View Full Version : Sionics 11.5 barrel w/ reduced gas port function report.
BufordTJustice
12-31-15, 23:09
I was fortunate enough to snag one of these very limited run barrels that were developed for a law enforcement agency's SWAT team rifles. They are used suppressed, with H2 buffers to great effect by the agency and I got in contact with SteveO at Sionics for a leftover from the run of barrels. I'm very glad I did.
I've assembled the barrel, a roughly medium contour barrel with true 5.56 NATO chamber and 1:7 twist (chrome lined), into a Rainier Arms forged upper with no FA, BCM KMR-A 10" w/ V7 Weapons Ti KMR barrel nut. I threw on an SLR Rifleworks Ti Sentry 7 set screw AGB and am waiting on a SiCo trifecta MAAD brake for my Saker 7.62 that's in NFA jail till February.
I used it on a buddy's SBR lower that uses the Vltor A5 system. I swapped in my A5H4 buffer and Tubbs 17-7 flat wire AR10 spring. Yes, you read that right. AR10 spring. It's stronger at the beginning of its stroke (in battery) than the SprinCo GREEN spring, but weaker at the end of its stroke (fully out of battery). It feels strange and has virtually no perceptible stacking effect. More pressure in battery and less pressure at the rear of stroke, allowing easier lock back. And the recoil stroke is really smooth on my 18" Handy Rifle.
I also used an LMT 4th gen e-carrier along with a Lantac NiB bolt and their domed cam pin. I also installed a SprinCo 5-coil CS extractor spring with insert (no donut), and McFarland single piece gas ring. Lubed PROPERLY with FireClean.
I was running no muzzle device on the Sionics barrel, so this was a worst case scenario for the given ammo (absolutely zero additional gas pressure provided by the muzzle device). I ran federal Brown box xm193 55gr NATO ammo in a magpul gen 3 PMAG and a Brownells aluminum 30rd mag with magpul follower. I started with the SLR gas block on full open (position 15 out of 15). Nice and smooth with lockback. I'll skip the boring part.
Onto position 5 from full closed and full lockback with no shoulder purchase and a lazy/floppy pistol grip. Reduced it to position 4 from full closed and same thing. And STUPID smooth. Position 3 from full closed and we had function with no lockback. A little too far.
Now, I know that Will and Steve HATE over sized gas ports, and that this was for carbines that were to be suppressed most of the time, so I'm going to measure it with some pin gauges tomorrow. But I bet it's horseshoes-and-handgrenades with the Crane spec, which is right around .070".
This isn't a testament to how over gassed the barrel is. Far from it. But it's an experiment (and a successful one, at that) into the use of the LMT e-carrier and Vltor A5 system and how they can be synergistically employed to significantly delay unlocking. This, necessarily, will have a significant effect on the amount of gas experienced by the users of suppressed rifles. Pix of the upper to come tomorrow.
My other buddy, who is a member of a local SWAT team had a select fire colt 6940 10.5" (or whatever model number their monolithic 10.5" is). It has a heavy profile barrel, grip pod, eotech optic, metal rear buis, foldable FSB, and streamlight TLR-1s. My upper had no sights, no buis, nothing. Despite being significantly heavier than my test setup, and using an H2 buffer, it was agreed by all shooters present that the Sionics setup was notably smoother, despite the enormous weight difference. And, frankly, the colt was VERY enjoyable to shoot.
EDIT: I used a buddy's pin gauge set to measure the gas port. It's .070-.071". Right on the Crane spec.
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160101/b005806b76ee6d921c2129871fd609f8.jpghttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160101/9ec87c38489b0a9f42d3777b403be106.jpghttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160101/9f828a97399b9872c33f6749edbe788f.jpghttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160101/d53b186b3b9a6e7f0447b249734af39c.jpghttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160101/41d4791a18f6fc92562a506728586b98.jpg
SeriousStudent
12-31-15, 23:15
Very interesting. I'm ordering one of these barrels for a suppressed SBR build. I'll be quite interested in a thread update when you get your Saker.I have not picked out thee can I'm going to use at this time.
BufordTJustice
01-01-16, 00:17
Very interesting. I'm ordering one of these barrels for a suppressed SBR build. I'll be quite interested in a thread update when you get your Saker.I have not picked out thee can I'm going to use at this time.
There MAY be more of these reduced gas port 11.5" barrels in the next few months. I'd imagine the std 11.5" barrel would be between the Crane spec and .078.
The Saker was an easy choice because I got SiCo LEO pricing. But the dead air sand man S and Rugged Razor 7.62 would be difficult to ignore if I weren't an LEO.
I was fortunate enough to snag one of these very limited run barrels that were developed for a law enforcement agency's SWAT team rifles. They are used suppressed, with H2 buffers to great effect by the agency and I got in contact with SteveO at Sionics for a leftover from the run of barrels. I'm very glad I did.
I've assembled the barrel, a roughly medium contour barrel with true 5.56 NATO chamber and 1:7 twist (chrome lined), into a Rainier Arms forged upper with no FA, BCM KMR-A 10" w/ V7 Weapons Ti KMR barrel nut. I threw on an SLR Rifleworks Ti Sentry 7 set screw AGB and am waiting on a SiCo trifecta MAAD brake for my Saker 7.62 that's in NFA jail till February.
I used it on a buddy's SBR lower that uses the Vltor A5 system. I swapped in my A5H4 buffer and Tubbs 17-7 flat wire AR10 spring. Yes, you read that right. AR10 spring. It's stronger at the beginning of its stroke (in battery) than the SprinCo GREEN spring, but weaker at the end of its stroke (fully out of battery). It feels strange and has virtually no perceptible stacking effect. More pressure in battery and less pressure at the rear of stroke, allowing easier lock back. And the recoil stroke is really smooth on my 18" Handy Rifle.
I also used an LMT 4th gen e-carrier along with a Lantac NiB bolt and their domed cam pin.
I was running no muzzle device on the Sionics barrel, so this was a worst case scenario for the given ammo (absolutely zero additional gas pressure provided by the muzzle device). I ran federal Brown box xm193 55gr NATO ammo in a magpul gen 3 PMAG and a Brownells aluminum 30rd mag with magpul follower. I started with the SLR gas block on full open (position 15 out of 15). Nice and smooth with lockback. I'll skip the boring part.
Onto position 5 from full closed and full lockback with no shoulder purchase and a lazy/floppy pistol grip. Reduced it to position 4 from full closed and same thing. And STUPID smooth. Position 3 from full closed and we had function with no lockback. A little too far.
Now, I know that Will and Steve HATE over sized gas ports, and that this was for carbines that were to be suppressed most of the time, so I'm going to measure it with some pin gauges tomorrow. But I bet it's horseshoes-and-handgrenades with the Crane spec, which is right around .070".
This isn't a testament to how over gassed the barrel is. Far from it. But it's an experiment (and a successful one, at that) into the use of the LMT e-carrier and Vltor A5 system and how they can be synergistically employed to significantly delay unlocking. This, necessarily, will have a significant effect on the amount of gas experienced by the users of suppressed rifles. Pix of the upper to come tomorrow.
My other buddy, who is a member of a local SWAT team had a select fire colt 6940 10.5" (or whatever model number their monolithic 10.5" is). It has a heavy profile barrel, grip pod, eotech optic, metal rear buis, foldable FSB, and streamlight TLR-1s. My upper had no sights, no buis, nothing. Despite being significantly heavier than my test setup, and using an H2 buffer, it was agreed by all shooters present that the Sionics setup was notably smoother, despite the enormous weight difference. And, frankly, the colt was VERY enjoyable to shoot.
Thanks for the review. More are being chromed right now and should be available by the end of the month.
PS. Yeah, Will and I friggin hate oversized gas ports. Measured a 16" carbine today at .074... friggin disgusting.
BufordTJustice
01-01-16, 00:29
Thanks for the review. More are being chromed right now and should be available by the end of the month.
PS. Yeah, Will and I friggin hate oversized gas ports. Measured a 16" carbine today at .074... friggin disgusting.
Steve, you guys hit it out of the park with this one. F*cking STUPID smooth. Brass looked great with no pressure signs; primers looked great too.
I have benefited from your hatred of whored-out gas ports. [emoji12]
EDIT: I bet that 16" shot like a 6.8spc, lol.
BufordTJustice
01-01-16, 11:50
Pix added. They're shitty and blurry. I'm no Stickman. I doubt anybody is surprised by this news flash.
SeriousStudent
01-01-16, 13:06
Thanks for adding the pics. I do like that barrel profile.
BufordT, a few questions about your porting strategy?
I agree about the LMT enhanced/A5 combo, I question the chosen mass?
With the adjustable gas block, why not gas it to an A5H2 for 5.56 without a can? Without changing the gas setting, you can step up or down in mass for different variables. Less mass for things like lower port pressure ammo, more mass for things like a silencer. Porting for the A5H2 for 5.56 without a can takes less gas than porting needed for the A5H4, less gas has many advantages. I Know when I'm adding a can, and adding in a buffer swap is pretty easy.
I do know and understand that a gas setting for the A5H4 can have a wide range of function, but that function may not be as preferable in use as more conservative gassing and simple buffer swaps.
I know little about the Tubbs spring mentioned. I stopped using them some time back due to issues, but those were CS. Do you know the L1 and L2 values?
BufordTJustice
01-01-16, 20:40
BufordT, a few questions about your porting strategy?
I agree about the LMT enhanced/A5 combo, I question the chosen mass?
With the adjustable gas block, why not gas it to an A5H2 for 5.56 without a can? Without changing the gas setting, you can step up or down in mass for different variables. Less mass for things like lower port pressure ammo, more mass for things like a silencer. Porting for the A5H2 for 5.56 without a can takes less gas than porting needed for the A5H4, less gas has many advantages. I Know when I'm adding a can, and adding in a buffer swap is pretty easy.
I do know and understand that a gas setting for the A5H4 can have a wide range of function, but that function may not be as preferable in use as more conservative gassing and simple buffer swaps.
I know little about the Tubbs spring mentioned. I stopped using them some time back due to issues, but those were CS. Do you know the L1 and L2 values?
I forget the L1/L2 values. They were surprisingly close.
As for the buffer weight, I have found that while using the e-carrier, going to a lighter buffer such as the A5H3 or A5H2 did not allow me to reduce the gas setting on the gas block.
They also provided harsher recoil pulses than the A5H4. As I stated, there is a synergy with the current setup. The heavier buffer also registers a notably smaller difference in sight tracking between SAAMI pressure ammo and full house 5.56 duty ammo.
As for the buffer weight, I have found that while using the e-carrier, going to a lighter buffer such as the A5H3 or A5H2 did not allow me to reduce the gas setting on the gas block.
Do you mean that they functioned the same regarding lock back as the A5H4 or that the gas block had to be set to fully open to run the A5H2 & A5H3?
BufordTJustice
01-01-16, 21:09
Do you mean that they functioned the same regarding lock back as the A5H4 or that the gas block had to be set to fully open to run the A5H2 & A5H3?
Correct, they functioned on the same gas setting, and both failed to function on setting 3, just like the A5H4.
Correct, they functioned on the same gas setting, and both failed to function on setting 3, just like the A5H4.
Gotcha. I'm thinking about picking up one of these barrels when they are ready. What A5 buffer would you recommend with a standard gas block, LMT Enhanced carrier and Springco Green?
BufordTJustice
01-01-16, 21:21
Gotcha. I'm thinking about picking up one of these barrels when they are ready. What A5 buffer would you recommend with a standard gas block, LMT Enhanced carrier and Springco Green?
I rec an A5H3 or A5H4. I'd advise starting with an A5H4.
SeriousStudent
01-01-16, 21:47
Buford, I just had to edit your thread title, all the weird spelling in the title was driving me batshit.
Thanks again for the work on the thread.
BufordTJustice
01-01-16, 21:52
Buford, I just had to edit your thread title, all the weird spelling in the title was driving me batshit.
Thanks again for the work on the thread.
Thank you. It was originally just a quotation mark that got turned into gibberish. I can't edit thread titles from my phone on tapatalk, just thread content.
I rec an A5H3 or A5H4. I'd advise starting with an A5H4.
I've been looking for an H4, but those things are like hens teeth right now.
BufordTJustice
01-01-16, 21:54
I've been looking for an H4, but those things are like hens teeth right now.
You could make one from an H3 and an H carbine buffer.
I've been looking for an H4, but those things are like hens teeth right now.
I think weapon outfitters has them in stock.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You could make one from an H3 and an H carbine buffer.
I thought about that, but I'd rather have both so I can test them back to back.
I think weapon outfitters has them in stock.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Thanks. I missed them in my searching.
I forget the L1/L2 values. They were surprisingly close.
As for the buffer weight, I have found that while using the e-carrier, going to a lighter buffer such as the A5H3 or A5H2 did not allow me to reduce the gas setting on the gas block.
They also provided harsher recoil pulses than the A5H4. As I stated, there is a synergy with the current setup. The heavier buffer also registers a notably smaller difference in sight tracking between SAAMI pressure ammo and full house 5.56 duty ammo.
You may want to look into the system further. A 11.5" carbine gas 5.56 AR using a normal 5.56 chamber, throat, and bore can use less gas with normal 5.56 ammo with the LMT carrier A5/ rifle like action in the A5H2 range without a sound suppressor. While I agree that the combo with with an A5H4 has desirable characteristics, some of that can change with the addition of a can.
The added can may not be as desirable in operation with an A5H4 porting than without a can. I will grant you that I am not familiar with your exact combo. Most testing was done with KAC, AAC, and Surefire. Even with each's traits, it's worth considering that it may be worth your time to look at the A5H2 gas when a can may be is involved for use without it to have the operation qualities in use with only the addition of more mass when it it is used.
Please explain, don't many try to use as heavy a buffer as possible especially with a suppressor?
BufordTJustice
01-02-16, 11:38
You may want to look into the system further. A 11.5" carbine gas 5.56 AR using a normal 5.56 chamber, throat, and bore can use less gas with normal 5.56 ammo with the LMT carrier A5/ rifle like action in the A5H2 range without a sound suppressor. While I agree that the combo with with an A5H4 has desirable characteristics, some of that can change with the addition of a can.
The added can may not be as desirable in operation with an A5H4 porting than without a can. I will grant you that I am not familiar with your exact combo. Most testing was done with KAC, AAC, and Surefire. Even with each's traits, it's worth considering that it may be worth your time to look at the A5H2 gas when a can may be is involved for use without it to have the operation qualities in use with only the addition of more mass when it it is used.
I'll certainly consider that when I get my Saker. I'll test all combos. However, this heavier buffer is defying convention right now. And the difference between the H4 and H2 is both noticeable and preferable so far, sans can. We shall see.
But I can tell you which has the slowest unlocking for a GIVEN cyclic rate, and it's the heaviest buffer used with the e-carrier.
jerrysimons
01-02-16, 12:15
You may want to look into the system further. A 11.5" carbine gas 5.56 AR using a normal 5.56 chamber, throat, and bore can use less gas with normal 5.56 ammo with the LMT carrier A5/ rifle like action in the A5H2 range without a sound suppressor. While I agree that the combo with with an A5H4 has desirable characteristics, some of that can change with the addition of a can.
The added can may not be as desirable in operation with an A5H4 porting than without a can. I will grant you that I am not familiar with your exact combo. Most testing was done with KAC, AAC, and Surefire. Even with each's traits, it's worth considering that it may be worth your time to look at the A5H2 gas when a can may be is involved for use without it to have the operation qualities in use with only the addition of more mass when it it is used.
I think this is the same thinking along the line of Grant's best suppressed SBR thread. In a nut shell, tune the gas setting for ejection but not quite lock back without can attached then add a can and it is right on with the added back pressure. This is for a predominantly suppressed use. Would the same principle apply for BTJ? Tune the gun in the same way but with a little added margin unsuppressed because his will be more mixed used. Grants thread focuses on gas settings and back pressure as the main variables reciprocating mass remaining the same. Tom brings up reciprocating mass as the variable to rely on for mixed use. Which variable has the most influence in the system? With gas tuned for an A5H4 unsupressed and the addition of a can leads to less desirable cycling vs a tune for an A5H2 unsuppressed with more desirable cycling after a can is added but using an A5H4 buffer on the A5H2 gas setting, then given the added back pressure from the can being the same for both, which variable makes more of a difference, mass or gas?
I think SIONICS 11.5" carbine barrels are .076" gas port. I would be the reduced gas-port is right at .070-.071". Note that is the crane spec for a 10.5"barrel used exclusively with 556 pressure ammo. As BTJ illustrates in the thread, even with the reduced gas port, there is still a good bit of margin for function built into the reduced gp sizing. Which just goes to show you how crazy over gassed .083" 11.5" carbine barrels are!
I'll certainly consider that when I get my Saker. I'll test all combos. However, this heavier buffer is defying convention right now. And the difference between the H4 and H2 is both noticeable and preferable so far, sans can. We shall see.
But I can tell you which has the slowest unlocking for a GIVEN cyclic rate, and it's the heaviest buffer used with the e-carrier.
If you tune it for the A5H4 without a can, the delay is less when a can is introduced. Unfortunately, theres really no way around that.
BufordTJustice
01-02-16, 14:12
I think this is the same thinking along the line of Grant's best suppressed SBR thread. In a nut shell, tune the gas setting for ejection but not quite lock back without can attached then add a can and it is right on with the added back pressure. This is for a predominantly suppressed use. Would the same principle apply for BTJ? Tune the gun in the same way but with a little added margin unsuppressed because his will be more mixed used. Grants thread focuses on gas settings and back pressure as the main variables reciprocating mass remaining the same. Tom brings up reciprocating mass as the variable to rely on for mixed use. Which variable has the most influence in the system? With gas tuned for an A5H4 unsupressed and the addition of a can leads to less desirable cycling vs a tune for an A5H2 unsuppressed with more desirable cycling after a can is added but using an A5H4 buffer on the A5H2 gas setting, then given the added back pressure from the can being the same for both, which variable makes more of a difference, mass or gas?
I think SIONICS 11.5" carbine barrels are .076" gas port. I would be the reduced gas-port is right at .070-.071". Note that is the crane spec for a 10.5"barrel used exclusively with 556 pressure ammo. As BTJ illustrates in the thread, even with the reduced gas port, there is still a good bit of margin for function built into the reduced gp sizing. Which just goes to show you how crazy over gassed .083" 11.5" carbine barrels are!
I know from purely unsuppressed use that the H4 buffer has a smaller change in cyclic rate and a smaller change in recoil pulse between ultra weak .223 and really hot 5.56 pressure ammo like independence.
I'm going to apply this observation to suppression in light of Grant's thread. My hypothesis is that the heavier A5H4 buffer will reduce the degree of the over-gassed position WITH suppressor after being tuned for operation WITHOUT suppressor. We'll see.
BufordTJustice
01-02-16, 14:27
If you tune it for the A5H4 without a can, the delay is less when a can is introduced. Unfortunately, theres really no way around that.
Agreed. But my hypothesis is that the delta between suppressed H4 and unsuppressed H4 is going to be smaller than the delta between suppressed H2 and unsuppressed H2.
Just to add some additional information to this. The first batch of barrels was done for a specific client (local SWAT) that wanted to replace their Über-heavy 11.5" piston guns. The goal was to trim weight, reduce gassing and maintain reliability with their duty ammo. They also stated that these would only be used with suppressors and the likelihood of shooting without one was very slim. However, we wanted to ensure that they would run un-suppressed in an emergency.
Once we had the basics down we then used a variety of port sizes and conducted testing with several types of ammo and buffer combinations. The end result was a suppressed SBR that would cycle and function with a wide variety of ammunition, and utilize standard components (no adjustable gas block).
BufordTJustice
01-02-16, 16:41
Just to add some additional information to this. The first batch of barrels was done for a specific client (local SWAT) that wanted to replace their Über-heavy 11.5" piston guns. The goal was to trim weight, reduce gassing and maintain reliability with their duty ammo. They also stated that these would only be used with suppressors and the likelihood of shooting without one was very slim. However, we wanted to ensure that they would run un-suppressed in an emergency.
Once we had the basics down we then used a variety of port sizes and conducted testing with several types of ammo and buffer combinations. The end result was a suppressed SBR that would cycle and function with a wide variety of ammunition, and utilize standard components (no adjustable gas block).
I can confirm it was fully reliable and impressively smooth even with no throttling via the gas block.
The profile is great. The gas port is probably ideal for MOST users who intend to suppress their carbine.
Is this the barrel on the website that ships in 5 to 6 weeks ?
These barrels are not up on the site yet. We will be adding it to the list very soon with the ability to pre-order for those that want to buy one.
Is this the barrel on the website that ships in 5 to 6 weeks ?
These barrels are not up on the site yet. We will be adding it to the list very soon with the ability to pre-order for those that want to buy one.
Do you know if they'll be available with FSB?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
All of our barrels are available with or without an FSB.
Do you know if they'll be available with FSB?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
All of our barrels are available with or without an FSB.
Sweet, thanks.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I've been looking to replace my 10.5 for an 11.5 on an SBR build. I've been collecting buffers and weights in order to "tune" the weapon. I haven't purchased the barrel yet, I think I will be getting the Sionics and if there is a pre-order I will be all over it.
We should have them up some time this week.
I've been looking to replace my 10.5 for an 11.5 on an SBR build. I've been collecting buffers and weights in order to "tune" the weapon. I haven't purchased the barrel yet, I think I will be getting the Sionics and if there is a pre-order I will be all over it.
Got my pre-order in today. Looking forward to building this one. My current 11.5 is a heavy pig. This one with a KMR-A, will make a nice combination.
BufordTJustice
01-09-16, 19:19
Got my pre-order in today. Looking forward to building this one. My current 11.5 is a heavy pig. This one with a KMR-A, will make a nice combination.
I'm loving mine. Just itching to mate it to my own lower once my form 1 gets approved. Finished my eform last night. Now begins the waiting.
I'm loving mine. Just itching to mate it to my own lower once my form 1 gets approved. Finished my eform last night. Now begins the waiting.
I'm pretty pumped about it. My current 11.5 pretty much always has the suppressor attached. Up until this point, a reduced GP barrel was pretty much impossible unless you had a direct line to a manufacturer. I'll be using a standard lowpro GB, but I'm looking forward to setting this one up with the LMT carrier and A5.
Be careful of not being in "constructive possession". If you do not have a current SBR AR stamp or a an AR pistol, don't take possession of barrel that is in a regulation within SBR or pistol lengths. That is 10 years Federal and $100,000 for something that should not be a crime in the first place. The bases for the NFA is absurd.
Be careful of not being in "constructive possession". If you do not have a current SBR AR stamp or a an AR pistol, don't take possession of barrel that is in a regulation within SBR or pistol lengths. That is 10 years Federal and $100,000 for something that should not be a crime in the first place. The bases for the NFA is absurd.
Not a problem here. Two SBR lowers, with one currently unoccupied.
That may be true for you, it would be caution to others.
BufordTJustice
01-09-16, 20:42
Be careful of not being in "constructive possession". If you do not have a current SBR AR stamp or a an AR pistol, don't take possession of barrel that is in a regulation within SBR or pistol lengths. That is 10 years Federal and $100,000 for something that should not be a crime in the first place. The bases for the NFA is absurd.
Lives in my friend's safe with his registered SBR lowers.
Also, constructive possession was never intended to be interpreted in that manner. Though I would NOT want to be a test case, that's one solid case from being overturned.
The concept was permitted by the courts in common sense cases such as a baggie of cocaine lying on the floor of a car full of people who are all high. It obviously belongs to SOMEBODY in the car. I charged folks on a few occasions in this manner, but they were each time revised once somebody rolled on the others.
Preaching to the choir here, I know.
The ATF was created by edict from the NFA. Neither are constitutional and neither should exist.
Let's not dilute this with "constructive possession" nonsense, please.
That may be true for you, it would be caution to others.
Is it really "nonsense", correct me so to be able to talk with those when that those that have spent $$money$$ to avoid conviction of the prosecution.
The actual prosecution in trial may not have included that, but it has been added as a threat to the defendant.
Wow, autocorrect changes words. How is that messed up?
Any update on when the RGP barrels will be ready?
They are already available for pre-order.
Any update on when the RGP barrels will be ready?
I think he meant ready to ship...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
They are already available for pre-order.
Already pre-ordered. Just curious about progress.
Should be soon. Typical SHOT Show and other delays.
Already pre-ordered. Just curious about progress.
Should be soon. Typical SHOT Show and other delays.
Thanks IG. Looking forward to getting it set up.
bnanaphone
01-25-16, 20:22
IG, how different in port size are these new barrels when compared to Sionics' standard 11.5' barrels? I have one of the 11.5" melonite-treated barrels That I exclusively run suppressed with a Scionics NP3 bolt & LMT-E carrier & A5H4 buffer to great success. Just wondering if the squeeze is worth the juice (above & beyond the standard barrel), so to speak.
BufordTJustice
01-25-16, 20:56
IG, how different in port size are these new barrels when compared to Sionics' standard 11.5' barrels? I have one of the 11.5" melonite-treated barrels That I exclusively run suppressed with a Scionics NP3 bolt & LMT-E carrier & A5H4 buffer to great success. Just wondering if the squeeze is worth the juice (above & beyond the standard barrel), so to speak.
I wouldn't ditch a std barrel if you already have it installed. Maybe add an adjustable gas block.
But, for even part time suppressed use, the reduced port size is JUST what the doctor ordered for a new build.
Thus far, those who have shot it, including the SWAT personnel for whom we put together the original product really like it. I am not sure I would advocate tearing apart something already built.
IG, how different in port size are these new barrels when compared to Sionics' standard 11.5' barrels? I have one of the 11.5" melonite-treated barrels That I exclusively run suppressed with a Scionics NP3 bolt & LMT-E carrier & A5H4 buffer to great success. Just wondering if the squeeze is worth the juice (above & beyond the standard barrel), so to speak.
Finally got my upper completed. 11.5" RGP barrel, Geissele 10" MKIII rail, SIONICS NP3 bolt w/LMT Enhanced carrier, Vltor A5H4 with Sprinco spring. Did some brief testing today and it cycles 100% with Magtech 62gr. FMJ and some 77gr. Markm handloads.
http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s188/iraqgunz/IMG_20160125_181253554.jpg (http://s152.photobucket.com/user/iraqgunz/media/IMG_20160125_181253554.jpg.html)
Just saw that on FB also. Way to rub it in man!
Lawnchair 04
01-25-16, 23:54
So if building a new upper that will be shot suppressed 75% of the time would it be worthwhile to run this barrel over a new ELW bcm barrel? The suppressor would be a surefire socom 762 mini, also running an LMT enhanced carrier with an A5 system and green sprinco if that would matter. I have several different weighted buffers but I don't want to mess with an adjustable gas block.
bnanaphone
01-26-16, 01:05
Appreciate the info guys. Right along the lines of what I was thinking.
BufordTJustice
01-26-16, 06:54
So if building a new upper that will be shot suppressed 75% of the time would it be worthwhile to run this barrel over a new ELW bcm barrel? The suppressor would be a surefire socom 762 mini, also running an LMT enhanced carrier with an A5 system and green sprinco if that would matter. I have several different weighted buffers but I don't want to mess with an adjustable gas block.
If you're not using an adjustable gas block and can tailor buffer weight to your uses, yes.
Jwknutson17
01-26-16, 11:12
Gunz,
Would you agree that .70 on an 11.5 is still conservative port size? I have had a lot of experience with chopping down car barrels with .0625 ports for suppressed builds in the 10.5-11" lengths that just flat run with a can, and still cycle and run 5.56 ammo with an H2 and some with H3 setups. I agree with the intended use that you mentioned for a specific client and why you went with a .070 gas port. Not arguing that.. But I am curious if you had run even smaller ports on 11.5 and if you found any major cons in your testing doing so?
I will be ordering one of your 11.5s to give it a go. Is it just an email sent out when in stock or am I missing something on the website?
They were available for preorder. But the run is sold out now.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Jwknutson17
01-26-16, 11:16
They were available for preorder. But the run is sold out now.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Well there goes that idea. Thanks for the info.
Well there goes that idea. Thanks for the info.
Give them a call, sometimes the website might not reflect the latest status.
We didn't run or test smaller port sizes. We went with a size after looking at various numbers and other data. We wanted to ensure that in the event the can had to come off, it would still function and it does.
Gunz,
Would you agree that .70 on an 11.5 is still conservative port size? I have had a lot of experience with chopping down car barrels with .0625 ports for suppressed builds in the 10.5-11" lengths that just flat run with a can, and still cycle and run 5.56 ammo with an H2 and some with H3 setups. I agree with the intended use that you mentioned for a specific client and why you went with a .070 gas port. Not arguing that.. But I am curious if you had run even smaller ports on 11.5 and if you found any major cons in your testing doing so?
I will be ordering one of your 11.5s to give it a go. Is it just an email sent out when in stock or am I missing something on the website?
Well there goes that idea. Thanks for the info.
They will be back eventually. These are supposed to be a recurring, limited production item.
Just one thing missing...
http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160201/5ecdb7f09b7476a46a4a7a9a66a3bac2.jpg
eternal24k
02-01-16, 08:24
These available with FSB?
They were, yes.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
BufordTJustice
02-01-16, 09:58
Just one thing missing...
http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160201/5ecdb7f09b7476a46a4a7a9a66a3bac2.jpg
How do you like the scout light?
How do you like the scout light?
I like the scout, but it's a little crowded on an 11.5, especially with the switch. I may just stick the clicky tailcap on it. It was mounted on a 14.5 ELW midlength upper before, with a KMR 13. That set up offered a little more room to work with.
They were, yes.
They made these in FSB too???? Fudge me. I did a lot of port size testing on an 11.5 using the insertable gas ports. I can't stand shooting suppressed SBRs with "standard" ports. It's just painful.
Yeah I'll be getting one too next time. Funds didn't line up first go round.
Plus I want stuff more after it sells out.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
*Patiently waiting for shipping email and in the mean time trying to decide which adjustable GB to go with*
:)
Just so you know. The barrel was meant to be run without an adjustable gas block.
*Patiently waiting for shipping email and in the mean time trying to decide which adjustable GB to go with*
:)
*Patiently waiting for shipping email and in the mean time trying to decide which adjustable GB to go with*
:) any word on shipping yet?
Eurodriver
02-12-16, 16:55
Gunz,
Would you agree that .70 on an 11.5 is still conservative port size? I have had a lot of experience with chopping down car barrels with .0625 ports for suppressed builds in the 10.5-11" lengths that just flat run with a can, and still cycle and run 5.56 ammo with an H2 and some with H3 setups. I agree with the intended use that you mentioned for a specific client and why you went with a .070 gas port. Not arguing that.. But I am curious if you had run even smaller ports on 11.5 and if you found any major cons in your testing doing so?
I will be ordering one of your 11.5s to give it a go. Is it just an email sent out when in stock or am I missing something on the website?
Came in here to post this.
I've cut down 16" Carbine barrels to 10.3" with 0.063" gas ports and with the LMT E carrier it still functioned. I can't remember his name, but a guy on here had managed to score a 0.058" gas port and even got that to work with an LMT carrier.
I agree to a point on the consensus of that without those actual numbers necessarily.
any word on shipping yet?
Nope no word. I am sure they are running around with their hair on fire post shot show.
Jan and Feb are a terrible time to try to get ahold of manufactures. I have emails out to Krebs, Kalashnikov USA, I finally got a call back from CZ USA. It's understandable and kind of expected. Its a great and busy time to be a manufacturer.
Nope no word. I am sure they are running around with their hair on fire post shot show.
Jan and Feb are a terrible time to try to get ahold of manufactures. I have emails out to Krebs, Kalashnikov USA, I finally got a call back from CZ USA. It's understandable and kind of expected. Its a great and busy time to be a manufacturer.
That's understandable. Especially with smaller companies.
Barrels are being X-rayed and inspected now. We are very busy due to the Atlanta PD contract and a medical emergency that has cropped up.
any word on shipping yet?
No worries, I think we all knew what we were getting into. Large contracts and emergencies take precedence.
Reading through this post it seems some of you guys don't understand that bore diameter can drive pressure up or down just like port size. You guys comparing X and Y barrel port sizes are just freewheeling. Airguage a bunch of barrels and then get back to me on comparing port sizes.
So... I get that this barrel wasn't meant to be run with a gas block, so why is OP doing so, at what point does the special sized gas port mean anything if you're just going to put an adjustable block on it? In what way is this "special" barrel noteworthy once the SLR block is in place?
And... Intentionally running an A5H4? That's going to seat into battery really well. But is more recirocating mass. This goes against every single competition modification I can think of. Isn't the goal to keep weight for reliability, but to remove it for soft operation? Or is this just preference of the slower cyclic rate?
Also... This Tubbs Spring that's supposed to be strong near lock and weaker at compressed open?... I'd LOVE to see a diagram of how they managed that! Because while I do think there is room for progressive rate springs in certain applications; that's not how they work. I can think of no spring design that looses rate as it compresses. Multiple stage springs always have their lowest rate "up first" on compression.
BufordTJustice
02-14-16, 09:17
Reading through this post it seems some of you guys don't understand that bore diameter can drive pressure up or down just like port size. You guys comparing X and Y barrel port sizes are just freewheeling. Airguage a bunch of barrels and then get back to me on comparing port sizes.
So... I get that this barrel wasn't meant to be run with a gas block, so why is OP doing so, at what point does the special sized gas port mean anything if you're just going to put an adjustable block on it? In what way is this "special" barrel noteworthy once the SLR block is in place?
And... Intentionally running an A5H4? That's going to seat into battery really well. But is more recirocating mass. This goes against every single competition modification I can think of. Isn't the goal to keep weight for reliability, but to remove it for soft operation? Or is this just preference of the slower cyclic rate?
Also... This Tubbs Spring that's supposed to be strong near lock and weaker at compressed open?... I'd LOVE to see a diagram of how they managed that! Because while I do think there is room for progressive rate springs in certain applications; that's not how they work. I can think of no spring design that looses rate as it compresses. Multiple stage springs always have their lowest rate "up first" on compression.
Noodles, CTFD. After you're done doing that, you need to re-read my post as it answers many of your questions already.
I don't need to air gauge a barrel to know that reducing port diameter reduces gas drive, as my bore diameter remains constant. And, please, give me numbers on how a few ten thousandths of variation between the bore diameter of two different barrels from the same manufacture would be enough to even transition between an H and H2 buffer.
I'm running the barrel with a gas block because I wanted to further restrict gas drive to the bare minimum when unsuppressed using my specific ammo. The already reduced gas port delays and slows the growth of gas port erosion.
I've posted on my use of the A5H4 coupled with the LMT e-carrier and the Tubbs AR10 spring before this thread. There seems to be a synergy in overall gun movement, recoil, reliability, and breadth of operation. I run everything from steel cased crap, PMC bronze, to full house NATO and even independence with 100% function and very little difference between the hot ammo and weak stuff.
The Tubbs spring doesn't defy Newtonian physics. It has more compressive force fully out of battery than fully in battery. But the difference between L1 and L2 is much lower than any other spring I've ever used. I'll have to re measure against my green spring. However, the first time I measured the two, the green was weaker in battery and stronger fully out. That made the green worse for gas drive and lock back, as all the gas drive is provided for each stroke within roughly the first 3/4" of travel, while the gas key is still telescoped over the gas tube. Slow that (and, obviously, extraction) and you get noticeable less gas in the face.
That's what I'm testing. My Saker gets out of jail any day now.
Ok... Slow down there Tex... Bore diameter and barrel cut type (button, cut, HF, plus poly, ratchet etc) absolutely changes X to Y gas port size. Saying "CRANE SPEC at XYZ" means nothing unless the entire barrel from chamber to muzzle is done the exact same way. You weren't, but other people in this thread were comparing bore sizes to other barrels - it doesn't work like that. .070 gas port between two barrels means very little. It's close, and it'll get you there, but I have seen DD barrels (tight hammer forged bore) work at smaller port sizes (.042 suppressed) than a button rifled stainless same everything. else. This is another reason people don't understand the DD are overgassed issue, by the port size alone they aren't "that" bad.
Ok, the running an adjustable block means the sionics barrel in the title really has no bearing on this thread for you at all. Seems weird to me, as a .1" gas port would give you the same effect, but ok. A good callout for Sionics, and you're buying from a guy that runs this forum, no issue, just clarifying.
"Seems to be a synergy" could definitely be be legit. Or, it could be a small sample of one subjective anecdotal report that goes against everything in production for the AR platform by people who have the tools to scientifically test this. I guess, I can't put as much confidence in one guy's feel of lots of mass and lots of spring pressure equals great, over the much more logical result that a lower reciprocating mass is going to be easier on the shooter. That's what everyone shooting competition has given for multiple examples. No mfg is shipping any gun with this high a reciprocating mass, not BCM who iirc ships with an A5H0 (right?), not KAC, or Colt, or anyone else I can think of. I'm not saying you're wrong, just that unless you have a highspeed camera and perhaps a full auto with a really good shot timer to determine peak bolt velocity and cyclic rate respectively that this is all going off one person's calibrated shoulder. - You definitely could be on to something everyone else has missed. Personally, I thought my A5H4 gun was slower, but also moved my scope too much along shots. I see there is room for preference here of course.
Ok, so the Tubbs spring is not stronger in battery and weaker out of battery (because I'm fairly certain it can not be, but I would love someone to prove me wrong)? Maybe I read that first post incorrectly then.
It's stronger at the beginning of its stroke (in battery) than the SprinCo GREEN spring, but weaker at the end of its stroke (fully out of battery).
That is... My gut is that you are mistaken or perhaps that's a poorly worded sentence. So, while the Tubbs may be progressive rate, it almost certainly does not work the way you wrote that it does. Similarly I'm extremely confused as to why anyone would care what the spring L values are. The operating length of the progressive sections in no explicit way determine its rate. There are spring compression tests for that. There are a lot of other factors that determine rate, mainly material, treatment, diameter, coil winding process, stress relief, etc. I'm not sure but are we comparing the operating lengths of a springco round coil to the lengths on a tubs flat coil? Because that's a billion times worse than comparing port sizes between different barrels (which does at least get you close). Or am I just misunderstanding all of this (entirely possible)?
BufordTJustice
02-14-16, 18:06
Ok... Slow down there Tex... Bore diameter and barrel cut type (button, cut, HF, plus poly, ratchet etc) absolutely changes X to Y gas port size. Saying "CRANE SPEC at XYZ" means nothing unless the entire barrel from chamber to muzzle is done the exact same way. You weren't, but other people in this thread were comparing bore sizes to other barrels - it doesn't work like that. .070 gas port between two barrels means very little. It's close, and it'll get you there, but I have seen DD barrels (tight hammer forged bore) work at smaller port sizes (.042 suppressed) than a button rifled stainless same everything. else. This is another reason people don't understand the DD are overgassed issue, by the port size alone they aren't "that" bad.
Ok, the running an adjustable block means the sionics barrel in the title really has no bearing on this thread for you at all. Seems weird to me, as a .1" gas port would give you the same effect, but ok. A good callout for Sionics, and you're buying from a guy that runs this forum, no issue, just clarifying.
"Seems to be a synergy" could definitely be be legit. Or, it could be a small sample of one subjective anecdotal report that goes against everything in production for the AR platform by people who have the tools to scientifically test this. I guess, I can't put as much confidence in one guy's feel of lots of mass and lots of spring pressure equals great, over the much more logical result that a lower reciprocating mass is going to be easier on the shooter. That's what everyone shooting competition has given for multiple examples. No mfg is shipping any gun with this high a reciprocating mass, not BCM who iirc ships with an A5H0 (right?), not KAC, or Colt, or anyone else I can think of. I'm not saying you're wrong, just that unless you have a highspeed camera and perhaps a full auto with a really good shot timer to determine peak bolt velocity and cyclic rate respectively that this is all going off one person's calibrated shoulder. - You definitely could be on to something everyone else has missed. Personally, I thought my A5H4 gun was slower, but also moved my scope too much along shots. I see there is room for preference here of course.
Ok, so the Tubbs spring is not stronger in battery and weaker out of battery (because I'm fairly certain it can not be, but I would love someone to prove me wrong)? Maybe I read that first post incorrectly then.
That is... My gut is that you are mistaken or perhaps that's a poorly worded sentence. So, while the Tubbs may be progressive rate, it almost certainly does not work the way you wrote that it does. Similarly I'm extremely confused as to why anyone would care what the spring L values are. The operating length of the progressive sections in no explicit way determine its rate. There are spring compression tests for that. There are a lot of other factors that determine rate, mainly material, treatment, diameter, coil winding process, stress relief, etc. I'm not sure but are we comparing the operating lengths of a springco round coil to the lengths on a tubs flat coil? Because that's a billion times worse than comparing port sizes between different barrels (which does at least get you close). Or am I just misunderstanding all of this (entirely possible)?
I've posted extensively on all of these topics prior to this thread. I have experience on over a dozen different guns that are running this A5H4/LMT e-carrier concept.
Search function, Noodles.
Lastly, if you're going to fail to read my posts and then come into my thread and assume some type of contrarian stance because: contrary, you can excuse yourself now.
You're not adding anything to the thread. You obviously have ZERO EXPERIENCE with the relevant setup being discussed, and you've made some pretty ignorant assumptions about my ability to select a barrel gas port and pair it with an adjustable gas block. You've also insinuated that I fail to understand how a spring functions.
In the event that you are "just misunderstanding all of this" (so it seems), you need to avail yourself of the search function as I've revealed no new information in ANY post within this thread that I haven't already posted extensively about before (ON THIS FORUM).
Our dialog in this thread is over.
I do not "run this website". I am a moderator just like several others who also happens to be in the industry.
You also realize that the initial barrel run was done at the request of a local SWAT team for suppressed use in which they indicated they would issue and use said SBR's suppressed all the time and that testing was done, right?
Ok... Slow down there Tex... Bore diameter and barrel cut type (button, cut, HF, plus poly, ratchet etc) absolutely changes X to Y gas port size. Saying "CRANE SPEC at XYZ" means nothing unless the entire barrel from chamber to muzzle is done the exact same way. You weren't, but other people in this thread were comparing bore sizes to other barrels - it doesn't work like that. .070 gas port between two barrels means very little. It's close, and it'll get you there, but I have seen DD barrels (tight hammer forged bore) work at smaller port sizes (.042 suppressed) than a button rifled stainless same everything. else. This is another reason people don't understand the DD are overgassed issue, by the port size alone they aren't "that" bad.
Ok, the running an adjustable block means the sionics barrel in the title really has no bearing on this thread for you at all. Seems weird to me, as a .1" gas port would give you the same effect, but ok. A good callout for Sionics, and you're buying from a guy that runs this forum, no issue, just clarifying.
"Seems to be a synergy" could definitely be be legit. Or, it could be a small sample of one subjective anecdotal report that goes against everything in production for the AR platform by people who have the tools to scientifically test this. I guess, I can't put as much confidence in one guy's feel of lots of mass and lots of spring pressure equals great, over the much more logical result that a lower reciprocating mass is going to be easier on the shooter. That's what everyone shooting competition has given for multiple examples. No mfg is shipping any gun with this high a reciprocating mass, not BCM who iirc ships with an A5H0 (right?), not KAC, or Colt, or anyone else I can think of. I'm not saying you're wrong, just that unless you have a highspeed camera and perhaps a full auto with a really good shot timer to determine peak bolt velocity and cyclic rate respectively that this is all going off one person's calibrated shoulder. - You definitely could be on to something everyone else has missed. Personally, I thought my A5H4 gun was slower, but also moved my scope too much along shots. I see there is room for preference here of course.
Ok, so the Tubbs spring is not stronger in battery and weaker out of battery (because I'm fairly certain it can not be, but I would love someone to prove me wrong)? Maybe I read that first post incorrectly then.
That is... My gut is that you are mistaken or perhaps that's a poorly worded sentence. So, while the Tubbs may be progressive rate, it almost certainly does not work the way you wrote that it does. Similarly I'm extremely confused as to why anyone would care what the spring L values are. The operating length of the progressive sections in no explicit way determine its rate. There are spring compression tests for that. There are a lot of other factors that determine rate, mainly material, treatment, diameter, coil winding process, stress relief, etc. I'm not sure but are we comparing the operating lengths of a springco round coil to the lengths on a tubs flat coil? Because that's a billion times worse than comparing port sizes between different barrels (which does at least get you close). Or am I just misunderstanding all of this (entirely possible)?
titsonritz
02-14-16, 18:24
We are very busy due to the Atlanta PD contract and a medical emergency that has cropped up.
Hope everything turned out OK there.
At no point was I attacking you Buford, I'm sorry you feel so defensive. I'm just curious because very little of your conclusions make sense to me - and I have done highspeed video testing of AR buffer systems (where do you think my a art came from? I took that using a 1,000,000fps camera). I have run the A5 for years. I too have a shoulder. I don't have your specific setup, but I'm not understanding how every AR mfg in the world hasn't come to the conclusions and created SKUs with the setup you have if the results are quantifiably better. Rather, the market has moved in the opposite direction. You very possibly could be using a setup that defies almost all common knowledge and the market will be shifting towards.
IG, it's soley semantics to argue your role here. Compared to most forums where mods only exist to delete spam, it's not unfair to say you and others run this site. I do understand why this special barrel was created - did you read where I wrote that since its an adjustable gas block that the specialness of this barrel is no longer relevant? Am I wrong about that? Is this barrel special in another way? Because based on the title of this thread it seems relevant to the conversation, but I can't see how in effect. I don't care about your barrel, just wasn't understanding why it's even called out in this application as any barrel should get the same result.
SeriousStudent
02-14-16, 23:58
Noodles: The last time I checked, you are not on the roster as a mod, staff or senior staff member. So you do not have knowledge of the inner workings of this website, and instructing IG on his role here is not something you are qualified to do.
It would be best if you did not post in this thread again. That's me being polite, and I'd encourage you to think of it that way.
Because I'm a really polite guy.
SeriousStudent
02-14-16, 23:59
Hope everything turned out OK there.
Same here, I hope things are resolved quickly, and everyone has a speedy return to health.
Barrels are in X-Ray/MPI and will be shipping soon. If you ordered a barrel, it will get delivered as advertised.
For those who wish to debate on whether or not it gas port size makes a difference (regardless of barrel profile), lets take a look at an old vid from a respected member here. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7i-HZmDPwu8
Barrels are in X-Ray/MPI and will be shipping soon. If you ordered a barrel, it will get delivered as advertised.
For those who wish to debate on whether or not it gas port size makes a difference (regardless of barrel profile), lets take a look at an old vid from a respected member here. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7i-HZmDPwu8
I miss that guy! Does anyone know how he's doing?
BufordTJustice
02-16-16, 07:18
I miss that guy! Does anyone know how he's doing?
I think i saw pictures of Paul at shot this year.
I met Paul a couple years ago, and he is a solid dude for sure.
Paul was at SHOT this year and I got to hang out with him for a little while. Solid dude and an even better shooter.
Voodoochild
02-16-16, 13:28
Steve-O or IG any chance of making these barrels again?
Yes, it is most likely going to happen very soon.
Steve-O or IG any chance of making these barrels again?
Got shipping notification the other day. Should be here Wednesday. ;)
Looks like they're available for pre-order, but no add-to-cart button?
They're not available for order now
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Looks like they're available for pre-order, but no add-to-cart button?
We're sold out for now. Not gonna take an order for anything I cant deliver.
We're sold out for now. Not gonna take an order for anything I cant deliver.
Any idea when NP3 BCGs (already ordered) will ship?
Thanks
Did all the pre-ordered barrels get shipped?
Any idea when NP3 BCGs (already ordered) will ship?
Thanks
Just sent another batch of 250 or so components to Robar. Once these come back, more will be test fired and shipped. Were upping our quantities each month due to growing demand. Just got caught a little off guard the past month after taking on more dealers.
Did all the pre-ordered barrels get shipped?
Our tech who operates the laser couldnt come this week. The barrels are inspected, dimpled and polished. As soon as she comes in Monday or Tuesday, the first batch will go out the door. I appreciate everyones patience.
Just sent another batch of 250 or so components to Robar. Once these come back, more will be test fired and shipped. Were upping our quantities each month due to growing demand. Just got caught a little off guard the past month after taking on more dealers.
Sweet! Thank you for taking the time to reply.
Got my barrel in on Wednesday and wasted no time putting it together. Took it to the range Thursday to sight in and ran around 60 rounds through it with no issue, with can on and off. Currently running a Sandman S while my IA Grunt mini is pending. Ran it on a pistol lower with a carbine buffer and a registered SBR lower with Troy tomahawk stock. No issues on either lower.38411
Steve-O, no worries and thank you for taking the time to reply. Looking forward to getting the barrel!
BufordTJustice
04-22-16, 21:13
Printing just under 3" @ 100 yards with Federal American Eagle 5.56 NATO 55gr using mag monopod and a 2 moa aimpoint knock off from primary arms. Wasn't my best shooting. Kinda rushed, in fact.
Super soft shooter.
Went on to hit steel swinger silhouettes at 150, 200, and 250 yards on demand. I shot a 25 round string at slightly faster than one shot per second and didn't drop a single shot.
Very pleased. VERY.
SeriousStudent
04-22-16, 23:25
I got my barrel this week, and will be assembling the upper this weekend. Still debating what can to match with it, I'm leaning toward a Griffin Recce 5 Mod 3.
BufordTJustice
04-22-16, 23:45
I got my barrel this week, and will be assembling the upper this weekend. Still debating what can to match with it, I'm leaning toward a Griffin Recce 5 Mod 3.
In mod 3 trim that's a very attractive can for a very attractive price.
Printing just under 3" @ 100 yards with Federal American Eagle 5.56 NATO 55gr using mag monopod and a 2 moa aimpoint knock off from primary arms. Wasn't my best shooting. Kinda rushed, in fact.
Super soft shooter.
Went on to hit steel swinger silhouettes at 150, 200, and 250 yards on demand. I shot a 25 round string at slightly faster than one shot per second and didn't drop a single shot.
Very pleased. VERY.
Glad to get some good feedback, Peoria PD is reporting stellar accuracy out of these barrels, curious to see what you get with more time between shots.
On another note, I saved a few of these out of the recent batch for complete uppers and factory SBRs, Any interest?
If you build it, they will come ;).
Got mine last week too. Will be assembling soon hopefully.
I got my barrel this week, and will be assembling the upper this weekend. Still debating what can to match with it, I'm leaning toward a Griffin Recce 5 Mod 3.
I'm sincerely curious as to why you're choose the Recce 5 vs the M4SD-II or M4SD-K.
Would the more secure attachment of the SD-QD mount be more of a benefit VS the precision/repeatability of a taper mount on an SBR?
Genuinely Interested in your thoughts.
Thanks
Harold
I want to try one of these barrels but jeez I need another AR like a fish needs a bicycle. I think with the massive increase in popularity of Suppressors and so many of us running 100% can on, this innovative move by Will and the guys at Sionics is spot on.
PB
BufordTJustice
04-23-16, 09:54
I want to try one of these barrels but jeez I need another AR like a fish needs a bicycle. I think with the massive increase in popularity of Suppressors and so many of us running 100% can on, this innovative move by Will and the guys at Sionics is spot on.
PB
Once i get my Saker 556, this barrel will be 100% canned. It will share my Saker 762 until then. The continuous profile is also excellent. The feed ramps on mine were hand polished... and not in a hurry, either.
It's just a high quality barrel, for a great price, with a feature that even those running 100% unsuppressed can benefit from.
Just missed this last batch. I was planning to get a DD 10.3" for a dedicated suppressed 5.56. Just picked up a Sandman-S. How do these compare to the BCM 11.5? I assume the port on the BCM is larger than needed for suppressed use.
SeriousStudent
04-24-16, 20:34
I'm sincerely curious as to why you're choose the Recce 5 vs the M4SD-II or M4SD-K.
Would the more secure attachment of the SD-QD mount be more of a benefit VS the precision/repeatability of a taper mount on an SBR?
Genuinely Interested in your thoughts.
Thanks
Harold
Because it was in stock a couple of miles from my house, and I got a stupid deal on the last one he had. :)
I am definitely looking at a M4SD-II as well. I have six in jail right now, and hopefully four of them get stamps next month. So many cans, so little time.....
Just missed this last batch. I was planning to get a DD 10.3" for a dedicated suppressed 5.56. Just picked up a Sandman-S. How do these compare to the BCM 11.5? I assume the port on the BCM is larger than needed for suppressed use.
DD barrels tend to be pretty heavily gassed. If you're looking for a dedicated suppressed barrel, it's probably not your best choice.
Because it was in stock a couple of miles from my house, and I got a stupid deal on the last one he had. :)
I am definitely looking at a M4SD-II as well. I have six in jail right now, and hopefully four of them get stamps next month. So many cans, so little time.....
That makes sense, thanks! :-)
What low profile gas block do you guys recommend to run with this barrel. Pre dimple alignment ok with the BCM low pro block?
Planning to run either a URX 3.1 10.75, BCM KMR 10", or SLR 10.75". Want it close to my Sandman-S.
We use a standard BRDE dimpling jig, so you will have no issues with the BCM block.
What low profile gas block do you guys recommend to run with this barrel. Pre dimple alignment ok with the BCM low pro block?
Planning to run either a URX 3.1 10.75, BCM KMR 10", or SLR 10.75". Want it close to my Sandman-S.
BufordTJustice
04-28-16, 23:25
http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160429/1cc274b2f06a1b4b34e896cbe5f14ddb.jpg
She's done. Range today (Friday).
Looks awesome! I was able to call and get one. Just shipped out. They still have one listed on the site.
I am going to go with the BCM KMR as well. Just need my stamp for my Sandman-S to come back.
Jwknutson17
04-29-16, 14:02
Nice rig BufordT
I picked up one of these barrels as soon as I got the email a few weeks ago it was back in stock. No plans for another build at the moment, but at least I got the barrel in hand when the time comes. Almost shot out my MK18 barrel now 15K + rounds on it with heavy daily fire schedule, and plenty of mag dumps on it) as it shoots about a 4 inch group now at 50 yards.. and think this might be a perfect replacement.
Yeah I dunno what to do with mine either. Might just swap it in my BCM BFH 11.5 upper and see which I like better.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yeah I dunno what to do with mine either. Might just swap it in my BCM BFH 11.5 upper and see which I like better.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Please do share your thoughts/feedbacks if you gone that route. Thanks.
A handful of these barrels are available again...
My upper is now built up with this barrel. The rest of the upper is vltor MUR-1S, BCM KMR-A 10" with Ti barrel nut, Dead Air Flash hider, BCM Mod 4 gunfighter handle, BCM gas block and tube, Bootleg Inc. Adjustable gas carrier, Chrome Colt Bolt. Sweet upper so far. Will need to wait for my stamp the get this to the range. Should be approved any day now.
Pappabear just got one of these barrels. He brought it over for assembly, and MAN!... These are nice. The Chamber, extension, and Chrome lining are beautiful. I didn't get pics, but I'll gather some pics/data etc later.
We shot the barrel today, and it runs perfectly without the can. It's exactly at .071+/-, in my opinion, where a standard barrel should be gassed. Just gorgeous, positive, rifle like extraction and ejection. I'm going to have a hard time running a can on this barrel when I get one. My insertable gas port 11.5, at .063, will choke up without the can, but runs perfect with the can. So the Sionics barrel, with good ammo, is perfectly reliable un-suppressed.
I want to give a shout out to RogTac for a great deal on a Vltor KM10 monolithic upper. Price was great and shipping fast. It made for a solid rig. We are going to do some more accuracy testing and chrono data just for grins in the coming weeks. It lobbed the brass at 3:30 which is very nice.
PB
Jwknutson17
11-06-16, 14:51
Pappabear just got one of these barrels. He brought it over for assembly, and MAN!... These are nice. The Chamber, extension, and Chrome lining are beautiful. I didn't get pics, but I'll gather some pics/data etc later.
We shot the barrel today, and it runs perfectly without the can. It's exactly at .071+/-, in my opinion, where a standard barrel should be gassed. Just gorgeous, positive, rifle like extraction and ejection. I'm going to have a hard time running a can on this barrel when I get one. My insertable gas port 11.5, at .063, will choke up without the can, but runs perfect with the can. So the Sionics barrel, with good ammo, is perfectly reliable un-suppressed.
My thoughts exactly on the gas port. I run suppressed only 11.X barrels in the .0625 range. This .071 without a can is ideal in my book. Glad to hear it ran well. I have had similar results and no complaints. Still have another new build on this barrel I have yet to take out, but the other one I have run, is just awesome.
Jwknutson17
11-06-16, 14:52
I want to give a shout out to RogTac for a great deal on a Vltor KM10 monolithic upper. Price was great and shipping fast. It made for a solid rig. We are going to do some more accuracy testing and chrono data just for grins in the coming weeks. It lobbed the brass at 3:30 which is very nice.
PB
Any accuracy report? I would assume with some of your guys hand loads it should be a really good shooter.
.0625"ish with a can, may work well depending on your combination of parts. Without a can, you could possibly run a less than .071" port, again it depends on your combination. I run a lot of 11.5" 5.56 carbine gas ARs with a .067" port without a can, and those run well.
If their RGP barrel is. 071ish what's their regular 11.5 barrel ported at? I have one but no pin gages yet.
Any accuracy report? I would assume with some of your guys hand loads it should be a really good shooter.
We didn't have the best optics set up to do serious accuracy tests, but we got 1.5 MOA with what we DID have. We were mostly on a functional test shoot for the first run.
Without a can, you could possibly run a less than .071" port, again it depends on your combination. I run a lot of 11.5" 5.56 carbine gas ARs with a .067" port without a can, and those run well.
For sure. .071 is the Crane spec for a 10.5 or 10.3, I believe. 11.5 leaves a bit more dwell to make .071 just right. How are you getting .067" 11.5 barrels? Cut downs? My challenge is getting a reasonably gassed 10.5-11.5 with an FSB. Sionics will get me the 11.5 with an FSB, but I'd love a .067" +/- too.
.0625"ish with a can, may work well depending on your combination of parts. Without a can, you could possibly run a less than .071" port, again it depends on your combination. I run a lot of 11.5" 5.56 carbine gas ARs with a .067" port without a can, and those run well.
If I recall, they tested a slightly smaller port size for the RGP, but ended up opening it up a bit in order to be sure it ran unsuppressed without any problems.
Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
We didn't have the best optics set up to do serious accuracy tests, but we got 1.5 MOA with what we DID have. We were mostly on a functional test shoot for the first run.
For sure. .071 is the Crane spec for a 10.5 or 10.3, I believe. 11.5 leaves a bit more dwell to make .071 just right. How are you getting .067" 11.5 barrels? Cut downs? My challenge is getting a reasonably gassed 10.5-11.5 with an FSB. Sionics will get me the 11.5 with an FSB, but I'd love a .067" +/- too.
Colt cut downs mostly, but KAC does their homework too.
Colt cut downs mostly, but KAC does their homework too.
That's good to know. My 11.5 SR16 barrel shoots very nicely when suppressed.
Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
KAC does a good job on this. They run without a can very well, with a can they can run great with commercial buffer mass additions.
BufordTJustice
11-06-16, 18:50
Any accuracy report? I would assume with some of your guys hand loads it should be a really good shooter.
No lie, i was hitting 70% on IPSC steel swingers at a verified 500 with federal brown box xm193 using the Sionics 11.5" and my Saker 762 with a primary arms 2moa micro dot using sand bags.
I was stacking rounds into one hole at 50 with the can.
Just can't ask for more than that.
The barrels are so nice theses days. Its pretty impressive.
PB
BufordTJustice
11-07-16, 09:47
The barrels are so nice theses days. Its pretty impressive.
PB
Truly, these are the good ole days. Also, POI/POA shift at 50 is less than an inch in the vertical plane only between can-on and can-off.
Just for reference, I recently had the opportunity to measure a Noveske 12.5 N4 barrel and a BCM 11.5.
The Noveske measured 0.071. Smaller than I expected.
The BCM 11.5 was 0.073.
68whiskeyncoke
11-07-16, 10:00
Finally picked up one of them, can't wait for the build!
I did a rough sight in at the local indoor range with mine. Definitely is a quality barrel. Need to get some quality ammo and head to the outdoor range. I have a Larue MBT trigger on this SBR so it should also be capable of some tight groups.
Ejection pattern and extraction was great. Was using weaker range ammo and had a couple rounds fail to pickup as its a new build and likely didn't cycle the bolt far enough (A5 tube and A5H3 buffer, BootlegInc adjustable carrier). Will get some M855 for my outdoor trip. This will have my Sandman-S on it 99.9% of the time when it gets approved.
Furbyballer
11-07-16, 15:25
Mine just shipped. I should have it by Friday and I plan to run it hard immediately this weekend.
Just for reference, I recently had the opportunity to measure a Noveske 12.5 N4 barrel and a BCM 11.5.
The Noveske measured 0.071. Smaller than I expected.
The BCM 11.5 was 0.073.
I have an 11.5 OLD Noveske barrel that is silky smooth. It was the softest shooting SBR gun I owned prior to my Sionics. I always wondered what the specs were on that barrel because, oh man ....it's nice. I did not need another SBR, but I had to try these barrels. SIONICS is ahead of the curve on this technology in the age of Russion / trash Ammo with whale blow holes for ports.
PB
I have an 11.5 OLD Noveske barrel that is silky smooth. It was the softest shooting SBR gun I owned prior to my Sionics. I always wondered what the specs were on that barrel because, oh man ....it's nice. I did not need another SBR, but I had to try these barrels. SIONICS is ahead of the curve on this technology in the age of Russion / trash Ammo with whale blow holes for ports.
PB
I was actually surprised on the reasonable port size of the 12.5 N4. These days, it seems like a lot of people feel like the Noveske barrels are a tad overgassed for extra reliability.
Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
Maybe we can get an M4C batch run. 75% off!!!
Maybe we can get an M4C batch run. 75% off!!!
I'd buy one.
I'd really like a lightweight version too.
My 11.5 bcm elw is going to spoil me.
jerrysimons
11-08-16, 01:24
I was actually surprised on the reasonable port size of the 12.5 N4. These days, it seems like a lot of people feel like the Noveske barrels are a tad overgassed for extra reliability.
Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
.071" for a 12.5" carbine. That is the cran spec for 556 out of a 10.X" barrel, go up to about .073" if you want to use .223 unsuppressed out of 10.X" carbine barrel. That Noveske is better than some but is still about two steps bigger than it could be. The Sionics RGP 11.5" is .071" and could go one step lower still. .065" or even .063" would be more like it for a 12.5".
My Noveske Recon 16" mid barrel will wobble a .082" drill bit in the GP, it will not fit a .086". Calipers say it's about .083" wide. Sionics 16" mid is right on at about .076" for reference (keeping in mind the mid gas port is not directly comparable to carbine location on the shorter barrels, since pressure is lower further down the barrel).
Jwknutson17
11-08-16, 06:50
.071" for a 12.5" carbine. That is the cran spec for 556 out of a 10.X" barrel, go up to about .073" if you want to use .223 unsuppressed out of 10.X" carbine barrel. That Noveske is better than some but is still about two steps bigger than it could be. The Sionics RGP 11.5" is .071" and could go one step lower still. .065" or even .063" would be more like it for a 12.5".
My Noveske Recon 16" mid barrel will wobble a .082" drill bit in the GP, it will not fit a .086". Calipers say it's about .083" wide. Sionics 16" mid is right on at about .076" for reference (keeping in mind the mid gas port is not directly comparable to carbine location on the shorter barrels, since pressure is lower further down the barrel).
I agree it ideally should be smaller. All of my chop down 10.x-11.x SBR barrels started with carbine barrels with a .0625 ish port. This is where I would have liked to seen this barrel. Esecally if they do a 12.5, If it's .07 anything, I would surely pass.
It's nice to see the intolerance of needlessly over gassed barrels spreading. :cool:
It's nice to see the intolerance of needlessly over gassed barrels spreading. :cool:
Yup, it's small gas port envy...
Yes, it is when it's applied appropriately.
We didn't port this for suppressed use only. The original requesting agency wanted a "smaller" port for suppressed use. We defaulted and still wanted it to work without a suppressor.
I agree it ideally should be smaller. All of my chop down 10.x-11.x SBR barrels started with carbine barrels with a .0625 ish port. This is where I would have liked to seen this barrel. Esecally if they do a 12.5, If it's .07 anything, I would surely pass.
Would it still be an advantage to use an adjustable GB with the reduced gas port of this barrel? I'm currently waiting for stamps to build a suppressed 11.5 and looking at barrels.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Rayrevolver
11-08-16, 20:19
I'd buy one.
I'd really like a lightweight version too.
My 11.5 bcm elw is going to spoil me.
A little off topic, but weight was another reason I rolled the dice on the 11.5 mid. Its 17oz and 0.625" at the gas block. And yeah, the original BCM 16 ELW kicked off the super light craze for me.
BufordTJustice
11-09-16, 12:44
Would it still be an advantage to use an adjustable GB with the reduced gas port of this barrel? I'm currently waiting for stamps to build a suppressed 11.5 and looking at barrels.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I use one, but I'm also running an LMT e-carrier.
I use one, but I'm also running an LMT e-carrier.
I will be running the E carrier as well.
It will mostly be suppressed but want it to fiction non suppressed as well.
Then add the A5 and the weight decision on top of that.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I will be running the E carrier as well.
It will mostly be suppressed but want it to fiction non suppressed as well.
Then add the A5 and the weight decision on top of that.
There is no need for an adjustable in the configuration you are planning to run. The set up will run fine with or without the can assuming you run good ammo.
I had this barrel and currently have a similarly ported colt with a non adjustable block (fsb).
It's runs both suppressed and unsuppressed. No face gas suppressed (saker 762) and unsuppressed cycles all the ammo I've tried although it does not lock back on PMC bronze.
ETA also running wth a5h4 and it functions with and without the lmt e-carrier
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Nice. This barrel seems to be the "do all" barrel to get in 11.5. I'm ordering and FSB variant, and it will become my house gun.
How satisfied would users here be in a base barrel porting that may not allow the A5H4 mass using 5.56 ammo without a can, but may have that option to increase reciprocating mass to that A5H4 with a can if needed?
How satisfied would users here be in a base barrel porting that may not allow the A5H4 mass using 5.56 ammo without a can, but may have that option to increase reciprocating mass to that A5H4 with a can if needed?
How so? Or am I missing the obvious?
A base port 11.5" AR that may only allow function with an A5H2 or A5H3 with 5.56 pressure ammunition without a can, but not the A5H4. That base porting can allow higher available buffer masses with a possible can/ammo choices. That base porting has the ability to run well with lower mass options with lower pressure ammunition without a can. Porting for this can have 5 buffer mass options to make it possible to optimize function for a particular use using COTS buffers.
If it starts out ported for good A5H4 function without a can, how do you keep the cycle in an appropriate range for the range of options available?
If it starts out ported for good A5H4 function without a can, how do you keep the cycle in an appropriate range for the range of options available?
I don't understand why one would want to start of with a gun that requires/uses the H4 at all? In my experience, the H4 helps reduce bolt speed in standard ported barrels with cans, OR over gassed barrels in general.
I don't understand why one would want to start of with a gun that requires/uses the H4 at all? In my experience, the H4 helps reduce bolt speed in standard ported barrels with cans, OR over gassed barrels in general.
Mark, do you think it's best to try and optimize the system (be it suppressed or not) to run on a regular H2 or A5H2 for that matter?
Mark, do you think it's best to try and optimize the system (be it suppressed or not) to run on a regular H2 or A5H2 for that matter?
Absolutely. I think I run an H3 in my 10.5 because it has a port of .080"... which is a little rich.. even with no can. With H2, you're hitting it right down the middle of the fairway and can tune up or down if you need to.. because of a can or something.
Absolutely. I think I run an H3 in my 10.5 because it has a port of .080"... which is a little rich.. even with no can. With H2, you're hitting it right down the middle of the fairway and can tune up or down if you need to.. because of a can or something.
Gotcha. Makes sense.
Of the 3 I'm finishing one is a factory mk18 with a. 60 BRT port insert, 11.5 sionics with a sentry 7, and a bcm elw with a sentry 7. They'll all be ran with a5h2s.
jerrysimons
11-11-16, 10:31
A base port 11.5" AR that may only allow function with an A5H2 or A5H3 with 5.56 pressure ammunition without a can, but not the A5H4. That base porting can allow higher available buffer masses with a possible can/ammo choices. That base porting has the ability to run well with lower mass options with lower pressure ammunition without a can. Porting for this can have 5 buffer mass options to make it possible to optimize function for a particular use using COTS buffers.
If it starts out ported for good A5H4 function without a can, how do you keep the cycle in an appropriate range for the range of options available?
Yes, this seems to be the full circle many have made here. First it was run the heaviest buffer, then it was adjustable gas with the heavist buffer, and finally settling in on port for middle of the road buffer and use the buffer weight to tune the gun. Also there are some recoil benefits to not using the heaviest buffer. A Lighter buffer than heaviest bottoms out with less energy and dips the barrel less upon return to battery.
I agree and understand that. The issue arises when base barrels with their porting can run well with 5.56 with the A5H4 buffer without a can, and then add a can to that. There are only a few combinations for a 11.5" 5.56 AR that can keep the action cycle in a more desirable range with the A5H4 without a can AND with a select few silencer offerings, ammunition and other conditions dependent, don't count on falling into that select plateau, it's not common. For use with and without a can, a more desirable porting range, if based on a Colt like barrel, ends up smaller than the .071" port. A .071" port towards to a .067" port for these can shift the area of operation into a wider means, providing the proper action mass.
A .067" port for the 11.5" carbine gas 5.56 AR is not a dedicated suppressed size. It could be better described as a port option that allows function for many possible options of ammunition, silencers or without, climate, etc.. That is provided that the appropriate mass for that selection is utilized.
A .067" port for the 11.5" carbine gas 5.56 AR is not a dedicated suppressed size. It could be better described as a port option that allows function for many possible options of ammunition, silencers or without, climate, etc.. That is provided that the appropriate mass for that selection is utilized.
Would you think an .067 port barrel with a light buffer would cycle very low power ammo like PMC bronze?
It has so in the past, it's your gamble on what the future holds though for a product offered.
Jwknutson17
11-11-16, 21:03
Would you think an .067 port barrel with a light buffer would cycle very low power ammo like PMC bronze?
I would say that port size on an 11.5 would still run an H or H2 still with PMC. I have two 11.0 barrels with .0625 ports that run and cycle H3 buffers with quality ammo. Even shorter barrels in The 10.5 range with the same .0625 run H2 buffers with Carbine springs And using M193 and Mk262s. Keep in mind these are meant to be suppressed only guns, but they do still run without a can with said buffers above.
Jwknutson17
11-11-16, 21:06
Ideally when tuning a rifle I would not want to run more then an H2 or an A5H2 when choosing specific port sizing or using adjustable gas blocks. It's hit or miss sometimes cutting down a barrel, but with an adjustable gas block, I tune the rifle with the A5H2 and have the best overall results.
Ideally when tuning a rifle I would not want to run more then an H2 or an A5H2 when choosing specific port sizing or using adjustable gas blocks. It's hit or miss sometimes cutting down a barrel, but with an adjustable gas block, I tune the rifle with the A5H2 and have the best overall results.
What other buffer weights have you tried? I'm thinking of going down the route of the lightest buffer with an adjustable gas block, but I'm thinking A5H0 will be too light?
Jwknutson17
11-12-16, 13:06
What other buffer weights have you tried? I'm thinking of going down the route of the lightest buffer with an adjustable gas block, but I'm thinking A5H0 will be too light?
I find that the H2/H3 and A5H2 run the best. Too light and you could be compromising function. Returning back into battery you want the little extra mass. Too much weight and you feel the ill effects of the A5H4 slamming home. I have tried all A5 and carbine buffer weights in many different barrel length rifles.
With a A5H0 pending what spring and ammo and how much your pinching down your gas block, you might see good results. But for me, I prefer the A5H2, with the slightly more mass, and tune from there.
I find that the H2/H3 and A5H2 run the best. Too light and you could be compromising function. Returning back into battery you want the little extra mass. Too much weight and you feel the ill effects of the A5H4 slamming home. I have tried all A5 and carbine buffer weights in many different barrel length rifles.
With a A5H0 pending what spring and ammo and how much your pinching down your gas block, you might see good results. But for me, I prefer the A5H2, with the slightly more mass, and tune from there.
I too have felt the heavier buffer slam home and didn't like them. The Gun functioned fine, but not smoother.
The idea of running heaviest buffer possible may not give best results.
PB
I find that the H2/H3 and A5H2 run the best. Too light and you could be compromising function. Returning back into battery you want the little extra mass. Too much weight and you feel the ill effects of the A5H4 slamming home. I have tried all A5 and carbine buffer weights in many different barrel length rifles.
With a A5H0 pending what spring and ammo and how much your pinching down your gas block, you might see good results. But for me, I prefer the A5H2, with the slightly more mass, and tune from there.
With your testing, where do you find the LMT E-Carrier necessary? Only when an A5 RE isn't being used?
This is sort of the same question as my thread a month or so ago, but my current line of thinking is that with adjustable gas and an A5H2, for suppressed or unsuppressed use, you should be able to tune the rifle pretty dang close to optimal without the E-Carrier.
Feel free to punch holes in that statement ;)
Question.
With all the emphasis on adjustability via gas blocks, carriers, etc. Why not reduction via reduced flow gas tubes? Simple install, no moving parts.
Viable or not really?
With your testing, where do you find the LMT E-Carrier necessary? Only when an A5 RE isn't being used?
We've only just tried to sub in/out the E carrier recently. No remarkable results were observed yet. We just looked at ejection smoothness briefly, and there were no remarkable differences. We'll probably keep trying combos.
Question.
With all the emphasis on adjustability via gas blocks, carriers, etc. Why not reduction via reduced flow gas tubes? Simple install, no moving parts.
Viable or not really?
Gas tubes are the least favorite thing I ever install. And swapping a baked in tube is often a pain. Aside from that... It'd probably be expensive to get customized tubes made. The industry just needs to get it together.
Jwknutson17
11-12-16, 23:16
With your testing, where do you find the LMT E-Carrier necessary? Only when an A5 RE isn't being used?
This is sort of the same question as my thread a month or so ago, but my current line of thinking is that with adjustable gas and an A5H2, for suppressed or unsuppressed use, you should be able to tune the rifle pretty dang close to optimal without the E-Carrier.
Feel free to punch holes in that statement ;)
Yes I do believe that if you just tossed in the ecarrier to a 11.5 with H2 you could benifit. Just going to the A5 you would have better results then if you just tossed in the ecarrier itself. Adding an adj gas block with the A5. Done deal. Don't even bother with the ecarrier. I have never personally experienced any benifit myself with the easier extraction using lower power ammo from delayed unlocking, and can't tell any difference in extraction as I do not run any 223 or other lower powered ammo to possibly see that benifit. . I do know that, the ecarrier swapped one for one with a standard auto carrier, has choked down specific cut down barreled rifles I own to not cycle where as the standard auto carrier will cycle the rifle. This may just to many variables all implemented at the same time.
I do not personally see added benifit in the ecarrier when running any sort of adj gas block. I also do not see any benifit in running it in a properly ported SBR with the A5 system and a smaller port or adjustable gas block. You would see more variable in a system with just a buffer or spring change in my opinion.
Yes I do believe that if you just tossed in the ecarrier to a 11.5 with H2 you could benifit. Just going to the A5 you would have better results then if you just tossed in the ecarrier itself. Adding an adj gas block with the A5. Done deal. Don't even bother with the ecarrier. I have never personally experienced any benifit myself with the easier extraction using lower power ammo from delayed unlocking, and can't tell any difference in extraction as I do not run any 223 or other lower powered ammo to possibly see that benifit. . I do know that, the ecarrier swapped one for one with a standard auto carrier, has choked down specific cut down barreled rifles I own to not cycle where as the standard auto carrier will cycle the rifle. This may just to many variables all implemented at the same time.
I do not personally see added benifit in the ecarrier when running any sort of adj gas block. I also do not see any benifit in running it in a properly ported SBR with the A5 system and a smaller port or adjustable gas block. You would see more variable in a system with just a buffer or spring change in my opinion.
ive been thinking about the same thing. i have a 10.5" with a .071 port and a 10.3" with a .073 port. both of which will cycle A5H4s unsuppressed with or without the E carrier.
now i am doing a cut down 12.5 and want to port it to run an A5H0-A5H2 unsuppressed with A5H4 suppressed. i didnt know if i should bother with the e carrier.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk
A 12.5" carbine gas normal Colt type barrel with a .065" gas port using 5.56 ammunition will run well with an A5H2, with or without a LMT enhanced carrier. With that port size, you have the option of the A5H3 and the A5H5 with a can depending on your combinations characteristics. With a can and the added mass options, you can run well with or the LMT enhanced carrier.
The addition of the LMT enhanced carrier can offer a few benefits. I myself choose those benefits for many of mine. The negatives associated with this carrier normally only arise with carbine actions and some portings, not this port size.
Jwknutson17
11-13-16, 08:46
A 12.5" carbine gas normal Colt type barrel with a .065" gas port using 5.56 ammunition will run well with an A5H2, with or without a LMT enhanced carrier. With that port size, you have the option of the A5H3 and the A5H5 with a can depending on your combinations characteristics. With a can and the added mass options, you can run well with or the LMT enhanced carrier.
The addition of the LMT enhanced carrier can offer a few benefits. I myself choose those benefits for many of mine. The negatives associated with this carrier normally only arise with carbine actions and some portings, not this port size.
With an adj gas block have you seen benefits with the Ecarrier personally? I do not, but everyone has there own testing and opinions. I also can not see positives with running an A5H4 and an adj gas block. Just too much mass for me when you have the option to tune it down to at very most the A5H3. Using colt or vltor springs. If you added in a Sprinco would change things up further.
You are correct and echo my findings with a suppressor on a 12.5 in that configuration that the Ecarrier would help. If you had a smaller port or an adj gas block, I don't know if I personally find the same need.
I really do not care for adjustable gas blocks, unless it's used to figure out what fixed barrel porting you want.
Yes, I have seen benefits with the enhanced carrier, even with specific porting. There are some possible negatives associated with them, but if used to take the advantages of them properly, then the balance is towards favoring them.
A few combinations with the A5H4 can fall into an area that the width of span between cyclic rates is narrower between certain ammunition types and certain silencer combinations. Those combinations are not the easiest to find.
For a non suppressed or non dedicated suppressed, I prefer porting for the A5H2 with 5.56 ammo. For dedicated suppressed, I prefer porting for the A5H2 and the A5H3 with 5.56 ammo.
My priority is as follows :
Buy quality barrel with decent port
Vitor A5
With these two components everything has run just fine.
E carrier or no e carrier. Can or no can. It runs fine.
Last thing I've never had to try. Adjustable gas block.
I love the Vltor A5 system and makes enough difference to make the difference. YMMV
PB
jerrysimons
11-13-16, 11:21
I really do not care for adjustable gas blocks, unless it's used to figure out what fixed barrel porting you want.
Yes, I have seen benefits with the enhanced carrier, even with specific porting. There are some possible negatives associated with them, but if used to take the advantages of them properly, then the balance is towards favoring them.
A few combinations with the A5H4 can fall into an area that the width of span between cyclic rates is narrower between certain ammunition types and certain silencer combinations. Those combinations are not the easiest to find.
For a non suppressed or non dedicated suppressed, I prefer porting for the A5H2 with 5.56 ammo. For dedicated suppressed, I prefer porting for the A5H2 and the A5H3 with 5.56 ammo.
How do you optimize for e carrier like you mentioned? I have a conundrum, it seems the e carrier actually allows you to get away with less gas-drive at the port or with lower pressure ammo for a given port-size yet at the same time the e carrier might not cycle an action with a really small port size where a regular carrier will. Isn't this contradictory? It seems like there is this threshold with the e carrier or sweet spot.
BufordTJustice
11-13-16, 12:59
With an adj gas block have you seen benefits with the Ecarrier personally? I do not, but everyone has there own testing and opinions. I also can not see positives with running an A5H4 and an adj gas block. Just too much mass for me when you have the option to tune it down to at very most the A5H3. Using colt or vltor springs. If you added in a Sprinco would change things up further.
You are correct and echo my findings with a suppressor on a 12.5 in that configuration that the Ecarrier would help. If you had a smaller port or an adj gas block, I don't know if I personally find the same need.
I've been experimenting with a tubbs stainless AR10 flat wire spring, A5H1 buffer, gen 4 e-carrier, and SLR gas block.
Huge benefit. Even bigger benefit using the e-carrier with a lighter buffer than with a heavy buffer like the A5H4.
I know it wasn't fruitful for you, but this may be a better compromise for you. You tried a ton of combinations, and can't remember all of them that we discussed.
BufordTJustice
11-13-16, 13:16
How do you optimize for e carrier like you mentioned? I have a conundrum, it seems the e carrier actually allows you to get away with less gas-drive at the port or with lower pressure ammo for a given port-size yet at the same time the e carrier might not cycle an action with a really small port size where a regular carrier will. Isn't this contradictory? It seems like there is this threshold with the e carrier or sweet spot.
You've unknowingly hit on the timing issue. Delaying the timing of unlocking has the effect of reducing the amount of gas drive required to cycle the action. The overall budget of gas that drives the action is actually reduced compared to a std carrier in terms of what enters the carrier and at what time/pressure.
So, it makes sense that it offers an improvement until the amount of gas becomes too small to operate the system fully. In this case, a std carrier, which adds gas drive over an e-carrier, will work when the e-carrier won't.
The added benefits of superior gas propagation in the toroidal expansion chamber and faster venting of said chamber not necessarily having a direct effect in function, but i like them nonetheless. Those aren't realized with a std carrier, obviously.
jerrysimons
11-13-16, 14:57
You've unknowingly hit on the timing issue. Delaying the timing of unlocking has the effect of reducing the amount of gas drive required to cycle the action. The overall budget of gas that drives the action is actually reduced compared to a std carrier in terms of what enters the carrier and at what time/pressure.
So, it makes sense that it offers an improvement until the amount of gas becomes too small to operate the system fully. In this case, a std carrier, which adds gas drive over an e-carrier, will work when the e-carrier won't.
The added benefits of superior gas propagation in the toroidal expansion chamber and faster venting of said chamber not necessarily having a direct effect in function, but i like them nonetheless. Those aren't realized with a std carrier, obviously.
I guess it fits with my theory then that as long as their is enough overall gas for the e carrier
to function then the main benefit is realized with the delayed cam pin track. I guess I hadn't considered that the e carrier itself compensates some for the reduced work of extracting a case with less pressure inside of it by also bleeding off some of the expansion chamber gas at the weep hole. I mean I knew it did it but didn't realize why. The balance must still be in the favor of a surplus in the kinetic energy budget or else the e carrier wouldn't increase the span of operation or have potential issues with over speeding to the rear/ increasing recoil in some overgassed but under-buffered configurations using the it.
How do you optimize for e carrier like you mentioned? I have a conundrum, it seems the e carrier actually allows you to get away with less gas-drive at the port or with lower pressure ammo for a given port-size yet at the same time the e carrier might not cycle an action with a really small port size where a regular carrier will. Isn't this contradictory? It seems like there is this threshold with the e carrier or sweet spot.
There's a lot going on with this. To keep this simple, at least at first.. For 5.56 ammunition, you need a minimum porting requirement to keep the carrier speed in check with an action system to increase the duration of time in magazine over travel. To keep this simple at first, remember that the cam path gain in length in battery delay also reduces BCG over travel to the magazine in the same dimensional length. You gain at one end, lose at the other as you are confined to the same dimensional limits in space available. With less bolt over travel to the magazine, it needs other ways to use that same over travel space with more time, i.e. an action system with a lower base cyclic rate.
There's more going on with this for sure, but this is a start.
I've been experimenting with a tubbs stainless AR10 flat wire spring, A5H1 buffer, gen 4 e-carrier, and SLR gas block.
Huge benefit. Even bigger benefit using the e-carrier with a lighter buffer than with a heavy buffer like the A5H4.
I know it wasn't fruitful for you, but this may be a better compromise for you. You tried a ton of combinations, and can't remember all of them that we discussed.
While I can not say that I've tested that specific combination. I would say that it is possible to have a better felt recoil with this, you may be adding some stresses and strains with this over some other options in the longer run.
It makes me wonder why BCM includes the lightest A5H0 buffer with their kit. Is it purely because it will run with any AR15?
You've unknowingly hit on the timing issue. Delaying the timing of unlocking has the effect of reducing the amount of gas drive required to cycle the action. The overall budget of gas that drives the action is actually reduced compared to a std carrier in terms of what enters the carrier and at what time/pressure.
So, it makes sense that it offers an improvement until the amount of gas becomes too small to operate the system fully. In this case, a std carrier, which adds gas drive over an e-carrier, will work when the e-carrier won't.
The added benefits of superior gas propagation in the toroidal expansion chamber and faster venting of said chamber not necessarily having a direct effect in function, but i like them nonetheless. Those aren't realized with a std carrier, obviously.
There's many timing events that we could look into when comparing and contrasting the two. Focussing on one of the event differences between the LMT enhanced carrier and the standard may not be the best way to look at things.
I guess it fits with my theory then that as long as their is enough overall gas for the e carrier
to function then the main benefit is realized with the delayed cam pin track. I guess I hadn't considered that the e carrier itself compensates some for the reduced work of extracting a case with less pressure inside of it by also bleeding off some of the expansion chamber gas at the weep hole. I mean I knew it did it but didn't realize why. The balance must still be in the favor of a surplus in the kinetic energy budget or else the e carrier wouldn't increase the span of operation or have potential issues with over speeding to the rear/ increasing recoil in some overgassed but under-buffered configurations using the it.
If you want to look at the comparison between the LMT carrier and the standard carrier, I don't think anyone would mind if that was addressed in an existing thread on that than going off topic here.
It makes me wonder why BCM includes the lightest A5H0 buffer with their kit. Is it purely because it will run with any AR15?
That could be another topic.
My barrel will be here tomorrow! Woo Hoo!
MSparks909
11-14-16, 21:42
My barrel will be here tomorrow! Woo Hoo!
Mine shipped today and will be here Friday :cool:
Jwknutson17
11-15-16, 17:31
My barrel will be here tomorrow! Woo Hoo!
Mine shipped today and will be here Friday :cool:
You guys will enjoy them. I just put a Geissele Super 42 with H2 in one of the few I have to see how it worked, and was impressed with that combo as well as the A5 and this Sionics 11.5 RGP barrel.
I got mine today, and had a little trouble. I'd planned on direct subbing this barrel into my house gun, which is and overgassed 10.5 with a KAC RAS. Unfortunately, the barrel profile behind the FSB is 1.000", whereas a Mil profile is around .840". The rail wont fit without modification.
I had to sub in a DD Omega rail... with the I beam profile that I hate more than nails on a blackboard.
Furbyballer
11-16-16, 15:54
Mine shot great last weekend suppressed and not suppressed on my pistol lower. Cant wait to try it out on my sbr lower with a5 and h2 buffer.
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
Do all of your 11.5 uppers come with the reduce gas port barrel?
No. We make standard ports and reduced ports.
Do all of your 11.5 uppers come with the reduce gas port barrel?
Since the profile of this barrel wouldn't work with the good old KAC RAS, I discovered, and bought, the Geissele Mk4 in 7.0. SO happy to get the Omega Ibeam off my gun.
http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb201/trixiebud/20161212_165309_zpshatsdbrd.jpg
Since the profile of this barrel wouldn't work with the good old KAC RAS, I discovered, and bought, the Geissele Mk4 in 7.0. SO happy to get the Omega Ibeam off my gun.
http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb201/trixiebud/20161212_165309_zpshatsdbrd.jpg
That looks fantastic, Mark!
Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
Shoots so nice, I took the mount off the muzzle so I can't wreck it with a can.
Markm, that looks like a very slick, no BS setup. One question, as I can't tell from the image you posted. Does the handguard cap contact the rail at all? It looks very close.
Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk
Shoots so nice, I took the mount off the muzzle so I can't wreck it with a can.
I'm gonna wreck mine... It shoots so nicely, that it's pretty much all I shoot other than my SPR.
Markm, that looks like a very slick, no BS setup. One question, as I can't tell from the image you posted. Does the handguard cap contact the rail at all? It looks very close.
No contact at all. I just fills the gap.
Dam Son.
http://imgur.com/gallery/7lZwLKc
Since the profile of this barrel wouldn't work with the good old KAC RAS, I discovered, and bought, the Geissele Mk4 in 7.0. SO happy to get the Omega Ibeam off my gun.
http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb201/trixiebud/20161212_165309_zpshatsdbrd.jpg
I'm gonna wreck mine... It shoots so nicely, that it's pretty much all I shoot other than my SPR.
I shouldn't say "wreck it". I mean... I know it'd shoot nice with a can, but it shoots beautifully without. I knew when I bought it, I'd like it so much unsuppressed that I'd wouldn't be able to put a can on it.
I'm surprised you didn't remove the handguard cap when you did the install. Hard to believe that sucker clears.
SeriousStudent
12-12-16, 20:50
Very business-like. Nice build, markm.
I do love those rails.
BufordTJustice
12-13-16, 11:41
I'm gonna wreck mine... It shoots so nicely, that it's pretty much all I shoot other than my SPR.
Same. Mines gonna get smoked. Shoots SO smooth.
My 18" rifle gas patrol upper doesn't even feel this smooth.
We'll see how the BRT Optimum 16" intermediate will shoot..... But this thing has been rode hard already. Lol.
I'm surprised you didn't remove the handguard cap when you did the install. Hard to believe that sucker clears.
Yeah. There'd be an unsightly gap without the handguard. I wish Geissele had made the rail longer so the cap could be removed. Makes no sense since you have to pull the FSB anyway. But I still like the rail.
Yeah. There'd be an unsightly gap without the handguard. I wish Geissele had made the rail longer so the cap could be removed. Makes no sense since you have to pull the FSB anyway. But I still like the rail.
If they would make a 10 or 10.5 rail again, I'd never use anything else.
Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
The standard port 11.5 barrel shoots good as well. I was able to get my KAC RAS to fit mine, just took a rotary tool to the front clamp to make it match the profile underneath the front cap. You don't need to take a lot off, just need some patience.
The standard port 11.5 barrel shoots good as well. I was able to get my KAC RAS to fit mine, just took a rotary tool to the front clamp to make it match the profile underneath the front clamp. You don't need to take a lot off, just need some patience.
I was thinking of doing that, but worried I'd mess it up. I couldn't decide on the risks of lathing the barrel (which I can't do myself) or permanently modding a RAS.
I have two of these barrels and I’m trying to figure out my bolt carrier/buffer combo. I plan on running VLTOR A5 buffers, Sprinco green springs, and A5H2/A5H3 weights.
These rifles will be ran both suppressed and unsurpassed. I’ve read about all the LMT Enhanced carrier hype, but I tend to stick with either KAC sand cutters or the JP full mass carriers. Anyone running any other carriers aside from the LMT with similar setups? Thoughts?
nightchief
08-28-18, 19:18
At danger of angering the necropost spirit...
I’ve run this setup with a BCM phosphate carrier and a Sionics NP3 carrier. Functioned fine, though a little gassy in the face when suppressed. I think I was running an A5H3 buffer with green spring...
I have two of these barrels and I’m trying to figure out my bolt carrier/buffer combo. I plan on running VLTOR A5 buffers, Sprinco green springs, and A5H2/A5H3 weights.
These rifles will be ran both suppressed and unsurpassed. I’ve read about all the LMT Enhanced carrier hype, but I tend to stick with either KAC sand cutters or the JP full mass carriers. Anyone running any other carriers aside from the LMT with similar setups? Thoughts?
I dont even know the heavier A5 buffers, I played with them but feel the standard are the best. I tend to feel the buffer slamming back on the heavies. The A5 is more important than the Enhanced BCG, but both dont suck. KAC stuff is always good.
PB
I am running the RGP with an LMT E-Carrier, Sprinco spring and A5H4 buffer. Which means a standard carrier group will be just fine with your H2/H3.
I have two of these barrels and I’m trying to figure out my bolt carrier/buffer combo. I plan on running VLTOR A5 buffers, Sprinco green springs, and A5H2/A5H3 weights.
These rifles will be ran both suppressed and unsurpassed. I’ve read about all the LMT Enhanced carrier hype, but I tend to stick with either KAC sand cutters or the JP full mass carriers. Anyone running any other carriers aside from the LMT with similar setups? Thoughts?
Because these barrels are gassed correctly, its no magic equation to make them run. A lot of different combos will work, hence the beauty of the Sionics RGP barrel.
PB
Because these barrels are gassed correctly, its no magic equation to make them run. A lot of different combos will work, hence the beauty of the Sionics RGP barrel.
PB
In that case, ordering some of the Sionics BCGs to go with them :D
BufordTJustice
09-13-18, 15:12
Because these barrels are gassed correctly, its no magic equation to make them run. A lot of different combos will work, hence the beauty of the Sionics RGP barrel.
PB
Agreed.
Being the OP, I suppose I should note that mine is STILL running with such boring reliability, that I forgot to post about it. Too busy actually shooting it, I guess.
Heavy-Metal
10-03-18, 20:07
Just out of curiosity, has anyone run a piston kit ie. superlative arms or adams arms on one of the rgp barrels, and if so how'd it work out?Just wanted to get some opinions.
Just out of curiosity, has anyone run a piston kit ie. superlative arms or adams arms on one of the rgp barrels, and if so how'd it work out?Just wanted to get some opinions.
BAN HIM!
Heavy-Metal
10-04-18, 10:07
BAN HIM!
Lol what did I do? I'm just a noob just asking questions.
Just kidding. I hate pistons. Suffered through a few buddies trying to make that silly crap function (ironically they were supposed to increase reliability).
Placing one of those on an awesome barrel would be blasphemy.
Heavy-Metal
10-04-18, 10:20
Just kidding. I hate pistons. Suffered through a few buddies trying to make that silly crap function (ironically they were supposed to increase reliability).
Placing one of those on an awesome barrel would be blasphemy.
Ah gotcha, so basically it would probably be more of a hassle than anything beneficial?
The general consensus around here is that a properly ported DI barrel with a good gas system configuration is very hard to beat when all factors are considered.
AR retrofit piston kits generally don't compare favorably on a basis of reliability, cost, weight, simplicity and serviceability.
Just out of curiosity, has anyone run a piston kit ie. superlative arms or adams arms on one of the rgp barrels, and if so how'd it work out?Just wanted to get some opinions.
Lol what did I do? I'm just a noob just asking questions.
Heavy-Metal
10-04-18, 10:29
The general consensus around here is that a properly ported DI barrel with a good gas system configuration is very hard to beat when all factors are considered.
Ah ok cool, well thank you for the clarification there Clint.
BufordTJustice
10-05-18, 12:27
Ah ok cool, well thank you for the clarification there Clint.
Not to dog pile on you, but I agree 100% with Clint.
And I would add cheaper. You can get a lighter, more reliable, softer shooting gun for LESS with a DI platform than you can via a Piston system.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Heavy-Metal
10-05-18, 12:37
Not to dog pile on you, but I agree 100% with Clint.
And I would add cheaper. You can get a lighter, more reliable, softer shooting gun for LESS with a DI platform than you can via a Piston system.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Very cool, and to aleviate some of the excess gas an adjustable gas block would be the best bet right?
There is only excess gas if the gas port is too large, which is the case with the majority of mfgs.
The best bet is to get a properly ported and configured barrel with a standard gas block or Front Site Base from the start.
With that setup, an adjustable gas block is unnecessary except in special circumstances.
* A proper gas system configuration is one where the gas system length and barrel length are matched. For example 11.5" CAR , 14.5" MID, 20" RIFLE.
Very cool, and to alleviate some of the excess gas an adjustable gas block would be the best bet right?
Heavy-Metal
10-05-18, 12:49
There is only excess gas if the gas port is too large.
The best bet is to get a properly ported barrel from the start.
Awesome, well thanks I appreciate all the help and answering all my questions.
BufordTJustice
10-05-18, 13:02
Very cool, and to aleviate some of the excess gas an adjustable gas block would be the best bet right?
Yessir. Ideally, starting with an optimized gas port is best, but there are several quality/reliable solutions to further adjusting gas flow. BRT has their microtune gas block and custom tune gas tubes. SLR has their AGB's as well.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
BufordTJustice
10-05-18, 13:03
There is only excess gas if the gas port is too large, which is the case with the majority of mfgs.
The best bet is to get a properly ported and configured barrel with a standard gas block or Front Site Base from the start.
With that setup, an adjustable gas block is unnecessary except in special circumstances.
* A proper gas system configuration is one where the gas system length and barrel length are matched. For example 11.5" CAR , 14.5" MID, 20" RIFLE.
Jinx!
We're twinning today, apparently. [emoji41]
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
natehansen66
11-10-18, 10:56
New guy here. Just built a pistol with the 11.5 rgp barrel and an A5H2. I haven't seen anyone mention how these run with cheap steel case ammo, and I was afraid the H2 might be a bit heavy with the underpowered ammo. 400 rounds down without a hiccup....140 today outside in 9deg temp. Super sweet shooter!
Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
Not surprising. The RGP should be called "Right Gas Port".
MountainRaven
12-17-18, 22:09
These must be great barrels, since they're the only 11.5s Sionics isn't sold out of.
ETA: I typed the above by mistake and meant to type:
These must be great barrels, since they're the only 11.5s Sionics is sold out of.
Well they are done in smaller batches and they are a "special application". Not everyone believes in the concept.
These must be great barrels, since they're the only 11.5s Sionics isn't sold out of.
MountainRaven
12-18-18, 00:16
Well they are done in smaller batches and they are a "special application". Not everyone believes in the concept.
Fair enough.
Not sure how I should interpret your two posts. It seems as if there is some agenda on your part. Maybe I am wrong.
Fair enough.
New guy here. Just built a pistol with the 11.5 rgp barrel and an A5H2. I haven't seen anyone mention how these run with cheap steel case ammo, and I was afraid the H2 might be a bit heavy with the underpowered ammo. 400 rounds down without a hiccup....140 today outside in 9deg temp. Super sweet shooter!
Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
This is good to hear. I’m in the market for a 11.5” barrel for a pistol thence SBR build that intend to run suppressed and unsuppressed. I would like to be able to run cheap ammo if needed. Also I’m heavily considering the new OSS suppressors which supposedly don’t cause anywhere near typical suppressor backpressure (was hoping for more reviews on that here but not sure anyone has one yet)
I don’t think I will be able to run an A5 stock setup, just a standard carbine buffer and spring
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.