Update to "Vltor Emod Mod"
It seems that Vltor thought up the alternate adjustment lever well before I did. However, they have no plans to produce it or a stock in this configuration...just imagine being a dealer and having to order an "EMod, Foliage, Mil-Spec, Lever 1" as well as an "EMod, Black, Commercial Spec, Lever 2" and everything in between, for a total of a dozen configurations!
Note that their design offers more leverage in the available space. It's also at a shallower angle, meaning a reduced chance of having the lever snag on or be depressed by something.
5.45x39mm: Why You Want to Shoot Corrosive Ammo
I love the price of 5.45x39mm ammunition. I love my S&W 5.45x39mm upper because it lets me shoot cheap ammunition that has recoil and blast characteristics similar to that of 5.56x45mm ammunition.
I'm glad to see that many people have caught on to this same idea. However, I'm a little puzzled by the folks who are put off by the fact that surplus 5.45 is mildly corrosive.
Hey, these aren't match uppers. They're meant for plinking and training. S&W was smart and made theirs with chrome lined barrels, which helps extend barrel life, but also helps prevent corrosion. Still, you won't consistently shoot 10 shot groups under 2-3 MOA with the weapon, unless you handload your own ammo, which doesn't make much financial sense.
After 4000 rounds downrange and absolutely no cleaning, the bolt was showing signs of pitting. Had I bothered to wipe everything down with Windex hot soapy water after shooting, I wouldn't have had this "problem." I went ahead and nickel plated the internals of my 5.45x39mm AR, mainly because I could. I haven't had any corrosion problems since (and I still haven't cleaned it).
What I'm saying is that if you want a 5.45x39mm rifle, you're most likely buying it because the ammunition is cheap. Buying new production Silver Bear or Wolf - which is essentially as expensive as steel case 5.56 - makes the 5.45 factor pointless. Beyond that, the surplus ammunition is very high quality. Some lots of Silver Bear 5.45 have had improperly sized cases, and Wolf is chronically underpowered. The surplus ammunition was made to be used by a military in wartime - it's hot and it'll cycle the action when the others won't.
Use the money you save by buying eeevil corrosive ammo to pick up a bottle of Windex hot soapy water and give everything a quick wipe down when you're done shooting.
A Quick & Dirty Vltor EMod…Mod
The Vltor EMod is my favorite stock. It doesn't add much weight to the weapon, overall, but the weight is concentrated at the rear of the stock, which helps balance out a muzzle heavy rifle. However, due to the presence of a battery compartment in the body of the stock, the adjustment lever is of a slightly different design, and isn't as easy to adjust on the fly. It does have its own advantages, but I prefer the "traditional" adjustment lever, as seen on CAR and M4 stocks, as well as the original Vltor Modstock.
So I decided to fix this myself, using a bunch of parts I had lying around. Here's how to do it. It's semi reversible - you won't damage any of the EMod components unless you hit them with a hammer (even then, nothing will probably happen), although you will kinda sacrifice a cheap stock adjustment lever.
Remove the lever from an unused M4 stock body - a single roll pin stops a nut from coming loose, once you punch out that roll pin and unscrew that nut, the lever will come off easily. You may find it helpful to hold the nut in a vise while tapping out the roll pin.
Then do the same with the EMod. Try to keep the spring and associated parts inside the EMod, it'll make reassembly easier.
Next, mark the M4 adjustment lever - you'll be cutting it. You should cut the portion of the lever that does not have a hole in it - that is, the part which is at the rear when the stock is assembled. If you cut it so the amount of lever behind the "angle" is exactly the same as the portion before the "angle", you'll be fine.
Finally, reassemble the EMod using the "new" lever, in reverse order.
Here's the final product. Enjoy.
Bravo Company MFG 14.5" Midlength Upper Receiver Group
I've long been a fan of Bravo Company uppers. I have a supply of BCM hats to last a long time (you receive a BCM hat with every upper purchase).
One of the things that most impressed me about Bravo Company was something pretty minor: barrel extensions.
Bravo Company products are held to such a high standard that the lack of properly hardened barrel extensions stopped production of Bravo Company upper receiver assemblies for two years.
Two years.
Keep in mind, we're not talking about the lack of any old barrel extension. You could buy barrel extensions during that time. However, barrel extensions are surface hardened to a specific number on the Rockwell scale. Those that were available were not, apparently, high enough on the scale.
That's a commitment to quality.
So, when I was contacted by Paul at Bravo Company with the opportunity to test and evaluate a new Bravo upper, I jumped at the chance. The upper in question is a 14.5" midlength with a permanently attached muzzle device of sufficient length to bring the barrel OAL to 16.1".
Several years ago, I was skeptical of 14.5" midlength barrels. I wasn't sure that they had sufficient dwell time - the time between when the bullet passes the gas port and when it exits the muzzle - to run reliably in all conditions. However, I heard from people whose opinions I respected (among others, the lathe wizards at Adco Firearms) that such uppers could run very well. So, with some trepidation, I picked up a Sabre Defense 14.5" midlength barrel and assembled it using parts I had lying around. Although I initially had issues with popped primers and stuck cases, after the chamber was reamed to 5.56 NATO, it ran like a sewing machine. I really liked how smooth the upper cycled. Though some will put down attempts at recoil reduction or muzzle rise reduction on a 5.56 carbine, such changes can make a big difference with regard to rapid follow up shots at distance.
Obviously, my initial feelings about 14.5" midlengths were just plain wrong. However, it was something that was a pleasure to be wrong about.
The upper I received from Bravo Company was well packaged. This was fortuitous, because UPS made a really decent attempt to destroy the box. However, they were outfoxed by Bravo.
It was equipped with a Daniel Defense Omega Rail 9.0, BCM marked Troy rear sight, a Vltor/BCM Gunfighter charging handle, a BCM bolt carrier group, and a permanently attached PWS FSC556. If you wanted to build or buy an upper with the best components, this is the recipe to follow.
As you can see, the upper was shipped with a liberal application of oil. This is a good thing. I think the next step UPS was going to take involved dropping the package in the Pacific Ocean.
I am a fan of fixed front sight bases. I've used quality clamp-on gas blocks with great success, but when it comes to a rifle that I'd stake my life on, I prefer an FSB attached by taper pins. It's not going anywhere, and it can take a hell of a blow before it fails. Plus, should an optic fail, it's already "there", and even if I don't have rear BUIS up and locked, I have practiced shooting using only the FSB, at least out to a reasonable distance (200 yards). A good, consistent cheekweld is critical here.
As I mentioned, this upper has a permanently attached muzzle device - the excellent PWS FSC556. The pin and weld - located on the bottom side of the muzzle device - is obvious, which is a good thing - there can be no mistake that this barrel has been properly modified and is legal to attach to a non-SBR (or pistol) lower receiver. However, it's not ugly and obvious. Whoever did this knew what they were doing and had done it before. So, if you like the idea of a 16.1" OAL barrel but are turned off by the concept of an "ugly" pin and weld, have no fear.
The bolt markings leave no room for error - no expense was spared on the testing procedure front, however small the failure rate may be. High pressure - also known as "proof" testing - and magnetic particle testing can detect cracks just below the surface. Also, note the extensive test firing that was undertaken, as evidenced by the brass marks on the bolt face.
Because of the pinned muzzle device, I was unable to completely disassemble the upper. However, I have disassembled other BCM uppers in the past, and they've all been the same - assembled with the utmost care and precision, with no expense spared and no detail overlooked.
Here's the upper on a Spike's Tactical ST-15 lower. For those of you who are interested in this sort of thing, the finish on the receivers was a perfect match. This rifle will get a Krylon bath soon, so it's not of much practical use to me, but it may be to others.
And, finally, here's the rifle with a few doodads attached. Notice that the center of gravity shifts forward with the addition of the PEQ-2A IR laser/illuminator.
In case you've been wondering, this is an absolutely splendid way to blow a good number of mortgage payments. Married men, ensure that you have a good couch before setting out on an endeavor such as this.
Range report will follow tomorrow.
3/20 BCM 14.5" Midlength Range Report
There was a bit of discussion online as to what this upper would shoot and what it would not shoot, what buffer to use, etc. I'm a big fan of the Spike's ST-T2 buffer, however, I feel that a slightly lighter buffer may be more appropriate for midlength gas systems. So, for the purposes of this test, I used a standard carbine buffer.
I had the following ammunition with me:
M193 - 40 rounds
M855 - 45 rounds
Wolf .223 55gr - 40 rounds
Remington (UMC) .223 55gr - 40 rounds
Federal .223 "value pack" - 100 rounds
As expected, the weapon functioned perfectly with all of the above. There were no failures of any kind. I even used a "suspect" magazine, which will be the topic of another post, without issue.
Also as expected, the weapon ran very smooth. It's hard to describe this with mere words. I was using an EOTech 552 mounted on an LT-110 shooting at 3" Shoot-N-C targets at 25 yards. When I placed the center dot of the EOTech at the 6 o'clock position of the target and fired in a rapid manner, the center dot of the EOTech never left that 3" circle, even as the action was cycling. It was very easy to track the reticle during recoil.
From a longevity standpoint, this upper is built for the long haul, and I've just driven it around the block. I'll continue testing and shoot for groups at some point in the near future. In the meantime, I'll just say this: this is an outstanding upper receiver assembly, and is easily worth the cost of admission.
Back Up Gun: Diamondback DB380
The Diamondback DB380 is a new firearm manufactured in Cocoa, Florida. Some of you may know that Kel-Tec is located in Cocoa, Florida. I've heard several stories about Diamondback, all of them essentially saying that Diamondback was started by former Kel-Tec employees. Whatever the background, the result is head and shoulders above anything produced by Kel-Tec. I am actually a fan of the Kel-Tec P3AT, having purchased 4 and given 3 to friends and relatives as carry handguns. Of those four, with about 800 rounds downrange between them, I observed 1 malfunction, a failure to extract on the last round out of the mag. However, I won't dispute that Kel-Tec handguns are not confidence-inspiring to behold. Every component and every detail screams "cheap". And, to be fair, it is. It's a $200-250 handgun. You have to look at it as such.
The Diamondback DB380, on the other hand, was $400 out the door. Thankfully, considering the price, it does not scream "cheap". Frankly, the quality of molding, machining, and the finish is on par with any quality handgun in the $500-700 range. Unlike the Kel-Tec, its barrel has a finish to prevent rust. Unlike the Kel-Tec, it actually has sights, albeit small ones. Unlike the Kel-Tec, it does not give you the impression that something could fall off or break at any moment. And so on.
But this article isn't supposed to be about the P3AT, even though I've just made it (temporarily) about the P3AT.
What do you get for your $400?
You get a very shootable handgun. What do I mean by that? Well, to me, a shootable handgun is one that doesn't make me work too hard to place the rounds where I want them. That's the DB380. Although the trigger pull is long and the reset is equally as long, it's smooth and consistent. I've never been terribly accurate with .380s, so I was surprised when the first 5 shots out of the pistol at 15 yards grouped like this:
Furthermore, I also noted that felt recoil was reduced compared to the P3AT. I used to own a Sig P232, and while it was very reliable and quite accurate, recoil was snappy and uncomfortable, especially with Gold Dots or other defensive ammo. The DB380, while still being a little snappy with hot ammo, was very manageable - and a manageable firearm is an effective firearm.
Indeed, as I moved to a "run and gun" bay at the range, I found that I was able to keep 90% of my hits in the "A" zone of an IPSC silhouette even as I was moving from the 3 to the 12 and back to the 3, as well as laterally. I wasn't able to keep 90% of the rounds on a 3"x5" index card, which I was able to do with a Glock 19, but I still found the results to be quite satisfactory.
Part of the reason why I wasn't able to keep the same level of accuracy was that I started with the Glock and then went to the DB380. While the slide of the DB380 is a virtual (miniature) carbon copy of a Glock slide, the lower half, specifically the way the trigger operates, is quite different. See below.
- G26 slide top - DB380 slide bottom
- G26 frame top - DB380 frame bottom
The DB380's trigger is a very simple and much more traditional double action, and while the Glock may be officially classified as a double action handgun (excuse me, "safe action"), the two have a very different feel. The DB380 is almost Sig DAO-like, whereas the Glock trigger is more staple-gun-like. On a more serious note, I much prefer the shorter reset of the Glock trigger.
What are the drawbacks to the DB380? Well, it's a .380, although Hornady's Critical Defense ammo shows some promise. The magazine release is very, very shallow. This is a double edged sword - the mag is less likely to inadvertently be released while the pistol is in a pocket holster, but it is very difficult to release the mag when you want to. I have to use the corner of my thumbnail, pressing straight down on the release, to drop the mag. I will go so far as to say that this pistol was not intended to be carried with a reload, although it might be a very prudent decision to do so if this is your only carry gun.
Another potential drawback is the magazine. The DB380 will take Kel-Tec mags, but my only malfunction to date was with a Kel-Tec mag, on the last shot out of the mag - a failure to extract. With over 400 rounds down the tube using the original mag, it has been absolutely flawless. If you want a spare mag, I'd advise that you buy a DB380 mag. Why, then, do I say that the magazine is a drawback? Well, P3AT mags are made by Mec-Gar, an Italian company with a very high reputation. DB380 mags are made by ACT-MAG, a company which I have had somewhat less success with. However, I can't complain about the performance of this magazine.
In conclusion, I'm very satisfied with the performance of this pistol. After an initial range test, I've been carrying it for several months as a BUG to a Glock 26 or Glock 19, with multiple range trips along the way to keep up my skills. It's so light that I don't even notice it on my ankle - going back to the 442 was a bit of a shock for a few minutes.
I've heard several reports of problems with other DB380s, especially early serial number DB380s - but every such report has been accompanied by a comment regarding fast and effective customer service by Diamondback. I understand that they have a 9mm version in the works - I'm looking forward to getting my hands on it. If you're in the market for a concealable and reliable .380 handgun, I strongly suggest you check out the Diamondback DB380.
DB380 with its 6 round capacity magazine
Diamondback DB380 with Smith & Wesson 442
Diamondback DB380 with Glock 19