« previous next »
Pages: [1]

Author Topic: SPR bodies  (Read 933 times)

Offline Cheeze_IZ_G00d

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Second Lieutenant
  • *****
  • Posts: 795
    • View Profile
SPR bodies
« on: November 19, 2005, 05:40:39 PM »
I am currently debating what metal body I should buy to accurately portray the SPR. Currently, it is a toss up between the HurricanE Bushmaster, and the HurricanE Knights. I am leaning towards the Knights because that is who makes the real steel version. Does anyone have any thoughts, which one might look cooler, etc? Thanks!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 05:00:00 PM by Cheeze_IZ_G00d »
Logged
Visit my website -
http://www.iwantafreedollarnow.com!!!

Get great ringtones here!

Offline BFC Crew

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Private First Class
  • ***
  • Posts: 42
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #1 on: November 19, 2005, 06:10:52 PM »
The snake on the bushmaster looks kind of cheesy. I would go with the Knights.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 05:00:00 PM by BFC Crew »
Logged
\"Is our children learning?\"

Offline PHX COBRA

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 935
    • View Profile
Re: SPR bodies
« Reply #2 on: November 19, 2005, 06:31:55 PM »
Quote from: "Cheeze_IZ_G00d"
I am currently debating what metal body I should buy to accurately portray the SPR. Currently, it is a toss up between the HurricanE Bushmaster, and the HurricanE Knights. I am leaning towards the Knights because that is who makes the real steel version. Does anyone have any thoughts, which one might look cooler, etc? Thanks!


Bushmaster doesn't make an SPR, unless you build one off a stripped lower reciever.  So go with the Knights.
Good luck.

Ohh and BFC crew, Bushmaster's kick ass so don't be dogging on something you know nothing about.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 05:00:00 PM by PHX COBRA »
Logged

Offline BFC Crew

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Private First Class
  • ***
  • Posts: 42
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #3 on: November 19, 2005, 07:08:22 PM »
He was asking for our opinions. So I gave him mine. Dont get all bent out of shape over it.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 05:00:00 PM by BFC Crew »
Logged
\"Is our children learning?\"

Offline azsarge

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • General
  • *****
  • Posts: 9999
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #4 on: November 19, 2005, 08:07:52 PM »
Let's get some facts straight.  

Bushmaster DOES make M16s and M4s for the military.

The Mk12 Mod 0 SPR initially fielded in the army were made from old Colt A1 lowers with a new upper, and gas block, FF tube by PRI.  The rail extention was by ARMS, the can by OPS, and the bipod was a versapod.

The Mk12 Mod 1 is made by colt as well, with Knights making a few for the Navy.  The Mod 1 rail is made by Knights, as are the bipod adapters.

What type of SPR you would like should determine what brand of reciever you put on it.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 05:00:00 PM by azsarge »
Logged

Offline Cheeze_IZ_G00d

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Second Lieutenant
  • *****
  • Posts: 795
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #5 on: November 19, 2005, 08:16:04 PM »
Well, considering I already have a KAC SPR/A Free Floating rail, I am thinking I will go with a Knights receiver. Thanks everyone!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 05:00:00 PM by Cheeze_IZ_G00d »
Logged
Visit my website -
http://www.iwantafreedollarnow.com!!!

Get great ringtones here!

Offline Ranger_Robby

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sergeant Major
  • *****
  • Posts: 531
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #6 on: November 19, 2005, 10:24:53 PM »
Bushmaster wasn’t the only one contracted to build M-16's for the US military. FN was also contracted to build M-16A2's in 1988. Colt is still a major manufacturer of M-16 variants for the US DoD. However the M4's are not contracted under Bushmaster, Colt is actually the exclusive supplier to the U.S. Govt for all M4 Carbine Assault rifles for all branches of the U.S. military. In fact, Colt is seeking a suit against Bushmaster and Heckler & Koch for patent infringement and trademark infringement among other claims dealing with this rifle, both in civilian and military markets.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 05:00:00 PM by Ranger_Robby »
Logged
Quote from: \"Vince\"
ALRIGHT GIRLS YOU\'RE BOTH PRETTY

NOW SHUT THE **** UP

Offline azsarge

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • General
  • *****
  • Posts: 9999
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #7 on: November 21, 2005, 09:28:35 AM »
Quote from: "Ranger_Robby"
Bushmaster wasn’t the only one contracted to build M-16's for the US military. FN was also contracted to build M-16A2's in 1988. Colt is still a major manufacturer of M-16 variants for the US DoD. However the M4's are not contracted under Bushmaster, Colt is actually the exclusive supplier to the U.S. Govt for all M4 Carbine Assault rifles for all branches of the U.S. military. In fact, Colt is seeking a suit against Bushmaster and Heckler & Koch for patent infringement and trademark infringement among other claims dealing with this rifle, both in civilian and military markets.


Tell that to the guys in the box who carry Bushy M4s and see what they have to say about patents.

In my short time in the military thusfar I've seen, in person, M16 variants from the following manufacturers:
-Colt
-FN
-Bushmaster
-Knights
-Rock River Arms
-DPMS

All in service, with the latter 2 being Marksmanship Team rifles (not combat).

AFAIK, the Navy is the only one using Knights recievers.

I've seen pics of military AR platforms from other manufacturers as well.  One was from a toy company (Mattel, IIRC).

Going with Knights trades is a sound choice for creating a Mk12 Mod1.
For an optic, go with the Guarder M3 replica.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 05:00:00 PM by azsarge »
Logged
Pages: [1]
« previous next »