UZI Talk Forums

View Poll Results: Full auto receiver type you prefer?

Voters
102. You may not vote on this poll
  • IMI

    59 57.84%
  • Vector

    43 42.16%
+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 56

Thread: What registered receiver do you prefer? IMI or Vector?

  1. #1
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    176

    What registered receiver do you prefer? IMI or Vector?

    I'm just interested in seeing what you guys prefer. A Vector Uzi, or a converted IMI with the blocking bar removed (Everything else can be done later if it isn't already)? I prefer the IMI, but am interested in hearing other people's opinions.

  2. #2
    UZI Talk Life Member
    Z06's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    2,708
    I voted with my $.
    "For civilians, semi-auto is like sex with your wife. Full auto is like sex at the Playboy mansion. They serve different purposes." -RoverDave
    President & Founder : UZI Shooters of America

  3. #3
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    56
    Vector has the best quality of them all. Yes, guys will bluster like crazy and say that "if it's not IMI it's not an Uzi", but you're talking about a converted gun, here. Read this for the whole scoop:

    http://www.kellyenterprises.net/the-vector-uzi.html

    Yes, I dearly love my full sized Vector Uzi, purchased new for $2,995.

  4. #4
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    250
    I love my Vector also. However, most of the people who's opinions I respect on this board will vote for a properly converted IMI.

  5. #5
    UZI Talk Life Member
    greenpeas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    MO
    Posts
    943
    I have an IMI so they're obviously the best. How can anything be better than the real thing?

  6. #6
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    1,795
    Yeah, but the Vectors started out as machine guns, not semi-autos, so they must be better. Besides, I have one.

  7. #7
    Administrator
    RoverDave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    ND
    Posts
    14,421
    Quote Originally Posted by tsmgguy View Post
    Vector has the best quality of them all.
    As I've said in the past, I don't have anything against Vectors or the people who own and enjoy then. I have a FA Vector myself and I shoot it regularly. And I don't think that it has to be IMI to be a real UZI. But I just have to point out that this is one statement that is factually incorrect. Every full auto Vector is built on out-of-spec Group Industries receivers. Vector did a lot of work to overcome the spec issues and were able to minimize the impact on the functionality of the gun, but it's hard to claim that an out-of-spec gun is the best quality of them all. That's just nonsense. They are good guns, they were a tremendous deal when they came out, their warranty was a real benefit, they take away the uncertainty some people have about conversions, and some people believe the hardened receivers are an advantage. But best quality of them all? Definitely not.

    The good news is that everyone wins in this poll. The only people who lose are the ones that don't have any UZI at all.

  8. #8
    Registered User thompson4433's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    1,023
    These threads are kind of pointless.

    Everyone's just going to say that whatever they personally own is the best.

    its a conversion job versus a knock-off

    some guys try to claim that the IMI guns are better than the vectors, but you don't notice anybody paying extra for the IMIs, more like the opposite (slightly)

    It really doesn't matter to me, I'd take either

  9. #9
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    56
    Quote Originally Posted by RoverDave View Post
    Every full auto Vector is built on out-of-spec Group Industries receivers. Vector did a lot of work to overcome the spec issues and were able to minimize the impact on the functionality of the gun, but it's hard to claim that an out-of-spec gun is the best quality of them all. That's just nonsense.
    Really? Since that allegation hasn't appeared in any kind of authoritative print, where did you hear it? Did you even read the link?

    http://www.kellyenterprises.net/the-vector-uzi.html

  10. #10
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    1,795
    Bah -- Dave just had a bad experience with Vector and bashes them every chance he gets.

    Here's the proof that Vectors are the best -- right from the internet:

    Finally, let me take all the suspense out of your mind. I have carried an UZI in a war zone for months (1996-97 in Bosnia, Croatia and Serbia) and also own the IMI version. While not being a total expert, I do have sufficient knowledge and real world experience to fairly test/evaluate one. Saying this, and with no financial interest in Vector Arms, I can unequivocally state the tested Vector UZI is the finest one I have ever used. Period

  11. #11
    Administrator
    RoverDave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    ND
    Posts
    14,421
    Quote Originally Posted by tsmgguy View Post
    Really? Since that allegation hasn't appeared in any kind of authoritative print, where did you hear it? Did you even read the link?

    http://www.kellyenterprises.net/the-vector-uzi.html
    You mean the link that you include in nearly every one of your posts (and that does not fully reproduce the article, does not cite the original publication and probably was done without permission from the author) or the copy of it that I put here in the UZI Talk library years ago, complete with all photos, a proper reference to the original publication and permission from the author? Yes, I have read it. Have you? Even this article mentions some of the corrections that Vector had to make to the out of spec Group Industries receivers. You can also reference the booklet D&D Sales provides for the Group Industry receivers they sell. It details all of the corrections you have to make to assemble the receivers into a working gun. More interestingly, I have spent a considerable amount of time talking directly to Ralph Merrill (owner of Vector) and to Mike Brown (owner of Group Industries) and they both readily admit that the Group Industries receivers were not stamped to spec. As part of the UZI Talk shoot #3, I organized a tour of Vector Arms for our members. At the tour, Ralph discussed some of the problems they had with the Group Industries receivers and he showed how they had to deal with them.

    So as you can see, these are not allegations at all. They are pretty commonly understood facts. You really need to do a little more research before you pass yourself off as an Internet expert.

  12. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,413
    I was awaiting a good smackdown.
    I am not disappoint.



    For the record I like my vector SMG just fine. It's reliable, I don't know how else to quantify liking one brand over another, but have not fired an IMI SMG. The welds haven't broken. It runs like crap in .22. Guns fault? Probably.

  13. #13
    Registered User thompson4433's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    1,023
    Yeah, but what does that have to do with vector smgs?

    The Group receivers were out of spec and vector knew about it and corrected the problem when they built theirs.

    They used the same flats but it's a completely dffernent gun made by a completely different company.

    it's just like SWD using the leatherwood TX MAC flats

    Aside from people endlessly bickering and fencing over such stuff there's no practical difference, they all sell for the same prices.

    I read all this crapola before I bought my UZI and came to the conclusion that nobody had any actual useful data.


    Quote Originally Posted by RoverDave View Post
    You mean the link that you include in nearly every one of your posts (and that does not fully reproduce the article, does not cite the original publication and probably was done without permission from the author) or the copy of it that I put here in the UZI Talk library years ago, complete with all photos, a proper reference to the original publication and permission from the author? Yes, I have read it. Have you? Even this article mentions some of the corrections that Vector had to make to the out of spec Group Industries receivers. You can also reference the booklet D&D Sales provides for the Group Industry receivers they sell. It details all of the corrections you have to make to assemble the receivers into a working gun. More interestingly, I have spent a considerable amount of time talking directly to Ralph Merrill (owner of Vector) and to Mike Brown (owner of Group Industries) and they both readily admit that the Group Industries receivers were not stamped to spec. As part of the UZI Talk shoot #3, I organized a tour of Vector Arms for our members. At the tour, Ralph discussed some of the problems they had with the Group Industries receivers and he showed how they had to deal with them.

    So as you can see, these are not allegations at all. They are pretty commonly understood facts. You really need to do a little more research before you pass yourself off as an Internet expert.
    Last edited by thompson4433; 10-24-2012 at 12:40 AM.

  14. #14
    Administrator
    RoverDave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    ND
    Posts
    14,421
    Quote Originally Posted by Philip View Post
    For the record I like my vector SMG just fine.
    I like mine too. I use it all the time. The Vector is a great gun and they were a great addition to the full auto market. I think we're all grateful that Group Industries made the receivers and that Vector took on the project to finish them. Without them there would be far fewer UZIs on the market and a lot of people wouldn't have the chance to own one. (Plus it allows me to leave the IMI in the safe where it won't get banged up.)


    Quote Originally Posted by thompson4433 View Post
    They used the same flats but it's a completely dffernent gun made by a completely different company.
    No, I wouldn't call it a completely different gun. They each used different parts, but Vector used the same receivers and learned how to build the guns from Group Industries. Vector built them exactly the same way, and worked around the spec issues in the exact same way that Group Industries did. Receiver related issues are pretty much the same between the two of them.


    Quote Originally Posted by thompson4433 View Post
    Aside from people endlessly bickering and fencing over such stuff there's no practical difference, they all sell for the same prices.
    Price is similar, but there are practical differences due to the receiver construction. Some are just cosmetic. For example, the space between the front and rear sight ears was too short, so the top cover would not fit. To correct this, both companies chopped off the back edge of front sight ears. It looks a little retarded, but it's just cosmetic. Other receiver problems were functional but easily fixed. For example, the sides of the receiver were too tall and had to be milled off. But the big problem is that the round section of the receiver (under the forearm) was stamped at an upward angle, instead of parallel to the back of the receiver like the original IMI. That can't be fixed in the assembly process. As a result, Vector had to weld in the trunnions at a bit of an angle to compensate the the skewed receiver. It was difficult for Vector to weld the trunnion in exactly the right alignment. Added to that was the warping that occurred when the receivers were heat treated. (All of this was identical for both companies.) So what's the practical difference? For one, many of the Vectors had barrel alignment issues. Anyone who was a member here 8-10 years ago remembers seeing lots of posts about guns needing to go back to Vector because they wouldn't feed properly, and that was generally due to barrel alignment. It was fixable and then the gun generally ran great, but people didn't like shipping their brand new NFA gun out for repairs. My Mini UZI had to go back to Vector twice before they got the alignment right. Another problem caused by barrel alignment is running .22 kits. Back in Vector's heydays, Rex said that 50% of their service was getting .22 kits to run. The biggest problems with the kits was not the kit itself, but was due to barrel alignment. A slight misalignment wouldn't show up with 9mm, but would become a problem with the weaker .22 round. My .22 kits run perfectly in my IMI but the same kits run less reliably in the Vector because the Vector is slightly out of alignment. It doesn't show up in 9mm but does in .22.

    Other small problems have cropped up on Vectors. For example, the Israeli tri-rail replacement forearm fits great on IMI guns but is hit or miss on the Vectors. Many people found that the folding stock they got with their Vector didn't lock up tightly when the stock was folded into the gun. On my full size Vector, the stock lug is too wide and surplus wooden stocks don't fit well, even though they fit fine on an IMI.

    So yes, there are practical differences. Nothing you can't work around or live with, but the problems can't be denied. People shouldn't be offended by it. "It is what it is", as they say.

  15. #15
    Registered User thompson4433's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    1,023
    Interesting

    I'm waiting on a stamp for a supposedly unfired vector smg.

    Should I send it off to vector when i get it?

  16. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,413
    Quote Originally Posted by thompson4433 View Post
    Interesting

    I'm waiting on a stamp for a supposedly unfired vector smg.

    Should I send it off to vector when i get it?
    For what? If it needs service for some observed problem I'd just go to richard at bwe. I don't know that my trunnion is or isn't out of spec but I'm tempted to send mine off to get more .22 reliability,.. though i do think its mostly a mag problem.

  17. #17
    Administrator
    RoverDave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    ND
    Posts
    14,421
    Quote Originally Posted by thompson4433 View Post
    Interesting

    I'm waiting on a stamp for a supposedly unfired vector smg.

    Should I send it off to vector when i get it?
    No, definitely not. The majority of the Vectors shot just fine when new. You might be wasting time and money if you just send it off. Use the gun and see how it runs. If there is a problem, I'd send it to Vector since they should do warranty work for free on it (unless their service policy has changed.) Richard at BWE does excellent work but why pay for something that would be a warranty issue (if it exists at all).

  18. #18
    Administrator
    RoverDave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    ND
    Posts
    14,421
    Quote Originally Posted by Philip View Post
    For what? If it needs service for some observed problem I'd just go to richard at bwe. I don't know that my trunnion is or isn't out of spec but I'm tempted to send mine off to get more .22 reliability,.. though i do think its mostly a mag problem.
    You're right that a lot of the .22 problems are related to mags these days. I don't think the Black Dog mags are as consistent or reliable as the old metal mags that Vector sold.

  19. #19
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    1,795
    Quote Originally Posted by thompson4433 View Post
    Interesting

    I'm waiting on a stamp for a supposedly unfired vector smg.

    Should I send it off to vector when i get it?
    Just shoot it first. If there's problems, then get it fixed. I bought mine NIB and its worked 100% since the first day I shot it.

  20. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,413
    Quote Originally Posted by RoverDave View Post
    You're right that a lot of the .22 problems are related to mags these days. I don't think the Black Dog mags are as consistent or reliable as the old metal mags that Vector sold.
    I'm sure you saw the thread on the umarex .22 mag I made fit, that ran better for me than the BDM.

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts


Please consider becoming an UZI Talk Supporter.