VFC Mk43 Mod 0

[Titleist]

This will mark my second review here on arnies, the first being the Guarder AK74SU kit almost a year and a half ago. So here goes:

 

 

Introduction

 

Back in July, WGC first showed off a new machine gun on their homepage, the VFC Mk43 Mod.0. I'm not known as a machine gun kinda guy, I like assault rifles, so I quickly wrote off the gun as just another big heavy waste of money, later I'd come to find it was a big FUN heavy waste of money, but regardless I wasn't that interested. A few weeks later after finding out a bunch of parts I had ordered were out of stock, and I had 400 bucks in store credit I said what the hell and transfered the amount over to the Mk43 pre-order. That was back in july, finally on September 2nd they released the damn thing. EMS delivered it 3 days later in a BIG box, and well...here we are with this review. I'm not a big support gun fan, but this is changing my opinion, built like a brick *beep* house, and just as pretty, this when upgraded is going to be a BB hose!

 

In all honesty the M60 series never appealed to me, I was extremely put off by the TOP guns, as they never seemed to work right and the gravity feed hopper system was umm...stupid. That said just like the M14 series I find the M60s to have stood the test of time. And because of that when you add stuff like rail systems or updated ergonomics the gun looks even better. It's amazing when you can have a gun that looks kick *albatross* being used by a current Navy SEAL or an army grunt in the vietnam war, it's just a pretty timeless design.

 

 

Real History (From Wikipedia)

This firearm is the latest generation of the M60 family and incorporates a number of improvements over other versions. Externally, it looks somewhat like the M60E3, but it has other internal changes improvements. It features a different forward grip and is also a more reliable weapon than the other M60s. The M60E4/Mk 43 has higher pull for the belt, and is highly configurable. It is available in a variety of configurations, and it is also possible to convert some older models to this standard. The M60E4 and Mk 43 were primarily developed in the 1990s. First the E4, and soon after the Mk 43—these early Mk 43 had some distinct differences from the E4 (such as a duckbill flash hider), though by the 2000s these distinctions seemed to have ended.

 

This version also has another designation under the Navy, Mk 43 Mod 0. The Mk 43 Mod 0 was developed for the U.S. Navy SEALs to replace their existing stock of M60E3 machine guns fitted with shorter "assault barrels". These weapons are identical to standard M60E4s, with the exception of the barrel length, and can be used either as suppressive fire or direct fire weapons, at least in terms of theory and training. The Mk 43 Mod 1 adds significantly more rail attachment points to the weapon's receiver cover and handguard.

 

The M60E4 and Mk 43 versions are roughly similar, although they are only part of the same family. While it might be fair to say that the Mk 43 are a type of M60E4, there are technical differences between any given M60E4 model. Early Mk 43s have certain differences over M60E4 from the same period, the most obvious being the duck-bill flash hider and different handguard. Current Mk 43s do not have these differences however, and the U.S. Ordnance website states in their FAQ, as of 2005, that the "M60E4 and the Mk43 are the same weapon system".

[Titleist]

First Impressions

 

Well, it's big, it's heavy, and it's awesome. Nothing rattles or squeaks, CHECK! No nasty seam lines, CHECK. Big box mag? CHECK! So when you get the gun out of the box it's roughtly about 38 inches long, the barrel from tip to mechbox is an impressive 18.75", so that gives you an idea of how things are spaced internally. The gun when loaded comes it at arund 17-19+ pounds depending on battery. I tip my hat to VFC for making everything on this gun have a positive locking system, nothing just sorta half *albatross* locks in, either stuff is LOCKED or its not. So nothing is accidentally going to fall off. Finish is very good for the aluminum parts, it's a mix of steel, aluminum, rubber, and fiber reinforced plastic. The bipod deploys easy enough, legs extend simple as pie, so far Thunderbirds are GO!

 

Build Quality

 

So how well is thing beast built, well...very good. I'm sure the Inokatsu is probably a hair better, but this is ready to rock right out of the box, and is much more user friendly. As good as the V3 gearbox is, it's well, a V3. The VFC employs a gearbox system that's much more likely to stand up to long periods of fire, and if you bought an M60 and don't plan on laying down on the supressing fire than you're a godless heathen, so get out, get out of my sight right now. Okay, now that those people are gone, let me say this, this is a fantastic mechbox design, much like the CA 249 design you can release and quick swap the spring and piston in a matter of seconds. It also makes getting to the mechbox as simple as releasing the locking bar on the stock, pulling the stock off, and then simply sliding the gearbox UP and OUT. There are no wires to fiddle with, the mechbox has a 3 prong female connector on the front bottom that slides into a male end under the barrel assembly, this supplies power to the gearbox as well as the autowinding box mag.

 

 

The barrel is also very easy to work on if you plan on installing a tightbore barrel or new hopup bucking. It uses the standard AEG barrel so nothing jenky needs to be done to make one fit, it's a 5 minute swap. The barrel is released just like the real one, in that you press in on the toggle switch, rotate the locking release UP, and then the barrel just kind of spring forward and is ready to be tugged loose. The hopup is controlled through a sliding adjustment which is nice and solid, so it won't wiggle itself loose, it's also very easy to get to so you can adjust the hopup while the gun is loaded up if need be to correct for more hop/less hop.

 

 

The gun has a fully operation leaf sight, but honestly, if you're aiming with the rear sight you're taking this too seriously, this gun just sprays...and sprays...oh and it sprays if I didn't mention that already. Speaking of spraying you'll need to store a battery somewhere, eh? You have two choices, you can fit a long AK style stick battery, about 1700mah max, in the gas return system. The gas return cap just unscrews and in there is a long battery connector. However 1700mah is kinda wimpy for a support gun, so you have another option, which is to fit a battery in the box/bag mag, as there is another battery connector in there for this purpose. I am having the gun wired for a 12v battery which will fit into the bag mag.

 

 

The grips are 1:1 dimension with the real one, so for the first time you FINALLY get an M60 with correct pistol grips, HOORAY! Sorry Inokatsu guys, we win this round.

 

Now for the bad stuff, the carry handle is apparantly weak on these guns, and it'd be real nice to be able to carry the guns by the handle, but I guess the aluminum combined with the weight is weak enough that inside the box from VFC has a big white piece of paper with the words "Do not carry gun by carrying handle" umm, for a gun that's over a 1000 bucks I expect that to work. But at the same time you're not supposed to carry the CA 249 by it's carry handle either. I will be slinging the weapon all the time so the carry handle isn't super important for me. But I want to rectify this shortcoming when I can do so.

 

The other thing that I found displeasing is the front sight, they seemed to have built it's inner diameter just a little too big, so even with the set pins installed it wobbles around a bit too much, a bit of JB Weld metal epoxy fixed that right up. Also for some damn reason my real 7.62 belt fits like ###### in the receiver, I need to file down the tips of the real rounds to make them fit in a bit more securely. Whatever.

 

So yes there are a few niggles that bother me, but nothing that couldn't be fixed with a little time and tools. Also this gun has fantastic looking SACO trademarks, they're spelled right as well. No SACO DESFENCE or any other weird spelling errors (read: Engrish).

 

Even the quality of the box mag's nylon is very nice, overal I'd say this is a 9/10 on the build quality scale. The front sight can be fixed easy enough, but the carry handle is somewhat inexcusable for the cost of this gun. I expect that lazy ###### out of ClASSic Army, not VFC.

[Titleist]

Shooting Impressions

 

So how does she shoot? Well just about as good as they get they come. It shoots as well as my briefly owned CA 249. It’s a very nice rate of fire, not too fast, not too slow. The 12V battery and high speed gears I’m having installed however are going to push this thing from “good” to “INSANE” regarding rate of fire.

 

Accuracy is very good considering you get a pretty long 475mm inner barrel. The box mag is very nice as well, however when the gun is being fired for the first time after loading expect a few seconds of dry fire till the hopper has pushed enough rounds up the tube to feed the gun. Also as for being an auto loading magazine it’s VERY slick, it loads as the gun is being fired so you do not notice the noise. And is not clumsy like the CA’s magazine mechanism.

 

The box mag is secured to the gun via a strap that loops over the magazine plate on the gun, and one more strap that loops around the plate to keep it nice and snug. Then a steel feeding tube goes from magazine to body of the gun, and a small cable next to it supplies power from the gun to the magazine. When everyhing is assembled it’s almost impossible to tell those two pieces are there. i.e it’s not obvious like the CA magazine system which is pretty obvious. i.e if you took off the dummy magazine (which aren’t included with the gun) it would still look pretty attractive as a whole unit.

 

 

Now the only knock I have the M60 series as a whole is that it’s incredibly akward to hold the gun as a right handed person. I wish I was a southpaw with this gun. As my left arm has to bend out to get around the box mag and reach the front grip. However I may force myself to hold it as a lefty so that my left hand is on the trigger while my right hand is on the vertical grip. This might be necessary for when running or manuvering the gun in and out of houses at places such as Ft. Ord. Either way it’s a big gun, and the ergonomics of the gun are a holdover from the 60’s and 70’s so forward all complaints to SACO, not VFC.

 

Cost vs Competitors

 

Okay, so how does this stack up against the TOP gun? No contest, go back to your hole TOP M60, this thing is MILES ahead of the TOP series M60. Both in performance, value, build quality, and cost out of the box.

 

But what about the INOKATSU you say? Well, I’d say the Inokatsu is probably the best gun in looks, except for it’s incorrect pistol grip, which is a bummer for those of us looking for 1:1 scale. However what the VFC lacks in amount of steel parts it makes up for in ease of upgrading and performance, it’s a great mechbox and the VFC includes a mechbox and box mag, something that Inokatsu makes you buy seperately (read: Jacks you!). So I’d say if money is no object go with the Inokatsu, but you will have to make a LOT of investment into that gun, besides just the gun.

 

Whereas the VFC is a complete solution out of the box. I’d compare this to the Guarder AK74SU which I also reviewed, in that if you’re looking for the best build construction and asthetics get the higher end product (i.e Inokatsu) but if you’re looking for a balance of what’s affordable and what will also make you happy you own it then go with the VFC. It’s rugged, looks great, feels great. And won’t completely break your bank, it’ll eat your funds, but at least leave you enough to get a battery and bbs, both of which you’ll need a lot of.

[That_One_Person]

Nice review, good to see a review on this giant money-taker.

[tcl]

Good Job! Thanks for the nice review!

[Gundrosen]

Great review!

 

Now I just want it even more! Well lets just hope WGC gets them back in stock soon.

[Titleist]

Thanks guys.

[ReaperBJJ]

Great Review, you have converted me from wanting the Inokatsu Mk43 to this. Now to email VFC to see if the GB-Tech Mk43 RAS for the TOP will fit on this, with little to no modification

[check6]

Titleist nice review.

 

Since I'm in SF we should get together and do a little heads up VFC vs Inokatsu comparison photo shoot.

 

As a Inokatsu owner I would like to respond to a couple of your comments, but lets keep this friendly.

 

One of the main reasons I went for the Ino was that it used a V3 box. ALL boxes will break eventually if your heavy on the trigger. When it happens I can buy a replacement V3 from Guarder, Hurricane, Marui etc. Where do you buy a VFC replacement box? I'm concerned about this because, when a friend broke his CA249 box he was unable to buy a replacement anywhere. Ended up selling the gun for parts. CA finally decided to sell replacement boxes 9 months later. Does VFC plan to sell replacement boxes? Who knows.

 

So the pistol grip is the right size on the VFC but not on the Ino. I'll give you that, but if your going to be that picky about details what about those horrible lock nuts all over the side of the VFC receiver by the ammo box hanger? And what about the ammo hanger itself, is it just bolted to the receiver? I know it's picky but you opened this can of worms.

 

Putting a 1700 mAh stick battery in the gas tube is silly. As you pointed out you need more capacity. Putting a big 12 volt in the ammo bag does not seem the ideal way to distribut the weight. The Ino allows for a large size 12 volt (I don't recco them) in the reciever at the back by the stock, this balances the gun out nicely IMHO.

 

I do really like the VFC upper reciever cover, especially the cam follower parts inside, the Ino cover is empty inside.

 

The Ino safety system is ###### in my opinon, not well designed and causes drag on the trigger. I just removed mine. The VFC hopup looks better as well but I didn't see pics of it.

 

Enjoy the gun maybe we'll meet out on the field sometime.

 

P.S. If your going to put a RAS on it (and I sincerely hope you don't) I be willing to buy your front foregrip. Cheers.

Edited September 14, 2006 by check6

[GlockGuy945]

Fantastic review! I kinda want one now, but I still can't afford it. Out of curiosity, why do you want to increase the rate of fire? Real M60s ROFs aren't that fast, you should just make it shoot at your fields maximum limit( w/.20s), and use heavy BBs to punch through thick cover. You'll have a true "pig" then .

 

I didn't see you mention anything reguarding the bi-pod. How sturdy is it? I the metal going to start tearing apart if you use the bi-pod alot? A buddy of mine used his CA M249 at LC5, and the bipod started getting wobbly, turns out the metal pegs that hold the bipod in place, and the legs on the bipod were being torn up by the two rubbing against each other.

[Gundrosen]

Is your pig back from AEX now?

Do you know it it would be possible to keep a backup battery in the gas tube, or will it be too much trouble changing the wires for the batterys for it to be practical?

 

WGC just sent me a mail saying it will ship the 27th (they just keep delaying it)

 

@check6, well regarding replacement gearboxes. With VFC coming with a full tune up kit. It should not be a problem to get replacement parts at least. But if youre thinking of the gearbox shell I doubt it will break. VFC say they designed the gun for the support role, and I'm positive they have reinforced the gearbox to handle the preasure(at least stock, but it will probobly withstand the FTK too)

But from what I have heard(and experienced) VFC has an excellent customer service, so if my gearbox breakes the first thing I'm gonna do is send VFC an email and ask for a replacement box

 

As for battery placement, I cant say for sure but my guess would be that the gun is fairly balanced without the boxmag on, and so putting the battery in the stock would unbalance it(I know it does on my STAR M249) And I think the box mag is the ideal place for the battery.

Edited September 20, 2006 by Gundrosen

[Titleist]

First off, no the gun isn't back from AEX, it'll be back by this weekend I'm hoping. You could keep a battery in the gas tube, but it'd be easier to just swap out a large one in the mag.

 

As for WGC, sorry it's been so delayed dude.

 

Personally the balance is damn good with the box mag.

 

And I'm going to be running the gun with a 9.6v battery, not the 12v that AE/FTK includes. Yes they include a 12v battery and high speed gears, scary eh?

 

The bipod is in fact steel, at the mounts and main brackets, with aluminum and steel mixes. It's VERY sturdy, and doesn't stress the main bracket like the CA 249 does.

 

Check6, hey man pick a date and I'd love to meet up and compare guns. Yes the V3 is more easily replaceable, but at the same time I think the V3 isn't up for long periods of fire like the VFC gearbox is. Again I won't know till I actually test fire the damn thing.

 

As for the lock nuts, I think I'm going to have a friend anodize them for me. I have Crenna's Inokatsu steel carry handle on the way, it mounts the same way as the VFC. The current line of thinking is that since VFC/GB built a good deal of spare parts for the TOP guns that they'd rework or carry over what they had already built so as to save on tooling costs. So parts like the sights, handle, etc should swap out fine.

 

And NO, not gonna put a RAS on the gun, what you see is what you get, I don't believe an m60 should have optics or RAS RAPE.

 

When I get it back this week I'll get a video of the damn beast firing.

[Gundrosen]

Sounds good, I wouldnt take the chance on a 12V either though 9.6 should be more then enough.

 

Hopefully I'll get mine in a two weeks time, cant wait to see it for myself now

 

It would be nice if you and Check6 hooked up and compared the guns, should be interesting too how theyre different.

[Titleist]

check6, where are you located?

[[VT]Mofo2000]

Great review, T. I was wondering how can the box mag handle any physical abuse (or rain) since it's made out of cardboard.

[check6]

check6, where are you located?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

San Francisco.

 

Email me and lets see if we can get it together:

 

check6@joelin.com

[Titleist]

Great review, T.  I was wondering how can the box mag handle any physical abuse (or rain) since it's made out of cardboard. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Not sure how durable it is.

 

Check 6, you should come down to the Ft Ord game on the 7th.

 

Also, called AEX, the gun will be ready for pickup by saturday.

[Gundrosen]

Just a little FYI, it's made of cardboard in RS too

However I dont think it is that durable, taking in regard, the cardboard is meant to be replaced every 100 rounds. But it probobly wont be hard to make a new box or order a RS(I've seen them around the net for a few dollars)

[starget]

some photos from my friend....

 

And some detail photos and review from combat2000 website(sorry...that's chinese web)

VFC mk43 mod0

[rather]

some photos from my friend....

 

And some detail photos and review from combat2000 website(sorry...that's chinese web)

VFC mk43 mod0

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

nice review thats awsome

 

dang to bad i cant afford one

Edited September 22, 2006 by rather

[tcl]

Move to here

Edited September 22, 2006 by tcl

[tcl]

relocate

Edited September 22, 2006 by tcl

[tcl]

relocate to here

Edited September 22, 2006 by tcl

[Agent47]

Okay, as another owner of the VFC Mk43, I'll add my comments.

 

The gun is exactly as what Titleist described, sturdy, solid as a rock with the omgwtfnotsteel carry handle...so in my case I need to find one (Crenna...). Unfortunately, there are some minor drawbacks in my opinion.

 

Charging handle: I couldn't move the charging handle - okay well I could, but when you get the annoying spring thingy in the handle out of the way, the charging handle moves back, but doesn't spring back to its original position. Not a big thing for some people, but for me it's slightly annoying, but it's something I can deal with. But I do hope VFC comes out with some sort of fix for this...

 

Box mag: As a SAW gunner I'm used to changing out box mags in the field. So when it comes to this I was slightly surprised. The Mk43 isn't very mag-changer friendly. The metal tube that is supposed to connect the box mag to the rest of the gun is designed in a way that you have to twist the tube once its inserted so that it stays locked in the feed port - and twisting the tube with the box mag on is a PITA - not to mention trying to secure on the box mag itself. Well, it is easy, and then there's the initial finaglement with the metal tube thing...

 

Apparently what VFC wanted for the gun was that you poured in the BBs into the cardboard box and closed the lid, sprayed some unfortunate yobbo with 6000 pellets, open the lid, and pour in some more BBs, I've seen rival SAW gunners do that in the field, for myself, that tactic's a little iffy...so its functional...but in an odd way for me.

 

Sling Swivel: one missing on the underside of the stock - checked the TOP M60E4 and it had one...

 

Electrode: Not in the most convenient place either...right on top of the feed port where it's really hard to reach...damn small hands.

 

On the holding thing - holding the M60 with the box mag didn't feel really awkward at all, actually...so...that can't be too bad.

 

Hope someone has a fix for all of this soon...

Edited September 23, 2006 by Agent47

[Gundrosen]

Sling Swivel: one missing on the underside of the stock - checked the TOP M60E4 and it had one...

 

Well, the RS dont so, I wouldnt complain about that: