|
|
|
October 27th, 2009, 14:41
|
#16 |
|
Anyone here wanna point out what's wrong with having a V2 mechbox in a support gun? The only "problem" I can see is the extreme availability of parts...
|
|
|
|
October 27th, 2009, 14:42
|
#17 | |
|
Quote:
__________________
I love freedom and consequently America |
|
|
|
|
|
October 28th, 2009, 23:26
|
#18 |
|
Ive had Star, Ca and A&K, ive used the G&P.
no v2 can compare to a properly built solid support airsoft gun mechbox. the CA is the best IMO hands down. it takes parts jsut as widely from v2/v3. and the carry handle of the CA is reinforced, how do I know? I carry it, run with it and have drop the gun on it a couple of million times and no signs of breakage and wont be any. as for A&K they are extremely durable and also outbeat most of 249's out there simply because of their great price efficiency for what you get, and yes they are built like a brick...I dropped his gun off the table onto concreate and nothing.. CA and A&K forever. |
|
|
|
|
|
October 28th, 2009, 23:42
|
#19 |
|
|
I've picked up an A&K only to have the carry handle snap off, and the outer barrel mounting system break from the 3 foot fall onto the ground...
Now.. I've seen some one (thundercactus) run full tilt, slam his shin into a solid piece of metal and go barrel rolling forward all over his G&P 249... and it was fine. And I still don't see any downsides to a gun being built off of a standard V2? A V2 box can be built to run a longevity fire box... |
|
|
|
|
October 29th, 2009, 00:09
|
#20 | ||
|
Quote:
I don't consider myself an expert gun doc like you amos, but i simply don't understand why having a V2 is such a downfall. I have seen some guys running V2 AR-15 box's putting out well over 20 RPS. The only consiquence i see from a V2 box is maybe breakage near the cylinder head. although that shouldn't be an issue, because if your saw is shooting hot enough for you to break a G&P mechbox, your doing something wrong IMO
__________________
Quote:
Chinese proverb
|
||
|
|
|
|
October 29th, 2009, 13:33
|
#21 |
|
Not Eye Safe, Pretty Boy Maximus on the field take his picture!
|
I've spent 6 hours doing an upgrade on an A&K249 because of all the casting faults in the mechbox and on the hopup chamber, it's made of pot metal, and they have the weakest metal bipods.
Sure if you just want to get a gun that shoots reliably and your going to baby it in the field, buy an A&K. If you want a gun that's a bit more durable, buy a CA. But if you want a tank, buy a G&P. Did I mention it comes with the awesome AUG hop chamber and that the box mags don't feed through an external tube? Everyone in manitoba that's owned a CA249 has had a box mag problem at one time or another, I've never heard of G&P box mags having issues |
|
|
|
|
October 31st, 2009, 02:21
|
#22 |
|
I had the G&P 249 Para,Sorry I ever sold it! Solid Beast
__________________
Death Before Dishonor" Bleeding Black Label" |
|
|
|
|
November 17th, 2009, 17:58
|
#23 |
|
Both my son and I own Stars which are crap and now collect dust due to constant hop issues!!
We now both own A&K'S since Jan/08, the A&K's are close to the real thing in weight..well.. close! (C-9's I have humped) so they are heavy..too heavy for most people, I wish I had the reliability of the A&K in my light weight star! The A&K though metal, will not stand much abuse, as mentioned before it is cast pot metal, but we all got to remember what we got! airsoft guns for $400-$700 are not forged real steel! As for A&K shooting performance, I bought a CA para Auto mag, new hop rubber and run a lipo battery at 360fps all day, I just don't use the weapon for a crow bar, pole vault or shovel. |
|
|
|
|
November 17th, 2009, 18:22
|
#24 |
|
Yes Stars are not very popular due to reliability issues.
A&K is a very very lame attempt to copy the CA version. G&P M249's do not have the real safety switch working!! end of discussion (at least for me :P) Again, my vote is for CA. Ken
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
November 17th, 2009, 19:22
|
#25 |
|
Not Eye Safe, Pretty Boy Maximus on the field take his picture!
|
"M249s only have 2 settings, off and KICKASS!!"
"well mine's a G&P so it really only has the one setting..." And the G&P 249 is actually the closest thing on the market to real steel weight, infact they're 100 grams over at 7.6kg
|
|
|
|
|
November 18th, 2009, 11:16
|
#26 |
|
The G&P M249 is a solidly built gun, but if you happen to break your hop-up unit (and it does happen), you will find yourself needing a MODIFIED AUG unit to replace it. Let me tell you, that's a colossal pain in the ass. Otherwise, they are built well and they tend to be very reliable.
For the best mix of price, value, and ease of acquisition, get a CA M249 (any one of the three versions) and you should have a good time with it. The air nozzle will be most likely to give you issues, but that is easily remedied. If you want to try and save a few bucks, get the A&K M249. It is basically a CA clone, but it is not made nearly as well (there are individual unit exceptions) and will have more flaws. They're cheaper, but its up to you to decide if you want to risk it. If you buy a STAR M249, don't bother showing up at a field with it. It will be blatantly obvious that you are a support gunner wannabe. Best to use STAR M249's as shovels, hammers, or canoe paddles. This is my opinion as I have owned and/or extensively used all of the above guns. |
|
|
|
|
November 18th, 2009, 12:40
|
#27 |
|
lol I used to have a STAR M249, it was ok after a couple of hundred bucks into it, I even have the posted project up o nthe forums somewere...plastic guns...well...are shit. When u hear STAR 249...just turn and walk away lol
The Classic Army is it. end of discussion. Go buy one already and enjoy it for years to come...you will probably die before it does. |
|
|
|
|
|
November 18th, 2009, 12:56
|
#28 |
|
I'll weigh in with a pair of A&K Minimis on my workbench right now.
.jpg) As you can see, I have stripped them both down, and am working on some rather substantial replacement parts for them. The front bipod support block has been machined from a solid billet of steel, and will be welded in place. The main trunnion is being replaced with another solid block of steel. I've installed a "Gas Tube" (too long in this photo, the part is mocked in place, not yet complete) which gives additional strength/stability to the front end, and ties the fore-end into the main body of the receiver shell. The original bipod support at the front end had a 1.010" diameter hole in it, and the fake gas plug that was bolted into it was 0.985", a .025" slop. (Read as FLOP.) This is why it's loose up there in the front end, especially if your bolts start to get loose. The new hole is 1.002", with a 1.000" steel tube going thru it. I think that'll be a bit more stable/strong. (.125" wall thickness....steel is GOOD  )Oh, and as an aside, the end result of this is going to be that it won't fire 6mm any more, it's going to fire 5.6mm. NS
__________________
Death from a bar.... One shot, one tequilla |
|
|
|
|
|
November 18th, 2009, 12:59
|
#29 |
|
Oh, as a followup, the pot metal parts on the original gun (trunnion, bipod support, etc) were and are junk. Buying one of the metal/steel upgrade kits for these guns would make them probably about 25% or so more durable.
NS
__________________
Death from a bar.... One shot, one tequilla |
|
|
|
|
|
November 18th, 2009, 18:47
|
#30 |
|
Not Eye Safe, Pretty Boy Maximus on the field take his picture!
|
Well doesn't G&P sell the exact hopup chamber that's on their 249?
I mean they make an AUG hopup chamber, the same one that's in their 249, but they don't make an AUG lol |
|
|
|
  |
|
||||||
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
 |
|
