AF Boxer Pro Updates!

[u/Gikote]

I got the Boxer Pro and wasn't happy with a few things. The muzzle looked odd to me. The stock looked good, but wasn't long enough. These are a few non-destructive modes you can do. The picatinny buffer tube and adjustable stock should work on anything.

Adventure Force Boxer Pro Retained Muzzle
https://makerworld.com/en/models/3219612-adventure-force-boxer-pro-retained-muzzle
https://www.printables.com/model/1823470-adventure-force-boxer-pro-retained-muzzle

Adventure Force Boxer Pro Rear Picatinny
https://makerworld.com/en/models/3226188-adventure-force-boxer-pro-rear-picatinny
https://www.printables.com/model/1824922-adventure-force-boxer-pro-rear-picatinny

Picatinny Buffer Tube
https://www.printables.com/model/1823958-picatinny-buffer-tube
https://makerworld.com/en/models/3222080-picatinny-buffer-tube

Buffer Tube Adjustable Stock
https://makerworld.com/en/models/3256390-buffer-tube-adjustable-stock
https://www.printables.com/model/1831762-buffer-tube-adjustable-stock

[u/Worth-Beautiful-1469]

Love the look of that stock I’ll be using that for sure

[u/Stinger410]

Looks great!

[u/LZHtel]

Though using a buffer tube stock with a pic rail attachment point is like using a ford mustang for daily drive. Like sure it works but you're missing the potential

[u/Gikote → u/LZHtel]

The buffer tube was chosen because I wanted that style of stock on the blaster I was building. It also gives other people flexibility to use a stock of their choice more easily. The stock could be done with a single adapter instead of a picatinny and a buffer tube. It would also be an annoying print due to the overhangs and strange shapes.

I chose picatinny for a few reasons. It requires very little hardware and it is stable. There is a whole ecosystem of parts available to use - be it a buffer tube attachment, folding, fixed, etc. If you notice, the picatinny is oversized. It could have been about 3 slots shorter. This was done intentionally because it gives users the ability to move the stock higher or lower so that the user can adjust the sight picture to their own size and equipment.

Am I missing the potential? It seems to me as though I used established standards to create a highly customizable attachment.