User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 2/4/2006 10:33:52 AM EDT
The NEW A.R.M.S.® #50™M-CV & Optional #50™M-CV Top Rail
 •Entire S.I.R.® front end can be installed in less than 5 min. directly to the std. barrel nut without Delta ring. • 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 ................ CLICK HERE to go our hidden page @ MSP for more info |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/4/2006 10:53:07 AM EDT
[#1]
FYI... the "hidden page" link does not work.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/4/2006 10:55:04 AM EDT
[#2]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/4/2006 10:58:16 AM EDT
[#3]
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? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/4/2006 10:58:46 AM EDT
[#4]
 It looks like ARMS is back to seriously contending in the FF rail arena! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/4/2006 11:04:30 AM EDT
[#5]
I like the looks of it so far. Hopefully it turns out to be a great product.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/4/2006 11:44:41 AM EDT
[#6]
price?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/4/2006 11:51:35 AM EDT
[#7]
ONE MILLION DOLLARS !
Or your first born Invisiblesoul |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/4/2006 1:00:54 PM EDT
[#8]
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?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/4/2006 1:20:46 PM EDT
[#9]
Neat. Will there be mid and rifle length as well? </previous rail system decision now on hold...>
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/4/2006 2:29:39 PM EDT
[#10]
Nice! I'm still one of the few ARMS fans here on ARFCOM.
Now...how much? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/4/2006 2:39:08 PM EDT
[#11]
Looks Good! Too bad I already have a Troy MRF-C.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/4/2006 3:13:23 PM EDT
[#12]
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.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/4/2006 3:43:27 PM EDT
[#13]
I'll take one... in tan please! My #58mod gun has been waiting for one of these.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/4/2006 4:11:23 PM EDT
[#14]
Tag.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/4/2006 4:28:02 PM EDT
[#15]
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. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/4/2006 4:34:28 PM EDT
[#16]
Does a TangoDown vertical foregrip fit?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/4/2006 4:57:06 PM EDT
[#17]
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.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/4/2006 5:10:49 PM EDT
[#18]
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. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/4/2006 5:11:15 PM EDT
[#19]
I dont understand why it took them so long to come out with a continuous (height) rail platform.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/4/2006 5:24:36 PM EDT
[#20]
"YHM Scope risers"?  Chris |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/4/2006 5:42:07 PM EDT
[#21]
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. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/4/2006 5:47:02 PM EDT
[#22]
With the SIR:  with the Troy: 
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/4/2006 6:00:34 PM EDT
[#23]
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. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/4/2006 6:06:14 PM EDT
[#24]
Standard barrel nut does not have to be removed. 
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/4/2006 6:07:14 PM EDT
[#25]
Standard barrel nut does not have to be removed.
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/4/2006 6:12:37 PM EDT
[#26]
No. you just have to take out the Delta Ring. |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/4/2006 6:53:21 PM EDT
[#27]
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.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/4/2006 7:41:54 PM EDT
[#28]
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.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/4/2006 9:02:02 PM EDT
[#29]
Any idea how much?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/4/2006 9:08:34 PM EDT
[#30]
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? |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/4/2006 9:12:46 PM EDT
[#31]
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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/4/2006 10:32:56 PM EDT
[#32]
You don't have to take off the front sight tower to get the delta ring off without cutting. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/4/2006 11:10:43 PM EDT
[#33]
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... |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/4/2006 11:43:35 PM EDT
[#34]
BTW, I have a question for paulosantos... why do you have an Aimpoint 3X magnifier mounted on the side rail of your FF forend???
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/5/2006 4:19:06 AM EDT
[#35]
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. |
||||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/5/2006 4:21:38 AM EDT
[#36]
I just had it there until my Samson flip mount came in. No other reason. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/5/2006 4:39:04 AM EDT
[#37]
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: 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/5/2006 4:43:02 AM EDT
[#38]
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? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/5/2006 4:48:04 AM EDT
[#39]
(Optics, Mounts, and Sights) Probably |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/5/2006 5:58:35 AM EDT
[#40]
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. |
||||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/5/2006 6:06:00 AM EDT
[#41]
I agree that putting the upper in block, securing it in a vice, and using a barrel wrench to loosen the barrel nut to take the snap ring off so you can remove the weld spring and delta ring is probably the easier (and safer!) way to leave just the barrel nut on your gun. However, it's probably pretty safe to say most people have a dremel, or at least know someone who does. The same can not be said of a vice, action block and barrel wrench. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/5/2006 6:15:43 AM EDT
[#42]
Thanks for the back-up. 
|
|||||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/5/2006 6:27:46 AM EDT
[#43]
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. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/5/2006 6:33:26 AM EDT
[#44]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/5/2006 6:34:07 AM EDT
[#45]
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... |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/5/2006 8:24:13 PM EDT
[#46]
NYP, The SIR systems are not the same as Troy at all. The A.R.M.S. #50 M-CV is superior is several ways. First, ARMS holds the patent on a handguard that bolts to the barrel nut. The also hold the patent on the tabs that align the rails to the upper receiver. The Troy rail does not have these tabs that guarantee alignment. The "plastic" bottom rail is actually a high end polymer designed to deflect heat away from the lower handguard. Aluminum absorbs heat, the polymer can not. That is why the ARMS SIR system will run much cooler without the use of rail pannels. If you were to grip the bottom rail of an MRF after a few mag dumps, it would just a bit on the hot side. With the polymer used by ARMS, it is not a problem on the SIR system. Also, polymer can be made to withstand higher levels of impact without deforming. (think Glock). And did you see the weight? 10.6 OZs! Also, the side AND bottom rails can be removed or replaced. Troy rails can not. The ARMS #50 M-CV is available in ARMS Brown as well. All and all, there are more than a few differences. Not to mention the fact that Crane is picking up 90,000+ of these things for the SOPMOD contract. Now, with that said, I will not get "hands on" until Thursday. I will see if I can get some quality photos at SHOT to show it off here for you guys. I am hoping that the rumor is true that there is a mid-length version as well.  No word on a price as of yet, but I am guessing that ARMS would not be displaying this new SIR without an MSRP to go with it. Look for an update on Thursday night. Rob www.TalonArms.com |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/5/2006 8:26:51 PM EDT
[#47]
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. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/6/2006 4:37:35 AM EDT
[#48]
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. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/6/2006 7:52:29 AM EDT
[#49]
TRUE DAT!
|
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/6/2006 10:36:18 AM EDT
[#50]
Some interesting comments being made here. One of the things you want to happen with your AR is for the rail to suck heat out of the chamber (via the barrel nut) and move it down the rail system to help dissipate it. One of the leading causes of a broken bolt and or a cook off is doing several mag dumps and then leaving a round in the chamber just sitting their getting hotter and hotter.
This is why a polymer rail is a bad choice IMHO as it does NOT pull heat away from the chamber. C4 www.GRTactical.com |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
