That all depends on what is important to you. The MOE SL and BCM stock are built with different design priorities and the SL design is clearly thought out to meet the requirements we set out for it. In this post I will highlight the some of the SL differences and why we designed it as we did. I will also answer any questions on the SL design the best I can.
Length- The MOE SL is longer than both the B5 and BCM stocks. This is to allow it to fully collapse and lock on the longer A5 and AR10 receiver extensions.
Regular carbine stocks hit the rear of the longer tubes usually resulting in the stock being unable to lock in the last position. This position compresses the pin and floats the stock between positions in an unlocked state.
Release Lever- The MOE SL features a recessed release leaver that is shielded from the stock body from accidental release from a underside impact.
The B5 and BCM both release with conventional underside pressure.
Friction Lock- The MOE SL has two specially coated leaf springs that constantly take up any play between the receiver extension and the stock body.
Neither the B5 or BCM has a friction lock and both rely on conventional spring pressure to push the pin up and engage the buffer tube. In the case of the BCM stock the pin unit has stabilizing wings that will work better in this regards than the B5's conventional pin. For those who state that their conventional stock is nice a tight on their tube, remember The ALU of the tube and the polymer of the stock will expand and contract differently in various temperatures and humidity. The end result is a tube that fits right in wet and hot Louisiana will fit very differently in cold and dry Montana. The MOE SL Friction locks give consistent resistance in all climates.
Buttpads- The MOE SL and BCM stocks feature slanted rubber coated butt pads with an angled toe kick. The B5 is just angled and rubber coated.
Cheek Weld- The MOE SL has a cheek weld based upon the original Colt ACR prototype stock (the father of the SOMPOD). It is wider than a CTR but not as wide as the B5. The BCM is similar to the SL in width but the shape is different. This is the most subjective part of the stock so I will not attempt to claim one is better than another.
QD Sling Options- The MOE SL and B5 stocks have a machined QD sockets that are injection molded into the stock body and allow for all common QD sling set ups like offside vertical orientation. The B5 is rotation limited via the QD cup and the SL is rotation limited by the stock body.
The BCM stock uses two plates that are slid in to the rear of the stock body post injection molding to provide the QD hole and the body design will not allow for offside vertical orientation of the sling in the QD.
Material- The MOE SL uses our propriety resin used in the STR stock and other products. This material has a proven track record of consistent performance in wide range of temperatures and over time. The B5 stock appears to use conventional material similar (but not the same) as the proven SOPMOD stock. The BCM stock body uses a couple of different polymers that have been used in this application before but have less of a track record than the polymer used in the SOPMOD. (It could be better or worse, field testing in multiple environments will shake that out)
Weight- Material is the biggest effect on the weights of each of the stocks but they are within 2 oz of each other. MOE SL 9.6 oz, B5 8.25oz, BCM 7.5 oz
Price- The MOE SL and BCM stocks have an MSRP of $60 and the B5 is $62
Impact Strength- In our drop testing the MOE SL outperformed the STR which out preformed all others in the 2012 Military Times break test
http://gearscout.militarytimes.com/2...ugh-talk-goes/.
Now this test was unscientific and the biggest thing left out was drops in extreme environmental conditions such as sub zero and super hot temperatures. The MOE SL has been tested in these environments also. It should be noted that one of the stocks that tested well in the Military Times test literally exploded when we dropped at sub zero temps. In testing the MOE SL with it's geometry and hardened pin started to deform the buffer tube detents so the buffer tube is becoming the limiting factor of stock strength.
With the B5 being built around the SOPMOD geometry it should fair similar to the SOPMOD although the quality of the metal used in the pin quickly becomes a factor if the body material holds up.
From the video released by BCM, the stock appears to "self collapse" under extreme loading. While this is documented as a feature to protect the integrity of the stock it is a design philosophy we to not agree with. We might be wrong on this but it is not something we will be designing into our stocks.
Modularity- While this is a feature of BCM stock it comes at a price. I patented the one of the first modular AR15 Carbine stocks back in 1999 and what we came to discover is that the price of modularity will require a compromise of one or more of the following -Increase in Price, Reduction in Strength, and or Increase in Weight. At the $60 price range a user would be likely better buying a another single purpose stock with no compromises over a modular one. Again we have a different design philosophy but ours is based on our experience in designing both modular and non modular products.
Install and Removal- The MOE SL and the B5 both can be installed and removed without tools (I will say the B5 is a tad easier but not by much). The BCM stock requires a tool (firing pin, bullet tip, allen key) to be inserted to over drive the pin to allow the stock to be installed or removed from the buffer tube.
Banned
Originally Posted by BufordTJustice
That's its job. Be strong and affordable.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks