Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

BadAssTronaut

Support Weapon Pics

Recommended Posts

Nah, when you get a zb26 then we'll call it that.  Didn't think anyone would buy the G&G MG42 though.

 

Not really at liberty to say what I paid for it, but working at an airsoft store does have some benefits. I've probably sunk more into my Inokatsu, so in my twisted mind the '42 didn't hurt quite as much.

 

 

How does it shoot? the GMG42

 

I have yet to field it, but I did some informal testing.

 

FPS on mine was about 355 w/ .20 bbs. With the included 11.1v lipo it spews out at around 20-21 rounds per second, so that's about spot on for the real thing.

 

Only got to do a little bit of outdoor shooting, and while I haven't touched the hopup yet, it was able to shoot .20s nearly 150 ft (based on Google Maps). I'm pretty confident that it will be able to do better with .25s or maybe even .28s.

 

I did notice that the drum had a bit of trouble keeping up during long extended bursts. Shorter bursts were ok, but if you're really laying it on, it might have some issues. Maybe a slightly higher C-rated 7.4 lipo might help with that (or perhaps just a full charge), maybe if I was to toss in a slightly stiffer spring the gun's RoF might go down slightly enough for the drum to keep up better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have an Inokatsu 240B, took approximately 1 year to iron out the issues. 

 

its the accuracy and range I am keen to see, the PKM has the most accuracy at range out of my MGs though the inokatsu isn't far behind at a minute of man at 100m/300ft on a good day so be interested to see how the 42 goes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dan, would you be willing to post a guide for sorting out the Inokatsu 240's issues? A friend of mine is buying my old Ino GPMG and I'd like to be able to point him in the direction of some expert assistance should the need arise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The inokatsu 240B had so many problems.  I had the aluminium version which weighs around 7kg unloaded, which I added extra lead weights to and pushed it up to 8kg.  Adding the boxmag, battery and ammo its 2kg kg on top.

 

By Default the accuracy is pretty horrid.  It is partially because the outer barrel is bored too wide for the inner barrel to sit perfectly inside without barrel whip, and the stock barrel is pretty bad quality.  So a barrel bushing is required at the end, and if not at the end its along the whole barrel.

 

 

- The most serious problem is airseal.

 

       The hop unit was made in such a way that the nozzle is pushed out of alignment as the BBs are fed into the hop unit.  It can be fixed by finding either/or:

       - A nozzle of the proper diameter so that it doesn't go out of alignment

       - Gluing a piece of aluminium to prevent barrel being pushed upwards out of alignment.

       - A hop rubber that seals with the nozzle

       - A barrel that seals with the hop rubber.

 

      This process costs a lot of time and money.  Not fun. 

 

      To improve the accuracy I first changed to a Madbull 6.01mm Python 650mm.  Then VFC Hop rubber for GBB MP5, the aluminium mod,

      a G&G M4 nozzle.

 

 

 

- Trigger switch, the plastic nub that contacts the steel trigger set, will wear and/or breaks over time.

 

      Solution:  Make the plastic nub out of abrasion resistant chopping board and replace the one in the contacts.

 

- Cardboard for a boxmag:

     Solution:  Fold a box mag out of see through polycarbonate sheets.

 

- Rivets which hold the bipod retention tabs fall out.

     Solution:  Replace using Pop rivets

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------

After that the gun is very useable, not PKM accuracy but better than the A&K/G&P 249s

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Over the past week I've been making an AGM MG42 skirmishable and converting it to a Yugo M53, a post-war derivative of the MG42, partly because I like the black furniture, partly because a gun still used by insurgents and militias appeals to me more than one relegated to the history books, and partly just to justify putting a scope on it.

 

How's it compare to your PKM?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How's it compare to your PKM?

 

I've been meaning to write up a comparison of the two, so let me answer your simple question with an unprovoked essay.

 

In terms of performance, both are not terribly useful in stock form. Both have very poor motors, mediocre shimming, overly greased gearboxes, and poor hop. Either way, you'll want to upgrade the motor and hop right out of the box. The PKM's wiring is sound once you install the bypass for the rate of fire adjuster, while the MG42 required me to splice and re-solder to move the motor wiring from a separate circuit to in parallel with the motor. On the other hand, the MG42 uses an AR-style hop unit so is easy to upgrade, while the PKM has the ineffective A&K unit with the vertical nub, with the alternative being an expensive aftermarket CNC hop unit. Basically, both guns needed a new motor and hop-up rubber/nub out of the box to get decent performance, but getting each one 'optimal' in my view is a bit involved. Also, both have a scattering of proprietary parts that can make getting good air seals a pain.

 

Both guns are similarly built. The MG42 is mostly aluminum, with steel used for the feed tray, bipod, charging handle, and a few random external parts. I know my gun is the second version by AGM/S&T, and I believe the first version was somewhat different, using steel in the receiver and/or shroud but having an aluminum bipod that was prone to failure. The PKM is mostly steel, except for the outer barrel, and unfortunately the interface between the outer barrel and receiver is not fully secure- after a game in which I spent a lot of time resting the gun on its muzzle on windows, I noticed substantial vertical play, and after re-tightening screws that had come loose I used some thin aluminum (from soda cans) to shim it. The MG42, on the other hand, is solid, and has no parts that I'd be worried about degrading in the same way. The bipods on both are solid and won't shear like the A&K M60s. The MG42 comes in a toy-like glossy black finish, while the PKM is a much better looking matte black. I hit the PKM with some steel wool for some minor weathering, but the MG42 needed refinishing with a graphite rub, matte coat, and buffing to get the zinc/magnesium phosphate grey of the real thing.

 

The PKM comes with polymer furniture, and the aftermarket wood is seriously bad- bad finish, bad fitment. The stock didn't even fit the buttplate when I got it, and I had to modify it to fit, and the wood carry handle panels are inaccurate to the Bakelite used on the real thing. I used paint for the carry handle, and refinished the wood- were I to do it again I'd just modify a real PKM stock to fit. The MG42, on the other hand, comes with a wood stock and bakelite grips, which isn't that bad. The earlier ones came with a laminate stock, which is inaccurate to real MG42s, but mine was one solid piece. Both come with obnoxious orange flash hiders. The MG42's is not replaceable, but is the right shape so can be painted black, while the PKM's is the old-style PK long flash hider and can be replaced with a real-steel PKM flash hider (provided it has the right threading, 14x1 left-handed). I got mine from CNCWarrior.

 

The MG42 has no external accessory support to speak of, while the PKM has optional aftermarket rails. Since I prefer to use an optic I attached rails to the feed tray covers of both. It's a pretty easy modification, and only requires one hole to be drilled on the PKM or two on the MG42, so is almost fully reversible.

 

The feed system is very important to an MG, and the PKM's wins. The capacity is ridiculous (somewhere between 7k and 10k), and out of the box it doesn't need any modification. Just plug it into the gun, set it to 'continuum', and go. In over 20k rounds I haven't had a single jam or stoppage. The MG42's drum, by default, uses a separate circuit from the gun, is powered by 4 AA batteries that go in the drum, and only holds about 2000 BBs, and I've heard that it can jam and eat its gears, so we'll see how that goes. Neither drum can be easily detached from their respective guns while in use, and neither is easy to refill while on the gun. The big thing that annoys me about the PKM's drum is that if, like me, you use a dummy belt and/or a large battery, the spring-loaded cover on the right side of the drum doesn't close (due to the belt and/or battery in the way), which allows BBs to pour out if you tilt the gun too far. I ended up cutting a square of foam, gluing it to a piece of cardboard, and stuffing that in the gap as a removable cover. The MG42's is a solid, sealed unit, but the rear cover can't be opened without removing it from the gun, although it appears that it may be possible to pour BBs into the drum from the top when the cover tab is open.

 

The battery space on the MG42 is tiny. I got a pair of this lipo for the MG42 and it barely fits, while the PKM has a spacious compartment in the drum for my 3300mAh brick. Swapping the battery is pretty easy on both guns.

 

Ergonomically, the MG42 wins. The shroud is easy to hold as a foregrip, the weight is concentrated in the receiver, and the drum is out of the way. The PKM doesn't have anywhere convenient to hold, the weight is centered on the drum mag (especially when full), and the drum's placement requires an awkward posture to support the front of the gun. Both are almost the same weight at 15-16lbs, which is realistic for the PKM but much lighter than a real MG42.

 

So all in all I'd say they're more similar than they're different. They're both 15-16lb machine guns with solid build and design but hamstrung by crappy motors and hop-up, and both require a fair investment to get running optimally. I'd say that the MG42 is probably better suited to a run and gun style of play since it's easier to carry and shoulder, while the PKM is probably better for a defensive setup due to its enormous box magazine and rock-solid feed system. But that comes with the caveat that without a modified or aftermarket hop unit it's a struggle to get the PKM to reach past 200ft, and you could improve the PKM's ergonomics with a 45-degree foregrip if you're so inclined. So really they're both equally viable, and considering how cheap they both are either one could be made into an effective MG without breaking the bank.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The inokatsu 240B had so many problems.  I had the aluminium version which weighs around 7kg unloaded, which I added extra lead weights to and pushed it up to 8kg.  Adding the boxmag, battery and ammo its 2kg kg on top.

 

By Default the accuracy is pretty horrid.  It is partially because the outer barrel is bored too wide for the inner barrel to sit perfectly inside without barrel whip, and the stock barrel is pretty bad quality.  So a barrel bushing is required at the end, and if not at the end its along the whole barrel.

 

Never had that with mine. It came with a TM M16 barrel with 3 bushes already fitted. Whether that was done by the shop tech when I bought it I don't know.

 

- The most serious problem is airseal.

 

       The hop unit was made in such a way that the nozzle is pushed out of alignment as the BBs are fed into the hop unit.  It can be fixed by finding either/or:

       - A nozzle of the proper diameter so that it doesn't go out of alignment

       - Gluing a piece of aluminium to prevent barrel being pushed upwards out of alignment.

       - A hop rubber that seals with the nozzle

       - A barrel that seals with the hop rubber.

 

      This process costs a lot of time and money.  Not fun. 

 

      To improve the accuracy I first changed to a Madbull 6.01mm Python 650mm.  Then VFC Hop rubber for GBB MP5, the aluminium mod,

      a G&G M4 nozzle.

 

Agreed! I find mine to be extremely fussy on hop rubbers. If too thick, then it catches on the chamber walls and won't sit flush and bends upwards. Too thin and the seal is horrendous. I have also had it where bb's either drop out the end, or the opposite and jam in the barrel. it was a case of serious trial and error on that part. in the end I found a standard TM M16 barrel with a Madbull blue hop rubber seems to work. And that's the standard blue, not the Madbull (blue) shark.

 

 

- Trigger switch, the plastic nub that contacts the steel trigger set, will wear and/or breaks over time.

 

      Solution:  Make the plastic nub out of abrasion resistant chopping board and replace the one in the contacts.

 

- Cardboard for a boxmag:

     Solution:  Fold a box mag out of see through polycarbonate sheets.

 

- Rivets which hold the bipod retention tabs fall out.

     Solution:  Replace using Pop rivets

 

My inok is 8 years old and gets used all the time and have never encountered issues with the rivets or trigger switch issues. Yes the box mag could have been better.

 

Now nothing may ever come of it, but was looking at having a new gearbox designed for mine. Do away with the box mag completely.

 

You can make the gear box small enough, with a small arm running along the bottom for the switch. So you would have the whole rear half to fit a small vat and winding feed.

If you cut away a Echo1 M240 feed mech, and use just the mech itself with some alterations, you could fit it in (just). Mill a groove down the side of the gearbox for the feed tube. 

 

I would then have the feed done like a G&P M249 feed, where it's sprung loaded. so when time to remove the barrel, you wouldn't have to remove anything. 

 

Haven't looked into a hop unit yet, but lets say we stick with a G&P M249 hop unit. Look how much less room that would take up inside compared to the massive long inok one. Plus the G&P is easy to source if it breaks. 

 

Then if you get a long enough reamer, you could ream out the gas tube and fit a stick type battery no problem. So essentially it would look like a rear wired M4 stock, but facing the other way.

 

As for the wiring, no more masses of wires. With the feed mech now sitting above the trigger switch, have it wired direct. Only wire then would be a 16 gauge wire running up the gas tube to the battery.

 

Only issue would be the ammo count wouldn't be amazing, maybe 1000-1500 max. but its work able. Plus you could still have it where the whole lot just slides out the back in one piece.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I've been meaning to write up a comparison of the two, so let me answer your simple question with an unprovoked essay.

 

In terms of performance, both are not terribly useful in stock form. Both have very poor motors, mediocre shimming, overly greased gearboxes, and poor hop. Either way, you'll want to upgrade the motor and hop right out of the box. The PKM's wiring is sound once you install the bypass for the rate of fire adjuster, while the MG42 required me to splice and re-solder to move the motor wiring from a separate circuit to in parallel with the motor. On the other hand, the MG42 uses an AR-style hop unit so is easy to upgrade, while the PKM has the ineffective A&K unit with the vertical nub, with the alternative being an expensive aftermarket CNC hop unit. Basically, both guns needed a new motor and hop-up rubber/nub out of the box to get decent performance, but getting each one 'optimal' in my view is a bit involved. Also, both have a scattering of proprietary parts that can make getting good air seals a pain.

 

Both guns are similarly built. The MG42 is mostly aluminum, with steel used for the feed tray, bipod, charging handle, and a few random external parts. I know my gun is the second version by AGM/S&T, and I believe the first version was somewhat different, using steel in the receiver and/or shroud but having an aluminum bipod that was prone to failure. The PKM is mostly steel, except for the outer barrel, and unfortunately the interface between the outer barrel and receiver is not fully secure- after a game in which I spent a lot of time resting the gun on its muzzle on windows, I noticed substantial vertical play, and after re-tightening screws that had come loose I used some thin aluminum (from soda cans) to shim it. The MG42, on the other hand, is solid, and has no parts that I'd be worried about degrading in the same way. The bipods on both are solid and won't shear like the A&K M60s. The MG42 comes in a toy-like glossy black finish, while the PKM is a much better looking matte black. I hit the PKM with some steel wool for some minor weathering, but the MG42 needed refinishing with a graphite rub, matte coat, and buffing to get the zinc/magnesium phosphate grey of the real thing.

 

The PKM comes with polymer furniture, and the aftermarket wood is seriously bad- bad finish, bad fitment. The stock didn't even fit the buttplate when I got it, and I had to modify it to fit, and the wood carry handle panels are inaccurate to the Bakelite used on the real thing. I used paint for the carry handle, and refinished the wood- were I to do it again I'd just modify a real PKM stock to fit. The MG42, on the other hand, comes with a wood stock and bakelite grips, which isn't that bad. The earlier ones came with a laminate stock, which is inaccurate to real MG42s, but mine was one solid piece. Both come with obnoxious orange flash hiders. The MG42's is not replaceable, but is the right shape so can be painted black, while the PKM's is the old-style PK long flash hider and can be replaced with a real-steel PKM flash hider (provided it has the right threading, 14x1 left-handed). I got mine from CNCWarrior.

 

The MG42 has no external accessory support to speak of, while the PKM has optional aftermarket rails. Since I prefer to use an optic I attached rails to the feed tray covers of both. It's a pretty easy modification, and only requires one hole to be drilled on the PKM or two on the MG42, so is almost fully reversible.

 

The feed system is very important to an MG, and the PKM's wins. The capacity is ridiculous (somewhere between 7k and 10k), and out of the box it doesn't need any modification. Just plug it into the gun, set it to 'continuum', and go. In over 20k rounds I haven't had a single jam or stoppage. The MG42's drum, by default, uses a separate circuit from the gun, is powered by 4 AA batteries that go in the drum, and only holds about 2000 BBs, and I've heard that it can jam and eat its gears, so we'll see how that goes. Neither drum can be easily detached from their respective guns while in use, and neither is easy to refill while on the gun. The big thing that annoys me about the PKM's drum is that if, like me, you use a dummy belt and/or a large battery, the spring-loaded cover on the right side of the drum doesn't close (due to the belt and/or battery in the way), which allows BBs to pour out if you tilt the gun too far. I ended up cutting a square of foam, gluing it to a piece of cardboard, and stuffing that in the gap as a removable cover. The MG42's is a solid, sealed unit, but the rear cover can't be opened without removing it from the gun, although it appears that it may be possible to pour BBs into the drum from the top when the cover tab is open.

 

The battery space on the MG42 is tiny. I got a pair of this lipo for the MG42 and it barely fits, while the PKM has a spacious compartment in the drum for my 3300mAh brick. Swapping the battery is pretty easy on both guns.

 

Ergonomically, the MG42 wins. The shroud is easy to hold as a foregrip, the weight is concentrated in the receiver, and the drum is out of the way. The PKM doesn't have anywhere convenient to hold, the weight is centered on the drum mag (especially when full), and the drum's placement requires an awkward posture to support the front of the gun. Both are almost the same weight at 15-16lbs, which is realistic for the PKM but much lighter than a real MG42.

 

So all in all I'd say they're more similar than they're different. They're both 15-16lb machine guns with solid build and design but hamstrung by crappy motors and hop-up, and both require a fair investment to get running optimally. I'd say that the MG42 is probably better suited to a run and gun style of play since it's easier to carry and shoulder, while the PKM is probably better for a defensive setup due to its enormous box magazine and rock-solid feed system. But that comes with the caveat that without a modified or aftermarket hop unit it's a struggle to get the PKM to reach past 200ft, and you could improve the PKM's ergonomics with a 45-degree foregrip if you're so inclined. So really they're both equally viable, and considering how cheap they both are either one could be made into an effective MG without breaking the bank.

 

My PKM has been fine, no real issues except box mag failure where the plastic switch disintegrated while on prone, but all in all its been a really exceptional MG.  I degreased, reshimmed, and shoots lasers out to 80m, basically all the work I have done to it.

 

My AGM '42 has been a bigger POS than the inokatsu.  It has an M140 spring but the airseal is no good as soon as you reassemble the rifle it just drops FPS.  the gun shoots 330fps on 0.25g when it should be closer to 420fps.  I cannot diagnose the issue, and with new hop rubbers, barrels etc, once pressure s applied somewhere the FPS changes, and it is consistently leaky

 

So I am pretty fed up with the AGM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've seen some people with the first version of the AGM MG42 report that the gun doesn't shoot as hard as it should because the spring guide sits farther back than on a normal AEG. Mine shot 400fps with 0.25g on an M120, which is over 40fps higher than it should, so I'm wondering if they changed the design for the second version. Did your gun come with a spring around the barrel to push the hop-up unit back? If not, you might have the V1. They seem to be considerably different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am unsure if mine is a V1.  It does have the spring to push the hop unit backwards.  But yeah the spring guide seems too far backwards as it is very easy to get the spring in.

 

 

I think I found the issue(s).

 

1) The mechbox dimension isn't compatible with certain pistons.  It sits, it fits, but when the piston is pulled back while the shell has screws in it, the piston seizes up as the mechbox applies pressure to the piston sides, basically the width is too narrow.  The fix is to think out the mechbox AND the piston guide rails.  Stock piston was bad, so I swapped out to an SHS which was an issue.  In fact the SHS piston melted due to the friction applied by the mechbox.

2) Hop rubber issues:  Which is pretty usual.  The stock one tends to work ok, but other aftermarket ones don't fit (Madbull, G&G, ICS), probably losing 10-20fps from that.

3) Nozzles: the stock one had an imperfection right at the nose of it, probably leading to some inefficiencies.  May get the PTS Masada nozzle.

 

Fixing problem 1)  I managed to get the gun shooting around 410fps on 0.25g so its on the low ball part with an M140.  Adding a spring tensioner I should be able to get it a bit higher.

 

Took too long to identify this issue.

 

Question now is, should I sell to get the G&G.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a play with the G&G and while its good, the AGM has a few advantages over the G&G.

 

- More space for battery in both the stock and the magazine (I wired mine to fit in the mag)

- It has more space for a tracer system in the hop unit (which is what I have mounted, along with custom wiring from the mechbox)

 

Currently the AGM is at the 8.5kg mark with no ammo and battery, I just need to get the AGM to the 10-11kg mark, possibly with a steel outer barrel and some lead in the stock.  Possibly steel flash hider and top cover if anyone has one for sale.

 

Anyone has made a steel outer barrel for the MG42?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm building a custom Minimi 7,62 for polish SF reenactment.

What i got:
Aky02bJ.jpg

7TkvXTV.jpg

How it's gonna look when it's finished:

zd75f0W.jpg

 

More photos:

http://imgur.com/a/Q41sU

For now i got:
-Steel bipod mount
-steel Barrel
-steel front sight
-steel gas tube/cillinder replica
-steel pistol grip mount

everything made of 1.2210 "silver steel", it's very good for stuff like that, because it's a highly wear resistant material. Every part was later put in a manganese parkerization.
Modified:
-trigger guard
-gas block
-RIS modifications (going to make the whole 1 piece alluminium set, just like the original FN ones
-cocking handle
Bought:
-new body with the vehicle mount
-real steel FN flashhider
-real steel FN carrying handle
-FN collapsible buttstock

 

Next step will be making a custom feed tray and it's cover. Then i need to buy the 7,62 nutsack and move the grip/trigger module about 2 centimeters to the back (like in real minimi 7,62).

 

Does anyone know if there's someone who'd sell me the 7,62 boxmag and ship it to Poland?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice, where'd you pick up the bipod? I've improvised with a Parker Hale on a QD mount. It's an improvement over the original, but it's not ideal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the Devt6 there´s a guy from ukraine whos building custom parts

Yeah i know about it, he hasn't got the nutsack for sale. I can make everything else myself as long as it's metal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

YXThjwS.jpg

 

Being an airsoft store owner for almost 10 years, I have seen and used a fair share of guns. G&G MG42 is, in my opinion, the best airsoft GPMG:

 

- all steel – combined with sound design of the original, it is practically indestructible; unlike some other highly coveted replicas

- gearbox – beefy, aluminum, CNC made = indestructible; easy to take out, change spring, disassemble

- drum mag – holds 2000+ bbs, steel = tough, does not get in the way

- barrel change – hopup easily accessible (although getting to the bucking itself could be easier)

- bipod – all steel, several degrees of freedom

- sights – open, very little target obstruction

- finish – grey, gets better and better with use

Not so good:

- smallish battery space

- rear sight wobbly – about to install original M53 sight

- aftermarket barrels will fit with some lathe work

 

I've installed PDI 6.08 barrel, R-hop, PDI cylinder, better motor, MOSFET and controller to overcome possible microswitch bounce. With 1.9J, this thing just dominates the field (if used correctly, of course).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the use of session cookies.