The new Fostech Echo trigger system for the AR15

[The Resistance]

I see you point but I am kind of on the fence because using a full auto weapon (depending on the specific weapon) it takes a lot of training to be able to consciously fire a specific number of rounds in a burst. Even after being on a weapons squad for years I would still fire 4 rounds when I meant to fire 3 out of a 48 or 240. The fact that to disengage the "echo" mode requires you to manipulate the selector does not mean a whole lot, as personally if I have it on Echo mode I am already committing to firing two rounds, just like a weapon with burst. Just my thoughts.

It would be interesting to to actually test this system out in a variety of scenarios, ranging from from close to mid ranges. But I personally think for the price I would pass. I am a huge fan of the FBI MP10's with the two round bust feature. Reliability of this system would have to be proven.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I honestly respect your opinion and service. Worrying about the level of training a person receives before purchasing this item is exactly what the liberal gun grabbers want to be able to quote gun owners as saying. The problem is they will take it to the extreme.

What level of training do you need to purchase a machinegun? None, just $200 for the stamp, bunch of stupid paperwork and a pile of cash for a machine gun you can buy.
What level of training do you need to purchase a firearm? None
What level of training do you need to purchase ammo? None
What level of training do you need to buy alcohol? None
What level of training do you need to by dope in Colorado? None

If we let the liberals determine the "appropriate level of training" before purchasing firearms, accessories and ammo you will not be able to meet the burden. It will be called "sensible gun control" and sold as a "good idea even by gun owners".

I don't want to start an argument about training and the ability to buy guns. I just want 2nd Amendment rights that are not infringed. I want people to have the freedom to buy and carry guns without the government or "do-gooders" effing the whole thing up by determining what is safest and best for us. That's how we ended up in this dicked up situation we find our selves in now. We damn sure don't need to add fuel to the fire.

The guy in the video appeared to be alone and safe with the weapon he was shooting. I personally wouldn't buy a trigger that fired upon release, but that's my choice and my right.
Trap shooters were shooting shotguns with triggers that fired on the release for years.

Hell, I won't buy most of the goofy stuff a lot of people worship over on this forum, but I don't care if they buy it and hang goofy shit all over their guns. Next week they hang the same goofy shit by a different method and swear it's better. Again, I am not jumping on that ship, but I damn sure ain't trying to stop it.

With Respect,

The Resisitance

[wildcard600]

I honestly respect your opinion and service. Worrying about the level of training a person receives before purchasing this item is exactly what the liberal gun grabbers want to be able to quote gun owners as saying. The problem is they will take it to the extreme.

What level of training do you need to purchase a machinegun? None, just $200 for the stamp, bunch of stupid paperwork and a pile of cash for a machine gun you can buy.
What level of training do you need to purchase a firearm? None
What level of training do you need to purchase ammo? None
What level of training do you need to buy alcohol? None
What level of training do you need to by dope in Colorado? None

If we let the liberals determine the "appropriate level of training" before purchasing firearms, accessories and ammo you will not be able to meet the burden. It will be called "sensible gun control" and sold as a "good idea even by gun owners".

I don't want to start an argument about training and the ability to buy guns. I just want 2nd Amendment rights that are not infringed. I want people to have the freedom to buy and carry guns without the government or "do-gooders" effing the whole thing up by determining what is safest and best for us. That's how we ended up in this dicked up situation we find our selves in now. We damn sure don't need to add fuel to the fire.

The guy in the video appeared to be alone and safe with the weapon he was shooting. I personally wouldn't buy a trigger that fired upon release, but that's my choice and my right.
Trap shooters were shooting shotguns with triggers that fired on the release for years.

Hell, I won't buy most of the goofy stuff a lot of people worship over on this forum, but I don't care if they buy it and hang goofy shit all over their guns. Next week they hang the same goofy shit by a different method and swear it's better. Again, I am not jumping on that ship, but I damn sure ain't trying to stop it.

With Respect,

The Resisitance

When people are putting products out that a unsafe we as the shooting community SHOULD be calling them out on it. How about a magazine that cannot be removed once it is loaded into the gun ? Or ammunition that cannot be extracted once chambered ?

I think i'll start marketing a charging handle that retracts into the upper once the gun is charged. Gotta expend the chambered round to clear the thing but its ultra low profile and snag free bro !

This whole idea ranks right up there with that "trigger activated laser" clown show.

[sua175]

When people are putting products out that a unsafe we as the shooting community SHOULD be calling them out on it. How about a magazine that cannot be removed once it is loaded into the gun ? Or ammunition that cannot be extracted once chambered ?

I think i'll start marketing a charging handle that retracts into the upper once the gun is charged. Gotta expend the chambered round to clear the thing but its ultra low profile and snag free bro !

This whole idea ranks right up there with that "trigger activated laser" clown show.

How is it unsafe?

[wildcard600]

How is it unsafe?

Having to manipulate a control to render the gun "safe" vs simply removing your finger from the trigger.

[sua175]

If you treat as you would a bust weapon system then there should be no problem. Understand that in that mode you will fire two rounds, just like I understand that when my m4 is on bust three rounds will come out the barrel. I'm not saying this will be a viable tool for tactical applications but I don't see it being any more unsafe than a bust or full auto weapon.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[wildcard600]

If you treat as you would a bust weapon system then there should be no problem. Understand that in that mode you will fire two rounds, just like I understand that when my m4 is on bust three rounds will come out the barrel. I'm not saying this will be a viable tool for tactical applications but I don't see it being any more unsafe than a bust or full auto weapon.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Burst and F/A do not fire on both pull and release. Imagine one of those, would you think that was safe ?

[Kdubya]

I see you point but I am kind of on the fence...

....The fact that to disengage the "echo" mode requires you to manipulate the selector does not mean a whole lot, as personally if I have it on Echo mode I am already committing to firing two rounds, just like a weapon with burst. Just my thoughts.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I actually think this is a pretty good assessment. I know that earlier I somewhat aligned myself with this being regarded as a "nonsensical product". For me it likely would be, especially at that price. Just like a bump fire stock, it's probably a lot of fun to play with, but really isn't that practical beyond the range for someone like me.

Yours is a valid point. If the end user can see an application, understands it's function, and trains to control its operation and application, it could serve a purpose. For someone who does not satisfy those requirements, it could cause some safety concerns. For the former, the fire upon release, unless the selector is toggled, should be a non issue. If a competent shooter has intentionally placed it in that mode, the mechanics of how it fires the two rounds are somewhat meaningless. Just like with a burst selector, a person understanding it's function, also understands they are committing to firing a string of multiple shots with a single manipulation of the trigger. If anything, in the scenario of an experienced shooter who's trained and treats this mode as a burst function, it actually affords them an ability that is not found on a traditional select fire weapon. In theory, for whatever reason, one could interrupt the cycle of fire. Albeit, this may be difficult to make that type of split second decision and subsequent action, it could be done.

With this product, after a bit more consideration, I'm not convinced of the "safety" argument. As firearm owners, we should be expected to understand a given weapon's function and what it takes to operate it in a safe and proficient manner. This goes for anything from a musket to a machine gun.

I'd be interested to know what those saying it's unsafe think of Glock Pistols; or any others lacking the "active" safeties. There's a number of LE individuals who've written articles arguing Glocks should be reconsidered for departmental use due to the lack of these external safeties; blaming the design for some NDs. When that argument pops up on the forums, the most common response is something to the effect of, "the issue isn't the gun, it's the training" and "the safety is the guy holding the gun." So how is this really all that different regarding the product at hand?

[turnburglar]

Having to manipulate a control to render the gun "safe" vs simply removing your finger from the trigger.

Hate to break it to you, but your one of the only people that see this as 'un-safe' and thats AFTER the BATF has reviewed it. Take your finger off the trigger. Bullets will stop coming out. pretty simple.

Infact this is probably SAFER than true auto, in that you won't have a run away gun if or when someone does ND. Just two rounds instead of 3+.

[Noodles]

Hate to break it to you, but your one of the only people that see this as 'un-safe' and thats AFTER the BATF has reviewed it. Take your finger off the trigger. Bullets will stop coming out. pretty simple.

Infact this is probably SAFER than true auto, in that you won't have a run away gun if or when someone does ND. Just two rounds instead of 3+.

The ATF doesn't regulate SAFE, they regulate LEGAL.

Most people know this is a joke of a product. The only people excited for it are the ones that think this is anything like an auto, and it's not.

This is just the latest in some bubba-class garbage that someone is going to get hurt with.

[thei3ug]

I'm not a proponent of the trigger type, but I don't understand the conclusion that people will be injured by this product.

This would require
1) a deliberate trigger pull by a shooter, which is held for an indeterminate period of time, who drops the muzzle to sweep his own body, then an unintentional release of the trigger; OR
2) a deliberate trigger pull by a shooter, which is held for an indeterminate period of time, who raises the muzzle, unintentionally releases the trigger, letting a bullet stray beyond a safety barrier; OR
2) a person standing downrange during a deliberate trigger pull which is then held for an indeterminate time, until a person who is down range is swept by the muzzle, then an unintentional release of the trigger; OR
3) if a range is being run properly, a deliberate trigger pull, held while the shooter then turns at least 90 degrees, followed by an unintentional release.

Or variations of the theme. Each requires a shooter hold the trigger for a period after the intention to fire has passed, which is keeping the finger on the trigger without the intention to fire, and then at least one second negligent act.

While the idea of a fire on release skirts the line of intentional act (as in, it doesn't require positive muscle action to perform, but rather, either a conscious act of muscle relaxation or loss of muscle control), and others argued the intentional act to fire twice begins with the initial pull... I don't believe the fire on release is inherently a negligent discharge, and I don't think I could argue that it is significantly less safe than a single trigger pull in the hands of someone who would act so carelessly to begin with.

I am, however, open to being persuaded. The proliferation of these triggers makes me uneasy.