- Thread starter Nittynate
- Start date
I think that your satisfaction level will be dictated by how hard core you are about the clone aspect of it.
It has the wrong gas block, muzzle device, upper receiver and bolt carrier group, although they are all quality pieces.
On the other hand, it has the correct rail, charging handle and barrel.
If you can overlook the inaccuracies from a clone standpoint, it is a Geissele product, with a Daniel Defense barrel and therefore, completely badass.
It’s not at the top of my shopping list, I intend to purchase one eventually.
Cloning is a sickness. A very expensive sickness.
It has the wrong gas block, muzzle device, upper receiver and bolt carrier group, although they are all quality pieces.
On the other hand, it has the correct rail, charging handle and barrel.
If you can overlook the inaccuracies from a clone standpoint, it is a Geissele product, with a Daniel Defense barrel and therefore, completely badass.
It’s not at the top of my shopping list, I intend to purchase one eventually.
Cloning is a sickness. A very expensive sickness.
@Gasgun Not the correct charging handle, but a close commercial version. Geissele makes two versions of the Aero whaever handle.
@Nittynate The real reason to pre-order the Geissele URG is if you want to clone the USASOC M4. Otherwise, I would cancel the order and build upon a standard 9.5" or 13" Geissele rail, like the Mk4 or Mk8 or its variants the Mk13 and Mk14, and pick your finish.
One person's opinion.
@Nittynate The real reason to pre-order the Geissele URG is if you want to clone the USASOC M4. Otherwise, I would cancel the order and build upon a standard 9.5" or 13" Geissele rail, like the Mk4 or Mk8 or its variants the Mk13 and Mk14, and pick your finish.
One person's opinion.
I have one and it is awesome. Slapped a SF Socom RCII can on there and a 1-6 Razor HD II and I can hold MOA or so to 600 meters with Mk262 ammo.
IMO, since the URG-I is not clone correct while being relatively expensive, for the same money the Knights rifle offers more improvements and gets my vote.
A quick google search shows KAC 14.5 whole upper (P/N 31949) for sale $1,780. Sell the sights for $250 and you're less than $200 to the URG-I.
I have a hard time buying things with the intent of stripping parts and selling them to get $$ back, but I do see your point. The more I think about it the more I start leaning towards custom action instead (Impact). I don’t know if the marketing just really got to me!!
It seems expensive for what it is and I’m not sure the whole is greater than the sum of its parts in this case.
No I have a complete rifle from Geissele that they sent me for a training class I was running.
No I have a complete rifle from Geissele that they sent me for a training class I was running.
Very nice setup all-around. The MK16 looks like what the MK14 should have been from the start.
Did anybody watch the livestream Mr. Geissele did? He said he has some big surprises coming he will release about the URGI closer to release. Rethinking canceling order. I think he might surprise us all and make it clone correct!!
If you want to sell something go to the PX.
I have actually shot this upper quite extensively during testing in Quantico. One with the Geiselle Rails and another with FN rails. The uppers performed flawlessly through thousands of rounds and the Geiselle 2 stage SSF triggers were quite a nice upgrade from the standard M4 trigger. Also tested the ATACR 1-8 and it was an incredible upgrade over the TA31. I'd absolutely stand behind one of the URGI uppers and be satisfied knowing I had a very capable combat rifle.
Attachments
Cool. Are you at liberty to say what the testing was for? Would be nice to see the Corps fielding some newer gear.
For sure. Big Marine Corps snagged a wide group of 03xx MOS’s and we got either an M27 or the URGI rifles and some other equipment. We all wrote in depth AAR’s about how we felt which was a better rifle and optic. The IAR did not come out on top.
Interesting; there seems to be a lot of emotion bound up in the IAR at this point.
The ironic part is that by the end of the first week, guys with IAR’s we’re trying to get rid of them for a URGI as fast as they could. Also the IAR doesn’t feed AA51, the replacement for A059, at all. Not one time could you fire a mag of it without some feed problem.
Thanks for the feedback. No dog in the IAR concept but it is interesting to follow. Would also be interesting to see the data points that show it is a more effective replacement for an open bolt weapon in the automatic rifleman role. Almost like going back to the BAR, or more recently the heavy M16 SAW variants.
Looking at the Geissele industry section on another forum, there seems to be some issues with the MK12 gas block used on the URG1s contacting the rail and inducing POI shift, or other rail deflection issues causing the same but just with LAMs and BUIS.
Even with that, the URG1 concept seems like a cost effective upgrade solution to modernize existing rifles and regain some bolt/barrel service life with AB57.
Sorry I got a few questions for you. Thoughts on a LPVO vs red dot? Did test uppers have mk12 or G gas block? Any knowledge if either of these are going to be fielded?
Last edited:
I have no idea what the JSAC (joint small arms committee) will decide as far as fielding. In my personal opinion the NX8 or 1-8 ATACR was the nest solution for current issues with optics and marksmanship. The TA31 forces you to use “Kentucky windage” to aim and it’s “ballistic” reticle doesn’t match the different types of ammunition in the current inventory and doesn’t match AA51 either. You can’t peoperly make an adjustment as there aren’t any holdover marks and 500 on the range is somewhere between 400-500 on the reticle. Using BASIC mil adjustments was incredibly effective out to 600m with all shooters being able to achieve 1st or 2nd round impacts on a upper torso steel plate. The time limit for this was 12 seconds for a hit and 2 rounds maximum, all shooters achieved the standard. On 1x it allowed us to use it as a red dot and it was faster to acquire that the RCO reticle in all situations lethality (headshots and heart shots are all we considered lethal). I can’t give numbers but is was a much more dramatic increase in sheer lethality that you’d imagine, multiple hundreds of percents. Ergonomics also played a large part in the increase of the lethality, if you’ve ever shot with a RCO, you basically have to put your eye on the optic to get a clear sight picture. Personally on the rifle range, when the lens of my eye protection barely touches the glass, I’m in the correct position and eat every round to the face. There isn’t enough eye relief for use of the RCO to be practical and both the ATACR and NX8 allowed us to engage faster and easier in distance and CQB situations, it was great having eye relief that allowed me to have cheek weld (also had BCM buttstocks.) One other thing, the rail. During testing at night the IAR rail was found to have too much flexibility and would cause POI shift as much as 12 inches (at 100m) when placed on any sort of barrier. Both the Geissele and FN rails that we tested had no flex and could be leaned on with no POI shift. The PEQ16 was found to induce thermal shift that was slightly less than 12 inches but the rail didn’t matter (when firing approximately 60 rounds in a minute) due to slight changes in the polymer housing when exposed to heat. The NGAL (next generation aiming laser) from Eotech was lighter, had a brighter IR laser and with its aluminum was impossible to induce thermal shift in during our study. The last question you asked about the gas block; I honestly didn’t check but it was a DI rifle and not piston.
Thank you so much for your detailed response and knowledge, I’m sure many people including myself really appreciate the insight you provided.
There were a mix of G and MK12 gas blocks on the URG-I’s.
The USMC has chosen to stay with the IAR despite all data showing other options are significantly superior.
Have any pics of those groups?
Why do you need to see his grouping, out of curiosity? Do you have one or are you just trying to prove this guy wrong or something?
I'd love it to be true but groups close to 1moa at 600 meters with a 14.5" 556 sounds like bullshit and gives people unrealistic expectations. You asked.
I’ve shot the initial baseline groups for about 20 URGI’s. 3x10 round groups for a 30 shot composite have averaged bewteen 1.7-2.2 MOA at 100 yards with good lots of MK262. 600 yard, 10 round groups are about the same- I.e.- 10-15 inches.
I actually have a few groups from 30 shot composites that I’ll snap pictures of when I get home. Every individual rifle was a little different as far as accuracy. Mine was one of the more accurate around 1.6 MOA and others were as high as 2.3 MOA. During our testing we did zero paper shooting at 600 yards and only shot steel.
Did you guys do any drop testing?
There are official reports concerning the fragility of the rails and massive POI shift from moderate drops. Geissle is aware of this
There are official reports concerning the fragility of the rails and massive POI shift from moderate drops. Geissle is aware of this
No there isn't. That was some wild internet rumor. Geissele is aware of the rumor and will refute the validity of it.
Nobody asked you there little fanboy
We beat the living **** out of those rifles and there was zero POI shift during the night or during the day with either Geiselle rails or the Fn tails. The HK rails could not say the same, as any pressure on the rails caused severe POI shift. The picture is from shooting 15 rounds off the Geiselle rail at night, sitting, at 100yards. This was a timed event and 60 seconds, sitting unsupported.
