Magpul PTS PDR-C

[renegadecow]

never trust an Ares design, ever

Learned that the hard way.

 

Concerning the losing ten bbs when you remove the mag issue: cut a small slot at the front of the feed tube and fit an o-ring over it to retain bbs while in the tube.

[Noveske]

Concerning the losing ten bbs when you remove the mag issue: cut a small slot at the front of the feed tube and fit an o-ring over it to retain bbs while in the tube.

 

 

Brilliant!

[Katotaka]

hmmm.... autosol that feeding tube might help.......?

[PianoBlack]

Or just polish it with a Dremel's fiber wheel and some Flitz.

 

-Piano

[Horsem4n]

Not technically, But A&K made a much more mechanically sound/solid version, which I guess counts for something. (most likely because it kept tooling costs down as they used existing parts instead of the notoriously "made of cream cheese" proprietary magpul gearbox, but still)

 

If there is an A&K representative in this thread please just make one run of working PDRs there will be plenty of people queueing up to buy them.

OK, i was only referring to clones, not a half *albatross*'d attempt at a gun before the company released a real one. the first time i bought an ACR, i bought the A&K version (about 2 years ago) for 2 reasons. 1, it was from a friend, so i didnt have to spend 300 on it. and 2, because it had a normal V2 in it. but, the gun was trash. the selector switches were very gritty (this hasnt changed on any new ones). the QD barrel design and hop up is a bit wonky and can work like attaching and detaching a scope to an SWS, but instead of loosing zero, you can randomly loose/gain air seal (i have even had to fix one that the trunion wasn't even molded straight so the barrel was a couple degrees off). the the whole gearbox needs to be replaced with all aftermarket parts to get it to preform well. it takes MORE work to get the A&K running good than it does to do the same to the PTS ACR. the only ones that i have seen that perform well were the G&P versions which you just cant find anymore. mine wouldn't work after i overhauled everything but the gearbox shell. i ran into a weird loss of 75 FPS from the spring rating. i dwindled the issue down to the relationship between the nozzle and hop up unit of which i couldn't fix even after i swapped out the chamber, nozzle and bucking countless times to find a marriageable combination, but no dice. i could even physically see the nozzle touching the bucking when it fired when trying the stock clear hop up unit. i ended up picking up a bone yard bravo RDW from a friend and transplanted all the pretty internals i could. the gun worked perfectly.

since then i have spent less time and money overhauling PTS ACRs that have worked numerous times better.

 

If there is an A&K representative in this thread please DO NOT make a run of PDRs

 

needless to say, i am butthurt over the A&K Masada.

 

Also what on earth is going on with the bottom of the cylinder there?

looks like lube that got between the cylinder wall and the gearbox shell.

[Noveske]

So here's my list of pros & cons on the PDR so far:

 

Pros:

-Neat/innovative/compact design by Magpul (ie "cool" factor)

-Ambidextrous mag-release controls

-Uses standard Stanaz mags or equivalent

-Easily accessible hop up adjustment

-Quick-change spring design on gearbox

-Spring release mechanism

-Gearbox internal parts standard/replaceable.

-8mm Bearings on gearbox

 

Cons/Could have done better:

-Short pistol grip / limited room for battery

-Non-adjustable cheek rest

-Long trigger travel

-Heavy, proprietary gearbox which makes the entire gun very rear heavy.

-Proprietary hop-up nub

-Selector plate design not reliable and can slip easily

-Very stiff mag-release

-Unintuitive sling mount

-Thin polymer tabs for upper/lower retention.  Should've had thicker tabs or metal tabs molded into the polymer.

[IBMedic]

Pretty much agree on the pros and cons, except for the cheek rest thing, I prefer fewer moving parts, especially if Ares is behind it.

The mag release design was just poorly thought out, the rod get pushed rather than pulled when you push the release.  Any elementary schooler can see this is a fail design since pushing the rod causes flex which means you don't release the mag till you've pushed hard, all the way in.

I don't get why they did it that way when the trigger mechanism is pull based. If they'd made the trigger mechanism a push based one that would have completely sunk the gun.

[AFV]

*slams head onto desk*

 

Dear Magpul

 

Please get a company can produce decent internals for your guns (e.g G&P)

 

Yours Sincerely Anyone who wants to buy your product.

[Nath]

*slams head onto desk*

 

Dear Magpul

 

Please get a company can produce decent internals for your guns (e.g G&P)

 

Yours Sincerely Anyone who wants to buy your product.

 

/signed 

Thanks for the review guys, you saved some innocent $$$ for being wasted for overpriced . Masada gearbox design was a failure, the PDR smells the same. And the body issues... my god, JG plastic body was more durable years ago. 

[Wild_XIII]

It's a shame really, I was really looking into getting one of these. My money is now going elsewhere.

[Berggy]

Whoa, I saw this thread last night and while reading along I thought, this PDR-C sucked balls. But then I think about it and I see a lot of hate in it that may or may not be justified.

1) Retaining pin - they need to thicken it. But damage can be avoided i guess? Afterall it doesnt take stress there

2) Curved feed tube - there are people here being disgusted at it. But i think if it works, then itz got nothing wrong I guess? If it doesnt feed smoothly some polishing will work wonders, but i don't see that being reported. Same for the trigger control mechanism. If it works, why bother?

3) Cheek rest - what is the deal here? A cheek rise will require the scope/red dot to be raised as well. I dont like my scope/dot sitting too high from the boreline, and most people have issues aiming with the P90 already. 

4) MOSFET - There is a good reason why 95% of the stock guns dont have them installed. Manufacturers are unable to dump a MOSFET into a toygun cheap enough to make it reliable. It will take another $50-80 dollar to include such a feature, but with the current micro switch the legacy design is already improved.

5) Sling mount - Agreed. Hope PTS will come out with something better

6) Hopup nub - Accuracy test needed before anything can be say about it. Dont even know what it looks like. 

7) Motor issue - Real issue here. Hot motors = No No. Swap it out.

 

Bottom line is, this is an AEG that shoots BBs alright if i am not mistaken. Some upgrades will improve it, but it works at stock so far as far as I heard. At ehobby it is selling for USD320 so it is not too unreasonable priced for an AEG. 

I also heard PTS did not work with ARES to produce the PDR. Not really a PTS fan, but lets just throw the subjectivity out for the time being. 

[Megalomaniac]

Berggy, your point #4 is moot, J bloody G throws half decent basic FETs in the Enhanced line which are only slightly more expensive, at a manufacturing level add a MOSFET is not at all expensive, and micro-switches are not a great improvement over contacts in anything but feel, most used are woefully under-rated or prone to vibrating apart when firing. As is point #1 If the tabs come broken from the factory I can't see them being able to stand up to player abuse.

[Berggy]

Megalomaniac, I personally have not seen those enhanced line you mentioned, but do not doubt their existence. I also have never heard of anyone fancy those, but that maybe due to other issues. The micro switch improves over the single shot feel only. Which is  quite insignificant to most, but nevertheless an improvement. I also have not seen the switch being vibrated apart but it is possible i guess.

To vastly improve on the legacy design it pretty much need to go the FET route, like the PTW, which is way more expensive. A single FET alone, me think does little to improve the trigger touch. 

 

As for the pin thing, yea they should thicken it if its factory. 

[Noveske]

Cheek rest was more of a "nice to have" for me.  Just seemed intuitive since PTS made it a separate piece.  But again, it's not a must.  I haven't commented much on the gearbox other than the fact it is rather heavy, the terrible motor and that the selector plate can slip.  I'm staying impartial on the internals until I've spent more time skirmishing with it.

 

One thing I did notice was that PTS went with a full length cylinder (type 0) on a 10.5" barrel.  Hmmmm...  I would've thought a 3/4 (type 1) or 2/3 (type 2) made more sense on a 10.5" barrel length.

 

Interesting to see how people reacted so negatively to the gearbox design/components.  Perhaps fueled by the dislike of ARES and everyone's high expectations for the PDR-C.  

[IBMedic]

One thing I did notice was that PTS went with a full length cylinder (type 0) on a 10.5" barrel.  Hmmmm...  I would've thought a 3/4 (type 1) or 2/3 (type 2) made more sense on a 10.5" barrel length.

Again, this is an Ares thing, all Ares guns are type 0 cylinders.

 

They did it to save on manufacturing costs, typical Ares cutting corners

[Kratisto]

Why do you guys keep talking about ARES when USMCCorps explicitly says they aren't the OEM behind PTS guns?

 

Remember that there are companies cloning ARES-style guns and parts, like S&T and UFC. And WE cloned ARES G36s EBB body for their G36 GBB (with all the small errors)...  maybe there is another unknow OEM behind all those, we have no way to know for sure.

 

I'm my opinion, the only real sin of the PDR is the weak retaining pin holes. This is truly unforgivable in 2013 after *decades* of broken m4 plastic uppers. WTF was PTS thinking?

 

Everything else is just the typical high prices and "fix-me-later"  internals of most guns in the market. Annoying, but fixable.

[IBMedic]

Gullible, it's written on the ceiling, look up.

[Kratisto]

Not gullible, just not jumping into conclusions.

 

Yes, PTS guns use the same designs as STAR/ARES/S&T/UFC/Army Force....etc, etc.  But, which one is PTS's OEM?

 

Why ARES and not S&T? Note that S&T already makes modified versions of ARES guns with 'new features', like the Tavor EBB. S&T is already an OEM for UMAREX, why not for PTS?

 

See? There can be more than one suspect...

[FTZ-WildeCard]

As a casual observer chipping in - does it really matter who manufactures the PDR for PTS? 

 

It could be made by TM for all I care. From my perspective, it has issues that are compounded by the premium price being asked for each unit. 

 

In short, not worth it at this time. 

[mimesis]

I think Kratisto's right that what's most important here is that the design and manufacture is Ares-like.

 

Whoever's been designing for M-PTS, they've been inspired by some Ares-like designs, and whoever the OEM is, they're taken some moves out of Ares' playbook.

 

What's important then is that there are design choices here that people associate with Ares and which are often not thought of as optimal, and there are manufacturing choices here that suggest cutting cost corners and which again people associate with Ares-like production.

 

This state of affairs goes back to the Masada.  Remember the figure-of-eight hop-up nub, and now many other makers/designs had used that shape/style prior to the Masada. 

[Ginger Chris]

At ehobby it is selling for USD320 so it is not too unreasonable priced for an AEG. 

At time of writing, that puts this at £203.23, practically clone pricing.

 

However in the UK at least they do their normal thing and swap the $ sign for a £ sign, so £320 for a gun with this many issues? That's in line with Top level G&Gs and CAs, I expect *no* internal problems at that price level.

Edited February 5, 2013 by Ginger Chris

[Phubar]

Having seen the internals and the descriptions related to the mechanics of operating this AEG, to say I'm disappointed is an understatement.  I really wanted this to be something spectacular. 

 

I guess in a way it is spectacular, just not a positive way.

[Megalomaniac]

No matter who the OEM is a bad design is a bad design. Even with the best materials and machine work a bad design is still doomed. But to me as a somewhat knowledgable tech the design screams out ARES based which means ambitious but rubbish.

[NeoVeNoM]

Again, this is an Ares thing, all Ares guns are type 0 cylinders.

 

They did it to save on manufacturing costs, typical Ares cutting corners

So does G&P.

 

Gullible, it's written on the ceiling, look up.

 

Even if it's Ares, let it go, they won't feel bad about it and you are left frustrated.

Or maybe worse, they might sue you for slander.

 

For 320USD I expected something better.

But then again, R&D has it's price.

USCMCorps: Maybe you should let M-PTS know that there are a ton of people here who claim (and probably can) they can do a better job, it could only lead to a win/win situation no?

[aznriptide859]

ambitious but rubbish.

 

TOP GEAR!

 

Sorry I just had to