Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Inokatsu M4 M.T.W

Recommended Posts

Od czasów MTW 2008 sporo się zmieniło i wersja 2011 z poprawionym suwadłem jest już w pełni gotowa do bezproblemowego używania prosto z pudełka. Replika oczywiście jest przystosowana do strzelania na CO2 więc bez problemu możesz używać magazynków GHK.

Najlepszymi magazynkami wciąż są ProWin gen. 2.

Natomiast magazynki które są również ok z tym, że wymagają minimalnych zabiegów/wymian (kolejność nie ma znaczenia):

- Beta Project(O-ringi na zaworze),

- GHK(szybciej zużywające się szczęki)

- G&P P-Mag.

Edited by Amadem
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 282
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

jeszcze jedno - czy są dostępne same szczęki do magów ghk skoro się szybciej zużywają ?????

Używajac ino na magach ghk zdecydowanie nalezy wymieniać niektóre części ?????? . Sander pisał , że coś tam trzeba podmieniać pytanie jest tylko - czy jest to niezbędne na początku , czy może części stockowe trochę wytrzymają ?????

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

Porównanie M4A1 Viper Tech 1 Gen (2008) kontra wersja 2011.


Okay' date=' so what I'm going to do is give ya'll a complete rundown of the 2011 version as of 2/24/2012. I just bought it last week from ehobbyasia so this is the most current stuff; it may be different later on as Viper Tech likes to change stuff around mid production cycle. I will also compare with my old gen. 1 that I purchased within 1 month of the original release (so it's the really old stuff).



[u']Externals:[/u] (front to back)




Gen. 1 - Came with an orange plastic flash-hider, along with a black steel flash-hider. Thread size is real steel dimensions, so 12mm. Real flash hiders should fit.


2011 - Only came with the steel flash-hider that was spray painted orange. A bit of acetone and some time and it will be back to black. Thread size is still 12mm.


Outer Barrel:


Gen. 1 - One piece, all steel, looks exactly like a real AR-15 barrel. Has correct 5.56 markings engraved in the correct place.


2011 - Same as the Gen. 1, no change.


Front Sight:


Gen. 1 - Steel casting, exactly like a real AR-15 front sight.


2011 - Same as the Gen. 1, no change.




Gen. 1 - Machined from aluminum, painted with high quality black paint, then laser engraved just like the original KAC version. Includes KAC markings on the inside of the heat shield and underneath the top of the top half.


2011 - Machined from aluminum. The top has been anodized black and has a very slick feel to it, exactly like the KAC version. The bottom piece is still painted like the Gen. 1. All of it is still laser engraved like the real version, but this one lacks the KAC markings on the inside that the Gen. 1 had.


Delta Ring:


Gen. 1 - Well, its a delta ring that would be just fine on a real gun. Can't tell the difference from a real one. Spring is stiff as hell.


2011 - Same as the Gen. 1, but the spring is even stiffer. That just might be a because of use though.




Gen. 1 - Cold forged and machined from 6061 aluminum. It used the same tooling from the original 2008 Inokatsu's so it is not completely correct if you look really really close. I honestly could never tell the difference. It is anodized black that kind of sparkles a bit in direct light, it's hard to explain, but it doesn't look like a the colt receiver it is supposed to be imitating. The machining is very nice, no defects anywhere. The inside of the magwell is very smooth from the machining, but the tooling marks can still be felt.


All the markings are laser etched on and are white. The markings are half Colt, half Viper. Look at the included picture, hard to explain. Features SAFE - SEMI - BURST markings.


2011 - Cold forged and machined from 6061 aluminum. The tooling has been updated and most of the mistakes from the 2008 have been fixed. Again, I can't tell the difference, that's just what they said. It is again anodized black, but where the Gen. 1 was kind of sparkly, this one is not. The finish is magnificent, I can't say much else. Where as the Inokatsu 2011 is more dull like the real thing, this is more shiny. Shiny isn't really the best word for it because it is far from it, it just reflects more light. Unfortunately (or fortunately) there are defects from the forging and machining that can be found on the receiver (mostly the upper). They look like little tiny divots. Now, some might see this as a negative, and if you are looking for perfection it is; but this is how most real receivers are, so technically it's more realistic. The magwell is also a bit rougher, signs of a quicker machining process. There is also milling lines around the bolt catch mounting area.


This time the trademarks are engraved onto the receiver. They are still the same markings as the Gen. 1, but damn the engraving looks nice. It's nearly perfect, no rough edges at all. This one features SAFE - SEMI - AUTO markings though. The full length M16 has the burst marking instead of auto.


Pistol Grip


Gen. 1 - Plastic of sorts. Nice feel.


2011 - Plastic of sorts. Smoother than the Gen. 1, and attracts scratches more. Still feels nice.


Buffer Tube:


Gen. 1 - It's a buffer tube, it's machined and it works? I don't know what else to say.


2011 - Same as the Gen. 1, no change.




Gen. 1 - LE style stock on my 14.5 in. version. Wobbles a lot.


2011 - LMT Crane stock now comes on the 14.5 in. model. Still wobbles, but not as much.







Gen. 1 - Steel, uses AEG type barrels and buckings. Adjusts underneath the bottom rail section. The standard barrel is a 6.04 brass tightbore. It is next to impossible to take apart the hop up unit. The lips on mine bent after a while and caused misfeeding. The rubber wore out after a while as well and the lips of the rubber eventually tore off. The barrel extension is made of aluminum and showed very heavy signs of wear pretty quickly. Barrel extension is gold in color. Generally bad unit.


2011 - Still made of steel, still has a brass 6.04 AEG type tightbore. Adjusts underneath the bottom rail section. I have not tried to take it apart yet, and I will not attempt it until I absolutely have to. Let's just assume that it will be hard to take apart. The rubber is completely different, the lips are now as wide as the steel lips of the chamber itself. They angle in toward the barrel and stop at the inner diameter of the barrel. What I am saying is they are very thick, ~2mm, and are designed to stop misfeeding and should not get torn off by jams and other malfunctions. You will have to buy replacements from Viper Tech though. The barrel extension seems to be made from steel this time and is a darkish brown in color.


Bolt and Carrier:


Gen. 1 - Steel carrier, aluminum nozzle, very heavy. The carrier is the same steely color as the outer barrel, the nozzle is goldish, somewhat like the barrel extension. The bolt features two o-rings to keep a good seal. The side-lock plate is held in place by a hex screw that has been subsequently loctited in place. Oh, and it's also held in place by a very tight pressure fit. It's nearly impossible to get this out without breaking something. The internals are negative pressure. The flute valve is made of brass and will break eventually, which sucked when it happened.


2011 - Steel carrier, supposedly the nozzle is steel as well. I'll have to go get some magnets to make sure. Carrier color is the same, the nozzle is grayer, but still has a gold tint. Still has two o-rings on the nozzle. The side-lock plate is no longer held in by a screw, and will fall freely from the carrier which is great news. The internals are still negative pressure, but the flute valve is now made of steel rather than brass, and looks a bit thicker too.


Charging Handle:


Gen. 1 - Aluminum, machined. Very nice.


2011 - Forged aluminum and machined. Very smooth and pretty shiny. Looks and feels great.


Firing pin Housing:


Gen. 1 - Aluminum. Western Arms design I believe. I could still insert a mag with the hammer not cocked and no gas would leak, might just be wear though.


2011 (GFPA '11) - Aluminum. Allows you to insert a mag without being cocked. I'd rather not go into tons of detail here because their video shows it pretty well. The bolt catch has also been slimmed down to work with the new design.




Hammer and Spring:


Gen. 1 - Steel. Western Arms-ish design. The hammer spring only forces it halfway through the cycle, when it hits the firing pin it is just moving on its own accord. The hammer spring is decently hard, may need to upgrade for co2.


2011 - Steel. I'm not sure if it's actual design has been changed, though it does now look like a real steel hammer. Due to the new firing pin design it does not travel as far as a real hammer or other GBBR hammers. Now though the spring does follow it until it hits the firing pin. The spring is also much stiffer than the Gen. 1, and should be sufficient for co2.




Gen. 1 - Steel.


2011 - Looks to be oil quenched steel. Very nice and should be a lot stronger.




Gen. 1 - Steel. Locks into place very well.


2011 - Steel. Also locks into place very well.


Buffer and spring:


Gen. 1 - Buffer is the same as a real steel version. Has a hard rubber piece at the end. Recoil spring is stiff, but still reasonable. Includes two plastic spacers at the end to short stroke the gun. Do not ever try to use the gun without these, it will cause major problems down the road. The bolt will still lock back even though it is short stroked.


2011 - Same as the Gen. 1, no changes.



That seems to cover all of it. I hope this helps anyone that is thinking of buying one. I know I have repeated some things that people have already said, but a lot of this has not been said. Having this much info would have helped me a lot when I was making the decision to buy this current one I have. I was so close to getting a 2011 Inokatsu, and honestly I'm glad I went with the Viper. They really have improved greatly from the first version.


I will try to have a bunch of pictures of the 2011 version soon.


If you have any question regarding this gun please don't hesitate to send me a message, I will help you.




Gen. 1 Pics:






2011 Version Pics:





















Źródło: http://www.gasguns.info/forum/

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 3 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...

Ktoś pytał jaka jest różnica między Ino 2010 a 2011.

Przede wszystkim najnowsza wersja ma poprawiony Nozzle, który jest wzmocniony w tylnej częsci..

Wcześniejszy potrafił się rozpaść nawet poniżej 1k strzałów na CO2.



Link to post
Share on other sites

Porównanie Viper 2012, z tanią wersją Inokatsu bez oznaczeń($580), która kilka tygodni temu pojawiła się w Taiwańskich sklepach.


BTW nie jest to oficjalny produkt wypuszczony jako Inokatsu, więc istnieją podejrzenia, że repliki te są składane z Receiverów odrzuconych przez Ino:


Ok' date=' After all these years hearing how good an Inok is, while sticking around with my Vipers. Now, it's time to give Ino a try, in the most cost effective way, I mean this good trade of course.


Here's some pics and my review of the no marking Ino from the auction page, also, few comparison with Viper.


[b'][ The overlook ][/b]




There's a big gap(big enough to me) between Ino's upper and lower :(



Comparing to Ino, Viper is just perfect:



And there's an horrible flaw on the Ino lower:



More shots of it...





A close look to bolt catch of Inok, it's still Ino style:


Comparing to Inok, Viper is more realistic to RS:




[ The ribs on magwell ]

Ino has a feature of an early version M4:



Viper 2012 verion has a later version outlook:



By the way, it seems it's either the dimension of the CNC cut-out is incorrect, or it's the forge mold design is incorrect. Ino's rib front end is looking weird and rounded:



Viper has no problem at all both on 2011 and 2012 version, a straight and beatiful cut:




The forge line are different between Inok and Viper, obvious the mold designs and forging machine capabilities of these two companies are totally different either:




[ The front pivol pin ]

When pushed to the end, Ino has a gap as shown. I believe it's another design value NG:



Looking into Viper's, quietly perfect:




[ The bolt catch (internally)]

I see Ino has a big problem in quality control:



I guess it's because of the shift is too much so that Inok has to rework the bolt catch:



Same view on my Viper, perfectly aligned to center:




Do you see any difference besides the firing pin block design?



It's the corner of the magwell, Ino wins here for realistic design:





[ The cut of buffer retainer ]

These two brands are different from each other at here:







[ The selector ]

Inok seems again has a design value NG for the selector is shifted from 90 degree:




Viper is just fine:





[ The buffer tube ]

Don't know if RS has this design, the bulk part is Ino's designed to hold buffer retainer in place.



Viper's buffer tube is much more main stream design:




[ Recoil spring ]

Viper wins. It's longer, harder (providing harder strength to push back BCG), and make BCG sports well.




Now comparing the upper.


[ Delta ring ]

This is Inok:



This is Viper:



Besides the parallel problem, I also noticed Ino's barrel nut seems not been tighten enough. The distance between barrel nut to upper is greater than Viper in above two pictures.



[ Shell deflector]

This is my favorite part. Many Taiwanese(maybe some others around the world) like to argue over the shape of the deflector, I want to say to see is to believe that Viper has improved A LOT.


looking form bottom:



looking from top:





looking from 45:





[ Upper rail engraving]

I think Inok uses laser carving for the artwork looks thin.



I'm 100% sure that Viper's artwork are CNC machined. It looks solid and awesome :thumbup:




[ The rail test ]

Few among friends around me all agree that A.R.M.S BUIS has the most critical spec of the rail dimension. So when we are bored we sometimes test rails with A.R.M.S BUIS. Here we use a 40SL-SP as a test jig:



And the results:




Score one, Viper.



[ Forward assist ]

Although this is not necessary in GBBR, but as an high end toy, I don't mind at all to have this feature especially when I see it as a playful model gun when outside is raining.


Ino has nothing in side:



But Viper has it :D




[ Conclusion ]


Left to right:

Inok 2012 without marking.

Self-built 14.5" Magpul AR, Viper 2012 upper, Viper 2011 lower.

Self-built MK18 Mod0, Viper 2011 upper, Viper 2012 lower.

Self-built PWS Diablo 7", Prime MUR upper, Viper 2009 lower.


I imagine Inok without marking is a good trade, but now as many of you might consider as well, the overall quality is not as good as I expect. I decide to stick on my Vipers.


By the way, I don't know if it's only me or not, after ripping all accessories off my Magpul Viper trying to make the criteria as close as possible, I feel Inok is much lighter than Viper. :eh:


I'm planning to borrow an electronic scale, then to weight every parts to compare and see the result. :problem:

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...

Generalnie żmijka łyka wszystko w standardzie WA-z wartych uwagi to: Prowiny v1/v2, GHK na GG i CO2, Pmagi G&P. Wiem że na bank nie podchodzą pmagi bety, próbowałem dwóch i w obu przypadkach kibel.

Edited by Nath
Link to post
Share on other sites

Do Europy nie chcą słać body z oznaczeniami innymi niż własne. Można zamówić body bez oznaczeń, ale nie wiadomo kiedy, żmijki nie chcą podać żadnych wiążących terminów. Ja osobiście nie posiadam, dłubię w żmijce znajomego (wersja 2010+gfpa, wersja 2011 ma gfpa na stocku). Po roku-półtora mogą się zacząć problemy z hopem (gumka się wyciera)-wyjęcie go z body to udręka i koszmar-wyglądał jak umoczony w kleju do gwintów (dopiero gumowy młotek i sporo siły pomogły), rozłożenie zespołu hu to następna droga krzyżowa-wszystko na czerwony locktite, na dodatek nie można za mocno podgrzać, żeby gumka nam nie spłynęła-siła spokoju i ręczny palniczek gazowy załatwiły sprawę, ale ilość rwa na minutę była naprawdę imponująca (niezbyt często mi się zdarza rzucać paniami, ale...). Ponoć wszystkie repliki vipertecha z ehobbyasia tak mają, bo ehobby dostaje je w zestawach do złożenia i samo sobie składa (challeng kitów Vipertech jednak sprzedać nie chce detalicznie). Od strzelania na Co2 odkształca się dysza (co śmieszne łatwo jej potem we własnym zakresie nadać pożądany kształt), ale to może być też kwestia twardej sprężyny przeciwpowrotnej (ucięty buffer spring od ostrego AR) oraz ciężkiego bezwładnika, a może wszystkiego naraz (co2+ciężki bezwładnik+spring od ostrej).

Nawet na stocku replika kopie baaaaardzo fajnie, na Co2 pokazuje pazur, podobnie jak Inokaśka. Body bite z alu ma fajną fakturę, risy cnc-miodzio, kolba lmt style jak to kolba :icon_smile:. Ogólnie jeśli cena nie jest dla Ciebie problemem to fajna alternatywa dla Ino.

Edited by Nath
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...