Unobtanium

It is my plan to create the "ultimate" combat shotgun in a well-finished, sleek, and ultimately durable package while not compromising on function, but rather, using the most effective parts available and applying the best I can find to the project. The property I just bought is pure shotgun territory, due to terrain, and I want a dominant force of a shotgun.

Surefire old-school E2E body with new clicky tail-cap and 500 lumen M600U scout head in purpose-built mount with QD attachment cup: More to come as parts arrive...

2 MOA T1 in IOcover Titanium/A2 tool-steel hybrid black bolt-handle:

custom bolt release: Purpose-made 1913 top rail:

Huh. Looks good to go! Mirrors Oem.

It's hard to tell, but where your hammer has peened, has the finish flaked off on the side any, or not? How do the contacts on the trigger/hammer engagement points look? It's tempting to use the OEM hammer and the FFT dis-connector and trigger. Also, FYI. where the hammer would contact the disconnector on my OEM hammer during the back-stroke is indeed shiny as if it kisses said part every cycle.

Thanks! I did note that racking the bolt with the safety on and the geissele hammer was difficult, as you said.

I'm just not cool with that, personally. :/ If the face is soft, so is the sear surface.

Is the hammer face mushrooming normal, or was that an early run and has the heat treat been changed? Also, what about the hammer kissing the disconnector? Oem doesn't do that. Just curious, as trigger groups are at the heart of safety and reliability.

Stains don't bother me, but flaking does.

Is the NP3 flaking or something on that trigger?

What of the np3 peeling picture on the trigger? Why not use the factory chrome disconnector? What about peening hammer face...np3 come off or flake? What about hammer hitting disconnector with the FFT trigger, when cocked? Lots of ?'s poorly worded from my mobile

Picture of said peening?

Great thread! How are the FFT parts holding up? I am interested to know about the coatings and surfaces of engagement on the trigger, as well as hammer, and how the impact portion of the hammer holds up? SD, what combo of parts do you use? I'm considering the geiselle hammer, FFT trigger, and stock disconnector. Very curious about how the FFT stuff is holding up to high round counts...

In the SBE, it pretty much is a stationary part that the shell rim/head is bashed into during rearward BCG movement, isn't it? Kindof like on Glocks and the like? I can't see much going wrong with that which isn't visibly noticeable. I don't own an SBE, so I'm just going off of E-diagrams, here.

Froglube has not been in general use for half a decade. It seems that your issues are roughly as recent as your lubricant choice change.

Thoroughly strip and re-lube it. I have found that Froglube gets pretty "gritty" with use. I tried it on a suppressed M4 and dumped it after that. I prefer Rand CLP or FIRECLean. Rand is still fluid at -10*F in my testing, and FIRECLEAN down toa bout 5-10*F, but it softens/slicks VERY EASILY. Froglube hardens up much worse and sooner.

Jammed in the cold. ID guns require a firm back-stop. People in the cold typically wear fluffy crap. Try your weapon with and then without your cold-weather gear. It's a long-shot, but it may have merit.

The M1014 hand-guards fit either receiver, they just won't fit the civilian barrel is all.

Well...that's that, then. My point was it would have been a soup sammich if that actually was load-bearing, really, as only 1 load bearing surface should be used in a non-precision (Sorry, the M4 barrel/receiver interface isn't a precision piece of machinery by this definition) instrument. This prevents un-even load-bearing between the two. It appears it really is, just a stop.

Will either barrel fit either receiver, if not, what is the bind?

I wondered if the tail cap was long enough, mainly, to fully interface.

Can you verify for me if the surefire fury tailcap can be held by the ring 100%, or if the body must be included in the clamping operation.

I would concur with it helping with recoil except that this goes against physics. Under recoil, the barrel will attempt to move FORWARD, not rearward. The shot charge will hit the forcing cone, pushing AGAINST the barrel. The recoil will knock the weapon as a whole backwards, and thus everything on it will be pushed forwards due to the laws of inertia. This is how the ID system in other Benelli's functions, as well as why every keyed mount should be pushed FORWARD in the 1913 rail slots on a weapon system. As to a visual indicator, the USMC and civilian manual states "make sure no silver is showing". It doesn't get simpler than that. Regarding harmonic stability, this is the only thing I can think of that makes sense based on the physics of the system. It well could damp vibration. The accuracy from my M1014 with slugs is stunning (1-hole groups at 25 yards, hitting torso-sized targets at 200 yards once I find my range, if I can "guess" where they are behind the HUGE fsp, lol). That said, this was why I was curious if anyone had a high-mileage M1014 that an inner-receiver picture could be taken of, to see if the harmonics are not as kind to it as the M4S90's.

Did we ever determine the "why" as to why this was added to the M4S90? Do current USMC issue M41014's have it? Picture evidence for yay or nay? Anyone with a high-mile M1014 notice any abnormal wear in the receiver because it ISN'T there? Pix? The 2000 circ USMC manual shows it clearly not being there: http://www.homedefenseweapons.net/wp-content/uploads/Benelli-M4-USMC-M1014.pdf This clearly shows it sans said collar, taken 2009: This taken at Camp Pendleton, 2013, also clearly shows lack. This is entirely speculation, but the gun looks pretty "clean" to not be somewhat new: