KWA or SRC
 

Hey guys,

What is the better G36C, the one from KWA http://www.albertaairsoft.com/store/...id_product=176 or SRC http://www.albertaairsoft.com/store/...id_product=261 ? Any help would be great.

Thanks.

I'd like to know too.
Info would be appreciated.

I wouldn't be all too surprised if KWA re-brands SRC... I know they re-brand KSC when it comes to their GBB's...

as far as I know Amos KWA IS KSC, just KWA is for outside japan, so its not a rebrand...
but this is second hand info, I dont know for sure, just what I've gathered from reading the forums

Here is the first hand info. KWA was a contract factory in Taiwan that KSC (Japan) had hired, to produce KSC parts and SOME KSC products.

KWA has been making the KSC "Made in Taiwan" products, while KSC Japan makes the KSC "made in Japan" products.

Later KWA started selling products they made with their own brand name "KWA" hence KWA and KSC products are the same. Note, that some KSC models are not made out side of Japan, like Mk23, M93R etc.

Ken
007Airsoft

I'm saying kwa

Note that the SRCs come upgraded to the tits, so as long as theres some quality parts in there, its a good deal, but WHETHER there is quality there is left to be determined... you can be the guinea pig!

Well the SRC GEN III has some pretty cool features...like the metal cocking handle...

well thing is so far there is only 3 rifle that you can get from KWA. M4, M4 S system, and g36 c but look at the SRC. they have tones of choice that you can buy.

Quality not quantity

that will change early next year. KWA TW got hit with really bad weather and set their production schedule way behind.

I had a KWA M93R. Was it made in Japan then? The Japanese factory made two version of this pistol?

The KWA's body is fiber reinforced ABS as apposed to the SRC which is nylon fiber mixed with glass fiber. Which is what the real gun is made out of, if what 007 states is true SRC have better externals. Plus you got the metal charging handle and mag release, and personally I think SRC look better:p. When it comes to Internals I don't know enough about gearboxes to tell you who is better.

Ian

KWA guns seem to be famous in the states for their internal quality, and the fact that are "Li-po reedy". i would go with KWA, i have heard pretty amazing things about them.

The SRC are truly a step up. Come check them out next time I'm open Phillip, you won't be dissapointed!

their both very nice guns. top of the line stuff, there is no a clear "better" brand of the two.

In other words, they are both much better than G&G, JG, WELL, etc etc cansofts.

Both are ABS plastic and the same material as TM/JG as far as the guns I handled last year.

I don't know if that has changed in 2009 with the cansofts.

SRC has metal cocking handle and it's on metal mag release catch and a metal hop-up.

As far as internals, both will be using ball bearings in their bushings and otherwise both are similar. I would say go for SRC.

how do the SRC compare to the new ics line up with the slipgear box?

The ICS Cansoft M4's that are available in Canada now all have plastic upper bodies. ICS currently cannot do any M4 type guns with metal upper and cansoft lower. Until that is problem is fixed, I will not considering carrying ICS M4 series guns.

Ken

I haven't used either, but I noticed in other threads people bemoaning the KWA for compatibility issues. Can any gun doctors comment here?

I just bought a KWA G36C from buyairsoft so I will post a review later. I choose KWA for better reputation in term of quality and durability. KWA G36 has been used since 2007 with good records of service. SRC Gen 3 are new and haven't been thoroughly tested on the market. First and second SRC generation had several issues and bad reliability.

Gen 3 SRC have also been out since end 2007, 2008 ....

It's pretty stupid to even have the upper reciever metal if the lower is plastic in the first place Not like you see people selling Metal lowers left and right and if they are selling recievers its both the upper and lower and your left with a metal upper ......and a clear lower no one realy wants

Not for ICS. Metal receivers for ICS, be that upper or lower, are rare to be sold standalone as they are not compatible with any other brand (for externals). To my knowledge, all non-cansoft ICS Armalites and MP5 of recent generations are full metal.
Having a metal upper for ICS cansofts would simply enhance their solidity (as long as it's not a cheap metal).

SRC has my vote.

Yes the SRC Gen I and Gen II were debatable. Also, the most common SRC guns in the states have been Gen II, there has been very few reviews of the SRC Gen III guns.

Gen III are top of the line with the best internals precisely installed and carefully tuned up. I have opened a few of them for re-wiring etc and found that the assembly is amazingly good.

Ken
007Airsoft

ok so ics has plastic upper, but how do their internals compare to src? are they cheaper version of the standard ics? src internals are loaded with goodies but arent cqb friendly

the ics internals are suposed to be the same ass there Full metal guns only diffrence is the body everythiign else is exactly the same

I have an ICS and out of the box it was shit,then it broke and I have spent the last two months trying to fix it.....No such luck.

In summary KWA or SRC FTW.

I own a Gen II SRC M4 and it isn't comparable to my buddys KWA M4.

I have never touched a SRC Gen III, so thats a different story.

some people should not post unless they have first hand experience with the brands...

"He said she said" is not a valid opinion or observation. It's down right misleading.

I have bought an SRC HK416 and I also own a G&G M4, both lower receivers are made of plastic but they are not similar at all. SRC lower receivers are very strong and slightly rugged to the touch, they are also curiously much more tinted than the usual G&G smoked lower receiver. From afar you can't even tell it is made of plastic and from up close are very dark. I also own an ICS MP5A4 and I can confirm that SRC upper receiver are much more resilient to scratches. There were also no wobble at all on the SRC HK416 which was welcome. Anyhow that's all I can say for the time being on my experience with SRC.

Here's a picture of the amazingly dark and sturdy lower receiver from SRC.

http://img696.imageshack.us/img696/167/dscf1929.jpg

^
Foxx showing off his HK416 again, same picture too lol.

Haha, you're right :lol: the whole internet must look at it!

But seriously, that lower receiver is really dark.

The SRC Receivers are pretty dark.

The only thing that sucks about My SRC G36C, is the Mag wiggles around, and when the stock is folded.. It's not held in as sturdily as I'd like it to be.

Haven't got a chance to fire it yet though, Waiting on a battery.. :'(

^
Be sure to review it once battery is on hand ;)

Honestly for the price.. go with SRC. Quality wise they are both very similar but forget about the lipo ready BS. With the internals in a stock SRC I really can't see why they aren't lipo ready.

I was over at ken's (007 airsoft) the other day to check out the SRC g36 series. My first impressions were quite positive. The body felt rock solid and the Plastic lower is quite sturdy and showed no signs of micro fractures or cracks around any stress points. The lower rec airsoft eiver is quite dark and does not take away from the guns overall appearance The sighting (scope) is fantastic, however the scope comes in the form of a full cross hairs unlike the scope of many other g36 such as the classic army g36 which uses the actual HK scope image. The externals were extremely solid overall with no creaks bends or compressions to worry about. my only complaint about the external parts was the extremely obvious mould lines especially on the forward hand guard. Ken had a CA g36k on sight and the difference in mould quality was quite pronounced. The CA had little to no sign of mould lines where as the SRC had a large obvious line right across the upper hand guard. This however is simply a cosmetic error as the gun is still quite solid and these simple cosmetic issues would not stop me from buying and using one in the future.

-DAN

I've noticed that mould line on the SRC G36 handguards also. I hate seeing mould lines on things, but the reality is that it is a very solid gun that feels and looks great. Definitely up to par I would say.

Well.. I've found out that the 95 Round King Arms 5pack of mags is a GREAT choice for the SRC's and KWA G36's. They fit quite a bit tighter and have little to no wobble, They'll only wobble with force.

I've unloaded about 2000-3000 rounds out of the SRC G36C so far.. and Have been quite impressed! Although I can't make it outside to do a grouping test because it's -30 to -36.. :( But standing outside the door and unloading 4 mags on full auto, It seems to take off branches on my neighbors trees.. :P

SRC to KWA Rate of Fire
 

So I knew KWA was faster, but how much faster... this came as a surprise-

YouTube- Capital Airsoft - KWA & SRC M4A1 Rate Of Fire Tests

SRC to KWA Rate of Fire Test-

Results-

SRC- 12 RPS
KWA- 22 RPS

ill be honest that just made up my mind for me. SRC is what i want now, but thats because im not firing a gun like a laser lmaoo.

I don't think 22RPS is necessary, Maybe in paintball were they tend to aim with their 'rope' of paint... But Since the 'Real Steel' does 12.5 RPS/750RPM.. SRC is more close, in terms of realism.

With a tracer unit, the KWA will look like goddamn Star Wars.

Keep in mind folks that was on an 10.8v Battery :P.

Lower rate of fire with the same mechbox design, wiring, and battery implies that the slower mechbox is less efficient. Faster rate of fire also implies faster trigger response.

Just FYI.