Have you guys seen this??

Not good for shooting from both shoulders. (sometimes you need to. Mout..)
And I imagine it would wear out quick. (the fit between the ball and socket.
Think sand and grit. neat idea otherwise.
 
I have to agree with the direction these comments are going. While it may make sense for one specific application, rapid transition to other postures and firing stances appears to be nil.

I'll stick with my regular stock.
 
Having worked with similar materials in the lab over the years I've seen how it wears. I wouldn't want that as a stock, especially in dirty/sandy environs. Besides you would need a socket on each shoulder if you ever wanted to consider transisitioning to your other shoulder.

Neat idea, but I'll pass.
 
I suspect that the current build is not the one that will succeed, but the idea is a provocative one.

I think they have it backwards. If the butt of the stock received some sort of fitting as the "female" part of the coupling, it could maintain its present profile and be used the same way it is currently with no compromises. Let the body armor be the mount for the "male" component (the Johnson semi-auto?) that would insert into the butt. (blush!)

The most interesting aspect of this new invention is the acknowledgement that the rifle needs to fit body armor, not human anatomy. The next transition could be to fit the weapon to an interface between the hand and the rifle instead of directly to the hand. Imagine some sort of high-tech glove that was made to fit the human hand inside but to "mount" an array of weapons on the exterior. Careful when you scratch your nose!
 
Yea, things that we were talking about were what do you do if you need to climb? Up a bank, through a window? What if you fall? If you're in CQ, someone grabs the muzzle...

I don't know. It's pretty neat, but I agree. It needs some work.
 
If it were really that great, John Moses Browning (Peace and Blessings be upon Him) would have already invented it; if the plastic is critical to the design, Eugene Stoner would have filled in for him. [wink]

Ken
 
I think dvl may be on to something here. A system where a male mount on the body armor/load bearing equipment/vest that interfaces to a female socket in the buttstock. No sliding, consistent shoulder placement, not permanently attached. Yeah, that'd work.
 
The original. Dvl is on track in one area that a "receiver" of some type on body armor may be worth experimenting with. However, there are too many variables that would not make it worth while, in my opinion. Body armor is not permanently attached to the wearer, and one size does not fit all.

That little gadget severely limits the shooter's ability to manipulate his weapon. I'd like to see someone in that little video demonstration fire that weapon in a combat zone, from the prone, over a piece of hard cover, around the side of cover from the weak side, etc, etc, etc.

That little gimmick will get people killed. I'd like to see him have to 'find dirt' in a hurry and fall on top of the damn thing. Besides shooting his foot off, he'll have a flail segment of his entire right side rib cage.
 
Yeah, I figured that.

If you, WW and I all agree it's not good, it's probably not good in a military situation.

Though we're not the only people here that are military/ex-military, we've posted our thoughts.

FWIW, I've used a Blackhawk sling on an M16A2 for drill weekends for a while (they wouldn't hand receipt my M9 from one unit to the other, I was "detailed" but not attached). It didn't seem to be too bad. Better than the current "silent sling" POS, and quieter than the old nylon green sling.
 
Two things seem to be going these days;

1 - People are trying to reinvent the wheel

2 - They try to come up with marketing scheme to sell useless junk

They should concentrate on refining the bulk, weight and effectiveness of body armor and LBE. Utilize good combat slings and improved mounting points that are interchangeable and adaptable to needed situations, improve marksmanship and correct training, and be done with it.

Stop trying to invent gadgets to make up for definciencies in other areas.
 
The "new" Load Bearing Vest" is a good example of a good improvement. It replaces the old suspenders and ammo pouches. Unfortunately, the new Body Armor doesn't use it, since they just hang the old style pouches directly on the armor.
 
JUst slap some high traction rubber or covering of choice on both shoulders of the body armor/vest like a shooting vest and that solves most of the issue. (butt stock sliding. )

lenght of pull with an A2 and body armor is another. that is one place where an adjustible stock is okay.
(I have not used the current issue Body armor with a rifle so I have limited knowledge of this, but the old A1 and the old flak vest where okay , with the LBE you could allways find a pocket to stick the buttstock into. )
(showing my .Mil vintage) :D
 
The problem with two high-traction surfaces is that the first contact between the two is going to be the one that grabs, most likely out of position, when in a "gotta do it now" situation.
 
I think the big issue is the cordura cover for the New armor, thus my suggestion of a type of covering. With an M-4 type stock they won't grab hard anyway. Hell a good thick piece of cotton would work as long as it is a loose weave. (burlap?) just give you a good seat for the stock.
I would rather have a grippy spot to seat a buttstock into than a slick one.
 
The A2 and the old flak wasn't a problem for me. either. The biggest pain was the H-harness strap. I've advocated for a non-skid surface on the shoulders since I was in the Corps. Grabbing isn't a problem, slipping and sliding is. The position doesn't have to be perfect if you're in hurry, but it does need to be stationary.
 
The LBV fixed all of that. Here's what they look like.

19641.jpg


Eagle_27.jpg


Eagle_28.jpg
 
I USUALLY carry an M9 (we don't have the M4's in state, or I'd carry one as well as the M9). I carried an M16A2 last year and part of this year.

When we did weapons qual last Oct, I fired the M9 course (21 out of 30 on pop-ups, Sharpshooter), then did the M16A2 at 25 meters (reduced target).

I shot 19 out of 20 prone supported, WAY better than I did any time I shot the A1. I attribute that to the vest, the LBV and the buttstock, more than anything else. Of course, I went totally FUBAR on prone unsupported, and got low Marksman (but I did qualify first try).
 
The LBV does not fix anything, in my opinion. If fact, the straps are more intrusive than my deuce gear. Also, there is no armor in those photo's. The armor and LBE need to be intergrated so the shoulder pocket is not obstructed and fitted with a non-skid material.

This could easily be done and still set up in a manner that would allow you to wear either piece singularly.
 
I actually used the old canvass H-harness instead of the issue nylon Y-harness in the field. I felt it wore better and was not as slippery as the new stuff. You had to take care of it, though, because it's not as weather resistent.
 

Similar threads

Can you guys tell me what this is?
Replies
8
Views
648
nordic alien
N
Good guys?
Replies
4
Views
327
pastera
pastera
Cool one for you hk guys
Replies
13
Views
545
GeorgeMason
GeorgeMason
  • Locked
Navy scrubbed this photo can you see why?
Replies
17
Views
762
Mountain
Mountain
We need 200 people like this in congress. NH residents, you need this woman in congress.
Replies
14
Views
540
Broc
Broc
Back
Top Bottom