So, I have had a few days to play with it and hit the range.
I usually put in a bunch of pictures when I review, but right now my iPhone is not putting pictures to my iPad automatically and I have not adapted to an easy post photobucket fiasco method of posting pictures.
To start, who is this intended for?
There is a market for guns that are innovative and look cool. This will scratch that itch. These, typically, are not serious end users and I tend to marginalize the opinions of such owners.
There is a market for guys seeking legal versions of issue small arms. This is perfect for that market. I suspect that group is very happy to have this. Not much to criticize if you pick up a semi auto version of a military small arm you have been wanting.
There is a market for Beretta lovers. This is a group that frequently minimizes serious evaluations of their products and is another group I rarely find insightful opinions from.
There is a market for “gun games” guys. This is a pretty robust market. They are high volume shooters that are moderately rough on their weapons. If a platform or accessory offers an advantage, they will find and exploit it. If something has a weakness, they will find it. I have only done about a dozen multigun marches, and five or ten times that in pistol matches over the years. I will not have the round count a serious guy will and find this to be a valued source of information and results. The applause and acclaim for the ARX from this community has been...
Some of us are just collectors that like guns and like to shoot. This is something different to play with.
Some judge guns by their applicability to combat. I am sure plenty here have done SFARTEC or OTC and are more highly trained than me. They can offer an even more detailed opinion. I do have some background and experience and will offer my opinion based on the suitability of this model for modern combat.
The gun is light for a piston model and not front heavy. It does have odd vertical measurement proportions.
From front to rear,
It has a standard birdcage with pencil 1-7 chrome lines barrel. Fine. You can find profiles with better dissipation, design with better accuracy, etc. But this will work. It is rapidly changeable. Wow. Not your usual. I had to have the barrel replaced on my M4 twice my last 8 years. I was never looking to do it on an objective or to swap calibers, etc. but I have to take my hat off to this feature.
The handguards are a techopolymer. The gun feels less robust than a SCAR. A platform I chose to not trade out M4s out for. I had better uses for the P11 and I saw plenty of Rangers doing damage to them more often than M4s. The Long, naked barrel is odd in a day of modern handguards and shooting techniques. The side rails are removable. But leave mounting bumps. WTF? The bottom rail is mostly for a non standard grenade launcher. You can get a bottom rail which I think is the same as the issue A3 version.
The barrel takedown buttons are reminiscent of Glock. A design of Glocks that is second only in factory magazine baseplate removal of shit I hate about Glocks.
The ambidextrous bolt catch at the front of the trigger guard is a decent concept. Not where I would place it. And difficult to push up hard enough to always retain the bolt, but easy to release the bolt. Good for modern weapons handling, but only passably and not excellently executed.
The monstrous version protruding below the trigger guard, is part of what I think jacks up full magazine compatibility. Not having full magazine capability on an AR magazine Weapon is a major flaw. Just make the damn magazine well the same as an AR.
The ambi mag release works well. The position is ok if not perfect. And it is horizontally long enough. But it is a very short vertically release. Suboptimal ergonomically. Why? On a design with such awkward vertical proportions, would you make such a vertically short mag release?
The bolt catch. Left side. Cool. More amenable to modern technique than a charging handle. And you can change it to left handed in no time flat. Innovative! But it is a short, painful, handle that serves only to cheese grater your hand on the oddly very sharp brass deflector protrusion when using it. You can buy an extension. Criticism of the handle is usually met with shouts of Ambidexteous! Fast! Innovative!
Great, I can rapidly change which hand I grate tissue and blood from in stereo.
Wrap you hand around the pistol grip. The A2ish, non changeable pistol grip. I am ready to call the man that designed this a rotten, son of a whore. The ambidextrous safety is.. just.. about.. where it would be on an AR. But enough different that I can’t put it from fire to safe effortlessly like I can on an AR. I have to break my grip. I am ready to straight up tell the guy’s mother to her face she is a straight up dirty whore.
Well, let’s try the trigger. Whoops. Must be on safe. Nope. There it goes. Clean beak. At twice the trigger pull of any other semi auto I own. What the monkey -uck. This is a sin Jesus Christ himself said no damn way am I covering this one. It is like half again the trigger pull of any damn bull pup I have ever tried. Where the hell is the guy responsible for this lower assembly? I am going to make him watch me repeatedly cunt punch his dirty whore of a mother for giving birth to him. Not really. But I want to paint an appropriate picture of my impression so far. PM me if you find it too subtle.
In disgust I move on to the upper.
The plastic BUIS feel flimsy. They attach in an odd manner. They literally semi obscure their own aperture. The height seems not quite standard. The rail has the pin modification to address the original real wobble. Then drops precipitously to a stock way lower than it should be. And the stock is curiously short. A guy way shorter than average height in body armor would find it too short. Fully extending it is find for me, but I am not even 6 feet tall. Who the hell much over that will find it suitable? In fairness the folding mechanism is robust, and it remains fireable folded.
It has multiple sling attachments. State of the art in 1960 sling attachments.
The sling it comes with is not as nice as a Vickers or VTAC, but not as cheap as most freebies. It is a sliding two point adjustable. A pleasant surprise. The case is very nice. Surisingly. But slightly small if you account for optics and accessories, and one mag pouch. Because so many of us roll with one magazine. It comes with a metal mag that seems decent.
This is a gun that came out with I believe a retail for $1600. With promises of short barrels, 7.62x39 barrels, 300 whisper barrels, etc. it has long been available for about $1200. Under 900 at at least one place. I just paid 800 plus tax. I need new sights. A lower rail. A charging handle extension. Optics. Someone to make a stock or riser I can use with the optics. A new trigger. A bag it will fit in after that. And, as much as I appreciate the guy who made the right style of sling, a more robust version. This is not turning out to be a bargain.
I hit the range in eagerness to find its redeeming qualities. I use several brands of ammo. All function fine. Some TULA has FTF. The ARX and my SIG556 are my only rifles that seem to do this. My 1980 era SP1 with Chinese knock off carry handle Colt style scope, my 1994 Bushmaster CAR with 5 1/2 inch flash hider, my Romeo equipped SIG556 and two Aimpoint and one Eotech equipped ARs all turn in better groups.
I am using a Burris AR 5x scope on the ARX. It has the FF3 on top. Sort of the poor man’s version of the ACOG Jpoint combo from ten or 15 years ago. That set up has always been taller than optimal. But on the low stocked ARX you can’t use a cheekweld for the FF.
The ARX is averaging 3/4 to 1.5 MOA less accurate than compared to combining the avaerages of the other guns. It succeeds in being more accurate than what I recorded for an AK 5.56 pistol with AR magwell last year. Is it the trigger? The awkwardness of the cheekweld? Some intrinsic loss of potential accuracy from the removable barrel design?
Getting away from accuracy testing, doing some combat shooting, it balances well, has very conducive recoil characteristics, and handles well. It is not as akward as it looks from a pure balance, handling issue. But cheekweld wise, you would need some flush mounted sights and optic or a higher stock.
Ergonomics are clumsy from the handle, safety, and mag release in comparison to an AR.
Overall,
This is an also ran.
Despite shouts of Beretta!, Design!, innovative!, Cool!, And ambidextrous!-
It will end up in firesale prices with little, expensive factory support and options and a few, expensive aftermarket options.
Like the SIG556, Para PTR (which at least had real AR ergonomics), etc. it is best left in the hands of Beretta fans (which I am), military issue collectors (which I am), guys that like playing with toys at the range ( which I am), and avoided by serious gun gamers (i’m Just a dilettante) and serious combat shooters - there are better choices.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by drjaydvm
Bookmarks