|May 18th, 2017, 08:40||#1|
Join Date: Oct 2016
ASG CZ EVO A1 Carbine BET (vs original)
Updated with field usage, further testing (second post below).
My new ASG CZ EVO A1 Carbine BET (Scorpion) arrived Tuesday. I have had the original EVO A1 for over a year now and it has performed very well. I play outdoors, so I thought I would see how well the new carbine version would perform.
Here are my initial impressions and a quick test in the backyard. Actual game performance will have to wait until after the weekend. Feel free to ask me any questions you may have.
I’m not a fan of the unpadded box. The cardboard support at the end of the receiver is a little crushed and the gun is free to move around in the box a bit. I’d much prefer a foam cut insert.
No separate instruction manual. The instructions are printed inside the box. No downloadable PDF for the carbine either. No cleaning rod. Good that I have a long one already. No ball bearing spring guide. At this price-point I think they could just include it. The included spring guide is steel and not the original zinc alloy. Phew, the iron sites are under the cardboard supports.
Damn the finish on the polymer looks strange. Duller and less uniform than the original. A bit patchy. Perhaps it’s just the mould release agent. [Comparing the two, they are pretty similar in finish].
Man, this thing is heavier than I expected. Surely it weighs more than my SIG553 (2.95 kg). It’s the balance. It feels meaty and weighty at the front end. Reserve judgement for now, but the original feels better in the hand, more balanced. [The SIG553 is actually 500g heavier but less front heavy.]
Extending the stock is much stiffer than the original EVO. In fact, I always end up snapping it open to the maximum instead of in single steps. Ugh: It wiggles when extended. In both positions. The original had less wiggle and only when fully extended. Damn. Collapsing it and hooking it against the receiver is a little different too. The hook seems longer than on the original and requires pushing down a little more on the stock to get it to catch. It is solid when it is locked into position though. [Confirmed, there is more play in the extended portion of the stock on the carbine than on the original, both sideways and lengthwise.]
Like the original EVO, there’s no unique serial number. An issue, and considerable additional expense and hassle, in countries like Spain where replicas have to be registered with the local authorities. Again, the cheesy “Made In Denmark” paper sticker on the side of the receiver where the serial number would be on the real steel. Fortunately it’s easy enough to remove.
Buyers’ remorse? I am praying this thing is better than the original. 430 euros plus 32 shipping. It had better be.
All of my batteries are wired for anything but Tamiya. Solder up a quick adaptor—definitely don’t want to start chopping before we know this thing works as it should. Who the hell uses Tamiya connectors with a MOSFET and LIPO anyway?
Surprise! The instructions are under the cardboard that supports the gun. Let’s see. Great. ASG now recommends a 9.9V LifePo battery for the EVO when running a M95 spring. Wish I had known that before ordering when I still had a chance to add the battery to the order. My original has been running fine on a 11.1V LIPO for over a year with a M95. I wonder what the hell has changed. I assumed the internals were virtually identical in quality compared to the original. Let’s hope they are. [Retailer has confirmed that 11.1V on M95 spring does not void warranty, but heavy use of Auto _may_ result in gear/piston breakage.]
Pretty basic instructions, no indication of which way to turn to remove the mock suppressor to insert battery. My suppressor was stiff so I had to double-check my original EVO. Okay. Counter-clockwise to remove. Okay, it’s turning. And turning. And turning. And it’s off. Jeez. That’s a lot of naked, unprotected inner barrel protruding. Even more when the hand guard pops off. Careful now. One false move and we’ll be taking hook shots. Nerve-wracking compared to the original which is fully sheathed by the outer barrel. It is a 6.03mm brass barrel though. At least that’s what the engraving at the tip says. There’s at least 20 cm of inner barrel exposed. And there’s tiny bit of front-to-back play. [The carbine uses the same parts as the original for the outer barrel from the receiver. The suppressor is fastened to the outer barrel, sheathing the extra length of inner barrel on the carbine. It does not support it although the tip is centred, and slightly recessed at the muzzle.]
Inserting a triple-stick battery into the EVO takes practice, especially getting the cables, third stick and connector over the outer barrel correctly while reinstalling the hand guard. It’s an art on the original EVO and it isn’t any easier with all that exposed inner barrel jutting out. With my improvised adaptor it proves hopeless. After five attempts I give up. The adaptor and original connector are just too bulky and keep catching on the holes in the hand guard with just two centimetres to go. No point forcing things. It does beep once when the battery is connected and a single shot responds quickly. The dilemma: throw caution to the wind and install a new connector, probably voiding the warranty, or try a longer adaptor? Back in the box for now. Once it’s finally reassembled again though, the carbine format is starting to grow on me.
I decide not to cut off the Tamiya for now until I am certain this thing works. I end up feeding the adaptor through the handrail and will hold battery on outside initially.
Quick test fire with a full mag and 0.25g G&G BBs. All modes working correctly, a bit twangy sounding, perhaps it’s the 11,V Lipo. 3 to 4 clicks of hop give a nice long range, and I definitely hit my target each time. Hard to tell without measuring and a direct comparison (it’s getting dark) but it appears to have longer range than the original EVO. This is stock with the stock spring guide. My original EVO has the upgraded ball-bearing spring guide which I will try in the carbine as well.
The fire selector is stiffer than the original EVO, especially the left side. Right side selector has a bit more slop. A little harder to operate with the right thumb than on the original.
Day 2. Airsoft Eire, the retailer, confirms that it is fine to use 11.1V without voiding the warranty. And that there have been no changes to internals other than cylinder porting. Tamiya removed. Proper testing. 3 to 4 clicks of hop with 0.25g G&G BBs. Measured range is at least 52-53 meters before running out of space in the backyard. There is a fairly loud, metallic twanging sound when shooting.
Chrono results (average of six shots). No hop. There is no joule creep on the carbine with the hop off, unlike the original EVO.
0.20g 320.8 fps
0.25g 282.3 fps
With ball bearing spring guide:
0.20g 333.0 fps
+13 fps with ball bearing spring guide upgrade versus stock spring guide. It seems a little less noisy with the upgraded spring guide.
Comparing range and accuracy (0.25g), the carbine appears to have about a 5 to 10 m increase in effective range over the original EVO with greater accuracy and grouping at 45 to 50 m. This is purely subjective though as the wind conditions may not be identical.
Compact, well-made modern carbine with excellent build quality and materials. There is absolutely no wiggle or slop anywhere except for the extended stock piece. Minor niggles are lack of basic accessories/ball bearing spring guide. A wider choice of springs when ordering would be nice (M105 stock, please). Light package but somewhat nose-heavy. Wishes: Outer barrel for non-suppressed version either in the box or as a separate option for two-in-one. I would have preferred a longer outer barrel covering more or all of the inner barrel and housed inside the suppressor.
To be continued...
Last edited by Pfeil; June 25th, 2017 at 07:35.. Reason: Added skirmish and further testing results
|June 25th, 2017, 07:27||#2|
Join Date: Oct 2016
Practical Experience Report, ASG Scorpion EVO Carbine (BET)
After fielding the ASG Scorpion EVO Carbine in outdoor events twice and after further testing, I would like to add a few comments to my initial remarks. Please note that I am comparing this to the original ASG Scorpion EVO (SMG), which I have used for over 18 months now.
I have never had an issue with feeding on the original EVO - mid-caps or high-caps. With the ASG high-cap magazines, a full wind was usual enough to run through almost the entire magazine on the original EVO.
On the Carbine, I find myself having to rewind more frequently or being caught dry firing after a few three-round bursts. In other words, I have to remember to rewind frequently on the Carbine version. I have no idea why, since I am using the same magazines that function flawlessly on the short/original EVO. My guess is vibration, because it often seems that the high-cap windup mechanism is being suddenly released.
With the mid-caps, 75 rounds, I often find that one round falls out when removing an empty magazine (the trigger cutoff/empty mag switch has tripped) on the Carbine. This never happens on the original EVO. I cannot, however, detect any additional wobble or play on the magazines on the Carbine version.
As I mentioned in my first post, ASG now recommends a 9.9V LifePO battery for the EVO Carbine version when using springs under M110. Field limits here are 350 fps. According to the dealer this primarily applies to predominantly FULL auto usage. Digging around, it appears that there is a danger of pre-engagement on the Carbine version with springs under M110 and 11.1V LiPo, potentially destroying the gears in full auto. Disconcerting.
Initially I found the sound of the gearbox with an 11.1V LiPo and stock M95 spring on the Carbine to be very loud and 'twangy" and have avoided full auto. However, I am concerned even about burst mode ruining the gears. I have used the original EVO with an 11.1V LiPo and the stock M95 spring exclusively. Apparently this recommendation doesn't apply to the original.
So what is the actual difference on the Carbine version other than the longer barrel and cylinder?
It's all in the spring. I have been testing various spring strengths and brands in both the original and Carbine EVOs.
SP100________344 fps______374 fps (!)
I was puzzled by the significant increase in muzzle velocity on all springs that I tried in the Carbine. Testing the stock M95 spring from the original EVO in the Carbine confirmed my suspicions. It was clear that the stock M95 spring issued with the Carbine is softer than the stock M95 spring in the original EVO. (All tests with stock steel spring guide from EVO Carbine in both replicas).
Testing the stock M95 spring from the original in the Carbine yielded an average of 357 fps! My findings have been confirmed by ASG's recent publication of the Carbine parts list. They are different parts. The spring from the Carbine version is definitely softer and is likely what is leading to potential pre-engagment/gear damage on sub M110 configurations with a 11.1V LiPo.
This is all moot for those who can play at 380 fps and over of course. But I am disappointed in this unexpected and unannounced change in the product. I assumed the Carbine would work flawlessly with an 11.1V LiPo just like the original does.
Note: The stock springs are linear and the ends have not been ground flat.
The extendable portion of the stock on the Carbine version has noticeable play/wobble both lengthwise and laterally. It increases as the stock is extended. There is none in the original stock except at the most extended position and it is much less than on the Carbine version.
Contrary to popular belief, the battery space on the Carbine version is EXACTLY the same as on the original. This is because it uses the same outer barrel part as the original.
Overall the ASG Scorpion Carbine is a very solid, well-constructed, quality replica (barring the wobble with the extendible stock). I also have an issue with hi-caps apparently losing their wind during light usage. I find it somewhat front heavy and imbalanced, but the replica is certainly quite light overall. My confidence in the durability of the Carbine version has been somewhat undermined by the need to use a 9.9V LiPo with springs under M110 and I would have preferred to have known this upfront before purchasing. It does sound much smoother with a heavier spring, even a Guarder SP100 or G&G M100 progressive spring.
Please feel free to ask me any questions you may have.
Last edited by Pfeil; June 25th, 2017 at 07:37..
|Thread Tools||Search this Thread|