ZEV Technologies is proud to announce the much-anticipated release of their Small Frame rifle. With over three years in development and thousands of rounds of rigorous testing, the ZEV Small Frame rifle has finally been perfected and ready for market.
Designed with the firepower of a large frame caliber in an AR15 sized package, the ZEV Small Frame delivers long range capability at a fraction of the size of its larger counterpart. Chambered in the popular 6.5 Creedmoor, with ballistic advantages over the .308 when shooting longer distances, this rifle is a perfect choice for both hunting and PSR style shooting when reaching out farther matters to you.
Never one to follow, ZEV Technologies decided on a different approach to the Small Frame. As VP of Marketing, Dave Roberts puts it “Creating a large caliber, small frame rifle was not good enough for ZEV. Others have been in development for years but had not yet come to market. We wanted a rifle that was not just smaller and lighter, but one that would go the distance. As in 1,000+ yards distance, consistently and reliably. One that would stand out from the others. We went back to the drawing board many times before getting it right. We are confident that the ZEV Small Frame is second to none.”
Manufactured from the same high-quality billet 7075-T651 aluminum offered in their billet line of receiver sets and rifles, the impeccable quality and finish work is apparent down to the smallest detail. The free-floating extended length hand guard installs directly to the integrated rail base on the upper receiver to enhance rigidity and gives the rifle a unique, streamlined profile. A custom 20” 416R stainless steel fluted heavy barrel by Noveske is topped off with a SureFire muzzle break for added recoil reduction, while a custom tuned gas and buffer system keeps the rifle cycling smoothly, ejecting spent rounds consistently and aids with recoil reduction. Ambidextrous operating controls for the safety selector, bolt release, magazine release and slide lock charging handle make this rifle shooter friendly. Featuring a ZEV exclusive flat face AR Gold trigger in sniper gray, outfitted with Magpul furniture and 20 round PMAG, the only thing missing is your optic.
The ZEV Small Frame is available now on their website and through their network of distributors.
www.zevtechnologies.com/zev-tech-small-frame-rifle
Tags: Zev Technologies
ohhh this is back! I remember when Mega was teasing us with this and they only let 12 out in the wild i believe before the merger! I hope this can come out with an 18″ barrel length as well cause adding a 7.62 suppressor onto it will be a little ridiculous forsure and the -2″ shouldn’t change much for ballistics. I think 18″ is the sweet spot anyways.
Completely agree. Using a lighter profiled 18″ barrel would take a half pound off the front of the rifle and make the most of the smaller frame.
I was a big fan of Mega, and would have probably gone all-in on the small-large-frame depending on how it was rolled out/parts compatibility. I’m actually kind of sad it has taken so long for Zev to get there after the merger.
Only with my very limited experience from doing several years of IC/PSD work for TITANGROUP/L-3 under a jointly run program’s contract assisting the DoJ/DoD and mostly to augment PMCs and a large JSOTF w/an ODA, I think, along with a handful of NSW Team guys from the West Coast NAVSPECWAR command or whatever, did we realize (at our firm) that our most modern platforms being the usual 5.56 caliber ARs was now exposing serious issues….The IC personnel (from ex-mil to fmr HRT etc) knew there had been issues and talk of one day changing to something else, though we hadn’t even considered back then a 6.5CM alternative….hell the 300BLK was just coming into the US SOF community w/any real regularity of operational use. That, and that TITAN’s outsourcing of us meant it was basically a one-off program to help the Mexican G.A.F.E alongside their Marines and a couple Mex Federal agencies specializing in these types of gigs, but not under the scrutiny these incidents would usually bring because it wasn’t large scale military advising etc as we usually do, I think.
During the 2006 thru ’09 time period, we did quite a lot of PSD work south of our border, but were, as I said, not a PMC (although we were told ahead of time PMCs like DyneCorp, Grumman etc would be on-site in certain AORs) and shortly after, we noticed issues w/the inefficiencies of the 5.56 cartridge.. Luckily, doing benign priv security firm PSD work as an IC gave us latitude to change that–even though we were taken back by having been signing NDAs by the truckload regarding certain aspects of the entire cooperative nature of the way they handle stuff down there w/DTOs we tracked (DTOs meaning Drug Trafficking Orgs—-“cartels”) in Baja.
Their escalations vs local LE there started effecting our people who’d be running several vics (SUVs and not very hard to ID I’m sure) and get engaged by threats using heavy hardware…Not something surprising as we WERE warned/briefed etc, but the 5.56 platforms were not
protecting people and we lost a few of our people (TITAN personnel) because of it along w/bad route planning.
As I said, we technically were fully prepped in case we were tasked to tactically assist JSOTF efforts’ “low-vis” direct action-esque types of efforts etc…Which didn’t cause anxiety for several of my longtime friends who’d been seasoned US SOF veterans (majority, actually, joining TITAN after being in top tier SMU’s, in fact) and despite their SOF backgrounds, AARs showed they had put seven to eight of 77gr rounds, on one occasion, into a threat, striking the sternum & lower torso–likely hitting the spine–yet somehow did NOT go down. ALL of us, before this, had a choice between a DPMS AR-15 (NOT one of those nice types you see in World of Firepower or RECOIL…these were off the shelf cheap-o-versions) or KAC SR-25 “battle carbine” variants (basically the first iterations of the EC/ACC you see now) and, since we trained w/our AR-15s, that’s what everyone was using, and even w/everyone–including me–having access to great gear, incidents kept occurring) such supremely awesome ammo like the universally favored Black Hills 77gr heavier rounds I mentioned earlier.
Now, again, that issue coming out of those incidents occurred in the ’06 thru ’09 time period when priv sec firms, even ones like ours that weren’t doing “mercenary work” or whatever BS people accuse Academi/DyneCorp etc of (when the guys I would have next to me stacking on a door were GREAT dudes, who wouldn’t ever sell their expertise to “the highest bidder” and they had AMAZINGLY generous hearts to locals and great moral compasses, imho) but nonetheless, they were doing something that was more effective eventually and we had to make a change ASAP (losing longtime friends, not to mention fmr Special Mission vets w/ double digit deployment histories was a DEFCON-1 red alert kinda moment for us) and seeing those threats was being engaged by top US SOF operators and still being injured or killed? It just clicked at one point…We switched to these compact SR-25 CQBR type systems, and suddenly, the reach and lethal terminal ballistics showed me what I think our CSASS today should’ve been more geared towards instead of the unwieldy HK417 reboot it appears to be to me… because even w/a 14.5″ barrel, and usually just reg reflexive type optics–or a 4x at most–showed they would thump the sh-t out of a bad guy even as far as 700m plus!.. What had happened before w/the ARs right outside their vics (under 10m-20m I believe) was a wake up also for our armorers back in San Diego, not to mention it was lucky the personnel had the kind of fmr DoD SUV w/that high level III or IV armor, I believe. But once our 7.62 NATO standard ammo came in, we saw it was anything but…it turned out to be not just customized versions of our suppressed SR-25s, but now w/CQC style stocks like the PDW ones you see everywhere now. ALSO, we had enhanced 7.62 NATO rounds that never failed us ever.
Point is, the 6.5CM requires an 18″-24″ barrel most of the time to get the most out that round!!! How does that make a CSASS or any weapon system more easily wielded…it gives range, but that excess weight/length/etc is not worth that trade off for a 6.5mm’s effectiveness.
BOTTOM LINE: Sorry for the long story, but it was to make a point. I HAVE SEEN WHAT WE SHOULD BE REPLACING EVERY SERVICE RIFLE WITH. THE KAC FOLKS HAVE YET TO FAIL ANYONE IN MAKING A BETTER WEAPON SYSTEM, AND ONE THAT WOULD BE MODULAR AND COMPATIBLE WITH WHAT’S ALREADY OUT THERE INSTEAD OF GIVING HK MORE MONEY, AND TRYING TO COMPLETELY OVERHAUL ALL THE AMMO STOCKPILES W/6.5MM INSTEAD OF STICKING WITH THE GAZILLION PERFECTLY GOOD 7.62 NATO ROUNDS THAT ARE EVERYWHERE. THAT’S ALL.
Dude… wtf?
You mention you had “enhanced” 7.62 rounds… Well, almost all of the gazillion rounds of 7.62 in inventory is linked M80 ball, which is not the best stuff out there for accuracy or terminal ballistics. IMHO, using existing stocks of ammo is very often given as a reason for not adopting a better cartridge (like .276 Pedersen vs .30-06 when the Garand first showed up in testing) and I think this favors the Ordnance Corps types instead of the trigger pullers. Not saying you’re one or the other, just a general observation.
6.5 Creedmoor does just fine out of 16″ barrels, with better efficiency and less felt recoil than 7.62×51. In particular, loads using the 130gr bullets have plenty of zip out of shorter barrels and don’t suffer vs .308 bullets in terms of terminal effects.
^GSC for the win. 6.5 Creedmoor would do even better if the Military ordered a round specifically designed for a 16″-18″, by using a fast burning powder.
DMR explains it better then me.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b32w6CWWn2U