Jump to content

Benelli M4 -- Interest in a true 4 point rail system?


stevenb

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 112
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

This project is still going strong. I recently took possession of a prototype top rail section. The designs are changing faster then we can keep up with as we refine the final design.

 

First, the maker has decided to go public with this project. This will be a product developed and produced by Mesa Tactical. You can find more information about their products here:

http://www.mesatactical.com/

Currently, this Benelli M4 project is called, "Floating Combat Accessory Mount, or FCAM system."

 

Here is the prototype that I have in my hands (EOTech 552 mounted):

prototype08s.jpg

http://www.citlink.net/~boehm/prototype08b.jpg

 

prototype07s.jpg

http://www.citlink.net/~boehm/prototype07b.jpg

 

prototype06s.jpg

http://www.citlink.net/~boehm/prototype06b.jpg

 

With the high number of revisions done to each segment, we've significantly reduced the weight of the unit. Final numbers aren't out yet though. I won't guess at a final weight yet since strength issues have to be determined.

 

prototype10.jpg

This is a current render of the target goal. We've yet to decide if we want to extend the rail past the end of the handguard further. The key issue is weight.

 

Now for how the unit assembles.

Notice on the image above the number of holes on the pink "handguard Assembly." The 5 larger holes shown offer a binding post to be mounted on the inside of the handguard. These 5 holes also serve as the placement for picatinny mounted rails. There are identical holes situated on the other side of the handguard assembly.

The "Top Rail Assembly" that is rendered in light green has slots milled into it that accept the binding posts mounted on the handguard assembly. These posts lift up into the top rail assembly, then slide to the rear aprox. a quarter to half an inch. The handguard assembly at that time seats against the receiver extension which the factory handguards mount to.

This is a simple fludic motion that allows you to lift the handguard assembly up into place, then back to lock into the top rail before the barrel is seated.

Once the barrel is seated against the front of the handguard assembly, the barrel extensions interface with the front of the handguard assembly and lock the rail into position.

 

Here is the disassembly process:

Here's how I would caption the steps showing how to field-strip a weapon with the FCAM installed:

 

1: Remove the magazine cap.

 

2-3: Remove the barrel. It slides through the FCAM assembly and off the weapon.

 

4-5: Remove the FCAM forend. Push the forend forward and then down and it slides off the FCAM top rail. Note that any forward shell holders, side rails or ventral rail are attached to the FCAM forend and are removed with this step.

 

6: Now the bolt and trigger group can be removed to completely field strip the weapon. The FCAM top rail remains attached to the receiver.

 

prototype12.jpg

 

--------------------------------

 

The small holes on the handguard assembly offer the user the option to mount Mesa Tacticals shell holder also. This is a similar unit as the one shown on the left side receiver.

 

More to come.

-Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks good thus far. Here's a vote for keeping the rail the same length as the foreend. I can't imagine needing any more top rail space than out to the edge of the foreend. Adds more weight for no real benefit at all, that I can see.

 

IOW's - the target render is right on the $$$.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, if anyone sees something they don't like, please explain your points. We're weighing any and all ideas.

 

I agree that the top rail doesn't need to be any longer then the handguard. If someone can think of a device that needs to be mounted that far up, please indicate what. Given the iron sights on the Benelli, no extreme forward iron sights are needed.

 

The only real reason the rail was extended so far out in the beginning was to simply support the side rails.

 

In this current design with the short top rail, side rails can be mounted as such:

prototype09.jpg

 

The only concern then is having an unsupported rail extending past the handguard. This leaves any device mounted this far forward subject to more damage since it is less protected.

 

Any comments/concerns about the design on how the handguard attaches to the top rail? The stand off bits are round, so you don't need to index them as if they were a hexhead shape to the rail. The rail groove is conformed to the shape of the bit. The number of these interlocking engagements is subject to change. Put it this way though, this design locks up my plastic prototype handguard rock solid. The same holes in which the screw threads into the standoff is the same one in which the side rails are mounted to. So none of those holes will be exposed allowing any gases to vent.

 

We were considering using the gas piston body to add extra strength to the handguard portion. You can see this groove in the photo above showing the inside of the handguard assembly. This groove seated up against the gas piston assembly within the M4.

During my trials shown above with the boat, thermal transfer issues became a problem. Also this design complicated proper indexing of the handguard. Too much stuff needed to be aligned inside the handguard to get a proper fit. So it was scrapped.

 

 

Different length picatinny rails will be offered, so you don't need to add unneeded weight or add unused rail space that can hang up in your gear.

 

The bottom rail will be optional much like the sides.

 

For those of you worried about removing the factory picatinny rail, I can tell you it was extremely easy to do. Very little effort was needed to break loose the 5 screws on the top of the receiver. These flat head screws will be replaced with quality torx bit screws.

 

Also, there is a rubber gasket installed on the inner side of the top rail where contact is made with the receiver on the side under the shell holder mounting plate. This gasket will protect your firearms finish. If I remember correctly, it measures aprox. .03", so the plate is not held very far off of the receiver.

 

Our goal weight for the project is under a pound. Right now we are under this weight when measuring the top rail, handguard assembly and the polymer handguard. Hardware and rails not taken into account nor the shell holders. This also doesn't calculate the weight that has been removed from the weapon to install this unit. You loose the factory handguards, receiver picatinny rail and mounting hardware. So you're not simply adding a pound of dead weight. Also, this weight isn't hanging ahead of the handguards which works against you using leverage, the mass is behind the handguard assembly along with the majority of any items you add.

Our next phase will be to test durability of the assembly. It's an interesting balance between durability/ridgidity and weight.

 

-Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, the side rails could be 75% of their illustrated length & still provide plenty of mounting room. That would reduce rail support issues. I'm not seeing how anything would need to be mounted that far forward - lights, lasers, whatever - on any of the rails. I keep stuff from extending beyond the end of the handguards on anything I put on rail mounts. Too front-end heavy otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That same rail can be moved back to any of the mounting holes. Also, shorter lengths will be offered as well.

I really think this is going to be the general design for the length. I'm leaning towards the weight savings over the support.

-Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by stevenb:

Hey everyone,

Like many with the Benelli M4, I've been seriously disappointed with the current aftermarket rail systems for this weapon. Currently I personally have the Sidearmor rail system. It leaves a lot to be desired though.

I have been in contact with an industry manufacturer in the firearm industry for a while now. They've developed a platform that is very impressive. I did throw in a tip here and there. ;)

 

This rail system once installed will make disassembly slightly easier then the factory stock handguards.

The top of the rail system is an uninterrupted rail from front to back. The top rail extends aprox. 4 inches past the front of the stock handguards. 3 and 9 o'clock rail positions are true to the barrel. Rails on the sides are optional, and different lengths can be used depending on the users needs.

The rail system offers a complete heatshield enclosing the barrel for the entire length of the railsys.

The system offers a free floated barrel assembly. No barrel clamps or bolting the rail to the weapon to prevent disassembly.

Exact materials are yet to be decided. Cost of molding/machining has to be taken into consideration before a final decision is made. As with final cost is yet to be determined.

Right now, a wiring plan is being laid so the user can properly route tape switches and keep them from being damaged. Something which no AR-15/M16 platform has offered.

Weight is a major issue, and is being dealt with in many different ways. There are a few other "features" that are being developed with this project that will make the weight penalty null.

Now, the only problem is the marketability of this item. There needs to be an interest in this item for the manufacturer to tool up to produce them. Crossing fingers and hoping for Military/LE contracts is risky.

We've all seen the rail system that is likely from Surefire that was at the Beretta booth at the NRA show, it was okay, but lacking.

 

The manufacturer will be watching this thread, (along with a few other places that I post it) So all you have to do is show some interest. When we get a little further with the design, the maker will probably let me post some renderings.

 

My personal interest?

A. I want one, it is by far the best design I've ever seen

B. Some of the design points I've helped with would be neat to see actually developed.

C. Resume material. tongue.gif

 

-Steve

 

[ 07-18-2005, 03:22 PM: Message edited by: Red Cobra ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Red Cobra,

Where'd you buy that HK in the other thread?

 

 

Given the general pricing of other rail systems on the market for the M4, I feel this system will compete strongly considering what you get.

 

No pricing has been finalized since we haven't finished the design yet.

 

-Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You might consider, not all that will be buying your system would have a 18.5" barrel and if the rail system is too long it will not be practical for special operations requiring shortened barrels (Benelli supplies a 14" barrel for this purpose). Just something to consider if you intend on marketing it to Military or Law Enforcement. Looks like a good product so far. But seems like it will be heavier than tolerable with all the ammo mounted on it.

 

IMHO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aj,

Thanks for the comments. With the newest revisions, the system will work with the 14" entry barrel quite nicely. I'd love to get one myself and make a SBS.

 

All the shell holders are optional, so the user can decide what they can deal with.

 

I'm extremely pleased with the weight of the assembly. Every time we turn around we find another way to lighten the unit without compromising the stability/strength of the system.

 

We recently came up with some ideas for the actual rails that people will wonder why no one ever did it before.

 

-Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
Originally posted by SpecOps66:

Hi everybody. I came in late (registered today) but would like to ask the ominous questions:

 

a.) Will it be for sale?

b.) When?

c.) For how much?

Just took a peek in this forum and found this thread bumped.

 

These systems are in production now. Here are some preliminary prices:

 

FCAM for Benelli M4 (black grip) $350.00

FCAM for Benelli M4 with 6 Shell Holder (black grip) $395.00

FCAM for Benelli M4 with 8 Shell Holder (black grip) $410.00

 

Each kit includes a ventral rail and a shorter side rail, in addition to a nylon forend grip. Additional rails and shell holder assemblies will also be available.

 

We will probably be shipping these in January, in time for the SHOT Show.

 

A little promo shot we did for the FCAM (as we call it):

 

fcam_benelli_promo_640.jpg

 

[ 11-17-2005, 03:00 PM: Message edited by: Mesa Tactical ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Mesa Tactical:

Just took a peek in this forum and found this thread bumped.

 

These systems are in production now. Here are some preliminary prices:

 

FCAM for Benelli M4 (black grip) $350.00

FCAM for Benelli M4 with 6 Shell Holder (black grip) $395.00

FCAM for Benelli M4 with 8 Shell Holder (black grip) $410.00

 

Each kit includes a ventral rail and a shorter side rail, in addition to a nylon forend grip. Additional rails and shell holder assemblies will also be available.

 

We will probably be shipping these in January, in time for the SHOT Show.

 

A little promo shot we did for the FCAM (as we call it):

 

fcam_benelli_promo_640.jpg

This product does not appear on the MT website. Where is it available?

 

Stevenb, could you describe the other additions/changes you've made to your m4.

 

[ 11-19-2005, 03:15 PM: Message edited by: Akoni ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure, I'm testing on my weapon a portion of the rail assembly. I'm using an extended top rail that is unsupported. This keeps the weight of the system down and uses the factory handguards. The unit also mounts the Mesa Tactical shell carrier. Far superior to any other carrier I've used. I trashed the Tacstar POS.

11.jpg

 

13.jpg

 

Currently, I am still using the Side Armor barrel clamp picatinny mount for my sling and laser assembly. The quick detach sling mount is distributed by Sidearmor as well.

The optic is a EOTech 552 holographic scope. The length of the rail allows me to properly mount it on the Benelli.

I'm fielding a 12mw Aimshot visible green laser mounted in two ARMS 22 low mount scope rings. I modified the factory handguards to accept the tape switch for the laser device.

 

The sling is a 3 point sling from Specter gear.

 

I have an oversized bolt release and charging handle from GG&G installed also.

 

The biggest hurdle for the FCAM system is to keep the weapons weight down. The M4 is already a heavy *******. Far heavier then a M1. Giving the ability to hang other heavy objects on a weapon can cause problems in itself.

The next issue is ergonomics of the system. I really like what I'm using at the moment since it uses the factory handguards which are top notch IMO.

 

The weights Mesa has shown me is very impressive and I hope to put one of their systems on my M4 when available.

 

-Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

I know I am a little late to this dance, but I am interestid in this rail system! I own an M1S90 and have a few questions:

 

1) Is this still on for production?

2) Is Mesa Tactical considering making a version that is compatable or that can be fitted to a M1S90?

 

TIA!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by officer960:

1) Is this still on for production?

2) Is Mesa Tactical considering making a version that is compatable or that can be fitted to a M1S90?

The system is in production and undergoing some teething pains. We had a version hidden under the table at the SHOT Show last month. We hope to iron out most of the problems by the end of this month and begin shipping in April or so.

 

Depending on the acceptance of the M4 FCAM, we might make one for the M2 Tactical, with a replacement nylon forend. Anything for the M2 Tactical will probably fit the M1, with some minor gunsmithing (for example, tapping a few holes in the receiver). We will not be producing anything for the M1 specifically, as it is no longer in production.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...