Do you own a GLOCK pistol? A 1911? Would you prefer a GLOCK carbine? Well MechTech Systems of Kalispell, Montana has a C.C.U. for you. That’s Carbine Conversion Unit (i.e. carbine conversion kit) and it does just that — converts your semi-auto pistol into a carbine with an ATF-legal 16-inch barrel, a stock, and rail space for red-dot optics and/or accessories. It isn’t a firearm, which means it can ship right to your door, all without changing the federal classification of your handgun. Sounds great on paper, but does it actually work? . . .
http://youtu.be/IL24ni91RAE
Spoiler alert: Yes, it works. Wonderfully. Quality, accuracy, reliability … all awesome. You’ll still find a full review below, but the dozen-word version is that any GLOCK, Springfield XD/XD(m) or 1911 owner should have at least one MechTech CCU in their stable.
How It Works
MechTech’s carbine conversion unit is a new “upper” for your pistol. In the case of GLOCK, this means small frame (9mm, .40 S&W, or .357 Sig) or large frame (10mm or .45 ACP) — click here for the list of compatible frames. Perhaps the coolest benefit here is that the small or large GLOCK frames are identical regardless of caliber, so you can get a CCU in any or all calibers that match your frame. In my case, I chose to use my G20SF and MechTech was kind enough to loan me both a 10mm and a .45 ACP CCU. The 1911 offers quite a lot of same-frame caliber swapping ability as well, so your .45 may work with a 1911 CCU in 9mm, .38 Super, .40 S&W, 10mm, .45 ACP, or .460 Rowland chamberings. EDITOR’S NOTE: MechTech doesn’t cut chambers for .45 GAP, and due to low demand intends to scale back its available 1911 calibers to .45 ACP, .45 Super, and .460 Rowland.
Field strip that GLOCK or 1911 and the frame is ready to install. In the case of a GLOCK, you’ll need to pop the MechTech Feed Ramp onto the locking block.
During assembly it’s held in place by a small magnet, and once the pistol frame and CCU are joined it’s physically pinned in by the CCU’s barrel.
Lock the CCU’s bolt back by pushing the charging handle into the cutouts in the channel:
Line up the slide rails with the notches in the CCU’s body:
Finally, push the frame forwards until it slightly compresses the rubber bump stop at front and the factory locking tabs click up into place, locking the frame to the CCU in a very factory GLOCK-like manner.
Et voila, you have a carbine!
Functionally, the MechTech Carbine is a straight blowback-operated unit like nearly all pistol-caliber carbines. It utilizes a heavy bolt to slightly retard and to control rearward movement, and it also has a nice, thick, rubber recoil/bolt stop at the rear.
Extractor, ejector, and firing pin are all contained in the CCU, of course.
Legality
In this case it is legal to convert your pistol into a rifle configuration and then back into a pistol configuration. The BATFE ruled:
Held further, a firearm, as defined by 26 U.S.C. 5845(a)(3) and (a)(4), is not made when a pistol is attached to a part or parts designed to convert the pistol into a rifle with a barrel of 16 inches or more in length, and the parts are later unassembled in a configuration not regulated under the NFA (e.g., as a pistol).
While it’s specifically illegal to turn a rifle into a pistol, in the case of the conversion kit, the “firearm” part of the system is a pistol and was manufactured as a pistol. Connecting it to the CCU isn’t altering the design of the pistol itself at all, it’s only temporarily switching to rifle configuration via an attachment. No permanent change or redesign is made. ATF ruling is here and further explanation is on MechTech’s forum here.
Build
As near as I can tell, the body of the MechTech CCU is a powder-coated piece of conduit or other pipe. It’s basically what I was expecting of the entire build of this thing, but all of the interior components pleasantly surprised me with materials quality and machining quality above and beyond what I thought I’d find.
Most of the components that are machined by MechTech and added inside of that pipe body are made of high-polished steel, including the entire bolt channel insert, the bolt, etc. The heavy-profile, button-rifled barrel is stainless steel. The machining is really top notch, and I’ve done a disservice to MechTech by taking my photos after shooting and dirtying up the CCUs.
I was truly very pleased and a bit surprised to see and feel the quality going on inside of the CCU here.
The barrel alone looks like something that would cost a healthy portion of the CCU’s entire MSRP were it an aftermarket AR-15 upgrade part.
Customize This
As you can see in the lead photos, there are different stocks and different rails on each of my CCUs. One has a flash hider and one does not. MechTech offers a whole bunch of custom configuration options and accessories that can be added to the base model CCU. Primarily, you’ll want to choose your accessory rail configuration and your butt stock. Although I really dig the telescoping wire stock with nice rubber buttpad that’s on my 10mm CCU, the option to order it with an M4 buffer tube adapter probably wins out as it opens up near-infinite options for any stock that fits an AR-15.
I do like the “Mini Rail Kit” that’s on the 10mm one, as it provides a full-length top rail with a comfortable grip on bottom plus some short rail sections out front, while weighing less than the “Quad Rail” on the .45 ACP example. When I order up my own, I may go for the standard config (six-inch rail section above the action) plus the “Mini Quad” out front to leave my options open but further reduce weight.
Unfortunately, MechTech does not offer barrel threading (muzzle devices from them are pressed on). Too many size and pitch possibilities to tool up to accommodate, basically. I do wish they’d consider threading for the three most popular pistol sizes, though: 1/2×28, 16×1 LH, and 0.578×28. This would cover most or all of the calibers that can be shot through the CCU, and definitely covers the two subsonic calibers (9×19 and .45 ACP). Purchasers would pay for this service. I know I would. Many do it later, of course, and simply take their CCUs to a local gunsmith or machine shop.
Disassembly
So there’s really no “field stripping” of the CCU. For the most part, you’re expected to clean what you can access with the bolt forwards and/or locked to the rear. This does give you the ability to clean the barrel and clean and lube most of the moving parts and friction surfaces. As it’s a straight blowback action, it doesn’t really require the level of cleaning that most firearms with locking mechanisms are going to need.
That said, it would be nice if a simple field strip were possible. When you decide you want to take the parts out, you have to truly disassemble the CCU and it isn’t quick or something you could do “in the field” without tools and some time.
Accuracy
Although all CCUs in all calibers receive 1:16 inch twist rifling, I found accuracy to be exemplary in both the slow-moving .45 ACP and screamingly velocious 10mm (more on 10mm velocity out of a 16-inch bbl soon). Where I set up in the woods I was only able to stretch out to 50 yards, but I hit my FBI Q target, which was at a 45-degree oblique angle and therefore even smaller than its full 12-inch width, with boring ease and regularity from standing.
On a sandbag rest at the indoor range, five-shot groups from the .45 ACP at 25 yards looked like this:
I did not officially accuracy test the 10mm CCU, but thought it was shooting just a tad tighter based on my time in the woods. The one five-shot group I managed to put on paper was ruined by a shooter-induced flyer:
10mm from a 16.25-inch Barrel
Thanks to one trip to the woods without a 9-volt battery for the chronograph, two with lousy weather — skies so dark my chronograph wouldn’t read — plus one failed attempt to get chronograph readings under the fluorescent lights at the indoor range, and then the pending arrival (and then arrival) of the wife’s and my second little girl when the weather finally took a turn for sunny skies, I was totally unable to get chronograph readings for over a month. This simply would not do, as I know 10mm gains substantial velocity out of a longer barrel and I just had to quantify that for myself and for y’all.
In a moment of brilliance (I have low standards for myself), I hit up ShootingTheBull410, who arguably has the very best ballistics testing channel on YouTube. Of course he’d like to borrow the 10mm CCU for some ballistics testing! With MechTech’s blessing, I shipped it off to STB410 along with a sampling of ammo and my G20 “upper” so he could get factory velocity readings with the use of his G21 frame. Keep an eye on TTAG here and on STB’s channel in the future if you’re as excited to see gel block testing of 10mm through the MechTech CCU as I am. For the time being, here’s what STB saw for velocity gains:
Factory Barrel (4.6-inch bbl) Averages:
Buffalo Bore 180 grn JHP: 1,292 fps — 667 ft-lbs
Underwood 220 grn Hard Cast Lead (my woods carry load): 1,134 fps — 628 ft-lbs
DoubleTap 165 grn Bonded JHP: 1,301 fps — 620 ft-lbs
MechTech Upper (16.25-inch bbl) Averages:
Buffalo Bore 180-grain JHP: 1,603 fps — 1,026.8 ft-lbs
Underwood 220-grain HCLFP: 1,359 fps — 902 ft-lbs
DoubleTap 165-grain JHP: 1,630 fps — 973.2 ft-lbs
Bonus: .40 S&W Liberty “HALO Point” (now “Civil Defense”) 60-grain HP: 2,569 fps — 879 ft-lbs
Average velocity increase (not including the Liberty load) was 288.3 fps and the average kinetic energy increase was a whopping 329 ft-lbs (51.54% increase). Probably time to go hog hunting.
On The Range
MechTech’s CCU is a joy to shoot. It’s everything you’d want from a pistol caliber carbine, if a touch on the heavy side — balanced towards the muzzle end. Recoil is very tame and ergonomics are pretty solid. The pistol locks in securely and the whole assembled unit feels like it was designed this way rather than assembled out of two halves from two companies.
Feeding from the magazine is perfect. Walking the bolt forwards as slowly as possible results in rounds stripped out of the mag and aimed just right so they slide into the chamber and up the bolt face with a bare minimum of resistance — better than in most pistols. Firing and ejection was also flawless, with perfectly-dented primers and consistent ejection across the board. I suffered zero stoppages of any sort in either caliber, which included shooting in heavy rain on one trip and in below-freezing temps on another.
A straight blowback action wouldn’t typically be recommended for high-pressure calibers, but all of my 10mm brass looked flawless, to include a couple of mags worth of two different Underwood loads (note: MechTech specifically advises not to shoot Underwood, as it’s the only brand of ammo that has resulted in blown cases in a CCU) and one mag of Buffalo Bore hollow points. In fact, the brass looked much better than when shot through the factory GLOCK barrel. No GLOCK “smile” at all, thanks to better chamber support. It seems that the bolt is definitely heavy enough to allow pressures to drop before the case backs out of the chamber.
Much to the dismay of the TTAG hall monitors and other safety 1st, 2nd, and 3rd types, I’m one of those guys who shoots tons of .40 S&W through a completely factory GLOCK 20. If anyone cares to know why I believe it to be safe — safer, even, than shooting 10mm through a 10mm GLOCK or .40 through a .40 — I’ll create a separate article on the topic (here). If you would, please save your derisive comments or friendly debate or questions on the subject for that article (just let me know here if that’s of interest or you can e-mail me at [email protected] if you want to see it but don’t want to derail the comments here away from the CCU itself). Anyway… after inspection I chose to run some .40 S&W through the 10mm CCU and it functioned completely flawlessly and the brass looked perfect. Once again, it looked better than .40 S&W brass fired through a GLOCK (whether through a .40 barrel or a 10mm barrel) due to the improved chamber support.
Conclusion
The appeal of owning a carbine and a pistol that not only shoot the same caliber but accept the same magazines has always been strong for me. I love the idea of a “bug out bag” outfitted ‘thusly.’ MechTech’s CCU really takes that one step further by providing a carbine that isn’t even a firearm, which means it ships right to your door with no FFL and it’s particularly sleek since it has no firing control, frame, or grip components. The ability to use one frame to shoot a handful of calibers is another nice bonus.
It’s mighty potent and accurate in 10mm, but I’m not going to hunt with it so when I go to purchase one of these for myself I’m going to stick with a subsonic caliber for shooting suppressed. As I don’t own a .45 can, it’ll be 9mm. I may pick up a double-stack 9mm 1911 for the job. As durable and versatile as a GLOCK is, I think I want this bad boy for a 1911 due to the quality of the trigger pull and the option for a manual safety. With all of this taken into account, a double-stack 1911 is likely my ideal setup. That said, I don’t own a small-frame GLOCK at the moment and if I already had one that would likely change the math.
Every GLOCK or 1911 owner should have a MechTech CCU to go with it. Simple as that. It’s a disservice to yourself not to.
Specifications: Mech Tech Carbine Conversion Unit
Caliber: Many available
Capacity: Same as your pistol can accept
Barrel length: 16.25 inch
Overall length: Varies from under 24 inches to more than 33 inches depending on stock choice and adjustment setting
Weight: 5.3 lbs in lightest, “basic” configuration
Options: Telescoping wire-framed stock, fixed stock, M4-style adjustable stock and an M4-style stock mount, additional rails, sights, lights, vertical foregrips
Website: MechTechSys.com
MSRP: $399.95 in “basic” configuration plus any additional accessories
Ratings (Out of Five Stars):
Accuracy: * * * *
It’s no benchrest rifle but for a relatively inexpensive carbine conversion adapter, it’s really excellent.
Ergonomics: * * * *
Your pistol has some bearing here. The GLOCK part still feels like a GLOCK. Otherwise, the frame-to-CCU interface, angle, and location feel just right. Everything else feels like it should, and the option to use any AR-15 buttstock really opens things up for ergonomics. I’m taking off one star just because it’s a bit nose heavy.
Reliability: * * * * *
Flawless for me, and the straight blowback action should run just about anything without stopping.
Customize This: * * * * *
Great for home defense. Tons of factory options for rail configurations, accessories, buttstocks, and more. With the AR-15 buffer tube adapter, the sky’s the limit there. You’ll have to get it threaded for muzzle attachments after you receive it, though.
Overall: * * * * *
Awesome. The versatility and quality you get starting at $399.95 is worth every penny.
More from The Truth About Guns
ShootingTheBull410: Mech Tech Carbine 10mm Ballistics Test
Gun Review: GLOCK 17 Gen 4 [Updated 2018]
Gun Review: Kel-Tec SUB-2000 9mm Carbine (GLOCK Magazine Compatible)
How the GLOCK 21 Revolutionized the Gun Industry in 1991
Holy… have I been living under a rock to have never heard of this before? It looks like it’ll eat the market right out of the SUB-2000 (at least as far as Glock owners are concerned).
The reason you don’t hear about it much is that it costs twice as much as a Sub-2000 – $400 for the MechTech, $450-$500 for the Glock. It also doesn’t fold in half like the Sub-2000, and _has no manual safety_. It is stunning that the review didn’t mention that latter fact, as it’s a huge drawback for this setup. About the most I can say for this setup is that it looks like the optics mounting situation is much better than the Sub-2000, and I guess you’ve got access to 45acp and 10mm.
I run a Glock 17 in a KPOS G2, and IMHO, if you’ve got the extra ~$250 for stamp and engraving, that’s the way to go. Much lighter, much smaller, and still has excellent optics mounting options.
I did mention the manual safety when I said I’d prefer to use a 1911 with a CCU for the better trigger and the addition of a manual safety. The frame has all of the firing control parts in it so if your frame has a safety then your CCU does and if it doesn’t then it doesn’t. Hopefully nobody else is confused by this.
The quality of the CCU is better than a Sub2k. It does offer a lot more configuration options. It doesn’t fold, yeah. It’s a lot easier to find in stock 😉 . It isn’t a firearm.
I suppose my point was more that your review seemed to gloss over the problems that this thing has. I come to TTAG for more critical reviews than this. This is a review I’d expect to see in a gun mag.
I simply disagree entirely that it’s a problem. It’s completely a matter of opinion. Post a review on a carry pistol and half of folks say “I wish it had a safety” and half say “thank God it doesn’t have a stupid safety.” This version of the CCU uses a Glock, so it has no safety. If that’s a problem for you, you probably don’t own a glock anyway. If it’s a problem for you, build it with a 1911. Sheesh. I stated in the review that it’s a bit heavy, it doesn’t come threaded, and it’s incapable of being field stripped. Those are my criticisms. Those are ALL of them. You feel I should make stuff up to sound more critical or something? I didn’t gloss over anything; it’s all there. It’s a really nice piece of kit and my criticisms are honest and thoroughly explained. Your “problem” isn’t my “problem,” so if you freak out about the lack of a safety then great, but you didn’t write this and it isn’t a big deal to me at all. I EDC a chambered pistol with no safety and that’s my dang preference.
A handgun is generally carried in the holster when a round is chambered; a rifle is not. You can’t compare the two when it comes to needing a safety.
You’re right. Maybe I was being a bit dramatic there haha. I already said I’d personally prefer it for a 1911 because of the trigger and the manual safety, so no secrets there. I think it’s clear enough that the Glock version doesn’t have a safety. It’s a Glock attached to a barrel and if that’s viewed as a problem then…
Possible solutions to this “problem:”
* Get it for a 1911 instead of for a Glock
* Don’t carry it chambered
* Use a trigger guard “holster”
* Buy something else
A YouTube viewer commented that since it doesn’t field strip it’s a non-starter and he’d never consider buying it. Fine. I understand that also. But it’s another opinion thing and I don’t care about this anywhere near as much as he obviously does. Same with the safety on the Glock frame version. I just don’t see some sort of catastrophic issue here at all. I see a tech note that’s worth pointing out, and then y’all can decide whether it’s important to you or not.
Enjoyed reading your review. I bought one to compliment my glock 23 . I agree with you totally. I added a magpul butt stock and flip up sights. I would like to get a butt stock pouch to hold the glock slide. I think it would be really cool if they made one for the desert eagle 50 cal
You don’t need to buy a entire $500 Glock to use the CCU. You can get brand new Glock lowers starting as low as $165. That’s what I did with mine.
Where can you buy just the lowers/frames? And real GLOCK-made GLOCKs or some race gun imitation frame?
You can buy Glock lowers on Gunbroker for $165-185 and possibly lower if you aren’t in a hurry.
You can buy a 357 levergun for $500 and it smokes the 10mm. 180 grain 357 magnum from buffalo bore does over 1900 fps from a carbine. 10mm doesn’t come close and the stubby 40 cal bullets lose energy too fast. It’s an all around crappy rifle round.
Unless your goal is to be subsonic and you are willing to thread a barrel.
Better off buying a Highpoint 45 ACP carbien and using 1911 mags in it with a little adjustment to the mags they work fine in the 45 acp verson….way cheaper so you save $150 to 200 and more options of set up.
Then you’d till have a piece of shit Hipoint.
Sub 2000s are cheaper (~$500 for the entire Sub 2000 vs. ~$400 for a cheap Glock and ~$400 for the CCU). A Sub 2000 will also fold up and fit in a small, innocuous briefcase. A Mech Tech CCU will not.
The Sub2000 can be folded-up to be 16 inches long. The CCU can be folded down to 24 inches long. Being 8 incher is nice, until you have to fire. The CCU can fire while folded, the Sub 2000 can not.
Very cool. I’ve had my eye on these for a few years…
A minamilist approach to carbine and pistol matching calibers. A handy little weapon that would be at home as a home defense setup. This carbine mated to a Glock 19 with a standard Glock 19 as backup.
I’m a shotgun man for HD. But I’m large and capable of handling a shotgun and it’s recoil. Less robust individuals with health issues and age issues could well benefit from such a light and handy carbine.
Unfortunately for those of us in CA we would be restricted to 10 round mags. Still, a 10 round mag of 9mm coupled with a determined 80 yo granma could make for a bad day for the bad guys.
Just travel to a free state and get a standard capacity magazine or 30. Think bad guys used the reduced ones? Besides, all the grandfathering makes determining the legality of real mags difficult. Reduced capacity mags make me sad.
And a felony if you are caught.
But I wouldn’t fault someone for doing it. Robert Heinlein said it best, “I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do.”
Only true in some states with a mag ban. Colorado has grandfathering and furthermore the law explicitly reminds prosecutors, et. al., that they have the burden of proof that you didn’t own the thing before 1 July 2013.
Unfortunately chickenhumper won re-election and so it looks like we are stuck with this turd of a law for the next four years, though I don’t see more passing in the next two years at least (unless some hideous thing happens and RINOs come out of the woodwork in the Senate to be stampeded).
@Slick — here’s a good quote, if a bit extreme in this case (it was RE racist laws during the reconstruction era):
Wouldn’t this be consider an “assault weapon” once the unit is fully assembled?
Only if you assault (hit) someone with it. Otherwise I consider it a “personal defense” weapon.
That is funny, but in all seriousness, wouldn’t this constitute an “assault weapon” under California law?
Yes. Must… have… bullet… button…
Is there a company that makes a Glock bullet button?
Just grind down a factory mag release so it’s flush with the frame or slightly recessed. Now it requires a tool to activate.
Thanks very much.
FYI please research that. I’m not a lawyer, I don’t play one on TV, and I haven’t stayed at a Holiday Inn Express for years. I know folks do this fairly often for Glocks for SSE purposes and such, but that doesn’t necessarily mean it’s totally above board.
I might have to buy a Glock now…
D__m the “Dark Force”. Always presenting temptation.
Jeremy S., excellent review! A very tempting piece of machinery. About the same weight as an M1 carbine, and in 10mm, a more potent round.
Any knowledge wether these are available for europe (germany specifically)?
They have contact info on their webpage…
http://www.mechtechsys.com/glock.php
Email Max at [email protected]. They are an exporter and may be able to assist you.
Too bad it’s illegal in CT. I’d love go have one in 10mm.
Perfectly legal if you use a pistol manufactured pre 1994. A police trade in glock in .40 is probably your cheapest option.
There is not a state that we cannot send the CCU to, including CA, NY & CT. It is up to the residents of those states to know what is required to be legal. That said, I found this on an official CT website:
http://www.jud.ct.gov/ji/criminal/glossary/assaultweapon.htm
When ordering/using your CCU, for CT, you can’t have a flash hider and must have the fixed stock.
Hope that helps.
Mechtech — from your link above, how does this:
“Assault weapon” means
…
(i) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least one of the following:
(I) A folding or telescoping stock;
(II) Any grip of the weapon, including a pistol grip, a thumbhole stock, or any other stock, the use of which would allow an individual to grip the weapon, resulting in any finger on the trigger hand in addition to the trigger finger being directly below any portion of the action of the weapon when firing;
…
Not make the CCU an illegal assault weapon in CT?
Buy pne of these if it looks like its for you.Screw the nazi rules that your state “representatives” have laid down for you. Have your freedom to do as you will. If your scared enough that you MAY break an injust law, then you never had any reasoning to do anything/anyone wrong to begin with. May sound dumb, may sound stupid and hell, its very dumb of me to even post this. But dont be a cow and stand in the pen they make for you as they shrink it down so small your forced into the slaughter house. Freedom Rings
Looks like a great product. The ordering process is unnecessarily clunky though. You cannot just buy a kit, you have to piece it together in the order (they are suggesting a phone call). Making things more complex than just clicking on the item you want is bad in an e-commerce world. The least they could do is have a form setup with drop down options for piecing together the upper you want. Since the site is “under construction”, I guess that would come later.
I have one of these in .45acp/1911 configuration with the factory extending wire stock.
A really nice feature is that the ATF measures over-all length with the stock extended. With the stock collapsed, you have a 24 inch pistol caliber carbine that you can shoulder and use with a foregrip—which you’ll want to do because it really is nose heavy.
The primary compedator seems to be the sub 2000 which is nice because it offers magazine compadibility with carry guns, particularly in glock and cz, without canabolizing the pistol in question. The mectec requires you to give up a pistol to the carbine, but offers you a much more customizable unit.
I have the full quad rail, which gives you a full flat top rail. Using a 3 inch riser, I can cowitness flip up utg iron sights with a lucid m7 red dot. My suggestion, especially if you’re something of a gear snob, is to buy the unit with the quad rail and ar15 style buffer tube. You can then buy all your normal ar15 accessories, stocks, foregrips, sights, lights, optics, and lasers. It is a very nice gun and the company has fantastic customer service.
If you, like me, are looking at the .45acp market, it’s worth pointing out that this monster gives you the potential for 14+1 capacity with a para p14 lower. Unlike the beretta cx4 storm, which you have to go to a custom after market manufacturer to get your round count up, you have access to factory double stack magazines with glock and para right out of the box. Even with a 1911 government model, there are plenty of 10 round single stack magazines out there.
Finally, it’s really sweet to put a tuned 1911 lower in this baby and start off with a 3 pound trigger pull.
i know this is ancient, but do you know who does a capacity increase for the cx4 storm
I wish they made one for Beretta 92 frames. But very cool, almost want to get one so I can play with it on my brothers Glock 19. Lol
2nd’d. Wouldn’t shock to to see just that, at shot show sometime soon.
You’d think it’d be easier to tool up for than a Glock or 1911. But with 1911 and Glock being the most customizable pistols in the world it doesn’t surprise me they came first. Hopefully in the near future my dream will come true for a Beretta 92 CCU because I don’t believe I’ll ever find a Keltec sub2000 in stock that accepts m9/92 mags. The only difficulty I forsee with the 92 version would be the slide mounted safety compared to the others being in the frame.
WRT the sub 2k, the S&W variants can easily be converted to accept 92FS mags. Just buy the S&W sub2k & the conversion parts. For myself, I broke down & bought the CX4, which I’m very happy with. A little pricey, but it’s a flawless performer. If the sub2k ever becomes truly economical, I’ll pick up one of those, too.
Is a C.C.U. for the M&P in the works?
Nope, their next product should be a CCU for the Springfield XD
🙁
Is there a reasonable chance it could happen in the near future?
Our XD model is in the final stages of the testing process. If we do one for another pistol model, the M&P has been discussed.
I was going to say that this looks like a great gift for my dad, but he only has a Glock 26, which is not supported. Shame.
Damn. Here I was, almost convincing myself that I had enough gun stuff. Got the future purchase list down to a Sig 226, AR-10, 300 WM, and a half dozen other essentials.
Now I’m really wanting a GLOCK 20 and a CCU. I know there will be more discussion in the future, but I’m reasonably convinced that .40 Smith can be shot through a G20 in some volume. Maybe a G21 is the ultimate converter, such as STB compatibility experiments.
Anyways, I’m thinking a Glock / CCU combo might be an excellent bug out combo. Thanks for the review.
“…almost convincing myself that I had enough gun stuff.”
I think we both know that’s never going to happen, dear.
“…the dozen-word version is that any GLOCK or 1911 owner should have at least one MechTech CCU in their stable.”
That’s more than a dozen words. I’m offended, and demand that this article be retracted and removed immediately!
Seriously, though, excellent review as always, Jeremy. Not quite my cup of tea, but I had wondered how these things perform. It’s a neat idea, but one I was kind of expecting to be poorly implemented when I first saw it. I’m glad to be wrong about that.
“I was kind of expecting to be poorly implemented when I first saw it”
Me too. Was sort of expecting a bunch of off the shelf parts from home depot and the S&W spare parts catalog all duct taped together haha. It was nice to see everything inside of the pipe custom machined and really really nice looking.
10mm carbine.
Love at first sight. Very cool.
“10mm carbine.
Love at first sight. Very cool.”
The hogs may not agree on that…
🙂
Looks like it could be a heavy-hitter in 10mm on the piggies…
I’ve never been a huge fan of carbines, heavy and cumbersome like a rifle, yet chambered with the weaker cartiage.
I guess I always figured, why not just get a 10/22 with the 25 rounder and call it a day. If you’re gonna go cheaper and more controllable, might as well go all the way.
But, now that .22LR is pretty much nonexistent, the carbine is starting to look more and more useful to me.
I might be switching up my .22LR varmint rifle for a 9mm varmint carbine, unless the .22LR situation gets better.
“Carbine” has nothing to do with caliber: http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/12/jeremy-s/carbine-vs-rifle-defined/
Okay, I will be more specific as to say I’m speaking directly to pistol caliber carbines
Jeremy are you on pre-order for a CZ Scorpion? Want to see a review of that …. looks like it could be a market segment slayer.
Yes, I should be receiving one of the first ones off the production line if all goes to plan!
…I’m just wrapping up the video editing of the Walther CCP and the Dan Wesson 715 (their new revolver!) now, and hopefully one of the next firearms to show up here will be the Scorpion…
Yes please with the CCP. When are those supposed to hit the market?
there is one on armslist now.
Sweet…I hope you plan to do some testing with your Mystic on it. I’m reading that the current CZ EVO threading is 18×1 but people are hoping that the US version will be 1/2×28. Do you know anything more?
If it’s 18×1 are you going to be ready with a thread adapter?
Thanks for mentioning this, as I totally didn’t even think about it! I’ll ask my guy at CZ and will definitely get an adapter ASAP if needed. No way on earth I’m not running it suppressed 😉
Dan Wesson revolver review? Oh boy, oh boy, oh boy, oh boy, oh boy, oh boy, oh boy, oh boy, oh boy, oh boy, oh boy, oh boy, oh boy,….. (sorry, I just got a little too excited)
I concur with this review. Have had the .45 glock version for a couple years now and it’s been flawless. Everyone’s favorite shooter, from beginners to experienced shooters. Collegue wants one for hog hunting. Considering possibilities of barrel chopping and suppressing. I recommend going light on accessories and rails. Mini quad rail at front is perfectly adequate. Call them to discuss yours, it’s worth it.
It’s expensive (400+ the pistol) but it looks nice. Do they make a CZ version?
Speaking as one who owns one for the G19, there’s one thing that needs to be mentioned.
While I do enjoy my CCU, getting one in 9mm is a little tricky. The straight blowback action combined with the heavy bolt creates some… issues with the small-bore 9mm.
MechTech specifically says that the _minimum_ bullet weight in 124 grains to properly cycle the bolt, and they _specifically_ recommend the use of +P ammunition. Believe me, I’ve had more than a few FTE and jams when I tested 115 grain bullets.
However, 124gr and up will reliably cycle the weapon.
So, while the CCU is a GREAT idea, and I want to get one for my Glock 20, I would hestitate to recommend it in 9mm. Be aware that you _will_ have to use heavier loadings in 9mm for it to be reliable.
The good part is the 33rnd mags, though, which makes it a proper pistol-caliber AR.
Hmmm, that’s interesting. I’ll have to check out a 9mm at some point. It sounds like they should just consider a lighter bolt. Not gonna lie, if mine was having those issues I’d drill some material out of the bolt to lighten it up.
Light and standard pressure 9mm loadings don’t always play well with conversions and such.
Yeah, but they play fine with the three 9mm AR’s I’ve had and the Sub2k I used to own. There’s no excuse for a straight blowback action with plenty of overtravel room and a big rubber stop not to run normal target ammo. IMHO…
The 9mm CCU does not require +P ammo. I have fired more 115 gr. ammo through them than anything else, including testing. This makes it an inexpensive shooter compared to most cartridges.
It can FIRE standard 115gr ammo, but it will have periodic malfunctions as a result. Mine has mostly jams. It might work better for the 17, but with the 19 it works best with heavier ammo, and the manual says so.
The only 9mm ammo that can be an issue is ammunition that is labeled as “Target Loads”. We do not specify bullet weights in any of our manuals or website. Very old writings have been updated. I specifically shoot 115gr. ammo such as Blazer and American eagle because of the low cost for plinking. They have always been very reliable. We do mention not to use +P+ as the pressure loads are to much for a blow back system.
That’s very strange, because the manual for mine said exactly this for my G19 CCU.
I bought mine back in May, so it’s not particularly old. And I’ve only had FTEs with 115 grain bullets.
You have us puzzled. What page of the manual do you read that on?
I’m at work at the moment, but I will search for the manual when I get home. I first experienced a malfunction while at the range, using bulk 115gr ammunition. The charging handle was stuck, but the bolt was not closed, so I could not fire the live cartridge in the chamber. With some help from the range officer, we were able to pull the bolt free (the bullet was deformed and deemed unsafe to fire).
I experienced a few more FTEs at that range session, and was going to either complain or send it back, but I consulted the manual, and it said that the CCU required 124gr or higher ammunition, and specifically recommended +P rounds for reliable firing. I was disappointed, of course, because my primary reason for buying one for my G19 over my G20 was the expectation of cheap ammunition (the other was the lack of extended magazines for 10mm), but 124gr range rounds were only slightly more expensive, so it was not a huge problem. Still cheaper than even bulk 10mm.
To date I have experienced malfunctions ONLY with the lighter ammunition (the bolt has even malfunctioned in the same fashion on two other occasions), and never with the 124gr ammunition. Considering the design of the CCU and the fact that recoil increases with the weight of the projectile, I wasn’t terribly shocked to find this in the manual. I had assumed (from the warning) that the lighter ammunition failed to cycle the bolt fully, thus causing malfunctions similar to the “limp-wristing” problem with semi-automatic pistols.
I’m not sure I kept the manual, but I will check.
I will of course be very happy to hear that it’s merely something wrong (and hopefully repairable) with my particular unit, or something more mundane like a lack of lubricant, but I distinctly remember seeing that, and some other people I asked (who had G19 units of their own) uniformly recommended heavier bullets for the CCU.
Don’t get me wrong; I love your product (although I recently misplaced the loading block and will have to order another). It’s a great concept, and I enjoy shooting it. I will probably be ordering one for my G20 some time this year, for use in hog hunting. I’ll _definitely_ be buying one if I can find some extended magazines for the 10mm that don’t have to be extensively modified (I would settle for 20 rounds, but would prefer more if you know anyone who makes them).
I had bought it with a SHTF scenario in mind; the construction is pretty rugged, and with the magazine/ammunition synergy I had figured it would be of great benefit.
Jeremy, great write-up!
Quick question: Did the ejection pattern for empty cases seem like it might cause a problem for folks shooting left-handed? About 7%-10% of readers would like to know…
And congratulations on the recent addition to your family!
Sorry to say, I didn’t try shouldering it on the other side and I’d probably just refer to my own video to get an idea of how it’s ejecting for that purpose. It’s possible you’d have to fashion a little brass deflector to be totally safe, or run a long stock to push the ejection port farther away from your face.
…thanks 🙂 …
Thanks for firing the Liberty through it. I was curious how much velocity it would gain through a long barrel, and, yeah.XD
I have 1 of these in 10mm and it does make the cartridge reach out very well.
The downside is it’s weight and open areas that are exposed when operating in the field.
If one is interested, Glock 17 “lowers” (gen 3 complete, without a bbl and slide) can be bought for only $175 (I have seen them on GunBroker)
This is seriously cool. I had a sub2000 in9mm but 10mm sounds very bada##…good review.
This is seriously cool. I had a sub2000 in9mm but 10mm sounds very bada##…good review.
Does the 5.3lbs basic configuration include the Glock frame and a stock or is it just the mech tech barrel assembly?
No stock, handguard but no forward rails (6″ section over action). No frame. It basically makes a super-sized pistol. The .45 ACP one you see above with the largest quad rail they make and the M4 stock adapter plus standard parts kit M4 adjustable stock and the flash hider weighs in on my kitchen scale at 6 lbs 10 oz. (no frame attached… but a Glock frame is only a few oz)
I’ve never been interested in turning a standard rifle into a pistol caliber, but this, this looks cool.
Bwu-huh?…standard rifle…..interested to….but this is….ahhhh, fuggetaboutit….
Very cool idea. I have an old, cheap Norinco 1911 “Government” .45 laying around (it’s actually very reliable with ball) and this might be just the thing to do with it.
Jeremy, nice review of a useful item that has no advertising budget.
A few years ago I decided a .45ACP carbine-style item with a red dot would be easier on the ears and eyes for indoor defensives, and would definitely be more accurate than a pistol. Having a G20 frame that I only use eight or ten days a year, I went for the MCC. It surprised me by proving reliable. It certainly produces much less muzzle flash and blast with 230 grain .45ACP than the pistols do.
It is worth knowing that the effect of the 16.25 inch barrel is to barely increase the velocity of the heavy standard loads, so they stay subsonic. Light +P loads like 165 and 185 grain +P gain much velocity, though. This the result of ratios of bullet/barrel friction and case capacity. The lighter bullets (in lead-core bullets) are shorter, and +P loads typically gain more complete burn in longer barrels. So with the MCC in .45ACP you can go from safely subsonic and low-flash, to fairly high velocity….your choice.
Since I most often carry a G30S with a G21 magazine for backup, the MCC in .45ACP made sense. I can leave the G/MCC unloaded, but instantly available, since the G21 magazine is almost always at hand.
Thanks rope- good to see your comment, as you seem experienced on the ground, and one great benefit of TTAG is being able to get that from credible guys, so I pay attention when you and A81 and a couple others explain their thinking on what works.
I like your rationale on the pistol carbine indoors home defense. I’ve been persuaded by reading on TTAG that the AR platform is easier to point and manage for smaller shooters especially, (than an 870, which is where I started, like jwm) and the only problem is the AR flash and noise (which cant be moderated with common sense hearing conservation device (aka silencer) in CA. Having an inexpensive mod to keep or swap in one extra pistol in that ” easy to use size-lower flash config” makes a lot of sense.
When I was first researching and choosing a handgun, I chose the G23 for commonality reasons- and ammo simplicity – one caliber to get used to and to store, reload, etc. I am not an expert by any means but in my own experience while its relatively easy to get used to the glock grip angle, the fat mag makes it like a brick, both for small hands, and more important- just that extra that makes CCW not so comfortable.
Now that .40 commonality is no longer the prime issue, I think I’d want to move to .45 based on many comments here, and elsewhere, including the case support issue that gave some early concern on .40 “glock kabooms” in reloads. (thanks Jeremy for reminding on that, yes please do explain further in a separate article)
Rope, How does the G30S shoot vs G23, if you have any experience on that? Im assuming the slim profile makes it the go to backup choice, no matter the caliber, but if its less snappy thats a bonus.
Anyone else with experience in same?
*Just a note – the MechTech product page for Glocks includes a shaded text box below listed models – it says the CCU does not work on subcompact frames. If thats the case, then a guy like me would have to plan to buy a frame only G21, to store in closet with CCU attached, to keep commonality with .45, and the G21 mags you have, and that way you’d still have your slim CCW handgun ready to go. Am I getting that right?
9mm Sub2000s boarder on unobtanium and are usually priced higher than MSRP when found. Stop using them as comparisons.
Disagree vociferously. You just don’t know where to look. I bought one this past spring for under MSRP. In fact, the little gun shop I went to had it in stock, didn’t even have to order it!
Jeremy, thank your time to do the review. When I read the Hi-Point 4595TS Pro Carbine review, It woke me up and I really want a long gun in .45acp to match my 1911. I love the idea that the CCU takes whatever magazines the lower uses. I can’t afford a Thompson and a Marlin Camp is rare and too hard to find.
Since you had “hands on” what would be the bare minimum of add-ons, if all I wanted to add was a red-dot? Also would you recommend a forward grip since its been mentioned it is nose heavy?
Thank you very much.
The base unit is heavy enough that I definitely advise a foregrip. If you pick the quad rail, you’ll need to provide your own. If not, the base unit can be pre-built with one. Re-the optic, the top unit does not come with irons unless you specify. If you want to use flip up iron sights (the manufacturer will sell you a serviceable set of UTG flip ups) then you’ll need a 3-riser for co-witness which they will sell you as well. If you want to run the unit with the optic by itself, you can mount it straight to the top rail with any picatini compatible component. Most shooters I know would rather pick their own accessories. As such, my recommendation is to buy the base unit with the quad rail and an ar15 style buffer tube. From that you can buy the rest of the components to taste.
Having dropped $700ish on my original build, I now wish I’d gone this root.
Hi 357M28,
In the article, I mentioned…
…and that’s still how I feel. I like the smooth handguard on the standard config and the 6″ section above the action is more than enough for a red dot or a scope. I think I’d get the “Mini Quad” for in front of the handguard to allow for a front sight should I want irons on there, a forward grip or hand stop, laser, bipod, etc… My preference is definitely not the full on quad rail like you see on the .45 ACP version in my photos. It’s a lot of extra weight and there’s no way I’m personally going to use much of that rail space at all, and I don’t find Pic rails particularly comfortable to hold onto. The 10mm with the smooth-ish handguard is a lot more comfortable to grip, IMHO. So my future CCU will look like the 10mm one except it won’t have a full top rail and on the front will be MechTech’s Mini Quad (see their accessories page). That’s all the “rail estate” I need without any extra adding weight that isn’t providing any usage benefit for me.
I have a mechtech for my glock 17 in 9mm.
It is built like a tank and weighs about as much as one, or at least feels like it. It is extremely front heavy. A keltec sub2000 feels much lighter and better balanced.
The mechtech is a great piece of kit though, I have mine setup as an M4 adjustable stock with folding hinge.
Jeremy S — regarding your multiple chrony issues…
Get a magnetospeed.
I did, and I’ve never looked back.
I started considering it as soon as this happened! I’ve shied away from it because I also chrony a lot of pistols and it doesn’t work for that (correct? Maybe they’ll make a Pic rail adapter?). Plus some of the rifles I shoot won’t even work with it due to having weird things on the muzzle, although this is rare. Anyhoo, you don’t find calibrating for different bullet types is cumbersome? I thought about the magnetospeed but then thought I’d be better off spending $90 on the LED shade kit for my chrony, which should basically guarantee me solid results no matter what.
Neat kit! I was not aware of these until reading this review. I am a little curious if Glock has any official opinion of this unit on their pistols? It’s a lot more weight attached to their plastic frame than they originally designed for.
One ‘feature’ of the CCU is that it should actually put less wear on your lower than the pistol slide. That is because it doesn’t slide with every shot. Once locked in place it doesn’t move. Only the internal parts are moving and then just the lower part of the firing pin insert really has contact with your pistol for loading and firing each round. But that should be no different than the same parts in your pistol slide.
We are not aware of any customer for whom the weight of the CCU has caused any problem with their pistol frame.
Just shot my new 1911 version with the collapsable stock. Very nice way to use a cheap old Norinco Gov’t .45 clone. Using standard 7 round mags, had 100% proper functioning with 125 rounds of 230 grain ball of 3 different brands. It has low recoil and is accurate.
Took some time to get the red dot dialed in because it was difficult to tighten the sight onto the rail of the riser – it almost didnt fit correctly and would shift away from the nut being tightened. But after monkeying with it for a while, got it sorted and then it was hitting exactly where the dot was pointed.
Would not feed with 15 and 20 round extended magazines, but I cant get them to work with any gun I’ve tried, so that’s ok.
Bottom line: the MechTech 1911 CCU is a blast, it seems heavy-duty, itmhas low recoil, it’s accurate, reliable (at least with ball ammo), and a lot of fun.
I’d post a picture if I could figure out how to past it into this comment section from an iPad.
The collapsable wire stock is really sturdy and comfortable, and collapses to make the carbine smaller than possible with an AR stock. The wires – rods, actually – do get in the way of the 1911 safety but it can still be switched on and off.
Strangely, the available .357 Sig version was not mentioned in this review, nor in the comment thread. .357 Sig would seem IDEALLY suited for carbine application. Glock models 31 and 32 (both .357 Sig caliber) would be awesome, ballistically, for this conversion unit because:
1). the inherent feed reliability of this bottle-neck configured cartridge (.40 cal. necked down to 9mm) makes it very jam resistant and conducive to reliable cycling in semi and even full autos.
2). .357 Sig would not be subject to failure-to-cycle issues of the light 115 grain 9mm bullets, as John P reported here (by lack of energy to cycle reliably).
3). .357 Sig, much like the venerable 10mm can reach out to extended distances.
4). .357 Sig ammo, though pricey, costs less than 10mm and is more readily available.
Can anyone offer any testimonials or random thoughts, pro or con, about this unit in .357 Sig caliber?
Any info would be appreciated as I contemplate purchasing this unit in either .40 or .357 for my glock 31 lower.
Actually, I mentioned it in the beginning of the 3rd paragraph: “In the case of GLOCK, this means small frame (9mm, .40 S&W, or .357 Sig) or large frame (10mm or .45 ACP) — click here for the list of compatible frames.”
First of all thanks to Jeremy S for the review, for the naysayers ” Yes it could have been done a bit more professionally, it wasn’t, get over it! And yes! the Glock has no safety in the sense of a 1911 etc, get over it, if it bothers you don’t buy a Glock, it’s like looking a beautiful women naked, if it offends you ” STOP LOOKING!!” b ut don’t preach against those of us who do like naked women … or Glocks.
Jeremy, I bought one of these back in 03 for my 1911, it was back in their early days, it was butt ugly but that sucker would shoot one hole groups at 25 yards all day long, the day I test fired it I put 15 rounds into one hole that ended up about .65 cal, my wife ” at the time” who had never shot a gun in her life proceed to put 10 into the same hole, it had a cheap red dot on it. I sold it because I hated that wire type stock ( this was before all the options) And yes it would shoot well at longer ranges, we had a steel oxy cyl target at a laser-ed 217 yards and it hit it with boring regularity.
I just spent more $$ on a pistol carbine in 40 that won’t shoot, I sent it back to the mfgr,, when I say it won’t shoot I mean 10 to 12 inch groups at 25 yards! with a very good red dot, now I’ll say that the makers think it may have come to me with a bad crown, I hope so because I wanted this weapon, it uses Glock mags which was the main reason for getting it,
But, I fully intend to look into getting a Mech-tech again after being reminded of it because of this review. Again, thanks Jeremy!
And again, all of you whiners please remember you are supposed to be gun owning adults, you have the right to buy and shoot whatever you want, please do so and stop kicking the guy who went out and spent his $$ on ammo, his time to show us all a product that’s very well made.
I had a Kel Tec Sub2000, and had nothing but problems with extraction issues that I couldn’t resolve no matter what I did. So I sold it and bought a Mech Tech for the Glock 9mm. I put a G19 Gen III frame on it. Guess what? I had feeding problems. Many calls to Mech Tech did not resolve the problem. They sent me two Glock Blocks. Still no help. I even tried my G19 Gen II frame on it. Same problem. So I did some home gunsmithing (and probably voided the warrantee) on the feed ramp and that fixed the feeding problem. Now that it feeds I found out it wouldn’t eject properly. It jams every 3-4 rounds. Seems I have the worst luck with 9mm carbines. I am considering selling this piece of ****, too.
That’s disappointing. However, I have a 1911 Mech Tech CCU on top of a cheap old Norinco 1911 .45 lower, and it works great, at least with ball, haven’t tried anything else.
I am very interested in the 1911 .45 ACP version of the C.C.U. but have a Q about the ejector. I have a built-up from stripped-frame Olympic Arms parkerized frame (w/ a Ciener .22 Conversion Kit) pistol that has an ejector unlike that pictured on the Mech-Tech website (it has an extended “nose” where it contacts the case and is not used in the function of the conversion kit: http://forum.m1911.org/showthread.php?96690-(New)-Colt-Series-70-ejector-problem-(w-pics)&s=4d9143e2dc4c443db5c4cf39985ee4c9 : 3rd from left bottom row), and I have an old (but good) well-massaged AMT Hardballer .45 ACP (stainless) that has the ejector configured like the one on the website. I’d rather use the Oly Arms frame for this as the Hardballer is my SD/HD pistol.
Will either ejector work with the 1911 .45 ACP C.C.U.?
Thanks in advance!
You’ll probably just want to give Mech-Tech a call. I certainly have no idea. Either Russ or Mark should be able to help you.
357 magnum carbine smokes the 10mm carbine.
?? SO WHAT? 44 mag lever action “smokes” 357 lever action, yes it is about as relevant as your comment.
I have a 45, 1911 model using a LLAMA IX-C double stack mag standard capacity is 10rds. With small mod Para-ordanance mags work great and are available up to 20nds, that’s a lot fire power. I shoot hot loaded 45 super with the 1911 model. If you get a Glock model shoot only 45acp, my previous Glock model blew out the bottom of the barrels chamber, and destroyed my Glock lower, as the barrel is machined flat on the bottom to accept the Glock lower causing a weak point for the higher pressure round.
So I just got my G19 CCU, looks and feels great, extremely high quality. Like others have said it is a bit heavy but for what I plan on using it for its perfect.
On the downside, however, I put it together with my receiver and it wouldn’t fire. After messing with it, I realized it must have something to do with the 3.5lb Ghost disconnector I had installed on my lower. So I reinstalled the factory disconnector and it worked fine. Im no gunsmith and couldn’t really tell the mechanism or geometry that was causing the lighter disconnector to not work and the factory one to work fine. I was looking forward to the nice trigger pull on both pistol and carbine but it looks like Im stuck with the OEM disconnector.
To Mechtech’s credit, they do explicitly state in the manual that the CCU is designed to work with an unmodified receiver and that aftermarket parts may not function. Oh well, should still be a lot of fun!
Sorry to be a buzz-kill, but the whole article smacks of a subliminal sales pitch/shilling for the company. If you read the information provided by the company, you’ll see there are several limitations to ammo and lower receiver use.
Even worse than the apparently subjective review, is the misleading information on the price. The author implies you can convert your XD, Glock, 1911, etc, into a basic AR platform for $399.99.
Not true…..unless you want a carbine without a butt stock.
If you want a fixed M4-type stock, it’ll cost an extra $35.00; if you want an adjustable M4-type stock, you’ll need another $100.00.
So, in reality, it will actually cost a minimum of $435 – $500 for a very basic AR conversion kit.
For that kind of money, you can damn near buy an entire AR.
Not in this market, you can’t…but please feel free to prove me wrong!
Mr. H.
Buyer beware !
If you’re going to buy one or get one back after repair, be sure they notify you before shipping, and take out insurance, or require a signature. While mine was being returned from being repaired, it was stolen off my porch because they didn’t notify me that it was being shipped, didn’t take out any insurance, or require a return signature. Russ claimed they only do those things only if the customer requests it and pays for it. So I wasn’t reimbursed even though I wasn’t asked
Bad customer service
After reading all the complaints about the website on this particular tactical rifle assembly ic everybody complain and I see the positive ones about it but to the matter would you use it in any type of situation that comes up if this was the only weapon in your hand
Loved this article! I just bought a Gen 4 G19. I used to shoot air rifles and 22s a ton when I was a kid, but haven’t shot much in years, and have very limited pistol experience. I’m fighting against that gateway drug first gun feeling right now. I did a lot of research before I bought, so I knew that there were tons of aftermarket mods for the Glock. My every impulse is telling me to go out and buy all the best ones ASAP, but I need tons of practice first. The first 30 rounds I put through the gun showed me that. After shooting at paint cans out in the woods at my parents’ house and only hitting with about half of my shots, I was rapidly humbled! So my first accessory purchase was the Advantage Arms 22 LR Conversion Kit. Still waiting on it to arrive, and I actually managed to find 1000 rounds of 40 Gr. CCI at one of my LGS for a very reasonable price. The guy there was like, “What 22 rimfire shortage?” As soon as the kit gets here, I’m going to book some range time and get used to the feeling of a semi auto. And when the weather gets a little warmer, I’ll head up to the family farm and share the fun.
I tend to be very obsessive when I get into a new hobby, so I’ve already been looking at a range of firearms. The problem is that my wife wasn’t too happy about the first gun, so I need to ease into it. I’ll have to explain why I started with a mid-sized pistol and why I need a compact for EDC and why we should have a revolver in a safe in the nightstand drawer. Those will be difficult enough, and I think she’d lose her mind if I brought home an AR 15 without really prepping her for it! That’s one of the reasons why the CCU looks so appealing. I can get the feel of an AR while only purchasing an “accessory”. I have to say though, MechTech’s website is a little daunting. I have no idea what I would need or want in terms of accessories. What options would be best to give it that AR feel? Also, I was excited at the possibility of purchasing a 9mm and a 45, but I see that the subcompact Glock frames will only take 9mm, 40, and 357 Sig. Any recommendations on which would be a better second caliber? It looks like a few people are in love with 357. Is it difficult to switch a rail kit from one CCU to another if I wanted to buy two CCUs and one rail kit?
Overall, I’m pretty happy with my G19. I definitely want something smaller for EDC, but the larger frame was a better choice for getting me used to shooting again. And with the 22 kit, it’ll give me some flexibility. However, I wish there had been a G23 at the store when I made my purchase. The ability to purchase 9mm and 357 barrels for the G23 plus the 22 conversion kit and one or more CCUs would really make for one heck of a bugout bag option!
Jeremy S
Thanks for the great review, my only complaint is the sound, try a remote mic or something so the pick up is the same regardless of where you are standing in relation to the camera.
I bought a MT in 1911 45 acp way back when they first came out, I put a cheap red dot on it and took it to the range, got it zeroed and then sealed down to shoot it from the bench at 25 yards, I fired my first shot and hit right in the center of the red dot, then the second was a clean miss as was the next four before I figured out it was shooting thru the same hole, when I had finished I put 25 rounds thru one hole that measured about the size of a nickel or maybe less, my wife at the time who didn’t like guns decided to shoot it and placed 8 rounds in the same hole, I was blown away. I dell it later because it wasn’t what I wanted.
Fast forward to today, I decided i wanted a PCC in .40 but it had to use Glock mags, so I looked around, bought the Lone Wolf which I thought would be the Cadillac of PCC … Wrong, nothing but trouble, lots of troubles, they finally gave me a full refund so I’ve no complaints as to the company, just for me that one unit sucked, YMMV. I’m not a great glock fan but I got a sweet G-35 style pistol with all the parts built by Lone Wolf, it’s a very sweet gun! also I picked up a G23, I got all the stuff to convert the Glocks to 9mm, now I just needed to find the best PCC I could find, and then I remembered the MT !! so that’s what led me to see your video, thanks!! I also saw the one Hickok 45, both good reviews.
I noticed all the back yard commandos jumping in with bitching about everything they could find, my advice to them is simple.
If you don’t like seeing naked ladies, stay out of strip clubs, don’t like drinking? stay out of bars, Don’t like Fords? don’t buy one…in other words STFU about it for gods sake! accept your dislikes and be happy, don’t try to sell them to the rest of the world!
Yes the Glock don’t have a safety in the usual sense, fine, if it bothers you don’t own one, if you have a glock and the idea of it on a rifle bothers you then try sticking a foam ear plug behind the trigger, easy to push out with the trigger finger OR keep your finger off the trigger.
For those who want a Glock lower/frame look at Lone Wolf, they make a sweet one for a damn good price.
Again Thanks Jeremy, work on the sound issues please.
Thanks
Trip
Dude I love your reviews! Blunt to the point and honest! ( with some comic relief thrown in for good measure) .
Curious to know if anyone has purchased the MT in .357sig . Or if anyone lately has encountered any complaints on thier MT?
Thanks again for a terrific website and its info
My business partners were wanting NY DTF CT-399 last month and saw a business that hosts a searchable database . If people require NY DTF CT-399 too , here’s
https://goo.gl/oO4ftPWow! A lot of smoke in the air in viewing all the reviews..I purchased a CCU for a 1911 Para hi-cap Aluminum carry frame (unramped and no longer made). I chose the simple STEN GUN style wire stock, and taking the pad off, it makes me think of a STEN style weapon. I tag 2 (25 round mags together) which adds a little weight, and painted the barrel black (getting rid of the plastic fore grip stock)…I put a CCU’s new flash hider ($29. with lock tight) on and I was set to rock and roll. I wanted to tone down the 45 ACP with lighter 230 grain lead reloads (still making power factor) so I needed to add some length to the spring (which was too strong) and this lightened it for target type loads. I added a c-more red dot rail scope to finished it off. A long story short, after 7000 rounds through this weapon, I have no complaints. It’s reliable and accurate and light enough to carry around. Too bad this wasn’t around during Korean conflict. GI’s could have their side arm and this unit in a backpack. No need for the wimpy M1 Carbine. Also, for all single stack magazine guys, take the advice from sub-guns of WW II: double stack magazines are the MOST reliable and work the best in both pistol caliber full auto weapons or semi-auto weapons.
They are a perfect fit for the CCU in any caliber. PS: For those concerned about safties, the good old 1911 has two safeties – you need to deep six the Glock
I’ve got one of the older versions with the sten type fixed stock for the glock 21, and love it, I shoot bullseye 200 grain SWC loads in the 750-800 FPS range and shoot one hole groups at 50yards with a bushnell red dot on it. My only complaint is that the wire stock is too long for my short arms and I know that MT offers a retro fit kit that allows you to use the M4 adjustable stock, but my question is, has anyone here ever used one of those kits? Is it hard to change out? Any accuracy concerns?
thanks in advance
If you love to wear hoodies? so get this amazing Feel The Beat Hoodie Moreover, it has a hoodie-style collar with a pullover front closure and rib knitted cuffs to hold your wrist. All these amazing features make it one perfect casual outerwear to get compliments from your fashion friends. Discover now the best deals and amazing prices.
Comments are closed.