dirigoboy Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 Found the new ad in my inbox. Anyone else receive it? http://www.dpms-gii.com/full.html#intro Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubbasks Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 Daddy like Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cali_Ed Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 Possibly stripped upper? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
392heminut Posted January 15, 2014 Report Share Posted January 15, 2014 Yup! Got it this morning! <thumbsup> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
survivalshop Posted January 15, 2014 Report Share Posted January 15, 2014 If I read that right , the upper/lower have smaller dimensions than the LR308 , but still a 308 , to lighten it , smells like proprietary parts . What effect would the duel ejectors have on the strength of the bolt ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Powerman Posted January 15, 2014 Report Share Posted January 15, 2014 Ya, I want one... only because I was looking at a carbine type and the recon would be really nice. But... that's what I thought... you take a non-standardized platform... you win the standardization war of DPMS pattern... then you put out more non-standardized stuff that won't work with other stuff. I think the only way you pull that off is moving to the AR-15 market as they did and the ability to use more available stuff. You guys know this stuff better than me... but that's what hit me right away. Oh... and did they really mean AR-15 buffers/tubes/springs work... probably just tubes? I also don't know what to think about elastomer. It has to be good because people are going to be skeptical and it will be tested. But I also know elastomer is effected by temperature and no elastomer retains it's properties from -60F to 650F. Now obviously they tested and it still works... but ya, that's going to take some time to be accepted. The only other thing is if two ejectors are better, why does the Ar-15 not need them? Mainly just curiosity questions... not hating. It definitely has my interest. OK... I'm sporting one.... there I said it. :)) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Powerman Posted January 15, 2014 Report Share Posted January 15, 2014 (edited) Oh... and now I am hating... I hate "modern sporting rifle". It's just as much marketing BS as "assault weapon". Except assault weapon did actually have a start in reality... nt just a marketing office. I'm done. Edited January 15, 2014 by Powerman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seasprite Posted January 15, 2014 Report Share Posted January 15, 2014 (edited) Nice I think they might have something here and did anybody notice towards the end of the video they were running steel cased ammo. I'm going to look at it again to be sure. Nope sorry fellers it was brass ammo. I hope they kept the accuracy to going to a slimmer profile barrel. Edited January 15, 2014 by seasprite Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robocop1051 Posted January 15, 2014 Report Share Posted January 15, 2014 I still say the best bang vs buck is that dang Recon. What a great design for an off the shelf rig! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
392heminut Posted January 15, 2014 Report Share Posted January 15, 2014 If I read that right , the upper/lower have smaller dimensions than the LR308 , but still a 308 , to lighten it , smells like proprietary parts . What effect would the duel ejectors have on the strength of the bolt ? Yup! More info here; http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2014/01/14/dpms-308-gen-ii/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&utm_content=2014-01-14&utm_campaign=SHOT_Newsletter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
survivalshop Posted January 15, 2014 Report Share Posted January 15, 2014 I just don't understand the duel ejectors , I don't see the ejector as a potential problem in any AR . Maybe it has some thing to do with how they changed the receiver ? The enlarged ejection port may also have some thing to do with how they changed the upper receiver & the duel ejectors. I'm not too crazy about the replacement for the extractor spring , I have seen that stuff fail & then it come apart in chunks .Yes they use it in them now ,but they have a spring also. Nice looking rifles & nice to see them make , well , changes/improvements ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Powerman Posted January 15, 2014 Report Share Posted January 15, 2014 The Sig 716 has two ejectors. I don't know the rifle, I just saw their stuff. I do not know how beneficial it is... they just say the same thing about increasing reliability... then why does their 5.56 not have dual ejectors? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shibiwan Posted January 15, 2014 Report Share Posted January 15, 2014 (edited) UGH.... yet another 308AR pattern. The central bore in the U/R is now reduced from 1.25" to 1". The barrel extension is also reduced to 1" (from 1.25"). So on top of the BCG changing to a uniform 1" dia BCG, the barrel is also changed significantly. Wonder how this affects the barrel rigidity since the original AR-10 barrel was designed for 1.25". My guess is that the GII will now use standard AR-15 compatible barrel nuts. The L/R looks like it's undergone a remake too, so that it'll accomodate the narrower takedown pin hole on the U/R.... that's another "proprietary" change. I do like the steel ramp inserts though... nice thought. Edited January 15, 2014 by shibiwan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beachmaster Posted January 15, 2014 Report Share Posted January 15, 2014 I am excited to see if the aftermarket can pick this up and run with it. It looks like a great direction for dpms to take, although I wish this is the direction they had taken from the beginning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robocop1051 Posted January 16, 2014 Report Share Posted January 16, 2014 I was talking about this recently. I didn't understand why the 308 receivers had to he SOOO much larger than their AR15 brethren. I understand the need for the larger cartridge, but it seemed like a bit of an overkill. And why the larger barrel nut? I've been waiting for someone to make a .308 receiver that would accept AR15 handguards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magwa Posted January 16, 2014 Report Share Posted January 16, 2014 For 1 lb no thanks... I will stick to what I know works my LR 308 is proven... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beachmaster Posted January 16, 2014 Report Share Posted January 16, 2014 Yeah, it is still supposed to be 8.5 lbs right? Thats not even a weight change... alot of their rifles are 8.5lbs, and s&w's m&p10 is 7.75 or something... Still looks awesome to me. I hope its not so proprietary for long. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
survivalshop Posted January 16, 2014 Report Share Posted January 16, 2014 Steel feed ramps ? Why ? There is so little feed ramp on the lower any way , why make an insert & how is it secured to the lower receiver ? Most of the feed ramp is on the barrel extension , unless they changed that also. I think they have some good idea's , but why , just for weight ? I was talking about this recently. I didn't understand why the 308 receivers had to he SOOO much larger than their AR15 brethren. I understand the need for the larger cartridge, but it seemed like a bit of an overkill. And why the larger barrel nut? I've been waiting for someone to make a .308 receiver that would accept AR15 handguards. Larger barrel , larger barrel nut . It all means they had to really lose some diameter @ the receiver barrel attachment point, should be OK , but with a 308 , I kinda want some meat (steel ) around the chamber. What they did was take there design , down sized to save material , to save money & add some flashy so called improvements & still charge the same or more . Good decision to save on the bottom line & make more profits .IMO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beachmaster Posted January 16, 2014 Report Share Posted January 16, 2014 I dont think they are saving money, because they are going from a 7029 extrusion to 7075 forged. Not only that, but a new more proprietary design will initially cost more. If anything, I feel like dpms standardized thear308 market somewhat by doing things at a level average Joe could afford, and saved up capital to create the high end product they wanted to make from the beginning. You can watch the evolution from a 6061 extrusion, to more added features, to 7029, then here with the 7075 forging. But hey, maybe I am way off and your right. One way or another, obviously they are releasing the product to make more money one way or the other ;-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Powerman Posted January 16, 2014 Report Share Posted January 16, 2014 (edited) I like it. Problem with new things though is even if I like it, it does not mean I need it. If I was in the market for my .308 today, I would strongly consider it. But no point selling mine for this. And If I really want a carbine, it makes much more sense for me to buy a AR15... even thought this is a sweet 308 carbine. So... I'm sure they will sell. And if it takes off, more will join in. It just depends how much sense it makes for each consumer. For DPMS... it's a great product. Edited January 16, 2014 by Powerman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shibiwan Posted January 16, 2014 Report Share Posted January 16, 2014 Steel feed ramps ? Why ? There is so little feed ramp on the lower any way , why make an insert & how is it secured to the lower receiver ? Most of the feed ramp is on the barrel extension , unless they changed that also. I think they have some good idea's , but why , just for weight ? Larger barrel , larger barrel nut . It all means they had to really lose some diameter @ the receiver barrel attachment point, should be OK , but with a 308 , I kinda want some meat (steel ) around the chamber. What they did was take there design , down sized to save material , to save money & add some flashy so called improvements & still charge the same or more . Good decision to save on the bottom line & make more profits .IMO Looking from a manufacturer's standpoint, it means even more parts commonality between the AR15 platform, and their tooling etc can be "unified" leading to cost savings. With common parts to both the AR15/M4 platform and the GII platform, the manufacturer does not need to make and stock as much of these different components since they can go into any gun. The "current" AR10/LR308 pattern has a bolt carrier that is 1.25" diameter front end with a 1" (0.998") tail end. In the GII, the BCG has become like the AR15 bolt carrier with constant 1" diameter from the bolt end to the tail end. The 308 bolt, however is quite a bit larger, and from the pics in the press release & promo page, you can see that the bolt carrier wall is significantly thinner to accommodate the larger bolt. If you look closely, the bolt has also changed - where the current bolt has a separate "DI piston" tail, the new bolt has the piston integrated into the rear end. Feedramps - great idea but I think it may be unnecessary. The ramps are more aggressive and cut into the barrel extension significantly more, therefore the remaining aluminum ramps in that spot would be thinner and weaker. The steel ramps are a probably a workaround for this, but I'm wondering what additional stresses are being added to the front pivot pin area, especially with lots of us opening and closing that area when we futz with our rifles all the time. Execution wise, I believe they've done a good job by trying to evolve the original AR-10 based design, but how it holds up is still left to be seen..... only time will tell, I guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
survivalshop Posted January 16, 2014 Report Share Posted January 16, 2014 As far as extruded vs forged , they already supply forged uppers for there AR 15 line & all that would be needed is the mold for forging & I don't know the difference in cost of tooling ,but in the long run , I'm sure they can spit out more forgings than extruded . They probably don't make them in-house any way .Farmed out to some other manufacturer, all they had to do is give them spec's on what they wanted. The bolt is going to be the weak point , the way I see it . They changed it entirely , including loosing metal at the bolt face & locking lugs . How does those converted 7.62x39 AR 15 bolts working out for people using them ? I think they did this all for , as you said , more commonality in some parts & the big thing was weight , to reduce it for a rifle that is more handy for all. Which makes it more sellable to consumers . Good idea if they work , put 10K of them out there & see how this unfolds. They also may be looking into Gov. contracts, ya never know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
98Z5V Posted January 19, 2014 Report Share Posted January 19, 2014 Oh... and now I am hating... I hate "modern sporting rifle". It's just as much marketing BS as "assault weapon". Except assault weapon did actually have a start in reality... nt just a marketing office. I'm done. I'm with ya. To me, "MSR" means Modular Sniper Rifle. Nothing more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rsquared Posted January 20, 2014 Report Share Posted January 20, 2014 And don't think that I haven't been looking for one of those. They're just not available. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beachmaster Posted January 22, 2014 Report Share Posted January 22, 2014 My ffl just quoted me 1414 otd for the gii recon... and my wife said if I had the cash I could buy it and sell my Ar later... Im in a conundrum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.