007 SRC Guns

[Percuvius]

I originally looked at the gen 3 SRC M4's, but for a little more you can get a much better gun like a VFC.

[Percuvius]

Originally Posted by GODSPEED|seven

I'm really looking into these SRC Gen III G36's.. from what I'm hearing these are pretty high quality for a pretty decent price tag.

Here is SRC's Catalog by the way.. as I've seen some post about SRC not having AK's

And the only gun that shoots 400 FPS stock is the SRC 416, all other guns are in the 330 FPS range. I think the only reason some websites post up 400 FPS is because of the M120 Spring they include..

SRC Full Catalog

Official Website

The gen 3 SRC m4 shoots around 400fps there is a video of it being chrono'd at Capital Airsoft VS the KWA

[kalnaren]

Originally Posted by GODSPEED|seven

I'm really looking into these SRC Gen III G36's.. from what I'm hearing these are pretty high quality for a pretty decent price tag.

Here is SRC's Catalog by the way.. as I've seen some post about SRC not having AK's

And the only gun that shoots 400 FPS stock is the SRC 416, all other guns are in the 330 FPS range. I think the only reason some websites post up 400 FPS is because of the M120 Spring they include..

SRC Full Catalog

Official Website

I thought we went over it the other day... FPS means nothing.

[GODSPEED|seven]

Originally Posted by Percuvius

I originally looked at the gen 3 SRC M4's, but for a little more you can get a much better gun like a VFC.

What is so much better about VFC? To be honest after lots of reviews I've read on the VFC SCAR, I wasn't too impressed, especially considering the price tag.. Sure I've read a few reviews of the SRC's that weren't the best, but I've read more positive reviews of SRC Gen III's than I have of the more expensive VFC's.. But please expand on what you mean by "much better gun".. thanks

Originally Posted by Percuvius

The gen 3 SRC m4 shoots around 400fps there is a video of it being chrono'd at Capital Airsoft VS the KWA

I am NOT arguing, but I like to be proven wrong sometimes

SRC's OWN catalog advertises the 416 as 400 FPS.. and ALL the other guns, including all the M4's either 300 FPS or 330 FPS..

If those guns did shoot 400 FPS off the bat, would it not be in their own interest to advertise it?? I mean, they would maximise their marketing to up sales by any means necessary, no??

I've only ever seen stores (or store reviews) advertise the 400 FPS while most reviews that are not linked to stores do confirm the average of 330 -360 FPS for most SRC Gen III's (except the 416 which seems to be a solid 396 - 408 FPS)

Originally Posted by kalnaren

I thought we went over it the other day... FPS means nothing.

yes we have... but what do you mean?

[TokyoSeven]

FPS does not make a person a better player. While FPS does play into the factor of how fast rounds get down range it does not necessarily mean that a person who has an AEG with higher FPS will be better player than a person whose AEG has lower FPS.

[GODSPEED|seven]

Originally Posted by TokyoSeven

FPS does not make a person a better player. While FPS does play into the factor of how fast rounds get down range it does not necessarily mean that a person who has an AEG with higher FPS will be better player than a person whose AEG has lower FPS.

Yes, I am very well aware of that, but puzzled as to why he commented that..

I was pointing out to the fact that most stores say that Gen III SRC's all shoot at 400 FPS while the SRC Official catalog advertises much lower.

I am personnaly NOT looking for the most powerful AEG; matter of fact, I am going for the SRC G36K which is advertised at 330 FPS... So, I just don't understand the relevance of his comment.

Maybe i didn't word my previous comment properly, but nothing in it seems to point towards higher FPS being better..

[Percuvius]

Originally Posted by GODSPEED|seven

What is so much better about VFC? To be honest after lots of reviews I've read on the VFC SCAR, I wasn't too impressed, especially considering the price tag.. Sure I've read a few reviews of the SRC's that weren't the best, but I've read more positive reviews of SRC Gen III's than I have of the more expensive VFC's.. But please expand on what you mean by "much better gun".. thanks



I am NOT arguing, but I like to be proven wrong sometimes

SRC's OWN catalog advertises the 416 as 400 FPS.. and ALL the other guns, including all the M4's either 300 FPS or 330 FPS..

If those guns did shoot 400 FPS off the bat, would it not be in their own interest to advertise it?? I mean, they would maximise their marketing to up sales by any means necessary, no??

I've only ever seen stores (or store reviews) advertise the 400 FPS while most reviews that are not linked to stores do confirm the average of 330 -360 FPS for most SRC Gen III's (except the 416 which seems to be a solid 396 - 408 FPS)



yes we have... but what do you mean?

In my opinion the VFC is a much better gun and no comparison in build quality especially externally .SRC has an ugly PLASTIC lower receiver, go with SRC if you want, but I'm sticking with my opinion.

[skalnok]

src may have an ugly plastic lower as you put it but that is just a metal body away and its internals arent proprietary like the vfc's

[Percuvius]

Originally Posted by skalnok

src may have an ugly plastic lower as you put it but that is just a metal body away and its internals arent proprietary like the vfc's

Metal body away = more money than just buying the superior VFC to begin with and you can internally mod a VFC easily, but it already is high quality internally.

[Rock 'N' Roll Outlaw]

Originally Posted by GODSPEED|seven

Yes, I am very well aware of that, but puzzled as to why he commented that..

I was pointing out to the fact that most stores say that Gen III SRC's all shoot at 400 FPS while the SRC Official catalog advertises much lower.

I am personnaly NOT looking for the most powerful AEG; matter of fact, I am going for the SRC G36K which is advertised at 330 FPS... So, I just don't understand the relevance of his comment.

Maybe i didn't word my previous comment properly, but nothing in it seems to point towards higher FPS being better..

The reason it was brought up was because you keep bringing it up. FPS means nothing is a way of saying that theres no reason to use FPS as a way to decide, or describe a gun. You also keep harping about "advertised as ___ fps" and so one, when in the end a $15 spring change is all that stands in a 280 fps gun and 400 fps gun (not without other upgrades that can allow the gun to use the higher fps spring without failing other parts). Worry about FPS when you actually have the gun, chrono'd it and decide on what kind of games you want to play (indoor with lower fps vs outdoor with higher fps).

[GBear]

Originally Posted by GODSPEED|seven

What is so much better about VFC? To be honest after lots of reviews I've read on the VFC SCAR, I wasn't too impressed, especially considering the price tag.. Sure I've read a few reviews of the SRC's that weren't the best, but I've read more positive reviews of SRC Gen III's than I have of the more expensive VFC's.. But please expand on what you mean by "much better gun".. thanks

What kind of VFC SCAR reviews were you reading. Every single one I've read, people have been extremely impressed with it. I actually just bought one myself as my first airsoft gun. It came on Thursday but no one was home to sign for it. I would've given you my personal opinion on it. It's going to come this afternoon and I'll tell you how it is.

However, from any of the reviews I've seen, as well as, other players' experiences, the VFC is right up there on the top of the list.

I chose this gun because I didn't want the typical M4/M16 AR. The SCAR seemed a little more unique on the field IMO.

I'm very new to the sport so I'm not sure about the build quality and material of the VFC SCAR is, however, I do know one thing that has been stressed on the forums time and time again. You get what you pay for.

[Donster]

i wish VFC still made their 416 series. I want one so badly.

[GODSPEED|seven]

Originally Posted by Percuvius

In my opinion the VFC is a much better gun and no comparison in build quality especially externally .SRC has an ugly PLASTIC lower receiver, go with SRC if you want, but I'm sticking with my opinion.

The "plastic" is the same one used on the real steel.. its nylon reinforced fiberglass. I would NOT want metal on a G36. I've read quite a few horror stories of VFC having to be sent back on day 1 for broken pins and triggers not working properly; piston heads having to be changed because they wouldn't last long, etc.. Ok, sure the full metal body is awesome, and beleive me, I am also thinking of getting either a VFC or ICS full metal body, but give me something to work on here. SRC Gen III G36's are 380$ near my place, and even sometimes on sale for cheaper, that with a smart charger and decent starter battery would come out to 480$ before taxes. The VFC is going for over 600$ and that without batteries, so easily 700$ + before taxes, does the over 200$ really justify the internal quality of VFC vs. the Gen III SRC Gearbox v3 ? For a noob? (I'm just trying to follow some experienced players advice here: Not to care about FPS, and to get something noob-friendly: G36 seems to be on the top of the list for that)

Originally Posted by Percuvius

Metal body away = more money than just buying the superior VFC to begin with and you can internally mod a VFC easily, but it already is high quality internally.

And from the reviews I've read, the SRC G36's have VERY VERY good internals.. I would like someone to tell me EXACTLY what is better about the internals. I really hope I am not misunderstood, I just like to get some precise answers, something to change my noob mind, I need something concrete to work on here. Just because everyone says its better, doesn't mean I'll also jsut go buy one for that.. just give me concrete examples as to why a VFC SCAR would last longer than an SRC G36 (internally! externals I don't care about right now).. Most users here I think will agree the G36's are really a good way to go for a first AEG, they're noob-friendly and all :razz: Is the almost 200$ higher price tag on a VFC worth it for a noob like me?

Originally Posted by Rock 'N' Roll Outlaw

The reason it was brought up was because you keep bringing it up. FPS means nothing is a way of saying that theres no reason to use FPS as a way to decide, or describe a gun. You also keep harping about "advertised as ___ fps" and so one, when in the end a $15 spring change is all that stands in a 280 fps gun and 400 fps gun (not without other upgrades that can allow the gun to use the higher fps spring without failing other parts). Worry about FPS when you actually have the gun, chrono'd it and decide on what kind of games you want to play (indoor with lower fps vs outdoor with higher fps).

In this case I apologize for bringing that up altogether, I think I have been very misunderstood / I didn't explain clearly enough what I meant. IN NO WAY WAS I TRYING TO SAY HIGHER FPS IS BETTER.. THE FACT I AM GOING FOR A GUN ADVERTISED AT 330 FPS SHOULD POINT TOWARDS THIS... BECAUSE I AM NOT FOCUSING ON FPS AT ALL, IT IS NOT WHAT I AM PLACING MY BETS ON. That was to comment on an earlier post further up this thread about the fps these aeg's put out.. has absolutely nothing to do with deciding on what gun to get or not. I was also pointing towards the fact that most stores use this as a marketing ploy to get buyers to go for it.. that is all! So can we stop flamming me about the whole FPS thing? (If I knew it was that time of month for most of you, I'd have shut up.. O: ) I was stating a fact, not giving a personal opinion..

*Sometimes I do have trouble explaining what I mean, so for this I apologize.. I know how touchy the FPS thing is, so trust me when I say I am not trying to face execution/flamming here! * O:

[Shooting Addict]

I prefer SRC internals over VFC internals since the SRC guns I've creaked open seem to be made of higher quality materials then VFC guns. If your getting a G36 the gun is supposed to be made of nylon fiber not metal. I find a G36 is a excellent choice for a starter gun since it has excellent mechbox design(V3) and the externals on a SRC are solid. GODSPEED seven ignore people like Percuvius who think since it's metal it's better.

[TokyoSeven]

From an internal perspective the VFC scar uses a V2 mechbox and a G36 uses a V3 mechbox. While some people speculate that V2's have a weaker design and may some day break, I believe that a well maintained version 2 mechbox that has been properly assembled will last a very long time if treated appropriately.

The only bonus in my eyes is that after upgrades or maintenance a user can test a V3 mechbox without having to partially reassemble their AEG.

Honestly I think debating which gun is better is pointless so I will contrast the companies instead. Also I'm not going to bother going into detail about each and every little internal part of each companies mechbox compared to the other. I will give you one example:

SRC currently uses cylinder heads that have dual Orings, while VFC uses cylinder heads that have 1 Oring. Take from that what you will.

If you want more specific details you can do your own research.

Here is a little history on both companies.

VFC has been producing airsoft guns for a little while now, they are extremely meticulous about the detail of their products externals and use fairly high quality materials in order to produce a quality product. In the past VFC used to produce their products with plasticy/polycarb like internals and a not so great quality wiring setup, however most users found the quality of these internals to be sufficient, those who did not merely swapped out what they did not like for something that they felt was more durable. VFC has recently been producing producing their recent AEGs with good quality wiring, non plasticy/polycarb like internals and have even moved onto using reinforced 7 or 8mm bushing mechboxes. VFC boasts that their internals are vigorously test and can provided the durability required to run lipo batteries out of the box.

Like VFC, SRC is not a new comer to the airsoft gun market. However only in the last few years has SRC produced anything remotely close to being called a quality item. Since SRC appeared on the airsoft market they have created low cost low quality items hidden behind shoddy metal externals that drew attention away from the atrocity was their quality control. Recently though SRC has appeared to have revamped its line with new generations of many existing models. These 3rd generation guns boast higher quality internals (compared to their previous lack of quality internals) that supposedly support the required durability for lipo battery use right out of the box. They have come a long way from where they began.