Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
11/22/2017 10:05:29 PM
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 9/16/2004 5:01:09 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/16/2004 5:02:05 PM EST by Stainless]
This looks VERY interesting.....
From Robinson Arms The XCR




The upper receiver has an integral rail system and quick change barrel mechanism.

Available in 5.56 NATO and 6.8 calibers in barrel lengths of 11.5”, 14.5”, 16.2, 18.5” , and 20”. The rifle uses standard M16 magazines for .223 and 6.8 magazines for 6.8.

The XCRTM is both durable and light at just under 7.0 lbs. empty.



Edited Cause: Pic was TOOO big

S
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 5:06:05 PM EST
The Xtra Cheezy Rifle...I Like it.
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 5:07:16 PM EST
That's what I thought when I first saw it. I think the M-16 has a REAL good rival, equal on all levels.

But then again, its basic design IS an AR...

I guess the only thing that can beat an AR is another AR.

Also, keep in mind that POF, KKF, ZM, and probably a fwe other outputs already have piston ARs. Colt could easily bring theirs back.
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 5:07:27 PM EST
Mildly interesting. I hate the stock.
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 5:13:44 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/16/2004 5:14:35 PM EST by Marksman14]
I think its interesting. Probably wouldn't mind owning one for the hell of it...seems like it might make a handly little carbine.

But based on the manufacturer, it will probably be atleast a 1500+ setup. Throw it in the mix at 800 dollars to compete with the AR15 price wise, and I think people may take kindly to it. It would never replace one of my AR's, but it would certainly compliment them well.

Scott
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 5:15:48 PM EST
What fascinates me about this, is that it is a monolithic upper. This means you don't have to worry about installing the "ras" or keeping the "ras" alligned, or the "ras" coming loose. This means fewer parts, and fewer things to go wrong.

Also, there is no buffer tube/buffer, and the bolt and bolt carrier can be DESIGNED to work with the gas piston, rather than a current Ar-15 Bolt/Bolt Carrier being RETROFITTED to work with a gas piston. Good thinking there.

I have always believed it is better to start with a FRESH piece of paper, rather that RE-build a current design. Now, if you want to include some of the ARs excellent ergonomics, such as the safety, mag release, etc etc, then thats fine. But I hate the thinking of "how can we maintain MAXIMUM parts similarity with the AR platform.... while at the same time making a WHOLE new weapon."

S
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 5:24:16 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/16/2004 5:28:19 PM EST by Dave_A]
NOT EVEN CLOSE!!!

What that seems to be is an AK gas system & bolt grafted onto an AR lower.

Take away the AR gas system, you take away the signature feature of the gun, and the part that makes it so accurate. The whole point of the AR design is to HAVE the bolt, buffer tube & buffer all in-line with eachother. This avoids the extra muzzle flip caused by a gas piston, and makes the AR the most accurate base design for a semi-auto rifle...

Another 'solution in search of a problem'...

Has anyone ever sean an AR bolt break?

I've never heard of it happening...

Then why 'simplify' the bolt at the cost of accuracy...

And as for reliability, it doesn't matter how reliable a gun is if you have no ammo left to shoot... The AR is reliable enough to reach that point, so reliability is a moot point. If you can shoot 1 day's load without cleaning, you're clear...

Putting a gas piston on a modern rifle is a giant leap BACKWARDS, to around 1947 or so...
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 5:25:31 PM EST

Originally Posted By Marksman14:
But based on the manufacturer, it will probably be atleast a 1500+ setup. Throw it in the mix at 800 dollars to compete with the AR15 price wise, and I think people may take kindly to it.
Scott



I disagree with this. No AR I am aware of comes from the factory with a RAS for $800. You need to include the price of the RAS, $300-400, and instillation. And if you will notice, that top rail is UN-interrupted, A' LA the LMT MRP. The extra $700 buys me a gas piston, a monolithic upper receiver, an un-interrupted top rail, and rails all around.... that sounds like a GOOD deal to me.

Now, this thing MIGHT be a bigger lemon than a yugo. It is untested and I am aware of that. But this is DEFINITELY something I want to keep my eyes on.

Have a good one,

Stainless
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 5:27:42 PM EST

Originally Posted By Extracheeze:
The Xtra Cheezy Rifle...I Like it.



HAHAHAHAHA funny as hell.

They named a rifle after you..... you MUST own it.

Stainless
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 5:28:40 PM EST
I like it.
I think I might look into this and see what they cost.

like others have said given who it's from it will probably be $1500 +
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 5:32:10 PM EST

Originally Posted By Dave_A:
What that seems to be is an AK gas system & bolt grafted onto an AR lower.



I have one thing to say to that......

<­b>SWEET


S
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 5:32:49 PM EST
Looks like a piece of crap.

Monolithic rail. I'd rather have a MRP upper (only) for about the same price.

Gas piston and 3 lug bolt. That's 50's tech. It won't work today. That crappy SIG 550 uses a similar setup.

I know it's very inaccurate because I have never shot one. Trust me.

Drop free (AR) mags and AMBI controls. Totally unneccessary.

Folding stock that could be easily upgraded to a folding/collapsable stock. No thanks

Not as modular as the AR that has had decades for refinements. A big obvious here.

Quick change of calibers/barrels. I can only ask why.

My thoughts without ever shooting or handling one is that it is a total piece of junk. The AR is waaaaaaaaay better.

Link Posted: 9/16/2004 5:34:49 PM EST

Originally Posted By Dave_A:
NOT EVEN CLOSE!!!

What that seems to be is an AK gas system & bolt grafted onto an AR lower.

Take away the AR gas system, you take away the signature feature of the gun, and the part that makes it so accurate. The whole point of the AR design is to HAVE the bolt, buffer tube & buffer all in-line with eachother. This avoids the extra muzzle flip caused by a gas piston, and makes the AR the most accurate base design for a semi-auto rifle...

Another 'solution in search of a problem'...

Has anyone ever sean an AR bolt break?

I've never heard of it happening...

Then why 'simplify' the bolt at the cost of accuracy...

And as for reliability, it doesn't matter how reliable a gun is if you have no ammo left to shoot... The AR is reliable enough to reach that point, so reliability is a moot point. If you can shoot 1 day's load without cleaning, you're clear...

Putting a gas piston on a modern rifle is a giant leap BACKWARDS, to around 1947 or so...



Haven't seen it but have heard multiple stories of AR bolts breaking (non colt bolts- no don't want to start a manufacturer war but colt magnafluxes their bolts from what i've heard)...

yes, reduces muzzle flip but at the same time what's the recoil for 5.56? next to nothing... if I can shoot an AK accurately then why not this? I don't think it's that bad of an idea- but at the same time........ not a new one either... Galil anyone? same thing (from what I can tell)

-Roth
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 5:36:43 PM EST

Originally Posted By Dave_A:
NOT EVEN CLOSE!!!

What that seems to be is an AK gas system & bolt grafted onto an AR lower.

Take away the AR gas system, you take away the signature feature of the gun, and the part that makes it so accurate. The whole point of the AR design is to HAVE the bolt, buffer tube & buffer all in-line with eachother. This avoids the extra muzzle flip caused by a gas piston, and makes the AR the most accurate base design for a semi-auto rifle...

Another 'solution in search of a problem'...

Has anyone ever sean an AR bolt break?

I've never heard of it happening...

Then why 'simplify' the bolt at the cost of accuracy...

And as for reliability, it doesn't matter how reliable a gun is if you have no ammo left to shoot... The AR is reliable enough to reach that point, so reliability is a moot point. If you can shoot 1 day's load without cleaning, you're clear...

Putting a gas piston on a modern rifle is a giant leap BACKWARDS, to around 1947 or so...


I'll keep my AR.
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 5:39:48 PM EST

Originally Posted By Stainless:

Originally Posted By Dave_A:
What that seems to be is an AK gas system & bolt grafted onto an AR lower.



I have one thing to say to that......

<­b>SWEET



S


Then go buy a SAR-3 and put an Ultimak mount on it...

But the concept in general is like putting a 1950's motor in a 2004 Corvette...

You take an old, obselete design and put a fancy body around it...
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 5:41:21 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/16/2004 5:42:33 PM EST by Marksman14]

Originally Posted By Stainless:

Originally Posted By Marksman14:
But based on the manufacturer, it will probably be atleast a 1500+ setup. Throw it in the mix at 800 dollars to compete with the AR15 price wise, and I think people may take kindly to it.
Scott



I disagree with this. No AR I am aware of comes from the factory with a RAS for $800. You need to include the price of the RAS, $300-400, and instillation. And if you will notice, that top rail is UN-interrupted, A' LA the LMT MRP. The extra $700 buys me a gas piston, a monolithic upper receiver, an un-interrupted top rail, and rails all around.... that sounds like a GOOD deal to me.

Now, this thing MIGHT be a bigger lemon than a yugo. It is untested and I am aware of that. But this is DEFINITELY something I want to keep my eyes on.

Have a good one,

Stainless



True, but I try not to look at it like that. If bushmaster built an upper with a rail built in, then they could probably do it for cheaper than 800+3-400 for a rail system, because that would just be a part of the manufacturing process. Mass produce something like that, and it certainly won't cost as much as adding seperate components.

Either way, an 800 dollar AR+ a 250 dollar Larue 7.0, and you're still at 1050. Hell, for 1500, you can get a KAC SR15, and then you get ALL the goodstuff.

So make the XCR around 950-1000, and it might have some appeal. They very well may end up doing that, but I just cannot see that company putting ANYTHING out at a reasonable price that isn't a VEPR. The M96 is a great rifle, until you look at the price tag. Simply put, you can get a much better rifle than the M96 for 1500 bucks.

If Robinson plays it smart and makes its price near high-end AR pricing, they may have a winner. But if they pull the same shit that they did with the M96, its going to flop.
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 5:42:18 PM EST

Originally Posted By G-CODE:
That crappy SIG 550 uses a similar setup.

I know it's very inaccurate because I have never shot one. Trust me.

Drop free (AR) mags and AMBI controls. Totally unneccessary.

Folding stock that could be easily upgraded to a folding/collapsable stock. No thanks

My thoughts without ever shooting or handling one is that it is a total piece of junk. The AR is waaaaaaaaay better.




HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Thanks for the laugh. Shit, I am STILL laughing.

I hope those were intended to be the jokes I took them as.

S
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 5:42:47 PM EST

Originally Posted By Dave_A:
NOT EVEN CLOSE!!!

What that seems to be is an AK gas system & bolt grafted onto an AR lower.

Take away the AR gas system, you take away the signature feature of the gun, and the part that makes it so accurate. The whole point of the AR design is to HAVE the bolt, buffer tube & buffer all in-line with eachother. This avoids the extra muzzle flip caused by a gas piston, and makes the AR the most accurate base design for a semi-auto rifle...

Another 'solution in search of a problem'...

Has anyone ever sean an AR bolt break?

I've never heard of it happening...

Then why 'simplify' the bolt at the cost of accuracy...

And as for reliability, it doesn't matter how reliable a gun is if you have no ammo left to shoot... The AR is reliable enough to reach that point, so reliability is a moot point. If you can shoot 1 day's load without cleaning, you're clear...

Putting a gas piston on a modern rifle is a giant leap BACKWARDS, to around 1947 or so...



While I agree that it cuts down on recoil and a bit of accuracy, I still think a gas piston is a better choice.

Yes, you will have to clean the gas system, but at least you won't have the danger of short stroking. The AR IS vulnerable to this.

Additionally, you won't have to deal with external debris added to crud from the normal operation of the rifle.

I will admit the advantages and disadvantages to the system. But look at the SIG550 - it has a gas piston operation, and is nearly as accurate as an AR. I personally think the secret is in the barrel ( just the quality of it ). Why not do the same thing, or just improve the ammunition?

It is a simple fix for an AR. Yes, I admit that the AR can and will use up your ammunition supply. But what about if you don't get a chance to clean your rifle? Say you just ended a manjor firefight and are sent RIGHT on into a patrol from your base? Let's think worse case scenario here - if the rifle can handle the worst, then it can handle anything.

We are dealing with accuracy in terms of MOA here. I'd gladly sacrifice 1/2"-1" of accuracy for the fact that I know my rifle will NOT fail, even if I am negligent and gunk builds up to an insane point.

As for the 3 bolt lugs, this is something I've wanted for a long time. Yes, you do need to have a longer arc of rotation for it to unlock, but then you get stronger lugs and easier cleaning in return. The 8 lugged AR is very difficult to clean thuroughly.

Put a piston in an AR and you will get the best weapon in the world, hands down ( and it is even without it, and I'll defend my statement to the death ).
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 5:44:42 PM EST
That damn stock is hideous.

Although Robinson is known for crappy stock designs. Just look at the VEPR.

Link Posted: 9/16/2004 5:45:17 PM EST

Originally Posted By Stainless:

Originally Posted By G-CODE:
That crappy SIG 550 uses a similar setup.

I know it's very inaccurate because I have never shot one. Trust me.

Drop free (AR) mags and AMBI controls. Totally unneccessary.

Folding stock that could be easily upgraded to a folding/collapsable stock. No thanks

My thoughts without ever shooting or handling one is that it is a total piece of junk. The AR is waaaaaaaaay better.




HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Thanks for the laugh. Shit, I am STILL laughing.

I hope those were intended to be the jokes I took them as.

S



Yes, they were jokes. I didn't post that, but its pretty obvious it was a joke. Very funny indeed.
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 5:46:33 PM EST

Originally Posted By Marksman14:
If bushmaster built an upper with a rail built in, then they could probably do it for cheaper than 800+3-400 for a rail system, because that would just be a part of the manufacturing process. Mass produce something like that, and it certainly won't cost as much as adding seperate components.



Man, If Bushmaster made a monolithic upper RIFLE.... and sold it at a reasonable (<1k) price.... I would run around the house, rubbing my nipples, screaming "I'm dead sexxah!"

S
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 5:47:43 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/16/2004 5:48:39 PM EST by Dave_A]

Originally Posted By NUCdt04:

Originally Posted By Dave_A:
NOT EVEN CLOSE!!!

What that seems to be is an AK gas system & bolt grafted onto an AR lower.

Take away the AR gas system, you take away the signature feature of the gun, and the part that makes it so accurate. The whole point of the AR design is to HAVE the bolt, buffer tube & buffer all in-line with eachother. This avoids the extra muzzle flip caused by a gas piston, and makes the AR the most accurate base design for a semi-auto rifle...

Another 'solution in search of a problem'...

Has anyone ever sean an AR bolt break?

I've never heard of it happening...

Then why 'simplify' the bolt at the cost of accuracy...

And as for reliability, it doesn't matter how reliable a gun is if you have no ammo left to shoot... The AR is reliable enough to reach that point, so reliability is a moot point. If you can shoot 1 day's load without cleaning, you're clear...

Putting a gas piston on a modern rifle is a giant leap BACKWARDS, to around 1947 or so...



Haven't seen it but have heard multiple stories of AR bolts breaking (non colt bolts- no don't want to start a manufacturer war but colt magnafluxes their bolts from what i've heard)...

yes, reduces muzzle flip but at the same time what's the recoil for 5.56? next to nothing... if I can shoot an AK accurately then why not this? I don't think it's that bad of an idea- but at the same time........ not a new one either... Galil anyone? same thing (from what I can tell)

-Roth



1) Define 'accurately'.

Acceptable accuracy to me means capable of putting a 10 shot group in 12" at 600yds, and 7" at 300yds, NO OPTICS..

The AR can (and has been known to manage even smaller than that).

The AK can't, due to it's operating system. Even if you rechamber for a more accurate round like .223.

AKs are fine for where they are used, but the AR is a 100% better weapon. Period.

2) If bolt breakage was a problem the Army would have had trouble with it, and the bolt would have been redone. After 40 years, they seem quite happy with the bolt design.

3) Any way you look at it, the piston op, PERTICULARLY the long-stroke AK design, is an obselete system.
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 5:48:06 PM EST

Originally Posted By Stainless:

Originally Posted By Marksman14:
If bushmaster built an upper with a rail built in, then they could probably do it for cheaper than 800+3-400 for a rail system, because that would just be a part of the manufacturing process. Mass produce something like that, and it certainly won't cost as much as adding seperate components.



Man, If Bushmaster made a monolithic upper RIFLE.... and sold it at a reasonable (<1k) price.... I would run around the house, rubbing my nipples, screaming "I'm dead sexxah!"

S



Would be sweet...but I gotta admit, I love the peiced together look of a basic AR with a KAC, or a free floated RAS system. MRP's just look goofy to me on the AR15 system. Can't get used to them, and for my applications, won't have to.
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 5:48:49 PM EST
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 5:51:54 PM EST

Originally Posted By Blackjack272:
While I agree that it cuts down on recoil and a bit of accuracy, I still think a gas piston is a better choice.

Yes, you will have to clean the gas system, but at least you won't have the danger of short stroking. The AR IS vulnerable to this.

Additionally, you won't have to deal with external debris added to crud from the normal operation of the rifle.

I will admit the advantages and disadvantages to the system. But look at the SIG550 - it has a gas piston operation, and is nearly as accurate as an AR. I personally think the secret is in the barrel ( just the quality of it ). Why not do the same thing, or just improve the ammunition?

It is a simple fix for an AR. Yes, I admit that the AR can and will use up your ammunition supply. But what about if you don't get a chance to clean your rifle? Say you just ended a manjor firefight and are sent RIGHT on into a patrol from your base? Let's think worse case scenario here - if the rifle can handle the worst, then it can handle anything.

We are dealing with accuracy in terms of MOA here. I'd gladly sacrifice 1/2"-1" of accuracy for the fact that I know my rifle will NOT fail, even if I am negligent and gunk builds up to an insane point.

As for the 3 bolt lugs, this is something I've wanted for a long time. Yes, you do need to have a longer arc of rotation for it to unlock, but then you get stronger lugs and easier cleaning in return. The 8 lugged AR is very difficult to clean thuroughly.

Put a piston in an AR and you will get the best weapon in the world, hands down ( and it is even without it, and I'll defend my statement to the death ).




YES!!! SOME ONE FINALLY UNDERSTANDS WHERE I AM COMING FROM

Thank you Blackjack272.

Stainless
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 5:54:13 PM EST

Originally Posted By Blackjack272:

Originally Posted By Dave_A:
NOT EVEN CLOSE!!!

What that seems to be is an AK gas system & bolt grafted onto an AR lower.

Take away the AR gas system, you take away the signature feature of the gun, and the part that makes it so accurate. The whole point of the AR design is to HAVE the bolt, buffer tube & buffer all in-line with eachother. This avoids the extra muzzle flip caused by a gas piston, and makes the AR the most accurate base design for a semi-auto rifle...

Another 'solution in search of a problem'...

Has anyone ever sean an AR bolt break?

I've never heard of it happening...

Then why 'simplify' the bolt at the cost of accuracy...

And as for reliability, it doesn't matter how reliable a gun is if you have no ammo left to shoot... The AR is reliable enough to reach that point, so reliability is a moot point. If you can shoot 1 day's load without cleaning, you're clear...

Putting a gas piston on a modern rifle is a giant leap BACKWARDS, to around 1947 or so...



While I agree that it cuts down on recoil and a bit of accuracy, I still think a gas piston is a better choice.

Yes, you will have to clean the gas system, but at least you won't have the danger of short stroking. The AR IS vulnerable to this.

Additionally, you won't have to deal with external debris added to crud from the normal operation of the rifle.

I will admit the advantages and disadvantages to the system. But look at the SIG550 - it has a gas piston operation, and is nearly as accurate as an AR. I personally think the secret is in the barrel ( just the quality of it ). Why not do the same thing, or just improve the ammunition?

It is a simple fix for an AR. Yes, I admit that the AR can and will use up your ammunition supply. But what about if you don't get a chance to clean your rifle? Say you just ended a manjor firefight and are sent RIGHT on into a patrol from your base? Let's think worse case scenario here - if the rifle can handle the worst, then it can handle anything.

We are dealing with accuracy in terms of MOA here. I'd gladly sacrifice 1/2"-1" of accuracy for the fact that I know my rifle will NOT fail, even if I am negligent and gunk builds up to an insane point.

As for the 3 bolt lugs, this is something I've wanted for a long time. Yes, you do need to have a longer arc of rotation for it to unlock, but then you get stronger lugs and easier cleaning in return. The 8 lugged AR is very difficult to clean thuroughly.

Put a piston in an AR and you will get the best weapon in the world, hands down ( and it is even without it, and I'll defend my statement to the death ).



Put a piston in the AR and you have just another rifle.

The fact is that the AR is reliable enough for military use. If you clean it once a day, it will work fine... And 'clean' means just the bolt carrier, bolt and upper reciever -> a 5 minute job.

We are talking about a gun that gan go 4,000-5,000 rounds without cleaning at least. That qualifies as 'reliable enough to last 1 day of ops without cleaning'.

The Army seems to have come to the same conclusion based on AARs from OIF -> the defining difference between folks who's rifles were reliable enough and folks who had problems was maintanance.

The only 'advantage' of a piston op system is that it's easier to get the thing parade-ground clean.
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 5:58:56 PM EST

Originally Posted By G-CODE:
Looks like a piece of crap.

Monolithic rail. I'd rather have a MRP upper (only) for about the same price.

Gas piston and 3 lug bolt. That's 50's tech. It won't work today. That crappy SIG 550 uses a similar setup. And for the price of a 550, you can get an AR that is light years ahead of it. Too comples, and it barely able to reach AR accuracy levels

I know it's very inaccurate because I have never shot one. Trust me. More accurate than your run of the mill AK. But then a White Oak Armaments AR is more accurate than your average M&A Parts gun. Same deal. The 550 is still no AR-15/M-16, although it's close.

Drop free (AR) mags and AMBI controls. Totally unneccessary. Pretty much -> AR controls are as intuitive as 1911 controls...

Folding stock that could be easily upgraded to a folding/collapsable stock. No thanks Collapsable is enough

Not as modular as the AR that has had decades for refinements. A big obvious here.

Quick change of calibers/barrels. I can only ask why. That one better not be sarcastic. Quick change barrels & calibers? Better have a notebook for your sight settings

My thoughts without ever shooting or handling one is that it is a total piece of junk. The AR is waaaaaaaaay better. I wouldn't be that severe, but the AR is still the superior weapon


Link Posted: 9/16/2004 6:00:09 PM EST

Originally Posted By Lumpy196:
NOT.





[teh ass] WOW, the great lumpy has graced my pitiful thread with his presence, and seen fit to make a ONE word reply. One day, I hope, I shall be cool enough to receive... dare I say it? TWO words. [/ teh ass]

HA HA HA

have a good one.

Stainless
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 6:01:36 PM EST

Originally Posted By Stainless:

Originally Posted By Blackjack272:
While I agree that it cuts down on recoil and a bit of accuracy, I still think a gas piston is a better choice.

Yes, you will have to clean the gas system, but at least you won't have the danger of short stroking. The AR IS vulnerable to this.

Additionally, you won't have to deal with external debris added to crud from the normal operation of the rifle.

I will admit the advantages and disadvantages to the system. But look at the SIG550 - it has a gas piston operation, and is nearly as accurate as an AR. I personally think the secret is in the barrel ( just the quality of it ). Why not do the same thing, or just improve the ammunition?

It is a simple fix for an AR. Yes, I admit that the AR can and will use up your ammunition supply. But what about if you don't get a chance to clean your rifle? Say you just ended a manjor firefight and are sent RIGHT on into a patrol from your base? Let's think worse case scenario here - if the rifle can handle the worst, then it can handle anything.

We are dealing with accuracy in terms of MOA here. I'd gladly sacrifice 1/2"-1" of accuracy for the fact that I know my rifle will NOT fail, even if I am negligent and gunk builds up to an insane point.

As for the 3 bolt lugs, this is something I've wanted for a long time. Yes, you do need to have a longer arc of rotation for it to unlock, but then you get stronger lugs and easier cleaning in return. The 8 lugged AR is very difficult to clean thuroughly.

Put a piston in an AR and you will get the best weapon in the world, hands down ( and it is even without it, and I'll defend my statement to the death ).




YES!!! SOME ONE FINALLY UNDERSTANDS WHERE I AM COMING FROM

Thank you Blackjack272.

Stainless



I know where you're coming from Stainless...

The same 'back to the past' crowd that mourns the death of the M14 and 1911 as US service werapons...

You take the Vietnam-era reliability 'urban legend', roll in some more 'legends' about the AK gas system, and get a gun that would have been great in 1954, but is totally outclassed today...
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 6:03:46 PM EST

Originally Posted By Dave_A:
I know where you're coming from Stainless...

The same 'back to the past' crowd that mourns the death of the M14 and 1911 as US service werapons...

You take the Vietnam-era reliability 'urban legend', roll in some more 'legends' about the AK gas system, and get a gun that would have been great in 1954, but is totally outclassed today...



"OK, buddy. Any more from you..... and you are gonna have to deal with fluffy."

Link Posted: 9/16/2004 6:04:10 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/16/2004 6:05:37 PM EST by Lumpy196]
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 6:04:18 PM EST
I also agree on that sand/A-stan/Iraq issue with ALL guns jamming up.

However, what if sheer idiocy, complaceny, etc. is the reason for not cleaning your weapon? That whole Jessica Lynch fiasco could have been solved if they had a weapon that didn't foul itself up ( however much I love the AR system, I will admit that it shits where it eats )? I recall that every gun they had jammed up because they didn't maintain the damn things. I'm not talking about the amount of time that goes by when rounds are being fired. I'm talking about the amount of time that it can sit there in a state of abuse and still work when needed.

Look at the AK. I'm convined that one of the reasons it works all the time is because:
a : Clearances. Sand can GO somewhere.
b : Less carbon/gunk buildup overall. Guaranteed, or your money back.

I mean come on. How many repeating firearms do you know of that will have a FTextract due to gunk on the extractor. It happened to that SIG P220 in some random 10,000 round torture test I read about, and it can certainly happen to an AR.

I do agree that the M-16A2 is reliable enough for combat. But I still see no reason why we should NOT modify it a little bit. I don't hear about HALF as many problems with AKs, SIG550s, G36s, etc. They are all piston weapons, two of which were designed AFTER the M-16.

Hell, one of Colt's first production variants of the M-16A1 was a piston driven rifle, and was one of the most reliable M-16s ever made. It wasn't produced because the military already had many impingement rifles, and they were cheaper.

I really cannot see why not.
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 6:06:01 PM EST
Its one of the few "new" AR competitors that dosen't look absolutely hideous, only the stock. Hopefully, it'll be lightweight and handy.
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 6:08:21 PM EST

Originally Posted By Lumpy196:
Ive said it all before, but everyone around here keeps jizzing their jammies over piston driven uppers like they're 12 and just saw a Playboy mag for the 1st time.



Whewh.... I thought I was the only one.


Originally Posted By Lumpy196:
AND, knowing Robarms propensity for overpricing things, it'll retail for what a Bushmaster M4 with a rail system and an Aimpoint go for.



Now... where did I put My eotech?
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 6:11:30 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/16/2004 6:17:03 PM EST by Dave_A]

Originally Posted By Blackjack272:
I also agree on that sand/A-stan/Iraq issue with ALL guns jamming up.

However, what if sheer idiocy, complaceny, etc. is the reason for not cleaning your weapon? That whole Jessica Lynch fiasco could have been solved if they had a weapon that didn't foul itself up ( however much I love the AR system, I will admit that it shits where it eats )? I recall that every gun they had jammed up because they didn't maintain the damn things. I'm not talking about the amount of time that goes by when rounds are being fired. I'm talking about the amount of time that it can sit there in a state of abuse and still work when needed. And that included piston driven weapons like the M249 and M240, blowback guns like the M2 Browning, etc. If you treat your guns like crap no design will save you. That unit would have managed to jam AKs. The solution to that problem is making everyone maintain their weapons, not chasing after a non-existant goal of a soldier-proof weapon.

'User headspace' is not a problem with the weapon, but with the user...


Look at the AK. I'm convined that one of the reasons it works all the time is because:
a : Clearances. Sand can GO somewhere.
b : Less carbon/gunk buildup overall. Guaranteed, or your money back. And because the natives who are shooting them live in that giant sandbox, and KNOW what happens when you don't take care of your guns. Further, the AR is a 1MOA gun, the AK is a 4MOA gun. Big difference.

I mean come on. How many repeating firearms do you know of that will have a FTextract due to gunk on the extractor. It happened to that SIG P220 in some random 10,000 round torture test I read about, and it can certainly happen to an AR. It can happen on any gun. I've seen it on several (none of them ARs)

I do agree that the M-16A2 is reliable enough for combat. But I still see no reason why we should NOT modify it a little bit. I don't hear about HALF as many problems with AKs See above, the AK shooters live in the environment. Also, AK accuracy is far from acceptable, SIG550s Last time one was used in combat? In a place like Iraq?, G36sHow many are in use in Iraq/A-stan?, etc. They are all piston weapons, two of which were designed AFTER the M-16. If you can jam a MAG-58 (basically the best GPMG out there), which is a gas op gun, you can jam anything. And Iraqi weather + bad maintanance has done exactly that. If there were as many SIG550s, G36s, etc where we have M16s, you'd have jam problems too... Ask the Brits about their 'wonderful' piston operated rifle (Which their special forces refuse to use, opting for M16s instead)...

Hell, one of Colt's first production variants of the M-16A1 was a piston driven rifle, and was one of the most reliable M-16s ever made. It wasn't produced because the military already had many impingement rifles, and they were cheaper. And as I recall, the Military tested it and decided 'No Significant Advantage

I really cannot see why not.

Link Posted: 9/16/2004 6:17:46 PM EST

Originally Posted By Dave_A:

2) If bolt breakage was a problem the Army would have had trouble with it, and the bolt would have been redone. After 40 years, they seem quite happy with the bolt design.

The Army seems to have come to the same conclusion based on AARs from OIF -> the defining difference between folks who's rifles were reliable enough and folks who had problems was maintanance.





Statements like this frustrate me. "If the military uses is, it MUST be right." Also known as, "If it is MILSPEC, it must be best."

The military has MANY other criteria when picking a rifle, one of them is COST. A rifle that costs $10,000 per copy, and does EVERTHING perfectly... is NOT going to be selected. This is a GROSS exaggeration, I am aware, but the point is made.

I would LOVE to see what the "gas-piston-sucks" crowd would say IF the next military weapon is gas piston. LOVE TO.

S
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 6:27:33 PM EST
DAVE_A has convinced me that the M-16/M-4 is the pinnacle of firearms development. There is no need to research any further. Please do not waste your time exploring the XCR. The AR series is the best. Colt will surley release it's SCAR related technology to civilians, don't you worry. Please excuse me while I go clean my AR.


P.S.: Has anyone with all this "knowledge" even handled and XCR?
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 6:30:19 PM EST
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 6:37:02 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/16/2004 6:45:49 PM EST by G-CODE]

Originally Posted By Lumpy196:
Im sorry.

This thing is the greatest EVER. You should buy TWO. Everyone should.



If they only made a LARUE! mount for it, then it would be super cool. Until then it's crap as I have posted earlier.

P.S.: I wonder if an ACOG or Aimpoint sits too high or too low for proper cheek weld. I'm sure someone "who has actually handled one" will come along shortly. Also, what about BUIS sytems, are they compatible? I still think this XCR is crap (EVEN THOUGH I'VE NEVER HANDLED ONE)!
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 6:53:22 PM EST

Originally Posted By Lumpy196:
Im sorry.

This thing is the greatest EVER. You should buy TWO. Everyone should.



+1 I could do alot with the funds it would take outfit that thing.
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 6:55:19 PM EST
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 7:16:47 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/16/2004 7:17:49 PM EST by Phessor]

Originally Posted By Lumpy196:
Im sorry.

This thing is the greatest EVER. You should buy TWO. Everyone should.



Link Posted: 9/16/2004 7:21:03 PM EST
I like it.
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 7:25:00 PM EST

Originally Posted By Stainless:

Originally Posted By Dave_A:

2) If bolt breakage was a problem the Army would have had trouble with it, and the bolt would have been redone. After 40 years, they seem quite happy with the bolt design.

The Army seems to have come to the same conclusion based on AARs from OIF -> the defining difference between folks who's rifles were reliable enough and folks who had problems was maintanance.





Statements like this frustrate me. "If the military uses is, it MUST be right." Also known as, "If it is MILSPEC, it must be best."

The military has MANY other criteria when picking a rifle, one of them is COST. A rifle that costs $10,000 per copy, and does EVERTHING perfectly... is NOT going to be selected. This is a GROSS exaggeration, I am aware, but the point is made.

I would LOVE to see what the "gas-piston-sucks" crowd would say IF the next military weapon is gas piston. LOVE TO.

S



Your wasting your keystrokes. The earth is flat, always has been, always will be, to some.
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 7:52:48 PM EST

Then go buy a SAR-3 and put an Ultimak mount on it...

But the concept in general is like putting a 1950's motor in a 2004 Corvette...

You take an old, obselete design and put a fancy body around it...



This is tantemount to the most ignorant thread I have ever read. An AK is innaccurate because of its piston?? Maybe its because they blast them together for $50 a copy using third word technology, steel, and manufacturing processes and have tolerences as loose as a slingshot.


Last time I checked the AR was a 1950's design and the XM8/G36 which is a gas piston driven 2004 corvette that will be "Mil Spec" in the near future. Try shooting something other than an AR and you will realize there aint much "muzzle flip" with any 5.56 weapon. Dork.

Go put daddy's AR back in the safe and finish your homework.

I am also amused by the attitudes about ROBARM who is a tiny manufacturer who has made huge investments in bringing some new or something old to the American public. Do you have any incling of how much it costs for CAD programming, machining, engineering, proofing, patenting, die making, equiptment costs, insurance so he can defend himself when you shoot a hole in your foot all to sell a few guns to civvies? The price is reflected in the cost of thier products. I bet the profit margin aint any better than any other rifle. This is not colt who has spent 40 years suckling the Kennedy's and governments tit. Hell, Colts major shareholder is the state of Conneticuit . This guy is taking a huge gamble on everything he does, and everything I have seen thus far from them is very high quality. The VEPR stock may be FUGLY but it will break down a mahogany door and is very comfortable to shoot from. The FAL style stock is the most battle proven in the world. You could but stroke Ivan's teeth out with it and it remains rock solid yet cuts 1/4 of the rifles length off for paratroopers, riding in vehicles etc, which is what a folder is for. Try that with your 27 position $300 AR stock.

I am sorry I feel so grumpy when I come here but this kind of BS is encountered no where else. I like my AR but some of you have major blinders on.
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 7:57:10 PM EST

Originally Posted By 48thHighlander:

Then go buy a SAR-3 and put an Ultimak mount on it...

But the concept in general is like putting a 1950's motor in a 2004 Corvette...

You take an old, obselete design and put a fancy body around it...



This is tantemount to the most ignorant thread I have ever read. An AK is innaccurate because of its piston?? Maybe its because they blast them together for $50 a copy using third word technology, steel, and manufacturing processes and have tolerences as loose as a slingshot.


Last time I checked the AR was a 1950's design and the XM8/G36 which is a gas piston driven 2004 corvette that will be "Mil Spec" in the near future. Try shooting something other than an AR and you will realize there aint much "muzzle flip" with any 5.56 weapon. Dork.

Go put daddy's AR back in the safe and finish your homework.

I am also amused by the attitudes about ROBARM who is a tiny manufacturer who has made huge investments in bringing some new or something old to the American public. Do you have any incling of how much it costs for CAD programming, machining, engineering, proofing, patenting, die making, equiptment costs, insurance so he can defend himself when you shoot a hole in your foot all to sell a few guns to civvies? The price is reflected in the cost of thier products. I bet the profit margin aint any better than any other rifle. This is not colt who has spent 40 years suckling the Kennedy's and governments tit. Hell, Colts major shareholder is the state of Conneticuit . This guy is taking a huge gamble on everything he does, and everything I have seen thus far from them is very high quality. The VEPR stock may be FUGLY but it will break down a mahogany door and is very comfortable to shoot from. The FAL style stock is the most battle proven in the world. You could but stroke Ivan's teeth out with it and it remains rock solid yet cuts 1/4 of the rifles length off for paratroopers, riding in vehicles etc, which is what a folder is for. Try that with your 27 position $300 AR stock.

I am sorry I feel so grumpy when I come here but this kind of BS is encountered no where else. I like my AR but some of you have major blinders on.



+1
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 8:59:38 PM EST

Originally Posted By _DR:

Originally Posted By 48thHighlander:

Then go buy a SAR-3 and put an Ultimak mount on it...

But the concept in general is like putting a 1950's motor in a 2004 Corvette...

You take an old, obselete design and put a fancy body around it...



This is tantemount to the most ignorant thread I have ever read. An AK is innaccurate because of its piston?? Maybe its because they blast them together for $50 a copy using third word technology, steel, and manufacturing processes and have tolerences as loose as a slingshot.


Last time I checked the AR was a 1950's design and the XM8/G36 which is a gas piston driven 2004 corvette that will be "Mil Spec" in the near future. Try shooting something other than an AR and you will realize there aint much "muzzle flip" with any 5.56 weapon. Dork.

Go put daddy's AR back in the safe and finish your homework.

I am also amused by the attitudes about ROBARM who is a tiny manufacturer who has made huge investments in bringing some new or something old to the American public. Do you have any incling of how much it costs for CAD programming, machining, engineering, proofing, patenting, die making, equiptment costs, insurance so he can defend himself when you shoot a hole in your foot all to sell a few guns to civvies? The price is reflected in the cost of thier products. I bet the profit margin aint any better than any other rifle. This is not colt who has spent 40 years suckling the Kennedy's and governments tit. Hell, Colts major shareholder is the state of Conneticuit . This guy is taking a huge gamble on everything he does, and everything I have seen thus far from them is very high quality. The VEPR stock may be FUGLY but it will break down a mahogany door and is very comfortable to shoot from. The FAL style stock is the most battle proven in the world. You could but stroke Ivan's teeth out with it and it remains rock solid yet cuts 1/4 of the rifles length off for paratroopers, riding in vehicles etc, which is what a folder is for. Try that with your 27 position $300 AR stock.

I am sorry I feel so grumpy when I come here but this kind of BS is encountered no where else. I like my AR but some of you have major blinders on.



+1



++

I'll reserve judgement until had-it-in-their-hands-&-ran-it-for-themselves end-users provide feedback on its performance. If it's a dud, well then so be it. Then again, if it delivers...

I've never understood the need to reflexively bash new firearms - more specifically, one's that don't use direct gas impingement - out of hand. It's a rather heaping pile of denial to argue that anything w/ a piston is incapable of delivering battle-worthy, even MOA, accuracy. BTW, I have it on good authority that some piston-driven SCAR candidates are delivering the goods in the reliability & accuracy departments. But, of course, it still doesn't mean anything, 'cause the AR is still better, no matter what.

No matter what, that is.

Lot of sour grapes getting thrown around lately.
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 9:08:59 PM EST
i'd buy one

if the price is around $900, max

if not, i'll stick w/ another bushy
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 9:24:52 PM EST

Originally Posted By Stainless:

Originally Posted By Dave_A:

2) If bolt breakage was a problem the Army would have had trouble with it, and the bolt would have been redone. After 40 years, they seem quite happy with the bolt design.

The Army seems to have come to the same conclusion based on AARs from OIF -> the defining difference between folks who's rifles were reliable enough and folks who had problems was maintanance.





Statements like this frustrate me. "If the military uses is, it MUST be right." Also known as, "If it is MILSPEC, it must be best."

The military has MANY other criteria when picking a rifle, one of them is COST. A rifle that costs $10,000 per copy, and does EVERTHING perfectly... is NOT going to be selected. This is a GROSS exaggeration, I am aware, but the point is made.

I would LOVE to see what the "gas-piston-sucks" crowd would say IF the next military weapon is gas piston. LOVE TO.

S



We will be saying the same thing then... Just like the 'direct gas sucks' folks complain abou tthe current choice.

The fact is that something as SERIOUS as bolt failure WOULD result in a revision. Just like concerns about slide separations with +P+ ammo in the Beretta resulted in the 92FS model being created.

That was never meant to mean they'd do a new rifle, just that they'd redesign the bolt...
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 9:37:51 PM EST

Originally Posted By 48thHighlander:

Then go buy a SAR-3 and put an Ultimak mount on it...

But the concept in general is like putting a 1950's motor in a 2004 Corvette...

You take an old, obselete design and put a fancy body around it...



This is tantemount to the most ignorant thread I have ever read. An AK is innaccurate because of its piston?? Maybe its because they blast them together for $50 a copy using third word technology, steel, and manufacturing processes and have tolerences as loose as a slingshot.

Even a US made AK will not match the AR for accuracy. And in general, it is accepted that piston weapons are less accurate than the AR's variety of direct gas. When you have a moving mass ABOVE the line of the bore, this is inevitable

Last time I checked the AR was a 1950's design 1960sand the XM8/G36 which is a gas piston driven 2004 corvette that will be "Mil Spec" in the near future The XM8 is old technology in a new polymer frame. It's not an AK-style piston gun, having a free-floating piston closer in terms to the M14, but it is still an older concept. And it is a POSSIBLE Army purchase, if it doesn't get canceled to pay for actually needed items. The Marines, of course, are keeping the (more accurate) M16, just adding optics). Try shooting something other than an AR and you will realize there aint much "muzzle flip" with any 5.56 weapon. Dork.1) Can the 'Dork'. Uncalled for, and it makes your argument seem even weaker 2) Yes, there isn't much, but how much movement does it take to add an extra MOA? Not much. 3) I have shot plenty of 'other than' guns in 5.56mm, I still find the AR 'the best'.

Go put daddy's AR back in the safe and finish your homework. Uncalled for. My guns are my own, I haven't been in school for years, either...

I am also amused by the attitudes about ROBARM who is a tiny manufacturer who has made huge investments in bringing some new or something old to the American public. Do you have any incling of how much it costs for CAD programming, machining, engineering, proofing, patenting, die making, equiptment costs, insurance so he can defend himself when you shoot a hole in your foot all to sell a few guns to civvies? The price is reflected in the cost of thier products. I bet the profit margin aint any better than any other rifle. This is not colt who has spent 40 years suckling the Kennedy's and governments tit. Hell, Colts major shareholder is the state of Conneticuit . This guy is taking a huge gamble on everything he does, and everything I have seen thus far from them is very high quality. The VEPR stock may be FUGLY but it will break down a mahogany door and is very comfortable to shoot from. The FAL style stock is the most battle proven in the world. You could but stroke Ivan's teeth out with it and it remains rock solid yet cuts 1/4 of the rifles length off for paratroopers, riding in vehicles etc, which is what a folder is for. Try that with your 27 position $300 AR stock. Robarms produces eccentric products at eccentric prices. Apparently, they have a niche market that keeps them around, but most folks won't want to spend the cost of a National Match AR on a rack-grade gun that will deliver 2moa or worse accuracy with irons

I am sorry I feel so grumpy when I come here but this kind of BS is encountered no where else. I like my AR but some of you have major blinders on.Some folks believe too much legend, and are so blinded by what they 'know', even if it hasn't been true for 25-odd years...

Link Posted: 9/16/2004 9:37:57 PM EST
Ok... you all asked for it.

Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top