Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 29

Thread: I chopped down my Midwest Industries SCAR17 rail (PICS)

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,234
    Feedback Score
    0

    I chopped down my Midwest Industries SCAR17 rail (PICS)

    (This is a cross-post from FNforum.net)

    I had a MI extended rail for my SCAR17, and decided the length and weight didn't suit my uses for the gun, but the OEM rail was too short for mounting a light and VFG comfortably, so I put it under a chop saw and ended up with what I consider the ideal rail for general use. It covers the gas block assembly and gives you just enough room to mount accessories without extending too far and adding too much weight. I might have gone for a Branham rail if they were available, but I suspect this might be lighter, but I don't have a way to compare them.










  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    362
    Feedback Score
    0
    #1 surprised 140 views and no comments

    #2 ballsy move, IDK how many innovations have come from "F this I am doing it"

    #3 not me but I can see exactly why you did it

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,663
    Feedback Score
    6 (100%)
    I'm planning on doing something similar with an SBR.
    Dave Merrill
    Terrible Technical Writer. Awful Photographer. Lazy Instructor. Kind of a dick.
    Loves Tacos.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    4,383
    Feedback Score
    16 (100%)
    Nice work. I considered the Branham rails for awhile and would consider something like this maybe for my 13" 17.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,663
    Feedback Score
    6 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by RHINOWSO View Post
    Nice work. I considered the Branham rails for awhile and would consider something like this maybe for my 13" 17.
    Branham just anounced on FB the other day they were considering having a limited run done (100 units) if they were shown enough interest.
    Dave Merrill
    Terrible Technical Writer. Awful Photographer. Lazy Instructor. Kind of a dick.
    Loves Tacos.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    362
    Feedback Score
    0
    I apologize ahead of time if I am highjacking

    Since someone let the cat out of the bag today I am sure Alan wont mind me linking this here. https://www.facebook.com/HandlDefense

    Their mk.17/mk.20 improvement program has CF handguards in short, mid, and long lengths. These are true QD fore rail kits. When OEM barrels are used (OEM trunnions) the 4 torx head screws and two pull pins are all that need to be removed. I do know they have several lengths and types of rails. IDK if he is planning to include the heat sink and the mirage mitigation stuff. I know that he is hoping the rekindle of common sense in DC might change some perspectives in Tampa and Bragg, he is close holding on all the cool trinkets.

    Their short rail is about this long (a touch longer IIRC) The mid is longer than the Full VLTOR (edit: just looked at a pic right about the same length as the Full VLTOR)or MI.
    Last edited by Fox33; 09-24-14 at 00:05.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,234
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Fox33 View Post
    I apologize ahead of time if I am highjacking

    Since someone let the cat out of the bag today I am sure Alan wont mind me linking this here. https://www.facebook.com/HandlDefense

    Their mk.17/mk.20 improvement program has CF handguards in short, mid, and long lengths. These are true QD fore rail kits. When OEM barrels are used (OEM trunnions) the 4 torx head screws and two pull pins are all that need to be removed. I do know they have several lengths and types of rails. IDK if he is planning to include the heat sink and the mirage mitigation stuff. I know that he is hoping the rekindle of common sense in DC might change some perspectives in Tampa and Bragg, he is close holding on all the cool trinkets.

    Their short rail is about this long (a touch longer IIRC) The mid is longer than the Full VLTOR (edit: just looked at a pic right about the same length as the Full VLTOR)or MI.
    Interesting. When I think CF, I think gamer guns, not combat weapons. I'm intrigued.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,247
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Very nice, a little extra space and still covers the gas block, unlike the Branham,
    which I have looked at it myself due to basically wanting just enough room for a light.
    What about the bare metal from the cut?

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,234
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by MBtech View Post
    Very nice, a little extra space and still covers the gas block, unlike the Branham,
    which I have looked at it myself due to basically wanting just enough room for a light.
    What about the bare metal from the cut?
    I'm going to hit it with some extra FDE spray paint I have around here somewhere.

    MI would have a winner on their hands here if they went after this. I'd recommend they make some continuous one-piece side rails too, though to replace the OEMs and avoid the space where the extra fasteners attach. I'd delete the QD hole as well.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    362
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911-A1 View Post
    Interesting. When I think CF, I think gamer guns, not combat weapons. I'm intrigued.
    I agree with this statement for the most part. But one thing that has to be said is: that when applied properly new materials and technology are superior to old tech and materials. I see three primary elements in why advanced materials have not truly taken off in the firearms industry.

    #1 Cost- stuff like Magnesium and Carbon Fiber are simply more expensive when compared to steel and aluminum. When a Magnesium part is $100 more than the Aluminum one, with no real differences in machining costs, it get hard to justify

    #2 Cultural Bias- The firearms community is conservative by nature. Gains in shooting are normally made based off of previous history with incremental changes. Radical departures from pre established concepts are often rejected without consideration. There was massive repulsion at the changing from wood and steel to plastic and aluminum. I would expect the same when the change comes goes to magnesium and CF.

    #3 Lack of Knowledge- The CF in the Handl Defense fore rails were tested to 800 degrees during sustained fire tests. It does not melt or deform, most people think CF will melt at that point (as some does). HD Carbon is used on the F-22 and F-35, so that material need a pretty high melt point. People think magnesium will catch on fire (as some does) so some said they wouldn't buy his Mg trigger module because they thought if a spark hit it that it would catch on fire.

    But things like CF and magnesium blended alloys are going to become more and more common. they have been used in aerospace, racing, and other applications for a long time.
    Last edited by Fox33; 09-25-14 at 19:27.

Page 1 of 3 123 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
  •