Maxim Defense PDX 300 blackout - gas problems solved?

[themonk]

Also factor in the the 300 blk version was delayed 6 months from the 5.56 & 7.62 versions.

Again I get the feeling there is not a lot of engineering going on. There is a reason that SIG won the socom contract.

[themonk]

[Flint_Ironstag]

Thank you again. Rattler hands down over this for me; size matters. I am not a fan of folding stocks. The kinematics of the Maxim Defense make sense to me. I am just not a fan of folding. I need to find someplace in Houston to rent some time on one.

Informative video, thanks.

[themonk]

100% agree. I built mine and could not be happier but I have shot the rattle and it is a great gun. Just posting for reference.

[Flint_Ironstag]

100% agree. I built mine and could not be happier but I have shot the rattle and it is a great gun. Just posting for reference.

I’ll go do a search, just wondering if you’ve made a post on your build...

[themonk]

I dont think I ever did do a post. I got tired of AAC saying they would release the Honey Badger and then they wouldn't. I decided to build my own. One of my good friends is a master gunsmith and he had a local PD that was interested in what we came up with. It needed to use a mil spec BCG, have a stock that was no button press to extend, be MOA, and under 22".

The gun was built around a Noveske Gen 3 upper and lower. Due to limited handguard selection and wanting to have some hand space we went with a 7.5" barrel custom made from X-Caliber barrels in a 1:6 twist (fastest they would do back then). Rail just based on the fact it needed to be exactly 7" for suppressor clearance was SLR Rifleworks. I used an SLR adjustable gas block and Maxim's CQB stock (which I upgraded at some point to the latest version). The buffer system was JP's silent heavy buffer system that Maxim worked with them on. The suppressor is a SIG 762ti.

Its an awesome gun that is wicked quiet with subs and is the right size for what I wanted - long enough to stretch its legs and short enough it could be used as PDW. In the end the PD looked at the price tag and laughed but most of that was Noveske. You could build the same gun on a cheap upper and lower and the only expensive parts would be the stock and the barrel. The barrel I think was under $300 so by today's standards not an overly expensive barrel.

That year Q released the updated Honey Badger. Its an awesome gun but the proprietary carrier and push button to extend the stock (the original Q Honey Badgers used to have pull to extend but they have since changed it) were, and still are, deal breakers for me. 7.5" barrel vs 7" also give you a full size carbine rail.

[Flint_Ironstag]

Nice build. So I’m looking at a $2200 Rattler, + $400 to replace the folding brace, + optics and laser, + fore grip. This is gonna be steep ��

[usmc51]

I went with the first two calibers offered, and never had much use for .300 until recently. Hoping for good experiences with these; a friend at the company is a really good guy and trying to do great things with them. For what it's worth, these were requested due to dissatisfaction with the Rattler and the .300 BLK. No submissions from the program were adopted, as I recall.

[Flint_Ironstag]

I went with the first two calibers offered, and never had much use for .300 until recently. Hoping for good experiences with these; a friend at the company is a really good guy and trying to do great things with them. For what it's worth, these were requested due to dissatisfaction with the Rattler and the .300 BLK. No submissions from the program were adopted, as I recall.

I like that PDX in arid more than I should rationally, even knowing it would go under the cerakote. Can you elaborate any more on this dissatisfaction with the Rattler?

[themonk]

I have no idea what he is talking about. They were all part of SOCOMs PDW submission.