really sturdy... seriously, strength is NOT a question. My old baby 
And on my 22lr with a fake can 
|
|
@Durabo, thanks for your input. I tend to be hard on stuff, and really like "stout" gear. I like the looks of it, and it seems like it offers a ton of options for user needs.
I am about to start the buying/building for this project, and see what it ends up as. I'm kind of tossed between a 16'' SOCOM profile, 16'' A2, and a 14.5'' Gov. of some sort. Guess there is alway time, no real hurry. I do however like the looks of a front sight post on this though. Thanks again guys, L2B |
|
Quoted:
@Durabo, thanks for your input. I tend to be hard on stuff, and really like "stout" gear. I like the looks of it, and it seems like it offers a ton of options for user needs. I am about to start the buying/building for this project, and see what it ends up as. I'm kind of tossed between a 16'' SOCOM profile, 16'' A2, and a 14.5'' Gov. of some sort. Guess there is alway time, no real hurry. I do however like the looks of a front sight post on this though. Thanks again guys, L2B Go with a 14.5 LW middy and youll never look back. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
@Durabo, thanks for your input. I tend to be hard on stuff, and really like "stout" gear. I like the looks of it, and it seems like it offers a ton of options for user needs. I am about to start the buying/building for this project, and see what it ends up as. I'm kind of tossed between a 16'' SOCOM profile, 16'' A2, and a 14.5'' Gov. of some sort. Guess there is alway time, no real hurry. I do however like the looks of a front sight post on this though. Thanks again guys, L2B Go with a 14.5 LW middy and youll never look back. Until the next fad hits. ~Augee |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
@Durabo, thanks for your input. I tend to be hard on stuff, and really like "stout" gear. I like the looks of it, and it seems like it offers a ton of options for user needs. I am about to start the buying/building for this project, and see what it ends up as. I'm kind of tossed between a 16'' SOCOM profile, 16'' A2, and a 14.5'' Gov. of some sort. Guess there is alway time, no real hurry. I do however like the looks of a front sight post on this though. Thanks again guys, L2B Go with a 14.5 LW middy and youll never look back. Until the next fad hits. ~Augee Well thats not very helpful in the tech forums. A LW middy 14.5 combines the best of all worlds without a tax stamp. Im sorry you think its a "fad" but I think it is the most practical setup out there. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
@Durabo, thanks for your input. I tend to be hard on stuff, and really like "stout" gear. I like the looks of it, and it seems like it offers a ton of options for user needs. I am about to start the buying/building for this project, and see what it ends up as. I'm kind of tossed between a 16'' SOCOM profile, 16'' A2, and a 14.5'' Gov. of some sort. Guess there is alway time, no real hurry. I do however like the looks of a front sight post on this though. Thanks again guys, L2B Go with a 14.5 LW middy and youll never look back. Until the next fad hits. ~Augee Well thats not very helpful in the tech forums. A LW middy 14.5 combines the best of all worlds without a tax stamp. Im sorry you think its a "fad" but I think it is the most practical setup out there. And this: Quoted:
Go with a 14.5 LW middy and youll never look back. ...was more helpful? You stated your opinion without any additional reasoning, evidence, or information. I simply stated mine in response. Fixed it for you: Originally Posted By durabo - Edited by Augee:
>I feel A LW middy 14.5 combines the best of all worlds without a tax stamp. Im sorry you think its a "fad" but I think it is the most practical setup out there. I feel that 14.5" midlengths are inherently under-gassed, and the "smooth action" and "soft recoil" are simply artifacts of that - and that all other things being equal, the MRBS (mean rounds between stoppage) of a carbine length 14.5" will be more than that of a midlength. I base this on anecdotal reports (admittedly) of midlength 14.5" setups being tempermental over a wide range of ammunition types and environmental conditions - I have not conducted this test first hand. I feel that the 14.5" midlength has been insufficiently tested in comparison to 14.5" carbine systems - and the fact that the very vast majority are being run exclusively in semi-automatic in ideal or near to ideal conditions obscures many potential flaws of the type that preceded the development of extended carbine feedramps and "H" weight buffers - developments that would not have happened without extensive testing in full auto. I believe that these concerns are, in general, not a matter of much concern to the civilian AR owner - however, I do not feel that the theoretical advantages of midlength gas systems in 14.5" barreled configurations outweighs decades of testing and service. When given the choice - I will go with the system that's demonstrably more mature and more reliable. Since one has been tested and one has not - the nod goes to the one that has. It has been my observation that 14.5" midlengths were available for many years before they became popular - and were in fact recommended against by many supposedly "knowledgeable" commentators here and elsewhere. Their popularity explosion coincided almost exactly with the release of the MagPul Dynamics DVDs - and photographs of Travis Haley and Chris Costa circulating on the internet, along with the seemingly neverending string of threads asking "what kind of setup is Costa / Haley using here?" hence my feeling that it is a fad. I think that "the hive" both here and TOS "decided" 14.5" midlengths were cool first - then started coming up with reasons why. The "claim" is made that you need all these enahncements to make 14.5" carbines "as good as" 14.5" midlengths - including *to spec* extractor buffers and springs, and *to spec* "H" weight buffers. Colt provides these parts standards on their baseline carbines. That bargain brands do not is irrelevant to me - they should - otherwise they are supplying the consumer with parts known to be inferior. I do not think it is fair for the corner cutting methods and failure to meet spec of commercial manufacturers to be held up as a reason that carbines are "flawed." I do like 14.5" lightweight barrels however! 
Though I prefer government profile for most work - a lightweight barrel's great for a no-frills "carry carbine." ~Augee |
|
For what it's worth, I don't think there's anything "wrong" with 14.5" midlengths.
For the most part they work, and owners are happy with them. Personally, I just feel they're a solution looking very hard for a problem - and being pushed incredibly hard. I'm glad you like yours, and I don't think anyone's a fool for owning one. I just don't think they serve a real purpose in a 14.5" barrel length. Intentionally tempting fate with an untested and immature system when a well tested system that is, for all intents and purposes, functionally identical just isn't my bag. I'm glad others are more adventurous when it comes to trying out brand new things, it's how the market develops and new products are born. Me? I'm pretty conservative when it comes to firearms. ~Augee |
|
Quoted:
For what it's worth, I don't think there's anything "wrong" with 14.5" midlengths. For the most part they work, and owners are happy with them. Personally, I just feel they're a solution looking very hard for a problem - and being pushed incredibly hard. I'm glad you like yours, and I don't think anyone's a fool for owning one. I just don't think they serve a real purpose in a 14.5" barrel length. Intentionally tempting fate with an untested and immature system when a well tested system that is, for all intents and purposes, functionally identical just isn't my bag. I'm glad others are more adventurous when it comes to trying out brand new things, it's how the market develops and new products are born. Me? I'm pretty conservative when it comes to firearms. ~Augee Much better stated. I don't quite agree with the conservative viewpoint when it comes to firearms or many other things for that matter but I respect your opinion although I do not share it. |
AR Sponsor