M40A3/5 PGW rails discontinued

#51
USMCsean said:
I was curious because I know of two people who have ordered them from PGW within the past couple months and got them without issue.
Click to expand...

Interesting.

I know PGW has "winded down" operations, and they laid off a bunch of their staff. Apparently they are still producing rifles, but I don't know to what capacity.

I wonder if the people you know got some of the last rails they produced and were sitting on the shelves, or maybe something else is going on.

Honestly IDK. I don't have any insights into the inner workings of PGW and what that means for rails. I just know that they have really slowed things down operationally.
 
#54
longshot2000 said:
FYI, our business will be carrying both the McMillan A4 stocks for M40A3 and M40A5, with the hope of having them in-stock and ready to ship at any time, and no waiting. Our first shipment arrives "May-ish" of 2023, and we are taking a waitlist if interested.

But more on topic, we are carrying the SOL Strategic EFR, and will have the stocks built for that embedded front rail, which is very similar to the PGW rail, which is not sold commercially.

In speaking with McMillan, they had nothing but excellent things to say about SOL Strategic, and McMillan recommended SOL Strategic as the best solution for a true A5 clone rifle. The owner tells me that his rail is not the same, but it looks the same to me. I am sure he has some differences to not just copy PGW.

We are carrying their product, for purchase as a part, or with a stock.
Click to expand...
Where do we sign up for the waitlist for the A4 stock at?
 
#59
Just an update to this thread: I bought an EFR directly from PGW within the last two months, and it came in looking exactly like the "old" version mentioned in this thread, shims and all.

Their estore was undergoing maintenance when I reached out to them, but I was able to purchase them through Roxanne, their CS rep, without issue and it arrived within a week.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eddystone and USMCSGT0331
#60
www.sixmm.com

[CYMA] Metal Scope Mount for M40A5 Sniper Rifle

[CYMA] Metal Scope Mount for M40A5 Sniper Rifle Description: CYMA Metal Scope Mount for M40A5 Sniper Rifle Specification: Part No.: CY-C.196 Colour: Silver Material: Metal Weight: 200g* Compatibility: Tokyo Marui M40A5 Sniper Rifle Package Contents: Mount x 1pc
www.sixmm.com www.sixmm.com

Or for $20............
 
  • Wow
Reactions: USMCSGT0331 and Coejro
#62
How well do you think this $20 mount will hold up? The mount does not really see any stress on it. I would hate to put a piece of shit part on a $1300 stock just to have it break. Someone here needs to do a review on this might be worth buying if it will hold up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: USMCSGT0331
#63
benfur said:
Someone here needs to do a review on this might be worth buying if it will hold up.
Click to expand...
Why?

It's not the correct mount so doesnt matter for cloning puposes and who in their right mind would actually install that thing onto an otherwise clone correct M40A3 or A5?

No reviews are needed since only hacks/poors would even consider using it on anything other than an air soft toy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Coejro, USMCsean and USMCSGT0331
#64
Neither is the SOL Strategic EFR Night Vision Rail for M40A5 USMC. If the airsoft mount is just as good as the sol mount why pay more when both of these mounts are not a PGW. If the PGW is no longer available and you need the mount what option do you have
 
  • Like
Reactions: USMCSGT0331
#65
benfur said:
Neither is the SOL Strategic EFR Night Vision Rail for M40A5 USMC. If the airsoft mount is just as good as the sol mount why pay more when both of these mounts are not a PGW. If the PGW is no longer available and you need the mount what option do you have
Click to expand...
The crux of your argument is the “Just as Good” part. The Sol Strategic EFR isn’t a PGW, you’re exactly right, but it is a very close clone. My bet is for $20 the air soft mount has zero QC. So if you’re good with out of spec rails go for it. But if you’re taking the time to build a clone rifle my opinion is it’s worth the expense to have a quality part.
 
  • Like
Reactions: USMCSGT0331, 5RWill and nn8734
#66
benfur said:
Neither is the SOL Strategic EFR Night Vision Rail for M40A5 USMC. If the airsoft mount is just as good as the sol mount why pay more when both of these mounts are not a PGW. If the PGW is no longer available and you need the mount what option do you have
Click to expand...
WTF is "SOL Strategic"? Does SOL = Shit Out of Luck"? .

None of these knock-off mounts are "just as good", lol.

You acquire the correct PGW mount if you're cloning an A3 or A5. If one isn't readily avail, simply wait or put a "WTB" in the PX after upgrading your account. You can research to determine if the Badger Ordnance EFR was ever used on any A3 or A5 but AFAIK, it wasn't.

No one's forcing you to clone anything, and it's becoming more and more expensive as time goes by but if you're going to do it, do it right.
 
  • Like
Reactions: USMCsean and USMCSGT0331
#68
nn8734 said:
WTF is "SOL Strategic"? Does SOL = Shit Out of Luck"? .

None of these knock-off mounts are "just as good", lol.

You acquire the correct PGW mount if you're cloning an A3 or A5. If one isn't readily avail, simply wait or put a "WTB" in the PX after upgrading your account. You can research to determine if the Badger Ordnance EFR was ever used on any A3 or A5 but AFAIK, it wasn't.

No one's forcing you to clone anything, and it's becoming more and more expensive as time goes by but if you're going to do it, do it right.
Click to expand...
www.solstrategic.com

SOL M40A5 EFR Night Vision Rail

SOL M40A5 EFR Night Vision Rail The UNS rail is the Embedded Front Rail (EFR) Allows the shooter to use clip on inline Night Vision and Thermal Imaging Systems with variety of tactical rifle stock Features 1 side rail for mounting additional accessories FREE SHIPPING WITHIN THE USA
www.solstrategic.com

Eh I’d get the sol strategic it’s a direct clone of the PGW, don’t think they were doing some kind of magic it’s just an efr rail.
 
#69
5RWill said:
www.solstrategic.com

SOL M40A5 EFR Night Vision Rail

SOL M40A5 EFR Night Vision Rail The UNS rail is the Embedded Front Rail (EFR) Allows the shooter to use clip on inline Night Vision and Thermal Imaging Systems with variety of tactical rifle stock Features 1 side rail for mounting additional accessories FREE SHIPPING WITHIN THE USA
www.solstrategic.com

Eh I’d get the sol strategic
Click to expand...
Were those sold to the USMC for M40A3 and/or A5 production?

As mentioned in my prev post, I dont think any EFR was used apart from the first design PGW EFR.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: USMCSGT0331 and 5RWill
#70
nn8734 said:
Were those sold to the USMC for M40A3 and/or A5 production?

As mentioned in my prev post, I dont think any EFR was used apart from the first design PGW EFR.
Click to expand...
It wasn’t hence the word clone lmao. Figured that would be implied. Doesn’t really matter less you wanna wait around to find a real one. If that’s your thing good on ya. I don’t have that kinda patience and think it’s semantics.

It’s like saying you have to find a CMP mount XM3 rather than having Chad Dixon make one. Sure if you wanna pay out to the ass for some markings. I’ll take the direct replica from Mr. Dixon for $300 all day long.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: USMCSGT0331 and nn8734
#71
5RWill said:
It wasn’t hence the word clone lmao. Figured that would be implied. Doesn’t really matter less you wanna wait around to find a real one. If that’s your thing good on ya. I don’t have that kinda patience and think it’s semantics.

It’s like saying you have to find a CMP mount XM3 rather than having Chad Dixon make one. Sure if you wanna pay out to the ass for some markings. I’ll take the direct replica from Mr. Dixon for $300 all day long.
Click to expand...
No, it's not.

The PGW mounts are still around, can be found whereas the Colorado Microprecision XM3 EFRs are all but unobtanium. so grabbing one of those from Chad is fine as far as Im concerned (same with the Troy repros).

If those SOL M40A3/5 mounts are decent then folks can use them if they want. I thought they were airsoft chink garbage.

But id buy the PGW mount if it were me...
 
  • Like
Reactions: USMCSGT0331
#72
Wallaback said:
Just an update to this thread: I bought an EFR directly from PGW within the last two months, and it came in looking exactly like the "old" version mentioned in this thread, shims and all.

Their estore was undergoing maintenance when I reached out to them, but I was able to purchase them through Roxanne, their CS rep, without issue and it arrived within a week.
Click to expand...
That's excellent info, especially if they're still selling the gen 1 version! The company was supposedly closing it's doors (again and again), so who knows what those crazy Canadians are doing (probably free basing maple syrup or some shit). If they have any EFR's in stock, gen 1 or gen 2, then that's what people should be using for their clone builds.

@Wallaback, have you received your PGW EFR yet? If so, can you please compare it to the gen 1 and gen 2 photos that are in this thread? Even if it comes with shims, there's a chance that it might be a gen 2. They stopped producing the gen 1 and moved onto the gen 2 a while back. The difference is that the gen 2 mount has additional material, so that it doesn't need the shims like the gen 1. However, many guys who were buying the gen 2 mounts were still asking for shims. Even though they didn't need shims with the gen 2 mount, the shims added another level of originality to the clone build, since that's exactly what the Marines used.

PGW could just be selling the gen 2 EFR with shims added to the package, since so many cloners had asked for shims to be included over the years. I have no idea because I haven't purchased one of their mounts in a long time, but maybe you can help us out. When you receive your PGW EFR, please post some photos and compare it to the photos in this thread. If they're actually selling gen 1 EFR's, then it's a good idea to stock up for future builds! Who knows if the company will go out of business again. For PGW, going out of business is good for business! Lol
 
  • Like
Reactions: B'N'F, HarryBC and nn8734
#73
I just read all the new posts in this thread, and I actually agree with all of you! There's no need to argue over anything. If you want to make a 100% clone, the get the PGW EFR. It's the correct rail that the Marines used, and it's currently available. I feel that if an original part that was used by the Corps is currently available, then everyone should be using that part.

However, if the original OEM part is no longer available for whatever reason, the definitely look for old stock originals first and then start looking for replicas made by other companies. There's also an issue of price. Some cloners have very tight budgets and they need to shave costs wherever they can. This means using cheaper parts, sometimes they're used originals or new replicas. Everyone with any kind of budget should be able to enjoy cloning, so I'm always going to support people who might only be able to afford some airsoft parts.

There's not many corners to cut on M40xx clones, especially with how much the stock costs, but it's possible to save a good amount of money and build an M40xx lookalike. Notice how I said "lookalike" as opposed to "clone." If you use a lot of reproduction or airsoft parts, as opposed to original OEM parts that the Marines used, then it eventually gets into an area where it's not really a clone, but it still really looks like the issued rifle. This is a grey area in cloning since most non-clones don't look anything like the original issued rifle.

I give a lot of advice to collectors and clone builders. I talk to many new people each week and I currently have 19 pages of messages on this forum alone! The best advice I can give is to use the same original OEM parts that the Marines used. If you can't afford some of these parts, then slow down on your build and save up. People are everywhere on the money spectrum, but they all have 1 thing in common - they all want to get their clone done and built right now! I tell everyone to hit the brakes, and do the build slowly at a rate they can manage to find and afford original parts. Every single clone builder I've talked to already has some guns in they collection, so I tell them to just go shoot and enjoy those guns in the meantime! It's very rare that someone contacts me asking about clone building advice, and that clone is their first EVER firearm. It might be their first clone build, but 99.9% of people already have other firearms to enjoy while they're collecting parts.

For the people who are looking at the SOL Strategic EFR over the PGW EFR, don't buy the SOL! For a while cloners couldn't get PGW EFR's, so the SOL EFR was an acceptable alternative, but that no longer appears to be the case. And if anyone thinks they're saving money buying the SOL EFR over the PGW EFR, it's actually cheaper to buy the original PGW part! The PGW EFR is $340 CAD, which is roughly $246 USD, and the SOL EFR is $290 USD. If anything happens to PGW and they're no longer able to supply the EFR for whatever reason, then people can look into getting the SOL EFR.

As for the $20 airsoft rail, it's wrong in so many ways, but if you really want to build a lookalike or non-clone M40xx and save a ton of money, then by all means try it out. There's quite a few guys out there who buy the airsoft Mk18 and M4A1 Block II Daniel Defense handguards for their AR15 builds, and they somehow make them work! These airsoft DD handguards look almost identical to the real ones, but they need some work to convert them to be usable on an actual firearm. People save a ton of money doing this, the rails look like the real deal, and they actually hold up just fine. The $20 airsoft EFR won't be put through anywhere near the same use as an airsoft handguard on a real firearm, so it should work out just fine. Using a $20 part on an M40xx build is pretty ridiculous, and if that's all you can afford, then maybe you shouldn't be doing clone builds right now, but that's none of my business. I'm not going to tell people what they can and can't do with their hard earned money.

Everyone should be able to have fun building clones, and we should be supporting each other. That includes guys who don't have the money to spend on the more expensive and correct OEM parts. You guys know how I'm a huge clone collector/builder who's insane about using very rare original parts, and yet I don't see any issues with anyone using cheap airsoft parts. I want everyone in our community to be happy, and I give advice to people who can't afford to build a perfectly correct clone rifle. If they're happy with their build, then I'm happy that I was able to give good advice. I usually give people options, and most people decide to stretch their build out longer so that they can save up for the correct OEM parts, but not everyone does that or is able to do that.

The only issue that I have with people using cheap airsoft parts is what they end up calling their build. In this situation, I kindly ask them to not refer to their rifle as a clone build, but instead say that it's "inspired by xxx" or it's an "xxx lookalike" or it's just a "custom rifle" etc., etc., etc. To me, being able to call a build a "clone" means that the person used as many original parts and build specs as possible, and the vast majority if the build has to use these original OEM parts. There's obviously exceptions for parts that are extremely rare or extremely expensive, and it's acceptable to use 1 or 2 reproduction parts. This community hasn't reall set a standard in stone for what is and isn't a clone build, so this is just my personal thoughts on it.

So, I see where you guys are coming from in your arguments, and I see each of them being valid. Instead of arguing with each other, lets (as a community) finally figure out what an actual "clone" is, and what "non-clone" "lookalike" "inspired by" builds are. Let's work together and support each other, everyone in our community should be able to enjoy these amazing rifles in one way or another. That's just my opinion on the subject, nothing more, nothing less. I don't expect anyone to agree with me, but this is how I view things. I hope that cloners reading this pick up the real deal PGW EFR's while they're still available, and I hope that someone buys the $20 airsoft rail to see if it's actually worth getting and saving a ton of money (and please share the results with us!).

Fuck me, I didn't realize that I just wrote 9 paragraphs on this topic! Sorry for the long winded post!
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 5RWill, HarryBC, nn8734 and 2 others
#74
Coejro said:
My bet is for $20 the air soft mount has zero QC.
Click to expand...
True, but for hacks/poors that aren't using NV it's a non-issue I guess. I know of two people that used the Airsoft EFR and it looks like the real thing from arms length. Having never seen the "real deal" from PGW, I wouldn't know the difference. Of course, everyone else here would in an instant.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Coejro and USMCSGT0331
#75
USMCSGT0331 said:
For the people who are looking at the SOL Strategic EFR over the PGW EFR, don't buy the SOL! For a while cloners couldn't get PGW EFR's, so the SOL EFR was an acceptable alternative, but that no longer appears to be the case. And if anyone thinks they're saving money buying the SOL EFR over the PGW EFR, it's actually cheaper to buy the original PGW part! The PGW EFR is $340 CAD, which is roughly $246 USD, and the SOL EFR is $290 USD. If anything happens to PGW and they're no longer able to supply the EFR for whatever reason, then people can look into getting the SOL EFR.
Click to expand...
Yep, zero benefit whatsoever for @5RWill or anyone else to buy a knock-off when he can buy the genuine article, as used by the USMC.

5RWill said:
It wasn’t hence the word clone lmao. Figured that would be implied.
Click to expand...
And here's why it wasn't, at least to me: Yours and my definitions for what a 'clone' is are vastly different.

Yours seems to extend only to what visually looks correct...Mine extends to the parts used (orig manufacturers) and procedures performed.

For example, lots of people have rifles they refer to as 'M40A1/A3/A5s that superficially look like those as fielded by the Corps but aren't clip-slotted/lug-slotted, don't use the correct McMillan A4, wrong recoil lug, etc). It's even worse with the Mk13s, at least what I've been seeing on Gunbroker as of late (motherfuckers on there selling "Mk 13 Mod 5" rifles with wrong color 2.0 AICS, wrong barrels, barrels threaded for fucking Surefire or whatever muzzle devices, and the like) and they want every bit of the $10,000 plus they are asking, lol.

To me, the only difference between a clone-correct rifle and one fielded/issued by the Marine Corps (or whichever DOD and/or agency rifle you happen to be cloning) should be the serial number...That's it...Just the serial number.

I've been waiting for about 10 years to come across the correct Colorado Microprecision EFR mount so I can build my XM3 (I'll likely be waiting another 10+). Yes, Chad's stuff is on-point; but for me, I want the real thing.

I am not knocking you at all for going with quality reproduction parts like LRI's, nor am I knocking you on not wanting to wait for parts (though the PGW rail is avail now, it seems) - just explaining why I didn't interpret your post in the way you expected.

I will absolutely knock anyone buying el-cheapo chinese airsoft crap.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5RWill, HarryBC and USMCSGT0331
#76
nn8734 said:
And here's why it wasn't, at least to me: Yours and my definitions for what a 'clone' is are vastly different.

Yours seems to extend only to what visually looks correct...Mine extends to the parts used (orig manufacturers) and procedures performed.

For example, lots of people have rifles they refer to as 'M40A1/A3/A5s that superficially look like those as fielded by the Corps but aren't clip-slotted/lug-slotted, don't use the correct McMillan A4, wrong recoil lug, etc). It's even worse with the Mk13s, at least what I've been seeing on Gunbroker as of late (motherfuckers on there selling "Mk 13 Mod 5" rifles with wrong color 2.0 AICS, wrong barrels, barrels threaded for fucking Surefire or whatever muzzle devices, and the like) and they want every bit of the $10,000 plus they are asking, lol
Click to expand...
Indeed. The look is the appeal for me and that’s the beauty of it all. Maybe there needs to be a new coined term “replica”.

However those you’re referencing who aren't even achieving the aesthetic of the clone shouldn’t designate the rifle as clones much less try to benefit off selling them as such. So I’m right there with you in that regard. Minor iteration to a build i personally have no issue with as long as the foundation that makes the build is intact. Designating a title to the weapon when it doesn’t remotely reflect the original such as the example you’ve given, grinds my gears. Again all subjective but take for instance the mk12. I would argue it can’t exist as a mk12 in my mind without the aem5 (12th model unobtainable) and/or PRI/KAC rail. Some liberties taken here or there otherwise certainly don’t bother me. So anyone selling an M40 series without a clip slotted receiver, wrong barrel, flash hider, or stock shouldn’t even designate it as such.

My XM3 has a clip slotted receiver, LRI CMP mount, surefire flash hider, the NF, and the the FA762ss. I went with badger m5 and didn’t seek out a titanium lug or the eagle industries stock pack. Is it clone correct? No. Would it be mistaken for anything else if anyone knew of the XM3 was looking at the rifle? Also i would argue no. It would be semantics at that point. So i would still and will still very much call it an XM3. Even if for sake of typing less when discussing the rifle, because at its core the 18.5” Hart barrel, clip slotted 700, surefire flash hider, and CMP mount are the XM3. Again just my opinion.

That’s good to know PGW is still available. Last i checked SOL wasn’t junk though so i think you need not worry in that regard. I agree I’d still go for PGW if applicable and I need to snag one but have too much going on.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: kthomas, nn8734 and USMCSGT0331
#77
5RWill said:
Designating a title to the weapon when it doesn’t remotely reflect the original such as the example you’ve given, grinds my gears. Again all subjective but take for instance the mk12. I would argue it can’t exist as a mk12 in my mind without the aem5 (12th model unobtainable) and/or PRI/KAC rail. Some liberties taken here or there otherwise certainly don’t bother me. So anyone selling an M40 series without a clip slotted receiver, wrong barrel, flash hider, or stock shouldn’t even designate it as such.

My XM3 has a clip slotted receiver, LRI CMP mount, surefire flash hider, the NF, and the the FA762ss. I went with badger m5 and didn’t seek out a titanium lug or the eagle industries stock pack. Is it clone correct? No. Would it be mistaken for anything else if anyone knew of the XM3 was looking at the rifle? Also i would argue no. It would be semantics at that point. So i would still and will still very much call it an XM3. Even if for sake of typing less when discussing the rifle, because at its core the 18.5” Hart barrel, clip slotted 700, surefire flash hider, and CMP mount are the XM3. Again just my opinion.

That’s good to know PGW is still available. Last i checked SOL wasn’t junk though so i think you need not worry in that regard. I agree I’d still go for PGW if applicable and I need to snag one but have too much going on.
Click to expand...
You're absolutely right about the Mk12, KAC 99167 rail and Ops Inc 12th or AEM5 - It's not a Mk12 without those.

The Badger EFR is a quality, well made piece that looks fine on the XM3, I don't see any issues there for your purposes. I don't know if any XM3 was ever built with the M5 bottom metal but if I was to deviate in one respect from the Corps' XM3s, it would be to install a M5 so I can run detachable mags... I hate hinged floor plates and having to reload my rifle likes it's 1855. If the XM3 went into active procurement, I'm guessing it would have either went with a BO M5 at the outset or upgraded subsequently. I think the transitional A3s with the detachable mag/M5 and PGW EFR were appearing around the same timeframe or a couple years later (XM3 is 2005-2006, BO M5 maybe 2007-2008ish).

Definitely get the PGW EFR while you can, who knows when they will suddenly dry up.
 
#78
nn8734 said:
The Badger EFR is a quality, well made piece that looks fine on the XM3, I don't see any issues there for your purposes. I don't know if any XM3 was ever built with the M5 bottom metal but if I was to deviate in one respect from the Corps' XM3s, it would be to install a M5 so I can run detachable mags... I hate hinged floor plates and having to reload my rifle likes it's 1855. If the XM3 went into active procurement, I'm guessing it would have either went with a BO M5 at the outset or upgraded subsequently. I think the transitional A3s with the detachable mag/M5 and PGW EFR were appearing around the same timeframe or a couple years later (XM3 is 2005-2006, BO M5 maybe 2007-2008ish).
Click to expand...
Sadly i don’t think there is even a prototype of the XM3 with M5. @USMCSGT0331 and i have tried to find it cause i thought there was mention of a prototype in Steve Reicharts write up but i can’t find any mention of it
 
#79
nn8734 said:
You're absolutely right about the Mk12, KAC 99167 rail and Ops Inc 12th or AEM5 - It's not a Mk12 without those.

The Badger EFR is a quality, well made piece that looks fine on the XM3, I don't see any issues there for your purposes. I don't know if any XM3 was ever built with the M5 bottom metal but if I was to deviate in one respect from the Corps' XM3s, it would be to install a M5 so I can run detachable mags... I hate hinged floor plates and having to reload my rifle likes it's 1855. If the XM3 went into active procurement, I'm guessing it would have either went with a BO M5 at the outset or upgraded subsequently. I think the transitional A3s with the detachable mag/M5 and PGW EFR were appearing around the same timeframe or a couple years later (XM3 is 2005-2006, BO M5 maybe 2007-2008ish).

Definitely get the PGW EFR while you can, who knows when they will suddenly dry up.
Click to expand...
5RWill said:
Sadly i don’t think there is even a prototype of the XM3 with M5. @USMCSGT0331 and i have tried to find it cause i thought there was mention of a prototype in Steve Reicharts write up but i can’t find any mention of it
Click to expand...

Just so everyone is on the same page, there was NEVER an IBA XM3 (prototype or issued rifle) with a Badger Ordnance M5 bottom metal or any other type of DBM. If you look through the IBA documents for testing the XM3 and other XM rifles, you can clearly see that a detachable bottom metal was NEVER part of the XM3 system. The only XM3's that had an M5 bottom metal were weird quasi-XM3 builds from the Remington Custom Shop. That's it, a random custom made Remington version of the XM3. I've discussed this extensively in the XM3 thread that's in the Bolt Action section of this forum.

Sorry for the thread derail, now back to the regular thread discussion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kthomas
#80
I’m definitely a POOR HACK….$20 dollars is $20 dollars….just sayin…

IMG_2481.jpeg
 
#81
USMCSGT0331 said:
@Wallaback, have you received your PGW EFR yet? If so, can you please compare it to the gen 1 and gen 2 photos that are in this thread? Even if it comes with shims, there's a chance that it might be a gen 2. They stopped producing the gen 1 and moved onto the gen 2 a while back. The difference is that the gen 2 mount has additional material, so that it doesn't need the shims like the gen 1. However, many guys who were buying the gen 2 mounts were still asking for shims. Even though they didn't need shims with the gen 2 mount, the shims added another level of originality to the clone build, since that's exactly what the Marines used.

PGW could just be selling the gen 2 EFR with shims added to the package, since so many cloners had asked for shims to be included over the years. I have no idea because I haven't purchased one of their mounts in a long time, but maybe you can help us out. When you receive your PGW EFR, please post some photos and compare it to the photos in this thread. If they're actually selling gen 1 EFR's, then it's a good idea to stock up for future builds! Who knows if the company will go out of business again. For PGW, going out of business is good for business! Lol
Click to expand...
I have, but there's really no telling whether it's back to the Gen 1 blueprint or just a Gen 2 with shims included... unless I had some original measurements to compare it against, visually it looks identical to the Gen 1.

My understanding is that PGW was only ever 'winding down' as in 'downscaling' their production and reducing their product line, and people misunderstood that they were shutting their doors.

Either way, they seem to be up and running now, which as a patriotic Canadian is good news to me!
 
  • Like
Reactions: USMCSGT0331
#82
Wallaback said:
I have, but there's really no telling whether it's back to the Gen 1 blueprint or just a Gen 2 with shims included... unless I had some original measurements to compare it against, visually it looks identical to the Gen 1.

My understanding is that PGW was only ever 'winding down' as in 'downscaling' their production and reducing their product line, and people misunderstood that they were shutting their doors.

Either way, they seem to be up and running now, which as a patriotic Canadian is good news to me!
Click to expand...

I believe PGW is just running at limited capacity compared to before.

They were to slow to adapt with the rest of the precision rifle world, and got passed by. Apparently the Canadian government held up a huge export order of theirs (I believe to Ukraine?), which they couldn't really recover from.

I'm not really sure what the future holds for PGW. I'm not sure if they have any military contracts anymore, and they've been stuck in the past, too late to adapt for the civi market. The fact that they are making anything right now is kind of incredible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: USMCSGT0331
#84
Wallaback said:
I have, but there's really no telling whether it's back to the Gen 1 blueprint or just a Gen 2 with shims included... unless I had some original measurements to compare it against, visually it looks identical to the Gen 1.

My understanding is that PGW was only ever 'winding down' as in 'downscaling' their production and reducing their product line, and people misunderstood that they were shutting their doors.

Either way, they seem to be up and running now, which as a patriotic Canadian is good news to me!
Click to expand...
@Wallaback, that's a good point, I didn't think about having another rail on hand to compare it to. How about this, you measure this part of your rail, I'll measure this part of my gen 1 rail, and then we'll compare the results. Here is a photo on the first page of thos thread that was posted by @kydron, and it shows the difference between the gen 1 and gen 2 PGW EFR's. I put an arrow in the photo to show the area that we need to measure and compare. I'll get mine measured asap and post the results. If you could kindly do the same, it would help us see if PGW is now selling gen 1 or gen 2 EFR's. Thank you!
 
#85
USMCSGT0331 said:
@Wallaback, that's a good point, I didn't think about having another rail on hand to compare it to. How about this, you measure this part of your rail, I'll measure this part of my gen 1 rail, and then we'll compare the results. Here is a photo on the first page of thos thread that was posted by @kydron, and it shows the difference between the gen 1 and gen 2 PGW EFR's. I put an arrow in the photo to show the area that we need to measure and compare. I'll get mine measured asap and post the results. If you could kindly do the same, it would help us see if PGW is now selling gen 1 or gen 2 EFR's. Thank you!
Click to expand...
IMG_5957.jpg


Just a quick and dirty measure, hopefully enough to give us some insight.
 
#86
bildoe308 said:
I’m definitely a POOR HACK….$20 dollars is $20 dollars….just sayin…

View attachment 8468225
Click to expand...
Can $20 be a true quality item? Material + machining time + tooling + debur + QC (?) = nope. Shop matching rates alone are easily $80 - 90 plus at the bottom of the range. A half hour is $40-45, so 15 minutes would be the range for just the machining. Costs are being cut somewhere and I would suspect that it translates into fit/form/function and overall performance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Coejro
#87
lariat said:
Can $20 be a true quality item? Material + machining time + tooling + debur + QC (?) = nope. Shop matching rates alone are easily $80 - 90 plus at the bottom of the range. A half hour is $40-45, so 15 minutes would be the range for just the machining. Costs are being cut somewhere and I would suspect that it translates into fit/form/function and overall performance.
Click to expand...
Costs are definitely being cut, and it will be made out of a lower quality type of aluminum, but that doesn't mean the part will be completely unusable. This isn't a heavy load bearing part, it's not a critical component, and it's not something that will ever see heavy use (and subsequent wear). Hell, the majority of people with EFR's on their A3 and A5 clones have probably never even attached a night vision or thermal device to it! I don't think that I've ever attached a NV or thermal unit to any of my A3's or A5's.

Obviously I will always recommend that people purchase the correct OEM part needed for a clone build, but if someone wants to build a lookalike (not a clone) A3/5 rifle for as cheap as possible, then by all means, go for it! This is a cheap part, but I doubt a civilian will ever break one from normal use. The military on the other hand...... there's a reason why Marines can't have nice things :ROFLMAO:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Belvedere, me124704, Modoc and 1 other person
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

RemCustom6
Firearms XM3, M40a3, M40a5, M40a1 build kits for sale. I’m getting out of the clone game.
Replies
12
Views
2K
RemCustom6
RemCustom6
USMCsean
My TKiv85 reproduction just got a huge boost.
Replies
21
Views
1K
Waltjaevel
W
Nate87
Accessories M40A5 build kit
Replies
1
Views
1K
Nate87
Nate87
USMCSGT0331
New McMillan smear stock review!
Replies
35
Views
5K
msr_762
msr_762
Victor-TNVC
TNVC Partners With Envision Technology - MARS Rangefinder & RAIL Family, MARS-Lc
Replies
0
Views
299
Victor-TNVC
Victor-TNVC
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Merch
Alerts