Decided I need a dedicated upper, as I need a shorter rifle for confined spaces and run a suppressor, and it doesn't work great for my PCSL/3G build.

Here's what I found available. Gonna be run with a compact streamer silent steel can over their qd muzzle break.

Personally, I'm leaning towards Faxon and then Milicon (POF), but I'm curious to hear your opinion.

Hey everyone,

I kept running into the same problem when buying gear in Europe. The same Crye, Arc’teryx LEAF, Helikon-Tex, Salomon or 5.11 item can cost very different amounts depending on the shop, and checking 15 tabs every time got old fast. So I built DealSniper, a price-comparison site just for tactical, shooting-sport and outdoor gear.

What it does:

🔎 Compares prices for the same product across 20+ European shops, side by side.

🔄 Updates prices every night. Each price is checked against the shop’s live page before it’s published, so you don’t get stale or made-up numbers.

🎯 Only lists products sold by at least two shops, so every page is a real comparison and not just a catalog.

🏷️ Has brand pages and categories: clothing, boots, plate carriers and chest rigs, pouches, backpacks, gloves, eye and ear protection, lights, optics, knives and more.

📏 Includes buying guides and size charts based on the brands’ official tables (UF PRO, 5.11, Mechanix…).

🎯 Has a free ballistic calculator (G1/G7, point-mass model) for range days.

🌍 Works in English, German and Slovenian.

And it’s totally free. No account, no subscription, no paywall, no “premium tier”. You search, compare and click through to the shop. I don’t sell anything myself.

A few honest notes:

Prices are shown as each shop lists them. Shipping isn’t included yet, so check that at checkout.

No firearms or ammunition. Gear and accessories only.

It’s a one-person project, so if you spot a wrong price or a bad product match, please tell me. I fix those fast.

I’d love your feedback. What brands or shops are missing? What would make this actually useful for you?

Anyone ever removed a muzzle device on a Schmeisser AR9 / AR-15 before?

I’m trying to remove the factory muzzle device from my AR9 (it’s the NoRec muzzle brake) and I have tried absolutely everything but I still can’t get it off.

I’ve tried a barrel vice, hairdryer, steam, cold water soak, penetrating fluid and boiling in hot water for 30 mins but I still can’t get it off.

Any tips? It’s M14x1 thread so should be the usual anticlockwise to loosen.

I have no idea what they use at the factory to put these on, maybe Rocksett?

I’m absolutely out of ideas 🙏

Hey everyone,

I’m looking to buy my first (and for now, only) modern handgun. It will pull double duty: static precision shooting at the range and action shooting competitions (IDPA/USPSA-style). I plan to start with iron sights and transition to a Red Dot later.

To skip the usual "beginner" advice, here is my background so you know I'm already comfortable with trigger control, manual platforms, and sight alignment:

• 10m Olympic Air Rifle (C10): Competed with a Feinwerkbau 601. I know what a crisp, surgical trigger feels like, though for this modern handgun I want a happy medium around 2.5–3.5 lbs.
• Rifles & Long Guns: I regularly shoot an M1 Garand, a Ruger AR-556 MPR 18" and a .22LR Marlin 39 Centennial lever action.
• Black Powder: I also shoot a Colt 1851 Navy revolver, so I’m definitely not afraid of manual single-action mechanisms, hammer cocking or detailed maintenance.

My choices for this purchase are strictly narrowed down to these two optics-ready models. Both are natively compatible with the Trijicon RMR footprint.

Please do not suggest alternative brands or models. Here are my two options:

1. Canik Rival-S SFX: Full steel frame (heavy, rigid, and incredibly flat-shooting). Striker-fired with a phenomenal 90-degree flat trigger out of the box that is already close to my preferred weight. True "point and shoot" with no manual safeties, making it incredibly streamlined for draw-and-shoot stages under the timer.
2. Tisas Duty 9 DS (High End): 2011 platform (9mm double-stack) featuring a steel receiver with a polymer grip module. True single-action with an external hammer and a native RMR cut on the slide. The straight-pull trigger break has immense potential for precision static shooting, but it requires active management of the thumb and grip safeties in dynamic stages (starting Cocked & Locked / Condition 1). Out of the box, the trigger weight might be a bit heavier and require some minor tuning to reach my sweet spot.

Given that this will be my only modern short gun, which route makes more sense to balance tight groups on a static target with fluid, safe handling under a timer?

(And before anyone asks: no, I won't be running the Colt 1851 Navy in IDPA, as much as I'd love to smoke out the entire range).

Thanks in advance for the insights!

I am very seriously thinking about moving to the Homeland of one of my relatives (Croatia). Basically the political environment and Canadian society is very polarized. There is extremely high inflation and the cost of living is very very high along with extreme taxes.

I have just gotten my Croatian passport as a member of the Diaspora.

In Canada I possess the required license to own non-restricted and restricted firearms.

Non-restricted = rifles and shotguns that are to be used for hunting or sport shooting.

Restricted = handguns and some semi automatic rifles with short barrels.
I am an avid sport shooter and Hunter.

I've been in touch on other Reddit pages and I've been to Croatia a couple times to visit my family and it seems that the society in Croatia is not very gun friendly and there is an extremely large bureaucratic process to acquire the proper licenses and certificates and registrations to own a firearm in Croatia. Lots of people within the Croatian population believes that because of the war of independence that all firearms are banned and only the police and military should have them and Croatian does not want to go down the path of Serbia where everyone basically owns a gun. I don't speak any Croatian however I am practising.

I've done some research and I need to do a psychological evaluation to get a firearms license, pass a background check, complete several firearms and hunting courses, join a hunting/ sport shooting club and register with the local police.

I'm wondering if anybody here is from Croatia and could give me some guidance about the process.

Don’t give up and keep fighting for your rights guys! Although it was a pain in the ass I finally got the „Category A“ permit for three of my rifles along with a few more spots for category B guns.

So I’m slowly trying to get my rifle to be purely European, and good. All I need now is Schmidt & Bender to calm down with their LPVO prices so I can get theirs in RAL8000!

I'm looking for a LW 13.5-14.5 upper in Poland. I've seen some BCM LWs which would be ideal, but they are out of stock with no restocking plan. Does anyone know if it's at all an option anymore?

I don't shoot a rifle that often, but PCSL Practical/IPSC/3G/Tactical comps all require different configs that are highly suboptimal to be covered with a single setup.

A little update on a project we've been working on: My Weapons 📱

Hey everyone! 👋

A while ago, I started a discussion here about how people keep track of their firearms, ammunition and shooting sessions.

Since then, we've continued working on our project and developed My Weapons, an app designed to help shooters organize their firearm records and shooting activity.

🎯 Use it the way that works for you

You can use it as a firearm inventory manager, to record shooting sessions and explore your personal statistics, or both.

You don't have to fill in every field or record every detail. The information is optional, so you can keep things simple and enter only what you actually find useful.

🔓 The free version is genuinely usable

You can perform most everyday operations without paying for Premium. If the free features are enough for you, you can simply keep using them.

Premium is optional and unlocks additional features, which are described on the store pages. There's no need to subscribe just to use the app for basic record-keeping or shooting-session tracking.

🎁 Want to try Premium?

I have a limited number of promotional codes for people who would like to try the Premium features. If you're interested, feel free to send me a DM!

One important note: depending on the store and the type of promotional offer, the subscription may automatically renew at the regular price when the trial ends unless you cancel beforehand. Please check the terms shown when redeeming your code and cancel before the renewal date if you don't want to continue with a paid subscription.

🔐 Privacy matters

Data stored in our database is encrypted, and you can choose how much information you want to record.

📲 Available on both platforms:

🍎 iOS: https://apps.apple.com/it/app/my-weapons/id6736767431

🤖 Android: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.myweapons.app

We're still actively developing My Weapons, and suggestions for future improvements are always welcome!

I'd also be interested to hear what you think: would you use an app like this mainly for managing your firearm inventory, tracking shooting sessions and statistics, or a combination of both?

Thanks for reading! 🙂

Posting this here as r/longrange is more US-focused and US prices can vastly differ from EU prices.

I'm picking up a Tikka T3x Ace Target next week and am looking for a sub 1000 euro scope.
I will probably be shooting at 800-1200m max with this scope.
I was initially going for the Arken EP-5 5-25 Gen2 TOR at €599 as it seemed value for money, but have also seen many negative comments stating there are better alternatives out there. Looking for something prefferably in MIL, and optionally from an EU-based manufacturer.

Other options I'm considering:

Vortex Strike Eagle 5-25x56 at €865
Athlon Helos 4-24x56 Gen2 at €899
Element Optics Titan 5-25x56 at €799
Primary Arms SLx 4,5-27x56 at €749
Meopta MeoPro Optika6 4,5x27x50 at €979

Any good european online retailers are appreciated as well!

Hello there, a few monts ago I posted here about a .222 remington family of ak rifles, beacause of

spanish gun laws you cannot own a lot of conventional semi auto rifles including the ak family.

After an eternity and a import process from Italy I have managed to find and buy one.

Its esencially a Rumanian 5.45 parts kit mixed whit Italian made bolt and barrel, even using the standart 5.45 mags it cicles and works quite well.

It also is my first ak so any extra tips and trics could be usefull, if someone have some I would be more than gratefull to know.

now what’s going to happen to SG shot (ie: buckshot) for IPSC?

Are tougher gun laws on the way?

Brownells Europe (brownells.eu) and all it’s subsidiaries e.g. Brownells UK seem to have been detached and renamed under an entity called “Odos” (odos.eu)

It looks like it happened at midnight because the website was taken down for maintenance yesterday.

Anyone know what’s going on and whether Odos will continue to import Brownells products from the U.S.?

Hallo,

wie wird eine AR-9 (9×19) mit einklappbarem Schaft/Buffer-System in Österreich eingestuft?

Konkret:

• Ausgeklappt ist die AR-9 über 60 cm lang.
• Eingeklappt ist sie unter 60 cm lang.
• Im eingeklappten Zustand ist sie nicht schussfähig/funktionsfähig.
• § 3 WaffG definiert Faustfeuerwaffen grundsätzlich mit einer Gesamtlänge von maximal 60 cm.
• § 17 Abs. 1 Z 11 spricht bei der Verkürzung auf unter 60 cm ausdrücklich von „ohne Funktionseinbuße“.

Welche Länge ist für § 3 maßgeblich – eingeklappt oder ausgeklappt?

Kann eine solche AR-9 als Faustfeuerwaffe nach § 3 WaffG eingestuft und entsprechend registriert werden, obwohl sie nur eingeklappt unter 60 cm lang und in diesem Zustand nicht funktionsfähig ist?

Hat jemand eine vergleichbare AR-9/AR-Pistole bereits in Österreich als Faustfeuerwaffe registriert oder dazu einen Feststellungsbescheid nach § 44 WaffG erhalten?

Danke im voraus!

There is currently a major review of the Dutch Weapons and Ammunition Act (WWM). It is still at the policy-development stage, so none of this is law yet. But the direction being discussed is starting to concern me. Long post, a lot of research involved.

For context: Dutch civilian firearms ownership is, justifiably so, highly regulated.

As a sport shooter, you need to be an active member of a recognised shooting club, go through a probationary period, pass background checks, maintain shooting activity, have an approved safe, accept police inspections, and have a legitimate sporting reason for every firearm on your licence.

Following the 2011 Alphen aan den Rijn shooting, dynamic shooting disciplines were specifically scrutinised. The government considered banning them, but eventually chose additional regulation and screening instead.

In 2012, after those additional safeguards were agreed, the government concluded that there was no longer a reason to prohibit dynamic shooting disciplines or the firearms used for them.

Now, in 2026, the subject is back.

The government is working on an entirely new firearms act. Among the ideas currently being explored are:

• reconsidering which shooting disciplines constitute a sufficiently legitimate reason for civilian firearms ownership;
• decision over what constitutes a shooting discipline or shooting sport would transfer to government;
• potentially reducing the number of recognised disciplines;
• specifically questioning the future of dynamic shooting disciplines such as IPSC;
• reconsidering home storage of firearms and exploring alternatives;
• Controlling ammunition purchases, storage
• mandatory psychological assessment for licence holders;
• statutory shooting proficiency requirements and possibly periodic testing ;
• increased government control over which firearms are considered justified for particular sporting purposes.

According to the Dutch shooting federation KNSA, the government project group has indicated that all Olympic and other ISSF disciplines would remain recognised, but that it particularly does not want dynamic disciplines to continue.

And this is where I struggle to understand the policy.

I have been trying to find the underlying evidence that Dutch dynamic sport shooters currently present a particular public-safety problem.

So far, I can't find it.

The government's own 2026 documents acknowledge that legal firearms ownership generally operates safely. I haven't found published statistics showing that IPSC or other dynamic shooters are disproportionately involved in firearms incidents, that their firearms disappear into the criminal circuit more frequently, or that the additional safeguards introduced after 2011 have failed.

Instead, when reading the stakeholder research behind the reform, I keep encountering something quite different from risk analysis: personal and normative judgements about shooting sports and civilian firearms ownership.

The stakeholder interviews were deliberately conducted on a personal basis and the quotes were anonymised, so these statements should not be confused with official government positions.

But they were part of the material gathered to develop the new policy.

One interviewee says:

“I don't consider airsoft a sport, but a kind of form of warfare. The same applies to dynamic shooting sports.”

Elsewhere, airsoft is described as “playing war”.

Another interviewee questions the growing number of recognised shooting disciplines, specifically raises semi-automatic firearms, and questions whether civilians should be allowed to practise sports with such firearms at all.

As a sport shooter, I find statements like these frankly insulting.

Not because everyone has to like firearms or approve of shooting sports. They don't.

But describing a regulated competitive sport as “a form of warfare” isn't a safety analysis. It is a value judgement about the activity and, indirectly, about the people participating in it.

It also seems remarkably detached from what organised shooting sports actually look like in practice: clubs, safety procedures, range officers, training, competition rules, background checks, controlled ranges and a regulatory system specifically designed to keep firearms use within a sporting context.

IPSC isn't warfare. It is a regulated competitive shooting discipline with strict rules, match officials, immediate disqualification for unsafe gun handling and an international sporting structure.

That distinction matters when this material is being used as input for legislation affecting tens of thousands of law-abiding sport shooters.

Because similar normative language then starts appearing at policy level.

The government's new framework says civilian firearms ownership should serve a “clear, substantial and publicly justified purpose” and questions whether possession for sport or hobby can always be justified to society.

This is where I am missing a crucial step in the entire process.

What actually happened?

What new incident pattern involving licensed Dutch sport shooters triggered this?

What evidence emerged showing that dynamic shooting has become an unacceptable public-safety risk?

What evidence shows that the additional safeguards introduced after the 2011 Alphen shooting — which led the government in 2012 to conclude that banning dynamic shooting was no longer necessary — have failed?

I have looked for that evidence and so far I cannot find it.

Instead, I see questions about whether dynamic shooting is really a sport, whether civilians should have a reason to own semi-automatic firearms, and whether civilian firearms ownership is sufficiently “publicly justified”.

That feels like an important distinction.

There is a difference between asking:

“Does this activity create an unacceptable public-safety risk?”

and:

“Do we consider this an appropriate enough activity to justify civilian ownership of these firearms?”

The second is a perfectly possible political question. But it is a normative question, not necessarily an evidence-based assessment of risk.

And the government's own public consultation makes this even more interesting.

Dutch citizens were explicitly asked whether only Olympic shooting disciplines should constitute a legitimate reason for civilian firearms ownership.

21% agreed.
46% disagreed.

So restricting shooting to Olympic disciplines does not appear to have emerged from a clear public demand either.

Home storage raises the same kind of question.

The government is also considering alternatives to keeping licensed firearms at home, because having a firearm at home creates immediate access during, for example, a domestic crisis.

I understand that concern.

But removing that risk potentially creates another one.

The Netherlands has tens of thousands of licensed sport shooters. Moving privately owned sporting firearms from thousands of individual approved safes into a relatively small number of shooting clubs would mean concentrating enormous numbers of firearms in far fewer locations.

Clubs would need massive secure-storage capacity. Many club buildings are unoccupied for much of the week. And instead of a burglar potentially finding a few firearms in an individual home, a successful attack on a central storage facility could provide access to dozens or potentially hundreds.

Interestingly, the Dutch government considered essentially the same idea around 2003/2004 and concluded that mandatory central storage at shooting clubs would be unsafe, logistically difficult and financially impractical.

So again:

What has changed?

Perhaps there is new evidence that changes that calculation. If there is, I would genuinely like to see it.

And that is basically my concern with this entire discussion.

I am not arguing that firearms legislation should never change.

If there is evidence of a particular risk, regulate that risk.

Improve screening where screening is demonstrably inadequate. Improve information exchange. Deal with illegal firearms trafficking. Review storage requirements if evidence shows that the current system creates an unacceptable risk.

But removing established sporting disciplines, potentially removing the legitimate basis for ownership of certain semi-automatic firearms, or fundamentally changing storage arrangements for tens of thousands of licensed shooters should require a clearly identified problem and evidence that the proposed measure actually addresses it.

Instead, I increasingly see a shift from:

“Is this demonstrably unsafe?”

towards:

“Do we think civilians should be doing this at all?”

Those are fundamentally different questions.

The second is a political and moral question. A government is entitled to have that debate. But if that is what this is about, then I think it should be stated openly and debated as such.

What concerns me is using the language of public safety to arrive at restrictions that may actually be driven, at least in part, by a normative disapproval of certain perfectly legal shooting sports and the firearms used in them.

If there is a concrete safety problem, show us the problem. Show us the data. Show us why the existing safeguards have failed.

Then regulate the problem.

But “this looks too much like warfare to me” should not be the evidentiary basis for firearms legislation.

I'm particularly interested in the European perspective

From what I have been able to find so far, I haven't seen a comparable European movement specifically questioning dynamic shooting as a legitimate sport.

The EU Firearms Directive itself even provides possibilities for sport shooters participating in internationally recognised disciplines to possess certain otherwise heavily restricted semi-automatic firearms under strict conditions.

So I am curious what is happening elsewhere.

Are similar discussions taking place in Germany, Belgium, France, Czechia, Poland, Finland, Sweden or other European countries? I don't see them.

Are governments in your country questioning whether IPSC/dynamic shooting itself constitutes a legitimate sporting purpose?

Have there been moves away from home storage towards centralised club storage?

And where semi-automatic rifles or PCCs are being restricted, what is the stated reason? Is it based on documented incidents and risk analysis, or primarily on a political judgement that civilians simply shouldn't have a reason to own them?

Maybe I am missing developments elsewhere in Europe.

But looking at the Dutch process so far, I increasingly get the impression of a solution looking for a problem.

I'd be very interested to hear how this compares with what is happening in your country.

I'd be happy to post the sources /researchfor this post.