Who else is working on their LRBHO install?

[Jeep297 20]

I don't get it? Seems like a ton of work, hacking, some guessing, and luck to get this thing barely working. Don't get me wrong, it's a cool feature and I have respect for those willing to try it but it seems like it's not worth all the hassle when it seems most of you now have a less reliable gun and a new piece added that I strongly question it's long term durability after being repeatedly bent/shaved. In fact, this thread has made me decide to stay away for now and I doubt I'll reconsider unless businesses like Tromix start offering it. Until then I'll let all you guys be the guinea pigs....but good luck though. Hope you guys figure it out, you're braver than I.

[hobbyshooter 59]

I want to see one after 1k rounds. I'm also waiting for gunfixer to post up his results/feelings on the part.

[raulcramirez 0]

After spending an entire weekend trying to install this gadget, I have come away disappointed and frustrated. I have tried everything other members have mentioned and I can only get it to work with some stick mags. It stopped dead in its track once I tried using MD drums or Promag drums. I wish advertisement for this product would have been more transparent -- that this LRBHO requires MAJOR modifications to get it to work, or worse, that it would cost you over $200 and a trip to Mr. Cadiz to make it work. This gadget my made my Saiga ultra unreliable, a feature that I am sure no one desires to have in their home defense weapon. I am in the process of trying to send these things back ,

[havok 21]

After spending an entire weekend trying to install this gadget, I have come away disappointed and frustrated. I have tried everything other members have mentioned and I can only get it to work with some stick mags. It stopped dead in its track once I tried using MD drums or Promag drums. I wish advertisement for this product would have been more transparent -- that this LRBHO requires MAJOR modifications to get it to work, or worse, that it would cost you over $200 and a trip to Mr. Cadiz to make it work. This gadget my made my Saiga ultra unreliable, a feature that I am sure no one desires to have in their home defense weapon. I am in the process of trying to send these things back ,

What problems are you having?

Post a pic of you LRBHO.

[dgyver 13]

Test firing did not go has hoped. Apparently the bolt had been hobbing into the LRBHO and not letting it move. Not sure if it was hardened enough. I only used a hand file and stone so I did not take the hardness out of it.

 

Anyway, I had to remove it and go back to what I know works. Got a 3-gun this coming weekend. Not giving up, just not working on it anymore this week.

[raulcramirez 0]

After spending an entire weekend trying to install this gadget, I have come away disappointed and frustrated. I have tried everything other members have mentioned and I can only get it to work with some stick mags. It stopped dead in its track once I tried using MD drums or Promag drums. I wish advertisement for this product would have been more transparent -- that this LRBHO requires MAJOR modifications to get it to work, or worse, that it would cost you over $200 and a trip to Mr. Cadiz to make it work. This gadget my made my Saiga ultra unreliable, a feature that I am sure no one desires to have in their home defense weapon. I am in the process of trying to send these things back ,

What problems are you having?

Post a pic of you LRBHO.

Havok,

My digital camera is broke and I can't post a pic. But I managed to whittle down that LRBHO to replicas of the pics posted by Gunfixer and other members on here. There are just too many variables to contend with on this gadget and I so I am throwing in the towel for now. I will wait for someone else to come up with a more concise LRBHO mechanism that does not require extensive guesswork.

Thanks for trying to help and I hope you are having much better luck than I did.

[theplastik 67]

I will wait for someone else to come up with a more concise LRBHO mechanism that does not require extensive guesswork.

 

As far as I have been told and can understand, this may not be possible due to CGW's patent on the item, unless the new patented item is significantly different in form and function from theirs.

[Caspian 32]

I will wait for someone else to come up with a more concise LRBHO mechanism that does not require extensive guesswork.

 

As far as I have been told and can understand, this may not be possible due to CGW's patent on the item, unless the new patented item is significantly different in form and function from theirs.

 

I think if someone makes one that works, it would be significantly different than CGWs.

 

As for patents, any modification of the original would be a patentable item. It wouldn't be hard to change a few features and avoid any lawsuit issues.

[Heath_h49008 442]

I will wait for someone else to come up with a more concise LRBHO mechanism that does not require extensive guesswork.

 

As far as I have been told and can understand, this may not be possible due to CGW's patent on the item, unless the new patented item is significantly different in form and function from theirs.

 

I think if someone makes one that works, it would be significantly different than CGWs.

 

As for patents, any modification of the original would be a patentable item. It wouldn't be hard to change a few features and avoid any lawsuit issues.

 

 

Cobra? A retrofit kit for the factory units off of the 109BHO? It's going to happen... maybe. If things go south with the ATF import ruling, and no domestic source is created, I wouldn't think too many people would invest in building new parts for a dead platform.

[Crusader 64]

After spending an entire weekend trying to install this gadget, I have come away disappointed and frustrated. I have tried everything other members have mentioned and I can only get it to work with some stick mags. It stopped dead in its track once I tried using MD drums or Promag drums. I wish advertisement for this product would have been more transparent -- that this LRBHO requires MAJOR modifications to get it to work, or worse, that it would cost you over $200 and a trip to Mr. Cadiz to make it work. This gadget my made my Saiga ultra unreliable, a feature that I am sure no one desires to have in their home defense weapon. I am in the process of trying to send these things back ,

This is why I think that there should be a saiga 12 upgrade rating scheme. The LRBHO device does indeed work, but it is at the graduate level. There is nothing on the package or the instructions that indicate that this upgrade should not be attempted by noobies.

[hobbyshooter 59]

The LRBHO device does indeed work, but it is at the graduate level.

 

In his threads he does recommend having people uncomfortable with the mod pay him to do it. Also, if someone wants to attempt it but screws it up he gives them 1 free replacement and they still have the option to have him install it.

 

Personally I want to see one of these DIY kits work with AGPs, Surefires, MD20, & a Promag 12. So far from what I'm reading nobody has successfully been able to make a gun equipped with this device run 100% with mixed mags & drums.

[Bridis 319]

Well I plan to make an attempt to get mine to work with several different mag. Yesterday I ordered a 12 round drum and a 12 round stick mag from CSS, along with a few other goodies. Man that place is fun to shop... Anyway, I plan to make a trip out to my testing site that has power. There I can shoot and tweak until I pass out or get this thing working.

[havok 21]

I tried a few spring's in mine today and even with a heavier spring in it still close's when drum is inserted. The heavy spring would not let the round lift up in the drum and would cause FTF sometimes only with drums, Sticks are still ok. Going to try and get my brother out tomorrow morning if he can to get video.

Edited April 5, 2011 by havok

[dgyver 13]

Ok I could not leave this alone. I had an issue with the device getting notched by the carrier hitting it. The device was RC 34 and carrier is RC 45. That explained it. Tom asked if I could harden it some. The contact area is now just under 50. A little harder than I wanted, but it will have to do for now. Going to install it again and test it before this weekend.

[Bridis 319]

Cool....

 

I will have a factory 5, (3) MD-20's, (1) Surfire 12 round and (1) Pro Mag 12. Even though I hate the thought of owning a Pro Mag, I wanted a wide range of test mags. I also don't think the spring is going to be the answer to the cycling issue. It's going to be the rise of the hawk's beak (kind of sounds like a movie title). I think we're going to have to be satisfied with notching the rear of the LRBHO so that the pressure againt the bolt carrier will hold the bolt open when a mag is loaded.

[PYRO 44]

Is it just me or is anyone else wondering why the maker of this part is not going into more detail on how they install these and get them tuned (other then being too busy)? The instructions that have been given are extremely incomplete. It seems like a lot of trial & error going on at the expense of the buyers. There are so many questions being asked and no real answers coming from the manufacture,,,,,,I seem to be have good results with installing the one I have, but I am just putting it together with educated guess work. It would be nice to know if I am doing the way it was designed to work. They said nothing about notching mags, or bending, or having to grind almost every edge,,,,,,,

 

BTW, thanks to birdis and the others for their input,,,,at least the buyers of this part have direction to go by.

[Bridis 319]

You're welcome.... But Tom has been participating in discussions on his forum.

 

This mod is not something that can be done over the phone or via the internet. It is a very specific modification to each individual gun. CGW can't tell you exactly what has to be done without seeing your gun. That's why they offer the installation option. Just imagine how many upset people there would be if CGW gave specific information on installation that didn't work for everyone.

[havok 21]

Cool....

 

I will have a factory 5, (3) MD-20's, (1) Surfire 12 round and (1) Pro Mag 12. Even though I hate the thought of owning a Pro Mag, I wanted a wide range of test mags. I also don't think the spring is going to be the answer to the cycling issue. It's going to be the rise of the hawk's beak (kind of sounds like a movie title). I think we're going to have to be satisfied with notching the rear of the LRBHO so that the pressure againt the bolt carrier will hold the bolt open when a mag is loaded.

 

I guess the notch in the lrbho would take away the "Deluxe" side release? If not shaped right. I did not cut the slot in my receiver yet, because the chrome release pin look's cheesy too me.

If this is the case then I will set mine up for all mag's to close the bolt on insertion. It seems like I could bend the whole HB side up a bit more but I do not want to fuck with what I got working right now.

[PYRO 44]

You're welcome.... But Tom has been participating in discussions on his forum.

 

This mod is not something that can be done over the phone or via the internet. It is a very specific modification to each individual gun. CGW can't tell you exactly what has to be done without seeing your gun. That's why they offer the installation option. Just imagine how many upset people there would be if CGW gave specific information on installation that didn't work for everyone.

 

I understand that each gun is slightly different, but who has installed more of this then anyone? I appreciate what you are sharing here but if Tom could put out the vid that he talked about with some tips from the designer hinmself, it would surely save people some time and save him from having to send out a second part to people. Oh well, I guess I expect to much, I'm just glad mine seems to be working, so far,,,,,,,,

[Gunfixr 76]

Well, I worked at one of these for several hours this evening, as I have several guns to put these in. So, to that end I started the install on another gun, milling the slot in the ejector block to fit the BHO.

I now have 3 of the BHOs modified, all in different ways. I think I have arrived at one of the reasons for so much difficulty at least.

I have one fitted to where the gun will feed absolutely flawlessly. However, it will never eject the fired rounds. Once you get the beak end up to where the round is allowed to come up to the feed lips of the magazine, as the gun is designed to work, it will not go down far enough to clear the rim of the round that is being pulled from the chamber for ejection.

When the beak end is down far enough so that it will go down and miss the rim of the round being pulled from the chamber, it will not go up far enough to allow the next round to sit against the magazine feed lips. Therefore, the gun is trying to feed rounds from a position that is lower than the original designed feed position. While the gun can be made to feed from this lower cartridge position, it will be more finicky, and will require tweaking to get it to work.

I haven't been able so far to find a setup that allows the best of both.

[havok 21]

Well, I worked at one of these for several hours this evening, as I have several guns to put these in. So, to that end I started the install on another gun, milling the slot in the ejector block to fit the BHO.

I now have 3 of the BHOs modified, all in different ways. I think I have arrived at one of the reasons for so much difficulty at least.

I have one fitted to where the gun will feed absolutely flawlessly. However, it will never eject the fired rounds. Once you get the beak end up to where the round is allowed to come up to the feed lips of the magazine, as the gun is designed to work, it will not go down far enough to clear the rim of the round that is being pulled from the chamber for ejection.

When the beak end is down far enough so that it will go down and miss the rim of the round being pulled from the chamber, it will not go up far enough to allow the next round to sit against the magazine feed lips. Therefore, the gun is trying to feed rounds from a position that is lower than the original designed feed position. While the gun can be made to feed from this lower cartridge position, it will be more finicky, and will require tweaking to get it to work.

I haven't been able so far to find a setup that allows the best of both.

 

What I did to get the HB to drop low enough not to catch the rim of the spent shell ejecting was taking about 1/16" off the back top of the LRBHO where it slide's on the carrier.

[dgyver 13]

Here is where I am. Cycles manually great. I could take a little more off the bottom of the HB since it can strip a round before the magazine is locked in. Even when slowly inserting the magazine it does not jam into the round. No problem ejecting. I was concerned that the HB was too high but it seems to work. It is bent upwards at the s-bend.

 

I did have to harden the back of device to eliminate the hobbing of the bolt into it and locking it. Ok I guess if you want it to be manual close. Now it barely leaves a witness mark.

 

Test firing in the next day or so. It is 1am and I do not think my neighbors would like it.

 

Engineering graph paper. 1 small square = .100"

[havok 21]

Here is where I am. Cycles manually great. I could take a little more off the bottom of the HB since it can strip a round before the magazine is locked in. Even when slowly inserting the magazine it does not jam into the round. No problem ejecting. I was concerned that the HB was too high but it seems to work. It is bent upwards at the s-bend.

 

I did have to harden the back of device to eliminate the hobbing of the bolt into it and locking it. Ok I guess if you want it to be manual close. Now it barely leaves a witness mark.

 

Test firing in the next day or so. It is 1am and I do not think my neighbors would like it.

 

Engineering graph paper. 1 small square = .100"

 

I like how your's has more meat at the neck then mine. I'am guessing you bent your's up before filing the underside of the HB? I filed the underside of mine before bending the HB side up.And that's how much had to come off to clear the mag and move up and down and it still hit the mag untill bending. I wish it said in the instruction's that the HB side would need bent up first before grinding/filing. I think they all will need the HB side bent up .

Edited April 6, 2011 by havok

[PYRO 44]

Has anyone been able to made this work without notching the mag?

[havok 21]

Has anyone been able to made this work without notching the mag?

Yes

The HB side will need bent up a good bit to clear the mag.

Edited April 6, 2011 by havok

[dgyver 13]

 

I like how your's has more meat at the neck then mine. I'am guessing you bent your's up before filing the underside of the HB? I filed the underside of mine before bending the HB side up.And that's how much had to come off to clear the mag and move up and down and it still hit the mag untill bending. I wish it said in the instruction's that the HB side would need bent up first before grinding/filing. I think they all will need the HB side bent up .

 

I did bend it prior to final finishing of the underside of the HB. Mine barely clear the HB when cycling quickly at this time but when pulled slowly it will catch on it. I will fix that, now that I understand the timing mechanics of this. The HB rise happens when the bolt carrier slides backwards and presses down on the top edge of the LRBHO. I cleaned up the stamping marks on the top edge of the LRBHO, removing minimal material. Also, I lowered the angle of the step on the top of THE LRBHO, it was really steep. I will remove some more material from the top edge of the LRBHO before the step to delay the rise of the HB a little more. The step can be moved back as well, if needed.

 

My mags are notched. Mine will not work properly without it.

[havok 21]

Ok I could not leave this alone. I had an issue with the device getting notched by the carrier hitting it. The device was RC 34 and carrier is RC 45. That explained it. Tom asked if I could harden it some. The contact area is now just under 50. A little harder than I wanted, but it will have to do for now. Going to install it again and test it before this weekend.

 

Just gave mine a look over and my carrier is starting to dig into the lrbho also.

[dgyver 13]

Ok I could not leave this alone. I had an issue with the device getting notched by the carrier hitting it. The device was RC 34 and carrier is RC 45. That explained it. Tom asked if I could harden it some. The contact area is now just under 50. A little harder than I wanted, but it will have to do for now. Going to install it again and test it before this weekend.

 

Just gave mine a look over and my carrier is starting to dig into the lrbho also.

 

Looks like it needs to be hardened more as well. Time to break out the torch, heat it until orange/red and quench in oil.

[hobbyshooter 59]

I haven't seen anyone post the RC of the factory BHO yet. The last thing you want to do is harden this LRBHO part more than the bolt carrier & factory BHO resulting in denting the carrier instead of the LRBHO. Granted, there is a lot more material in the carrier so I'd figure it would be harder to deform given the same hardness.

Edited April 6, 2011 by hobbyshooter

[dgyver 13]

I won't be able to check it until next week. I am off work until Monday after today. But the manual BHO is not normally subjected to the force the LRBHO has to endure.

 

The LRBHO is 4140 and with flame hardening expect high 40 to low 50 with an oil quench. It can get a little harder with extended soaking. Too short of torch heating will soften it.