Monkey configuration AR15

Credit given to M4Carbine.net Forums



K.L. Davis Offline
Industry Professional

M4 Feedramps
Here is another fun debate... Rather than take sides, I will try to do the Fox News "you decide" sort of thing. And now, for your viewing pleasure, the M4 Feed Ramp.

So what are they? Well, all ARs have feedramps cut in the barrel extension... the bottom two lug cuts in the barrel extension are widened and ramped to guide the round into the chamber during loading.

So what is different about the M4 ramps? Well, on a regular AR type platform, the ramps are cut into the barrel extension only -- the M4 style ramps are cut so that the cut "breaks through" the barrel extension and cuts slightly into the upper receiver. To be honest, an M4 feedramp is really a two piece arrangement... part of it is in the barrel extension and part is in the upper receiver.

Here is a great picture that shows the difference, shamelessly stolen from bigbore (thanks Steve).


As you can see, the feed ramps on the regular rifle barrel are cut just to the edge of the barrel extension... but do not extend beyond that edge; while the M4 ramps continue slightly "outside" of the barrel extension.

As stated, the rest of a properly cut M4 feedramp is in the upper receiver... while the cut in the receiver is small, it matches up with the cut in the barrel extension and makes for a smooth, continuous ramp.


So why are they there? Ughhhh... here are both sides, the extremes at that:

1. "M4 feedramps serve no purpose at all, they are nothing more than an attempt by Colt to get a patent continuation based on redesign."

2. "M4 feedramps are the greatest thing since canned beer... in order to have a reliable rifle, you must have them. It is a miracle that the platform has functioned this long without them."

Here are some of the facts that lie between those two arguments. With the proliferation of the the carbine gas system, there did come some unique problems -- it is believed that with the M4, there are times when a cartridge being loaded is more "tip down" than normal, and that the bullet tip could strike the flat surface of the upper receiver, just below the standard rifle feedramp.

So, the ramps were extended down slightly, in order to catch these.

There is a suggestion that the use of heavier bullets also exacerbates any potential problem... this idea seems to have some weight (get it) -- and of course the use of soft or open tip ammunition can help make things snag.

So... Do I need them? Being married has taught me that there are varying degrees of need. The honest answer would be that unless you have a select fire carbine... no, you can get by fine without them. Truth is, everyone that really "needs" them has been given a rifle that has them... I certainly would not run out and replace an upper, just because it does not have M4 feedramps. Note: With the increased use of larger diameter cased cartridges (6.8 SPC, etc), the M4 feed ramps are proving to be of value when using these cartridges... the magazine lips can not move, so with these larger diameter cartridges, the tip of the bullet sits lower in relation to the centerline of the bore (half of the diameter increase to be exact) -- this puts the cartridge in a position where feeding is improved by the extended feed ramp.

Okay, but do I want them? Well, sure, why not. As they are becoming more and more the standard and they certainly do not do any harm -- why not look for them on your next purchase. Again, I wouldn't consider them a deal breaker and would not pass up a good deal on an upper only because it did not have them. Our military is doing just fine with a whole lot of rifles that do not have them...

And all of this is in a perfect world. Feed problems can be caused by several things... the fact that magazine quality is all over the map is most often the first suspect and there is more than one lower receiver in the wild that has an out of spec mag well.

My gun has an M4 barrel, but it looks like someone cut the ramps in the upper receiver with a dremel tool! That is most likely exactly what happened. There are a lot of uppers out there that do not have the cuts... hand cutting the upper receiver with a dremel is a quick way to make the conversion.

Granted, it may not look so great, but odds are (if they are actually doing anything) they will work fine. The most obvious fault with this method is that the cuts are not refinished and you see bare aluminum -- while there may be some surface hardness that is not there... you will wear out a lot of other things on the gun before you have to worry about any problems with "wearing" on the hand cut ramps.

If you are the kind of person that lays awake at night and obsesses over the dire thought that your feedramps were not refinished... well, hit one of the dealers on the site up for a new upper so you can relax.

Can I run a M4 barrel in a regular upper receiver? Sure, there seems to be no issues with this... or you could just dremel in the receiver cuts.

Can I use a regular barrel in an upper receiver with M4 cuts? I don't recommend it... there is a chance that the round can jam on the little "lip" that is caused by the barrel extension extending into the cut; however, there are guns out there that have this setup and work fine -- this tends to go towards the thought that the ramps really do very little? Again, it is not a setup that I would feel all warm and fuzzy about. Here is why...

 

Great. Now I hafta go dig out my AR and check my upper receiver.

HK_User that is one heckofa good find, thanks for posting

ETA: Confirmed, feed ramp extensions are there.

(Daniel Defense upper On a Tactical Innovations billet lower if you must know.)

 

DIG it out! You mean it's not at your bedside?

 

My choice and what is on order in brown.

Barnes Precision Machine | USA Owned, USA made rifles, parts, and accessories.

CQB - Patrolman's Carbine - MOE Package


Magpul MOE stock and grip.
Magpul MBUS sights with front sight adjustment tool.
11.5"/14.5"/16" ss barrel 1-8 twist with .223 Wylde chamber standard with optional 5.56mm NATO chamber and 1-7 twist, available on 11.5"/14.5" barrels.
BPM A2 Style Flash Hider / Breaching Tip.
Exceptional Quality -Commercial grade /semi auto AR15 Fire Control group.
BPM Bolt Carrier Group w/Nickel Boron coating.


Technical Specs:

• Mil Spec 7075 forged upper/lower.
• Upper receiver, lower receiver and handguard hard anodized to Mil Spec Type III specifications.
• All BPM Inc. lowers feature adjustable tension screw and detent retention set screw for rear takedown pin detent .
• Mid length gas system (unless otherwise specified -i.e carbine length gas system on 11.5" models)
• 16" 416 stainless steel Montana Rifle barrel blanks. CNC machined in house with .223 Wylde chambers, for function /as well as improved accuracy for both 5.56 NATO, and .223 Remington commercial ammo .
• BPM Inc. PSFFRS Ultralite Extreme 12" Handguard complete with quick detatch sling swivel inserts and removable bipod stud.
• Every BPM rifle ships with Patriot AR Case with custom high density foam inserts, Users Manual with Warranty and one Magpul PMAG

Puts the Merica in America! August 2, 2013
Reviewer: Anonymous Person from Charlotte, NC United States
I just want to say to all the people at BPM you guys have raised the bar on personal defense firearms, your product is comparable to any of the way more expensive AR-15's (Spike's, Daniel Defense...) the accuracy and most importantly the ability to chew though any ammo I put though it w/o fail. I even love the simplicity and foresight in the furniture on the rifle, and it is all American made, simply awesome...


2 of 2 people found the following review helpful:
Much more than I could have hoped for April 2, 2013
Reviewer: Anonymous Person from Raleigh, NC United States
Being new to AR type rifles, I was unsure what to expect from this or any AR-15, and since this is my first one I can not compare it to other manufacturer's models.

I can however say that this is an incredible weapon. It was utterly reliable out of the box and the accuracy is incredible. It is pleasant to shoot with ridiculously light perceived recoil.

My only complaint with the weapon was that out of the box, the trigger was a bit sloppy and very heavy. However, after an hour at the smith it is perfect. This is not necessarily a negative aspect of the weapon since I have taken nearly all of my new firearms to this smith for some sort of trigger work.

Given that, I could not be happier with the weapon. I am grateful to see such a high quality product coming out of a local company. If you're considering Barnes for your next AR, there's no need to hesitate.

Awesome Rifle March 16, 2013
Reviewer: B.A from North Carolina
Bought my BPM CQB back in November, and almost immediately ran it in a course. 500 rounds in a day course, with only what was needed to zero the MBUS and my red dot prior to that. It ran flawlessly as expected! The instructor was running a custom build, probably $3,000+, and could not believe the "rifle you got for the price". This rifle is well-built, and likes to be shot. I look forward to another one sometime in the future. Maybe a 14.5" with a welded comp and the 14" UERS...... Thanks BPM for an excellent rifle, which also happens to be my first.

CQB Patrolman 223/556 and 300 Blackout March 10, 2013
Reviewer: Anonymous Person from Lillington, NC United States
I have both a Barnes CQB Patrolman 223/556 and a 300 Blackout. Both are far above superb in craftsmanship and both shoot amazingly precise. This is a lot of gun for the dollar. I have a 3rd one on order, so if the liberals stay on vacation in Washington, maybe I'll get it.

Post-range review. March 10, 2013
Reviewer: John Oravitz from Portsmouth , VA United States
I've had this rifle for almost a year now and I shoot it as often as I can. The rifle has no limitations on accuracy (besides me) and refuses to malfunction. The fit-up is still tighter than any other AR I've ever handled (23 years active duty and counting) and it looks like I bought it yesterday. Every person that shoots it says the same thing: "Crisp, clean, and better than any other AR they have shot."

If you are searching for an AR and you are reading this review, STOP SEARCHING AND ORDER YOUR BPM.

 

Not familiar with this company and difficult to tell from the specs listed what exactly you are getting in my opinion. Unsure if there is any MPI testing on either the bolt or barrel. Unsure if there are any M4 feed ramps. Unsure if there will be proper staking on the castle nut and bolt key assembly. Maybe I missed those, but I can't place it within the parameters of the chart as a result.

Please keep us informed as to what you find out when it arrives.

Phishi

 

I have used Barnes Precision before. I can attest to this being one of the best AR Platforms. When they say it meest all MlSpec you can know it.
Below is one user's email to the Company.

"I hope this email finds you and yours well. I see your taking your show on the road to the Shot Show. I'm sure you'll be well received and I would like to do my part to help promote your excellent equipment. I've been carrying your rifle around Afghanistan for the last 6 months and it's done great. Never a malfunction and very accurate. I'm finishing off the the third can of military issue 118LR so since new the rifle has over a thousand rounds through it without a malfunction. It still holds minute of angle when I put a 10x scope on it and can do failure drills and fast engagements when I have my ELCAN on it. Thanks again for everything,"

I will keep all updated.

 

Sunday, September 16, 2012
Barnes Precision Machine BPM-15 AR Review
Barnes
Precision Machine BPM-15 AR Review

As
a guy who has owned a little over two dozen AR15s in the last year or two, I
have seen and reviewed almost everything from simply stock to crazy custom,
carbine to rifle length gas systems, adjustable gas systems, a few piston
systems, and even my own creations.

Of
those rifles I have kept, I have always found myself preferring the “lean and
mean” configurations even in the custom builds.Though
I love all my adjustable gas blocks, cool parts like monolithic & billet
receivers, and fancy ceramic finishes, all these things upgrades do not make the
rifle necessarily more accurate, just more expensive. Do they make the rifle
cooler? Arguably yes, however these upgrades are far from the requirement
everyone would lead you to believe for a high performing rifle. Let’s face it, a
bone stock AR with a free float forend tube can put shots reliably on a 12”
plate at 300 yards with iron sights; honestly it is not that hard when shooting
in prone position. A better match grade barrel allows the same iron-sighted hits
at 400-500 yards with proper zero.



After
shooting and owning a large array of various AR15 rifles and configurations, I
have come to the conclusion that the best general purpose AR15 defense and
sporting configuration for the money is just a standard well built AR with rifle
length free float forend to maximize accuracy, a mid-length gas system to reduce
recoil, a high grade stock trigger (Doublestar and ALG are outstanding), Magpul
flip up sights and maybe your grip and stock dejour such as Magpul or Mission
First Tactical. A
high quality stainless steel match grade barrel tipped with a decent flash hider
is where any other cash should go. Everything
beyond these components are an upgrade, an un-needed luxury and in the case of
adjustable triggers, potentially a liability in a patrol or personal defense
rifle.

Truly,
a solidly build basic configuration AR15 with high reliability is all you will
ever need to engage man sized targets out to 500 meters, however a non-magnified
red-dot such as a Eotech or Vortex Spark will make that a bit easier. Add on an
optic like a 1-4X magnification Hi-Lux CMR or Trijicon scope, and bipod and you
can hammer away on the 200-500 yard gongs shot after shot until even you become
bored with it.


From
my perspective the Barnes Precision Machine BPM-15 AR-15 concentrates 100% of
its price into everything you need in a high grade AR15 without the expensive
“Tacticool” upgrades which net little in terms of accuracy or functionality. It
is a rifle which is at the top of my list when someone wants a recommendation
for a no-nonsense tack driver for patrol, sporting, and/or home defense
use.
My
buddy and I proved that this BPM-15 was up to the task of medium range target
engagement by delivering reliable hits on the 500 yard gong from prone position
with only an Eotech 512 and Atlas bipod attached. If you are exterminating
little rodents, I would definitely slip on a higher power optic to take full
advantage of the BPM-15's half-MOA accuracy.

With
the exception of the sub-MOA accuracy bit, this sounds like any AR you can get
from just about any AR manufacturer who offers an upgraded A,
B, or C rifle package.
Oh, but there is so much more to the story to this capable rough and tumble
$1200 AR and the manufacturer.

BARNES
PRECISION MACHINE IS DIFFERENT
Here
is the deal; almost all AR manufacturers buy their finished ready-to-assemble
parts from a very limited number of real manufacturers in the industry. This
means in almost all cases, everyone sources their super-special super-duper
rifle component(s) from the same as everyone else. This is because the machinery
and know-how are tough to come by, expensive, and some cases proprietary which
make it more cost effective to buy the components.

BPM turning a set of bolts.

Is
this a horrible thing? No, however it does limit the control a manufacturer has
on the quality, originality, refinements, and origin of the parts... small parts
for example are pretty tough to regulate where they come from. For those
companies who do manufacturer parts on site, they tend to have a pretty
significant edge on quality.

BPM Bolts ready for initial phase 1 inspection.

Not
to crush anyone’s beliefs in brand X with great marketing fluff and $15K
advertisements in the latest gun magazine, but well over 90% of the AR
manufacturers are just buying 100% of their parts finished and bolting them
together and then concentrating on building their marketing brand. Yes, some
certainly do a better job than others, and some use better parts than others,
however there is a huge range in quality.

Even
fewer manufacturers do any finish work at all such as final anodizing, component
marking, or light machining. Of those who are left, most are still using
finished parts to build rifles but take the time to machine their own receivers
from Archor or Cerro forgings or from raw billet. Some machine
their own gas blocks and flash hiders,
finish and chamber barrels from blanks or even hammer forge their own
barrels.
The
little bits and parts such as detents, bolts, extractors, and flash hiders,
almost everyone buys. ...And then there are a very, very small number of
manufacturers who truly make everything possible in-house such as Barnes
Precision Machine.
BPM
is one of the select few who actually make almost every single part in house for
their own branded ARs and as an OEM supplier to other manufacturers. What is
even more impressive, is that outside of the raw receiver forgings, springs,
carrier, buffer assembly, trigger group and Magpul components, all other parts
are made on site. Only LMT, Daniel Defense, and Colt can claim that and some
would argue those points to some degree.

ABOUT
BARNES PRECISION MACHINE
Barnes
Precision Machine was founded as a North Carolina tool and die machining company
by Andrew Barnes in 1992. Long before he opened his BPM doors he had a long career
as a machinist. During that time he worked for NASCAR legends, aerospace
leaders, and even firearms manufacturers where he learned his craft. Shortly
after starting his machining business in 1992, he quickly became well know for
premium quality for companies varying from the industrial space to $10K Cary
Audio audiophile amplifier chassis's. One manufacturer began working with BPM
and the two companies grew quickly together as the marketing company’s products
became widely distributed. Later that company sold to Bear Archery; that company
was Whisker Biscuit Archery. Barnes Precision was the OEM production machining
company behind Whisker Biscuit and was so well regarded by Whisker Biscuit and
Bear that Barnes still produces those products
today.


For
BPM, those were good times when over 20 CNC machines were running near
continuously. Machines were paid off, and facilities were purchased during that
time, however the downturn of the economy had the company looking to others
products to fill machine availability. Andrew realized there was a large market
for 100% USA Made AR parts.

Like
so many other OEM firearm manufacturers who started in machining, one simple
request for part production grew, to another, and another, to the point where
BPM was not only producing nearly every major part of an AR in house, but also
had a booming AR15 Parts business on its www.usamade-ar15parts.com
site.

When
I talked with Andrew, he noted “Whether you know it or not, most rifles are
using imported parts kits, screws and pins because a rifle can have as much as
20% imported parts and still be labeled 'Made in the USA'. Customers are
starting to realize this and have really supported and demanded 100% USA made
parts and rifles... the growth of our parts site has been stunning. We now we
have a growing list of manufacturers who are using our OEM parts in their rifles
to deliver real 100% USA made rifles. That makes us very unique.” Andrew noted
that he is very close and well connected in the Special Operations and Military
community at Fort Bragg, NC. Many of those contacts were so impressed by his
parts that they pushed him to begin producing a complete rifle.

Bucket of pivot pins ready for surface finish.

Today
BPM’s .223/5.56 and soon to be released .308 rifles are in military service
overseas and have been extensively and rigorously military tested. Barnes
Precision is not just another company screwing together ARs, they are quickly
building inroads into the military as well as becoming a parts supplier for
other manufacturers and top military suppliers. During my tour I was also shown
a new full auto military/police versions of their rifles as well. Based on the
video I was shown, there is almost no muzzle rise from the mid-length gas system
all while delivering a slower more controllable full auto
burst.

BPM-15 With Nickel Boron Treatment

Box of Bolts back from treatment

Due
to the production capabilities of the business, BPM has the capacity and tooling
to machine all the little intricate parts most companies purchase such as
detents, pivot/take-down pins, and all the BCG (Bolt Carrier Group) components
with the exception of the carrier; though Barnes will bring production of the
carriers in house by the end of the year.
Although
Barnes purchases roll pins, buffer tube plates, buffer assemblies, and springs,
it is one of only four MPI tested AR bolt and extractor manufacturers in the
world.
Barnes Precision has a little over twenty CNC machines
including Swiss CNC machines each dedicated to high volume production of certain
AR parts. This prevents having to tear-down and reset the machine for another
milling operation and greatly increases efficiency and speed.
Business demands are high that almost every machine runs three shifts daily.
This has positioned BPM as an alternative high availability supplier during the
recent years of constant AR component stock outages, but now many of their new
customers are just sticking with them because of high availability from BPM and
the extreme quality.

Barnes is now one of the
major industry suppliers for parts kits to consumers and other firearms
manufacturers as well. BPM offers 100% USA made receiver parts kits for only
$59.99 on their site (excluding the stock, buffer and buffer tube). Andrew
noted that they can offer these prices because they run tens of thousands of
parts at a time; during my factory tour I saw five gallon buckets and boxes full
of detents, take down pins, extractors, bolts, flash hiders, and gas blocks.
Let me tell you a bucket full of detents is impressive... but
oily.
Barnes
even manufactures its own barrels from blanks and its own forends and
proprietary barrel nut. I have toured a few manufacturers and usually I see
boxes of parts which have been shipped into an assembly room from the usual
names. At Barnes however, I saw piles of raw materials at one end of the shop
and finished parts at the other end of over two dozen
machines.

BARNES
PRECISION MACHINE FACTORY TOUR
For
my real job, I travel a bit and occasionally have the luxury of taking advantage
of gaps in my business travel schedule to visit with manufacturers. On a recent
trip out to Raleigh/Durham North Carolina, I reached out to Barnes Precision and
they rolled out the red carpet for me... I was shocked, awed, and amazed at the
hospitality. I had already picked up one of their rifles months before, but was
hoping they would give me the nickel tour anyway.

Carrier Group Cam Pins

I
could make up a hundred reasons why I wanted to visit BPM, however the real
reason was a in the back of my mind, I really could not grasp that someone was
really producing detents and cam pin or taking the extreme care to product
bolts. Yeah I know there are other parts, however those seem to be the least
profitable and most often purchased parts of an AR, and even though I believed
that they were manufacturing them, there was a part of me that kept asking
“really?”


One of the many cubed rows of CNC machines at BPM.
At
4PM I arrived and was promptly buzzed into the secure building by one of the
machinist and lead in between a vast line of busy CNC machines and piles of raw
materials to a huge, but rather meagerly equipped office where I was greeted by
the office staff. I was asked to sit tight while Andrew finished up another
meeting. About 15 minutes later, I was lead into the BPM assembly room where
parts were being assembled into rifles and a group of Special Operations tagged
folks were inspecting some of the newer designs and models.


Go/No-Go Hard Gauge Check on Bolt
This
gave me time to snap some pictures of loose parts and handle a few of the new
production rifles including the new Nickel Boron coated “Amphibious & Marine
Rifles” which were created to provide a completely corrosion resistant rifle
similar to the Mossberg Marine 550 Shotgun. Despite its intent the rifle
coincidentally happens to look kick ass.

During
the tour, Andrew led me through each stage of production for his barrels,
receivers, bolts, extractors, pivot/take-down pins, and handguard production and
showed the machine which machines all the detents. Each part is hand inspected
and tested with a set of “hard go/no-go gauges”. Interestingly, Barnes has
excelled at innovative refinement of the AR platform all while still adhering to
military specifications.

I
have been there and yes, this guy is producing all these parts in house, the
only parts not produced in house are those mentioned previously which are still
produced in a US facility to BPM spec using virgin US
stock.


MY
BPM-15
Barnes
offers only three rifle options, but several barrel lengths; CQB, a Designated
Marksman Rifle, and Tactical Match carbine. Chamberings are 5.56 Nato in 11”-14”
barrels and .223 Wylde chambered in 16”-18” barreled models. I choose the basic
CQB Patrol Rifle with a 16” .223 Wylde chamber with mid-length gas system.

Above - Original Quadrail with new UltraLite Rail
As
tested, the 100% USA made rifle was still a very competitively priced at $1221
and about $100-$200 less than any comparable model I could find. Of note Barnes
only charges about $200 extra for the Nickel Boron coated model which has all of
the components excluding the barrel and forend NiBo coated; not a bad deal for a
rifle that is essentially corrosion proof. Originally I picked up the rifle with
the Heavy Quad Rail, however since I have swapped it to a 14" UltraLite
BPM forend.

Note the length of the supporting barrel nut.
FIT,
FEEL, FINISH
The
CQB Patrol Rifle BPM-15 arrived without dazzling packaging, but packed simply in
a cardboard box and functional four clasps, lockable hard plastic foam lined
case. Inside the case was a color operation manual and full sized catalog and
one 30-round Magpul PMag. Fit and finish is a similar high quality deep black
Type III hard anodizing as you see on any other high quality black rifle. The
feel is really unique to the rifle and is exceptionally well balanced. This is
partially due to Barnes’ barrel contour behind the gas block. The effect is a
feel something much lighter than a heavy Mil-Spec barrel but just a bit heavier
than a M4 profile.

As
shown on their less than frequently updated website, originally the Barnes
rifles came with their own unusually hefty full quad-rail forend which was crazy
thick heavy billet. Really... seriously the thing was like 1/2"x1/2" billet in
some areas; a total tank. They are now including the BPSFFRS 12” Ultralite
Extreme Rail on all their models, but still offer the heavier quad-rail as an
option. After my visit, Andrew asked that I talk about their new rail and
surprisingly provided me with a 14” rail as shown which is half the weight of
the original 12” rail. The reason for this change was that the BPM listens and
reacts to the feedback it receives from its civilian customers and those in
military community and law enforcement.

The
feedback was that a flexible lightweight rail would be preferred to a heavy duty
quad-rail which BPM lovingly refers to internally as the “cheese grater”. Having
handled both before and after the swap, the new Ultralite Extreme Rail is far
slimmer, lighter, and worlds more comfortable in the ungloved hand. Previously
the heavy rail was my only complaint, however now with the Ultralite rail there
is little to pick at on the rifle.

From
a fit perspective, the forend marries perfectly to the upper receiver and has
well designed reliefs to allow for un un-obstructed pivoting of the barrel for
cleaning or breach inspection and even has a jack screw hole to expand the jaws
of the forend to ease removal.

FEATURES
The
BPM-15 really is a wolf in sheep's clothing cleverly disguised a lightly
upgraded standard Mil-Spec rifle. Those innovative refinements I noted earlier
really add up to a stunning performing rifle.

The
new forend also has a number of unique features including being the only free
float forends which readily accept Magpul MOE picatinny rails. Barnes is also
one of the few Master Distributors for Magpul. This is a perfect union between
the companies and allows for less expensive, lighter, more hand friendly Magpul
rails to be used on the forend. Yes, finally someone has a standardized forend
rail option.



New UltraLite BPM Rail accepts Magpul Rails
The
forend also has four hardened QD-Sling inserts and a front swivel stud which can
be swapped with any of the other QD sling studs. If you want to mount a Magpul
section at the most forward portion of the rail you will need to remove the
appropriate QD stud to mount the Magpul rail. The forend is also one of the
sturdiest forends I have ever used. The proprietary barrel nut is nearly 2”
long and provides more support and stability to the forend than any I know of.

The
forend actually keys into the receiver to prevent it from turning under stress,
the QD Sling mounts screw in and functionally lock onto the barrel nut to
prevent forward movement as do the lower pinch retention screws to prevent
movement. The net result is one super stable
forend.

M4 Feedramps

As
noted previously the match grade barrel blanks are bored, button rifled, hand
lapped and polished by Montana Rifleman. BPM contours to a weight reducing
profile and machines the barrels to concentricity to the bore and finishes each
end with threading and final crowning. They then use a match .223 Wylde reamer
to cut the chamber.

Moving
down the barrel, BPM also makes the crush washers and flash hiders in house.
The design is unique and effective as a zero dust signature A2 style flash
hider with prongs for bolt, wire, lock breaching. Some refer to this style flash
hider as a universal lock pick which I will need to test at some
point.

Although
the lower receiver may appear standard, there are a few refinements. The BPM
features a captured spring for the rear take-town pin which is a nice touch for
a part that seems to get lost a lot. The other feature included in the Barnes
lower receiver is an “accurizing” set screw. This screw allows the user to
tension the upper and lower for a very tight fit even after the upper and lower
receivers begin to wear and loosen. Out of the box, the Barnes was pretty tight
however I gave the set screw a twist just to put a bit of tension on the take
down pin and really lock the receivers together. Barnes does not broach the
magwell for square corners. His valid point was that no magazine has square
corners and by removing more metal from the receiver your are making it weaker.
Barnes has also designed the magwell to assure Magpul magazines drop free each
and every time.

Adjustable Accurizer Tension

Barnes
also makes a low profile gas block and take-down/pivot pins, however it is the
bolt which deserves special attention. There are only four AR bolt and
extractor manufacturers in the world and Barnes Precision Machine is one of
them. It is without a doubt the most challenging part to make on the AR and the
most critical. If the bolt is not correct, the gun will not function
correctly.

BPM
adds a little refinement which is unique. Instead of peening the under- side of
the bolt to prevent incorrect cam pin assembly, they simply machine and
precision short stroke ream the hole which increases strength and cam pin
alignment. Oddly enough the extractor is even more difficult to produce.
Currently in addition to its own bolts, BPM supplies phosphated, nickel boron,
and chrome plated bolts to some of the top AR names in the business which are in
turn using those bolts to fulfill military
contracts.

I
hate to diminish all that Barnes is delivering, however all the remaining
typical components look and perform just as they would on any other Mil-Spec
rifle. Overall though, I found everything just a hair tighter fit of all the
little bits. From my experience the bolt and barrel locking lugs are very tight
and do require break in. Barnes does use Doublestar trigger groups and selectors
which I consider to be among the best feeling stock triggers on the
market.

FUNCTION
& ACCURACY
Barnes
builds a really quite fantastic AR for $1200 and in fact I would suggest that it
is every bit as good or better than LMT or Wilson for 30% less. The rifle is
tighter than hell during the first few magazines which did cause a total of four
cycling issues initially which included a couple failure to cycle and a few
initial extraction issues. This most certainly was due to the tight initial
bolt and locking lug fit. It took me well into the 100+ round count to get it
broken in however after that it was cycling bliss and I have had no other issues
since. This is actually a good very good thing and allows the bolt and barrel
locking lugs to “wear in” for optimal accuracy. I have experienced similar
break-in situations with other match grade rifle
builds.

Generally,
I take any new rifle out and run a minimum of a 150 rounds through it in a
process I call “getting the new off”. This allows me a few rounds to assure I
have a 25M/300M zero, let the bolt and barrel locking lugs seat, and play around
with my new toy. At this point I have run just over 500 rounds through the gun
and only cleaned it initially at the 150 round mark. After the break-in, the
rifle fed and ate everything from inexpensive steel case ammo, to high quality
Hornady Steel Case ammo, to 3GunAmmo.com Reman loads, to various Hornady premium
rounds.

For
accuracy, my best 5-shot 100 yard prone position group was a very respectable
.43” group with Hornady .223 75gr TAP FPD during a nice 87 degree day with
10-12MPH winds. The re-manufactured 3GunAmmo.com 62gr .223 loads have been
regularly pulling in .75” groups and the 55gr loads from them almost always
deliver under 1” groups. The Hornady Match rounds also did well with .67” and
.71” groups, however I am kinda in love with the Hornady steel case 75gr Match
ammo which simulates the FPD ammo closely for far less money; these rounds
consistently delivered groups under .75”.

My
Nikon 8-32X Monark scope on a quick release Precision Reflex Gator Grip mount
was used for accuracy testing. The PRI Gator Grip Scope mount allows me to clip
it on and off various rifles as needed. The BPM-15 is certainly prairie dog
accurate out to 200-300 yards with a powerful optic like the Nikon, however I
will most likely pick up a dedicated red dot for the rifle such as the Vortex
Sparc or Strikeforce which include 2X doublers or another Eotech
sight.

EXTRAS
Never
before have I felt there was so much to talk about during a review, however at
this point I have to say “and there is even more!” Want a Leupold Optic or
Eotech sight buy a BPM-15. For each rifle you purchase from BPM, they have an
agreement with Leupold and Eotech that they will sell you your Eotech or Leupold
optic of choice for BPM’s dealer price as a pass through. You do not need to
order it with the rifle, however you do need to order a BPM-15 rifle and there
is a limit of one optic at the special price per BPM rifle purchased. This alone
could pay for a third of the rifle price in the optic savings. Tell me who else is offering this to its customers.

FINAL
THOUGHTS
The
Nickel Boron BPM-15 is super awesome looking, however is the standard BPM-15 a
showy AR with all the cool parts? No, that never was the intent. The cool parts
are limited to the forend and the Magpul MOA furniture. Hidden away is the
non-apparent cooler part of the rifle; the super accurate half-MOA capabilities
all for just over $1200. The intent was to build the best 100% USA made durable
mil-spec rifle for the most competitive price possible. From my perspective the
BPM-15 is an affordable solution for designated marksman of US and LEO
operators, those who want an uber accurate home defense AR, and the
three-gunners.

Sure,
there are less expensive options out there which contain non-US or dubious
origin-ed parts, however if you are just shopping on price you are missing the
entire point of this or any other 100% USA made rifle, what Barnes is doing, and
this article. Let me put it another way; buy American damn it, a 100% USA made
$700 AR is a fallacy; it may be the required 80% US parts, but not 100%. We all
need to make an effort to assure, were fiscally possible, that we support
products made right here and preferably 100% USA made goods as it is the only
way we will keep dollars here and rebuild this great
country.

I
like the direction and dedication Andrew has put into the development of this
summation of in-house made parts which have become a rifle and I feel compelled
to support his business. I have pledged to myself to start purchasing his parts
kits for future builds since they are about the same price as other industry
kits I have used before. The BPM-15 delivers everything you need in a refined
AR platform and nothing you don’t all in an affordable package which needs no
upgrade. The BPM-15 is arguable one of the only 100% American made ARs and
certainly one of the finest factory AR-15 shooting tools I have
reviewed.

SPECS
16”
BPM Stainless Steel Match Barrel
Barrel
- 1:8 Twist
Chamber
- Match Precision .223 Wylde
Bolt
- 158 Carpenter Steel MPIU tested
Mid-length
gas system with stainless steel low profile gas block.
BPM
A2-style flash hider (muzzle brake / breaching tip).
BPM
PSFFRS Ultralite Extreme hand-guard with sling swivel options.
Receiver
'accurizing' set screw.
Magpul
MOE Grip, Stock and flip-up sights
Hardcase
included
1
- Magpul 30-round PMAG included
Street
$1221
100%
MADE IN USA!!



SOURCES
Barnes
Precision Machine
Barnes Precision Machine | USA Owned, USA made rifles, parts, and accessories.

 

You obviously feel that this is the direction you need to go, so I wish you luck with it.

From the purpose of this thread, and some of the parallel ones started here recently, I do not believe that this is a Tier 1 weapon as previously defined. Reviews I found online seemed mixed. You may be getting a great weapon, and I hope you do, but it does not have the same perception as a reliable defensive carbine from some of established Tier 1 manufactures.

If you think it meets your needs in this configuration go for it. It is not set up in the before mentioned Monkey Configuration however, and it also costs more than the rifles previously discussed. It would not be a weapon I would choose to purchase or stake my life on for those reasons.

Phishi

 

Yup sounds like you have made a Management decision.

Count me out.

 

I don't see how my choice to buy what I buy is anymore a "management decision" than you choosing to buy what you buy. This idea is not for everyone. I'm glad you found something that works for you.

Phishi

 

@phishi - it's because the discussion is for a "Monkey" configuration AR-15. Not throwing stones (I've already posted mine which is not considered a Tier 1) but you can't really start a thread labeled "Monkey Configuration AR-15", set standards for such configuration and then say it isn't a "management decision".

1) You are a founding member
2) You are a moderator
(the above two don't necessarily make your opinion more important but for this conversation, it's a data point and it is relevant)
3) melbo is management
4) You and melbo are, in effect, declaring what you feel should be the "standard" monkey configuration

Ergo, management has made a decision on what they will consider a "Standard Monkey Configuration". Now, what does that mean in the large scheme of things? Not much really. Should we, if we are going to be one big MAG, try to standardize as much as possible? Yeah, sure. To be completely honest though, I've probably run 5,000 rounds through two dozen AR-15s and with the exception of a truly deplorable build by a manufacturer with an already bad reputation, at the ranges I was using it at there was negligible different between them.

Trigger pull was within tolerances and VERY close to the same. They ALL went bang every single time I pulled the trigger on new and reloads of probably a half-dozen brands of ammo.

0 FTF, 0 FTE, 0 jams, 0 dimpling of the primer...nothing. Half of them were what many consider a Tier 1 rifle. Some were carbines, some were full length. Two had non-collapsible (A1 or A2) stocks. Half had optics, one was a Trijicon (I am JEALOUS, believe me!).

My point in all of this is that I can absolutely see where @HK_User or anyone else might be coming from when they say that you've made a management decision, because it's like the "Official Forum Stamp of Approval".

That having been said, this is NOT what this thread is about. This thread is about what should/could/would be in a standardized battle rifle for the tree. May I humbly propose that future posts (and I include myself in this) discussing whether or not a brand or configuration is good enough or not, acceptable or not, Tier 1 or not, be put into a separate thread or threads?

Will we all agree with the standard? Probably not. Can we all agree on some standard functionality and level of reliability/quality? I'm absolutely sure we can because even with all of the slight differences we will each have in preference, it's a PLATFORM first and foremost. If we all have something similar based on that platform, I think the differences overall in function will be minimal.

 

Darklight,

If the impression that "management" had each given their seal of approval to this configuration simply because of its name, and because 2 members who happen to be mods and "the management", I am sorry. It needs to be stated here and now that no other mods where communicated with before this thread was created. In no way shape or form do I or Melbo speak for the other members. This is simply an idea we spoke about and thought that others would find at least interesting, if not something they could grab onto and move forward with.

My attempt to standardize the configuration is simply that, my attempt. I recognized that others would not reach the same conclusions as I have. My opinion even differs from Melbo's in that regard. I still felt that the dialogue needed to occur and am glad that it has moved forward, even though it has seemed to be a clumsy process at best. Again the standards for this configuration have not been discussed by any members of "management" other than Melbo and I.

As to the idea that I am "declaring" what a standard will be, I feel more that I have a stated set of parameters that I have been defending. Few have engaged me in dialogue as to what they would like to see changed, what they might like, why the standards are stated the way they are, or where I might be willing to compromise for the sake of standardization. I remain open to hearing discussion on what these standards might be as what I proposed was merely that, a proposal, not a "declaration". If it appeared that I was declaring what those standards might be and that I was not open to discussion of alternative view points I am sorry. Tone can be hard to detect across a key board.

I think your idea of posting other builds in other threads and sticking with only the discussion of what those standards might be is an excellent one. I hope that others will join in this conversation, including members that have turned away for what ever reason.

Finally, your last paragraph really hits on something. I know that you are correct, all of us will not agree on the standard. That is absolutely okay. I firmly believe that each of us must do what we think we should with what we have available to us. I have made a decision to go down this path based on the information that I have available to me. Others will look at the same information and go another route, I wish them well but still count them as fellow monkeys.

Thanks for your post.
Phishi

 

Darklight was 100% correct in what I felt was true.

The only thing left out of Darklight's post and another reason I made mine is pretty simple.

Each time Phishi ask for "proof" of some level of the build of the AR15 Platform I had mentioned I provide the answer he openly requested either in print or in some type of photo format. Each time the fact and that source was ignored and then another pick it apart statement was made. Odd "bad gun statement on line" references were made but no sites were provided. So, yes it did appear that a management decision was in the works.

Cost? Cost is not a factor in the value of a weapon used to protect my family. A 50% difference in another proven weapon that has saved US lives in the sand box should not limit the selection factor. Any AR platform that is selected to carry the Sniper tag and that has a NSN should be considered.

Tier 1 is a management buzz word often used to select what management wants, all others will never meet that level and will be considered a bad product if found in the Bid Pile on any Monday morning.

For my part I was trying to broaden the knowledge base of what is "out there" and let others know that there are good AR Platforms that do not start with COLT.

Yes I own 3 AR 15 Colts.

YMMV

 

HK User,

Neither Melbo or I own FFLs. I am not affiliated with any firearm manufacture or distributer. To the best of my knowledge Melbo is not either. We are not selling or making money on any level concerning this idea. Tell me, what do we gain by making a " management decision" concerning this configuration?

It was unclear to me exactly what you where trying to communicate in the thread above. Some of what you had to say might have fit better in other threads that surfaced at the same time concerning the AR15 platform. Others, as pointed out by DarkLight, might have been better served in their own posts. I appreciate you attempting to let others know that there are other options out there, but it was not clear to me that it was your intent.

Your thoughts concerning Tier 1, I think we are going to have to agree to disagree. Your statement on a 50% decision, I'm not sure what you are referencing. Is it cost or quality? I believe that really what we are attempting to define is the value of the system we each prefer.

You place greater weight on things that don't fall with in the design of the configuration and then cry foul when I don't agree. You may have a system that is better than any other out there, but where I have chosen to place weight, inside the parameters of the configuration, it is hard to get a true comparison. It also does not advance the idea of a standard for the site, only shows that you have found what works for you.

I believe that the Chart was proof enough to get the discussion going. I can see your point concerning references. Primarily I have been using M4 carbine and Lightfighter as reference points. Tactical yellow visor has been another sight I frequent, as is Military Morons. All of the above, in one way, shape, or form have formed my decisions that have led to this configuration.

In the end, you have demonstrated that regardless of the outcome of this thread, you are going your own way concerning AR15s. That way does not seem to include what we have been attempting to discuss here in this thread, which is fine. I leave the door open to you to come back and discuss at anytime what, as DarkLight stated, is the true attempt of this thread, "what should/could/would be in a standardized battle rifle for the tree."

I respect both you and your decision and am glad you at least chose a standard caliber AR. Also, I would stand shoulder to shoulder with you any time. At least we could swap mags if needed.

Phishi

 

The post above is yet another Management Style post.

Nothing to do with Monkey Admin.

Management style in this case relates to the format.

In this there is a Good news start.
A bad news middle.
And "you're really a good guy" end.

Best described as a cookie post.

Better understood by those who know, as much more than what it first appears to be.


YMMV

 

Getting back to the topic at hand,

Ghrit has a good idea, possibly where this thread should have started in the first place.

If we eliminate the Tier 1 debate, what do we think this configuration should have? Do we all agree that it should have a light, two point sling, iron sights of some sort, and retractable stock? Or should other features be present?

Phishi

 

Topic at hand is the current config.

As such I believe we should start with a look at all those items and have an understanding of the product being reviewed. We can then have one source for the basis of a semiautomatic AR 15 Platform.

In this we can look at the information on hand. Along with this we can look at the MilSpec requirment. I once performed on MilSpec Bids so they can be abit of a pain but we do need to understand why some changes are in place.

So I suggest all read the list below and "vote" on what you think will fit the highest number of Monkey Members. So first we kick out the Launchers and Auto functions and burst control listed below.

"
M4 5.56mm Carbine
The M4 5.56mm carbine is a lightweight, gas operated, air cooled, magazine fed, selective rate, shoulder fired weapon with a collapsible stock. Equipped with a shorter barrel, collapsible stock, and subsequently accessory rails, it provides soldiers operating in close quarters with improved handling and the capability to rapidly and accurately engage targets at extended range, day or night. A shortened variant of the M16A2 rifle, the M4 provides the individual soldier operating in close quarters the capability to engage targets at extended range with accurate, lethal fire. The M4 Carbine achieves over 80 percent commonality with the M16A2 Rifle and was initially to replace all M3A1 .45 caliber submachine guns and selected M9 pistols and M16 series rifle in service. In 2005, it became the standard issue infantry weapon in the US Army.
After the military conflicts in Panama, the Persian Gulf and Somalia, the need for a shorter version of the M16A2 again appeared. While various short barreled versions of the M16 series had existed in the US military before this, they were mostly limited to special operations forces. Soon after the introduction of the M16A2, Colt engineers had begun work on a carbine variant. The offiical specifications for the XM4 were issued in 1987. For the new weapon, the barrel of the M16A2 was shortened to 14.5 inches, a length which had been found on earlier commerical Colt carbines based on the M16A1. The Colt Model 653 had been in use by special operations forces already. The fiberlite collapsible, sliding buttstock used on the Model 653 was also carried over.
The desire to mount the M203 grenade launcher on the shortened weapon required a modification of the barrel's profile. The standard M203 mount was designed to attach to the thinner profile of the M16A1, one of the reasons why this profile was maintained for the M16A2 behind the front sight block. The shortened nature of the XM4 required that the front portion of the M203's mount attach to the barrel in front of the forward sight block. A number of profiles were tested, and the final design incorporated a "step" in the barrel with a thinner profile, to allow the mounting of the launcher. In this form the weapon was type designated standard as the M4.
In 1992, Colt had introduced an upper reciever for the AR-15/M16 series that featured an accessory rail built to military specifications (MIL-STD-1913). This feature, plus a fully-automatic function, were desired by the special operations community, which had already been using fully-automatic AR-15/M16 type carbines, such as the Model 653. The US Navy had also purchased a number of weapons fitting the basic description of the XM4 in 1988 commercially from Colt. These weapons were also known by their commercial model number as Model 727s. The variant of the M4 with these features initially given the designation M4E1.
In August 1994, both variations were adopted as standard by the US Army, with the M4E1 becoming the M4A1. The first lot of M4s delivered to the US Army featured the same carry handle and sight arrangement as the M16A2. The accessory rail equipped "flat top" upper reciever found on the M4A1 was subsequently subtituted, becoming a common feature between the 2 weapons. The US Navy retained their stock of Model 727s, which were visually identical to the first M4s, but were marked with Colt's commerical nomenclature. Also in 1994, the US Army accepted the use of a heavier recoil buffer assembly to allow more reliable functioning in the shorter weapon. The US Army had initially resisted the use of the heavier buffer, hoping that it would be able to retain additional commonality with existing M16A2 rifles.
The M4 carbine was similar in design and functioning to the M16 family of rifles, thereby greatly simplifying training, supply, and maintenance. Compared to the M16A2 rifle, the M4 carbine was 1.3 pounds lighter, 6 and 5/8 inches shorter with buttstock extended, and almost 10 inches shorter with the buttstock collapsed. The original basis of issue plan was to replace, on a one-for-one basis, all caliber .45 submachine guns, selected caliber .45 and 9mm pistols, and selected Ml6A2 rifles. Infantry personnel receiving the M4 included platoon leaders, platoon sergeants, radio-telephone operators, and mortar gunners. The pistols carried by infantry commanders, executive officers, and operations officers would not be replaced.
The M4A1 carbine, differing from the M4 essentially only in the replacement of the 3 round burst with a fully-automatic fire capability, was originally intended for use by US Army Special Forces Groups, Rangers, and Special Operations Forces Aviation Units. The M4A1 would replace M4 carbine and the M16 rifle in the 75th Ranger Regiment and Special Forces Groups. The M4A1 would also replace the M4 carbine issued to flight crew members in special operations forces aviation units.
Following the introduction of the M16A4 and the Modular Weapon System (MWS) concept, a similar move was made to acquire a rail accessory handguard for US Army carbines. The carbine length version of the Knights Armament Company's (KAC) Rail Adapter System (RAS), the M5 RAS, was eventually selected. The M4 RAS was used on the M16A4 MWS. The usage of the designation M4E2 was sometimes used to describe carbines fitted with the M5 RAS, but eventually the new handguard became a standard option for existing M4 type carbines. These weapons became known as M4 or M4A1 MWS carbines.
As early as 2001, special operations forces identified a need for a heavier barrel for the M4A1 carbine to prevent catastrophic failures during sustained fire. A new profile barrel, with a greatly increased diameter between the weapon's reciever and front sight block, was subsequently provided to USSOCOM. Weapons fitted with the new barrels remained designated as M4A1s. Colt's internal nomenclature identified the standard M4A1 as the Model 921, and the subvariant with the heavier barrel as the 921HB.
In 2002, the US Army's Project Manager for Soldier Weapons issued an urgent requirement for the development of a lightweight carbine, to be designated as the XM8. The US Army's Objective Individual Combat Weapon (OICW) contract was subsequently modified to include this weapon. The prime candidate was derived from the kinetic energy component of the OICW. In 2003, this was further ammended to expand the XM8 program into a multi-component weapon system, which included rifle and carbine elements. What became the XM8 Modular Assault Weapon System was expected to cost about the same as the M4, but fielding was initially expected to be unlikely to begin before FY08. The system was also known as OICW Increment I.
Also, by the early 2000s, one of the Army National Guard's central readiness requirements was individual weapons modernization. By that time, the Army National Guard still had some 34,951 obsolete M16A1's in its inventory. Obtaining ammunition for these rifles became increasingly difficult, particularly for deployed units. While the ammunition designed for the M16A1 could be used in the M16A2 and its derivatives, the heavier ammunition used primarily in the M16A2 suffered serious performance degradation when used in the M16A1. The M16A2 and M16A4 were also being fielded to replace the first generation rifle and used the same heavier ammunition as the M4 carbine.
The M4 was issued to units and personnel with a requirement for an effective but compact, highly portable/slingable "hands free" weapon. It was ideally suited for use in close quarters and/or by soldiers who operated from vehicles with limited stowage space. The M4 could mount the optics and lighting components of the Modular Weapons System (MWS) giving it significant additional capabilities. It had become the weapon of choice for the Global War on Terror and homeland security. Any M4 carbines purchased for priority units already modernized with M16A2/A4's were to cascade those weapons to replace the much older M16A1's in other Army National Guard units.
The FY06 Army National Guard requirement for M4 Carbines was 60,943 rifles at a cost of $1k each. On hand were 15,975 with Army National Guard fielding suspended IOT push the entire weapons production to units in or deploying to Iraq. 22,648 Carbine's were programmed (Modularity) for the Army National Guard, leaving a shortfall of 22,320 weapons. Excess production capacity was available after FY05 and approximately 1000 weapons per month could be delivered on a new contract.
Funding the program was expected to allow the Army National Guard to deploy and operate with maximum effectiveness on all fronts of the Global war on Terror. It would contribute to the soldiers ability to defend him/herself and, with the MWS components, significantly increased the soldiers ability to rapidly engage targets in all environments. It was essential that the M16A1's be replaced as soon as possible. The M16A2 and A4 fieldings were funded, but alone would not displace all the M16A1's. Failure to fund the M4 fielding was seen as increasing risk to the soldiers, increasing costs of pre-deployment cross-leveling, and might degrade the Army National Guard's ability to train for and execute its federal and state missions.
In 2007, Army testing laboratories at Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, subjected the M4 carbine and 3 other weapons to a severe environmental test called the "Carbine Extreme Dust Test." The lab environment allowed engineers to push the weapons beyond their technical limits to better inform and understand what was required for the most capable weapons on the current battlefield. At the time it was the third such test for the Army's carbine of choice, the M4. The other 3 weapons tested were the XM8, the Heckler and Koch 416, and the FN SCAR-L.
The Army noted all the weapons in the test performed well. The number of stoppages all the carbines exhibited was roughly one percent or less of the total rounds fired by each, meaning the weapons had over a 98 percent reliability rate under the unique conditions. Though the M4 performed exceptionally well, it came in fourth compared to the other 3 carbines in this particular extreme single-environment (dust as the only condition) testing.
The Army subsequently submitted a request for funds in the FY10 budget to examine potential replacements for the M4 carbine. Despite plans to field the XM8 carbine as a replacement, no such replacement had been adopted in the regular US Army by the end of 2009. In December 2010, it was reported that the US Army was preparing to begin the trials."

 

@phishi, I never heard of you before this post by @melbo . Is it any wonder we have to believe you swing a big club around here? Who would want to argue with you, even if you might be wrong?

"Ahh phishi. Where to begin... perhaps at the end.... No. How 'bout just this much. for now:

phishi is a Founder and Moderator here at the Monkey. He was former Special Forces and got into some trouble doing contract psy op work in Columbia for one of those un-named, off budget groups. He took the fall for a group of good men and did his time quietly, G Gordon Liddy style, not saying a word even under heavy persuasive measures.

phishi's a lot like a Chuck Norris crossed with a Ph.D, in fact they used to call him Dr Norris behind his back in hushed whispers around the fire. Legend has it that he once gutted a sand sand shark and climbed inside to sneak up on some bad guys somewhere but I don't so much believe that one. Then again, he does have a scar that runs from above his eyebrow down to his ankle - nobody will ever ask him about it. When meeting phishi, remember this: There Is No Scar.

phishi's also a good friend of mine and was one of 29 in attendance at my wedding.

I'm not sure how but he's aware of this meeting and I wanted to alert him to this thread so he can run some local logistics prior to the shoot. We'll be needing lots of beer, lots of bourbon and a perhaps a loaf of bread."

 

If all that is true, how come he didn't know what a Colt SP1 is?