Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Posted: 2/16/2006 3:58:51 PM EDT
Thinking about purchasing my first AR in a 308 platform (instead of the 223) and am intrigued by the DPMS LR-308C (16" barrel). Anybody have some feedback on this rifle (or the manufacturer). Want a solid tactical rifle, plus want the range and punch of 308 caliber for sport shooting. Feedback and suggestions please?
Link Posted: 2/16/2006 4:10:14 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/16/2006 4:15:03 PM EDT by rogue007]

Originally Posted By JTL:
Thinking about purchasing my first AR in a 308 platform (instead of the 223) and am intrigued by the DPMS LR-308C (16" barrel). Anybody have some feedback on this rifle (or the manufacturer). Want a solid tactical rifle, plus want the range and punch of 308 caliber for sport shooting. Feedback and suggestions please?



I heard (also, I am on the waiting list to get mine) that they are the best shooter and most important,
most accurate out of the box 308 AR platform.

As soon as I saw them I was looking for them, I really want the AP4 set-up. DPMS doesnt sell a carry handle
for them, so I already bought a Bushmaster detachable carry handle from their line of 308's that unfortunately got
cancelled. I will buy a DPMS LR308 and try to make it look like a big M4...... glub glub


Also you might want to look into RRA's new line of 308's.............they are not out yet but looks promising.............




It uses FAL mags so it would be alot cheaper to stock up on mags than the DPMS 308 with $40 mags.
I think I might change my mind on that purchase and buy my first RRA in 308........but gotta hear reviews first.
Link Posted: 2/16/2006 4:31:09 PM EDT
Since "AR" stands for ARmalite and AR-10 is an ArmaLite model, the Panther isn't any type of AR-10 platform. It IS a type of .308 platform however.

5sub
Link Posted: 2/16/2006 4:33:20 PM EDT
24" bull bbl hits at 1100 yards repeatedly in our DDm course. The 18 inch should be solid, just get it broken in before you pass any judgements. The tolerances are really tight.
Link Posted: 2/16/2006 5:20:28 PM EDT
The RRA .308 is simply the Bushmaster BAR-10 abortion.

Link Posted: 2/16/2006 6:13:33 PM EDT
Go with an AP4 upper. They're much nicer and have an ejection port cover.

The DPMS is an AR type platform, whatever the Armalite crowd have to say. If you took their position at face value, Colt doesn't build ARs...

Nice rifles.

Simon
Link Posted: 2/16/2006 6:17:15 PM EDT
Actually, I do own a Colt AR15, SP1 (modified upper with full aluminum) that I just purchased on a whim from a neighbor; however. I've got the "new gun" rash and have to have the 308 (already have the Colt up for sale). If I get a buyer for the Colt, I'll be ordering ASAP, if not, I'll still be ordering (probably by May or June).

So the comments about Rock River 308 being the "abortion Bushmaster?" What the story on this? Are there problems with the RR?

Good feedback so far, please keep the information flowing!!!
Link Posted: 2/16/2006 6:30:37 PM EDT
There was a pretty long thread with pics here:

DPMS LR


- Ice
Link Posted: 2/16/2006 6:42:57 PM EDT
DPMS 308 Detachable Carrying Handle.
308-DCH
Yes, they do offer one.
Link Posted: 2/16/2006 6:50:02 PM EDT
I can't see how anyone can say whether the RRA is going to be a good rifle or not, seeing as how they aren't on the market yet. I can't believe RRA would market a piece of junk. They are a solid company. Lets wait and see what the rifles do when they are shipping them. Until that day all comments about quality are speculation pure and simple.

Cheers,

Phil
Link Posted: 2/16/2006 6:50:35 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/16/2006 6:50:46 PM EDT by SHIVAN]

Originally Posted By SimonTan:
Go with an AP4 upper. They're much nicer and have an ejection port cover.

The DPMS is an AR type platform, whatever the Armalite crowd have to say. If you took their position at face value, Colt doesn't build ARs...

Nice rifles.

Simon



AR-10 is trademarked.

AR-15 is now in the public domain. Colt is just too stupid for their own good sometimes.

AR is/was an ArmaLite designator and stands for ArmaLite.

Calling a DPMS LR308 an AR-10 is like calling a magazine a "clip" and a flash suppressor a "flash hider".

While we all understand what is being said, it sounds ignorant to those who know better.
Link Posted: 2/16/2006 8:18:58 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/16/2006 8:20:15 PM EDT by eisman]
Since "AR" stands for ARmalite and AR-10 is an ArmaLite model, the Panther isn't any type of AR-10 platform. It IS a type of .308 platform however.


Does that mean that the Stag Arms, Olympic Arms and the Rock River AR15's I own aren't really AR15's????
Link Posted: 2/16/2006 9:14:38 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/16/2006 9:16:15 PM EDT by MonkeyGrip]

...is like calling a magazine a "clip"...


But then again, Armalite isn't really Armalite is it?
Link Posted: 2/17/2006 6:25:20 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/17/2006 10:28:57 AM EDT by SHIVAN]

Originally Posted By MonkeyGrip:

...is like calling a magazine a "clip"...


But then again, Armalite isn't really Armalite is it?



According to the Patent and Trademark attorneys, Mark Westrom, the President of ArmaLite, Inc, owns the trademark to AR-10, AR-10B, AR-10(T), etc....

At the end of the day, only a company called Armalite makes AR-10's. If your pockets are deep enough, I'm sure you could find a judge that would agree with me.
Link Posted: 2/17/2006 6:31:14 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/17/2006 10:29:15 AM EDT by SHIVAN]

Originally Posted By eisman:
Does that mean that the Stag Arms, Olympic Arms and the Rock River AR15's I own aren't really AR15's????



The AR-15 nomenclature is no longer under Patent or Trademark protection. The AR-15 spec's and blueprints are in the common, and public, domain - just like the M4 was ruled to be recently.

That argument is an apples to water buffalo analogy.

Ever heard some dumbass refer to a smallish SUV as a "jeep"?? You look around and all you see is a RAV4 or CRV or Daihatsu Rocky or Range Rover or something? A Jeep is a Jeep, a Honda CRV is not a Jeep.

Link Posted: 2/17/2006 10:26:44 AM EDT
Didn't Bushmaster already prove that you can't build a reliable .308 AR style rifle that uses FAL magazines????


Also just an FYI- if you go with a 16" barrel on a .308 your muzzle velocity is only about 85 FPS greater than the muzzle velocity of the 123grain 7.62x39 round out of an AK barrel. So other than launching a 165 grain bullet that weighs only 40 grains more from your 16" .308 platform- you have an AK for the most part with ammo that weighs nearly twice as much if not three times greater than the standard 5.56NATO. I know of course their is a difference but the loss in velocity by using a 16" barrel in a .308 is not worth the extra weight when terminal balistics with such loss of velocity are minimal at best over standard 5.56NATO. So really when it comes .308- sure the 16" barrels "look" cool, are loud, weigh a bit more, but not any better. Remember engergy transferred is mass x velocity squared. So the .308 series should be built around a 18" minimum barrel length at best.

Just my .02,
Creeper


Originally Posted By rogue007:

Originally Posted By JTL:
Thinking about purchasing my first AR in a 308 platform (instead of the 223) and am intrigued by the DPMS LR-308C (16" barrel). Anybody have some feedback on this rifle (or the manufacturer). Want a solid tactical rifle, plus want the range and punch of 308 caliber for sport shooting. Feedback and suggestions please?



I heard (also, I am on the waiting list to get mine) that they are the best shooter and most important,
most accurate out of the box 308 AR platform.

As soon as I saw them I was looking for them, I really want the AP4 set-up. DPMS doesnt sell a carry handle
for them, so I already bought a Bushmaster detachable carry handle from their line of 308's that unfortunately got
cancelled. I will buy a DPMS LR308 and try to make it look like a big M4...... glub glub


Also you might want to look into RRA's new line of 308's.............they are not out yet but looks promising.............

www.rockriverarms.com/images/r308mid.gif


It uses FAL mags so it would be alot cheaper to stock up on mags than the DPMS 308 with $40 mags.
I think I might change my mind on that purchase and buy my first RRA in 308........but gotta hear reviews first.

Link Posted: 2/17/2006 10:43:28 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/17/2006 10:52:24 AM EDT by SHIVAN]
Wolf is listed at 2395fps, I assume that is from a standard AK barrel. Whatever that is.

Using a quick external ballistics calculator that shows that the .308Win has more energy at 225yds than the AK has at the muzzle.

Even with the velocity reduced by 20fps/inch of barrel lost, or 2490fps.

A better BC and sectional density mean better time to distance and theoretically better penetration.

That's looking at a .308 match load.

7.62NATO loads are even hotter at 147gr with NATO pressures. Comparison Chart

M80 ball listed at 2700fps from a 20" barrel. Which would yield ~2620fps from a 16" barrel.

I'd say that smokes the pants off a 7.62x39.


Link Posted: 2/17/2006 10:48:14 AM EDT

Originally Posted By props:
I can't see how anyone can say whether the RRA is going to be a good rifle or not, seeing as how they aren't on the market yet. I can't believe RRA would market a piece of junk. They are a solid company. Lets wait and see what the rifles do when they are shipping them. Until that day all comments about quality are speculation pure and simple.

Cheers,

Phil



I guess you have not seen the picture of the feedramps in one of my RRA DEA uppers?

The RRA design is from Bushmaster. And what did Bushmaster do with that line? If Bushmaster could not make that platform work reliably, would do you think RRA can? Bushmaster been at this game a bit longer than RRA. The only thing RRA has going for it in that line is that some of their engineers once worked for ARmalite. Unless RRA does something drastic to the design, I would put money on a DPMS first if there was a budget concern. If budget was not an issue I would take the AR-10 anyday.
Link Posted: 2/17/2006 11:23:34 AM EDT

Originally Posted By 223Rem:
I guess you have not seen the picture of the feedramps in one of my RRA DEA uppers?

The RRA design is from Bushmaster. And what did Bushmaster do with that line? If Bushmaster could not make that platform work reliably, would do you think RRA can? Bushmaster been at this game a bit longer than RRA. The only thing RRA has going for it in that line is that some of their engineers once worked for ARmalite. Unless RRA does something drastic to the design, I would put money on a DPMS first if there was a budget concern. If budget was not an issue I would take the AR-10 anyday.


I see you are one of the people who have boughten into the myths surrounding the BAR10. I was once one as well. Upon looking into the whole ordeal, I realized how irrelvant the common assumptions really are.

Myth - The bolt breakage issue is because of FAL mags.

This is completely false. I have yet to see but one BAR10 bolt that was broken anywhere aside from the indented tail. These breakages were not from FAL mags, but from a pointless indent that some how made it into the design. Bushmaster did address this near the end of their run, and RRA has stated they are addressing it even further. Expect to see the tail of the bolts beefed up to the point there will be no issues.

Myth - Bushmaster deleted a lug to use FAL mags.

Another misunderstood area. Bushmaster never deleted the 6 o'clock lug. They simply shaved it down a very minimal amount. I have seen one bolt issue possibly relating to that shaved lug, and it was a minorly chipped lug that the author said did not effect function in any way. When I say chip, it was literally a minor chip. Reguardless, it is completely false that Bushmaster deleted a lug to allow proper feeding.

Fact - Bushmaster thickened the tail of the bolt's when the problem became common.
Fact - Rock River stated they are going to reinforce the bolts even more.

The BAR10 did suffer some growing pains, and with the discontinuation, it appears it was done at Bushmaster's expense. Bushmaster had very high prices that resulted in little sales on a market that no longer suffers from high capacity magazine envy. I'm confident that RRA will cover any possible defects that happen, and they will adjust the design accordingly.

Here is a picture of where the bolts really break, and the problem area is circled for anyone that cares. The bolt tail issue should not be an issue any more.


Link Posted: 2/17/2006 11:32:29 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/17/2006 11:33:34 AM EDT by SHIVAN]

Originally Posted By olds442tyguy:
I'm confident that RRA will....



I really like RRA, but the infancy of this design makes me a little nervous.

Their pricing scheme is light years better than Bushmaster's was though. I suspect you will find some base RRA 308 AR for right around $1000.

That is a pretty "right" price.
Link Posted: 2/17/2006 12:07:23 PM EDT

Originally Posted By SHIVAN:

Originally Posted By olds442tyguy:
I'm confident that RRA will....



I really like RRA, but the infancy of this design makes me a little nervous.

Their pricing scheme is light years better than Bushmaster's was though. I suspect you will find some base RRA 308 AR for right around $1000.

That is a pretty "right" price.


Exactly. It is in it's infancy, but that's no reason to rule it out, especially at that price. I'm confident RRA will put an effort into developing it now that some of the major kinks are being addressed. As with all new rifles, only time will tell and I hope any possible future issues will be corrected as well.
Link Posted: 2/17/2006 12:17:49 PM EDT
The name AR-15 is a Colt trademark, and has been since they bought it in 1959. They also bought the name AR-10, but did not use it, so Mark was able to snag it.
Link Posted: 2/17/2006 12:18:54 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/17/2006 12:19:34 PM EDT by SHIVAN]

Originally Posted By Ekie:
The name AR-15 is a Colt trademark, and has been since they bought it in 1959.



I thought that they let it lapse....

If not, oh well, like I said they do some dumb things -- like not enforcing their trademark if they still have it.
Link Posted: 2/17/2006 12:27:59 PM EDT

Originally Posted By SHIVAN:

Originally Posted By Ekie:
The name AR-15 is a Colt trademark, and has been since they bought it in 1959.



I thought that they let it lapse....

If not, oh well, like I said they do some dumb things -- like not enforcing their trademark if they still have it.



The AR-15 trade mark is enforced, here and there. For one thing, you don't see other manufacturers roll marking their rifles AR-15.
Link Posted: 2/17/2006 12:41:39 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/17/2006 12:57:23 PM EDT by MonkeyGrip]

According to the Patent and Trademark attorneys...


Now that I know I might be pissing off a lawyer, I'll be sure to call all AR-10 clones AR-10s.

Just kidding.

Not.

Just kidding.
Link Posted: 2/17/2006 3:10:10 PM EDT

Originally Posted By MonkeyGrip:

According to the Patent and Trademark attorneys...


Now that I know I might be pissing off a lawyer, I'll be sure to call all AR-10 clones AR-10s.



....after I wrote it, I thought the same thing.

If this pisses off lawyers maybe I SHOULD start calling them all AR-10's.

Link Posted: 2/17/2006 4:26:06 PM EDT
223Rem,

No I haven't seen any pix of your RRA DEA feed ramps. But, I have seen lots of RRA feed ramps and they are uniformly very well done.

If you don't like RRA why do you buy their stuff?

Phil
Link Posted: 2/17/2006 4:28:33 PM EDT
WOW!!! That's a lot of good information on the subject - especially Creeper's comments on barrel lengths > velocities, etc. The weight is something that I really haven't considered too much until now. Most of my shooting will be range-type stuff, and have it handy if the days comes when I have to "lock n load!" Don't see myself doing much varmit hunting - I am an avid Deer Hunter (thus the 308) - just like big guns!

I'd definitely get something with 18" barrel (or more).

thanks guys, your wisdom is appreciated!
Link Posted: 2/17/2006 4:52:47 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/17/2006 5:01:40 PM EDT by Creeper]

Originally Posted By SHIVAN:
Wolf is listed at 2395fps, I assume that is from a standard AK barrel. Whatever that is.

Using a quick external ballistics calculator that shows that the .308Win has more energy at 225yds than the AK has at the muzzle.

Even with the velocity reduced by 20fps/inch of barrel lost, or 2490fps.

A better BC and sectional density mean better time to distance and theoretically better penetration.

That's looking at a .308 match load.

7.62NATO loads are even hotter at 147gr with NATO pressures. Comparison Chart

M80 ball listed at 2700fps from a 20" barrel. Which would yield ~2620fps from a 16" barrel.

I'd say that smokes the pants off a 7.62x39.







Ok you just said yourself, basically firing .308 will net around 2490FPS which is less than 100FPS faster than 7.62x39. Actually I have seen the chronoed results from shooting .308 out of a 16" barrel and it is more around the mid 2400's in velocity. True the .308 bullet weighs more, retains more energy but by how much? It only weighs maybe 40 grains more than 7.62x39 and with your Hot M80 ball your talking less than 30 grains more. That is if your numbers of 2620 from a 16" barrel are accurate but many posted results on this board from members have shown otherwise- so what exactly are you gaining by going to a 16" barreled .308 rifle? Considering your ammo weighs twice as much as 5.56NATO and terminal results are marginally better than 7.62x39 then I'd say your just getting a really heavy AK that doesn't perform balistics wise much better than a standard 5.56NATO AR. Now getting an 18" barreled .308 AR then you might gain something here but not much. The round was designed around a 21" barrel, not a carbine.

Just my .02-
Creeper
Link Posted: 2/17/2006 5:31:33 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/17/2006 5:36:42 PM EDT by HeavyMetal]
Link Posted: 2/17/2006 5:54:21 PM EDT

Originally Posted By HeavyMetal:
Creeper,

As with most of your hypotheses, there is a fundamental flaw in your thinking that pretty much invalidates the whole thing.

1) Find information on the Ballistic Coefficient of .308 bullets.

2) Find information on the Ballistic Coeficient of 7.62x39 projectiles.

3) Notice a huge difference.

4) Discard faulty hypotheses.



Thanks, that's what I was getting at.....
Link Posted: 2/17/2006 5:57:35 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Creeper:
Ok you just said yourself, basically firing .308 will net around 2490FPS which is less than 100FPS faster than 7.62x39. Actually I have seen the chronoed results from shooting .308 out of a 16" barrel and it is more around the mid 2400's in velocity.



Match rounds in a battle carbine isn't necessary in the 7.62NATO rifles. The 147gr M80 ball is doing 2600fps+.


True the .308 bullet weighs more, retains more energy but by how much?


I noted the difference. The standard 123gr AK round has the same energy at the muzzle as a 168gr match round for the .308Win has at 225yds. About 600 lbs-ft more at the muzzle for the Match round. A lot more.
Link Posted: 2/17/2006 7:15:44 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/17/2006 7:17:50 PM EDT by www-glock19-com]
Holy fucking hijack batman!!!!

anyway my co worker shoots a DPMS 18" for Silhouette
that rifle drives tacks shoots sub MOA out to 900 yrards 3/4 to 700

have sold many of the LR 308s all the feedback i have gotten is they drive tacks
the plastic magazines suck though

also they will not extract 7.62x51mm most of the time but how often you gonna shoot surplus in a flat top Hbar rifle
Link Posted: 2/18/2006 5:28:34 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/18/2006 5:39:13 AM EDT by 223Rem]

Originally Posted By olds442tyguy:

Originally Posted By 223Rem:
I guess you have not seen the picture of the feedramps in one of my RRA DEA uppers?

The RRA design is from Bushmaster. And what did Bushmaster do with that line? If Bushmaster could not make that platform work reliably, would do you think RRA can? Bushmaster been at this game a bit longer than RRA. The only thing RRA has going for it in that line is that some of their engineers once worked for ARmalite. Unless RRA does something drastic to the design, I would put money on a DPMS first if there was a budget concern. If budget was not an issue I would take the AR-10 anyday.


I see you are one of the people who have boughten into the myths surrounding the BAR10. I was once one as well. Upon looking into the whole ordeal, I realized how irrelvant the common assumptions really are.

Myth - The bolt breakage issue is because of FAL mags.

This is completely false. I have yet to see but one BAR10 bolt that was broken anywhere aside from the indented tail. These breakages were not from FAL mags, but from a pointless indent that some how made it into the design. Bushmaster did address this near the end of their run, and RRA has stated they are addressing it even further. Expect to see the tail of the bolts beefed up to the point there will be no issues.

Myth - Bushmaster deleted a lug to use FAL mags.

Another misunderstood area. Bushmaster never deleted the 6 o'clock lug. They simply shaved it down a very minimal amount. I have seen one bolt issue possibly relating to that shaved lug, and it was a minorly chipped lug that the author said did not effect function in any way. When I say chip, it was literally a minor chip. Reguardless, it is completely false that Bushmaster deleted a lug to allow proper feeding.

Fact - Bushmaster thickened the tail of the bolt's when the problem became common.
Fact - Rock River stated they are going to reinforce the bolts even more.

The BAR10 did suffer some growing pains, and with the discontinuation, it appears it was done at Bushmaster's expense. Bushmaster had very high prices that resulted in little sales on a market that no longer suffers from high capacity magazine envy. I'm confident that RRA will cover any possible defects that happen, and they will adjust the design accordingly.

Here is a picture of where the bolts really break, and the problem area is circled for anyone that cares. The bolt tail issue should not be an issue any more.

i29.photobucket.com/albums/c278/olds442tyguy/BushyBolt.jpg



Where did I ever mention anything about FAL mgas? Where did I mention anything about bolt lugs? I question some QC issues that RRA is having lately with their AR15 platform. If they have problems there, it will creep over to their .308 line as well. For the price RRA suggest for their .308, you can buy an AR10. Below is abig QC concern.

If you go way back to one of the key selling points for the BAR-10 was the ability to use readily available and inexpensive FAL mags. Did not turn out to be such a great selling point did it? What selling point do RRA have then? Their name? Did not work for Bushmaster.......


Originally Posted By props:
223Rem,

No I haven't seen any pix of your RRA DEA feed ramps. But, I have seen lots of RRA feed ramps and they are uniformly very well done.

If you don't like RRA why do you buy their stuff?

Phil





So, would you buy a rifle from a company that does this kind of work? RRAs attempt at adding feedramps to certain uppers is a dismal ass-half way of doing it. RRA does not do feedramp correctly. They dremel them in. What other company that offer feedramps dremels them in? No, sorry that is just cutting corners.

The last time I purchases a RRA rifle was 2 year ago and everything was fine. My first RRA rifle had a upper receiver was way out of spec. Lots of people hear remember that whole fiasco. As of three week now they have not return any of my correspondence about this matter. Until RRA rectifies this issue, I not purchase any more RRA products.



Link Posted: 2/18/2006 7:28:39 AM EDT
I can tell you this right now, those ramps were NOT done by RRA. Peddle your crap somewhere else.

Phil
Link Posted: 2/18/2006 7:58:16 AM EDT

Originally Posted By www-glock19-com:
Holy fucking hijack batman!!!!
anyway my co worker shoots a DPMS 18" for Silhouette
that rifle drives tacks shoots sub MOA out to 900 yrards 3/4 to 700
have sold many of the LR 308s all the feedback i have gotten is they drive tacks
the plastic magazines suck though
also they will not extract 7.62x51mm most of the time but how often you gonna shoot surplus in a flat top Hbar rifle


I don't know yours, but mine came with two steel magazines. Nice, reliable and sturdy


- Ice
Link Posted: 2/18/2006 9:11:13 AM EDT

Originally Posted By 223Rem:

Originally Posted By 223Rem:
I guess you have not seen the picture of the feedramps in one of my RRA DEA uppers?

The RRA design is from Bushmaster. And what did Bushmaster do with that line? If Bushmaster could not make that platform work reliably, would do you think RRA can? Bushmaster been at this game a bit longer than RRA. The only thing RRA has going for it in that line is that some of their engineers once worked for ARmalite. Unless RRA does something drastic to the design, I would put money on a DPMS first if there was a budget concern. If budget was not an issue I would take the AR-10 anyday.



Where did I ever mention anything about FAL mgas? Where did I mention anything about bolt lugs? I question some QC issues that RRA is having lately with their AR15 platform. If they have problems there, it will creep over to their .308 line as well. For the price RRA suggest for their .308, you can buy an AR10. Below is abig QC concern.

If you go way back to one of the key selling points for the BAR-10 was the ability to use readily available and inexpensive FAL mags. Did not turn out to be such a great selling point did it? What selling point do RRA have then? Their name? Did not work for Bushmaster.......


Originally Posted By props:
223Rem,

No I haven't seen any pix of your RRA DEA feed ramps. But, I have seen lots of RRA feed ramps and they are uniformly very well done.

If you don't like RRA why do you buy their stuff?

Phil



www.hunt101.com/img/373463.JPG

So, would you buy a rifle from a company that does this kind of work? RRAs attempt at adding feedramps to certain uppers is a dismal ass-half way of doing it. RRA does not do feedramp correctly. They dremel them in. What other company that offer feedramps dremels them in? No, sorry that is just cutting corners.

The last time I purchases a RRA rifle was 2 year ago and everything was fine. My first RRA rifle had a upper receiver was way out of spec. Lots of people hear remember that whole fiasco. As of three week now they have not return any of my correspondence about this matter. Until RRA rectifies this issue, I not purchase any more RRA products.





So if you don't think it's from FAL mags, what do you think is making the BAR10/LAR10 system unreliable? You say it won't work just because RRA is making it, but you also specifically said Bushmaster couldn't get it to function reliably either.

By the way, I've never seen RRA feed ramps that sloppy. That looks like a clean dremeling that some idiot messed with afterwards. In the one spot it even looks like someone messed it up on purpose. There's not a dremel in exsistance that could make a cut like that. I highly doubt RRA did that, but if they did they should take care of it.
Top Top