Armory Sponsor
M249s (Page 7 of 7)
|
Originally Posted By realwar: The Savit stock is the best out of all of them. Attached File Contrary to what someone had mentioned previously, it does not pinch my fingers when making length adjustments. I additionally tried it while wearing Mechanix gloves and it didn’t pinch the gloves either. There are 2 cheekpiece options for it, low and high. The high one is for optics. I have yet to mount an optic, but I’m considering a Primary Arms 3x prism. I even found a MK46 fixed stock (with the flat polymer butt plate) but I don’t like it as much as the lightweight adjustable one. |
Member
Joined:
Jul 2024
Posts:
146
EE: 100% (1)
TX, USA
|
Originally Posted By AR_Shorty: I'm hoping they become more plentiful sometime soon as I'd like to pick one up too. I wouldn't mind having one myself for the nostalgia, but damn they are pricey. Some of you guys have done really well for yourselves to afford things like that. I should take some career advice! |
|
Originally Posted By Clan_McIntyre: I wouldn't mind having one myself for the nostalgia, but damn they are pricey. Some of you guys have done really well for yourselves to afford things like that. I should take some career advice! my career advice... leave a lucrative industry, and take on an exceedingly poor paying job with access to guns |
|
Originally Posted By withoutremorse42: my career advice... leave a lucrative industry, and take on an exceedingly poor paying job with access to guns Originally Posted By withoutremorse42: Originally Posted By Clan_McIntyre: I wouldn't mind having one myself for the nostalgia, but damn they are pricey. Some of you guys have done really well for yourselves to afford things like that. I should take some career advice! my career advice... leave a lucrative industry, and take on an exceedingly poor paying job with access to guns My career advice...marry your best friend, save and invest wisely when you are young, don't be a dick.....you'll have plenty of money when your older and you'll have a good friend to grow old with. 
|
|
Originally Posted By vellnueve: I picked up an early (looks like 3 digit serial) 249s LNIB, per the LGS it was unfired and never had the recall work done - still has the blue caps on the CH and FH. $8K plus tax. Would SN M249SA0051x fall under the 'early' range? I honestly don't know much about the admin side of these things |
|
Originally Posted By withoutremorse42: Would SN M249SA0051x fall under the 'early' range? I honestly don't know much about the admin side of these things |
“The difference between treason and patriotism is only a matter of dates.”
"And how can man die better
Than facing fearful odds,
For the ashes of his fathers,
And the temples of his Gods."
"And how can man die better
Than facing fearful odds,
For the ashes of his fathers,
And the temples of his Gods."
|
Originally Posted By jtb33: Yes. The SN on my M249S is M249SA015XX and mine's from the first batch made. However, the more important part is one that you can't tell just from the SN... and that is if it has had the recall work done. To know that, you'll need to see the internals or [try to] pull the trigger on it. Cool. Well, it was shipped from FN yesterday, so I'm assuming it's had the warranty work done already. Maybe I'll get lucky |
|
Originally Posted By jtb33: Yes. The SN on my M249S is M249SA015XX and mine's from the first batch made. However, the more important part is one that you can't tell just from the SN... and that is if it has had the recall work done. To know that, you'll need to see the internals or [try to] pull the trigger on it. Trigger is nice and light |
|
There has been tons of speculation and multiple inquiries regarding the changes FN made to the M249S with the new striker system (the update) and the much heavier trigger pull vs. the 1st Gen M249S. I have watched and studied this situation as many of you have and could not find a logical answer until now. I’ve seen the photos of the different striker assemblies posted in this thread, but I could never make sense why the trigger pull weight would be increased so dramatically. I bought my first M249S in 2016 and just recently purchased another. I never sent in my original] gun for the recall. I finally had the time to disassemble them and see the actual differences. Upon first inspection, I immediately noticed the redesigned striker as I’ve seen in other poster’s photos, but I couldn’t comprehend how it increased the weight of the trigger pull so much. It was only after I disassembled the trigger group that I realized the major change and reason behind the vastly increased trigger pull weight. In my examples, on the 2nd Gen M249S, FN installed a standard full auto sear spring instead of the special semi-auto sear spring in the 1st Gen M249S. The standard full auto sear spring is much thicker and stronger than the semi-auto spring installed in pre-recall M249S’s. I’ve included a picture of the two different sear springs below. On the left is the semi spring and on the right is the standard full auto spring. Attached File |
|
Originally Posted By KVSmith: There has been tons of speculation and multiple inquiries regarding the changes FN made to the M249S with the new striker system (the update) and the much heavier trigger pull vs. the 1st Gen M249S. I have watched and studied this situation as many of you have and could not find a logical answer until now. I've seen the photos of the different striker assemblies posted in this thread, but I could never make sense why the trigger pull weight would be increased so dramatically. I bought my first M249S in 2016 and just recently purchased another. I never sent in my original] gun for the recall. I finally had the time to disassemble them and see the actual differences. Upon first inspection, I immediately noticed the redesigned striker as I've seen in other poster's photos, but I couldn't comprehend how it increased the weight of the trigger pull so much. It was only after I disassembled the trigger group that I realized the major change and reason behind the vastly increased trigger pull weight. In my examples, on the 2nd Gen M249S, FN installed a standard full auto sear spring instead of the special semi-auto sear spring in the 1st Gen M249S. The standard full auto sear spring is much thicker and stronger than the semi-auto spring installed in pre-recall M249S's. I've included a picture of the two different sear springs below. On the left is the semi spring and on the right is the standard full auto spring. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/387476/IMG_4940_jpeg-3391920.JPG 
|
“The difference between treason and patriotism is only a matter of dates.”
"And how can man die better
Than facing fearful odds,
For the ashes of his fathers,
And the temples of his Gods."
"And how can man die better
Than facing fearful odds,
For the ashes of his fathers,
And the temples of his Gods."
|
Originally Posted By jeeperxd1: If it is the spring I doubt they will be available True, but a spring isn’t terrible to have made. Even if it was expensive, if that “fixes” it I’d think Wolff or somebody would make them for $35-50, or hopefully less ,but still approachable. |
| The heavier spring increases the trigger pull weight, yes, but simply swapping to a lighter spring isn’t going to “fix it” because the post-recall design has you compressing the hydraulic buffer as you’re pulling the trigger. That’s where the majority of the increased resistance comes from. |
|
Not the buffer. To lighten the trigger, you need to take material off the sear just a bit at a time, testing between efforts. Out of the box, the sear is basically barbed, so it pushes the slide back (against the hammer spring) as you depress the trigger. Changing that geometry will reduce how much you have to push the slide back, and the lightest trigger will have no slide movement and as little friction on those mating surfaces as possible. This was done for safety reasons, so be aware that lightening the trigger in this way (IMO the only way) will come at the cost the sear not engaging reliably. Make sure whoever is firing the gun knows how to stop a run-away M249 Everyone should know that anyways, as a close bolt and hot barrel is enough to cause a semi to run away. |
Where There Are Sheep, Wolves Will Always Thrive
Joined:
Jan 2008
Posts:
9143
EE: 100% (38)
VA, USA
Where There Are Sheep, Wolves Will Always Thrive
Joined:
Jan 2008
Posts:
9146
EE: 100% (38)
VA, USA
|
Originally Posted By withoutremorse42: none have been shown to actually exist that I know of Originally Posted By withoutremorse42: Originally Posted By TAP: Are any of the advertised binaries for this decent? none have been shown to actually exist that I know of [holy shit emoji] These are fake/scams? https://rarebreedtriggers.org/product/m249s-binary-trigger/ |
|
Originally Posted By TAP: [holy shit emoji] These are fake/scams? https://rarebreedtriggers.org/product/m249s-binary-trigger/ Originally Posted By TAP: Originally Posted By withoutremorse42: Originally Posted By TAP: Are any of the advertised binaries for this decent? none have been shown to actually exist that I know of [holy shit emoji] These are fake/scams? https://rarebreedtriggers.org/product/m249s-binary-trigger/ I'm pretty certain the only official RBT site is a .com, not a .org or .net |
|
Any gun site asking for crypto is a scam 100% of the time. If the content of the pages, the in-stock status, and the prices aren't enough of a red flag, you can confirm by looking at the checkout pages. You'll notice all the methods with buyer protection do not work, but you can choose to use cash through Paypal (friends and family), Apple, or Zelle, and crypto. There are hundreds of these sites under every brand name showing good deals on products that are not in stock anywhere else. When you see crypto, just close the page. The only Rare Breed site that is legit is the one that says you can't buy anything, and no one makes an M249S binary trigger (yet). More fake sites. There are dozens under each brand stocking SKUs/UPCs of popular items for attractive prices. https://barrettarmstore.com/ https://fnamericagunstore.com/ https://blackmarketarmory.net/ ETA that Rare Breed scam site even says: Hello, We've encountered a problem with OUR CARD processing system and it's currently NOT available. We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause. For now, we kindly request you to use an alternative payment method. We're working hard to resolve this issue and improve your experience. Thank you for your understanding. Billing Department To comply with PayPal's guidelines on firearms and ammunition transactions, we kindly ask that all payments for these items be processed using the "Family and Friends" or "Personal" payment options. This approach ensures a seamless transaction while respecting PayPal's policies.
|
Where There Are Sheep, Wolves Will Always Thrive
Joined:
Jan 2008
Posts:
9148
EE: 100% (38)
VA, USA
|
Originally Posted By Ehtacs: Any gun site asking for crypto is a scam 100% of the time. If the content of the pages, the in-stock status, and the prices aren't enough of a red flag, you can confirm by looking at the checkout pages. You'll notice all the methods with buyer protection do not work, but you can choose to use cash through Paypal (friends and family), Apple, or Zelle, and crypto. There are hundreds of these sites under every brand name showing good deals on products that are not in stock anywhere else. When you see crypto, just close the page. The only Rare Breed site that is legit is the one that says you can't buy anything, and no one makes an M249S binary trigger (yet). More fake sites. There are dozens under each brand stocking SKUs/UPCs of popular items for attractive prices. https://barrettarmstore.com/ https://fnamericagunstore.com/ https://blackmarketarmory.net/ ETA that Rare Breed scam site even says: I'm pretty sure no one here would actually send money to these clowns, but its gotta be worth the hassle because some idiots are I do 99% of my business with a short list of companies, so I've never actually come across any of those before. Its really obvious when you look at it on a real screen, that's for sure. |
|
Originally Posted By Ehtacs: This is totally possible! I'd be curious what your findings are if you try! Originally Posted By Ehtacs: Originally Posted By withoutremorse42: seems like the lighter spring would prevent the sear from needing to have as much material removed, by a good margin If I can find/make a pre-recall spring, I'll work on it |
|
Just an FYI on the topic of FN and scam sites.. I was always scared off of “fnestore” but FN’s SC warranty department suggested I use their “eStore” and sent me the link… FN eStore |
|
Originally Posted By TallPine: In for the post-recall trigger pull fix.  thats gonna mainly be a spring change to fix. someone remove their original spring and find a spring company to make 100 of them  the hard to charge issue we can fix. thats slide hammer to buffer interference |
|
Originally Posted By HaveBlue83: thats gonna mainly be a spring change to fix. someone remove their original spring and find a spring company to make 100 of them the hard to charge issue we can fix. thats slide hammer to buffer interference I was under the impression the main issue causing the increase in pull weight was the slide hammer and buffer interference. It would be great if someone that has both a pre-recall and post-recall gun to take out the suspect parts, identify their differences, and maybe even swap the parts around to see which part was the culprit. That would seemingly lead you to the procedure to fix it. Could it be as simple as re-shaping of the post-recall slide hammer to mimic the pre-recall slide hammer? |
|
Originally Posted By TallPine: I was under the impression the main issue causing the increase in pull weight was the slide hammer and buffer interference. It would be great if someone that has both a pre-recall and post-recall gun to take out the suspect parts, identify their differences, and maybe even swap the parts around to see which part was the culprit. That would seemingly lead you to the procedure to fix it. Could it be as simple as re-shaping of the post-recall slide hammer to mimic the pre-recall slide hammer? Originally Posted By TallPine: Originally Posted By HaveBlue83: thats gonna mainly be a spring change to fix. someone remove their original spring and find a spring company to make 100 of them the hard to charge issue we can fix. thats slide hammer to buffer interference I was under the impression the main issue causing the increase in pull weight was the slide hammer and buffer interference. It would be great if someone that has both a pre-recall and post-recall gun to take out the suspect parts, identify their differences, and maybe even swap the parts around to see which part was the culprit. That would seemingly lead you to the procedure to fix it. Could it be as simple as re-shaping of the post-recall slide hammer to mimic the pre-recall slide hammer? @TallPine all of what you're describing is being measured, designed and worked out in another thread, led by the guy you're quoting. check this thread for details https://www.ar15.com/forums/armory/Pre-recall-M249S-parts-hammer-carrier-pics-/24-552920/?r=-1&page=2&anc=6147376#i6147376 yes, machining the slide hammer is one of the biggest part of the fix. trigger spring, I think a smaller portion |
New FN Evolys belt fed. Maybe one day they will offer this in a semi auto version? FN Evolys LMG |
|
Could anyone confirm the thread pitch of the various barrels? I'm getting a lot of mixed info. A lot of posts say 9/16-24LH for military para barrels, but other sources like Midwest Gunworks say 1/2x28. - M249S 18" barrel - M249 18" barrel - M249S pinned and welded para barrel - M249 para barrel - MK46 barrel (this I know is 9/16-24LH) Also, can anyone confirm that the flash hider on the MK46 barrel is NT4 spec / compatible with the QDSS? I've seen photos of it being used on there but I'm not sure if there's also just some near identical KAC version. |
|
Originally Posted By atz: Could anyone confirm the thread pitch of the various barrels? I'm getting a lot of mixed info. A lot of posts say 9/16-24LH for military para barrels, but other sources like Midwest Gunworks say 1/2x28. - M249S 18" barrel - M249 18" barrel - M249S pinned and welded para barrel - M249 para barrel - MK46 barrel (this I know is 9/16-24LH) Also, can anyone confirm that the flash hider on the MK46 barrel is NT4 spec / compatible with the QDSS? I've seen photos of it being used on there but I'm not sure if there's also just some near identical KAC version. The standard flash hider (or suppressor adapter) on military MK46 barrels is not NT4 spec and is not directly compatible with the KAC QDSS-NT4 suppressor. The MK46 (and military M249 para) uses a 9/16-24 LH threaded flash hider/suppressor adapter specifically designed for platforms like the MK46/Minimi Para. SureFire makes a dedicated 3-prong version (SF3P-556-MK46) that serves as both a flash hider and a direct adapter for their SOCOM/FA556-series suppressors. The KAC QDSS-NT4 (and its M4QD flash hider mount) is a completely different system. It is designed for 1/2x28 threaded barrels (standard AR-15/M4/MK18 platforms) and uses KAC's proprietary gate-latch QD interface. It does not mount directly to a 9/16-24 LH barrel or the military MK46-style flash hider. Photos you've seen of "it" on an MK46 are almost certainly the SureFire MK46-specific adapter (or a similar military-issue prong-style device), not a KAC NT4/M4QD. They can look superficially similar (multi-prong flash hiders), but the mounting interface, thread pitch, and suppressor compatibility are different. There is no "near-identical KAC version" for the MK46 barrel KAC's NT4 ecosystem stays on 1/2x28 platforms. |
https://www.ArizonaShooting.org
|
Originally Posted By jtb33: They all use 1/2x28 except the M249 Para barrel (military version) and the MK46 barrel. Those two use the 9/16-24LH). The standard flash hider (or suppressor adapter) on military MK46 barrels is not NT4 spec and is not directly compatible with the KAC QDSS-NT4 suppressor. The MK46 (and military M249 para) uses a 9/16-24 LH threaded flash hider/suppressor adapter specifically designed for platforms like the MK46/Minimi Para. SureFire makes a dedicated 3-prong version (SF3P-556-MK46) that serves as both a flash hider and a direct adapter for their SOCOM/FA556-series suppressors. The KAC QDSS-NT4 (and its M4QD flash hider mount) is a completely different system. It is designed for 1/2x28 threaded barrels (standard AR-15/M4/MK18 platforms) and uses KAC's proprietary gate-latch QD interface. It does not mount directly to a 9/16-24 LH barrel or the military MK46-style flash hider. Photos you've seen of "it" on an MK46 are almost certainly the SureFire MK46-specific adapter (or a similar military-issue prong-style device), not a KAC NT4/M4QD. They can look superficially similar (multi-prong flash hiders), but the mounting interface, thread pitch, and suppressor compatibility are different. There is no "near-identical KAC version" for the MK46 barrel KAC's NT4 ecosystem stays on 1/2x28 platforms. Thank you for the response! In the meantime I managed to find the operator's manual for the MK46. It looks like that flash hider actually is NT4 spec, as the manual has photos and instructions on how to mount the QDSS. (Unless there actually is another one made by KAC that looks almost the same. Page 5 of this thread makes that unclear.) https://www.scribd.com/document/285655850/Sw360-Ag-mmo-012-5-56mm-Lightweight-Machine-Gun-Mk46-Mod-1-Feb-2006 |
M249s (Page 7 of 7)
Armory Sponsor