Classic Army M15A4 C.Q.B

[Tef]

Hi all, as some of you might have noticed i got the one of the first Class Army M15A4 CQB on this planet as my first gun. As requested i will do a little review on it. But before i start off with anything, i would like to say, this is my first gun and i only have my brother's FAMAS to compare it with. As i go more skirmishes i will add more thoughts to it. in this review i would refer it as the CQB/r, although that’s what everyone is calling it, BUT there’s no where on/within the box said anything about it’s a CQB/r, only state M15A4 C.Q.B. (even the manual)

 

http://www.arniesairsoft.co.uk/forums/inde...pe=post&id=7585

 

A little background on the gun. this gun is based on the Class army M15A4 RIS series, not the basic model. it is built on the 7mm bearing gearbox, not the 6mm oily steel bushing gearbox used in M15A4/2 rifle/carbine/tac carbine.

 

A little summary on what CA have done to the normal M15A4:

 

>This gun comes with a shorter barrel than the standard M15A4 RIS/SPC/tac carbine/carbine

>It has two pieces RIS rail set pre-installed, top with 3 rails, bottom piece with just one.

>It comes with CA's own vertical grip

>It comes with 2 CA's Rail cover panels

>It has crane stock pre-installed, which is a copy of the STAR crane stock (more on that later)

>Instead of a whole carrying handle, it has only a rear sight mounted on the top body rail.

 

http://www.arniesairsoft.co.uk/forums/inde...pe=post&id=7657

 

Here’s what’s in the box, there’s also a little adjustment tool for the front sight, which is not in the photo. The gun itself, the 300rounds hi-cap magazine, the vertical grip and two rails cover panels.

 

http://www.arniesairsoft.co.uk/forums/inde...pe=post&id=7586

 

When I first opened the box it was covered with all kind of CA posters, there were so many of them, the M249, the CQB, the G36 series and all the manuals. After sorting them out, i picked the gun up, it was unexpectedly heavy, from the website it said it's 3kg, but when i looked at the weight on the parcel, it said 3.9kg and somehow i doubt the box and manuals weight as much as 0.9 kg.

 

http://www.arniesairsoft.co.uk/forums/inde...pe=post&id=7588

 

The manual, it's completely different from the RIS/SPC manual, this is specifically for the CQB/r. all the diagrams are clear, and actually using detailed drawing on the CQB/r. HOWEVER, it will put people who try to take it apart right off, because the disassembling steps only consist of 6 pictures and fail to tell you where and which screws to take out. Here’s an example, the one about how to adjust the hop up, all it is, it's just a picture with of the side of the gun with a finger pressing the door/cover.... and what comes with my mind it's this is a CA not a TM, you don’t push it to open a magnetic cover/door (good luck, i read other reviews on the CA before getting the gun)..... But none the less this is easy bit to figure out.

 

http://www.arniesairsoft.co.uk/forums/inde...pe=post&id=7656

 

Here’s the gun with my old school bag sling on

The empty mag felt very light when i first picked it up, because i only handle a FAMAS standard cap before. I would have thought it's made out of thicker metal sheet. But anyway, it’s quite tough, wont be bend/dent that easily. However, the paint scratched off so easily, it's unreal, after the first day I have it, a lot of paint came off already.

 

http://roostercastle.no-ip.org/attachment....e011&download=1

 

Since CA has reinforced gears so i hooked it up with a 9.6V battery and test fire it.

it's nothing too special if you have fire an AEG before. The 1J spring pre-installed into the gun by CA is making a notice-able difference to my brothers stock Famas.

 

Aiming with the CQB/r's iron sight is very easy, previously some reported the day-time rear sight was so small it's not even look-through-able on other M15 model, which is not the case with this sight.

 

http://www.arniesairsoft.co.uk/forums/inde...pe=post&id=7658

 

Here’s my Glcok 26c and the CQB/r .

The crane stock is very nice to put my face on, it's made out of some medium hardness plastic, so you wouldn’t really feel you are freezing your face off in winter. However, it's those material which makes the existence of the biggest seam line on this planet possible. It is the same design as the Star crane stock; unlike the Prime crane stock it connects to battery via mini connector and not the dean connectors. So do be carefully when you buy battery for it

 

http://www.arniesairsoft.co.uk/forums/inde...pe=post&id=7655

 

Ok, that’s all the good thing, lets move onto the bad things about this. I myself can be a perfectionist, so what I’m about to say, please before you think this gun is bad think if it really bothers you or not.

 

First off, the manual, it’s frustrating looking at it presented very nicely but doesn’t deliver what it supposed to. There’s no mention on how to take the front part of the gun apart i.e. the RIS, front sight etc. It doesn’t tell you how to put silicone spray to maintain the gun.

 

Now move onto the gun itself. The front sling hook it’s pointing downward and downward only, making it very annoying when you try to slide things in or out of the rail. Next is the charging handle, there’s only 50% chance you can pull it smoothly without scratching all the paint off.

 

The crane stock, yes, it’s nice to feel, but not to see. The massive seam line down the middle is not just visible, it can put a little line on your face if you move fast enough along it. If you open up the back of the crane stock where the back plate supposed to go, you will find that the hole is cut out by a butter knife or a hamster. It’s so ugly you really want to put the back plate straight back on, it’s so un-cleanly cut out, all the bits still sticking out. The battery cover for the crane is also somewhat bad quality, it will go on, but feels like it can come out anytime soon. (Only happen to one side).

 

The pistol grip, I don’t know if this happens to anyone, but the trigger guard and the weight of the gun pressing it to my middle finger, and I had it all red for the next day.

 

Next thing I have to complain is the plastic used for the vertical grip and the rail cover panels. They are properly some of the worst plastic made on this planet, the texture is so utterly #### now I will never ever use the side panels on my gun. It is properly the worst complaint I have for this gun, it will put a message in you r mind similar to this: ‘is that the sort of quality I supposed to get for paying 300pounds for an AEG’

 

All in all, those are just little things that I’m picky about; overall I rate this gun as high as 8-9/10. Especially I got discount due to CA shop opening, and costing me 160pounds in total with shipping.

 

So summary,

 

It’s a superb solid gun if you don’t mind taking all the plastic bits off.

 

Other note :

the gun feels very unbalanced straight out of the box, but once battery is put into the stock, it feels very balanced, as good as a bullpup

 

Hope you guys like my first review, and sorry for the bad English.

 

[elrey]

Nice job Tef! I've been wondering about how this thing would turn out.

[Shao14]

Good review, Tef.

 

I think the plastic on CA's AEGs are supposed to be fiber-glass reinforced with matte black finish. Seam lines, yes, but the parts on the M15A4 carbine feel pretty solid, and I like it. Does the plastic used for the side panels and vertical grip look different from the pistol grip and stock?

 

by the way, if the sling loop used on the CQB is the same as the one on the M15A4 carb, I think you can turn it sideways. Just need to take off the front sight, and turn the loop assembly sideways and then put the front sight back on. The sling loop is mounted sideways standard on the carb. But from the photos, it seems the loop is mounted on the front sight as in the full length rifle. In that case, never mind.

Edited July 1, 2005 by Shao14

[Tef]

Good review, Tef.

 

I think the plastic on CA's AEGs are supposed to be fiber-glass reinforced with matte black finish.  Seam lines, yes, but the parts on the M15A4 carbine feel pretty solid, and I like it.  Does the plastic used for the side panels and vertical grip look different from the pistol grip and stock?

 

by the way, if the sling loop used on the CQB is the same as the one on the M15A4 carb, I think you can turn it sideways.  Just need to take off the front sight, and turn the loop assembly sideways and then put the front sight back on.  The sling loop is mounted sideways standard on the carb.  But from the photos, it seems the loop is mounted on the front sight as in the full length rifle.  In that case, never mind.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

nah, the slign hook is using one of those old m16 ones, it;s built into the front sight, i cant be turned unless i turn the front sight with it....

[spuddeh]

great review tef! glad you like your first gun

[TMC]

That's odd.. the plastic CA used for all my M15a4's plastic bits was very nice...

[Tef]

hmmm... not too sure, but comparing the fibre look-a-like texture, i highly doubt they will use this for handguard.

[doc_newstead]

Aiming with the CQB/r's iron sight is very easy, previously some reported the day-time rear sight was so small it's not even look-through-able on other M15 model, which is not the case with this sight

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

No accounting for naivity eh?

 

Don't know who these people were who told you the big sight was night and the small sight for day, but they woz wrong. The big sight is for firing in auto, the small sight for marksmanship. So I have this comedic image of M15 users running around skirmish sites, squinting like buggery through that tiny aperture

[the man with no name]

british army training says that the large sight is for night and CQB wheres the small sight is used for marksmanship, only yanks use full auto.

[doc_newstead]

We're not talking about real guns here, just airsoft.

[Tef]

i learnt this day/night from from my brother's TM famas manual

[Hissing_Sid]

No accounting for naivity eh?

 

Don't know who these people were who told you the big sight was night and the small sight for day, but they woz wrong. The big sight is for firing in auto, the small sight for marksmanship. So I have this comedic image of M15 users running around skirmish sites, squinting like buggery through that tiny aperture

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Erm...

 

Actually, the smaller aperture was for up to 300m (!) and the larger one was for beyond that range. On the real gun, at least.

I'd never even held an Armalite until I got my ICS M4 and I reckon that the rear sight is utter balls. The small hole is way too small and the big one is ferkin huge!

 

Personally, I reckon using them according to lighting conditions is a far better idea though.

[Machineabuse]

Indeedy dos. The large aperture is also marked 0-2 in other words; 0-200 meters. The small aperture is for anything beyond that or pricision work.

[unimatrix001]

Indeedy dos. The large aperture is also marked 0-2 in other words; 0-200 meters. The small aperture is for anything beyond that or pricision work.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

^^ what he said

 

The AR15 ironsights are actually the finest mechanical sights available at the moment. I don't know any better sights, so I can't understand the critics of Hissing Sid. Maybe a ICS specific thing?

Edited July 11, 2005 by unimatrix001

[Tef]

^^ what he said

 

The AR15 ironsights are actually the finest mechanical sights available at the moment. I don't know any better sights, so I can't understand the critics of Hissing Sid. Maybe a ICS specific thing?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

i got my ics m16 in the manual it said the small one is for day tme and big one of night time

[Screwschom]

My friend who is in the room right now is ex U.S. Army and he said that they used the large apeture only when doing night fire but it was also prefered for CQB.

[chino]

Hi, I'm new here and wish to talk about my new CA M-15A4.

 

First, a little about myself.

 

I have served as an infantryman in the Singapore Armed Forces for 2 years and then a month afterwards every year for 10 years.

 

My service rifle was the M16S1 (Singapore-made M16A1).

 

I was a previous owner of a Marui MP5A4 and several Taiwanese Beretta 92F's when I lived in Hong Kong.

 

 

 

Here is my review of the Classic Army M-15A4 CQB delivered this week in Shanghai - where I now live:

 

Overall, I am satisfied with the weapon.

 

But here are some gripes:

 

It is a heavy beast at around 3.5kg with battery - about the same as a real M16A1 FULLY LOADED with 30-rounds.

 

The sights on my CA M15A4 CQB were problematic.

 

The front sight post was tilting very slightly to the right.

 

The rear sight was a huge problem. The entire unit sat at a very bad tilt to the left on the RIS rails. This made zeroing the weapon impossible even when the rear aperture was tuned all the way to the right. I had to loosen the screw holding the unit and stuff a folded piece of paper to reduce the tilt. And this finally made it possible to zero the shots to land dead center.

 

The next problem was that the shots all went very high despite the Hop Up being at the lowest.

 

Adjusting the front sight post to make the shots land lower had some effect but not enough. And the front sight post became very wobbly once you tune it up. Of course the height of the shots is not a big issue since at a longer distance the bullet will drop anyway.

 

The grouping of the shots are consistently tight so the barrel is rigid like most people claimed.

 

PROS

Very rigid construction

Amazing out-of-box power

Great battery storage in the crane stock

Very realistic

 

CONS

Badly aligned sights on my weapon

Delicate finish - easily scratched

Soft metal easily cut by use of tools etc

Slight wobble in the otherwise great crane stock

Too heavy

Pricey

 

The sights alignment problem will not a problem for people not fussy about AEG's accuracy.

 

Also, I would say that for skirmishings, I will think twice about using the CA M15A4 CQB for the following reasons:

 

• too expensive

• too heavy

• metal too soft.

 

Its weight will make it easy to damage as the weapon weight itself would magnify any bumps or drops.

[Shao14]

Also, I would say that for skirmishings, I will think twice about using the CA M15A4 CQB for the following reasons:

 

• too expensive

• too heavy

• metal too soft.

 

Its weight will make it easy to damage as the weapon weight itself would magnify any bumps or drops.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Wait till you buy a CA M249.