Shane45

Absolutely true. So it is likely worthy to add that my impressions of a BC 2.0 and a Surefire MB556k are from identical Kac SR15E3 Mod1's.

Well....I think that vid can be a bit misleading if its meant to indicate the effectiveness of the brake. The saw is designed to stay pretty stable IIRC. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X4nfZu8VqgQ

In my experience the BC is better at less blast and less felt recoil but more muzzle rise. The surefire has more blast, more recoil but less muzzle rise. The PWS brakes run very similer to the Surefire.

"Any mount will eventually show wear to the receiver if constantly removed and reapplied." With some mounts, like the Larue, I would say this is true. But for other mounts I think I would need to hear your definition of wear to say. Are we talking a little finish wear or wear that would actually affect zero? Let me put it this way. In the land of high end mounts, repeatability is achiavable at a high level. I run high end QR mounts on ALL my rifles including long range precision rifles.

I dont mean to speak for HE but I believe he is refering to the BUIS being in the UPPER 1/3rd of the optic which... is obviously useless. In other words it makes the irons way to high/optic to low...

Although I am a fan of lower 1/3 for Aimpoint M3/Pro/M4/M4s I am not a fan of Larue mounts. I am not a believer in their repeatability and I hate the smiley faces they cut in the rail, which leads to the afformentioned repreatability issues IMO. Even though many consider the American Defence mount a Larue knock off, I believe they actually have a much better clamping system. But there are a good number of options out there. I run Ops2Inc but these are not publically available. But mounts from Bobro or GDI and others are. For me, I like fixed sights with a lower 1/3 on a full sized red dot. But for the T1 I like folding and true cowitt.

I actually think there is a correlation in the downplay. I suspect the anti's have realised all you have to do is utter the word ban to trigger record sales country wide. This is the real killer of ban talk IMO.

Ball mill cut in addition to all other feature mentioned.

Thanks!

Do tell!

1500 is potentially true for calibers like 338lm. But not true for most others. You could spend over 10k in ammo trying to wear out a quality 308 barrel. But to answer the question, when the barrel is done, you may be able to have it set back but of not, replace it, its a consumable.

ND's. Unintentional doubling. Things of that nature.

The PPQ is a sleeper. I think it will continue to grow in popularity. With that being said it is not a pistol I would recomend to a new shooter for the same reasons I dont recomend a 1911 to a new shooter. 5 lb trigger with a near instant reset. Add to that equation no external safety. Trigger discipline, especially when reholstering, is paramount with this one IMO. I think you get quite a bit for your money with the PPQ.

I have been giving thought to the question of the legality of a brake that is threaded for supressors that mount that way. I still dont think they violate the law. The barrel was threaded but is now considered "permenantly capped" with a compensator/brake. Since the law states that the barrel cant be threaded to readily accept a flash hider that criteria has been met. The brake its self is NOT threaded for a flash hider, and therefore is of no concern. If someone knows of some mongo economy sized threaded flash suppressor that would fit the OD of the brake, id be interested to hear about it. (and no a suppressor is not a fh! Its a biproduct.) (not legal advice, just my opinion)

In a 1911, you get what you pay for. For those that have heard my speach before, skip it. 1911's were designed at a time labor was cheap and technology was expensive. Rooms full of talented old men assembled them carefully and they were built from the correct spec materials. Fast foward to today and the opposite is true, tech is cheap and labor is expensive. So manufacturers try and skirt this fact by building production 1911's in a production (assembly) environment with as little fitting as possible. The more fitting done, the better materials used, the more expensive the 1911 you end up with. Now I understand scale economics. The more ,insert part here, you buy the better deal you will get. But that only goes so far. And then if you have a company that wants to save whatever amount over tens of thousands of said part, then you can end up with less than ideal parts inside. Anyway I can tell you that just the parts alone in my 1911 builds cost well over 1k. Thats with ZERO labor. Look at a sprinfield 1911 loaded model. Then look at a springfield professional. Why is it roughly 4x more expensive. It has the same number of parts right? As I said, the better the parts and the more hand labor involved, the higher the price. I will also like to add that price/cost and value are not synonomous. What I place a value on is unique to me. Things I value and are willing to pay for may hold no value at all for another. If you shoot a box a year, and truly dont care if you have a failure here and there, you likely will not see the value. For me, I shoot a 1911 better than anything else so that is my choice platform. I know that a true quality 1911 built right from the best parts is expensive and readily accept that. I see the value for me and I am willing to pay for it. Each individual needs to figure out what their point of diminished returns is. But you should ideally understand what those differences are. Its likely not just the price tag. A Ferrari and a Hyundai probably have about the same number parts, but clearly they arent the same cost or value.

They arent threaded.... If anyone wants to see brakes that use a threaded attachment method take a look at AAC's. http://www.advanced-armament.com/Cyclops-Muzzle-Brake_p_495.html

Mickeyduck, your primary criteria is pretty? Interesting....

It surely depends on you definition of good.

My two bikes are a Ducati 1098 (Red, my brothers is the yellow one) and a V-Rod.

It doesnt matter if its stupid or not to carry empty brass, what in the hell is the rationality for making it illegal?!?!?!?!

A couple things to consider. The BATF is not interested in what you are attaching to the barrel. They are only interested in making a single tube longer than 16". So it really isnt even considered permenantly attached as a seperate item, its what they consider is needed to make the tube a single piece of metal. It would not matter to them if you used a cannon barrel as long as you attached it in a way to make it one single piece of metal longer than 16" as to not be NFA. To meet the ATF criteria, many people forget or overlook the clause that says if you can remove it with normal hand tools, it is not considered to have been permenant. So in my personal opinion, the ATF information is probably safe to use. But in my view, a properly done blind pin qualifies as a method to make an attached device permanant for NJ. Consider that if it did not, then all pinned stocks would not be compliant. You cant say its permenant at one end and not the other. This is not legal advice, that should be aquired from an attourney.

Yes....you can probably run it in to a welding shop for a weld or try it yourself etc etc. BUT the number of butcher jobs I get in to fix would indicate to me that you take a healthy risk in proceeding down that path.

WIthout my glasses I get the scatter in my RDS but with my glasses the astigmatism is corrected and goes away. But the older I get, the less my eyes seem to favor a projected red dot. Im finding these days an etched reticle is somewhat eaier on my eyes. Perhaps something like the Leupold Prismatic may work better for you now. Although highly subjective and surely individual results are likely to vary, my time differentials between an aimpoint and a unit with an actual reticle are tiny. http://www.leupold.com/tactical/scopes/tactical-prismatic-riflescopes/prismatic-tactical-1x14mm/

Yes, if I transition to the irons in a lower 1/3 config my cheekweld changes but it is very small. I run this way: Small amount of realestate (aimpoint T1 Micro) true cowitt with rear iron folded. More realestate (aimpoint m3/m4) lower 1/3 cowitt with irons always up.

AR, check! Ginormous blade, check! Cartoon Network on the TV, check! Mom nagging you to clean that room ? Missing!