Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 45678 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 74

Thread: What's so great about the Vltor A5 ? ?

  1. #51
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    311
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Badger89 View Post
    Did I miss something? Why all the booing of the A5 all of a sudden? I thought the general consensus was that they are beneficial for reducing recoil, eliminating bolt bounce (with the right buffer), improving reliability and contributing to more consistant cycling overall? Now were talking like Vltor is selling overpriced snake oil? Sure a carbine RE works, but so does an SKS... that doesnt mean there isnt a better design out there that works better.

    but ? for someone like me ? an old farmer out in the hills...
    who shoots ....( maybe ) ??? three boxes of ammo a year ?
    could be snake oil ..
    my setup works slick.. and i really dont want to spend any more money.
    remember ...im the guy who likes del ton and model 1 sales....ha !!
    its all good.. everyone can spend their money as they wish.
    cheers.

    peabody
    i started this life with nothing.....kept most of it.

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    colorado, usa
    Posts
    201
    Feedback Score
    0
    seems like the original purpose was to make 20in rifles work with carbine-length collapsible stocks.
    this was of interest to the USMC and .CA.

    since i'm probably one of the 7 people who actually bought a 20in upper (two, actually), i appreciate this system.
    considering other priorities, i'm running an A1 length (vltor) stock on my rifle lower , and an H3 buffer in the carbine lower.
    so far, the H3 is working well, and the A1 is is an acceptable compromise albeit still a bit too long.

    the vltor a5 is definitely on my wish list to eliminate the above compromises.
    Last edited by jmk; 08-08-13 at 20:31.

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    5,795
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by peabody View Post
    this is true .. i have no experience with an A5 .
    never have seen one.
    i prolly wont either. thats kinda expensive.
    Canada has used a plain ol carbean stock for years in their military.
    mine works just fine. like ive said it works.
    it ain't broke.. so ? why ?
    I think we can all agree that for the overwhelming majority of us, a standard carbine spring and an H, H2, or H3 buffer has served us well for years. Vltor came up with an answer to the issues for the full sized M16A2 with the A5. Of course, it's only natural that more than a few would try to fuse that innovation with the carbine. After all, once you install it, you'll never have to replace the rifle length spring again, and you get the benefits of a very smooth recoil. I can see it taking off in the tactical community, as well as the 3 gun crowd. We as a forum are normally in the pursuit of the next greatest widget that can add to our capability and efficiency. I went the Sprinco route to accomplish a similar result, but I'm not discounting the A5, nor am I saying I won't eventually add one to one of my weapons. When I first joined, people were talking up CProd mags as the end all be all for Christ's sake. Things evolve, and times change, but in the end, to each is own.
    Last edited by RogerinTPA; 08-08-13 at 21:02.
    For God and the soldier we adore, In time of danger, not before! The danger passed, and all things righted, God is forgotten and the soldier slighted." - Rudyard Kipling

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    AZ-Waging jihad against crappy AR's.
    Posts
    24,902
    Feedback Score
    104 (100%)
    I have a 20" FN upper that I run with an A5 and -3 buffer.

    Quote Originally Posted by jmk View Post
    seems like the original purpose was to make 20in rifles work with carbine-length collapsible stocks.
    this was of interest to the USMC and .CA.

    since i'm probably one of the 7 people who actually bought a 20in upper (two, actually), i appreciate this system.
    considering other priorities, i'm running an A1 length (vltor) stock on my rifle lower , and an H3 buffer in the carbine lower.
    so far, the H3 is working well, and the A1 is is an acceptable compromise albeit still a bit too long.

    the vltor a5 is definitely on my wish list to eliminate the above compromises.



    Owner/Instructor at Semper Paratus Arms

    Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/SemperParatusArms/

    Semper Paratus Arms AR15 Armorer Course http://www.semperparatusarms.com/cou...-registration/

    M4C Misc. Training and Course Announcements- http://www.m4carbine.net/forumdisplay.php?f=141

    Master Armorer/R&D at SIONICS Weapon Systems- http://sionicsweaponsystems.com

  5. #55
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    NOVA
    Posts
    1,178
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Iraqgunz View Post
    It's not about problems. I agree that one could build a lower using a standard tube and buffer (H, H2, H3) and the rifle/carbine would be just fine.

    But, the A5 when done correctly will allow you to use a wide variety of uppers on one lower. In my experience with it, it almost guarantees that you will have more reliability and control.

    I suspect that most of the experience you have is also with military weapons where there is virtually no difference in port sizes, operating systems, etc....
    Point very well taken. I have built a number of civy guns as well, but like you said, most prob used same port size (No 7.5-10.5" uppers)

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    NOVA
    Posts
    1,178
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by peabody View Post
    muzzle device 150 bucks ..are you serious ?
    wow

    I'm gonna have to research that..that's crazy !!
    i just use an A2 or A1 ..or a simple thread protector..made by the local machine shop.
    back to the A5 .. i guess i don't need one.
    A good muzzle device will serve two purposes on an AR

    1. Follow up shots. Using something like the BC or Dynacomp, you will eliminate most of the barrel rise and be able to get back on target much quicker. Shoot two side by side, and you can notice the difference. On a .308 AR, it will tame a good amount of recoil and do the same as above. I use the dyna on one of my .308AR's and its a huge difference. Pretty much same/similar design as a BC, so $90 is better than $200.

    2. Can Mounts. Good QD cans use good mounts. If you want something that is quality, you are going to pay. Look at surefire's mounts. Very good stand alone brakes, that lock up rock solid when you throw the can on there.
    Last edited by TurretGunner; 08-09-13 at 07:13.

  7. #57
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,954
    Feedback Score
    22 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by TurretGunner View Post
    A good muzzle device will serve two purposes on an AR

    1. Follow up shots. Using something like the BC or Dynacomp, you will eliminate most of the barrel rise and be able to get back on target much quicker. Shoot two side by side, and you can notice the difference. On a .308 AR, it will tame a good amount of recoil and do the same as above. I use the dyna on one of my .308AR's and its a huge difference. Pretty much same/similar design as a BC, so $90 is better than $200.

    2. Can Mounts. Good QD cans use good mounts. If you want something that is quality, you are going to pay. Look at surefire's mounts. Very good stand alone brakes, that lock up rock solid when you throw the can on there.
    If you have to explain the benefits of a muzzle brake to someone its probably because they are either new to firearms or do not care enough about enhancing their weapon or their personal skills thus trying to explain the benefits of the A5 is lost to them.

  8. #58
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    950
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by vicious_cb View Post
    As for number 2, I suppose enhanced buffer springs and heavy buffers are only for those running suppressed too right?
    I mentioned both H and H2 buffers? If gas port size is ideal you would use a heavier action spring??

  9. #59
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,954
    Feedback Score
    22 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by nml View Post
    I mentioned both H and H2 buffers? If gas port size is ideal you would use a heavier action spring??
    No what Im trying to say is if the carbine buffer system is so perfect why are there a myriad of different types of buffers and so many different kinds of extra power springs? Why constantly tweak your buffer system for different barrel lengths, gas port sizes and running suppressed or unsuppressed?

  10. #60
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    950
    Feedback Score
    0
    Not my department. Simply listed 3 reasons in response to "if you're building a lower, no reason not to use an A5"---one of which is I have not had issues unsuppressed using the recommend heavy buffer specified by the people that drilled the gas port. Not a condemnation of the A5 or a slight against those that use it.

Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 45678 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •