View Full Version : Wolfpack Armory MK5 Rifle
Full disclosure: I am the owner of Wolfpack Armory. This post is to gather feedback and introduce our products to new people. I am straight forward and will answer any questions that you have.
My company has been making duty rifles for law enforcement agencies and small military units since 2016. Most of these have been custom built for each agencies needs and budget. We are planning on releasing a duty rifle for our new commercial lineup and wanted to show you fine people what we have to offer.
We will offer a 16" rifle and 11.3" pistol. My plan is to offer these as high value and come in under $1K in order to buy up some market shares for Wolfpack. I understand that this is a brand loyal section of the market so we plan to come in with high quality at a low price in order to get these out there being used. The main focus of these models is having a quality barrel and bolt carrier with a properly tuned gas and buffer system.
71133
Here are the MK5 specs:
LOWER RECEIVER
7075-T6 Forged Aluminum.
Flared Magwell.
M4/M16 Trigger Pocket.
Precision CNC machined to upper receiver for limited movement between the upper and lower receivers.
UPPER RECEIVER
7075-T6 Forged Aluminum
Extended M4 feed ramps
Forward assist and dust cover
RAIL SYSTEM
15” Lightweight Modular MK5 M-LOK
Anti Rotation Tabs
Barrel Nut Interlock System for securly using IR devices and other accessories
BARREL
16” 5.56 NATO
4150 CrMoV Barrel Material
Chrome lined bore and chamber
Mid Length Gas System
1:7 Twist Rate
Hybrid profile
MUZZLE DEVICE
Night Howler Flash Hider
Compatible with Plan B Tapered suppressor mounting system
Made from 17-4 H900 stainless steel
Black nitride case hardened
BOLT CARRIER GROUP
8620 Carrier Material
C-158 Bolt Material (MPI/HP Tested)
Magnesium Phosphate
Hard Chrome plated carrier and gas key bore
Hard Chrome Plated Firing Pin
SpringCo 5 coil extractor spring
Grade 8 Bolts and Properly Staked Gas Key
GAS SYSTEM
Low Profile Gas Block
Made from 416 Stainless Steel
Gas Block is Black Nitride Case Hardened
Gas Block Properly Secured to Barrel
CHARGING HANDLE
Gas Blaster Ambidextrous Charging Handle
Machined from 7075-T6 aluminum
Raised rear gas defllector lip
Reinforced section where it interfaces with the gas key
TRIGGER
2 Stage Combat Trigger
NIB Coated
Full power hammer spring
4.5 lb trigger pull
PISTOL GRIP
MAGPUL K2 pistol grip
SAFETY SELECTOR
Ambidextrous Safety Selector
60 degree throw
Undercut on right side so to not interfere with trigger finger
BUTTSTOCK
Magpul MOE-SL Mil Spec Buttstock
A5 9 Position Buffer Tube
3.8oz. A5 buffer and Chrome Silicon buffer spring
Properly Staked Castle Nut
Product Link: https://www.wolfpackarmory.com/product-page/aw15-mk5-duty-rifle
Thanks for your time.
Mods: Please message me if not allowed.
So I guess I would start by saying that while Manufactures are on this board, they typically don't advertise their product in a post, and maybe you would want to first reach out a moderator on the best way to approach that.
Secondly, this is a very technical board. A lot of people here know a good amount of the knowledge and data pertaining to certain rifles and why they utilize the components that they do. We tend to be more of a data driven board then others in my humble opinion, and as such I would start by asking you what makes you different?
You talk about utilizing 16" and 11.3" barrels with a "hybird profile" and this instantly makes me think that you are using Ballistic Advantage Hanson Profile barrels, and if so I would state that. They are a known quantity, and people can start to get an idea of where your product stands in a sub $1k gun, which isn't a bad thing by any means but we want to have an expectation of what we are getting for that price.
The same can be said about your BCGs, and other components. What do you make in house, or what build quality do you bring to the table? What sets you apart or why do you feel that there is a niche in the market for your rifles that others are not doing?
GAS SYSTEM
.
.
Gas Block Properly Secured to Barrel
Properly secured typically means that the gas block is pinned to the barrel. Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of high quality weapons like BCM who are not pinning their gas blocks and never had an issue, but it does beg the question of what exactly you mean.
Can you elaborate please?
So I guess I would start by saying that while Manufactures are on this board, they typically don't advertise their product in a post, and maybe you would want to first reach out a moderator on the best way to approach that.
Secondly, this is a very technical board. A lot of people here know a good amount of the knowledge and data pertaining to certain rifles and why they utilize the components that they do. We tend to be more of a data driven board then others in my humble opinion, and as such I would start by asking you what makes you different?
You talk about utilizing 16" and 11.3" barrels with a "hybird profile" and this instantly makes me think that you are using Ballistic Advantage Hanson Profile barrels, and if so I would state that. They are a known quantity, and people can start to get an idea of where your product stands in a sub $1k gun, which isn't a bad thing by any means but we want to have an expectation of what we are getting for that price.
The same can be said about your BCGs, and other components. What do you make in house, or what build quality do you bring to the table? What sets you apart or why do you feel that there is a niche in the market for your rifles that others are not doing?
I have reached out to the contact page here on the forum several times and have not gotten a response yet. I understand that this is not the typical way that new products are introduced, but I am blunt about things sometimes.
The barrels are made by an OEM company from FL using Shaw blanks and them chrome plated and phosphated. The hybrid profile is a slightly modified government profile. It uses a mid length gas system with a 0.081" gas port. I understand that is overgassed for M193 and M855, but unfortunately many guys are running less powered .223 ammo and this is the sweet spot we found for mid gas and A5 buffer system. Plus, now they are making choked down gas tubes that allow you to tune the system based on your individual use. As a manufacturer, I would rather be slightly overgassed than having guns coming back all the time for not cycling.
BCG's are made by Microbest and lower parts are Schmid.
What we make in house are receivers, handguards, charging handles, and muzzle devices for now.
As for build quality, every component is torqued, threadlocked, dimpled, properly staked, and hand fitted where necessary. We perform full function checks and live test fire every gun that leaves here.
What sets us apart is the quality control that you get for the price you pay. Even at $1299 MSRP, these are still a good deal. We also offer an unlimited lifetime warranty if something breaks or doesn't end up being on par with what I am telling you.
Properly secured typically means that the gas block is pinned to the barrel. Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of high quality weapons like BCM who are not pinning their gas blocks and never had an issue, but it does beg the question of what exactly you mean.
Can you elaborate please?
The barrel is dimpled in 2 locations and held with set screws torqued to 33 in-lbs using LocTite R620 high temp threadlocker. The Samson gas blocks we use also have 2 more set screws that apply pressure at an angle from the sides for a better gas seal to the barrel.
everready73
12-11-23, 12:10
Actually kinda impressed with the components if these come in under 1k. I can't think of a rifle with a chrome lined barrel, A5 gas system, 15 inch mlock rail that comes in under 1k.
Barrel blank is Shaw and that is quality so no issue there
Microbest for the BCG which is gtg and Sprinco 5 spring extractor is a plus
2 stage trigger and Schmid lower parts are a plus
I think if you market the right way you could have a winner. My biggest complaint would be the gas port size (would prefer .078 or .076) but i understand your justification for the size you went with
The biggest unknowns would be your receivers and handguard IMO. If they are decent I would consider buying one if they are at a good price point
I have reached out to the contact page here on the forum several times and have not gotten a response yet. I understand that this is not the typical way that new products are introduced, but I am blunt about things sometimes.
The barrels are made by an OEM company from FL using Shaw blanks and them chrome plated and phosphated. The hybrid profile is a slightly modified government profile. It uses a mid length gas system with a 0.081" gas port. I understand that is overgassed for M193 and M855, but unfortunately many guys are running less powered .223 ammo and this is the sweet spot we found for mid gas and A5 buffer system. Plus, now they are making choked down gas tubes that allow you to tune the system based on your individual use. As a manufacturer, I would rather be slightly overgassed than having guns coming back all the time for not cycling.
BCG's are made by Microbest and lower parts are Schmid.
What we make in house are receivers, handguards, charging handles, and muzzle devices for now.
As for build quality, every component is torqued, threadlocked, dimpled, properly staked, and hand fitted where necessary. We perform full function checks and live test fire every gun that leaves here.
What sets us apart is the quality control that you get for the price you pay. Even at $1299 MSRP, these are still a good deal. We also offer an unlimited lifetime warranty if something breaks or doesn't end up being on par with what I am telling you.
Thank you very much for you're explanation, that really helps.
I personally don’t care for sprinco springs and would prefer a pinned gas block, but otherwise sounds pretty solid! Best of luck to you!
I have reached out to the contact page here on the forum several times and have not gotten a response yet.
The board is going through a transitional point at the moment, and probably will be for a little while. I do not speak for the owners in any way, shape or form. However, it would be my guess that the new software and upgrades are taking priority over everything else. It is entirely possible they do not have a price structure in place, or a means set up for taking on new dealers and manufacturers.
Please bear with the site as all of us go through the changes. Personally, I would like to see the ability to add "likes" to posts. Credible posts should have higher ratings so new people can understand the info is factual. While a low ranked troll post is shown to be less than useful. That is just the take from Uncle Stick, I can roll with just about anything unless this place turn into arfcom. People being permitted to post factually incorrect things should never be allowed, I don't care how good, bad, or large a site claims to be. If it can't be trusted, it is garbage.
The flip side to that is the collective "we" on this site could state to be a bit more welcoming to new people, maybe even the stupid ones.
The barrels are made by an OEM company from FL using Shaw blanks and them chrome plated and phosphated. The hybrid profile is a slightly modified government profile. It uses a mid length gas system with a 0.081" gas port. I understand that is overgassed for M193 and M855, but unfortunately many guys are running less powered .223 ammo and this is the sweet spot we found for mid gas and A5 buffer system. Plus, now they are making choked down gas tubes that allow you to tune the system based on your individual use. As a manufacturer, I would rather be slightly overgassed than having guns coming back all the time for not cycling.
I doubt that many people on this site are going to be interested in yet another AR-15 with a badly over-gassed mid-length 16" barrel, particularly when your philosophy is "you'll need to buy a custom after-market gas tube to get our barrel to cycle properly with 5.56 ammunition."
....
I doubt that many people on this site are going to be interested in yet another AR-15 with a badly over-gassed mid-length 16" barrel, particularly when your philosophy is "you'll need to buy a custom after-market gas tube to get our barrel to cycle properly with 5.56 ammunition."
....
I agree. Whatever this company is, they’re doing themselves a great disservice by right out of the gate over gassing their rifles and then openly admitting to doing so on a forum like this. You are settling for and simping to the hobby shooters who will shoot the absolute cheapest, garbage ammo they can find and likely eliminating any serious customers right off the bat. Build a solid, properly spec’d rifle and settle for no one.
titsonritz
12-11-23, 19:23
I doubt that many people on this site are going to be interested in yet another AR-15 with a badly over-gassed mid-length 16" barrel, particularly when your philosophy is "you'll need to buy a custom after-market gas tube to get our barrel to cycle properly with 5.56 ammunition."
....
I agree, I wouldn’t do it. I also don’t care for the two dimples as it marries you to a specific LPGB selection, if I feel the need beyond a single dimple opposite the gas port I’ll pin it.
I doubt that many people on this site are going to be interested in yet another AR-15 with a badly over-gassed mid-length 16" barrel, particularly when your philosophy is "you'll need to buy a custom after-market gas tube to get our barrel to cycle properly with 5.56 ammunition."
....
The barrel was originally set to be 0.076". This was hit and miss on cycling any .223 ammo and never held the bolt back with the A5 buffer system.
0.079" cycled but still would not hold the bolt back consistently so we planned to spec these to 0.081"
From my position, it is easier to suggest a gas tube swap than to tell a customer that their gas port needs drilled larger if they plan to use .223 ammo.
With that being said, I am on here talking to you guys for feed back. These rifles have not even been released yet and things can still be changed.
We work with several local LE agencies and the majority of them are using .223 believe it or not so we still have to offer that option.
I guess we could make 0.076" the standard and have a dropdown option to oversize the gas port for .223 if that is a make or break it.
Actually kinda impressed with the components if these come in under 1k. I can't think of a rifle with a chrome lined barrel, A5 gas system, 15 inch mlock rail that comes in under 1k.
Barrel blank is Shaw and that is quality so no issue there
Microbest for the BCG which is gtg and Sprinco 5 spring extractor is a plus
2 stage trigger and Schmid lower parts are a plus
I think if you market the right way you could have a winner. My biggest complaint would be the gas port size (would prefer .078 or .076) but i understand your justification for the size you went with
The biggest unknowns would be your receivers and handguard IMO. If they are decent I would consider buying one if they are at a good price point
We will probably add an option for gas port size (see reply above)
As for the receivers and handguards, they are solid. We have been machining these for the past 5 years and would probably be out of business if they weren't.
We quit offering forged sets a while ago due to the number of sub $50 lowers on the market. We are currently bringing back sets in hardcoat anodized FDE and OD green.
The only handguard offerings that we are keeping are 10.3" and 15" for the MK5 line. They will also be offered in hardcoat anodize FDE and OD green.
I agree. Whatever this company is, they’re doing themselves a great disservice by right out of the gate over gassing their rifles and then openly admitting to doing so on a forum like this. You are settling for and simping to the hobby shooters who will shoot the absolute cheapest, garbage ammo they can find and likely eliminating any serious customers right off the bat. Build a solid, properly spec’d rifle and settle for no one.
I am here simply to give you the honest technical data about our products and collect feedback. With that being said, we will be making the standard gas port sized 0.076" and adding the option to oversize for use of .223 ammo (see reply above).
titsonritz
12-11-23, 23:31
The barrel was originally set to be 0.076". This was hit and miss on cycling any .223 ammo and never held the bolt back with the A5 buffer system.
0.079" cycled but still would not hold the bolt back consistently so we planned to spec these to 0.081"
That is odd, I have a SIONICS 16” LW barrel that pin gauged at 0.076”, I it on an A5 buffer system and it will cycle and lock back on .223 PCM Bronze, the brass dribbles out of the ejection port but it does it. Hotter .223 has never been an issue. Maybe the slick Np3 BCG makes the difference.
The people bitching about the port size would be the first ones to bitch if the port was smaller and failed to cycle 100% of the time. Why do you think BCM sold their A5 kits with a "0" buffer? The same reason Wolfpack sells rifles with the larger port.
The people bitching about the port size would be the first ones to bitch if the port was smaller and failed to cycle 100% of the time. Why do you think BCM sold their A5 kits with a "0" buffer? The same reason Wolfpack sells rifles with the larger port.
No not really. And no one is bitching. I love how anytime something that is wrong is pointed out it’s automatically “bitching”. That’s real constructive. There are pretty well established standards these days for gas port sizes. Deviating from them simply to accommodate the use of shit ammunition is not the right thing to do. I’d much rather swap buffers and use full powered ammunition than have an obnoxiously over gassed barrel.
Defaultmp3
12-12-23, 07:37
That is odd, I have a SIONICS 16” LW barrel that pin gauged at 0.076”, I it on an A5 buffer system and it will cycle and lock back on .223 PCM Bronze, the brass dribbles out of the ejection port but it does it. Hotter .223 has never been an issue. Maybe the slick Np3 BCG makes the difference.Bore size can cause big differences in what size gas port is needed, all things being equal. The guy behind MicroMOA did some tests showing that using essentially identical rifles and identical cans, you could have a fair bit of difference in what size gas port was needed to achieve locking back on empty. The original webpage with the test if gone, sadly, but he did say on another forum:
I tested 3 different 10.5" 5.56 uppers using the same lower, ammo and BCG....they all locked the bolt back at different port sizes.
.063, .070 and .076
That is a big spread. Granted that test was done with 5.56 not 300 BLK but these same variations are seen in 300 BLK as well as I'd assume in any caliber.
Variations in bore diameter and rifling will affect the different port sizes and we are not even talking about bare steel, nitriding, chromed yet...
BCGs can also play a bit of a role, too, depending on how much gas they let leak out.
I am here simply to give you the honest technical data about our products and collect feedback. With that being said, we will be making the standard gas port sized 0.076" and adding the option to oversize for use of .223 ammo (see reply above).I personally think the reverse would be better, where the larger gas port is the default value, with the ability to choose the smaller gas port for the more discerning shooters, as I suspect most people won't care too much about gas port size/be ignorant about it, and thus you'd have to deal with more complaints about your gun being undergassed when those folks don't realize that they needed to pick the larger gas port size to be able to feed their rifles the shitty ammo they use. On the other hand, those that would be picky about having a smaller gas port would easily be able to take that extra step of selecting that option.
Adrenaline_6
12-12-23, 07:40
The port size dropdown option should also be geared for the less educated. Reverse it. Big port size standard, so the people who don't even know what a port size means, gets a rifle that will work with all ammo. They also don't know what overgassed is either. The ones that do know what port size does, will pick the correct one they want. Maybe add an option to add-on to the menu for another buffer weight so you can shoot the 223 with the small port size....or do just that and get rid of the port size options and now you don't have to have multiple barrel/port combos to inventory.
The port size dropdown option should also be geared for the less educated. Reverse it. Big port size standard, so the people who don't even know what a port size means, gets a rifle that will work with all ammo. They also don't know what overgassed is either. The ones that do know what port size does, will pick the correct one they want. Maybe add an option to add-on to the menu for another buffer weight so you can shoot the 223 with the small port size....or do just that and get rid of the port size options and now you don't have to have multiple barrel/port combos to inventory.
Love that idea. For folks who shoot suppressed this is going to be key. .076 on a middy with a can I would spec a Sprinco Green and A5H2 to start and go from there, for instance. I know that will get me close. This is one of the reasons I build instead of buy. By the time I take an off the rack rifle and tune it to my liking it becomes cost prohibitive in most cases.
Bore size can cause big differences in what size gas port is needed, all things being equal. The guy behind MicroMOA did some tests showing that using essentially identical rifles and identical cans, you could have a fair bit of difference in what size gas port was needed to achieve locking back on empty. The original webpage with the test if gone, sadly, ...
https://web.archive.org/web/20141120013024/http://micromoa.com/?page_id=855
I am here simply to give you the honest technical data about our products and collect feedback. With that being said, we will be making the standard gas port sized 0.076" and adding the option to oversize for use of .223 ammo (see reply above).
Well done sir.
The people bitching about the port size would be the first ones to bitch if the port was smaller and failed to cycle 100% of the time.
Just because you don’t like the technical facts that someone has posted in a technical thread doesn’t mean that posting those technical facts in a technical thread is “bitching.”
My 16” mid-length Noveske Recon barrel that was made by John Noveske had a gas port diameter of 0.072”. It functioned flawlessly with 5.56 ammunition and quality 223 Remington ammunition. Colt’s 16” mid-length barrel has a gas port diameter of 0.071” and I’ve never seen one choke on quality 223 Remington ammunition. My TRIARC Track 2.0 16” mid-length barrel has a gas port diameter of 0.0695”. It runs flawlessly with 5.56 ammunition and quality 223 Remington ammunition and it is the smoothest shooting 16” mid-length that I’ve tested.
But hey, if you want to buy an over-gassed AR-15, knock yourself out because nobody is stopping you.
….
Love that idea. For folks who shoot suppressed this is going to be key. .076 on a middy with a can I would spec a Sprinco Green and A5H2 to start and go from there, for instance. I know that will get me close. This is one of the reasons I build instead of buy. By the time I take an off the rack rifle and tune it to my liking it becomes cost prohibitive in most cases.
I wouldn't be opposed to this idea. We could add some buffer weight options for a small upcharge.
I wouldn't be opposed to this idea. We could add some buffer weight options for a small upcharge.
I think you're onto something here. Taking this a step further how about upgrade packages? Charge a price for the base rifle, which has a good set of core components. Then offer something like an all FCD parts upgrade along with a nicer trigger for $350 (just throwing a number out there.) Offer a quad rail option and Bob's your uncle. You keep the core components; receiver set, barrel, bcg, gas block and the A5 set up as the heart of the build so you maintain a certain level of production scalability.
Thinking about this a bit and using the upgrade example (I used to build product configurators for ecommerce in a prior life.)
You want to minimize the potential combinations for production scalability while at the same time still offering the end user an acceptable amount of options. Couple of thoughts
* Given you guys are making your own rails, if you offer a QUAD option engineer it so the barrel nuts are the same between the rail options. This way you can build uppers but leave the rail off until final assembly based on the order.
* For the lowers you could build two options in each color. One with the upgrade package, one without. The only option that would be added in final assembly of V1 or V2 of the lower would be the aforementioned spring and buffer weight option per color option
per version.
* Assuming Three colors (black, ODG and FDE) it starts to look like this for assembling configs
Upper Version Base - UV1B, UV1OD, UV1FDE
Upper Version Upgrade - UV2B, UV2OD, UV2FDE
Lower Version Base -LV1B, LV1OD, LV1FDE
Lower Version Upgrade - LV2B, LV2OD, LV2FDE
You can cost each of these versions out for simplicity and then the add on cost would be rail or buffer/weight. Assuming port size is a no cost item but still would be a config. You would have the 12 SKUs listed above and then the add on options.
Couple different ways to look at pricing models. I would include the cost of the MLOK rail and standard buffer/weight config in all upper and lower combinations. Then your upgrade price on those items would be the incremental cost between the base option and the upgrade. From a configuration standpoint this is pretty basic stuff and most ecomm platforms should offer base functionality that allows you to set this up. Then make sure your pricing model on the back end supports it.
If that is too many options for this point in your growth cycle, then I would offer the base model in the three colors and then one upgrade model in one color scheme (I always liked ODG receiver and rail and FDE components) and make that your holy grail until you grow to the point where you can support more options.
My 16” mid-length Noveske Recon barrel that was made by John Noveske had a gas port diameter of 0.072”. It functioned flawlessly with 5.56 ammunition and quality 223 Remington ammunition.
….
Such sweet barrels. Johnny really knew how to make them!
Such sweet barrels. Johnny really knew how to make them!
Indeed. A chamber that was 100% reliable shooting MK262 on full-auto in a hot environment and could still do this with match-grade hand-loads . . .
https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/28568/noveske_recon_10_shot_group_at_100_yards-3058493.jpg
..
Indeed. A chamber that was 100% reliable shooting MK262 on full-auto in a hot environment and could still do this with match-grade hand-loads . . .
https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/28568/noveske_recon_10_shot_group_at_100_yards-3058493.jpg
..
I remember talking with Johnny and he commented that his desire in making the barrel was to make the best all around barrel troops could have. He felt it was shameful for US troops and men in uniform to use anything less. That mean most accurate, long lasting, and reliable.
Thinking about this a bit and using the upgrade example (I used to build product configurators for ecommerce in a prior life.)
You want to minimize the potential combinations for production scalability while at the same time still offering the end user an acceptable amount of options. Couple of thoughts
* Given you guys are making your own rails, if you offer a QUAD option engineer it so the barrel nuts are the same between the rail options. This way you can build uppers but leave the rail off until final assembly based on the order.
* For the lowers you could build two options in each color. One with the upgrade package, one without. The only option that would be added in final assembly of V1 or V2 of the lower would be the aforementioned spring and buffer weight option per color option
per version.
* Assuming Three colors (black, ODG and FDE) it starts to look like this for assembling configs
Upper Version Base - UV1B, UV1OD, UV1FDE
Upper Version Upgrade - UV2B, UV2OD, UV2FDE
Lower Version Base -LV1B, LV1OD, LV1FDE
Lower Version Upgrade - LV2B, LV2OD, LV2FDE
You can cost each of these versions out for simplicity and then the add on cost would be rail or buffer/weight. Assuming port size is a no cost item but still would be a config. You would have the 12 SKUs listed above and then the add on options.
Couple different ways to look at pricing models. I would include the cost of the MLOK rail and standard buffer/weight config in all upper and lower combinations. Then your upgrade price on those items would be the incremental cost between the base option and the upgrade. From a configuration standpoint this is pretty basic stuff and most ecomm platforms should offer base functionality that allows you to set this up. Then make sure your pricing model on the back end supports it.
If that is too many options for this point in your growth cycle, then I would offer the base model in the three colors and then one upgrade model in one color scheme (I always liked ODG receiver and rail and FDE components) and make that your holy grail until you grow to the point where you can support more options.
Damn, now you got me thinking of making a free floating quad rail. Does anyone really still prefer these to M-LOK?
Everything else sounds pretty on par with what we offer now. Color options are already on most of our products, I have added gas port sizing and buffer selection will be easy to add.
Damn, now you got me thinking of making a free floating quad rail. Does anyone really still prefer these to M-LOK?
Everything else sounds pretty on par with what we offer now. Color options are already on most of our products, I have added gas port sizing and buffer selection will be easy to add.
Quad rail popularity has made a small resurgence as of late. Several manufacturers have released them in recent years, BCM & Centurion to name a few. I personally prefer a well made MLOK rail, but one of my serious use rifles wears a 10” Centurion Quad rail. If it’s feasible for you guys to manufacture them it wouldn’t be a bad option.
Damn, now you got me thinking of making a free floating quad rail. Does anyone really still prefer these to M-LOK?
Everything else sounds pretty on par with what we offer now. Color options are already on most of our products, I have added gas port sizing and buffer selection will be easy to add.
I swapped back over to quad rails on all my rifles from MLOK. Not casting shade on MLOK. But I really found I prefer both the attachment method and size of quads over most MLOK rails out there. Centurion, BCM and I even have an MI quad on a build. They are making a small comeback.
Don't sleep on the lower receiver parts upgrade package options either. One of the reasons I don't buy off the shelf is because by the time I swap out all the lower parts to suit my liking I mine as well build it myself. Same thing with the buffer and gas set up, but you already have that covered. Being able to sell a custom package at decent price point is attractive to a guy like me. I can't speak for the rest of the market, but I am sure there are folks out there who would like to take advantage of custom options that companies like FCD offer but don't know how to turn a wrench. Personally, building an AR from the detents up is my happy place lol.
Also, for guys who like to tuck their cans, QUAD rails make that more better. I personally do not like not having access to the attachment point of a can but to each their own.
I'm not sure what the sales numbers break down to, but there is still a very solid base of quad / 1913 rails users, and those who continue to purchase them.
titsonritz
12-14-23, 16:14
I’m about 50/50 quad/mlok with a sprinkle of old school two piece plastic.
I’m about 50/50 quad/mlok with a sprinkle of old school two piece plastic.
I’m kinda the same. My favorite rail is the Geissele Mk4. That’s the perfect rail in my opinion. Quad where it matters, MLOK for the rest, beefy and tough as hell. Easy to service and install/uninstall. The current version with the steel QD inserts is perfect.
I’m kinda the same. My favorite rail is the Geissele Mk4. That’s the perfect rail in my opinion. Quad where it matters, MLOK for the rest, beefy and tough as hell. Easy to service and install/uninstall. The current version with the steel QD inserts is perfect.
We have made something along those lines before. Ironically, it was also called the MK4. I can't get the image to upload on here no matter how microscopic I make it but it is a similar design with Quad at the end and M-LOK the rest of the way back. We could basically use that same extrusion and make a full quad, add some QD ports on both ends, and drill out between the 1913 sections to reduce heat and weight.
We also discussed making a version that has a cutout for an A2 FSB in both Quad and MLOK. This might be better sold as a complete upper because it will be a bitch to install and won't work with a bayonet lug.
Another thing I am gathering in this thread, alot of guys seem to be torn between preferred gas port sizing. As I have stated before, I am here to gather technical data and use that to turn it into new products for WPA to offer.
What if we were to offer custom barrels that you could choose your specific length, gas system length, barrel profile, and gas port size?
Of course the product would need to have as much data as possible regarding these options for the less educated customers but it would give guys the option to make their own selections based upon personal preference for their setup.
I could see this having a great deal of benefit when building a dedicated suppressed rifle.
What if we were to offer custom barrels that you could choose your specific length, gas system length, barrel profile, and gas port size?
What if someone specifies a combination that just doesn't work well? "5.56 only" or "feed anything please" seem simple enough to troubleshoot, but this sounds like chaos.
What if someone specifies a combination that just doesn't work well? "5.56 only" or "feed anything please" seem simple enough to troubleshoot, but this sounds like chaos.
That is why we would have to put standard data in the description to educate the everyday customer. The whole idea originated from complaints earlier in this thread about "feed anything please" gas port sizing being overgassed so I figured maybe we give options to those who have a preference.
The whole idea originated from complaints earlier in this thread about "feed anything please" gas port sizing being overgassed so I figured maybe we give options to those who have a preference.
Right. But I am supposing that two carefully chosen options for each barrel length would be a lot easier to support than a choose-your-own-adventure mix-and-match.
Right. But I am supposing that two carefully chosen options for each barrel length would be a lot easier to support than a choose-your-own-adventure mix-and-match.
I guess we could add 3 options for each length. 1) tuned for all ammo, 2) tuned for military ammo, 3) tuned for suppressed use. This would basically cover all of the uses.
I guess we could add 3 options for each length. 1) tuned for all ammo, 2) tuned for military ammo, 3) tuned for suppressed use. This would basically cover all of the uses.
It would, but that is becoming a lot of inventory to play around with. It is also upping the MOQ for barrels with each of those variables.
It would, but that is becoming a lot of inventory to play around with. It is also upping the MOQ for barrels with each of those variables.
It would be super easy in our case. We have a full machine shop so we would just have barrels made with an undersized gas port (0.050" for instance) in mid and carbine lengths and HBAR profile. All we would have to do is cut the barrel down to length, machine the profile selected, drill the gas port to size, and phosphate the completed barrel.
It would be super easy in our case. We have a full machine shop so we would just have barrels made with an undersized gas port (0.050" for instance) in mid and carbine lengths and HBAR profile. All we would have to do is cut the barrel down to length, machine the profile selected, drill the gas port to size, and phosphate the completed barrel.
Cool, I would hate to see people giving unrealistic expectations and expecting everything they want.
Cool, I would hate to see people giving unrealistic expectations and expecting everything they want.
Definitely agree
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.