My go-to LMT/BCM/KAC 11.5 SBR build

[ballerchaos]

Wow thats sexy as hell. Wish we could have SBRs in NJ..keep up the good work

[Pappabear]

That is one bad ass gun with quality components. Top shelf from top to bottom. KAC makes some good stuff and I've always wanted one of their cans. I had their SR15. No complaints. Enjoy

Update on the SBR.. Few things have changed.

-Geissele SSA now is replaced with the Geissele SD-C (flat trigger face)

Once I tried one of the flat geissele triggers, I didn't have the slightest clue what I was missing until then. I have larger hands and the little extra reach and flat face really felt like a better pull for me. The flat/straight to the rear pull was a little easier for me. I tend to reach lower on the trigger and I still have a nice flat pull. Almost feels lighter then the SSA. Absolutely nothing wrong with the SSA or SSA-Es as I still have them on many rifles. But this trigger on the Go-to SBR just feels right.

-Vltor A5 System and E-Carrier.

With insight from BradfordT and others with success on this combo, the rifle runs cleaner and just feels better suppressed.

-KAC MAMS and QDC Suppressor replaced the Surefire Brake and RC & mini

While I absolutely love the SOCOM series suppressors and for the money I would say they are still the best in the biz. I have a KAC QDC CQB suppressor also on hand. As this is my Go-To training, HD, etc etc rifle, I have been doing a lot more un-suppressed shooting and using the rifle in classes, etc, etc. The MAMS is considerably less evasive on a 11.5 then the Surefire brake. I also have been using the SOCOM mini a bit more then the RC. Even though it was only an inch or so, getting in and out of the Polaris and the truck made it marginally easier. Probably in my head but never the less its shorter. With the MAMS still even shorter and 3.8oz lighter (MAMS and Suppressor combined) and I feel has slightly less flash then the socom Mini, but comparable performance, with the rifle being used more unsuppressed, I felt the best option was switch to the MAMS and QDC suppressor. Also I carry it through the woods on the property a lot. With all the garbage and suppressor strapped to this thing, it adds up in weight.

-KAC Front sight made it on the rifle.

After using the CQBL-1 as my backup, in the day time more then 30 yards was really not a viable BUIS option. It was too hard to see. Night was no issue. Day time didn't work that well. As the M4s would most likley never fail, I decided to run BUIS's also for peace of mind. All my rifles had them but this one. The switch coming unplugged on the laser under fire was previously an issue that was remedied with a rubber band, the KAC micro sight installed flipped around, perfectly touches the plug and does not come out no matter what round count or recoil. The only issue this brings up is that the front sight has to be removed to replace the CQBL-1 battery. I tested POI from removing the sight and installing and constantly within 2moa of previous zero. I had to move the SR-D-IT switch back 2 notches for the KAC iron front. The front sight is in the fixed upwards position and will stay that way.

-Bobro mount replaced with ADM

This was not my plan. I love Bobro mounts. But with the rail space it takes up and with wanting to run PVS-14, I needed the little bit of cantilever mount on the optic. I had an M4s with ADM mount, so optic and mount switched with another rifle. It gives me enough space to still have my rear sight and the optic in desired position and add my magnifier if needed or PVS-14s when needed.


That's it for now.. The continued evolution of the rifle. It truly never ends. But I have to say this thing runs and runs. And with my new found love for Fireclean, it is a lot easier to run it hard and clean up after. The second to last pic is this MAMS with Aprox 800 rounds on it after it was cleaned up with fireclean. The KAC MAMS directs some of the bast towards the mounting surface on the KAC can/MD. When NOT using fireclean after a few hundred rounds it would become harder to remove and have to yank the can off. Now with the fireclean, I don't have this issue. (was mainly on heavier rate of fire) See the last photo for the MAMS where the arrow is pointing. This is on another one of my rifles. Where it is scraped off at the arrow is where the carbon builds up. This was without fireclean and needed a carbon scraper.

[Jwknutson17]

That is one bad ass gun with quality components. Top shelf from top to bottom. KAC makes some good stuff and I've always wanted one of their cans. I had their SR15. No complaints. Enjoy

Thanks!! Next time I'm down in AZ Ill shoot you and MarkM a PM and bring an extra MD for the KAC can so you can run it on your rifle. Maybe I can try out some of your guys famous hand loads at distance with this thing too . I travel down to PHX / Tucson ever few months and have my 5320.20 for this SBR and others to travel to AZ already.

I appreciate the praises. Its a fun rifle that's never let me down.

[Pappabear]

Yea, hit us up and we can go sling lead. Good stuff.

[jerrysimons]

How is your mams holding up to the blast on the 11.5"? I am considering putting one on a 10.5" barrel mainly as a sacrificial baffle but man, don't know if it is worth it as a $300 sacrificial baffle that is difficult to replace.

[Jwknutson17]

The only thing I really noticed is that the ports clog up a little bit. It would be hard to blast through the 3 prong flash hider part of the mams if you will. I can't see any wear really in that reguard. Only reason I went with the mams is I shoot it unsuppressed also. A 10.x would be little difficult to stomach if you were to run the mams and only had it covered up the whole time. I feel your pain in your decision... 300 dollar MD to just cover up with the can..

[Boba Fett v2]

So after taking some advice from BradfordTjustice on the A5 set up, I have now been converted to..... The A5H4 and LMT E-Carrier with standard BCM bolt. I have to say, that this setup just flat out works. I was hesitant to pull the trigger at first, but I am sure as heck glad I did. I also ran the E-carrier A5H4 set up in 10.X and 12.Xs and 13.7 all suppressed rifles. I think I'm fully converted, but need to send a few thousand more rounds down range before I put all my chips in the same bag. The A5H3 felt pretty good, but throwing the 4 in there.. man, that is nice with the e-carrier standard bolt setup!!

I really like this set-up. Not just a little bit, but a lot.

Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk

[Jwknutson17]

I really like this set-up. Not just a little bit, but a lot.

Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk

Thanks. Yea its a great combo.

Seeing the thread got bumped to the top, I will fill everyone in that I had my CQBL-1 go down. Apparently the main switch board was faulty (per Steiner's diag) and would prevent the laser from coming on. Smacking the side of the unit would bring it back to life. Using both the manual fire and the remote switch, same issue. Back up and running now and hopefully I do not have any more issues with it. Took about a month to get the unit back. Shipping was on my own dime to get it to them. But other then that, no out of pocket cost.

Rifle is still running well and no other issues to date.

[tom12.7]

To the OP, as an informed consumer apparently, I am curious about a few things.
First. Would you have rather tried a barrel with a more conservative or smaller porting as a baseline? I'm not knocking your build at all, just asking. The barrel chosen should run well with the A5 type action and LMT enhanced carrier well without a can with the heaviest A5 buffer.
Second. Could you have preferred an option that would be in the realm of an A5H2 that runs without a can, but cycles well enough when a can is added given that an increased mass option is available for suppressed use only? Sometimes a build can work well with a simple can add on with a buffer swap over just adding the can.
Third. The tension or stress of the sealing surfaces of the mounting surfaces of a can to mount is always a concern. Do you think that increasing or decreasing tension overall is a positive or negative in your scheme? Would a chunk of fouling or "whatever" maybe alter your end decision.
Again, I'm not knocking your build by any means. I am simply curious about an informed users thoughts. I worked at the other end for some time. I'm not in that field anymore, just more curious than anything.

[Jwknutson17]

To the OP, as an informed consumer apparently, I am curious about a few things.
First. Would you have rather tried a barrel with a more conservative or smaller porting as a baseline? I'm not knocking your build at all, just asking. The barrel chosen should run well with the A5 type action and LMT enhanced carrier well without a can with the heaviest A5 buffer.
Second. Could you have preferred an option that would be in the realm of an A5H2 that runs without a can, but cycles well enough when a can is added given that an increased mass option is available for suppressed use only? Sometimes a build can work well with a simple can add on with a buffer swap over just adding the can.
Third. The tension or stress of the sealing surfaces of the mounting surfaces of a can to mount is always a concern. Do you think that increasing or decreasing tension overall is a positive or negative in your scheme? Would a chunk of fouling or "whatever" maybe alter your end decision.
Again, I'm not knocking your build by any means. I am simply curious about an informed users thoughts. I worked at the other end for some time. I'm not in that field anymore, just more curious than anything.

Thanks for the reply.

I would have ideally would have liked a smaller port with a an A5H2 on this build. In other builds I have run even smaller ports .0625 with 10.9-11.1 inch car barrels. These however will rarley lock back on empty unsuppressed with H3 buffers (both Car H3 and A5H3 setups) with standard auto BCGs. With the Ecarrier, neither would cycle. These setups however are run suppressed 100 percent of the time and run very well.

This 11.5 BCM barrel could be ported smaller. But it is what it is. I do not necessarily like running the A5H4. With properly smaller ported barrels, I run A5H2s in all of those rifles. Of course properly ported barrels are subject to opinion and related directly to your ammo of choice. I run m193 m855 and MK262 and nothing else.

I'm not 100 percent sure I understand your specific question. I prefer the least amount of gas leakage between suppressor and mount surface. I do not know if there is a measurable difference in performance to consider the mounting surface tension in the build. If you have some specific experience in the difference between, I'm all ears. I have not put much thought into it as with the cans run (surefire and KAC on this build), both seem to preform very well and no noticeable difference.