PDA

View Full Version : CAA Stocks are Fugly... Agree? Disagree? Vote now!


BillyGoatMachine
10-20-2009, 1:42 AM
They probably work just fine for the average Ar owner and will never fail them. Besides that, IMO, they look like a pile of steaming ............................

BigDogatPlay
10-20-2009, 1:44 AM
FWIW, while the CAA stock looks ugly the basic model has been plenty durable on my build. Cheek riser... useless IMO, and wouldn't own one regardles.

Pretty doesn't win the race and I've seen higher priced parts that appearred great aesthetically that plain looked fragile on examination. So far I am pleased with the CAA stock and it's been worth what I paid for it.... which was below retail before the panic.

I am ready for my abuse now. :)

pacrimguru
10-20-2009, 8:43 AM
you may not agree and that's fine but i just had to get this off my chest...

Styling wise, Command Arms Stocks = Riced out Fast and the Furious of the AR world.

no offense to those who run and love them, BUT i just think they are sooo got dang ugly and cheap looking. i'm sure they function fine, blah blah blah, but they look like supercharged stocks that have air scoops, ground effects, and vents. observe these pics and see if you agree or not. to think, some people went out of their way to take off the A2 or M4 stock their AR's came with, fork out cash and then install it on their rifle - wow. whew, that felt good to get off my chest.

if you're a noob and you're looking for stocks right now, think twice before going with a CAA. just a suggestion!

you know what, i'll make this a poll to see if i'm alone on this or not.

http://www.stormfront-tactical.com/catalog/images/CAA-ACP-Adjustable-CheekPiece.jpg
http://www.mike.vcn.com/tmp/ricer_civic_2.jpg
http://estore.websitepros.com/stores/1891705/catalog/SRS.jpg
http://www.anti-rice.com/rice010/127200265924PM57221.jpg
http://store.a51tactical.com/images/cbs%20od%20green.jpg
http://www.wrxtuners.com/forums/attachments/f56/3488d1219942646-bodykit-my-jetta-enjoy-some-ricer-car-pics-ricer-48377.jpg

pacrimguru
10-20-2009, 8:46 AM
http://store.a51tactical.com/images/srsnl.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/43/Poser.JPG

tomd1584
10-20-2009, 8:50 AM
hideous

technique
10-20-2009, 8:51 AM
Yes, not well made either. I made the mistake of putting one on a .458 socom build once right before I went hog hunting. NEVER again. Too bulky and just not a practical stock. Just like with any stock, if you use a riser like they offer it negatively effects the use of the charging handle..so its a useless item. I run my stock on the #1 position for the most part #2 sometimes. I train as I would fight, with a chest rig and armor so I have no need to be extended any further. In order to use a cheek riser on an AR you would need that sucker fully extended.

For the price point, you can get a better stock for the same cost. CAA doesn't make much of anything note worthy IMO.

"Friends don't let friends buy CAA"

AndrewMendez
10-20-2009, 9:11 AM
Nothing looks prettier then a A2 Butt stock!

Black Majik
10-20-2009, 9:13 AM
Nothing looks prettier then a A2 Butt stock!

Heh, I'll agree to that! :)

+1 on the CAA.

00BuckShot
10-20-2009, 9:25 AM
I have two of the CAA stocks. I disagree, they are very well made and hold up to abuse well. They might be a little heaver but that's what makes them good. I'm not a big fan of their sniper stock but the 6 position without all the mods on it makes for a good collapsable stock. Not like some of the cheap plastic M4 stocks you see out there. I also like the rubber buttpad. Just my opinion though.

xounlistedxox
10-20-2009, 9:37 AM
I've had the CAA basic stock for years now. It just looks like a basic issue stock with the addition of a compartment on one side and a rail on the other. I bought this stock, so that I can have extra cr123 batteries readily availible without having to dig through pockets, or packs to find them. I have never purchased any of the add ons like the cheek rest, or mag holder. These options do look somewhat cheesy, but I would chose function over looks 100%

I will agree their "sniper" stock is crude looking and poorly designed, but that doesn't mean you can categorize all of the CAA stocks as ugly.
http://i415.photobucket.com/albums/pp240/xounlistedxox/img1249670553152.jpg

pipboy
10-20-2009, 9:49 AM
I've never used one, but with that said...

I'm with you Pac, I think they are uglier than Glocks...:puke:

:D

evidens83
10-20-2009, 9:55 AM
These options do look somewhat cheesy, but I would chose function over looks 100%

Then why do you have the fake suppressor??? :D CAA looks cheap I wouldnt even pay a dime IMO.

pacrimguru
10-20-2009, 10:00 AM
...that doesn't mean you can categorize all of the CAA stocks as ugly.

oh, yea i can, because they are! :rolleyes: hahaha... come to think of it, their grips are out of control too. people need to know that things can be overly designed. someone needs to tell them to hold off on some of those tactical grooves and alien-like slots.

http://www.bowerstactical.com/store/images/CAAFGA.jpg

http://www.m-aparts.com/products/82307103835_april19%20096.jpg

http://cueballcol.files.wordpress.com/2007/10/alpre.jpg

xounlistedxox
10-20-2009, 10:00 AM
If you noticed we live in CA. This is a BCM 11.5" Upper with a permanently attached Spike's Fake Can. I've built several with the 5.5" Flash Hider and I think that build looks hideous, so I wanted to check out how a fake can would look. Spike's Fake Cans look awesome and are very well made.

pacrimguru
10-20-2009, 10:04 AM
i'm cool with the fake can thing because we simply can't get NFA restricted stuff here. like if you bought a HK 416 10.5" upper, you pretty much have to get a fake can if you're not using it as a pistol.

evollep3
10-20-2009, 10:32 AM
:nuts:
so you like fake cans well what is the difference between that and that big hood scoop? and FYI i like my SRS on my AR10 a hell of alot more then my PRS :43:

and BTW that big wing reminds me of your old Scope mount high rings with high mount :rolleyes:

i'm cool with the fake can thing because we simply can't get NFA restricted stuff here. like if you bought a HK 416 10.5" upper, you pretty much have to get a fake can if you're not using it as a pistol.

xounlistedxox
10-20-2009, 10:38 AM
A fake can has one function. Make your barrel to the legal 16" length. This can comes off the second SHTF and then I have an 11.5" upper. Since I live in the city a shorter rifle would be much better. I suppose you didn't think of this? Believe me if I had a million dollars I would have a permit that would allow me to own SBR's, but since I don't this is how it has to be done.

Vanguard
10-20-2009, 10:44 AM
....These options do look somewhat cheesy, but I would chose function over looks 100%



This coming from a guy with a fake can. :rolleyes: :D

evollep3
10-20-2009, 10:45 AM
A fake can has one function. Make your barrel to the legal 16" length. This can comes off the second SHTF and then I have an 11.5" upper. Since I live in the city a shorter rifle would be much better. I suppose you didn't think of this? Believe me if I had a million dollars I would have a permit that would allow me to own SBR's, but since I don't this is how it has to be done.

if you had a 11.5 than it would be required to be pinned however i do agree with your concept on the SBR but i think i would go with the extended Flash hider CMMG uses

WeekendWarrior
10-20-2009, 10:50 AM
WWRTW

pacrimguru
10-20-2009, 11:05 AM
:nuts:
so you like fake cans well what is the difference between that and that big hood scoop? and FYI i like my SRS on my AR10 a hell of alot more then my PRS :43:

and BTW that big wing reminds me of your old Scope mount high rings with high mount :rolleyes:

if you actually read my response, i was saying that sometimes you are forced to run a fake can due to this state's laws. there is no law forcing you to use ugly grips and stocks!

as for the scope rings, you got me there! at the time i had no idea how to mount a scope because i didn't do any long range shooting. got that fixed now.

btw no need for underhanded comments, i'm just stating my opinion on CAA items. didn't mean to offend your SRS.

xm177
10-20-2009, 11:07 AM
It would be a cold day in hell before I use anything CAA or UTG. I see that junk all the time at gun shows. My AR is not a futuristic harpoon gun.

tomd1584
10-20-2009, 11:07 AM
Its not like CAA stuff is cheap either....if you buy there stuff it must be because you like the looks, cuz its certainly not for the huge price difference.

tomd1584
10-20-2009, 11:08 AM
It would be a cold day in hell before I use anything CAA or UTG. I see that junk all the time at gun shows. My AR is not a futuristic harpoon gun.

Or an Airsoft gun (UTG)

xounlistedxox
10-20-2009, 11:24 AM
I have owned many stocks including the lmt sopmod, magpul m93b, a few vltors. All of these I mentioned are drastically overpriced and look just as strange when compared to an issue collapsible stock. I buy the CAA because it looks basic, has many add-on options, and is priced where it should be.

Now as far as UTG goes. I've also owned KAC Rails, Surefire Rails, TROY Rails etc... None of them lock up as solid as my "Cheapo" UTG Rails. How about that? I recall spending upwards of $300 for my old KAC rails and they had slop. If you guys like paying more just for a name then be my guest, but I'll stick with what works the way it's supposed to for the price it should be.

pipboy
10-20-2009, 11:33 AM
The only thing CAA I have and use are their ladder rail guards. You can get a set of 4 for the cost of 1 magpul rail ladder and they look/function pretty much the same.

http://www.opticsplanet.net/caa-command-arms-accessories-ladder-style-rail-cover.html

technique
10-20-2009, 11:35 AM
Now as far as UTG goes. I've also owned KAC Rails, Surefire Rails, TROY Rails etc... None of them lock up as solid as my "Cheapo" UTG Rails. How about that? I recall spending upwards of $300 for my old KAC rails and they had slop. If you guys like paying more just for a name then be my guest, but I'll stick with what works the way it's supposed to for the price it should be.

UTG rails aren't made of the same quality metals, they are heavier, they aren't anodized, and they are made in China...
If it works for you, good. But they don't hold a candle to the sun power of a quality product.

As far as CAA, you can get a CTR or MOE stock for that price...soooooooo.

xounlistedxox
10-20-2009, 11:40 AM
CTR, and MOE Stocks don't hold batteries, so they aren't as versatile, and you wouldn't be getting the same bang for your buck.

UTG's are still aluminum, so the coating is near pointless since they won't corrode in either case. They may be slightly heavier, but whats a couple ounces on a firearm that weighs in at several pounds?

00BuckShot
10-20-2009, 11:48 AM
MOE and CTR stocks are functional, yes. They are basic, yes. They are the same price, yes. Are the better quality, no. They are cheap plastic with cheap springs and injection mold marks all over the place. Not as good as CBS, IMHO.

RECCE556
10-20-2009, 3:46 PM
CAA/MAKO/TDI = JUNK.

They design their stuff to appeal to people who don't know sh*t. It's just like douchebags that put super gigantic REAR wings on their FRONT WHEEL DRIVE car...they don't realize why you need the wing, they just know that every F1 car has one and they think their 130HP Civic is a F1 car... It "looks tactical" and that's good enough for some people I guess...:rolleyes: