FM-9 9mm Belt Fed AR-15/M-16 Upper Receiver

[A&S Conversions]

Like this? Been mulling it over..

Anyone want to prototype one up? It's going to be a few months before I can consider working on this..

Looks good, I just wonder where does the carrier go?

Scott

 

[theduke]

? And no a belt fed that uses a mag doesn't exist.

The point of a belt fed is to get away from the constraints of mags. :dunno Or Not

.

Doesn't the Shreik ( or whatever there are @ least 2 models similar) use belts and/or mags?...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ARES-16™ Small Arms Family
The ARES-16™ small arms family represents a military grade, state-of-the-art advance in compact, lightweight and mission-configurable weapons. The ARES-16™ features a unique and patented receiver group from which a variety of military firearms can be configured including

Sub-Carbine
Carbine
Assault Rifle
Designated Marksman Rifle
Magazine-Fed Assault Machine Gun
Belt-Fed Assault Machine Gun
Dual-Feed Assault Machine Gun
Belt-Fed Mounted Light Machine Gun...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

info from...http://www.aresdefense.com/?page_id=126



Granted were talking about a 9mm upper in this thread ...but yes there is a belt & mag fed combo upper.

 

[Vegas SMG]

I'm not sure there's enough people who'll put their money where their mouth is for a belt fed "MAC". Alliance Armament didn't have people lining up and fighting to buy their 5.56 and 7.62x39 uppers and I found that very surprising. They sold dozens, not thousands or even hundreds of uppers for the M-10 and M-11/9 platform.

I own a RR M-16 and I have zero interest in a 9mm beltted upper. The wear is one reason and 9mm in a belt gun just doesn't trip me trigger. All that linking to shoot 9mm?! No thanks. Same holds true with any beltted MAC upper. I believe the FO 9mm beltted platform appeals to a very limited number of people who own an M-16 and I wouldn't be surprised if they sell half to semi auto AR-15 fan boys. Even if I was a RDIAS or RLL owner I doubt my interest would be strong enough to warrant its purchase. Different strokes.

 

[rhouston8]

^^ yup. I guess different strokes. I have the polar opposite view and am pumped about a 9mm Beltfed option on my FA AR platform. I didn't buy a 556 mac upper for a few reasons. #1: I didn't ever see enough of them in the wild to gauge their reliability, #2 it wasn't drop in and you basically had to send your mac to them to "fit" ,#3: I think the mac receiver was mildly but permanently modified ( hole drilled maybe?), and #4 to a lesser degree the fact that I already had 556 beltfed.

The FM9 doesn't seem to have those issues but I'll know for sure after I get it and eval it.

 

[rybread]

Looks good, I just wonder where does the carrier go?

Scott

Heck if I know- this was just a cut and paste! There would be several issues to overcome.. maybe it would need to sit higher to allow for a regular carrier/buffer tube?

 

[SwampMan]

Like this? Been mulling it over..

Anyone want to prototype one up? It's going to be a few months before I can consider working on this..

Very interesting concept. So it would be an adapter to allow you to install standard AR15 uppers onto your MAC lower. It would need to use an AR style buffer tube & stock. It would also need to use a modified bolt carrier, like the one that AA developed for the Sabre in order to allow it to run open bolt.

If someone was to prototype it, they could buy an 80% AR lower, then cut out the bottom section to make room for the MAC lower. If they could get that to mount up, then the trick would be to get a bolt carrier system to work.

If someone could pull this off, then you would be talking about a cut up 80% lower and a custom bolt carrier. Someone could put that on the market for about $500.

Wow, such a thing really would be the holy grail for MAC owners. You could run a bunch of different calibers full auto using temporary upper swaps.

 

[GunMD]

It's been a year. An feedback? I'm especially wondering about reliability and if your RR has worn at all.

Thanks!

 

[rhouston8]

No appreciable wear on my host lower. But I'm using an RLL not a RR lower.
Big problem though. Broke an ear off my RLL despite always using a KNS protector. The protector was bent/ chewed upon.
Had to send RLL off to M60 Joe for a multihundred $ repair ( which looks great). Haven't tested the repaired RLL yet. Scared. And scared to try it again in the modified FM-9. Full disclosure is that the KNS protector I believe was a knock off product and not a true KNS made one. Prob. Soft metal. Dunno.

Had maybe 5k rounds through it.

 

[Gaujo]

Disturbing.

 

[Esox]

No appreciable wear on my host lower. But I'm using an RLL not a RR lower.
Big problem though. Broke an ear off my RLL despite always using a KNS protector. The protector was bent/ chewed upon.
Had to send RLL off to M60 Joe for a multihundred $ repair ( which looks great). Haven't tested the repaired RLL yet. Scared. And scared to try it again in the modified FM-9. Full disclosure is that the KNS protector I believe was a knock off product and not a true KNS made one. Prob. Soft metal. Dunno.

Had maybe 5k rounds through it.

As a fellow RLL owner, I'd be very interested to see any pictures you might have of the RLL before it was repaired to help diagnose what went wrong. Also, did you have any additional clearance machined out of the rear pocket of the receiver?

Thanks,
Esox

 

[rhouston8]

yes. the lower was custom set up for the fm-9/rll/kns -style protector. Shooting 115gr reloads. Anderson lower with pocket cut for RLL + protector. Can't remember if I was using the weight in the bolt when it happened or now. Prob. not. Think it ran better without the weight .

here's the pic. Looks like both ears broken actually.

 

[rhouston8]

^^^sorry. That's a stock image from m60joe's site and not my own rll. uploaded the wrong pic. I had used that pic in comm. with m60joe to show him what exactly was wrong with my link.

It was just ONE ear on mine that was broken. Appearance looked exactly like either of the ears in the above pic.

sorry for the confusion.

 

[FreedomJosh]

I have not received any feedback from customers about damage to registered receivers. This is also the first I am seeing/hearing about damage to a lightning link but then again not all feedback gets sent my way lol that's why I try to come on the forums. Sorry to hear about the RLL glad to hear it was able to be fixed

 

[Esox]

It was just ONE ear on mine that was broken. Appearance looked exactly like either of the ears in the above pic.

I don't own the belt fed 9mm upper yet (still saving money for one), but it seems really odd that an ear would break off using that system since from what I have read the belt feed mechanism slows down the bolt prior to going into battery. In a "typical" 9mm blowback setup this rapid bolt closure is what has been thought of as the culprit for breaking off ears. Another possible reason could be the ears "banging" on the rear pocket of the receiver if it hadn't had extra room milled out.

Too bad you didn't take pictures of the RLL or even better with the protector on it. I'd like to figure out what went wrong.

 

[rhouston8]

^ I have pics. Somewhere. Will require some digging.

Yeah I didn't mention it to you Josh. I'm not blaming anyone or stirring up crap. It could have been any # of things.
I'll probably try it out again carefully and see how it goes. I'm just gun shy at the moment. Mostly I'm surprised that the protecter didn't prevent the ear fracture.

 

[Concorde]

We have an FM9 in full auto for demo at our shop with a standard AR setup with a RDIAS, tripod mounted with spade grip trigger. No issues.

Super fun and always brings happy smiles to participants.

 

[atakk]

Anyone making this Spade grip for Mac11's? Would be nice on my SABRE556.

 

[Junkcollector]

I don't own a Lightning Link myself, but after seeing talk about them breaking here is some info I have found. Don't know if this info could be used to make repair so the ears don't break.

 

[root]

I'm not sure there's enough people who'll put their money where their mouth is for a belt fed "MAC". Alliance Armament didn't have people lining up and fighting to buy their 5.56 and 7.62x39 uppers and I found that very surprising. They sold dozens, not thousands or even hundreds of uppers for the M-10 and M-11/9 platform.

Let that be a lesson to the next vendor that thinks they are going to FUCK customers time and time again.

Rich

 

[Esox]

I don't own a Lightning Link myself, but after seeing talk about them breaking here is some info I have found. Don't know if this info could be used to make repair so the ears don't break.

Neither of those drawings represent the dimensions of a registered transferable lightning link from S.W.D. I think those drawings are on the interwebs for people looking for a felony conviction in making their own. Nevertheless, the bottom picture does represent an improved design in which the 'ears' are replaced with a closed contact area. It is probably not kosher to weld the ears shut in the eyes of the ATF, and really shouldn't be needed if the KNS or Andrews Armory RLL protector is doing its job since the paddle should not even be contacting the ears...which is why it is so strange to bust an ear off while using the protector.