Why and from Whom? Having used an upgraded M4A1 for the past 3 years for my woodland skirmishing, I have become a little bored with it. Thoughts of Gucci gear like metal bodies, RIS units and silencers do not excite me greatly, although from a practicality point of view, a metal body would have been nice. So I thought about getting an M16A2 after using Patterson’s (a team-mate) for the benefits of better accuracy for the more open area games. I considered swapping the M4 for a TM M16A2 and then upgrading it, but then I worked out the rough costs of getting it to be anywhere near half decent:
So that little lot (not including the cost of the TM M16A2) comes to a grand total of a minimum of £480 GBP. Now that’s a fair whack of cash, and that’s the just the upgrades and the cost of fitting them. Due to my situation, I try to skirmish on an absolute shoe-string budget, so there was no way I could afford a nicely upgraded A2. That was depressing. Obviously, at this point I say “Enter Classic Army”. CA has had a fair amount of flack over the past couple of years for the poor quality and reliability of their products. However, they seem to have been listening to their customer feedback and have improved the quality of their MP5 range immensely. The CA M4 releases didn’t impress me at, a member of my team had one and it was a bit lame to be honest; mainly plagued by reliability issues. However, after a tonne of investigation, I came to the conclusion that a CA M16A3 is actually a really good deal for the following reasons:
So you are basically getting a hugely expensive rifle for a rather low price, this is something that a lot of people don’t seem to have picked up on yet. After looking around on the internet at the various UK Airsoft shops, Airsoft Armoury (http://www.airsoftarmoury.com) had the best price at £224 not including shipping. You do the maths, £224 for an upgraded, metal M16A3 or £200 for a standard TM M16A2….humm…to me, the choice is quite clear.
My research did, however, uncover a couple of immediate problems with the CA M16 rifles. Firstly, the gearbox’s do tend to be bone dry when it comes to lubrication. This is obviously not a good thing as lack of lube = exploding gear box. The second is the range of FPS that the rifles fire at out of the box. They appear to range from anywhere between 330 and 400FPS. The site limit for my regular haunt (Combat South – http://www.combatsouth.co.uk) is 350FPS, therefore I had to ensure that I am not breaking this rule. After speaking to Airsoft Armoury, they ensured me that the gearbox would be lubricated and the FPS would be checked to make sure that I would not receive an Airsoft cannon prior to shipping! I ordered a CA M16A3 on a Friday from Airsoft Armoury and received it on the following Monday morning, despite a slight mix up with the courier trying to deliver it to the wrong house. Airsoft Armoury’s sales people were helpful throughout the purchase and should be commended.
When you first pull the M16A3 out of the box, the first impression is of sturdiness. The metal body combined with a one piece outer barrel appears to make the rifle rather solid. No barrel wobble at all (something that plagues TM M16A2’s/M4’s); it does feel like it will be able to easily withstand skirmish use. The detail on the body is consistent with the new version CA bodies, with no Colt logos and is marked with “Classic Army AR-15A3” (see picture) in white writing, which appears to be simply painted onto the body itself. The writing is a little ugly, so I might attack it with some nail polish remover; it feels like it will come off easily enough. Why AR-15A3? Well, I am 99% sure that goes back to the trademark issues with Colt. The AR-15 is (in real steel versions) the civilian version of the M16. The stock is good and solid and actually quite close in appearance to the real thing (I have fired the M16A2 real steel extensively) and feels good and solid. The front end looks ok, although I am not too pleased with the quality of the fore grips, they have a rough texture which is, again, not consistent with the real steel version. However, this is easily remedied if I can hold of some TM ones.
Upon opening the stock via the usual pull down catch, the wiring is exposed. I have a CA MP5 SD2 and the quality of the wiring is awful. Not the case in the A3, they have obviously put in some much better quality wire which is pleasing to see. The fuse is there (which is good to see!) and is in a slim line case. I have, so far, only tried putting an 8.4v 2000mah battery in, I will try a 9.6 as soon as possible. It should fit without too many hassles, indeed CA seem to think that you can get a 12v in there! After I had a peer down the stock with a torch, it is possible to see a strengthening bracket which also acts as a back stop for the battery. They did something similar with the MP5 solid stock and this is quite easily removed to accept a larger battery, which I will do if getting the 9.6 in is problematic. The magazine is, well, a Classic Army high-capacity magazine holding the usual 300+ rounds. The colour is a really odd greeny-gray colour (I am colour blind so I might be wrong!), which is certainly not consistent with the real steel magazines. Quite why the designers at CA painted the magazine this colour I am not sure. The CA M16 magazines are not renowned for their outstanding quality; to be honest I will probably not even bother to use it and stick to the superior TM magazines.
Anyway, magazine in, fire selector to semi automatic. A nice pleasing action in the fire control switch, makes a good solid click. On the real thing, it’s a fair old click when you chance fire modes, I am yet to find an Airsoft Armalite that comes close to the real thing, but then we can’t have everything. With the battery and magazine locked and loaded, the A3 is well balanced and certainly not front heavy. Weight wise, it is not all that far off the real deal.
To my eye, which could be completely wrong, the FPS appears to be around 340FPS which is what I am after. This will be confirmed at my site. Accuracy wise, it appears to be easily comparable with my M4A1 with a TN barrel installed. Once I get into a big open space, I will be able to test it more effectively. If accuracy proves to be a problem, then a TN barrel and possibly a Systema metal Hop-Up could be installed. I have a feeling that this might not be strictly necessary, but we’ll see. Switching to fully automatic, the RoF (Rate of Fire) is pretty good (bearing in mind that one BB = one kill, in theory at least) on an 8.4v battery. I grab my U shaped 9.6/wire converter and the RoF becomes rather insane begging the question of the necessity of a higher voltage battery. As a fire support weapon, a bigger battery may be necessary. A 2000mah 8.4v should last a fair amount of time, and it certainly does not have a problem turning the gear box over. Accuracy on fully automatic is pleasing and can be compared to any other relatively long AEG. The gear box is louder than I was expecting, no bad noises or anything, just louder. I am going to say that this is because of the metal body; a plastic one absorbs a lot more sound than a metal one (see your GCSE physics book as to why). Certainly not a cause for concern. Releasing the magazine is smooth and easy. However, reloading it is a little sticky and can be a pain. I am 99% sure this can be fixed through some filing inside the magazine well. Compare and Contrast Comega wrote a first impressions review of the CA M4A1 a while back. Due to the similarities of the Armalite range, the points raised in his review are highly relevant to this one. For those who have not read it, the major points brought up in Comega’s review include:
Point 1: In contrast to the M4, the M16A3 feels incredibly solid. I wouldn’t want to wrap it around a tree or anything daft, but it really does feel good. No barrel wobble and no movement in any of the parts. It will certainly stand up to vigorous use in the skirmish environment. Point 2: Obviously, the battery is not in the fore grip. The one piece outer barrel is substantial and impressive, I have always wanted one. I have experienced no battery problems of any kind with the A3. Getting them in and out is not a problem and the wiring is of a high quality. Point 3: Well, to be honest, I think this is to be expected. The springs used in the CA gear boxes are pretty strong, especially when compared to a standard TM or M80 spring. Therefore high battery consumption is an issue, but I would not anticipate this being a problem when using a solid stock with a good sized battery. Point 4: The selector switch problems have certainly been ironed out in this replica. The movement is solid and reassuring and does not appear to suffer the problems experienced in the M4 series. Point 5: As stated previously, there is no movement whatsoever in the front end of the rifle, another good point fixed since previous versions. Point 6: The overall build quality and finish to the A3 is, what I would consider to be, pretty good. In all honesty, the CA A3 really does compare pretty well with the real deal. The colour and finish of the metal work is good and it is a joy to hold.
Comment on this review in the forums Last modified: Thursday, May 15, 2003 5:12 PM Copyright 2003 ArniesAirsoft
|
