Review: Sig 556R - Not what I expected

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

03-19-11, 19:11
Phazuka

Quote:

Originally Posted by variablebinary

Not all opinions are created equal. That is a flawed premise. This type of thinking is why most forums turn into turd farms.

If the 556 is a quality firearm, so is DPMS, Bushmaster the XD and anything by Taurus.

Is that what M4C is coming to?

If the 556 was built to Swiss standards, as it should be, there would be less contention on the issue. It isn't like SIG USA didn't have a well traveled blueprint to follow. They just chose not to, thus removing their end product from "duty class" to "bubba shooting in flip flops and tank top fodder"...

Bushmaster makes the ACR, is that included as well? To me it sure does and it produced the biggest golden turd of all time.
03-19-11, 19:14
outrider627

Quote:

Originally Posted by Templar

There's no way he'd come on a board and go into detail, but the short of it is, he was hired by SIG USA to develop a rifle based on the SIG 550/551 that could be built here in the US. He demonstrated how to do so and maintain Swiss Arms standards without breaking the bank, but there were/are people inside the upper management of SIG USA who wanted to dumb the rifle down, dispense with quality control, and make maximum return on their investments at the cost of said quality control. Much as it's "cheaper" for DPMS and Bushmaster to repair carbines that they know probably won't get shot very much than it is to do it right the first time, SIG USA made that calculation.

He butted heads repeatedly with upper management and Cohen, trying to save the project and make a carbine that was worth of the SIG name, but was ultimately let go.

I see the "Ford Pinto" business strategy still has its followers. That's really disappointing to hear.
03-19-11, 19:31
kal

There will never be a reliable 7.62x39mm rifle that takes AK mags, has an optics rail on top of the receiver, and has an improved/ambi selector switch all out of the box.

:suicide:
03-19-11, 19:38
variablebinary

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phazuka

Bushmaster makes the ACR, is that included as well? To me it sure does and it produced the biggest golden turd of all time.

The ACR is not based on a well proven 30 year old design. It has no TDP that Bushmaster intentionally poops on. I think everyone expects it to have gremlins.

This is very different than what SIG USA decided to do. Where they know what the standard is, they just choose to ignore it and release garbage...on purpose.

If someone gets lost on an uncharted trail, I can be understanding at least. However, to get lost on a charted path when you have a map, GPS and compass just because you decided to ignore it all, that is unforgivable because that level of stupidity is a crime.
03-19-11, 19:38
KhanRad

Quote:

Originally Posted by kal

There will never be a reliable 7.62x39mm rifle that takes AK mags, has an optics rail on top of the receiver, and has an improved/ambi selector switch all out of the box.

:suicide:

Perhaps MilitaryArms review of the XCR in 7.62x39 will have different results.
03-19-11, 20:35
SPARTAN HOPLITE ARMS

Quote:

Originally Posted by Templar

There's no way he'd come on a board and go into detail, but the short of it is, he was hired by SIG USA to develop a rifle based on the SIG 550/551 that could be built here in the US. He demonstrated how to do so and maintain Swiss Arms standards without breaking the bank, but there were/are people inside the upper management of SIG USA who wanted to dumb the rifle down, dispense with quality control, and make maximum return on their investments at the cost of said quality control. Much as it's "cheaper" for DPMS and Bushmaster to repair carbines that they know probably won't get shot very much than it is to do it right the first time, SIG USA made that calculation.

He butted heads repeatedly with upper management and Cohen, trying to save the project and make a carbine that was worth of the SIG name, but was ultimately let go.

I don't blame him. I'd like to read the particulars about exactly what happened and what they changed from the original design to produce the Sig USA piles of junk they're selling now. How did they get permission from Swiss Arms to produce such a pile of junk? Someone from the parent company should have put the smackdown on the idiots who destroyed it.
03-19-11, 20:43
Magic_Salad0892

I love that bitchin' AK introduction.

ETA: I just love the Military Arms channel. Wish you'd post pics here though. YouTube makes my computer freeze.
03-19-11, 20:47
Todd.K

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phazuka

I always hear this analogy but aren't the lowers and uppers made by only 2 or 3 defense contractors anyway? The same people that make DPMS lowers make NOVESKE, COLT, Sig, BCM, anyone who uses the standard aluminum forged receivers.....so I discount this argument.

There is a significant difference when you start to compare a bolt made from C158 that is properly shot peened to those that are in a cheap AR.
03-19-11, 21:49
Phazuka

Quote:

Originally Posted by Todd.K

There is a significant difference when you start to compare a bolt made from C158 that is properly shot peened to those that are in a cheap AR.

There is also a significant difference in price and a significant difference in need. Not everyone needs a $2500 rifle to shoot a $.50 cent paper target every weekend.
03-19-11, 21:56
TOrrock

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phazuka

There is also a significant difference in price and a significant difference in need. Not everyone needs a $2500 rifle to shoot a $.50 cent paper target every weekend.

Enough. This is not the board for that kind of carbine. This has been hashed out ad naseum. Time and again we go over this and explain the differences and that it's a false economy, no one is talking about a $2500 AR, when you can get a very acceptable working carbine for $900.00 or less.

That argument just doesn't hold water.

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page