V7 Weapon Systems: A New Gun Parts Manufacturer

IMG_3774-2

Joel Allen, who was the lead tech at Noveske Rifleworks from when John Noveske founded the company up until, has started his own gun parts manufacturing business called  V7 Weapon Systems. From the companies about page …

It all started back in 2000 when a young man named John came into Joel’s shop for supplies, after recently deciding to start a gunsmithing business in his dad’s garage.  After one passionate conversation about Christ, country, and guns, an instant brotherhood was forged.  The two young men, with wives and babies in tow, were inseparable as they combined forces to take over the world. After countless hours in the shop, blood, sweat, and tears, a legend had been born.

After losing his best friend & brother on January 4, 2013, Joel Allen began a new chapter.  One that unfortunately no longer includes Noveske.  And so became V7 WEAPON SYSTEMS.

Joel, his wife and a handful of other talented and experienced individuals from the AR-15 industry have been working around the clock to get the foundations laid for a new company in the world of firearms. With V7 WEAPON SYSTEMS now up and running full speed ahead and Mr. Allen’s years of experience at the top of the AR industry, the V7 team is excited to start bringing life to his vision of creating quality parts and developing new products for the AR platform.

Our company believes that weapons and their components should be made of the highest quality materials and workmanship.  We expect our products to perform exceptionally well for our customers.  We design them to be the best in form and function.  This is why we offer a 100% lifetime warranty on all parts manufactured by V7 WEAPON SYSTEMS.

The company is making AR bolts, buffer tubes, pivots pins and other parts, apparently with many more to come.

IMG_2343

IMG_2366

IMG_3908


Steve Johnson

Founder and Dictator-In-Chief of TFB. A passionate gun owner, a shooting enthusiast and totally tacti-uncool. Favorite first date location: any gun range. Steve can be contacted here.


Advertisement

  • bbmg

    “the AR-15 industry”

    I would say a dead horse is being flogged here but public demand seems to keep it alive. Do US shooters go for the AR because they are not interested in other rifles, or because it is the rifle that floods the market?

    • big daddy

      It’s modular that’s why. In theory any group of parts that are within spec can be put together and made into a working, accurate and deadly rifle. In reality that’s not always the case. Ones reason is poor quality parts. For that end it’s important that more companies that produce quality affordable parts push out the companies that produce cheap crap. So many companies right now are producing cheap parts that don’t fit well and are substandard. I commend anybody who is making quality AR parts right now, there is a very high demand. That demand will not go away anytime soon. Making ARs has become a business for some and a hobby for others.

    • PCP

      Ergonomics, light weight, compactness, accuracy, user friendliness all dispute the second place for the why. But the first reason is that the AR-15’s architecture lends itself very well to upgrades and modularity. The only “downsides” being the DI system (which greatly contributes to the accuracy, and isn’t that bad if you don’t treat your rifle properly) and the lack of a folding stock due to the BCG/Buffer/Buffer-Spring layout. Basically it’s a very good design that stood the test of time. Most of its flak comes from the main caliber, the fact it’s american, and because it’s what it’s being used right now so it’s exploitable as a reason to complain.
      The other greatest reason is that the AR market is already consolidated, it has a lot of technology and excellent products/manufacturers on the AR pattern, it created its own legacy. Any rifle that wants to be mildly successful needs not only to have all those attributes but to also be able to use, at least partially, all that legacy; stocks and magazines being the imperatives, barrels and grips and irons being highly desirable. Building a psiton AR helps getting a foothold on the market and ensure some money, but it will never be able to compete with the original because to gain in reliability your loose on weight and accuracy and on cost (if you’re smart and don’t sink on the almighty proprietary parts’ tar pit, slayer of great designs). It also applies to calibers to a certain extent, that’s why the 6.8 SPC and 6.5 grendel will never be, and the .300 AAC is the little caliber that could and the 6.5 PCC has great potential.
      And besides if there’s public demand, it’s not a dead horse. If the public wants and the market delivers it, what is the problem?

    • M.M.D.C.

      “And besides if there’s public demand, it’s not a dead horse. If the public wants and the market delivers it, what is the problem?”

      Bingo! I can’t see how such a thriving industry or such a successful design could be called a “dead horse.”

      • bbmg

        No issue with public needs being met, this is how the economy works. My question was more along the lines of if the said public would go for another design if it were available, as opposed to overwhelmingly purchasing the AR because that is what is overwhelmingly available.

        As an observer outside the US, all I see is a bewildering range of AR variations available, many of which are touted as game-changers when appearing very slightly different from one another.

        Quality manufacturing and materials can definitely distinguish one similar part from another but on the whole whenever a “new” AR variation or manufacturer is announced, it’s very hard to tell what innovation they actually bring to the market.

        Again, not questioning the usefulness of the AR, or saying that its popularity is undeserved. It just seems to me that too much fuss is made every time such announcements appear.

        • M.M.D.C.

          Gotcha.

          What all the fuss is about is a rather complicated mixture of patriotism, politics (not suggesting we talk about it) and industry, among other things.

          The patriotic aspect is rather obvious: our military uses the things and that is a draw for some.

          They have been the center of a great deal of controversy and that is a draw for some. Evil Black Rifle, Molan Labe and all of that.

          The industrial aspect is the most significant, IMO. They’re well designed and (mostly) well built and so they’re easy to operate and dependable, they’re plentiful and popular and so have a great deal of support, and there is plenty of competition among manufactures and this brings prices down. The most common caliber is easy and relatively cheap to shoot but they’re highly versatile and so can be chambered for numerous rounds.

          What’s not to like?

    • http://www.thefirearmblog.com/ Phil W “Senior Writer TFB”

      There are a lot of reasons. My reason is the fact I can go out and select the exact quality parts I want and build my own in a few hours or less. I’ll have a very high quality rifle at the price of a medium price range complete rifle.
      Even though my Tavor has taken it’s place as my primary rifle I still enjoy my AR and shoot it a lot.

  • DiverEngrSL17K

    It should also be remembered that there are many high-quality AR parts from assorted manufacturers that don’t necessarily interchange or work well with high-quality parts from other manufacturers. Interchangeability and compatibility is also, to a large extent, a matter of selective blueprinting and tolerance matching, keeping in mind almost every manufacturer will have minutely differing tolerance ranges.

    @PCP :

    You have written a very good summary of the advantages of the AR system as well as the consumer preferences that drive the market, but the DGI system does not “greatly” contribute to accuracy — it contributes to a limited extent relative to the AR’s specific design, but not as significantly as some might think when judged from the viewpoint of practical battlefield usage. Also, keep in mind that there are battle / assault rifles which utilize piston-operated systems which are equally accurate because they have had them properly integrated into their original designs to begin with, and are not add-ons.

    • PCP

      Yes, sure a standard M4 with the fixed rails probably won’t benefit nearly as much as a bench queen made purposely for that role. So far what I’ve seem and heard makes me convinced a DI offers more absolute potential of accuracy, maybe not be practical to get all of it but it’s there.
      I’m not so familiar with service rifles, so I have to ask which designs are those? I can’t think of many examples other than the SCAR, which has a lovely gas system.

      • DiverEngrSL17K

        Thanks for the reply, PCP. Apart from the the SCAR 16 and 17 — which you have already mentioned — a few additional examples would be the SiG 510 / Stgw57, Sig 540, SiG 542, SiG 543, SiG 550 / Stgw90, CIS SAR-80, CIS SR-88, AR-18, Leader Dynamics T2 series, Steyr AUG, CIS SAR-21, IWI Tavor, Vektor CR-21, AK-74, AK-12 and AK-103. And yes, there are also many who swear by the FN-FAL and L1A1 SLR for sheer accuracy. Bear in mind that all were designed as service rifles for military use, so taking into consideration real-world factors in the never-ending debate on accuracy, all are about as accurate as an AR on the bench or in the field. However, battlefield accuracy is a whole lot more than having a tightly-toleranced weapon that shoots tight groups at the range ; it is a function of tolerances, balance, control of reciprocating mass and recoil, the instinctual “feel” and “pointing” capability of a gun, ammunition type and general ergonomics ( such as the placement of controls, the shape and orientation of the buttstock relative to LOP and comb height, and so on ). In other words, accuracy is in many ways a function of the overall interaction of the many components of a gun. A weapon that is highly accurate on a bench rest often turns out to be far less than satisfactory in the field, or when firing off-hand. This is where you will read innumerable arguments and counter-arguments stemming from different end users in the accuracy debate, because of the broad range of “test” criteria each one uses. Some are more comprehensive, others more sketchy, and most I have seen are inadvertantly flawed or skewed to some extent or the other.

        What is most important is finding the right weapon and combination ( with or without modifications or accessories as you see fit to install ) that balances well, feels “just right” and works reliably for you. Everything else being equal, a gun that you are comfortable with will generally be the most accurate for your purposes. A case in point is the AK-74. There are some users who contend that it is more accurate than an M-16, and others who say that it is less so, while there is a middle group that concludes they are about equal in accuracy. Assuming that we are comparing equivalent quality builds and firing standard military or civilian-spec ammunition with standard barrels ( no special rounds or twist rates ), and looking more deeply into the other causative factors, one generally finds that this wide range of opinions is the result of ergonomic issues. Depending on the individual, some do very well with the OEM buttstock and hand guard, while others find that accuracy improves considerably with the same gun using after-market parts, and others yet again may actually do worse with certain combinations of after-market parts. This is also why you will see endless debates in the Tavor versus M4 blogs. Personally, I do far better with a conventional layout than with a bullpup, but that is simply a case of what works for me. Other users do their best with a modern bullpup like the Tavor, AUG or SAR-21.

        • PCP

          I’ve always heard good stuff about the Swiss rifles, the project looks very solid with that rigid gas tube; not so much about the versions built in the US now. But can we really call the STGW-57 a piston gun? As far as I’m concerned it’s a delayed blow-back.
          I don’t doubt the FAL’s capability, it’s a solid project and very ergonomic and intuitive, but underestimated. Probably its currently inaccuracy reputation comes from too high expectations and a mixture of worn surplus parts and sub-optimal assembly and fitting. I would love to see a proper flat top receiver and free floating handguard in a Para-FAL.
          I’ve read mixed stuff about the AUG, but it’s hard to fish information out of the sea of complains about the triggers and the fact it’s a bullpup. The QD system for the barrel doesn’t look all that that solid and even if it’s accurate I suspect some shift in the point of impact. Other than that and the bolt sleeve, I like the design.
          I’m really not familiar with the AK family other than you can get awesomely accurate guns and barn door MOA, but so ar emost guns made by multiple manufactures. I know that the Valmets, specially the ones milled receiver, are phenomenal.
          One rifle I’m really curious about is the FNC, you don’t hear much about it anymore

          Very interesting summary on practical accuracy, ergonomic makes all the difference, it helps you get the accuracy out of a rifle in a practical way. Something akin to a revolver and a semi auto, the wheel gun example I handed was much more accurate than the semi, but much harder to maintain its consistency and much less tolerant to my mistakes.

          One idea that has being floating around my head for a while for a piston is to make a sleeve in the style of the Tavor’s gas system but completely free floating, hanging from the receiver, locking the barrel nut in place (it would be shaped like an upside down AR end plate with a second smaller hole) and fed by low profile gas block by a standard short AR gas tube. Sure it’s complicated but I can then use standard AR barrels and gas blocks (if the gas pressure and volume is adequate, I know but nothing than and adjustable block and a re-boring of the port hole won’t solve), but it’s the only feasible way I can think of making the barrel as free of interference as possible while using a piston and without being forced to play with fixed pistons on the receiver like a Ljungman rifle (all that heat under your main rail would be just… lovely). The BCG would be similar to the Tavor but with the guide rode in the G36/SCAR type running inside the BGC’s tube, in place of those funny spring guides and much in the style of the VHS and acting like an air piston providing some cooling ventilation to the gas sleeve.

          • DiverEngrSL17K

            Thanks for writing back, PCP. You are correct, the SiG 510 / Stgw 57 is actually a roller-delayed blow-back weapon functionally similar to the early H K G3 and CETME rifles. I was typing in all the SiG gas-operated guns I could think of that fit the bill and accidentally included the 510. My sincerest apologies for the mix-up.

            You have some very good ideas concerning variations on the FAL. Perhaps someone like DSA, ARS or Enterprise Arms might actually take up your suggestion?

            I did forget to mention the FNC as one more example of a well-made, accurate and reliable battle / assault rifle — thanks for reminding me! Its derivatives, the Swedish AK-5 and the PINDAD SS1 and SS2 , also enjoy a similar reputation. It is a pity that it has not seen more widespread acceptance, but unfortunately that old bane of every firearms manufacturer, “market timing”, has not spared the FNC either.

            That reminds me — the new CZ805 BREN and Robinson Arms XCR would also be good examples of piston-operated military-grade rifles with DGI-level accuracy.

            Your concept of a rifle with a free-floating piston gas system is really intriguing. It’s pretty obvious that you’ve given it a great deal of careful thought while examining the potential technical challenges from different angles. Are you in a position to actually fabricate your own components for this prototype, i.e., have your own machine shop and the necessary tooling, or do you plan to have an outside vendor make the parts to your design specifications? Either way, please keep us posted if you do decide to proceed. Who knows, this may be the beginning of a successful new-generation rifle!

          • PCP

            Unfortunately I’m in outside of a good location to manufacture prototype firearms, by a few thousand kilometer; Brazil to be exact. The gun scene here is dreadful, might change to horrible if the less restrictive gun laws on the works are approved (tip: It won’t happen). Currently I could make a crude demonstration model in either steel or wood, but the work would have to be outsourced as I have no expertise on building stuff.

            I was studding mechanical engineer but had to stop due to medical reasons and eventually gave up on the idea due due to career prospects. I’m planing on changing my major to economy due to more welcoming market and career, but my passion for guns might prevail and I might return to engineering. Maybe I won’t, maybe I just sponsor a business to make my and other ideas into reality; who knows? In the good but realistic scenario I would finish the project five years from now as my conclusion project, them I would gladly leave it open sourced to any industrious lad in America or Europe try their luck. I also would be happy just to see my idea take shape even if someone else with more means take the due credits. Until there I will be fishing for ideas, reports from people with real world experience to give a north, empirical data and fresh ideas.

            Now enough with the laments of a frustrated engineer undergrad, and more with my idea for a rifle. The thing will have an upper-lower architecture for the easy of modularity. It would use a captive front hinge pin because it’s simple and it works, but I’m thinking in using a FAL style lock for the receiver for easy of manipulation (but I’m not sold on the though of depending of a spring to secure the receivers, but it’s tempting) but with the lock on the backplate/buffer locking a hook protusion of the lower receiver. The backplate/buffer will be vertically secured by the same internal rails on the side of the receiver the bolt carrier will run. For the bolt I would use fewer and bigger lugs than the AR-15 bolt and a one piece leaf spring extractor (I hate tiny springs and cross pins), made to fit into a proprietary barrel extension that fits into a regular barrel… BUT since some people might be too stubborn to get rid of the old extension a AR-15 style bolt head might be offered as well. Only the bolt head would be similar to an AR-15 tough, as I plan into using a sprig loaded firing pin and spring loaded bolt (but instead of a AUG style sleeve I plan on a thrust foil bearing sandwiched between two washer). The lower receiver would be a standard AR-15 lower but with the rear ring filled and the longitudinal curvature inverted and centered around the pivot pin in order to secure the upper receiver when firing and in case of failure of the lock; will use standard AR grip, controls and trigger group. It will feature a side folding stock base that accepts AR buffer tubes. The material would probably the 7075 aluminum billet for both halves (extrusion & forging would be cheaper to mass produce, but would require too much initial investment to even contemplate at this stage), or forged carbon-fiber (cheaper and more suitable to impact applications than weaved CFRP while still rigid and strong enough to make a car monocoque out of it) for the lower, with steel locking lug and pin sleeves and plunger tubes. I’m torn between a full length upper without the underside of the handguard like the ACR, or a one-piece handguard with the whole upper rail like in the LaRue OBR; with both using the keymod pattern for weight saving and modularity.

            I’m really enjoying the exchange of ideas and appreciate your time, consideration and knowledge.

  • zip

    I wish him luck. It is has been interesting to watch the evolution of the “designer” AR15 parts business in the last few years. Designer pivot pins, buffer tubes, charging handles etc shows just how far marketing has come to this generation of gun owners. I believe they are only eclipsed by teen age girls in their gullibility.

  • Clint Notestine

    his rifle doesnt have a rear sight

  • Carey

    Joel made that place run…without him its just not the same…even quality went down with Noveske as the scabs came from the woodwork to take control of the company Johnny built. Joel knows his sh*# and his products are TOP NOTCH.