Bufferless?

[az doug]

I have shot one of the ZMs. Admittedly not very many rounds. The gun belonged to Rob Leatham and he had many, many, rounds through it. As you can imagine he shoots a lot. He was impressed with it. I did not get a chance to disassemble it or talk to him about any maintenance or repairs he has had to do to it.

Shortly after I shot the gun, 6 months to a year, ZM sold the design to Para.

ZM uppers were expensive. I remember them in them in the Brownell's catalog. I think their cost was one of their downfalls. I don't have any need for a folding stock AR. I do own one, an AR 180, but I do not use it very often either.

[sinlessorrow]

What exactly is it about foldin stocks that makes people wan them?

To me it seems like they have minimal use and i honestly wouldnt be to excited about having to use an AR without a stock, seems uncomfortable and pointless to me

[eodinert]

It's interesting how 'it looks sloppy' or 'it looks half-assed' is the argument against, not 'it doesn't work'. Is it the Surefire magazine thread where people say 'it looks too complicated' and get the beat-down because 'it works, and fills a niche'?

If it were made by Colt/Surefire/Magpul, or any company with legions of fan-boys, this post would look way different. The first machine gun John Browning made was from lever action Winchester. Talk about half-assed.

[ccosby]

What exactly is it about foldin stocks that makes people wan them?

To me it seems like they have minimal use and i honestly wouldnt be to excited about having to use an AR without a stock, seems uncomfortable and pointless to me

With a sbr and a folding stock you can pretty much throw the complete gun in a backpack if you wanted assembled. I see the advantage to the folding stock. Most would be extending the stock for firing.

[sinlessorrow]

With a sbr and a folding stock you can pretty much throw the complete gun in a backpack if you wanted assembled. I see the advantage to the folding stock. Most would be extending the stock for firing.

I figured you would, and thats fine for a casual shooter but what about a fighting gun? Seems like one more step before you can engage atarget

[Thomas M-4]

It's interesting how 'it looks sloppy' or 'it looks half-assed' is the argument against, not 'it doesn't work'. Is it the Surefire magazine thread where people say 'it looks too complicated' and get the beat-down because 'it works, and fills a niche'?
One of the problems is most people think that they need that niche filled and 99% don't and the manufactures know this. But hey they are out to make money even if it is only in the short term before people realize they don't need it or they find out its crap.

If it were made by Colt/Surefire/Magpul, or any company with legions of fan-boys, this post would look way different. The first machine gun John Browning made was from lever action Winchester. Talk about half-assed.
The difference is that responsible companies tend to care about there names in the long run and usually try to identified genuine need for some thing and then invest the needed resources and time to properly develop it. Unfortunately it does not always work that way, even the companies you mentioned have had there failings but they do have a good track record over the long term.

I put the folding stock Idea in the same category has the piston AR.
If you have to have it you better be looking for something that has a design that allows for it with out bastardizing the operating system.

[Heavy Metal]

My concern is the fact it has far less recoiling mass. Half the carrier and all the buffer is missing.

How does it work when really dirty?

[buckshot1220]

I'm not against the idea of a folding stock. I'd imagine it would be especially useful for LEO/MIL/Etc. getting in and out of vehicles on missions and such.

The problem is finding a way to put a folding stock on an AR without compromising the action and recoil system. Take a look at all the buffer/gas system/buffer spring/gas port size/gas port location/ejection pattern and on and on threads we have here. Do we really think that this hacked up set-up has "fixed" all of that and doesn't have side effects?

[Suwannee Tim]

The fundamental trouble here is the perfection of the AR. It is the only perfect rifle, given to us by the Angel Eugene Stoner. This perfection evokes a strong spiritual response from many owners. These owners regard any adaptation or innovation as a sacrilege.

[Suwannee Tim]

The standards of what is considered "innovation" in this thread are very, very low. Take a hack saw to your weapon and mix it with some parts from Ace Hardware and you'll be praised as a radical innovator. Better yet, get it published in some gun rag and brand your own hacksaw blades.

This is slander plain and simple. You are besmirching the reputations of the presumably good folks at Para. You should be ashamed. You are entitled to your opinion but you are not entitled to lie.