AR platform Improvements?

[K.L. Davis]

I take it that means it's been tried and wasn't such a good idea? Oh well.

Maybe something like you are talking anyway... PCAP, Picatinny Component Attachment Point, was a byproduct of the XM-8. The back story to the development is a whole other story, but in order to eliminate the standard rails that we all know so well, they came up with PCAP -- You probably have seen it... a row of oblong holes in the side of the weapon that made it look way too much like the hood of an old Buick.

The biggest problem that I have heard about them is that they required very precise manufacture (think who designed this now) and were overly expensive. They also required that every device known to man be retrofitted with the male part of the attachment device -- of course you could just make standard picatinny rails that attached to the PCAP holes, so you would be right back where you started, only at a far greater cost and now with two attachment points for each device.

There has been talk that the system did not work out so well with dirt and abuse... I have no real experience with them though, so I can not say for sure. I have some pictures of the early prototype components at home, I will see if I can find them when I get there.

[CapnCrunch]

PCAPS

Ughhhh... I cringe everytime I hear that word.

[SinnFéinM1911]

Not sure about the mounting method, but the concept seems interesting. His mount also includes tritium dots at 3 o'clock and 9 o'clock position, just below the elevation level of the front sight post. He maintains they work well when bracketed around a plain black post up close, yet you still retain the precision offered by the fine post during daylight scenarios.

His front sling mount is pretty clever too.

My only concern would be if you had a Free Flaoting tube / rail - The excessive about of weight now added to the front of the bbl.

Any thoughts ???

[jmart]

My only concern would be if you had a Free Flaoting tube / rail - The excessive about of weight now added to the front of the bbl.

Any thoughts ???

If you have a FF rail, then I would think you would just use that to mount a light. The thing that looks good about this mount is that, unless you want to add a laser, you could get by w/std handguards. Also, I don't think this mount would work with lights any bigger than SF200/SL TLR-1/2 series. Lastly, I'm sure this would work fine with 16" barrels, 14.5" maybe, but SBRs I would guess would be a no-go. Having the lens of the light that close to the muzzle would not be a good thing for longevity, plus I would think the lens would get covered with firing residue.

I'm still not sure though that the clamping/mounting points are up to snuff. It looks like they just clamp onto the front sight housing, and I'm wondering how secure that would be.

[Forest]

...
I'm still not sure though that the clamping/mounting points are up to snuff. It looks like they just clamp onto the front sight housing, and I'm wondering how secure that would be.

I don't think it would be any less secure than a rail mount. It proably won't have the 'return to zero' of a rail mount, but I don't think it's really needed.

[twl]

MGI has developed a Modular system that retains the AR15 basic architecture, but adds quick-change-barrels and interchangeable magazine wells, so that caliber conversions and configurations can be quickly done by the operator, for mission specific roles.

Anticipated configurations for this system would be Entry/SMG, Duty Carbine, SPR, and LMG. All off one platform, and in various calibers, and readily convertible in the field, if needed.

MGI feels that this is a valid step forward in the platform design, but retains all the good features of the AR15 that we've come to love, and rely on.

Some may feel that this is the "new generation" that brings the M4 into the 21st century, and others may not. It certainly has possibilities, especially considering all the hoopla surrounding potential ammuntion changes, and their required feeding devices.


Disclaimer: I work for MGI. This is intended to be a useful, on-topic response, and not an ad.

[CapnCrunch]

I don't work for MGI, but the QCB upper and modular lower are both innovative approaches at expanding the old AR15/M16/M4 into a true modular system.

But then again, I think the two biggest advancements in the namesake of this site are the VLTOR Modstock and ABS Carbon Fiber wrapped barrels. I use a lot of gear, and those are perhaps my two favorite pieces of kit thusfar.

With the advent of true monolithic uppers (VIS, in particular) and next-gen continuous railed handguards (URXII), lightweight and flexible illumination solutions (Mil-Lite, EDC, the new SF Millenniums and Scout), and 1-4x variable optics (Short Dot, Meopta)... I mean, jeez... The ATPIAL is powerful enough to cause physical burns and is half the size of a PEQ-2A, AND it uses CR123As!

Eurotrash spaceguns and blended metal BS aside... Is there anything aside from appications of more modern materials and coatings, and perhaps cartridge devlopments that could propel the system any further?

Let's face it guys, the rifle is already lightyears ahead of almost all of its competition... What more could you ask for?

[yakrat101]

SNIP...
What more could you ask for?

Self-cleaning.

(In actuality I don't mind spending a moderate time cleaning as it also allows me to look over the weapon and ensure everything is how it should be, but you asked.)

yakrat101

[CapnCrunch]

Self-cleaning.

(In actuality I don't mind spending a moderate time cleaning as it also allows me to look over the weapon and ensure everything is how it should be, but you asked.)

yakrat101

We're working on a really interesting solution for just that problem. We'll see how it works out in VERY rigorous testing, and then third party verification of our initial results. If everything works out, you should hear an update before the end of the year.

And no, I'm not talking about totally eliminating cleaning Just reducing maintenance time to something bearable.