bbk

I will be watering myself to a stupor, somewhere. Four weeks of mid terms, and it'll finally be over in time for the festivities. So, I don't think I'll need a costume-- just a buddy to get me home (or somewhere that won't get me in trouble).

Pistols on the vest aren't necessarily a "bad" idea, or at least I'll trust the judgment of professionals I've met who did bad things to bad people (I've never run a pistol on my vest so I can't talk from experience). The main reason they would run that configuration some times was because they were going to be in confined spaces (notably vehicle and vehicle dismounting), and running a drop leg was not an option (nor could they run a shoulder or belt holster as those would interfere with other essentials). I agree with most of the notions that putting a holster on the vest isn't the best option-- but, again, it goes back to mission specifics. I personally wouldn't run a vest mounted holster for safety reasons. Not that it could cause any more problems-- but the NDs I've heard of are far more devastating than NDs when drawing from the hip or leg. As for that comment, that gives me the impression you might not have experience with the application of these ideas. Sure, long guns/rifles are a primary, but a pistol tends to be the life line. I can say from experience that a lot of times in MOUT situations, the SOP I was familiar with stated to use handguns and not long guns. When behind the wire, when rifles and PCs could be set aside, a pistol was still strapped on somewhere (had to be). I agree with the rest you've said though, about keeping it light. I also agree that a person is better off thinking about a sort of pack for the essentials instead of a rig.

BCM is great value for the money. The company is not that well known beyond the inner community because its relatively new (and their primary focus has been uppers only until the past few years when they introduced lowers). However, the quality is top notch, as vetted by numerous industry professionals-- and the pricing is geared towards the consumer, not the brand! I believe I found BCM by accident, but gosh darn, I'm glad I did because I'm never looking back. Yes, the BCM uppers you listed do not come with hand guards, and would need some after market work done to make them NJ compliant-- but both of those services (getting the bayonet lug removed and the muzzle device permanently attached) are provided here in state and out of state (BCM does not do custom orders, I've asked). Even though I run a railed hand guard system, I do love the idea of something like the Magpul MOE hand guards (http://store.magpul.com/product/MAG405/50). They are cost effective, and their quality has not suffered (they are made in carbine length and mid length). Honestly, for uppers (as a whole), I stick with certain "brands": BCM, Colt, Daniel Defense, Noveske, LMT, White Oak Armament, JPE, and maybe Stag (I would include KAC, but they don't sell complete uppers, just rifles). Aside from those, I just feel like the quality does not justify the cost. Lowers are lowers are lowers, sure (though, Lower Parts Kits are not all equal), but uppers is what will make the difference. Regarding your linked upper, I've never heard of that retailer actually-- so, I can't vet for their quality. As for the complete upper you noted, I would strongly suggest you consider other alternatives. I know its your money at the end of the day, but, for a bit more, there are solid, vetted, proven complete upper systems-- notably from BCM. I'm sorry if some of this doesn't make sense, its late and my brain is a bit fried . If you need any more clarification/questions, ask away-- I'm sure others will add their insight as well.

1. BFH 16'' mid length (system): BFH means its a cold hammer forged barrel. Its debatable if this method is an improvement, and really a moot point for most users. 2. 16'' carbine length (system) in a light weight configuration: Light weight meaning the barrel is thinner (hence lighter)-- also known as the "pencil barrel." Its a recent trend, also done by a few other manufacturers (Daniel Defense off the top of my head). The thinner barrel does not affect accuracy or create heat issues. Yes, the barrel can get as hot, but it also cools off quicker. 3. M4-style 16'' carbine length (system): M4-style refers to the barrel's profile (the "M4 cuts") 4. 16'' mid length (system) in a light weight configuration: Same as above, but a mid-length system. 5. 16'' mid length (system): Plain-Jane 16'' mid length upper (probably the best value) 6. 20'' rifle length (system): Government profile; similar to what is used for M16A4 (as in its a flat top receiver) The different systems [carbine, mid length, rifle] refer to the gas tube's length. The main difference here is that the longer the tube, the less wear and tear it puts on the tube and other parts of the system (over a comparable fixed time). Also, the longer the gas tube, the softer the rifle shoots (of course other factors are at play here too, like the different types of buffers and buffer springs). As of right now, mid lengths are the preferred as they bridge the gap by having a longer gas tube than a carbine, but in the same overall length as a "carbine" length system (meaning you can have a mid length gas tube in a 14.5/16'' upper). They're all great choices. You missed out on listing the 14.5'' uppers. BCM now offers their 14.5'' uppers with permanently installed muzzle devices, three of which are NJ compliant: the two PWS muzzle brakes, and, just added, Battle comp 1.5s! So, check those out too.

Welcome. I really love that area, especially around this time of the year.

An LBV/LBE, like every other piece of gear (to include firearms), is mission specific. Understand that a vest or chest rig is considered the secondary line, while a belt is considered first line. Now, if you're just getting it for aesthetics, it doesn't really matter. But in a dynamic scenario, would I take the time to throw my chest rig on? Probably not (even though I might be able too). We have ground pounding grunts on the forum that had to hump around the ridiculous loads that could give a better idea (notably mortar men and medics), as I didn't have to deal with that type of stuff daily. However, having a kit that can carry enough to arm a Sudanese militia (and feed them on the side) is not the smartest idea, and probably not even the most ideal. Pounds = pain, bottom line. There is a reason why the Army is constantly trying to optimize kits to lighten the load. There is a reason why more-task-specific units don't hump around the types of loads that our blessed infantry or combat medics do-- and it goes back to the fact that kits are ALWAYS mission specific. Another factor that the US Army has been considering regarding kits is that with the proper training, an individual does not have to carry a combat load of 300+ rounds (albeit there are still units whose SOPs may dictate this). With an upswing in rifle marksmanship, task-driven units' SOPs might reflect a combat load of no more then 150-180 rounds (read: five or six 30 round magazines [these numbers do not reflect the practice of downloading two less rounds]). Again, this varies, but the consensus is that ALL units are trying to optimize kits (most notably trying to reduce weight). Now, reducing weight/dead space on a rig can be done without the expense of ammunition. I think this is a bigger issue in NJ as we're only allowed 15 rounds, which in effect makes us double our magazine count (meaning if we want to be able to carry 150 rounds, it would take 10 magazines instead of just five, etc). This can be done in numerous ways, and is really about optimizing a "balance" that shifts weight away from creating stress points on your body (off your back or neck for example). Still, an addition of a belt, or extra pack might be a good idea as well. With all of that said, my rigs are task specific. I don't expect to have to ever carry everything on my tactical nylon... SHTF, zombies, volcanoes, whatever. I honestly think its a bit too much, and a bit gimmicky. Instead, I run a chest rig that is similar to what I've trained/used prior, and its tasks would be a carbine course. In an HD situation, I run a Redi-Mag on my rifle, so, I'm not immediately screwed if the first magazine blue-falcons me. With the tinfoil hat on, if the worst were to happen, yes, I would still only run my chest rig, and compliment it with a pack and/or belt. I do have an actual vest, but I've barely touched it since I bought it because I realized its useless to my needs. Its a total PITA to put on; not enough webbing; I don't run plates; and doesn't breathe well. I'm only holding on to it because I'd rather have it than not... plus I could always cut it up and use it like that. If you're looking for cool factor, check out airsoft forums-- plenty of relevant threads I could imagine

Its also a good idea to have a back up cell. I'm sorry to hear about it happening, and its a stiff reminder that the threat is out there. Even with the loss of valuables, at least it is just a burglary and not a tragedy.

I keep originals somewhere safe, and copies with the firearms. Why? Redundancy. While I'm not concerned about being in a situation where I would be proverbially smacked around by LEOs because I'm not the type that gets into those types of situations; however, if/when it rains, it can pour. And while I do not think its in the law enforcement's realm to judge, but to serve based on what is written, we are but human... which means we're fallible creatures. So, yes, I will carry copies of the documents for my own sake. As for the rhetorical, I do carry some ID mostly everywhere. Its a scary, crappy world out there... and while many of us may theorize in absolutes, the world is but-- oft in grays (as we all know already). I'm saying this coming from the other side of the fence...

Some info here: http://njgunforums.com/forum/index.php?/topic/19059-magazine-rig/

Well, 75% doesn't mean much when only four people have spoken up!

What method did you use to neuter the stock? I've search-engined it, but the methods have been limited, and mostly for CA users.

Happy Birthday, Ken

You can... Just need to pin them!

Oh man, ANOTHER "ACR vs. SCAR" thread? http://njgunforums.com/forum/index.php?/topic/18800-bushmaster-acr/ http://njgunforums.com/forum/index.php?/topic/18662-scar-17s/ http://njgunforums.com/forum/index.php?/topic/11963-remington-bushmaster-magpul-acr/ http://njgunforums.com/forum/index.php?/topic/14923-bushmaster-acr/ http://njgunforums.com/forum/index.php?/topic/17000-review-of-acr-thus-far-not-full-review-yet/ http://njgunforums.com/forum/index.php?/topic/17729-opinions-on-the-bushmaster-acr/ I'm sure there are some more I missed while skimming. There's also a lot of other healthy discussions on more rifle-specific forums. My opinion, abridged version: If money is not an issue, and you want pure quality between these two, go with a SCAR. It comes in both 5.56 (SCAR L/SCAR 16) and .308 (SCAR H/SCAR 17). Unabridged: From what I understand, ACR is NOT interchangeable to take .308, even with the barrel swap thing. You would still need to get a dedicated ACR lower for .308 (which is not available... yet, and no publicly announced time frame). However, the .223 ACR model can be used to shoot 6.8SPC with the barrel and bolt swap (though I haven't heard anything regarding the availability of this yet... Bushmaster hasn't even said anything about aftermarket parts like different barrel lengths or extra bolts for the .223 version yet). And don't get me started on how Bushmaster royally screwed the production and marketing of the ACR. Understand that this was Magpul's baby originally, but, from what I understand, Magpul sold the rights to Bushmaster and Remington and hardly have a stake in the ACR anymore. Originally, Magpul wanted to reinvent the wheel with the Masada, and then wanted to price it for the every day person-- like they do with most of their [awesome] products (apparently they wanted to list it for around $1000). Once Bushmaster and Remington got their hands on distribution and production rights... well, the rest is history. The Bushmaster ACR has sub par manufacturing and oversight (do a search for ACR issues, and most aren't design flaws as QC blunders), and the MSRP is $2600... for the "Basic" and "Compliant" versions? A rifle that was envisioned to be the every day person's rifle has just become a cruel and terrible joke. Maybe in a few years after Bushmaster, hopefully, rights their ship, as well as coming to their senses regarding their pricing. The only plus is that it can be made NJ compliant very easily. The 'Basic' model comes with a fixed stock and no bayo lug-- just needs the muzzle device pinned. For the same price, the recently released 'Compliant' model has a fixed stock and no bayo lug, but also comes with an already pinned muzzle brake (similar to what Bushmaster uses on their compliant AR models). Still, these are issues that can be easily resolved for a small amount of money compared to the actual cost of the rifle itself. The SCAR on the other hand is a different story. Yes, its the creation of FNH, a foreign company. But, like all of the FNH products that are used by the US military, the SCAR is manufactured here in the US (there was initially uproar that it was a foreign product). It is battle proven, and is currently on the end of its field-testing by USSOCOM and other elements. It is not interchangeable in any manner, but comes in both 5.56 and .308 (apparently Bushmaster ACRs are "not made" to fire 5.56 ammunition, as said by Bushmaster armorers). I think one of the downfalls is that the .308 can only take proprietary magazines, and I think maybe FAL magazines. Regardless, both are difficult to find/make NJ legal, and/or are expensive. Other .308s like the DPMS or SR25 accept more readily available magazines, the SR25 accepting the Magpul 20LR (which can be easily fixed to be NJ compliant-- Ty of MidwestPX has these actually, and aren't much more expensive then compliant PMags). The major thing that gets me about the SCAR, and its a small detail, but its a bit more difficult, notably the stock, to make NJ legal. The muzzle device it comes with is the PWS FSC (which is NJ legal, and just requires permanently attaching). The stock though is still something of an enigma, though, I'm sure there is a way. VLTOR also released a stock adapter for the SCAR (similar to their AK stock adapters) during SHOT 2010, but nothing of it since. Still, if this option were available, I think its a relatively easy fix (as regular AR stocks tend to be pretty easy to pin). Its not an easy choice, but if you're ready and willing to spend the money-- go with the SCAR. Its not perfect by any means, but I think, long term, the only regret would be parting with the cash for it-- and, if you go with the 17, the money you would spend on the ammo!

The "fake suppressor" he's talking about is referring to these, I believe: http://www.spikestac...dex&cPath=78_31 If I am reading it right, these make the appearance of a 16'' barrel look like its an SBR with a sound suppressor, and not an actual short barrel with a permanently attached muzzle device. The accessory it self is just a barrel shroud that attaches via the threads normally used for more traditional muzzle devices (muzzle brakes, flash hiders, etc). Like PK90 said though, the device would have to be permanently attached. Since these fake cans are made for 16'' barrels, the OAL (overall length) wouldn't be a Federal issue, but a state issue as you can't have a threaded barrel on rifles that fall under the NJ AWB. If you could find a way to permanently attach one of these fake cans though, I guess that would work? ETA: If my assumptions above are correct, this is merely a cosmetic thing, and would have no impact on the operation of the rifle. Also, I'm no legal-eagle, but I'm not 100% positive that a fake can wouldn't be considered a non-compliant muzzle device (if it would even be considered a muzzle device to began with). I wouldn't think it would be as it functions as a shroud, and the rifle would essentially function as though it were a crowned barrel. Still, tread lightly.

Happy Birthday!

Its not a matter of whether or not its true, telescopic stocks are illegal by the NJ AWB. As KPD also pointed out, be aware of the other NJ AWB caveats (muzzle device can only be a brake-type device and must be pinned; no bayonet lug). These are small fry issues though, considering compliance work is inexpensive and can be done by the manufacturer (depending on who) or in-state (or by another third-party). If you're adamant on piecing one together yourself, don't be concerned about brand names just yet-- and know what you're looking for in the different parts. After that, then consider the reputation of manufacturers. Also, and I should have mentioned this initially, its easier if you know what purpose the rifle will serve. Is it going to sit in the safe and be the occasional plinker? Is it going to be used hard as a training gun? Is it going to be the primary rifle you might use to depend your life on? Or maybe a competition gun? Once you know that (or have an idea), then its not too difficult to know what to look for and where to find such items. I could drag this post on, but I think it would be easier for the community if you knew its use first, and then asked-- that way you can get the information you're looking for specifically, and not get further confused by all of the specifics.

The rifle-length tube *can* shoot softer... meaning it can have less felt recoil. Its more obvious if you were to run that with a mid-length or rifle-length upper though. I liked the EMod when I tried it out once. VLTOR makes great stuff, though I am waiting for some stuff they released at SHOT that hasn't been talked of since...

I've been talking to some other people about lasers (I don't own any myself, nor will I any time soon). I think for items like lasers, lights, and other peripherals, I would stick with what has been working for the community. I'm not a brand-guy, though it happens that a lot of stuff I use happens to be known brands-- though, more importantly, the stuff is known to work (and works for me). However, the market for things like lasers specifically is so small that you're either going to spend good money on something that is safe and will work over time, or it can be a health risk and/or break easily (lemons aside). And the worst part is that the stuff is normally not inexpensive. So, if you're going to spend decent money, might as well invest a bit more for something that will work for the long run. I'm not going to recommend the expensive stuff because I think super-expensive visual lasers are a waste of money for civilians ("super-expensive" being 400-600+). I've heard decent things about Barska. Lasermax like Pizzabob pointed out. I would also say consider Laserlyte.

Speaking of foreign stuff, I'm waiting for the US release for Tomorrow: When the War Began As for Dead Set, it honestly looks pretty decent. I think there's been a lot of really cruddy additions to the zombie genre lately, and I had been worried that the genre was going by the wayside (which it still might be). Hopefully it'll end up better than Romero's recent stuff.

This movie was terrible, but what more would I be expecting from a fourth movie of a series that didn't really make sense about 60 minutes into the first one? The only series of movies that don't make much more sense to me are the Scary Movie ones (the first one was funny, I'll give it that), and the Saw series (albeit, its clever... but I dread in 13 years, we'll have Saw XX or something). Still, fun movie-- though, I wouldn't recommend anymore then borrowing it from a friend so you don't need to pay a dime, ha. And to think, like Silent Hill, if Hollywood just stuck to the source material, it could have ended up pretty decent.

Wow, awesome job, and a thanks to you and Bry@n. So, 8 lanes, 32 folk... maybe more if we have people rotating from behind the line. Jeez, we just need a bbq or slow cooker and we're set.

Welcome!

+1 to what kenw said. We strive to make amends, but we live within a rule of law.

Welcome!