Ease of internal upgrading CA/ICS/G&G? Looking for gun-doc comments..

[tofu]

Hi,

I'm looking to purchase my first non-TM AEG, which will be an m4-type variant, however, I am a little uneased with anything not TM. having worked on the first and second gen ICS and CA guns many years ago (particularly the mp5 series), I can say that I was not impressed thoroughly. While they may have been exteriorally fantastic, I found that internally, they were all shit (please note that I have never dealt with G&G so I do not speak for them). Jumping to the present now, these 3rd market manufactuers seem to have up'ed their quality, and I have read a number of reviews, but few seem to go indepth into the internal aspect of ease of upgrading and reliability (ie. jams, freezes, lock-ups, etc.). I was wondering if any gun-docs out there can comment on CA/ICS/ or G&G mechboxes, particularly m16-types? I have heard that the G&Ps out there are quite flawed as well with their tappet-plate, hopup, etc. - if anyone is able to comment on those as well, that'd be great.

Thanks

[MadMax]

I have to say I'm impressed with current CA AEGs. Mechanical build seems solid. Well made gears. I can't say for sure without more lifecycle testing though. So far I'm still setting up a 50k cycle test which will be loading bbs (not dryfire). The armalite line is very easy to take apart (compared to TM) so servicing is pretty easy. Changing springs is not as easy as with ICS, but it's not something you normally do all that often. The split ICS box is also still not a very proven design so I'm not so sure about alignment issues.

[tofu]

thanks for the advice Carl - have you/anyone had any experience with the G&Gs though? From what I've read, they're the same "good gun" dealio in all the reviews..

[Amazing KG3]

My G&G UMP was beautifully made, but the interanls are terrible. The tappet plate was useless, and one of the hardest mechboxs to open IMO