Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 3
Posted: 2/4/2006 10:33:52 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/4/2006 10:42:38 AM EDT by mountsplus]
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 10:53:07 AM EDT
FYI... the "hidden page" link does not work.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 10:55:04 AM EDT
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 10:58:16 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/4/2006 11:03:13 AM EDT by JosephR]
neither does the picture- it's a link as well.


ETA: you are too fast for me!!

I might just have to build a carbine upper and get a 37mm for this f*cker. Wow. Kinda neat how the mount for the 203 gives you extra uber tactical flashlight and laser rails. Is there a 203 sight that attaches to a side rail? Will it attach to either of those two side pieces and work correctly?

Are you sure you are supposed to be showing us all of this mounstplus?

EST price?

Is that a coating or an anodizing?

I suppose they can make a midlength one as well so midlengths can use "Flare Launchers" huh?
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 10:58:46 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/4/2006 10:59:19 AM EDT by NYPatriot]

The system only weighs 10.6 oz.


It looks like ARMS is back to seriously contending in the FF rail arena!
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 11:04:30 AM EDT
I like the looks of it so far. Hopefully it turns out to be a great product.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 11:44:41 AM EDT
price?
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 11:51:35 AM EDT
ONE MILLION DOLLARS !

Or your first born

Invisiblesoul
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 1:00:54 PM EDT
Thats pretty cool- I remember the ARMS "protest" of the SOPMOD II RIS competition.. supposedly because their entry raised the height of the upper receiver like the original SIR.. the one in the picture however, doesn't seem to do so?
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 1:20:46 PM EDT
Neat. Will there be mid and rifle length as well? </previous rail system decision now on hold...>
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 2:29:39 PM EDT
Nice! I'm still one of the few ARMS fans here on ARFCOM.

Now...how much?
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 2:39:08 PM EDT
Looks Good! Too bad I already have a Troy MRF-C.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 3:13:23 PM EDT
I had the ARMS #59 and I had to return it because I had a midlength gas system and I needed Back up sights for my bushmaster. (I did not have a front sight post, it was under the SIR System). I tried several front sights such as the PRI, YHM and Troy, only to find out that no one made a front sight that was compatible because the top rail is not level with the top rail of the M4. They gave me a hard time with returning it, but they finally refunded my money.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 3:43:27 PM EDT
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 4:11:23 PM EDT
Tag.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 4:28:02 PM EDT

Originally Posted By paulosantos:
I had the ARMS #59 and I had to return it because I had a midlength gas system and I needed Back up sights for my bushmaster. (I did not have a front sight post, it was under the SIR System). I tried several front sights such as the PRI, YHM and Troy, only to find out that no one made a front sight that was compatible because the top rail is not level with the top rail of the M4. They gave me a hard time with returning it, but they finally refunded my money.




For the life of me, I cannot understand why ARMS does not offer one.

I had the same friggen problem, before I knew better.

I just went to a 20" bbl with a standard FSB.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 4:34:28 PM EDT
Does a TangoDown vertical foregrip fit?
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 4:57:06 PM EDT

Originally Posted By paulosantos:
I had the ARMS #59 and I had to return it because I had a midlength gas system and I needed Back up sights for my bushmaster. (I did not have a front sight post, it was under the SIR System). I tried several front sights such as the PRI, YHM and Troy, only to find out that no one made a front sight that was compatible because the top rail is not level with the top rail of the M4. They gave me a hard time with returning it, but they finally refunded my money.



What? did you put a rifle length system over a midlength gas system? Is that what you are saying? Of course you had problems at that point.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 5:10:49 PM EDT

Originally Posted By JosephR:

Originally Posted By paulosantos:
I had the ARMS #59 and I had to return it because I had a midlength gas system and I needed Back up sights for my bushmaster. (I did not have a front sight post, it was under the SIR System). I tried several front sights such as the PRI, YHM and Troy, only to find out that no one made a front sight that was compatible because the top rail is not level with the top rail of the M4. They gave me a hard time with returning it, but they finally refunded my money.



What? did you put a rifle length system over a midlength gas system? Is that what you are saying? Of course you had problems at that point.



Then how come I did it with the Troy Rifle Length MRX-R? And no, you cannot attach the TangoDown grip on the ARMS Handguards without an adaptor like the YHM Scope risers.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 5:11:15 PM EDT
I dont understand why it took them so long to come out with a continuous (height) rail platform.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 5:24:36 PM EDT

Originally Posted By paulosantos:
.... And no, you cannot attach the TangoDown grip on the ARMS Handguards without an adaptor like the YHM Scope risers.



"YHM Scope risers"?




Chris
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 5:42:07 PM EDT

Originally Posted By mrcr0603:

Originally Posted By paulosantos:
.... And no, you cannot attach the TangoDown grip on the ARMS Handguards without an adaptor like the YHM Scope risers.



"YHM Scope risers"?

www.hunt101.com/img/325914.jpg


Chris



I could not get mine on so I used the ecope risers that I had because I didn't want to damage the bottom rail.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 5:47:02 PM EDT

Originally Posted By JosephR:

Originally Posted By paulosantos:
I had the ARMS #59 and I had to return it because I had a midlength gas system and I needed Back up sights for my bushmaster. (I did not have a front sight post, it was under the SIR System). I tried several front sights such as the PRI, YHM and Troy, only to find out that no one made a front sight that was compatible because the top rail is not level with the top rail of the M4. They gave me a hard time with returning it, but they finally refunded my money.



What? did you put a rifle length system over a midlength gas system? Is that what you are saying? Of course you had problems at that point.



With the SIR:


with the Troy:
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 6:00:34 PM EDT

Originally Posted By mountsplus:

• Front sight, gas tube, and front handguard retaining cap do not need to be removed.
• Barrel does not have to be removed.
• Standard barrel nut does ................



Am I the only one confused? How do you remove the standard barrel nut without removing the front sight or gas tube?

I'm assuming that "Standard barrel nut does..have to be removed" is what the last line is implying.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 6:06:14 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Centauro97:

Originally Posted By mountsplus:

• Front sight, gas tube, and front handguard retaining cap do not need to be removed.
• Barrel does not have to be removed.
• Standard barrel nut does ................



Am I the only one confused? How do you remove the standard barrel nut without removing the front sight or gas tube?

I'm assuming that "Standard barrel nut does..have to be removed" is what the last line is implying.


Standard barrel nut does not have to be removed.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 6:07:14 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Centauro97:

Originally Posted By mountsplus:

• Front sight, gas tube, and front handguard retaining cap do not need to be removed.
• Barrel does not have to be removed.
• Standard barrel nut does ................



Am I the only one confused? How do you remove the standard barrel nut without removing the front sight or gas tube?

I'm assuming that "Standard barrel nut does..have to be removed" is what the last line is implying.


Standard barrel nut does not have to be removed.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 6:12:37 PM EDT

Originally Posted By dport:

Originally Posted By Centauro97:

Originally Posted By mountsplus:

• Front sight, gas tube, and front handguard retaining cap do not need to be removed.
• Barrel does not have to be removed.
• Standard barrel nut does ................



Am I the only one confused? How do you remove the standard barrel nut without removing the front sight or gas tube?

I'm assuming that "Standard barrel nut does..have to be removed" is what the last line is implying.


Standard barrel nut does not have to be removed.



No. you just have to take out the Delta Ring.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 6:53:21 PM EDT
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 7:41:54 PM EDT
Looks like SIR is starting to rethink their design and make it more compact to contend with the market. Although it looks as if this design still has some size compared to other models out their. Can't really make an accurate account until I try one myself.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 9:02:02 PM EDT
Any idea how much?
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 9:08:34 PM EDT

Originally Posted By paulosantos:

Originally Posted By JosephR:

Originally Posted By paulosantos:
I had the ARMS #59 and I had to return it because I had a midlength gas system and I needed Back up sights for my bushmaster. (I did not have a front sight post, it was under the SIR System). I tried several front sights such as the PRI, YHM and Troy, only to find out that no one made a front sight that was compatible because the top rail is not level with the top rail of the M4. They gave me a hard time with returning it, but they finally refunded my money.



What? did you put a rifle length system over a midlength gas system? Is that what you are saying? Of course you had problems at that point.



With the SIR:
i51.photobucket.com/albums/f376/paulosantos/DCP_2127.jpg

with the Troy:
i51.photobucket.com/albums/f376/paulosantos/DCP_2235.jpg



I'd rather not use harsh language but you are an idiot. You really need to show me a picture of what you did? You think I didn't understand what you did? I fully understood what you did. That's why I said "Of course you had problems at that point."

You stated you couldn't get backup sights to work because you mounted the #59 over the wrong sized gas system. You went on to say (complain) that noone makes a front sight for the ARMS foreend.

The ARMS foreends are made in two sizes to be used on two differently sized gas systems. That's all there is to it. If you had a midlength gas system, you shouldn't have bought the rail system for rifles.

Based on your two pictures, you appear to be really confused about what you want in a rifle. You have a QD ARMS scope mount and no reason to QD it. You have only a rear sight to use if the scope is removed. Why have the rear BUIS anyway?
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 9:12:46 PM EDT
i think mountsplus intended for the "............." following "• Standard barrel nut does" was meant to be like putting quotes for "ditto" because on the mountsplus page, the following is how it is written:



• Barrel does not have to be removed.
• Standard barrel nut does not need to be removed or replaced.

Link Posted: 2/4/2006 10:32:56 PM EDT

Originally Posted By new-arguy:
To leave the barrel nut while removing the delta ring, weld spring and snap ring, just dremel the delta ring off. When the SIR was one of the only FF rails you could get, people did it all the time. Its easy and quick, and means you dont have to take off the front sight tower. Thats good news for those of us with 14.5" barrel and perm installed flash hiders.



You don't have to take off the front sight tower to get the delta ring off without cutting.

Link Posted: 2/4/2006 11:10:43 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/4/2006 11:13:08 PM EDT by NYPatriot]
This might clear things up a bit... it is my understanding that this new ARMS offering is essentially just a Troy MRF with a plastic lower half. The top half of the unit attaches to the standard barrel nut just like a MRF does. The only difference is that the lower half of the ARMS rail is plastic, not aluminum.

Correct me if I'm wrong...
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 11:43:35 PM EDT
BTW, I have a question for paulosantos... why do you have an Aimpoint 3X magnifier mounted on the side rail of your FF forend???
Link Posted: 2/5/2006 4:19:06 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/5/2006 5:41:35 AM EDT by paulosantos]

Originally Posted By JosephR:

Originally Posted By paulosantos:

Originally Posted By JosephR:

Originally Posted By paulosantos:
I had the ARMS #59 and I had to return it because I had a midlength gas system and I needed Back up sights for my bushmaster. (I did not have a front sight post, it was under the SIR System). I tried several front sights such as the PRI, YHM and Troy, only to find out that no one made a front sight that was compatible because the top rail is not level with the top rail of the M4. They gave me a hard time with returning it, but they finally refunded my money.



What? did you put a rifle length system over a midlength gas system? Is that what you are saying? Of course you had problems at that point.



With the SIR:
i51.photobucket.com/albums/f376/paulosantos/DCP_2127.jpg

with the Troy:
i51.photobucket.com/albums/f376/paulosantos/DCP_2235.jpg



I'd rather not use harsh language but you are an idiot. You really need to show me a picture of what you did? You think I didn't understand what you did? I fully understood what you did. That's why I said "Of course you had problems at that point."

You stated you couldn't get backup sights to work because you mounted the #59 over the wrong sized gas system. You went on to say (complain) that noone makes a front sight for the ARMS foreend.

The ARMS foreends are made in two sizes to be used on two differently sized gas systems. That's all there is to it. If you had a midlength gas system, you shouldn't have bought the rail system for rifles.

Based on your two pictures, you appear to be really confused about what you want in a rifle. You have a QD ARMS scope mount and no reason to QD it. You have only a rear sight to use if the scope is removed. Why have the rear BUIS anyway?



Why am I an idiot? I only had the rear sight on the SIR system because I didn't have a front one. You probably can't see it that well, but on the Troy system, I have the front and rear Troy sights. The reason I wanted the Rifle Length Hadguard system over the Midlength system is because I wanted as many rails as possible to mount different things such as bipods and other things. If I knew that no one made front sights that would not work with the SIR, thenIwould of purchased the Midlength SIR instead of the Rifle Length one. And that is what I told ARMS and they agreed. SO why am I an idiot. Last time I checked this is still a free country and I don't have to have the same tastes that you do. And the reason I had the ARMS mount on the scope was because I wanted the scope as far forward as possible because I like to shoot NTCH. But I must be an idiot for that also.

And to clarify one thing. I personally like the ARMS SIR system. It didn't work for my rifle. Just like it doesn't work for the other rifle I have with a Bull Barrel. It doesn't mean the SIR sucks, it just mean that this IDIOT can't use it because it is not compatible. The only thing I would change with the SIR System is the price. It should be around $300 to compete with the other companies. I also think that the lower rail on the mid and Rifle length SIR Systems should be one piece instead of two. But that is just one IDIOT's opinion.
Link Posted: 2/5/2006 4:21:38 AM EDT

Originally Posted By NYPatriot:
BTW, I have a question for paulosantos... why do you have an Aimpoint 3X magnifier mounted on the side rail of your FF forend???



I just had it there until my Samson flip mount came in. No other reason.
Link Posted: 2/5/2006 4:39:04 AM EDT
To Joseph R:
Here are three other IDIOT companies that also make the AR with the Handguard system over the Gas Block, just like my idiot ass did.

1. YHM:


2. Troy:


3: MRP:
Link Posted: 2/5/2006 4:43:02 AM EDT
Why is the discussion about a rail system in the optics section?

Shouldn't this be in the "Rifles, Uppers, Lowers, Barrels, and more " section?

Link Posted: 2/5/2006 4:48:04 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Hellhound:
Why is the discussion about a rail system in the optics section?

Shouldn't this be in the "Rifles, Uppers, Lowers, Barrels, and more " section?




(Optics, Mounts, and Sights)

Probably
Link Posted: 2/5/2006 5:58:35 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/5/2006 6:01:16 AM EDT by new-arguy]
Link Posted: 2/5/2006 6:06:00 AM EDT
Link Posted: 2/5/2006 6:15:43 AM EDT

Originally Posted By new-arguy:

Originally Posted By JosephR:

Originally Posted By paulosantos:

Originally Posted By JosephR:

Originally Posted By paulosantos:
I had the ARMS #59 and I had to return it because I had a midlength gas system and I needed Back up sights for my bushmaster. (I did not have a front sight post, it was under the SIR System). I tried several front sights such as the PRI, YHM and Troy, only to find out that no one made a front sight that was compatible because the top rail is not level with the top rail of the M4. They gave me a hard time with returning it, but they finally refunded my money.



What? did you put a rifle length system over a midlength gas system? Is that what you are saying? Of course you had problems at that point.



With the SIR:
i51.photobucket.com/albums/f376/paulosantos/DCP_2127.jpg

with the Troy:
i51.photobucket.com/albums/f376/paulosantos/DCP_2235.jpg



I'd rather not use harsh language but you are an idiot. You really need to show me a picture of what you did? You think I didn't understand what you did? I fully understood what you did. That's why I said "Of course you had problems at that point."

You stated you couldn't get backup sights to work because you mounted the #59 over the wrong sized gas system. You went on to say (complain) that noone makes a front sight for the ARMS foreend.

The ARMS foreends are made in two sizes to be used on two differently sized gas systems. That's all there is to it. If you had a midlength gas system, you shouldn't have bought the rail system for rifles.

Based on your two pictures, you appear to be really confused about what you want in a rifle. You have a QD ARMS scope mount and no reason to QD it. You have only a rear sight to use if the scope is removed. Why have the rear BUIS anyway?



I've read the whole thing and Joseph, you are the one acting like an idiot. You go on about how you know what he was doing, but you dont have a clue. I cant say I'd have set up a rifle the same way he did, but the guy had a legit complaint. He wanted a rail mount front sight but the top rail on the SIR is higher than the flat top. All rail mounted front sights are made to work with rails that are on the same level as the flat top. So it doesnt work. He is not the first person to discover this, the question has come up several times before. What length he bought has absolutely no bearing on the discussion, at all. Get off your high horse.



Thanks for the back-up.
Link Posted: 2/5/2006 6:27:46 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/5/2006 6:28:46 AM EDT by Boom]
Link Posted: 2/5/2006 6:33:26 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Boom:
Oh forget it. We have the rest of the year to discuss this "new" copy cat of a rail with a "plastic" bottom.


One more thing. Joseph quit being an ass.



Link Posted: 2/5/2006 6:34:07 AM EDT

Originally Posted By NYPatriot:
This might clear things up a bit... it is my understanding that this new ARMS offering is essentially just a Troy MRF with a plastic lower half. The top half of the unit attaches to the standard barrel nut just like a MRF does. The only difference is that the lower half of the ARMS rail is plastic, not aluminum.

Correct me if I'm wrong...



Yes, I seem to remember that there was some issues between ARMS and Troy about the rail mounts sometime ago. I don't recall if anything ever became of it.

As a former SIR owner I also remember thinking that the Troy MRF was what the SIR should have been, at least for me the MRF corrected the issues I had with my SIR 50...
Link Posted: 2/5/2006 8:24:13 PM EDT
Link Posted: 2/5/2006 8:26:51 PM EDT
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 4:37:35 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/6/2006 10:04:46 AM EDT by Yojimbo]

Originally Posted By TalonArms_R:

Originally Posted By Yojimbo:


Yes, I seem to remember that there was some issues between ARMS and Troy about the rail mounts sometime ago. I don't recall if anything ever became of it.




Yojimbo,
I think that you are remembering the problems between Samson and Troy. I don't think that ARMS had a dog in that fight.



I think you're right maybe I'm getting confused about which company was doing what and to who.

Still, isn't there some relationship between Troy and ARMS? IIRC, the owner of Troy was an ARMS employee.

A few things I wish ARMS would have done with the new SIR is:

1. To make the selective rails attach in a way that doesn't put them so far from the weapons center. As with the older models, it seems to add too much bulk and it also makes 3/9 o'clock attached accessories harder to reach when you're using a vertical grip.

2. I also wish/hope they use the correct neck length on ther rails.

3. Use solid rails without the cut away running down the center.

Also, if ARMS wants the new SIR to do better in the civie market they need to keep their pricing very competitive with the top of the line rail systems. IMHO, the older models were way overpriced.
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 7:52:29 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Yojimbo:

Originally Posted By TalonArms_R:

Originally Posted By Yojimbo:


Yes, I seem to remember that there was some issues between ARMS and Troy about the rail mounts sometime ago. I don't recall if anything ever became of it.




Yojimbo,
I think that you are remembering the problems between Samson and Troy. I don't think that ARMS had a dog in that fight.



I think you're right maybe I'm getting confused about which company was doing what and to who.

Still, isn't there some relationship between Troy and ARMS? IIRC, the owner of Troy was an ARMS employee.

A few things I wish ARMS would have done with the new SIR is:

1. To make the selective rails attach in a way that doesn't put them so far from the weapons center. As with the older models, it seems to add too much bulk and it also makes 3/9 o'clock attached accessories harder to reach when you're using a vertical grip.

2. I also wish/hope they use the correct neck length on ther rails.

3. Use solid rails without the cut away running down the center.

Also, if ARMS want's the new SIR to do better in the civie market they need to keep there pricing very competitive with the top of the line rail systems. IMHO, the older models were way overpriced.



TRUE DAT!
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 10:36:18 AM EDT
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 3
Top Top