Sound Like a good setup??

So ive been on the search for a less recoil setup on my overwatch..and this is what im looking into doing..go with the CS spring,h2 buffer..(sounds like an endine is too much of a pain),Carrier Weight System and the PWS DNTC .308 brake..dont worry about the thread im going to turn it down and thread it.Sound good? tell me what you think.

So ive been on the search for a less recoil setup on my overwatch..and this is what im looking into doing..go with the CS spring,h2 buffer..(sounds like an endine is too much of a pain),Carrier Weight System and the PWS DNTC .308 brake..dont worry about the thread im going to turn it down and thread it.Sound good? tell me what you think.

I've had good luck with the CWS. I was more interested in reducing the violence of the ejection to preserve the brass for reloading, but it really does keep the scope almost on target by reducing or stretching out the recoil.

Just be aware that some rifles won't let you pivot the upper closed on the front take down pin because of the extra length at the back of the carrier. You have to put the upper and lower together in the closed position (push the cws back into the buffer) then insert both pins. You can also file or polish the weight holder but that isn't recommended by the manufacturer. I guess they don't want you filing it so thin that the weight holder sleeve breaks.

You may also have to file some plastic off the end of the buffer to allow the carrier to go a little farther back, so that the bolt will latch open. Again that's because of the extra length that the weight holder adds to the back of the carrier.

I had to do a little of both, but it was well worth it. Brass is a lot cleaner because unlocking is slowed. Brass is also not bent up on ejection. Recoil is less and you can re-aquire the target for a follow on shot much more quickly, or self spot with the scope.

Downside would be slower cycling on full auto if you do that sort of stuff.

Slower ROF is not necesarily a con: it doesn't jump that much already, and firing slower means its easier to reaquire target between shots, rather the shots going high over the target. alternatively a higher ROF means if your aim is true, more rounds will hit the target easier in a shorter timespan. Its just what you prefer.

awesome i heard you talking on another post about the cws and you basically sold it to me..im not worried about pounding a 1000 rpm downrange.. and greater brass life is a great plus with the price tag its at these days..when i get it setup ill get with you if i have any problems..i dont think ill be filing much ive got access to some cnc machines if she needs modded.i can clean yours up too if you want. thanks

I've had good luck with the CWS. I was more interested in reducing the violence of the ejection to preserve the brass for reloading, but it really does keep the scope almost on target by reducing or stretching out the recoil.

Just be aware that some rifles won't let you pivot the upper closed on the front take down pin because of the extra length at the back of the carrier. You have to put the upper and lower together in the closed position (push the cws back into the buffer) then insert both pins. You can also file or polish the weight holder but that isn't recommended by the manufacturer. I guess they don't want you filing it so thin that the weight holder sleeve breaks.

You may also have to file some plastic off the end of the buffer to allow the carrier to go a little farther back, so that the bolt will latch open. Again that's because of the extra length that the weight holder adds to the back of the carrier.

I had to do a little of both, but it was well worth it. Brass is a lot cleaner because unlocking is slowed. Brass is also not bent up on ejection. Recoil is less and you can re-aquire the target for a follow on shot much more quickly, or self spot with the scope.

Downside would be slower cycling on full auto if you do that sort of stuff.

So ive been on the search for a less recoil setup on my overwatch..and this is what im looking into doing..go with the CS spring,h2 buffer..(sounds like an endine is too much of a pain),Carrier Weight System and the PWS DNTC .308 brake..dont worry about the thread im going to turn it down and thread it.Sound good? tell me what you think.

The .308 brake is not optimized for the 6.5mm bore.

I've had good luck with the CWS. I was more interested in reducing the violence of the ejection to preserve the brass for reloading, but it really does keep the scope almost on target by reducing or stretching out the recoil.

Just be aware that some rifles won't let you pivot the upper closed on the front take down pin because of the extra length at the back of the carrier. You have to put the upper and lower together in the closed position (push the cws back into the buffer) then insert both pins. You can also file or polish the weight holder but that isn't recommended by the manufacturer. I guess they don't want you filing it so thin that the weight holder sleeve breaks.

You may also have to file some plastic off the end of the buffer to allow the carrier to go a little farther back, so that the bolt will latch open. Again that's because of the extra length that the weight holder adds to the back of the carrier.

I had to do a little of both, but it was well worth it. Brass is a lot cleaner because unlocking is slowed. Brass is also not bent up on ejection. Recoil is less and you can re-aquire the target for a follow on shot much more quickly, or self spot with the scope.

Downside would be slower cycling on full auto if you do that sort of stuff.

Take you rifle buffer apart and make it weigh the same amount as the H3

Just get some tungsten weights

That is what I just did.

is it going to be even noticeable?? explain your reasoning

The .308 brake is not optimized for the 6.5mm bore.

if i could get some dimensions on all the parts of the cws system i could just MAKE it lol

Take you rifle buffer apart and make it weigh the same amount as the H3

Just get some tungsten weights

That is what I just did.

if i could get some dimensions on all the parts of the cws system i could just MAKE it lol

It's real simple, just a stamped metal sleeve that fits in the hole in the back of the carrier with a hole in the front end so air can blow out when the weight flies forward, and a flange in the back wide enough to keep the sleeve from flying forward without scraping the sides of the upper. Weight is just a rod cut off to whatever length your sleeve is, with a diameter big enough to not rattle around, guess that depends on the gauge of the steel in the sleeve.

They actually send two rods of different materials that are the same size but different weights.

It's dirt simple and easily removable.

if i could get some dimensions on all the parts of the cws system i could just MAKE it lol

I just received mine today. I can measure and take pictures for you sometime this weekend. The instructions say one weight is stainless steel the other is carbide. Stainless one weighs 1.25 oz vs 2.51 for the carbide.

The carrier itself weighs 1.54 ounces. That is all from the paper work that is included.

you would be the man! from the looks of it all you would need is a set of calipers to get the job done..if you would do that for me that would be great! again thanks



I just received mine today. I can measure and take pictures for you sometime this weekend. The instructions say one weight is stainless steel the other is carbide. Stainless one weighs 1.25 oz vs 2.51 for the carbide.

The carrier itself weighs 1.54 ounces. That is all from the paper work that is included.

if i could get some dimensions on all the parts of the cws system i could just MAKE it lol


That is not nice an may be very illegal ;)

That is not nice an may be very illegal ;)

I'm pretty sure it isn't, as long as he is only making one for personal use. If he were to try and profit he could possibly have problems, but even then I would question it because the CWS is only listed as patent applied for.

As far as I understand things if someone were to try and compete with this product, their is nothing that would currently prevent that. Now there would more than likely be lawyers involved, but like I said if he is only making one for himself no one is going to bother him, nor should they.

Anytime you copy in exact detail something that is sold by an individual or company that spent hefty sums doing R&D to produce a perfectly functioning product, you're stealing. Doesn't matter if patent applied for or patent in hand. Doesn't matter if it's 1 or 100, you are copying someone else's designs which are protected and you have not gained permission to copy.

You are not modifying someone else's design to be adapted to work on something different. You are making an exact copy in every detail. The Reasearch and Design costs to make that item is usually pretty extensive. My parents taught me that was just wrong.

I am not a person who makes things. I am a regular end user like 95% of the people here. I buy items R&D'd and proven, and assemble them into a customized functioning rifle for my needs or immediate family needs. So I am paying out of my pocket and putting up with the long wait times like everyone else here.

Now if you were making a copy of the lower receiver, upper receiver, barrel, or other AR part that has been out for 40 plus years, great. Those individuals had the opportunity to profit from their research and work. Not the case with anything fairly new.

Now if somebody made a part, but will not work on the Grendel, and you compare what's out there and come up with you're design to work on the Grendel, that's another story.

Scott

I understand you concern and i know that if i made a product only to have someone rip it off is just not right.Im not out to make 1000 of them and sell them all to you for half the price...or sit and laugh about people paying $60 in a CWS system..when theres less than $5 in raw materials to build it.From the sound of it MOST of the guys on here have taken a file to their CWS anyway to get a custom fit..Im not going to make and EXACT copy i can sure do my own design and put a Pat. on it.I don't want you to think im out to rip off the world.I have a skill that allows me to be creative and build dam near anything..and trust me if you had that availability you'd be surprised on the stuff you'd want to build.

Anytime you copy in exact detail something that is sold by an individual or company that spent hefty sums doing R&D to produce a perfectly functioning product, you're stealing. Doesn't matter if patent applied for or patent in hand. Doesn't matter if it's 1 or 100, you are copying someone else's designs which are protected and you have not gained permission to copy.

You are not modifying someone else's design to be adapted to work on something different. You are making an exact copy in every detail. The Reasearch and Design costs to make that item is usually pretty extensive. My parents taught me that was just wrong.

I am not a person who makes things. I am a regular end user like 95% of the people here. I buy items R&D'd and proven, and assemble them into a customized functioning rifle for my needs or immediate family needs. So I am paying out of my pocket and putting up with the long wait times like everyone else here.

Now if you were making a copy of the lower receiver, upper receiver, barrel, or other AR part that has been out for 40 plus years, great. Those individuals had the opportunity to profit from their research and work. Not the case with anything fairly new.

Now if somebody made a part, but will not work on the Grendel, and you compare what's out there and come up with you're design to work on the Grendel, that's another story.

Scott

That's different when you examine other products and design your own. I was refering to exact copies where you use all of their R&D. If you can come up with your own design that is great.

Scott

AA is selling the PWS compensator in 6.5G.
http://alexanderarms.com/siteshopper.htm?cat=15&item=113

However when i go to the PWS site they don't make a 6.5 Compensator
its a .308/6.5G.
http://www.primaryweapons.com/store/pc/viewPrd.asp?idproduct=26&idcategory=2
Does anyone have any insight on this?Warped gave me his thinking it wont work,and if hes right then why is AA selling something that isn't optimal?

The .308 brake is not optimized for the 6.5mm bore.