M4: are CA and G&P clone of TM?

[TokyoSeven]

The way I like to visualize it is that Tokyo Marui is the mother of auto electric airsoft as well know it, everything else is essentially just its off spring. Some of those offspring have learned and grown from family mistakes. Other offspring went the other way and married cousins and aunties and have dipped into the lower end of the quality gene pool.

[ThunderCactus]

A clone is something that's a direct copy. The CA M4 is NOT a direct copy of a TM M4.
CA's M4 may be BASED on the TM design, but it's not a CLONE. If it were a clone, you'd have interchangeable parts, just like you can swap parts between a CA and G&P M4

[Crunchmeister]

Originally Posted by Sepulcrum

I've heard of at least one stock TM breaking down in a day, Brand new. but that doesn't mean they all break down fast. CA is more solid than TM IMO and I've never opened/worked on a G&P but from what i hear it's the best of the 3... though that's just what i hear...



Realsword Aks use a custom shorter gearbox.... so in other words they reinvented it. And same mechbox means part of the guns a clone at least.

As you know, my brand new TM M4 was nothing but problems. Motor burned in a day. I got a replacement (which is still in use 2 years later), and the gears snacked on themselves about a week later (under 1000 rounds). I replaced the gears, and the mechbox cracked less than 1000 rounds later. So yeah, even the almighty TM can make lemons.

As for the RS Type 56, there are a lot of little differences in the mechbox where standard parts won't fit.

The basic theme here that seems to get riddled with useless info is that ALL AEGs are based on TM design to some extent or another. While I wouldn't call a modern CA or G&P M4 a TM clone, other than the body and hopup, all externals and internals are readily interchangeable. So to say they're clones or to dismiss them as being completely different are both incorrect.

[Huron]

They're all 99% compatible with little to no fitting required. [/question]