Anyone see this yet? Anyone know more?
https://www.knightarmco.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/M110-UPGRADE-KIT-SLICKSHEET.pdf
Tag because hell yes!
Aww, come on! I’m still trying to collect enough funds to finish my MWS build and now there’s a KAC large frame I can get in CA? (SR-25 is banned by name in CA)
I wonder how much weight the skeletonization saves. There looks like some kind of slot for manipulation of an AGB at the end of the handguard? No full ambi lower, it looks like.
Wow I hope that’s not the direction KAC lowers are going. That’s the exact opposite of their current design mentality. Looks like a boutique billet lower.
Upper is cool though. I thought they already had a 6.5 SR-25 though.
ETA: note the circle cutouts up top. Interesting to see KAC make this change especially at this particular moment in rail design. I wonder if was done on the hypothetical basis, or if they performed in house drop/crush test to determine how much rigidity was gained by adding the circles vs. MLOK slots.
Would be sweet with a chrome lined, cut rifled barrel. Increase barrel life into the ~6k round range?
The KAC SR-25 CC already has a Chrome lined barrel.
Something about a billet offering from KAC seems wrong.
Are y’all sure this isn’t a April Fools creation?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sorry, I’m a “newb”
Why?
I would argue that Instagram is a good conduit for an April fools joke while a military marketing brochure is not. This appeared in the latter.
As far as billet, it would be a deviation from their past. Forgings are stronger and cheaper once set up costs are recovered. Despite many other companies moving to billet for nothing other than branding reasons(to have a unique look) KAC and nearly all other serious manufacturers that market to serious military users have retained the use of forgings.
The biggest reason I could see for someone to go to billet is if they decide to use exotic alloys like LiAl that has been used by some others like V7 and Hodge. They did mention pushing the envelope of material selection in the literature. This is a scientific wild ass guess btw.
Yep, as on another forum:
Personal preference. KAC has been associated with forged lowers on their small and large frame rifles so this seems odd. The forged lowers connect back to the original AR-10 and carried over to the Mil-Spec M-16 / M-4 carbine. In my opinion, forged lowers look clean / sleek while the billet lowers look chunky / ugly.
Billet lowers definitely have a try hard look instead of clean and purposeful.
Been searching for reviews on this and have been unable to gather much. :mad:
On TOS, a KAC rep stated that these were a one off project for a customer and they will not be available commercially. .
Just saw this pop up over here. Apologies, have been unable to clear schedule to peruse the internets this week.
As I was quoted, this was a program gun submission that was used in some quick turn-around literature that someone found buried on the website that wasn’t supposed to be released because it never materialized.
Yeah, we built it, yeah, it shot, and yeah, it had some design features that weren’t very “Knightsy”.
No, it wasn’t an April Fools Day thing, our funny stuff is way funnier than that, at least generally and according to perspective.
What is cool about it, is that it is essentially a first look into what is now the 6.5 Creedmoor program, and that’s a real thing with real legs, and is soon to be delivered to the commercial market.
Does that program go beyond the 6.5creedmoor SR25 uppers?
That program is not/was not connected to our 6.5mm Creedmoor program more than being an alternate caliber for large-frame rifles.
The amount of conceptual, and prototype equipment KAC has, must be staggering.