Surefire X300U-B

Everyone is at the least familiar with the Surefire X300 weapon light.  It’s been around a long while now  for something gun related.  Recently they have come up with a upgrade on the old X300 with the 300U-A  and B.

The A uses the old system and the B has the new T-slot  with bolt to tighten with.

A much much better method  if you are putting it on a 1913 rail.

Below is the older system  and new compare.

Just be sure not to get over enthusiastic if you are tightening the new system on a polymer framed handgun.

One of the other very recent upgrades is boosting the light  to 1000 lumen.

Retro – Surefire M25

Last week I went and bought another something that I really don’t need.  A Surefire M25 from CDNN.  It showed up today.

This is from the dark and early days of primitive weapon lights.  The manual has a revision date of 1-1-2006.  So by weapon light standards, this is positively ancient.

This Surefire M25 I received from CDNN looks nearly new.  Just a few scuffs and marks on it.

A little wear, but hardly anything on the one I got.  I read that some other people that purchased them got some pretty beat up units.

This is similar to the old Laser Products/Surefire 6P.  Uses 2 CR123s and has a P60 bulb.  The P60 will put out about 65 lumens of light for 1 hour.  This was a massive improvement over the giant Maglites.

Back when I was using Surefires like this as weapon lights, I liked to replace the bulb assembly with a P61 that gave us an insane 120 lumens for 20 minutes.  The weapon lights were often just pulsed, so I didn’t need longer run time.  As for a flash light carried in my pocket, I preferred the longer run time of the P60.

While newer LED bulbs have rendered these obsolete, they still perform well.

The M25 only puts the light on the right side of the front sight base it is clamped on.  You can move the light back some in the ring is it mounted in, but the large tail cap will hit the hand guard pretty quickly.

 

Looks like the barrel is shot on my favorite AR.

My favorite gun started key-holing last weekend.  It is the most distraught I’ve felt in a long time.  Like losing an old friend.  Extra kick in the nuts was that I just rebuilt the gun as I was upgrading it.

After I had issues with my first SBR I decided I’d have another built no holds barred.

I started seeing pictures of 10.5 inched barreled carbines with the 9.5 inch long Daniel Defense Lite rail.  I really liked that setup.  That rail was a predecessor to the RIS II rail.  Similar profile but the bottom rail was lower and did not detach.  I was planning to use one of those when I learned about the RIS II rails.  I liked the idea of being able to remove the bottom rail for cleaning.  And one of the Daniel Defense reps told me that ALL the RIS II rails could mount a M203.  Later I learned that was not true of their MK18 Rail.

I like this upper setup so much I decided I’d swap the old WOA upper on it with a Colt FDE upper and have one of my SBR lowers Cerakoted Burned Bronze to turn this setup all FDE.

Sort of like that, but with an FDE lower.

It was interesting pulling this old upper apart to rebuild it.  There was a little corrosion:

Along with lots of gunk.

But everything cleaned up nicely:

The barrel was part of a limited run from a company that no longer exists.  They had Douglas blanks turned down by Compass Lake Engineering with wylde chambers.  Then a small part of this batch was given an ion bond finish.

Now days I wouldn’t recommend a match barrel on a SBR.  But it sure was a fun combination.  I don’t know how many rounds I had through it, but it is somewhere around 10,000 +- 3,000.  Match ammo, m193, m855, lots of wolf and other assorted cheap ammo, some of it fired full auto on other peoples lowers, lots of rapid fire.  Only failures I had were two case head separations with Black Hills blue box remanufactured ammo.

I often drove my self nuts trying to shoot very small groups with that 75 grain boat tail open tip match Black Hills ammo.  I would shoot 5 or 10 round groups and have 3 or 8 rounds touching under half an inch at 100 yards.  Then always I would have a shot or two that opened the group up to 1.1 inches.  Drove me mad.  Later I was told by some other shooters that used the same ammo that about 1.1 inch groups at 100 yards were what they normally got out of that ammo.

For a long time this was my main AR.  It also functioned as a test bed.  If I had something new to test, try it on with this gun.  Note, I have multiple SBR lowers and I move uppers between them.  In no particular order here are a few of the setups I’ve used other the years and happened to take photos of.

I hated the UBR stock, but when I had one, it was on this rifle.

I even ran an A1 fixed stock on it for a while after I got rid of the UBR.

I’ve used many different iron sights and scopes on it.  I used Troy BUIS for a long time before finally deciding that I liked the sight picture of the KAC sights the best.

That picture is from when I was joking on a forum about having an offset ACOG for close in work when you are running your fixed 10x scope.  The ACOG was mounted to an offset rail which at the time I was normally using a Doctor sight on.

Yup, I even had an ACOG with piggyback T-1 back in the day.  I love the combo of running the Nightforce 2.5-10×24 on this rifle as the rifle is accurate and the scope makes hitting what you want to hit easy.  I sent a good number of round downrange at 565 yard targets with a Nightforce on this upper.

In the past I’ve called this gun my “Micro-Recce”.  A rifle small and handle enough for fast work, but plenty accurate enough if you needed to take a little longer shot.  But in hind sight I think everything practical that I ever did with this rifle could have been done just as well with a chrome lined barrel.  Had I started with a chromed barrel I probably wouldn’t be rebararreling it now.  While a well made stainless barrel will hold  up to a great deal, it just is not made for sustained abuse.

I’ve tried a great number of fun or odd setups with this gun.

I was debating if it was time to retire this upper and build something different but instead I decided that I am going to rebarrel it.  I’m taking a Colt M4A1 SOCOM barrel that I have lightly used and having it cut down to 10.3 inches by ADCO Firearms.  The old 4 slot Legacy Surefire mount is going to be replaced with a new Warcomp.  I know a collector who is going to give that 4 slot a good new home.  This new set up should give me a good reliable accurate barrel (but not a match barrel, which I feel is excessive on a SBR).  The Warcomp will reduce the already minor recoil.  That will give a great deal more life out of this gun.

I’m relieved to know that I am going to still be using this years to come.

Interesting Picture

I stumbled across this photo online.  I have no information about it other than the photo.  I saw it was referenced on a couple of forums I don’t have access too.

For all I know it could be airsoft, but lets imagine for a moment that we know it isn’t.

I used to hear that women could tell a great deal about a person by their shoes.  I’m not a women, so I have no idea if that is true or not.  But you can tell a little about a person by their weapons.

Lets take a look at some of the oddities of this weapon first.  Well I suppose we should look at the basics first:

It appears to be a HK416 or a cut down/rebarreled MR556.  The photo is somewhat blurry so I can’t tell if there is a third pin for full auto or not.  It has a Geissele scope mount which means this is a newer photo, but it appears to have a very old Surefire 4 slot flash hider.  This seems to imply the user has been using an old Surefire 556K for a long time.

Correction, it has been pointed out to me that it is the newer 212A 5 slot flash hider.

I’ve heard rumors of the combination of the old 556k and the 416 destroying guns.  I have no idea if this is true or not, when I had MR556 uppers I never ran them suppressed.

Back to the topic.  This rifle appears to have one of the new Nightforce 1-8x scopes which are pretty new.  That scope is sitting in a Geissele scope mount, which are said to be very good (and are extremely expensive).  I find it extremely ironic that this ultra tough non quick detach scope mount has been set on top of a LaRue QD riser.  This tells a few things.  The person who set this up wanted or needed the scope higher and/or needed the ability to quickly remove the scope.

They they didn’t just use a taller Geissele or Larue mount I don’t know.  If this is an issued firearm and they are using an issued Geissele scope mount this would be an example of the the wrong equipment being selected for the end user.

 

Then there is another aspect I find interesting.  There is an offset Aimpoint T-1, while the rifle has a 1-8X on it.   Aside from the offset T-1 and the light tape switch hinting strongly the the user of this rifle is right handed.  It also implies that they feel that switching the scope to 1x is either inferior or slower to just rolling the rifle and usign the offset T-1.  If they didn’t feel that way it would be unlikely that they would have the additional weight and cost of the T-1 on their rifle.

This person then is also doing something that warrants having 8x magnification on their 10.4 inch barreled rifle.  If it was simply for observation the user would most likely just carry something like a monocular or binocular.  Instead this person can use the 8x magnification on their rifle.

 

But my two biggest things I found interesting in this photo.  That the 1x on the 1-8x is some way insufficient and warrants still having a T-1.  That the Geissele scope mount is either too low or not QD and needed to be set on a Larue QD riser.

 

Misc rambling on the A4.

I was looking at my notes and realized I hadn’t shot my AR15A4 in over a year, so I took it out last weekend.

The reason I keep an A4 configured rifle around is because I carried one in combat.  I actually carried the M16A2 more while I was in the service, but I had an A4 in Iraq.

I know that I write a post like this each year, and I’ll probably have another one for you all next year.

When we carried the M16A2 in the Corps we felt it could do everything we needed.  From CQB to 500 yards.  Now one could argue if we really could do what we felt we could do.

Ignoring what our actually capability might have been, we had no idea what we were missing.  Since our experience was only based around the A2, we didn’t know how much of a combat multiplier an optic would be, or how much handier a carbine would be, etc.

It was common knowledge in the Corps back then that the M4 was too unreliable, inaccurate, and didn’t have enough stopping power for military use.  Just like how it was common knowledge that the M14 was the best service rifle ever and it would one shot kill commies even if you shot them in the toe, and the .50 BMG created a super shockwave that would rip people to pieces even if you missed by three feet.  Then other things that were taught and believed started to get really silly.

Now I think going to the M16A4 over the A2 was as big improvement as suddenly we learned that we could customize our weapons to fit our mission.  Optics made for a huge improvement in hit ratios.  Story goes that there was a quiet investigation on the Marines during the invasion of Iraq because so many enemies were being shot in the head that higher ups thought that Marines were executing people.  Turns out it was just a massive increase in head shots due to the ACOG optic.

We could suddenly effectively mount lights, lasers, night vision devices, thermal, bipods, etc to our rifles.  Not that we couldn’t before but we couldn’t do it easily.  The old barrel mount for the AN/PEQ-2 IR laser required us to beg an Armorer to install it.  Now we could just slap an IR laser on anywhere.

I remember being in Iraq and seeing another unit that was issued Harris Bipods and Surefire M900 lights and being so jealous of them.  But their higher ups were worried about guys loosing the equipment, so they were required to have both on their rifles at all times.  That must have been so heavy and awkward.

The A4 got the job done, but the M4 would have done just fine.  Now it is clear that the future is all carbines.

I find it hilarious how the Marine Corps used to say that a 14.5 inch M4 barrel was not good enough for general use but then they decide that a 16.5 inch barrel is good enough for an automatic rifle.  I really think the adoption of the M27 IAR was the Corps trying to get a carbine with out buying the M4.

I spend a great deal of time to get my Colt AR15A4 set up exactly the way I wanted it, but each time I shoot it it is a reminder that the A4 just doesn’t excel in any particular area.  It isn’t a precision rifle, it isn’t a light handle carbine, it is just a sort of jack of all trades.  Using it is like owning many knives, but none of them sharp.