View Full Version : PWS CQB Comp 5.56?
Is it worth getting? My friend has the FSC 5.56 and it's great but I can't stand next to him when shooting. It's too loud. So I'm wondering will this actually work like it's suppose to. What's your thoughts?
http://primaryweapons.com/store/pc/viewPrd.asp?idproduct=90&idcategory=
i saw that the other day and thought that thing is wicked, although 150 is crazy!
Here's a writeup on their Diablo piston AR, including a discussion of that comp: http://www.defensereview.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1220.
It says that instead of 2-3 feet of fireball from an FSC on an SBR, they are seeing 2-3 inches of "low-intensity flame" with the CQB Comp.
I've been thinking about this for a 10.5" SBR but haven't yet read any feedback from somebody who owns one.
This is for short barrels(under 14.5"). SKD is taking pre-orders for $124.99 I believe, I ordered one a few days ago.
WOW! Looks like the Bastard off-spring of a Vortex and a KX3! Priced like it too!
Sounds like it works well, but looks heavy and it's butt ugly! About like having the Predators face hanging off your muzzle.
I'm really interested in seeing some reviews. But I think for now, I'll save my $125 to put towards a suppressor...
-RD62
These things have been out for over a year now. Mine has been in the package for a year. My LMT 10.5" runs fine with an A2 so I never put it on.
I would like to hear from people who have used the PWS CQB Comp and a Pig. Which do you guys like better (on a DI AR).
Post some pics if you have them.
wild_wild_wes
02-20-11, 21:15
Any more input on these?
Given that its price competes with the BattleComp, what's it do better than the BC?
-B
I'll update this thread:
I ended up being silly with this CQB Comp and built a 7.5" upper. I got a good deal on a brand new CMMG 4150 chrome-lined barrel that at least marked 5.56.
I got it all together and it had a lot of problems. It was getting so hot and cases were getting stuck in the chamber. I figured the barrel was most likely a .223 chamber.
I emailed Ned Christiansen and ended up sending him the upper. He checked it, it was not a 5.56 chamber and he reamed it with his "5.56+" chamber reamer.
The upper runs fine now but it seems to run the same whether the baffle cap is screwed on the comp or not.
I don't own a KX3 so I cannot compare.
The only reason I built a 7.5'' AR upper was more of joke and the fact I had this $150 comp laying around that needed a home.
I don't have any pics of it otherwise I would post it. The 7.5 is still a flame thrower, especially in the dim light of an indoor range. Not something I would ever use in a HD situation.
Would I buy another, doubt it. This product would most likely help someone who had a shorty that was under gassed (maybe a small gas port and even using real NATO pressure ammo didn't help).
The product itself is extremely robust (heavy) and very well made. IMHO PWS are great all work well.
As far as comparing it to a battle comp; I own a battle comp but have not shot it yet so I cannot compare. I do not believe the BC was designed to increase "back pressure" so I think a BC vs. PWS CQB is a little Apples vs. Oranges.
D
I had a PWS and it was unpleasant to shoot with a 16 barrel, I'd try the Battle Comp.
I had a PWS and it was unpleasant to shoot with a 16 barrel, I'd try the Battle Comp.
Did you own the PWS CQB Comp Specifically? Or are you just adding the fact that you owned one of their products and was not satisfied with it, but yet has possibly nothing to do with this thread?
I ask because if you put a PWS CQB Comp on a 16" barrel, you are already wrong, and your advice would mean little in any thread regarding AR's
Is it worth getting? My friend has the FSC 5.56 and it's great but I can't stand next to him when shooting. It's too loud. So I'm wondering will this actually work like it's suppose to. What's your thoughts?
http://primaryweapons.com/store/pc/viewPrd.asp?idproduct=90&idcategory=
No, I was referring to the FSC556 the OP discussed. I neglected to specify it was the FSC. Sorry about that; I stand by my comment about the FSC, which may do the job but has terrible concussion. Please be courteous with your comments. It doesn't advance your point.
I have a short barrel that was under gassed. Instead of throwing money at the problem and hoping what this money buys would solve the problem, I fixed the problem more directly: widen the gas port. Problem solved, and 0 dollar required.
Re: back pressure, I don't believe BCE made claims about Battle Comp increasing back pressure. Regardless what the KX3 is supposed to do, in my experience, the only thing that increases back pressure which results in fast ROF on an AR/M16 (in automatic fire) is a sound suppressor.
No, I was referring to the FSC556 the OP discussed. I neglected to specify it was the FSC. Sorry about that; I stand by my comment about the FSC, which may do the job but has terrible concussion. Please be courteous with your comments. It doesn't advance your point.
Actually the OP titled the thread PWS CQB Comp (http://primaryweapons.com/store/pc/viewPrd.asp?idproduct=90&idcategory=6), did you click on the link he provided. He only stated his friend owned an FSC556 (http://primaryweapons.com/store/pc/viewPrd.asp?idproduct=9&idcategory=6). I also own(and like) the FSC556 (http://primaryweapons.com/store/pc/viewPrd.asp?idproduct=9&idcategory=6) as well as the CQB Comp (http://primaryweapons.com/store/pc/viewPrd.asp?idproduct=90&idcategory=6). They are apples and oranges. Your experience with the FSC556 has no bearing on the conversation topic.
So I sand by my original statement that your post adds nothing to this topic.
Discussion is highly encouraged when you have experience with or knowledge about the specific topic.
TwitchALot
02-21-11, 19:23
The upper runs fine now but it seems to run the same whether the baffle cap is screwed on the comp or not.
I don't own a KX3 so I cannot compare.
The only reason I built a 7.5'' AR upper was more of joke and the fact I had this $150 comp laying around that needed a home.
I don't have any pics of it otherwise I would post it. The 7.5 is still a flame thrower, especially in the dim light of an indoor range. Not something I would ever use in a HD situation.
Would I buy another, doubt it. This product would most likely help someone who had a shorty that was under gassed (maybe a small gas port and even using real NATO pressure ammo didn't help).
The product itself is extremely robust (heavy) and very well made. IMHO PWS are great all work well.
As far as comparing it to a battle comp; I own a battle comp but have not shot it yet so I cannot compare. I do not believe the BC was designed to increase "back pressure" so I think a BC vs. PWS CQB is a little Apples vs. Oranges.
D
I happen to really like the CQB on a 10.5; it helps balance the gun and it seems to do as advertised - redirects the sound, suppresses flash, and compensates. It probably doesn't compensate as well as a BC (not really fair to compare it with the BC on my 16 ML), but then, it also helps with the noise and cuts down on the flash significantly compared to an A2. For an extra inch of extra OAL, I think the CQB does a great job. If I could legally suppress, I may not have gone 10.5/CQB, but since I can't, the CQB is an excellent alternative to an A2 on a 10.5 IMO, especially if you're trying to keep the OAL down.
Looking at the design, I'd venture a guess and say that it also increases dwell time more than a Pig would based on the fact that it essentially has two baffles (the flash suppressor section) instead of one. My 10.5 didn't need it to run reliably with Centurion on an H buffer and USGI spring, but the extra dwell time on a 10.5 is welcome just as it would be on an 11.5.
I'm digging this thread up from the past. Please let me know if anyone has additional experiences or opinions on the PWS CQB compensator. I am most interested in the reduction in muzzle blast.
Thanks.
Joe Mamma
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.