Gemtech introducing suppressed bolt carrier

[Eurodriver]

Euro, what's your point? I have 3k through mine with no issues, but I can somewhat replicate what Slippers is saying even if it's not causing malfunctions.

Slippers, have you contacted Gemtech? May be a tolerance issue and they should send you a new BC.

My point is that it must be a tolerance issue and not endemic to the BCG for everyone.

[themonk]

My point is that it must be a tolerance issue and not endemic to the BCG for everyone.

Completely agree.

[Slippers]

I don't disagree with you guys, although as I said before, I'm not the only one experiencing this. TOS has a few people with the same problem. I have a second gemtech carrier here, purchased months after my original, that does the same thing. On these two samples, the geometry on the underside of the carrier is different than a standard carrier, ever so slightly.

Anyway, I spent awhile last night going through all my lower receivers with my MRP upper, and found a combination that works. There's definitely drag when using a m3 pmag as a monopod, but it's about the same as with a standard carrier. The working lower is one of my newer LMT defenders that was in the back of my safe, and hadn't been tested before.

Worst combo is any upper combined with my ~2008 BCM lower. I can monopod on the m3 pmag, hit the bolt release, and the gemtech carrier literally stops cold on the feed lips.

So we're looking at some tolerance stacking between various parts. Annoying, but that's why we all own a dozen ARs, right?

[themonk]

I don't disagree with you guys, although as I said before, I'm not the only one experiencing this. TOS has a few people with the same problem. I have a second gemtech carrier here, purchased months after my original, that does the same thing. On these two samples, the geometry on the underside of the carrier is different than a standard carrier, ever so slightly.

Anyway, I spent awhile last night going through all my lower receivers with my MRP upper, and found a combination that works. There's definitely drag when using a m3 pmag as a monopod, but it's about the same as with a standard carrier. The working lower is one of my newer LMT defenders that was in the back of my safe, and hadn't been tested before.

Worst combo is any upper combined with my ~2008 BCM lower. I can monopod on the m3 pmag, hit the bolt release, and the gemtech carrier literally stops cold on the feed lips.

So we're looking at some tolerance stacking between various parts. Annoying, but that's why we all own a dozen ARs, right?

Have you contacted Gemtech?

[Slippers]

Have you contacted Gemtech?

Tried awhile back, they suggested it was something else besides the carrier. I haven't bothered dealing with them again.

[Agile53]

Tried awhile back, they suggested it was something else besides the carrier. I haven't bothered dealing with them again.

As a longtime (2005) GT can owner their reply is no bueno IMO, seems I did the right thing in holding off buying one.

A slight lane veer but can anyone here say if Kel is still employed @ GT & if not what entity is he working for now?

[Pappabear]

I used a GT Carrier from a fellow M4carbine.net member. I was shocked how well it worked. I completely discounted the technology because I had soso experience with GT in the past. I had some issues with cans but their CS was outstanding for me. Anywho, I might be grabbing one. Mark and I were shocked it worked and made unruly guns manageable. We are running all Colt and Okay mags currently so that magpul issue was not seen, nor did we run it prone.

My preference is to get the right size port in the beginning, or fix at the port, but this is a valid tool in the toolbox. Note : this is one day at the range.

Slippers, have you tried one in your LMT MWS. Im thinking I might have to try this in 7.62. Anybody?

[domestique]

I used a GT Carrier from a fellow M4carbine.net member. I was shocked how well it worked. I completely discounted the technology because I had soso experience with GT in the past. I had some issues with cans but their CS was outstanding for me. Anywho, I might be grabbing one. Mark and I were shocked it worked and made unruly guns manageable. We are running all Colt and Okay mags currently so that magpul issue was not seen, nor did we run it prone.

My preference is to get the right size port in the beginning, or fix at the port, but this is a valid tool in the toolbox. Note : this is one day at the range.

Slippers, have you tried one in your LMT MWS. Im thinking I might have to try this in 7.62. Anybody?

I can't remeber if it was Slippers, but someone gave a poor review of the SBC on the LMT MWS thread. IIRC, the biggest problem is the LMT MWS firing pin doesn't fit. I'm unsure however if you could use a JP firing pin as a substitute.

[Slippers]

Yep, it was me. The MWS firing pin wouldn't fit in the 762 gemtech SBC that I had. Returned it.

Also, the staking looked like a 3rd grader went at it with a chisel and sledge, and left burrs hanging off both sides that initially prevented the carrier from being inserted into my upper.

[krichbaum]

I might as well post up where I'm at with these carriers. I had two of them that I've been using for quite a while and they've worked great for me through several thousand rounds. Normally I use Lancer mags, gen2 pmags, and USGI mags, none of which seemed to present any problem for the Gemtech carriers. However, I did find that the gen 3 pmags were a problem and the carriers could hang up on the feed lips. I contacted Gemtech and they asked me to send my carriers in for them to look at. They said they were able to reproduce the problem and sent me two new carriers.

Unfortunately, these seem to have the same issue. I didn't take any pics or measurements on the original carriers (wish I did), but these newer ones really don't seem any different in terms of the cuts on the bottom of the carrier. When looking at the front of these carriers and comparing to others, it's clear that the cuts don't go up as high. I'm glad they sent me two new carriers but I'm really, really disappointed that the same problem still exists. Other than this problem these carriers have been working great and they actually fulfill a very specific need for me, so I'm not sure whether I'll keep using them or not.