Isamu Posted August 14, 2012 Report Share Posted August 14, 2012 Arent the XDm and Samurai edge made by HK3 and rebranded? I need to get a PX4 and see if it is really "that good". Anyway, back on topic, this is really a not so bad idea, it just need to be cheaper or same price as regular midrange AEGs and not explode at second hicap to take off Link to post Share on other sites
fiddlesticks4220 Posted August 14, 2012 Report Share Posted August 14, 2012 This looks cool, I wonder if I can purchase this split gearbox for my bad *albatross* rifle I all ready have. (Similar to Pro-Win gearbox ) I don't understand why everyone is butt hurt. Link to post Share on other sites
Isamu Posted August 14, 2012 Report Share Posted August 14, 2012 The only problem with this "new" system This looks cool, I wonder if I can purchase this split gearbox for my bad *albatross* rifle I all ready have. (Similar to Pro-Win gearbox ) I don't understand why everyone is butt hurt. only issue with this "new" system is that its not new and they speak as it was the holy grial of aegs, and given the fact that as soon as WE releases a new gun, ratech releases spares... well, WE is not much about reliability. I will keep my ICS instead of this. BUT, if this is compatible with regular AEG bodies, that will be an advantage, but that hasnt been stated by them yet Link to post Share on other sites
NeoVeNoM Posted August 14, 2012 Report Share Posted August 14, 2012 BUT, if this is compatible with regular AEG bodies, that will be an advantage, but that hasnt been stated by them yet didn't he say TM compatible? or was that only for the parts? Link to post Share on other sites
Isamu Posted August 14, 2012 Report Share Posted August 14, 2012 I understood he was talking about internal parts, but now that you mention it, maybe he was referring to the body as well Link to post Share on other sites
Chevieblazer Posted August 14, 2012 Report Share Posted August 14, 2012 Well, I got an answer to the bolt/fire stop question. It does NOT stop firing on an empty mag... must say I'm not that interested any more. Why the heck are they building a new system with old flaws?!? Link to post Share on other sites
Isamu Posted August 14, 2012 Report Share Posted August 14, 2012 Its cheaper to add a couple of "innovations" and advertise them as "awesomesauce" than really work in a new system like the RS M4 or at lower scale, the Airsoft systems M4 Although for those who already have some regular AEGs this could be good news, as tehy could still use their setups and just change the gearbox to get some improvements Link to post Share on other sites
uscmCorps Posted August 15, 2012 Report Share Posted August 15, 2012 While I'm not a huge fan of WE, I will admit that (IMO) this has the potential to be easier to work on in respects to adjusting the velocity than most standard V2 gearboxes (including ones with quick spring access rear screws). The notion that you can push out the rear receiver pin, fold the gun in half like a real gun, swap out the piston/spring assembly and put it back together in a matter of seconds is pretty cool. The biggest failing of the ICS series (from what I recall) was that they had huge reliability and compression issues, a lot of proprietary parts, and the receiver was elongated, etc. If WE have managed to produce a replica that is relatively reliable that's pretty cool. The receiver appears to be non-G&P/KA/VFC etc spec since it uses both front and rear receiver pins to hold the upper receiver in place. Link to post Share on other sites
LordElpus Posted August 15, 2012 Report Share Posted August 15, 2012 I welcome this move if nothing else to get manufacturers away from the old tech just because it's easier. It still peeves me that the majority of airsoft guns still use the old copper wedge and spring trigger mech. 10 years ago i can see the point, but now? hell no. Maybe there will be a generation of guns that use brushless motors, ecu's and have hopup's that do what they need to do without needing work out of the box. Although i believe I have more chance of winning the Euromillions Lottery. Link to post Share on other sites
Isamu Posted August 15, 2012 Report Share Posted August 15, 2012 The biggest failing of the ICS series (from what I recall) was that they had huge reliability and compression issues, a lot of proprietary parts, and the receiver was elongated, etc. Im sorry for the offtopic, but I see myself forced to defend the honor of my Sportline ICS Certainly it has some propietary parts, mostly external, although I have changed some of them with ACM spares I had lying around, like the stock tube, external barrel, delta ring..., but internal like, except the gearbox, 99% of the parts are TM compatible, which to be honest, dont need to be changed. Maybe im lucky, but my gun works flawesly. Compression was excellent just installing a madbull blue bucking I got a maximum difference in FPS of +2 or - 2 between shots, now its about 5 or 6 FPS difference because I made a Flat hop mod and TBH, im clumsy with these matters Reciever is elongated, yes, that cant be changed, but I just want to shoot people in the field, so no problems for me there Link to post Share on other sites
NeoVeNoM Posted August 15, 2012 Report Share Posted August 15, 2012 First I thought they were using a ICS or TM ABS receiver. You know, the TM two part hop up unit of the previous generation. But the I got a better picture, courtesy of Airsoftnews.fr I don't know what to think now. is this a modded G&P/WE/VFC body? simply holding the upper receiver due to its cylindrical shape? Which brings me to another question; aren't 1 piece Hop up unit going to be a problem with this setup? Link to post Share on other sites
TheFull9 Posted August 15, 2012 Report Share Posted August 15, 2012 As in a GBBr magpul lower reciever? I've never seen one before that didn't have the big magpul logo on the magazine housing personally. Link to post Share on other sites
Boom3r Posted August 15, 2012 Report Share Posted August 15, 2012 Which brings me to another question; aren't 1 piece Hop up unit going to be a problem with this setup? Shouldn't be as standard V2 gearboxes extend much further into the upper part of the magwell than this appears to do. Link to post Share on other sites
Horsem4n Posted August 16, 2012 Report Share Posted August 16, 2012 the one piece hop will be fine. the upper part of the gearbox moves with the hopup, so theres nothing to worry about. looks pretty good to me, but if the tollarances are off even a bit, AOE may not be attainable. Link to post Share on other sites
IBMedic Posted August 20, 2012 Report Share Posted August 20, 2012 Good in concept, I always like the idea of a self contained interchangeable cylinder unit. Since 80-90% of failures happen in this area, having an interchangeable unit really makes field repair possible. With that being said, I have some concerns about how this thing locks up. There is only 1 rear locking pin that locks the cylinder down. The upper receiver does NOT lock down into the lower via a rear pin. It seems that the upper receiver is held in place by the cylinder... this is really questionable design, and will result in massive upper wobble at the best and terrible meshing between the cylinder and sector gear at worst. I really think that WE need to rethink this one. They have not had a good record in the past with "innovative" designs. Link to post Share on other sites
QQexDERA Posted August 20, 2012 Report Share Posted August 20, 2012 I'm with IBMedic on this one. I really dislike the way that the tab on the cylinder is used to lock the upper receiver in place - WE really ought to go back to the drawing board on this one. Link to post Share on other sites
SteevoLS Posted August 20, 2012 Report Share Posted August 20, 2012 It looked like a VFC/Classic Army tab style receiver, but I could be wrong. Link to post Share on other sites
jal3 Posted August 20, 2012 Report Share Posted August 20, 2012 I agree that its not a smart solution. The rifle in the video has a big tap in the middle instead of on the sides, possibly proof that they're still developing and they might implement it later on. 'FireKnife' Link to post Share on other sites
SteevoLS Posted August 20, 2012 Report Share Posted August 20, 2012 D'oh, realized it can't be a VFC/CA style since it swings instead of sliding. If their receivers are sturdy and the upper/lower gearbox junction is tight when the body pin is slid through I doubt it would be a problem. Lord knows the ICS receivers have a lot of play and it doesn't seem to have much of an effect. Link to post Share on other sites
IBMedic Posted August 23, 2012 Report Share Posted August 23, 2012 It is NOT hard to make a break open receiver where there is no wobble between the upper and lower. KWAs have had this since the beginning, and their receivers are all cast and painted. In fact it is much easier to make a break open receiver wobble free than a sliding one wobble free since you have a second aft pin. The sliding receivers need to have a upper that matches near perfectly with the lower in dimensional terms, which is hard to achieve when you use clamshell casting. So in that sense, WE has no excuse for coming up with such a *suitcasey* design when off the shelf designs are already out there which are far superior. Link to post Share on other sites
HardcoreCook Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 · Hidden by Rob15, August 23, 2012 - Spamming to 100 posts Hidden by Rob15, August 23, 2012 - Spamming to 100 posts It's a way to make money, for people who don't know much about it. From a market point of view, not too bad. Link to post
Zombie00 Posted August 23, 2012 Report Share Posted August 23, 2012 I'm with IBMedic on this one. I really dislike the way that the tab on the cylinder is used to lock the upper receiver in place - WE really ought to go back to the drawing board on this one. WE never goes back to the drawing board, no sir, they just doddle up something, pull their pants down, sit on the toilet and start shi... I mean making an innovative airsoft gun. And then they just call Ra-tech to try to unclog the toilet. 'Fireadadqgg' Link to post Share on other sites
uscmCorps Posted August 23, 2012 Report Share Posted August 23, 2012 I'm not a huge fan of WE's but it seems a little premature to make any conclusions as to what WE have or haven't implemented here. Link to post Share on other sites
Isamu Posted August 28, 2012 Report Share Posted August 28, 2012 Video of the thing http://www.popularairsoft.com/news/we-katana-split-gearbox-test-fired Cant comment on it as I cant watch it in the job Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.