View Full Version : Strike IND QD dust cover
Seems like we will be seeing more aftermarket dust covers coming up.
Strike came out with a 10 sec QD dust cover.
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-rzOovDxj5vA/Uvby_D-VcUI/AAAAAAAAWtU/qixklEf43gU/s1600/QD+Dust+Cover+2.jpg
Any thoughts?
Any thoughts?
Yeah, just one. Why?
SilverBullet432
02-09-14, 19:49
Yeah, just one. Why?
x2, what benefit does this have?
Yeah, just one. Why?
LOL kind of what I was thinking about the qd aspect, but they still don't look too bad. 10$ price point. Now would def be interesting if you could remove the qd aspect and put a normal rod through. If composite may be even lighter than the v7 cover.
Guess just one more way to dress an ar up.
This will go nicely with a stippled front sight post and a transparent forward assist plunger.
Is it aluminum or polymer? Is it lighter than Mil-spec?
Is it aluminum or polymer? Is it lighter than Mil-spec?
I have no idea. Looks like it will probably be polymer just due to the shape/design of it, and the cost. I really don't see 10$ billet dust covers anytime soon.
Weight is anyones guess. Springs, pins, clips and whatever else makes it work all would theoretically add weight. Will be interesting to see more details. IMO modding it to ditch the stupid qd ordeal would probably be many peoples first thing to do if possible. I also am a bit leeary of a polymer cover as hot brass is constantly coming out of the area. Not saying it would melt or anything like that but still.
KingsideRook
02-09-14, 21:11
Less parts to play with than the standard dust cover, including that damnable tiny spring-loaded C-clip, a little tiny bit of saved weight, and a lot easier to install and uninstall with a rail fore end in the way. I'm aware that it's often possible to de/re a dust cover with the rail installed, but it's sure a pain compared to with the rail off. I do not enjoy trying to move the dust cover pin past a URX or my MFR fore-end rails. That alone is a feature that initially endears me to the idea, if the product holds up.
I'd like to try one, if only to go from 3-4 separate dust cover parts to 1-2, and quick removal/replacement. Time will tell if it's any good, but I can see uses for it. Would like to test out the real deal when it's available.
The only reason I could see for this product is if the existing port cover got damaged and you didn't want to completely disassemble the upper because of the rail or whatever. Also, if you bought a stripped upper and had difficulty finding the standard cover. Aside from those two scenarios, I can't see how it would be of much use to the average consumer. As for the possible weight savings, I'd rather do an extra couple of push ups and save ten bucks than dish out money for an item that might shed a fraction of an ounce, at best.
KingsideRook
02-09-14, 22:00
BCM sells a dust cover assembly for $8.95. I'm not sure 10% more is an outrageous price to pay for the ability to remove the dust cover with a pointy object. If you're building a new rifle, it's not substantially more expensive than standard parts. I'm not about to rush off and replace my existing dust covers, but I'm interested in the ability to replace dust covers without removing rails in the future.
I agree, $10 is pretty cheap and the only reasons I can see buying one are what I stated earlier, repair or build option. But, why does the cover need to be easily removable?
Am I missing something here? I can't think of too many times where I've thought to myself, "man, I wish I could remove my dust cover in under 10 seconds..."
I'm not really seeing the benefit even for a build as a stripped receiver is probably going to need a barrel, which means a standard dust cover is plenty easy to install before adding said barrel.
KingsideRook
02-09-14, 22:44
I agree, $10 is pretty cheap and the only reasons I can see buying one are what I stated earlier, repair or build option. But, why does the cover need to be easily removable?
I guess all I'm saying is - for the same reason I'm glad the upper and lower receiver use push pins instead of screws like the old Colts. The easier it is to disassemble a rifle, the easier it is to maintain and replace parts. If it comes at no decrease in reliability or increase in weight, and doesn't break future or past parts compatibility, then who would opt for the option that requires tools and handguard removal to service, vs the option that pops out and can be replaced quickly?
I am not trying to sell you guys this thing, but in all honesty, I'd very happily consider this the next time I had to replace a dust cover or dust cover spring, over getting out my action block, bench vise, torque wrench, allen wrench for the set screws in my rail, and loctite to re-loctite the set screws in my rail. It's not even remotely the same amount of trouble that pushing a captured spring detent would be, to do the same job.
Edited to add - BCM's new KMR rail uses a tool-free removal system, shown here:
http://i.imgur.com/sZNfogb.jpg
Now, I've never needed to remove my rail in the field, or had to make repairs to my rifle without tools. Does anyone here genuinely think the rail's quick-removable handguard portion is a worthless feature, and that there's no reason it shouldn't require a table full of tools to remove like the URX or NSR, to get at the gas system beneath? Again, if we can make servicing the AR15 easier via new components that remove without the use of specialized equipment, then I'm going to see that as a useful upgrade, especially if it's not expensive to do so.
I just woke my wife up to show her this. For years I've been trying to invent a product that everyone wants with no real value as a pinnacle of marketing achievement. Kind of like the pet rock. This was it. I missed the boat. Of course that's a bit harsh. Let's just call it another attempt to create value in an increasingly commoditized product.
Honestly, I don't see it being successful as a "QD" dust cover, so much as a quick build convenience for hobbyists.
no reason it shouldn't require a table full of tools to remove like the URX or NSR, to get at the gas system beneath? Again, if we can make servicing the AR15 easier via new components that remove without the use of specialized equipment, then I'm going to see that as a useful upgrade, especially if it's not expensive to do so.
A table full of tools to remove an NSR? You mean a freakin TORX wrench? What are you going to remove a KMR with - your finger nail?
KingsideRook
02-10-14, 08:14
Actually, I was thinking of the Geiselle barrel nut, and because it was late, wrote the other popular Keymod rail. My mistake.
My Daniel Defense MFR and my Omega X needs to have 4 screws removed, then reinstalled with loctite. The Lite II is even less fun. Still, even with just a Allen wrench and loctite, it's an operation I'd happily skip next time.
Edit. Totally forgot. A rail removal, even if the barrel nut stays in place, which many good designs allow for, is cause to rezero my iron sights, since I have some rail mounted front sights. Anyone here hate this idea more than they hate having to hit the range to reconfirm iron sight zero?
So he goofed and wrote the wrong rail. Wouldn't you rather have the easy removal of the KMR if possible? Isn't that just another added benefit?
If this dust cover is a decent reliable option, I for one will be glad to have an easier install. Maybe I should check it out on my new 5.45 build. Maybe try their Kmod rail at the same time. Hmmm...
Sent from my SCH-I500
Just when you think the AR realm's circus retardation has summitted.... Alas...
I wonder how many shades of grey it will come in.
morpheus6d9
04-10-14, 14:44
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QjLHXlVFew8
I always just pull the c clip and remove from the buttstock end. No need to screw with the rail at all. Maybe there is some billet sets you can't do this with but I never had a problem.
TacticalSledgehammer
04-10-14, 23:15
I really think people are running out of ideas of things to make for the ar-15.
I really think people are running out of ideas of things to make for the ar-15.
Is the any single part of an AR15 that hasn't been "improved" on?
...
The buffer spring detent! That's what needs to be improved!
Is the any single part of an AR15 that hasn't been "improved" on?
...
The buffer spring detent! That's what needs to be improved!
Try again. V7 makes a lightweight improved version.
SR25's have had similar, but steel covers like this for years now.
The buffer spring detent! That's what needs to be improved!
I have all of mine chrome lined.
nateebumpo
04-13-14, 09:51
How is the kmr toolless, cause if it is I think I've been doing it wrong and I'd like to know how to make it easier.
I think this thing is for those times when you get a build done sit back and look at it and "aw shit, I forgot the dust cover" and are too lazy to tear it back down to do it right. Or to forgo the possibility of losing the c clip.
You guys crack me up. I have a pair of new uppers and I hate the damn c clip! I am going to buy two of these. I don't care about being able to take it off in seconds. I do like the idea of being able to put it on "wicked easily!"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QjLHXlVFew8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCvD7oiR_Vw
Diamondback
11-14-17, 12:43
LOL kind of what I was thinking about the qd aspect, but they still don't look too bad. 10$ price point. Now would def be interesting if you could remove the qd aspect and put a normal rod through. If composite may be even lighter than the v7 cover.
Guess just one more way to dress an ar up.
IIRC, it's composite and 4oz complete--the V7 metal and FAB polymers are both 2.
Kinda neat being able to pop your DC on one-handed, though. Not sure the Value For Money is there, but... I only got the FAB because I was already ordering a ton of stuff on a killer everything-they-sell sale, and figured since the gun it was meant for was in dire need of a diet, "what the hell."
Diamondback
11-14-17, 12:45
I really think people are running out of ideas of things to make for the ar-15.
Forearm-mounted Star Trek phaser? Built in espresso machine? Tactical coffee-cup holder? :p
I would not replace a dust cover with this but when looking for parts I saw it and thought it was a good idea.
Forearm-mounted Star Trek phaser? Built in espresso machine? Tactical coffee-cup holder? :p
Even better than the M203 I want!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Diamondback
11-14-17, 14:30
Even better than the M203 I want!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Ah, I know! A freakin' LIGHTSABER for a bayonet! :D
(sorry, couldn't resist... I'll just go back to my corner now...)
Ah, I know! A freakin' LIGHTSABER for a bayonet! :D
(sorry, couldn't resist... I'll just go back to my corner now...)
Ummm. You been paying attention to the lunens on lights these days? Not that far off.
Also, why are we resurrecting a 2014 thread? I mean other than this being more constructive than 98% of GD threads lately.
Ummm. You been paying attention to the lunens on lights these days? Not that far off.
Also, why are we resurrecting a 2014 thread? I mean other than this being more constructive than 98% of GD threads lately.
I used the search function! I wanted to see if anyone here had used this dust cover.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Different for the sake of being different = fashion :p
Diamondback
11-14-17, 17:12
Different for the sake of being different = fashion :p
QFT. Without something functional to offer it's just Tactical Snowflakery.
That said, if they could get it down to the combined weight of a V Seven pin/spring/door assembly at a less Freakshow price than V7, it might be a contender in lightweights--V7's ultralight pin eliminates the C-clips, but at the cost of using the barrel nut as a retainer so you have to take the whole upper apart to install/uninstall.
I wouldn't look to weight saving from the ejection port cover. Some parts on the AR were so well designed or redesigned early on, they're hard or impossible to improve, the ejection port cover is one of those.
If you want to shave weight, you'd need to do that on everything, which results in light weight but it's not without significant compromises.
An ultra light weight should be kept as an engineering exercise to see how far one can go, then develop PRACTICAL light weight components from it. Some of these LW gizmos are imbalanced, and that's giving the manufacturers too much credit, for I don't think it's occurred to them.
The AR is mostly aluminum already. The use of Ti to replace steel components is certainly one way to achieve practical light weight, and let's be honest, it is one value (weight) that can be resolved by throwing money at it. Whether it's justified or not, it depends on who you ask.
Is the any single part of an AR15 that hasn't been "improved" on?
...
The buffer spring detent! That's what needs to be improved!
Someone is making a captive recoil spring assembly to eliminate the buffer retaining pin and spring entirely.
I can see this dust cover being somewhat similar in concept to the 2 piece handguard rings for FAL rifles in case the installer forgets to put the ring on before screwing the barrel in...a lower hassle option.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.