milspec or not..... I have a question
- Thread starter 45ACPKING
- Start date
ACP,
Will the AR stocks mounting be inline or slightly above he barrel like the new Troy stock? I recall you saying you handled one and it impressed you. I would be VERY interested in something like that. An ACE tube stock or some collapsible stock would be what I'd be leaning towards attaching to your design.
I have a Dave GP stock and it is nice, comfortable style of design. Glad to hear you are delving into this area also to fill the gap for the E2 style stocks.
Will the AR stocks mounting be inline or slightly above he barrel like the new Troy stock? I recall you saying you handled one and it impressed you. I would be VERY interested in something like that. An ACE tube stock or some collapsible stock would be what I'd be leaning towards attaching to your design.
I have a Dave GP stock and it is nice, comfortable style of design. Glad to hear you are delving into this area also to fill the gap for the E2 style stocks.
AR buttstock in line with the barrel.
Make the AR buttstock adapter to Commercial standards(well majority of commercial tubes anyway) and have an optional ring adapter to fit Mil-Spec AR buttstock tubes.
As far as rails go make a picatinny rail that replaces the handguard and rear sight, possibly also anchoring to the scope mount hole.
Make the AR buttstock adapter to Commercial standards(well majority of commercial tubes anyway) and have an optional ring adapter to fit Mil-Spec AR buttstock tubes.
As far as rails go make a picatinny rail that replaces the handguard and rear sight, possibly also anchoring to the scope mount hole.
The viron stock seems really nice and the price is surely right something like that would be the cat's bum. The only thing I don't like about them is that they seem a little like something I could build in regards to finish. I locked on the viron site and he seems to do a lot to help accuracy which as well as weight is whats important to me. Having 50 rails that I will never use is really not important to me. All I would want is a relatively simple, light, accurate stock with a pistol grip. Collapsable stock is nice too but not necessary.
Lets see some of your ideas, in the end its gonna be all about the LCF anyways.
Lets see some of your ideas, in the end its gonna be all about the LCF anyways.
The materials i am utilizing will be as weight conscious as possible, and really, this is one reason why this is taking some time. Material selection is key. I have borrowed from the marine industry here. Maintaining weight and maintaining proper barrel/stock pressure and rigidity is something that has not been lost in my designs. I would safely say that a finished stock will weigh in slightly heavier than a typical usgi fiberglass stock. I also aim to offer a solid warranty with my product so.... I don't wanna be producing stocks that i will see again once they are sold hehehe unless it's in glory shots from stock owners 
I will be aiming to keep pricing in line with what is currently availlable stateside and if i can do better i will. Obviously we are encroaching into the "I can not discuss yet" area, so that's all i can say there.
again I really appreciate your input guys.... immensley
I will be aiming to keep pricing in line with what is currently availlable stateside and if i can do better i will. Obviously we are encroaching into the "I can not discuss yet" area, so that's all i can say there.
again I really appreciate your input guys.... immensley
dangertree
Business Rep
- Location
- NL/ON/FL/PL
I'm not sure I understand the question? The threads are the same on both (as they all fit the same receiver), the difference is in the actual diameter of the the extension tube.
Or, are you asking what type of receiver extension you should buy to include with the stock you are designing? If so, check the price, the milspec tube is ~3X-4X the price and less available. Not dissing milspec extensions, (they're all we sell), but for market research purposes, I'd assume there are many more civilian spec tubes/buttstocks out there and I assume they work fine.
Good luck with your project.
Or, are you asking what type of receiver extension you should buy to include with the stock you are designing? If so, check the price, the milspec tube is ~3X-4X the price and less available. Not dissing milspec extensions, (they're all we sell), but for market research purposes, I'd assume there are many more civilian spec tubes/buttstocks out there and I assume they work fine.
Good luck with your project.
Boy I have to say I am REALLY looking forward to this edition of the support group...can't wait to see what everything is looking like!
Thomas,
I have been looking at making my own AR butt tube to M-14 stock adapter. I will be using simple aluminum angle, with the AR pistol grip adapter welded on to the bottom. Not much machining, no fuss, no muss.
If you have the correct tap [ or can borrow it from someone we know who does have it ] then tapping the adapter for the AR-15 Buffer tube thread will always use the same size / thread. How high you pick to locate the buffer tube, and which buffer tube you choose, will be the major variables after that.
IMHO, the AR-15 buffer tubes ALONE are a bit too thin for a structural device supporting the weight, recoil, and potential abuse of an M-14. When they designed the first GI fiberglass stocks, they actually went and did bayonet practice with them on practice dunmmies, and had a set number of times the stock had to survive vertical and horizontal butt strokes. Not surprisingly, the horizontal butt strokes were harder on the stock.
So, if by MILSPEC, you mean we get to buttstroke somebody till the stock breaks, and record this number, I am all up for that. Wonder who we can get to volunteer as the dummy?
Personally, although thousands of ACE fixed skeleton stocks are successfully out there, and have stood up well, for my AR fixed stocks, I prefer the extra strength of the YHM design, which adds another tube around the existing buffer tube. I will be using this for my fixed stock M-14 / AR crossbreeding experiments.
As for FOLDING stocks, I have built about half a dozen of these, mostly on GI WOOD front ends, with Bulter Creek folders. I also have done one each Chinese wood stock, and one US GI Fiberglass stocked folders.
The only problem I ever had with a folder, was when one of my clients, who weighs about 280, dived into rollover prone with the folder extended, and the 3" thin /hard drywall screws came out of the VERY soft Chinese mystery wood. Fatter screws, and more epoxy fixed that one.
If you are planning on making the stock to use a folder, then check into some of the other designs [ the FN folder and copies are probably one of the best ].
However, if you want to use the vast array of SLIDING stocks that fir the AR-15 shorty buffer tube, then do whatever works fastest / cheapest /best [ choose any two ] for you.
I personally have never met a sliding stock that I liked, but maybe you can convince me different?
good luck with your R&D
LAZ 1
I have been looking at making my own AR butt tube to M-14 stock adapter. I will be using simple aluminum angle, with the AR pistol grip adapter welded on to the bottom. Not much machining, no fuss, no muss.
If you have the correct tap [ or can borrow it from someone we know who does have it ] then tapping the adapter for the AR-15 Buffer tube thread will always use the same size / thread. How high you pick to locate the buffer tube, and which buffer tube you choose, will be the major variables after that.
IMHO, the AR-15 buffer tubes ALONE are a bit too thin for a structural device supporting the weight, recoil, and potential abuse of an M-14. When they designed the first GI fiberglass stocks, they actually went and did bayonet practice with them on practice dunmmies, and had a set number of times the stock had to survive vertical and horizontal butt strokes. Not surprisingly, the horizontal butt strokes were harder on the stock.
So, if by MILSPEC, you mean we get to buttstroke somebody till the stock breaks, and record this number, I am all up for that. Wonder who we can get to volunteer as the dummy?
Personally, although thousands of ACE fixed skeleton stocks are successfully out there, and have stood up well, for my AR fixed stocks, I prefer the extra strength of the YHM design, which adds another tube around the existing buffer tube. I will be using this for my fixed stock M-14 / AR crossbreeding experiments.
As for FOLDING stocks, I have built about half a dozen of these, mostly on GI WOOD front ends, with Bulter Creek folders. I also have done one each Chinese wood stock, and one US GI Fiberglass stocked folders.
The only problem I ever had with a folder, was when one of my clients, who weighs about 280, dived into rollover prone with the folder extended, and the 3" thin /hard drywall screws came out of the VERY soft Chinese mystery wood. Fatter screws, and more epoxy fixed that one.
If you are planning on making the stock to use a folder, then check into some of the other designs [ the FN folder and copies are probably one of the best ].
However, if you want to use the vast array of SLIDING stocks that fir the AR-15 shorty buffer tube, then do whatever works fastest / cheapest /best [ choose any two ] for you.
I personally have never met a sliding stock that I liked, but maybe you can convince me different?
good luck with your R&D
LAZ 1
the milspec question is mainly for me to know what accessories to have on hand to test fit the design, be it rail mounts or buffer tubes. Also as some have mentioned, position of the buttstock in relation to the boreline is good info to have as well. The actual buffer tube mount will be deeper and beefier than the ar design, will utilize the ar lockring and any ar grip and will be molded right into the stock, not attached afterwards. I can safely say, I should have everything in order sometime in late april... if not before.
