Brigade Makasi MK15 First impression Canada review part 2

greentips

Administrator
Moderating Team
Rating - 100%
261   0   0
Location
Pluton
Brigade Makasi MK15 First impression Canada review part 2

The first box opening thread is pretty jam packed with comments, so I am opening a new thread with mainly big pictures, since I am opening the rifle up for firing prep.

The big compliment here to Brigade Manufacturing is the machining and aesthetics Let's put aside the hand guard fitment and loose hairpin to the gas regulator, everything else actually looks very good. Looks like they make the upper and lower out of aluminum plates.

The upper and lower has zero movement. the front pivot is so tight I have to pound it out and pound it back in. The tongue and groove lock up at the back is solid.

The charging handle is pinned on with a a ball detent to lock in on the receiver. The charging handle channel is clean and smooth.

The barrel extension lined up with the upper receiver. They use an extended "m4" style feed ramp but do not use a M4 type receiver ramp cut. this is fine and not a big deal.

The handguard seems to be their achilles heel here. Since this is a sporting rifle, so bridging over the rail is probably not a requirement and I doubt anyone will use such a long eye relief scope on a rifle like this, but you can see the rail and upper do not line up on the same level. Personally this is no big deal.

The bolt is marked MPI - it doesn't say it is proofed but it is marked MPI so maybe MPI only. i

The muzzle and the crown are clean - the flash suppressor is good, remind me of the old PWS 3 pronged indexed flash suppressor. I won't waste money or time to swap for just another flash suppressor.

I ran a patch through the chamber and barrel, and based on the carbon on the muzzle, I believe they did test fire this, maybe for about 3 rounds or so. This is a good thing because I don't think all commercial makers test fire. The question is why it was set in suppressed setting out of the box. Did they test fire this in suppressed setting and passed it? We will find out later.


IMG_7062.jpegIMG_7063.jpegIMG_7067.jpegIMG_7070.jpegIMG_7060.jpegIMG_7064.jpegIMG_7069.jpegIMG_7066.jpeg
 
Last edited:
This is more like the positive review I was expecting, and bodes well for buyers of the Makasi. Good stuff! Glad to hear about the rattle-free Receiver lock-up and I can see the clean machining in the photos.

Thanks so far, GT! Looking forward to your Range Report as Part 3...
 
Poor design choices machined by drunkards then forcibly assembled by enslaved monkeys is the best way I can describe what we are looking at.


Part 2 of brigade Makasi take down

The Clip that holds the gas plug failed - I pulled the handguard the clip fell right off. But the spring pressure of the push rod will theoretically hold the plug in place against the gas block. Still - this is not well designed. Why put a small part there that doesn’t fit well and just come off? View attachment 1153107
The handguard and barrel nut design is a direct copy of HK 416 and therefore Giessele - but the handguard is not exactly lined up with the barrel nut channels, and the bolts got forced into the barrel nut channels at a slight angle - so a bit of tolerance issue here View attachment 1153112

I cannot wait to see the numerous cope post trying to claim this is still better than the Carmel.
 
Poor design choices machined by drunkards then forcibly assembled by enslaved monkeys is the best way I can describe what we are looking at.





I cannot wait to see the numerous cope post trying to claim this is still better than the Carmel.
I was struggling to define SKS characteristics...and in you walk.
 
Honest question regarding the bcg. Is a single ejector problematic? I'm aware that if it works, then it works, but my question is more about design. If one ejector is sufficient then why do most bcg's have two? Is two just a military contract type redundancy that is really unnecessary or is relying on one going to be a problem?

Further, can this MPI bcg simply be replaced with a better and drop in AR15 bcg?
 
Honest question regarding the bcg. Is a single ejector problematic? I'm aware that if it works, then it works, but my question is more about design. If one ejector is sufficient then why do most bcg's have two? Is two just a military contract type redundancy that is really unnecessary or is relying on one going to be a problem?

Further, can this MPI bcg simply be replaced with a better and drop in AR15 bcg?
most BCGs have one ejector. Some have two for redundancy but the norm is definitely one
 
Honest question regarding the bcg. Is a single ejector problematic? I'm aware that if it works, then it works, but my question is more about design. If one ejector is sufficient then why do most bcg's have two? Is two just a military contract type redundancy that is really unnecessary or is relying on one going to be a problem?

Further, can this MPI bcg simply be replaced with a better and drop in AR15 bcg?

Picture is from GT's initial First Impression thread.

img_7050-jpeg.1153126


Sure looks like a standard AR15 BCG that had the rear cut off and then a proprietary gas key installed for the piston to strike so I would honestly say YES any AR15 BCG can be chopped to fit the rifle as that is what Brigade has done.

I'll let GT confirm that but from what I can see it's the same thing that was done on the Backlands Hunter's BCGs without using an angle grinder.
 
Honest question regarding the bcg. Is a single ejector problematic? I'm aware that if it works, then it works, but my question is more about design. If one ejector is sufficient then why do most bcg's have two? Is two just a military contract type redundancy that is really unnecessary or is relying on one going to be a problem?

Further, can this MPI bcg simply be replaced with a better and drop in AR15 bcg?

I honestly think that you are concerned about a non-issue when it comes to two Ejectors over one. The AR15 Bolt has featured a single Ejector since its design and inception by Eugene Stoner back in the late 1950s. Countless M16s, M4s, and AR15s have functioned just fine with a single ejector for the past 70 years, during which time the single Ejector has been the norm. The use of dual ejectors is a recent trend based on a misplaced desire for redundancy where none has ever been required, IMHO. But that's just me. One ejector or two, I am confident that the Makasi will eject its empty casings with sufficient authority to ensure reliability.

If you are the overly cautious type who insists upon having dual Ejectors, the good news is that the Makasi Bolt is 100% AR-compatible. So you need only source an AR15/M16 Bolt with a dual Ejector setup and swap it in for that extra degree of insurance. You can replace your factory Makasi Bolt with any upgraded AR15/M16 Bolt that you believe will improve the rifle's performance.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom