Photobucket Pictures, Images and Photos

I used the Eagle Eye 416 in anger today and I couldn’t fault it.
But, having thought about it, there’s actually more to it than that.

I barely registered I was using a different blaster to my stalwart M4 (aside from the sound, which I’ll get to later). I think this says a lot about the 416’s form factor. Yes, it’s obviously similar to an M4. However, I expected to notice the receiver’s additional height, while using my T1 (which has an M4 lower-third mount). I didn’t notice it at all.

Something I did notice was the extended and flared magwell of the 416. It really helps with mag changes. Seating my Pmags firmly was also a much better experience and this is down to the way Eagle Eye designed the lower.

I’ve owned perhaps five Prime lowers and I don’t think they do well in the magwell area. I’ve experienced a few niggles, which leads me to believe they are a little off spec. Eagle Eye, on the other hand, seems to have got this right – over and above what the 416’s design lends.

That’s not to say Prime is outside acceptable tolerances: they are not the gold standard for no reason and they work perfectly well. But I think EE’s magwell is better.

Lastly, the sound of the EE 416. I noticed this straight away. It’s different. Given that both of my guns are CQBRs running Tackleberried 2008 motors, with PPTW Hogues, I can only put this down to the EE receiver’s harmonics. Still, it was a good sound. More ‘thunk’ than ‘zip’.

Bass. I like it.

 photo 588b0355ab9310b75bd08aea33a54e20_zpsf1ac8a33.jpg
 photo 52cea0f04ed47d783929a720e528b632_zpsb2076f55.jpg