There was a satisfying pop when the bottle seal broke, unlike a protracted hiss when the Impact bottle is removed. Plus, there was no discernible leak when the bottle was reattached, again unlike the Impact. The RAW appears to be of superior design and workmanship than the Impact (notwithstanding the unfortunate inability to adjust the trigger w/o removing the bottle and stock.)
No special tools. I did invest in a set of extended socket round-tip Allen wrenches today though. The RAW uses a 3/16th Allen bolt to attach the stock to the receiver. Martin uses a T-handle Allen key, but I couldn't find one at The Home Depot :-(
Yeah, I wish I would have found one. The socket set is nice though; it's a seven-piece set including a 3/16". I have a boatload of ratchets and adapter/extenders.
It doesn't matter; you can unscrew the bottle at max pressure if you want. The bottle has its own valving. In fact, that's usually how it;s done as the gun is used to fill spare bottles.
The Impacts come with a nice hard-shell case w/ diamond foam cut-outs inside (unlike the RAWs with a corrugated fiberboard box :-(). Jeesh.
I have as well. The way the RAW is designed, it's challenging to replace the existing moderator. And it's questionable whether this would do a better job. An after-market mod can be screwed on the end of the existing mod, but the rifle is already extremely long! Actually, I am happy with the noise suppression of the factory mod; it's much better than I had feared.
I had a synthetic stock on my Daystate Pulsar. I liked it (positive comment). It hides scratches better than a wood stock. Is noting that wood is prone to scratches a negative comment tantamount to complaining?
on that walnut thumbhole stock you passed on.