quote:

Originally posted by Ferrari Steve:

quote:

Originally posted by ivy6t5:
I wondered that after I read Steve's post. Below are pics of a Non-Ambi handle from a Gen I MPX-P compared to an Ambi handle from a Gen II MPX-C.

First pic of handles showing both exactly 6" long:

Hmm.. then I wonder what they sent me?

Charging handle for an MCX? The placement of the "wings" on the side of the shaft look AR-ish.

I'll be in the shop tomorrow--if we still have our MCX on the shelf, I'll pull the CH and take a photo.

Man, you guys are really talking me out of one of these. It really seems to be a bigger headache than it's worth.

Maybe MPX Gen3 will be a side charger. No more drooping charging handle and Tavor face when suppressed.

Ive got the KM on its way, now. Just got tracking notification. Im excited to try the difference.

Which do you like better, Ivy?

quote:

Originally posted by PorterN:
Ive got the KM on its way, now. Just got tracking notification. Im excited to try the difference.

Which do you like better, Ivy?

Right now my personal preference is the KM - it is more compact, sturdy and the right length for me, but I am using it on my Carbine and keeping my MXP-P just as a pistol - no SBR. The Collapsible definitely has the "COOL" factor, but I have not found any use for the half-extended position, and the full-extended position is a little short for me. I have the new Sig Telescoping/Folding stock arriving today that I want to compare with the KM. Once I decide, I will likely sell the other two.

quote:

Originally posted by Ferrari Steve:

quote:

Originally posted by ivy6t5:
I wondered that after I read Steve's post. Below are pics of a Non-Ambi handle from a Gen I MPX-P compared to an Ambi handle from a Gen II MPX-C.

First pic of handles showing both exactly 6" long:

Hmm.. then I wonder what they sent me?

They're sending a return label.
Apparently they sent me an MCX ambi charging handle.

They're not shipping the MPX ones separately yet.

So mine's now backordered.

ok.... as requested



and




edit:
the angles are weird and it doesn't look like it.... but that tape measure is in the same place on both pics

So here is a question that I found to be hotly debated on another forum:

If I replace the Collapsible stock on my MPX-Carbine (currently measuring 28-1/4" OAL when fully collapsed) with the KM stock making it 25" OAL when fully folded, is my Carbine now subject to NFA regulations because it no longer meets the 16" barrel and 26" OAL requirements for rifles? Or does the requirement mean with the stock extended and ready to fire from the shoulder as would be the case with a fixed stock rifle?

If it would now be subject to NFA regulations (AOW), I could easily add a picatinny riser to the back of the MPX to meet the required OAL. Any thoughts?

Finally got my Gen 2 30rd mags today! I'm stoked cause I finally have something real related to my MPX. Hopefully, my actual MPX's will arrive soon!

quote:

Or does the requirement mean with the stock extended and ready to fire from the shoulder as would be the case with a fixed stock rifle?

I have always thought it to be the fully extended measurement. Otherwise folder AK or like the VZ2008 would be nfa. Or you couldnt buy a Law Tactical folding adapter without a class III.

When SBRing a rifle, the forms ask for the total length with stocks fully extended, too.

quote:

Originally posted by ivy6t5:
So here is a question that I found to be hotly debated on another forum:

If I replace the Collapsible stock on my MPX-Carbine (currently measuring 28-1/4" OAL when fully collapsed) with the KM stock making it 25" OAL when fully folded, is my Carbine now subject to NFA regulations because it no longer meets the 16" barrel and 26" OAL requirements for rifles? Or does the requirement mean with the stock extended and ready to fire from the shoulder as would be the case with a fixed stock rifle?

If it would now be subject to NFA regulations (AOW), I could easily add a picatinny riser to the back of the MPX to meet the required OAL. Any thoughts?

IANAL but I think that since the definition of a rifle includes that it is meant to be fired from the shoulder, it would be the measurement when fully extended because that is the length it would be when fired from the shoulder.

quote:

Originally posted by PorterN:

quote:

Or does the requirement mean with the stock extended and ready to fire from the shoulder as would be the case with a fixed stock rifle?

I have always thought it to be the fully extended measurement. Otherwise folder AK or like the VZ2008 would be nfa. Or you couldnt buy a Law Tactical folding adapter without a class III.

When SBRing a rifle, the forms ask for the total length with stocks fully extended, too.

Thanks PorterN and md-dave!
I think you hit the nail on the head PorterN when you state that the SBR form asks for total length with stock extended. I got concerned after reading another forum thread - I should know better!

Called CS today and they will ship my new handle next week, will post a few pictures then

My Folding/Telescoping stock came yesterday and I compared it with the KM stock for size and function. As Creslin pointed out, the length is identical, though the KM has a curve at the top that makes it appear slightly longer.

When compared side-by-side, both stocks are identical in length to pad where it contacts shoulder:


The KM stock requires only one step to go from folded to fully-extended, but the thin top-rail is not as natural & comfortable against the cheek as the Folding/Telescoping stock. I am researching a neoprene tape product to add for comfort on top-rail:


The Folding/Telescoping stock requires 2 steps to unfold to fully-extended, and release button is not very smooth, but the stock feels great and provides best alignment against cheek. If you keep it extended when folded, it would only require one step:


Now that I have tried all three stocks, I think all three are great and each one will serve a specific purpose for each user. I thought that one would stand out over the others, but in my opinion I was wrong. I really appreciate this forum for not criticizing people for having an opinion - thank you and Merry Christmas!

Thanks for the comparison! Since the folding extender was out of stock, and i could get the KM for the same price, I'll take a pass on the other.

I like the collapsible that i have ok, but the slightly longer KM will hopefully be a bit more comfortable, even with the thin cheek part. Ive always liked the look of AKs with folding stocks over ARs with 6-position stocks, so the KM is ideal for me: ar style rifle with set-length folding stock!

quote:

Originally posted by PorterN:
Thanks for the comparison! Since the folding extender was out of stock, and i could get the KM for the same price, I'll take a pass on the other.

I like the collapsible that i have ok, but the slightly longer KM will hopefully be a bit more comfortable, even with the thin cheek part. Ive always liked the look of AKs with folding stocks over ARs with 6-position stocks, so the KM is ideal for me: ar style rifle with set-length folding stock!

I agree completely - the upper photo with the KM is my favorite configuration - I am just waiting for a slightly longer handguard. I think you are really going to like the KM stock and I will be sure to post the neoprene pad solution I am working on for the top rail.

quote:

Originally posted by ivy6t5:

quote:

Originally posted by PorterN:
Thanks for the comparison! Since the folding extender was out of stock, and i could get the KM for the same price, I'll take a pass on the other.

I like the collapsible that i have ok, but the slightly longer KM will hopefully be a bit more comfortable, even with the thin cheek part. Ive always liked the look of AKs with folding stocks over ARs with 6-position stocks, so the KM is ideal for me: ar style rifle with set-length folding stock!

I agree completely - the upper photo with the KM is my favorite configuration - I am just waiting for a slightly longer handguard. I think you are really going to like the KM stock and I will be sure to post the neoprene pad solution I am working on for the top rail.

Thank you for the pictures ivy6t5!! I really hope that I don't end up with all 3 stocks, but knowing me I probably will...

quote:

Originally posted by ivy6t5:

I agree completely - the upper photo with the KM is my favorite configuration - I am just waiting for a slightly longer handguard. I think you are really going to like the KM stock and I will be sure to post the neoprene pad solution I am working on for the top rail.

I was so focused on the stocks in your pics that i didnt even notice the bbl length with 8" handguard. My carbine has the full length keymod rail, and i like it for now, but I'd like it better if it were a bit shorter.

quote:

Originally posted by PorterN:

quote:

Originally posted by ivy6t5:

I agree completely - the upper photo with the KM is my favorite configuration - I am just waiting for a slightly longer handguard. I think you are really going to like the KM stock and I will be sure to post the neoprene pad solution I am working on for the top rail.

I was so focused on the stocks in your pics that i didnt even notice the bbl length with 8" handguard. My carbine has the full length keymod rail, and i like it for now, but I'd like it better if it were a bit shorter.

My Carbine came from the factory with the 14" keymod guard, but I swapped out my 8" pistol guard to get a feel for the length I want - I figure shortening the keymod to about 11" or waiting for a nice Sig option or aftermarket hand guard.

I did receive today the "fixed" CH (Gen 1) that Sig sent. It does have a slightly beveled leading edge similar to the picture ivy6t5 shows with the ambi CH. So I would assume it will help some when compared to the original that has no bevel. They only have one ambi charging handle (I asked if there was a Gen 1 and Gen 2 CH and was told no) so since it is beveled as well I went ahead and ordered it (currently on backorder).