Printable View
I'm considering the purchase of the LMT Enhanced BCG to upgrade the stock BCG on a Colt SOCOM - 14" barrel, etc. But I was confused by the option of choosing a full auto over a Semi? I should mention that I am planning on a suppressor for it and wondering if that makes any difference or would impact my choice.
More generally, let me also ask if a LMT Enhanced BCG is a wise move to assure additional reliability of the M4?
Thanks.
What do you mean by "to ensure additional reliability"? Are you having problems with the Colt bcg?
Get the "full auto" M16 version. There's no reason to go with the "semi auto" AR15 version.
This. Because I think the extra weight is a good thing. But I’ve never weighed them both to see the weight delta. Also, I’m. Not sure if the BCG’s have changed since this time.Quote:
Originally Posted by 556Cliff
I’m pretty sure a couple of years ago LMT specifically said the enhanced BCG (with enhanced bolt) was meant to improve reliability on longer barrel AR’s. I think that barrel length was 16”. Robb says you don’t need it until your running 14.5 or greater and FA. But you can read that for yourself. Always search the forums. It’s possible to come up with an original inquirer based on a new product but for age-old questions like yours - there will probably be a thread to two.
There is some time and effort spent in developing that BCG. I use the enhanced carrier and standard or Sionics bolt in my SBR’s.
However did you search M4C??
If you didn’t your question is addressed here:
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread...-full-auto-BCG
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread...to-vs-semi-BCG
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I have an M4A1 SOCOM. I have an LMT enhanced BCG.
You MIGHT see a small improvement by installing the LMT. You might not.
Having put both the SOCOM and the LMT BCG through their paces, I would not put an LMT BCG in the SOCOM. The SOCOM doesn't need it.
If you did put the LMT BCG in the SOCOM, you would also need to adjust the gas port to see any advantage the LMT BCG would give you.
Take the money you would spend on the new carrier, buy ammo and go shoot it up this weekend on Veteran's Day.
Before I get into LMT, if you are not opposed to spending $330, then maybe look at the new Surefire bolt/carrier kit:Quote:
Originally Posted by FredL
https://www.surefire.com/optimized-b...oup-556mm.html
https://www.opticsplanet.com/surefir...er-system.html
I have a few LMT E-BCGs but I am not an expert. I ended up with both a Full and Semi. And they weigh almost the same, I think. My S/A was 9.00oz but I cant find what my F/A weighs. If you are buying new, then get the full auto.
Remember this is a system, if you add the LMT enhanced carrier you will need to address the faster bolt speed. If you add the e-carrier AND suppress, then you are adding 2 things to speed up the carrier. The faster carrier speed caught me out, I thought years ago that it slowed the carrier.
I use them on suppressed setups with heavy buffers. One has an adjustable gas block 11.5 and the other 12.5, has a smallish port.
I have a Colt M4A1 F/A for 10 years and thousands of rounds and have never had a failure. Not sure why you would spend additional funds.
For your application, the LMT E-Carrier Group isn't going to do much.
What’s wrong with the Colt BCG? The answer is nothing. You’re literally wasting money. Spend that on ammo, optics, mags, or training.
I thought the LMT EBCG was designed specifically for the 14.5" M4? Not that the Colt BCG comes up short or anything, just that the OP's barrel length is what LMT designed it for.
To wit: http://www.sadefensejournal.com/wp/?p=3188
Is it overkill? Perhaps, and certainly pricey. I have two in carbines and two more in storage. I like them, and if you have the $$$ go for it. That said, if your budget is tight the Colt BCG should do just fine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ABNAK
Thanks, this is why I asked, and I appreciate the well written write-up on the LMT BCG.
Do you even know why the enhanced BCG was developed by Mr. Lewis who owns Lewis Machine & Tool? I’ll give you a hint. It wasn’t the tooth fairy.Quote:
Originally Posted by DoubleW
And I mean prior to your kool aid comments about the OP “literally wasting” his money?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It came up short in that operating environment. Fact. Otherwise SOCOM wouldn’t have contacted Mr. Lewis with a list of problems. Agree it can be overkill for the casual shooter. If you believe that you will do nothing more than casually shoot your AR, then yeah. Probably a nice to have. However if you ever suspect you may use it differently, I don’t see anything wrong with the “insurance”.Quote:
Originally Posted by ABNAK
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That's kind of what I was thinking too, and thanks for your helpful comment.Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertTheTexan
I don’t know about helpful, I just get fired up with the finality some guys have towards some manufacturers out there. I mean if you were talking about some BS part from a boutique AR manufacturer who’s aspiration is Instagram or FB likes, then I probably would have been on the other side of the fence. But this is not that.Quote:
Originally Posted by FredL
And as ABNAK said - it’s your shekels.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It was meant specifically to help with the early unlocking and excess bolt velocity issues inherent to the M4 carbine gas system. The LMT enhanced bolt has an elongated cam path to delay unlocking for better extraction and an additional and relocated gas vent to blow out more gasses out the carrier. Running suppressed on a 14.5" carbine barrel is a less than ideal configuration so both of these modifications will definitely benefit the OP's rifle.Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertTheTexan
Unsuppressed the gains the pretty marginal but for the suppressed use it would definitely help. Better yet would be to use a midlength gas system with a small gas port.
Agree 100%.Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertTheTexan