Armory Sponsor
[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Masterpiece Arms MPAR556 Review (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 4/30/2014 11:19:47 AM EDT
|
I recently got the Masterpiece Arms MPAR556 in and thought I would write up a review since there doesn’t seem to be any substantive review of it anywhere.
First, I need to give a hand to Brandon and Lisa at MPA. When I first received the rifle, there was a minor issue with the BCG, as the FFL I bought the rifle from had one of the first iterations of the MPAR and the company had since updated a few things on all the MPAR556’s. They were super helpful both on the phone and email and replaced the entire upper with a brand new, updated upper to include swapping the included steel mag with a PMag. Here is a big picture (no pun intended) overview of the rifle 
I added the vertical grip and Magpul angled grip, although the rifle does come with MPA’s own angled foregrip. The scope is just a low cost UTG 3-9 illuminated mildot. So, out of the box, the rifle feels VERY solid. It is slightly heavier than your “normal” AR, weighing in at 7.8 lbs w/o any accessories. I expected this as it is a piston gas system and not DI, and the entire upper/lower/handguard is metal. Front to back, it’s got a great muzzle brake on front of a 16”, 1:9 chromolly barrel. The handguard has 4” user-placeable picatinny rails on either side with full length picatinny rails on top and bottom. As you can see, I’ve moved both side rails to the same side. 
The front end cap of the handguard is secured via 4 screws, one at each cardinal position. The handguard is very ergonomic and solid; it fits my hands great. The only thing I’d say about it is the rails are quite sharp, so shooting w/o rail covers or some other accessory might not be too fun. 
Moving back to the upper & lower receiver, you can see some resemblance to a “normal” AR, but it is most certainly a different rifle in its own right. The magazine release is in the normal position (a circle instead of the normal oval) and the magwell will fit any number of aftermarket magazines. I’ve tried steel GI, Troy Battlemag, and several generations of PMags. With Troy/PMags, the bolt will catch on the carrier if dry charging the rifle; it will NOT catch when firing though. 
On the left side you can see the non-reciprocating charging handle with attached dust cover. It only moves with user input, which I really like. 
The stock is your standard AR buffer tube and buttstock, but since this is a piston gas system there is no buffer/spring and it has an included side folding assembly. You CAN fire with the stock folded, as there is a slight downward cant to clear the ejection port while firing. 
Opening the rifle is incredibly easy. Simply pull out the retaining pin at the top/rear of the upper, and push forward on the BCG release tab. 
The rifle opens exactly as a normal AR would with a removed rear take down pin. After it is open, push the BCG forward and down, and the entire unit slides out. The bolt is reminiscent of an AR bolt, but as you can see it is obviously not the same. The BCG has rails that run the entire length of travel, so I don’t see carrier tilt becoming an issue. 
The fire control group looks nearly identical to a normal AR, but I cannot be sure how “drop in” an aftermarket trigger would be. I know some guys have talked about the safety being backwards…as you can see that is not the case. The pistol grip CAN be changed out with one of the many aftermarkets (Magpul/Hogue/Ergo/etc) by unscrewing the bolt inside the grip. I currently have the Hogue on mine and it fits great. 
If you want to remove the piston to inspect/clean/oil/etc, its very easy. One of the only 2 problems I have with the MPAR is you must remove any muzzle devices to access the piston. After that, unscrew the 4 faceplate screws as well as the two screws at the rearmost 6 oclock position of the handguard. The handguard easily slides off, exposing the gas block and piston. The piston is a 3 piece system which is surprisingly easy to disassemble and reassemble. I think it is important to mention the Owner’s Manual is very clear, straightforward, and easy to follow. Now for the important part…the range report. I took this to a local range and shot roughly 100 rounds, using several different magazine brands to check for compatibility while firing; there were no issues with any of the previously mentioned magazines. The second of only 2 problems I have with the MPAR is the bolt does not have any kind of catch, so it will NOT lock open when your magazine is empty and in fact cannot be locked open at any time like your normal AR. If you are conscious about how many rounds you have loaded/fired, it is not a huge issue. However, I can definitely see this being an issue for people unfamiliar with firearms. This is the one thing I would suggest to the guys at MPA to change, if for no other reason than user safety. After 100 rounds of 55 grain FMJ 5.56 (magazines of either 5 or 10 rounds), every group was sub 2”, with most at sub 1” at 100 yards. Every shot was standing with my forward arm braced on a high bench, going back and forth between the vertical grip and angled fore grip in between magazines. I am by no means a marksman of any kind, but I felt like the rifle was very accurate right out of the box. The barrel got as hot as any other AR when firing, but I would say only 10% of that heat was transferred to the handguard. When the barrel was at its hottest, I could put my hand directly on the hardguard metal and feel it was warm but by no means hot. All in all, for a $725 piston driven 5.56 rifle I am very happy. I think it’s a great gun and a lot of fun to shoot. If you guys have any questions about it please feel free to PM me! |
|
Quoted:
Why is this posted in an AR Discussion form? Not trying to be rude but that rifle only shares a few parts with a M4. Well, it's an AR style rifle, I honestly thought it would be the best place, just like if it were a Ruger SR762 or a Sig516. If it's not, by all means Mods please move it if it would be better suited somewhere else. Maybe AR variants? Quoted:
Smells like an ad Interesting design. Why screws over rivets? An ad? I was just trying to post up a review for a gun that has never been reviewed. Certainly wasn't trying to advertise anything other than my personal experience with a new firearm. I would assume the screws were used so you could remove them easier when disassbling the hand guard. Although I don't have a ton of experience with rivets so I could be completely off the mark :) |
|
I purchased one last year, unfortunately, I haven't shot it yet. After I received it, I had my Gunsmith at Windham Weaponry speck it out. He found a few issues with the chamber after the rifle had been fire several rounds. The rifle was quickly returned to MasterPiece Arms for repair. As a result of my rifle and a few others being returned, MasterPiece made a few changes to correct the problem. (Due to the return of your gun and a couple key others we have made a few dimensional revisions to our bolt and upper receiver assembly.)
Here is some information that I received from Brandon about my rifle The Firing Pin Retaining Pin is 1/8 x 1” The Extractor Pin is 0.109 x 0.400 and is proprietary. The Extractor Pin and Firing Pin Retaining Pin, like any spring pins are consumable and should be replaced after removal. The hand guards are assembled in two halves and there are two ways to disassemble. - One method is separating the two halves. This requires a 1/8 and 3/32 wrench. The are 3 screws holding the handguard to the rear retainer on the sides and bottom to be removed. There are 4 screws holding the handguard to the front cap on top, bottom and sides. Last there are 4 screws holding the two handguard halves together on the sides. Once these are removed the two halves can be separated. The screws holding the top and bottom full length rails do not need to be removed. - The other method is leaving the handguard halves intact and sliding them forward. Only the 3 screws at the rear need to be removed and 4 screws at the front loosened and the handguard assembly slides free This requires removal of the flash hider however. |
|
Quoted:
Yo dawg I heard you like grips. Now you can grip while you grip! Gripping while you grip is the new thing, haven't you heard! Haha I really just put the two on there to try the different styles out with the rifle and hadn't decided which one to remove at the time I took pictures. |
|
Quoted:
That thing is discusting Quoted:
That thing is discusting Quoted:
Oh wow. That looks... terrible. Out of curiosity, what is it you guys think is disgusting/terrible about it? Not looking to change anything to suit anyone's preferences other than my own, just interested to know 
|
|
It's based on this:
http://world.guns.ru/civil/austr/leader_sar-e.html MPA has a habit of basing their guns off ugly obsolete designs. People still buy them, and to their credit they do a decent job of it. |
|
I think most are commenting on the crude appearance of both the design and execution of the piece. It may function perfectly fine and at the end of the day that's what really matters. Having said that the guy who said it looks like something Hi-Point would make is not far off the mark. The receiver is very 995ish. I will add that if Mikhail Kalashnikov had designed the AR in the 40's it would look very similar to that rifle.
ETA: Looking at the pictures again, another example of the crudeness I am talking about are the welds on the shell deflector. Dirty jobs but as long as it slings lead well, shoot it. |
|
Quoted:
I think most are commenting on the crude appearance of both the design and execution of the piece. It may function perfectly fine and at the end of the day that's what really matters. Having said that the guy who said it looks like something Hi-Point would make is not far off the mark. The receiver is very 995ish. I will add that if Mikhail Kalashnikov had designed the AR in the 40's it would look very similar to that rifle. ETA: Looking at the pictures again, another example of the crudeness I am talking about are the welds on the shell deflector. Dirty jobs but as long as it slings lead well, shoot it. Fair enough, and thanks for actually explaining vs just saying gross 
Perhaps just because it's different from the "normal" AR look, but I actually like the design of it...plus the price point for a piston gas system is something that is attractive to me, especially because it functions very well thus far. |
|
Quoted: I am happy to see any non-AR15 get on the market. There are those of us who don't like the AR and its good to have some options out there. Nice write-up, OP. On that note, I wish Daewoo would build the K2 in the US. |
|
Hrmm. My thoughts:
That handguard assembly looks friggin' huge, as does the bolt carrier Mag release button could use a fence Seems like you could leave off the front end cap and not bother with it Charging handle and takedown latch remind me of the XCR A bolt catch would be handy to have Before the review, I was leaning towards getting one. Now I'm leaning the other way. Thanks for the review and photos! |
|
Quoted:
Hrmm. My thoughts: That handguard assembly looks friggin' huge, as does the bolt carrier Mag release button could use a fence Seems like you could leave off the front end cap and not bother with it Charging handle and takedown latch remind me of the XCR A bolt catch would be handy to have Before the review, I was leaning towards getting one. Now I'm leaning the other way. Thanks for the review and photos! The end cap and having to take the handguard apart and remove the flash hider just to clean the piston out are terrible design elements, IMO. That top rail looks positively painful. I really hoped these would turn out better. |
|
Quoted:
when you can build a decent AR for $600, this is a joke. If it were a copy/paste of a DI AR, I would totally agree. I would just make the argument that it's not trying to "be" an AR but rather a totally separate niche. Plus the difference in DI/piston is a discussion all on it's own. That's one of the biggest pulls of this rifle for me, at this price at least But that's the great thing about all the different guns that exist, everyone can customize to their own preferences
|
|
Thanks for the review.
It definitely looks like it was built by MPA. I'm excited that companies selling economy priced firearms are willing to do some work and not just try to order parts with their name on it. So in a way... MPA > PSA. I won't be looking to get one of these rifles, but it may lead to something else down the road. |
|
Quoted:
when you can build a decent AR for $600, this is a joke. You may find this hard to believe, but some people don't want an AR, or they have one or a few or a lot and want something different. I think ARs suck, personally, but it would be bad form for me to start dogging on someone for (IMO) wasting good money on an overpriced black Barbie doll like a Noveske or some such. This is "General Firearm Discussion." There is a whole other sub-forum over yonder to talk about how ARs are better than everything. |
|
Quoted:
You may find this hard to believe, but some people don't want an AR, or they have one or a few or a lot and want something different. I think ARs suck, personally, but it would be bad form for me to start dogging on someone for (IMO) wasting good money on an overpriced black Barbie doll like a Noveske or some such. This is "General Firearm Discussion." There is a whole other sub-forum over yonder to talk about how ARs are better than everything. Quoted:
Quoted:
when you can build a decent AR for $600, this is a joke. You may find this hard to believe, but some people don't want an AR, or they have one or a few or a lot and want something different. I think ARs suck, personally, but it would be bad form for me to start dogging on someone for (IMO) wasting good money on an overpriced black Barbie doll like a Noveske or some such. This is "General Firearm Discussion." There is a whole other sub-forum over yonder to talk about how ARs are better than everything. Or people that have ARs but want something a little different but can switch out stuff easily and similar manual of arms |
|
Quoted:
You may find this hard to believe, but some people don't want an AR, or they have one or a few or a lot and want something different. I think ARs suck, personally, but it would be bad form for me to start dogging on someone for (IMO) wasting good money on an overpriced black Barbie doll like a Noveske or some such. This is "General Firearm Discussion." There is a whole other sub-forum over yonder to talk about how ARs are better than everything. Quoted:
Quoted:
when you can build a decent AR for $600, this is a joke. You may find this hard to believe, but some people don't want an AR, or they have one or a few or a lot and want something different. I think ARs suck, personally, but it would be bad form for me to start dogging on someone for (IMO) wasting good money on an overpriced black Barbie doll like a Noveske or some such. This is "General Firearm Discussion." There is a whole other sub-forum over yonder to talk about how ARs are better than everything. Not only do AR's suck, but since when is putting a stock, grip & FCG in a lower and putting on an upper considered building a rifle? Some of you guys really need to get over yourselves. 
|
|
Quoted:
Any smart man wouldn't trade the oppurtunity to own a truly quality AR to get an untested gen1 rifle built by MPA [for duty use]. Personally, I can't think of a platform that beats an AR overall. Who's talking about duty use? We are talking about a review of a new rifle and its appeal to shooters (not tier 1 operators) who perfer something other than the AR. I'm sure you will survive the mythical SHTF because you are smart and opted for a "quality AR" (if there is such a thing). Congratulations, you win internets. |
|
Quoted:
Who's talking about duty use? We are talking about a review of a new rifle and its appeal to shooters (not tier 1 operators) who perfer something other than the AR. I'm sure you will survive the mythical SHTF because you are smart and opted for a "quality AR" (if there is such a thing). Congratulations, you win internets. Quoted:
Quoted:
Any smart man wouldn't trade the oppurtunity to own a truly quality AR to get an untested gen1 rifle built by MPA [for duty use]. Personally, I can't think of a platform that beats an AR overall. Who's talking about duty use? We are talking about a review of a new rifle and its appeal to shooters (not tier 1 operators) who perfer something other than the AR. I'm sure you will survive the mythical SHTF because you are smart and opted for a "quality AR" (if there is such a thing). Congratulations, you win internets. Im a big AR fan but its apples and oranges. You can eat only so many apples before you want an orange or two |
|
Quoted:
Any smart man wouldn't trade the oppurtunity to own a truly quality AR to get an untested gen1 rifle built by MPA [for duty use]. Personally, I can't think of a platform that beats an AR overall. Quoted:
Any smart man wouldn't trade the oppurtunity to own a truly quality AR to get an untested gen1 rifle built by MPA [for duty use]. Personally, I can't think of a platform that beats an AR overall. At one point in time, the AR was an "untested gen1 rifle"...at some point, someone has to try it and test it. Which is why I posted this review
For any kind of "duty use" is a totally different discussion Quoted:
Quoted:
Why is this posted in an AR Discussion form? Not trying to be rude but that rifle only shares a few parts with a M4. It's not posted in the AR Discussion Forum. This is the General Firearms forum of the Armory. To be fair to the person who asked about it being in AR discussion, it WAS originally posted in AR discussion and moved to general |
|
Quoted:
Odd that it would have a non-recip charging handle and no way to hold the bolt open. Yeah, the lack of a BHO is the only aspect of this rifle's design that I am disappointed about. Even if it didn't have a manual release, like the AR180, I would be fine. BHO is a crucial component if for no other reason than safety reasons (showing clear). |
|
Quoted:
Yeah, the lack of a BHO is the only aspect of this rifle's design that I am disappointed about. Even if it didn't have a manual release, like the AR180, I would be fine. BHO is a crucial component if for no other reason than safety reasons (showing clear). Quoted:
Quoted:
Odd that it would have a non-recip charging handle and no way to hold the bolt open. Yeah, the lack of a BHO is the only aspect of this rifle's design that I am disappointed about. Even if it didn't have a manual release, like the AR180, I would be fine. BHO is a crucial component if for no other reason than safety reasons (showing clear). That was the only thing I could find "wrong" with the rifle as I was going over it and doing the review. Hopefully MPA will make that correction for the future iterations of this and their other rifles. Other than that, all the good/bad is purely subjective. |
|
As stated before, this is a new version of the Leader Dynamics T2MK5.
Which traces it's design from the AR-18 or AR-180. Charles St. George was granted a patent for the triangular bolt design which was later copied by Barret. It is a very good design in it's own right, but was made a bit "cheap". I have an original Leader and it's very accurate and reliable. from the web 
I spoke at length with the President of MPA at SHOT, and he said Mr. St George was involved in the developement of this new rifle. The only things I would have done differently would be to offer a polymer handguard and buttstock for a cleaner "retro" look. 
|
|
Quoted:
I spoke at length with the President of MPA at SHOT, and he said Mr. St George was involved in the developement of this new rifle. The only things I would have done differently would be to offer a polymer handguard and buttstock for a cleaner "retro" look. Same here. I like the idea of modernizing old designs, but seeing how I have Ar15's for my "practical" rifles, I have more interest in designs like this if they have a version closer to their original form. Maybe the desire for close copies of old designs comes from the fact that I'm young enough that I never got to see many of these types of rifles. By the time I got into guns and could collect them, the Ar15 pretty much ruled the market. Regardless, if the MPAR556 proves to be at least halfway decent I wouldn't mind picking one up. |
[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Masterpiece Arms MPAR556 Review (Page 1 of 2)
Armory Sponsor
Join the Community
Your next conversation starts here.
Create your free account to join discussions, share your experience, save topics, and connect with the AR15.COM community.
- Join discussions
- Follow topics and replies
- Connect with fellow enthusiasts
Already a member? Sign in
Stay informed by subscribing to our Newsletter