Classic Army CA53 A4

Schlyder · August 26th, 2008, 05:06

Classic Army CA 53 A2 .....Any reviews of this gun would be appreciated. Will it swap out other MP5 parts?? Is it all metal?? What's inside. Etc. Thanks in advance folks.

Schlyder · August 26th, 2008, 07:10

By the way, I am verified in Sask. It hasn't been put up here yet. Has CA solved the piston problems yet??

ShelledPants · August 26th, 2008, 07:10

Google is your friend:

http://www.airsoftretreat.com/review...uct=234&cat=22

No more spoon feeding for you.

Schlyder · August 26th, 2008, 08:52

Thanks ShelledPants. Don't mean to get spoonfed LOL ( picturing the scene from Clockwork Orange), Just what I was finding wasn't telling me what I was looking to find out. But that review was a better one. I have read of issues with CA's pistons, so am unsure of their reliability/durability. But then read about Sorbo, and that sounds like the way to go with a CA gun.
Have you handled one of these yet? I have read of some issues with fit of mags. And aside from the forestock, buttstock and hand grips, Is the rest of the gun all steel?? Thanks again, I will continue hunting for info on this gun. Technical question...Why would they put a V2 into a relatively new gun? Aren't the newer versions better? What would you recommend for upgrades for this unit??

TokyoSeven · August 26th, 2008, 13:19

In the past CA used to be hit or miss internally, today things are much better.
But you never know, with out maintenance, use with to low of a batter or an accidental half pull of a trigger you could still lock up your mechbox.
The reciever of the AEG in question should be metal, I wont say its steel but it will be metal. As for your technical question they have different version mechboxes for different shaped guns. It would be useless to say a version 7 mechbox in a gun that would fit a version 2 or 3 better. Just because the number is higher on the version does not mean it is better.

As for upgrades I recommend no upgrades. Whats wrong with the stock gun?
I know youve got a lot of questions, but slow it down a little and let all the info sink in, you cant learn everything in a few days.

All answers provided today were found by using google.

Schlyder · August 26th, 2008, 14:25

Thanks Tokyo, yea I couldn't find out anywhere if the reciever was metal/steel. OK, I understand about the shape of the reciever in relation to the shape of the mechbox that has to go inside. And that a V3 isn't necessarily better because 3 is after 2. But with all the problems with the V2 box, why would they not come up with a better design or something for that shape of reciever? I was just wondering. And I am all for stock, I am not looking to boost fps or anything. Just reliability, and solid build of the gun. My AK just broke out in the field, so I am more concerned with how something will hold up to the punishment out in the field. Not so much the internals.
Again, thanks Tokyo. Will you be at Bootcamp on the 6th? if so, I willl see you there.

Donster · August 26th, 2008, 14:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by TokyoSeven

In the past CA used to be hit or miss internally, today things are much better.
But you never know, with out maintenance, use with to low of a batter or an accidental half pull of a trigger you could still lock up your mechbox.
The reciever of the AEG in question should be metal, I wont say its steel but it will be metal. As for your technical question they have different version mechboxes for different shaped guns. It would be useless to say a version 7 mechbox in a gun that would fit a version 2 or 3 better. Just because the number is higher on the version does not mean it is better.

As for upgrades I recommend no upgrades. Whats wrong with the stock gun?
I know youve got a lot of questions, but slow it down a little and let all the info sink in, you cant learn everything in a few days.

All answers provided today were found by using google.

I have to say that while i agree with T7 that CA has gotten better, i have still seen a brand new CA fuck up right out of the box to a point where it was inoperable. Needed sanding on the BB chamber something or other.

TokyoSeven · August 26th, 2008, 15:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by IronOverlord

But with all the problems with the V2 box, why would they not come up with a better design or something for that shape of reciever? I was just wondering.

Well its possible they could have come up with something different but to be honest I dont know why they dont, although I do have to say take all those "terrible" things you hear about the V2 with a grain of salt. Alot of people complain about issues with this or that or a cracked mechbox but Ive run the same mechbox for 3 years, thats been opened dozens of times for spring changes and minor preventative maintenance and of course upgrades. It has yet to fail on me and to this date many thousands of rounds have been fired through with it from FPS ranges of 280 all the way to 450. The only full out mechbox failure Ive seen in the last year was a version 3.

Donster has a good point though there have been CA's that just plain crapped themselfves right out of the box.

I will be attending the fall bootcamp.

808 · August 26th, 2008, 15:13

There are many modifications or "upgrades" to the V2, and V3 style of mechboxes (OK, all of them, really, but V2 and V3 are the most common).

Some projects/products go so far as to change the mechbox entirely, and others just reinforce common breakage points, and are designed for much more reliable operation and strength.

If you absolutely must have something like this (and I would recommend against it, until the stock internals fail), look at the SystemA line of complete mechboxes. They are a one-stop shop for upgraded internals.

Again, it's not worth the money until it is absolutely necessary.

You also have to watch out for internals that will increase the power of the gun beyond allowable limits for the game/group/location you are playing with/at. Many places don't allow more than 350fps for a CQB (Close Quarters Battle) game, or more than 400fps for an outdoor "Milsim" game.

Experienced players get around this by having a few primary weapons we use for different games/events.

Schlyder · August 26th, 2008, 17:14

ThanksCQB, I am more concerned with the reliability. I don't want any more than 320fps. Stock fps is fine. I am looking for a dependable, solid built gun. That will handle the abuse of the field. Any upgrades I am interested in, would be for durability factor, not increasing fps, or RoF. I don't really give a **** about RoF. It is what it is, and that is more than enough. And what good is a gun that shoots at a fps that you can't use. No, I am more worried about durability of the gun as a whole. How solid they are put together, and what materials they are using. More about looks, feel, and durability, than all out fps and RoF. My AK just broke on me, so I'm fixing that as we speak. (not internals) some small white metal tab that holds the outer barrel in place under the forestock. Have to go Macguyver on it. So I am really, really only concerned that I won't have to be constantly repairing a poorly built package around the inner workings, no matter what version of mechbox is in it. I can always make the inside stronger with upgrades for durability, and they wouldn't be all that much money. But you can't really make a poorly constructed container for all those parts better. I am trying to find out who builds the most durable containers, that those innards to go into. Preferably all metal. (I am only looking for MP5 A4's from all the parties concerned, as well as the CA53 A2)
The ICS sounds like the best constructed, the TM sounds like the best stock innards, and from what I can find, only CA makes the CA(H&K)53 A2. But I am not sure ( haven't found anything in specs or reviews) if it has a metal reciever. Or if CA has a metal body kit for it. And I haven't found out any other makers of that gun.(53A2) Does this concur with more knowledgeable folks in the community?
So I guess what I am looking for is....If you had to choose an MP5 A4 based on durabilty, and quality of build of the externals, from TM, ICS, or CA. Which is built the strongest? And as for the 53A2, does anyone know if anyone else makes one besides CA, or if there is a lower reciever of 53A2, made by someone, that would fit into one of the other MP5A4s.
Thanks again all, I know I am the umpteenth million person asking all this ****, but bear with me ( and others). I have been doing my reading and researching, but some stuff, you gotta ask people in the know. And there are alot of people here at ASC that know. Cheers

attack-beaver · August 26th, 2008, 19:56

i have a CA G3-SG1 for a year know that basically the same thing and its been stock internals only till recently and never had any problems with the gun it self since i bought the gun. mostly with the star mags i bought for my g3. as long as u keep the gun maintained it'll never fail you.

Schlyder · August 26th, 2008, 20:53

You have had the gun a year now, with the stock internals, only up until recently. And never had any problems with the gun itself. Only problems with the star mags you bought for it. I hope I translated that correctly, LOL What was the mag problem?? not fitting good?? or were the mags themselves not working great??? Thanks for the input AB. Do you know if that G3 lower reciever would would fit with the rest of an MP5. It sure looks like it would. Have you tried any MP5 attachments on it?? Cheers.

attack-beaver · August 27th, 2008, 00:46

i bought 15 20 rd star mags for 160 bucks shipped to my place (do the math and you'll see how i had issues). first had to mod the shit out of the mags so they could fit in the gun. but 90% percent of the issues i had with the gun were mag related the other 10% was poor maintenance on my part.

the G3 and the MP5 are to totally different platforms. the G3 lower could not fit in a MP5 upper reason being is the MP5 upper is to slim and in real steel the MP5 fires the 9mm, 10mm or .40S&W well the G3 fires the much larger 7.62X51mm.

here's a pic of my little creation.

this is an older pic i sold off the elcan and got a EOtech clone.

just wait on some new bits for her and shes going up for sale.

Home	Forums	Register	Gallery	FAQ	Calendar
Retailers	Community	News/Info	International Retailers	IRC	Today's Posts

British Columbia	Alberta
BCAC	EAR
Op-For	JOC
Northern Arms Airsoft	Skunkworx Airsoft
Airsoft Kelowna	RAAT
Prince George Airsoft	Manitoba
Saskatchewan	MAA
SK Airsoft	Ontario
PDW	Airsoft Ottawa
South Sask Mercs	Snow Dragons
Quebec	1st Ranger Platoon
PQAC	Wolfpack Tactical
1st Pathfinders Regiment	TTAC3
Quebec Airsoft
MTX Airsoft	Atlantic
FAQc	Atlantic Airsoft

August 26th, 2008, 05:06	#1
Schlyder IronOverlord Trader rating Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Broadview,Saskatchewan	Classic Army CA53 A2 Classic Army CA 53 A2 .....Any reviews of this gun would be appreciated. Will it swap out other MP5 parts?? Is it all metal?? What's inside. Etc. Thanks in advance folks. Last edited by Schlyder; August 26th, 2008 at 05:39..

August 26th, 2008, 07:10	#3
ShelledPants Trader rating Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Toronto, On	Google is your friend: http://www.airsoftretreat.com/review...uct=234&cat=22 No more spoon feeding for you. __________________ Ár skal r?*sa, sá er annars vill fé eða fjör hafa. Sjaldan liggjandi úlfur lær um getur né sofandi maður sigur.

August 26th, 2008, 13:19	#5
TokyoSeven Red Wine & Adderall Trader rating Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Saskatoon, SK	In the past CA used to be hit or miss internally, today things are much better. But you never know, with out maintenance, use with to low of a batter or an accidental half pull of a trigger you could still lock up your mechbox. The reciever of the AEG in question should be metal, I wont say its steel but it will be metal. As for your technical question they have different version mechboxes for different shaped guns. It would be useless to say a version 7 mechbox in a gun that would fit a version 2 or 3 better. Just because the number is higher on the version does not mean it is better. As for upgrades I recommend no upgrades. Whats wrong with the stock gun? I know youve got a lot of questions, but slow it down a little and let all the info sink in, you cant learn everything in a few days. All answers provided today were found by using google. __________________ "Its only a little bit on fire"

August 26th, 2008, 08:52	#4
Schlyder IronOverlord Trader rating Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Broadview,Saskatchewan	Thanks ShelledPants. Don't mean to get spoonfed LOL ( picturing the scene from Clockwork Orange), Just what I was finding wasn't telling me what I was looking to find out. But that review was a better one. I have read of issues with CA's pistons, so am unsure of their reliability/durability. But then read about Sorbo, and that sounds like the way to go with a CA gun. Have you handled one of these yet? I have read of some issues with fit of mags. And aside from the forestock, buttstock and hand grips, Is the rest of the gun all steel?? Thanks again, I will continue hunting for info on this gun. Technical question...Why would they put a V2 into a relatively new gun? Aren't the newer versions better? What would you recommend for upgrades for this unit??

August 26th, 2008, 14:25	#6
Schlyder IronOverlord Trader rating Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Broadview,Saskatchewan	Thanks Tokyo, yea I couldn't find out anywhere if the reciever was metal/steel. OK, I understand about the shape of the reciever in relation to the shape of the mechbox that has to go inside. And that a V3 isn't necessarily better because 3 is after 2. But with all the problems with the V2 box, why would they not come up with a better design or something for that shape of reciever? I was just wondering. And I am all for stock, I am not looking to boost fps or anything. Just reliability, and solid build of the gun. My AK just broke out in the field, so I am more concerned with how something will hold up to the punishment out in the field. Not so much the internals. Again, thanks Tokyo. Will you be at Bootcamp on the 6th? if so, I willl see you there.

August 26th, 2008, 15:13	#9
808 Trader rating Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: 6mm-mag.com - Winnipeg	There are many modifications or "upgrades" to the V2, and V3 style of mechboxes (OK, all of them, really, but V2 and V3 are the most common). Some projects/products go so far as to change the mechbox entirely, and others just reinforce common breakage points, and are designed for much more reliable operation and strength. If you absolutely must have something like this (and I would recommend against it, until the stock internals fail), look at the SystemA line of complete mechboxes. They are a one-stop shop for upgraded internals. Again, it's not worth the money until it is absolutely necessary. You also have to watch out for internals that will increase the power of the gun beyond allowable limits for the game/group/location you are playing with/at. Many places don't allow more than 350fps for a CQB (Close Quarters Battle) game, or more than 400fps for an outdoor "Milsim" game. Experienced players get around this by having a few primary weapons we use for different games/events. __________________

August 26th, 2008, 17:14	#10
Schlyder IronOverlord Trader rating Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Broadview,Saskatchewan	ThanksCQB, I am more concerned with the reliability. I don't want any more than 320fps. Stock fps is fine. I am looking for a dependable, solid built gun. That will handle the abuse of the field. Any upgrades I am interested in, would be for durability factor, not increasing fps, or RoF. I don't really give a ** about RoF. It is what it is, and that is more than enough. And what good is a gun that shoots at a fps that you can't use. No, I am more worried about durability of the gun as a whole. How solid they are put together, and what materials they are using. More about looks, feel, and durability, than all out fps and RoF. My AK just broke on me, so I'm fixing that as we speak. (not internals) some small white metal tab that holds the outer barrel in place under the forestock. Have to go Macguyver on it. So I am really, really only concerned that I won't have to be constantly repairing a poorly built package around the inner workings, no matter what version of mechbox is in it. I can always make the inside stronger with upgrades for durability, and they wouldn't be all that much money. But you can't really make a poorly constructed container for all those parts better. I am trying to find out who builds the most durable containers, that those innards to go into. Preferably all metal. (I am only looking for MP5 A4's from all the parties concerned, as well as the CA53 A2) The ICS sounds like the best constructed, the TM sounds like the best stock innards, and from what I can find, only CA makes the CA(H&K)53 A2. But I am not sure ( haven't found anything in specs or reviews) if it has a metal reciever. Or if CA has a metal body kit for it. And I haven't found out any other makers of that gun.(53A2) Does this concur with more knowledgeable folks in the community? So I guess what I am looking for is....If you had to choose an MP5 A4 based on durabilty, and quality of build of the externals, from TM, ICS, or CA. Which is built the strongest? And as for the 53A2, does anyone know if anyone else makes one besides CA, or if there is a lower reciever of 53A2, made by someone, that would fit into one of the other MP5A4s. Thanks again all, I know I am the umpteenth million person asking all this **, but bear with me ( and others). I have been doing my reading and researching, but some stuff, you gotta ask people in the know. And there are alot of people here at ASC that know. Cheers

August 26th, 2008, 19:56	#11
attack-beaver Trader rating Join Date: May 2005 Location: calgary	i have a CA G3-SG1 for a year know that basically the same thing and its been stock internals only till recently and never had any problems with the gun it self since i bought the gun. mostly with the star mags i bought for my g3. as long as u keep the gun maintained it'll never fail you.

August 26th, 2008, 20:53	#12
Schlyder IronOverlord Trader rating Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Broadview,Saskatchewan	You have had the gun a year now, with the stock internals, only up until recently. And never had any problems with the gun itself. Only problems with the star mags you bought for it. I hope I translated that correctly, LOL What was the mag problem?? not fitting good?? or were the mags themselves not working great??? Thanks for the input AB. Do you know if that G3 lower reciever would would fit with the rest of an MP5. It sure looks like it would. Have you tried any MP5 attachments on it?? Cheers.

August 27th, 2008, 00:46	#13
attack-beaver Trader rating Join Date: May 2005 Location: calgary	i bought 15 20 rd star mags for 160 bucks shipped to my place (do the math and you'll see how i had issues). first had to mod the shit out of the mags so they could fit in the gun. but 90% percent of the issues i had with the gun were mag related the other 10% was poor maintenance on my part. the G3 and the MP5 are to totally different platforms. the G3 lower could not fit in a MP5 upper reason being is the MP5 upper is to slim and in real steel the MP5 fires the 9mm, 10mm or .40S&W well the G3 fires the much larger 7.62X51mm. here's a pic of my little creation. this is an older pic i sold off the elcan and got a EOtech clone. just wait on some new bits for her and shes going up for sale.

Classic Army CA53 A4

Airsoft Guns Discussion