View Poll Results: QC/Multi-Caliber AR Uppers

Voters
100. You may not vote on this poll
  • Good Idea--Worth Any Additional Cost

    55 55.00%
  • Bad Idea--No Value/Not Worth Any Additional Cost

    45 45.00%
Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 56

Thread: Multi-Caliber AR's--Necessity or Useless Boondoggle?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New Mexico
    Posts
    3,550
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)

    Multi-Caliber AR's--Necessity or Useless Boondoggle?

    http://www.shootingillustrated.com/i...eapons-system/

    While the idea of being able to quickly and easily swap from one caliber to another with a minimum change of parts sounds like a great thing, I find myself questioning the actual practicality of such a system. Much interest has been expressed in the multi-caliber features of the SCAR, XCR and ACR and now I see some makers working on QD barrel set-ups for the AR.

    The systems I've seen advertised tout such claims as being conceived "for specialized military and law enforcement use, where an operator might need to clear a building with a short 5.56 NATO barrel and then transition to a 6.5 Grendel for an overwatch or designated marksman role, or to the .50 Beowulf for vehicle checkpoints, close-in work against body armor-wearing opposition or any other mission where a huge, slow hunk of lead is the preferred projectile."

    But, as mentioned in the article linked above, the glaring issue with this is loss of zero and POI/POA shift between dissimilar calibers. Using a 10" 5.56 for CQB--and having the optic zero'ed accordingly--will not give the shooter an optic that's useful in a 6.5 Grendel in the DM role. Even if the shooter has the ability to know his holdovers or optics settings between one caliber and the next, I have to wonder just how repeatable the POI shift is each time a certain barrel is removed and re-installed. Also, I think the idea that the individual user will have three or four barrels (along with bolts, magazines and ammo) in his backpack or whatever is silly.

    With the above concerns voiced, I do see the the merits of such a system in a limited and specific role when the shooter has the chance to swap out his barrel and bolt and re-zero his weapon with the new barrel installed. But, if these systems are going to suffer from POI shift and loss of zero, even that becomes a useless feature. If I pull my 16" barrel off for transport or storage and then attach it to shoot a target at 200-300 yards, only to find that the QD barrel has a random POI shift of 3-4 MOA, my time will be spent re-zeroing rather than actually shooting.

    Another benefit would be that the rifle can be stripped for a very detailed cleaning. Again, the benefits sound good on paper but I don't think I've ever really found the need to pull a barrel or gas tube off an AR so I can get every last little hint of crud out of the gas tube hole in the upper receiver or whatever.

    Lastly, I guess the best and most realistic use for a multi-caliber system would be the ability to shoot more ammo at a reduced cost. Having a quick and simple system that would allow the shooter to go from 223 Rem to 5.45 or 22LR (or from 308 to 223) would probably be the best selling point for most users.

    Are my concerns valid or am I missing the point of the new technology?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,211
    Feedback Score
    17 (100%)
    FWIW I think the AR is already "multi-caliber" capable. Pop two pins and swap uppers, no tools required. This takes seconds and results in a pre-zeroed rifle with the appropriate optic for the appropriate barrel.

    I believe the AR is unique among firearms in that the lower receiver is the registered component. On many other rifles the upper receiver is registered, so barrel swapping becomes the only way to change calibers or barrel types without having to buy and transfer a new rifle every time. This is especially true if your have an SBR in the mix. To me, swapping barrels on an AR does not make sense.
    Scout Rider for the Mongol Hordes

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    775
    Feedback Score
    14 (100%)
    I think we're seeing this concept continue to evolve. The Colt 901 is perhaps the best response I've seen to the idea of a QD barrel system - instead of swapping the barrels you swap complete uppers, thus preserving zero and avoiding the multiple POI issues you mention. The 901 is lower is designed to permit a wider range of calibers.

    It'll be interesting to see how the QD barrel systems (MRP, ACR, SCAR) fare in the upcoming Army trials. I think in most cases, you are adding unneeded weight and complexity to a military rifle - and perhaps compromising long term durability. I can't help but think that a fixed barrel is going to be more reliable and durable in truly rough field use than any QD system, but perhaps the state of the art will surprise me.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    84
    Feedback Score
    0
    Useless boondoggle's a little overboard, but then again so is necessity. In my limited experience, these features aren't as useful as they appear on paper.

    In addition to several AR's, I have an XCR and an ACR. Despite mainly purchasing them for the promise of quick caliber conversions, I have never felt the urge to swap calibers at the range. 5.56 pokes holes in paper far cheaper than 6.8 or any of the other "better" calibers. Granted, this isn't an option with the ACR. The caliber conversion options for the XCR were relatively expensive, to boot.

    I have never done any comparison, but I haven't noticed the zero-shift on the ACR to be terrible.

    I feel their main advantage would be to change calibers inexpensively compared to an AR. If you can switch calibers for essentially the cost of a new barrel (~$300) plus bolt ($50) it beats having to spend $500+ dollars on a new upper plus anddtional optics.

    They can get rid of the change calibers in 5 seconds feature and not loose anything, either. Just make it so you can change the barrel in a few minutes with basic tools. I have had the XCR's barrel retenetion screw work it self loose twice, so you need smothing more robust than this. The ACR's barrel wrench dosen't let you tighten the barrel consistently each time you use it. And it's freaking hot as hell when you get done shooting the rifle so don't dream of touching it with your bare hands.

    Well that's my two cents

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New Mexico
    Posts
    3,550
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    I should maybe clarify my thoughts, as I'm thinking maybe my initial post isn't quite clear.

    I do see some limited benefit or merit to the QD barrel idea if I'm going to pop out my barrel, re-zero, and then leave whichever caliber I'm shooting in place for a fairly long time. Something like sight-in and shoot my 223 Rem all summer for varmints and then rebarrel and re-zero my system in 6.8, 6.5 Grendel or 308 Win for deer hunting in the fall. In this regard, it might be nice to have a limited number of parts (and expense) needed to swap calibers.

    I can also see some merit in an LE or military format where the armorer can have access to some simple parts that will allow the shooter to have one rifle or one lower that would allow him to change his rifle around to fit a number of roles. But I don't see (as mentioned) the user running around in the hills with a couple of barrels and related parts to swap roles "on the fly."

    But, in the AR world anyway, a whole new upper can be had fairly cheaply. A new conventional upper is going to be cheaper, in most cases, than a complicated and propriety QD barrel system even if the QD barrel offers a small number of detachable parts.

    I guess my question is, "Are these QD barrel systems being invented at the request of the shooting public or are they being produced by manufacturers in an effort to outpace and out-cool the competition?"

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    775
    Feedback Score
    14 (100%)
    Did the SCAR program require multi-caliber compatibility and QD barrels? If so, industry might have regarded that as an indicator of future military requirements and adjusted accordingly.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    84
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Tokarev View Post
    I should maybe clarify my thoughts, as I'm thinking maybe my initial post isn't quite clear.

    I do see some limited benefit or merit to the QD barrel idea if I'm going to pop out my barrel, re-zero, and then leave whichever caliber I'm shooting in place for a fairly long time. Something like sight-in and shoot my 223 Rem all summer for varmints and then rebarrel and re-zero my system in 6.8, 6.5 Grendel or 308 Win for deer hunting in the fall. In this regard, it might be nice to have a limited number of parts (and expense) needed to swap calibers.

    I can also see some merit in an LE or military format where the armorer can have access to some simple parts that will allow the shooter to have one rifle or one lower that would allow him to change his rifle around to fit a number of roles. But I don't see (as mentioned) the user running around in the hills with a couple of barrels and related parts to swap roles "on the fly."

    But, in the AR world anyway, a whole new upper can be had fairly cheaply. A new conventional upper is going to be cheaper, in most cases, than a complicated and propriety QD barrel system even if the QD barrel offers a small number of detachable parts.

    I guess my question is, "Are these QD barrel systems being invented at the request of the shooting public or are they being produced by manufacturers in an effort to outpace and out-cool the competition?"
    Probably mostly for the shooting public.

    The SCAR project probably did have a multi-caliber capability reuirement as the XCR and SCAR both have it (did the other competitors?), but I have seen no indication from my computer that anyone other than the commercial market has gotten excited about it. Based on this it seems that currently it is to out-cool the competition.

    These weapon systems have not to my knowkedge displaced the traditional AR in any amount worth mentioning.

    As mentioned previously it will be interesting to see what comes of the MRP/ACR/XCR in the carbine trials (if they happen).

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New Mexico
    Posts
    3,550
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Kind of along these lines, here's a link to MGI's adaptable lower. This seems like a great idea on paper (especially in an SBR role) but I've never seen one nor do I know anyone who has. It seems like a unique and logical approach to the multi-caliber idea since it doesn't rely on a cartridge that's based on the AR's magazine limitations.

    http://www.mgi-military.com/index.php?id=27&sub_id=22

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Canon city Co. at the moment
    Posts
    3,076
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)
    Different calibers on ONE rifle have always seemed silly to me.

    If I want to transition from 5.56 to 7.62 I would rather grab my .308

    Ammo, Magazines, Bolts, Optics. Etc. Etc.

    I dont know about anyone else but I already have enough stuff in my range bag.

    Tryin to keep everything organized for one rifle can be enough pain in the ass
    Quote Originally Posted by Split66 View Post
    I wouldnt listen to BCMjunkie. His brown camo clashes like hell with his surroundings. His surroundings are obviously pinkish and lacey and have big hooties.

    Instagram Dangertastic
    Danger@Flickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/m41979/

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    233
    Feedback Score
    0
    The AR platform is already versatile, simply pop two pins and remove the upper and swap for a 'PRE-zeroed' upper. Simple.

    Unfortunately, the market is saturated with firearms(ARs) and companies are trying to separate by introducing a "new" scheme or marketing ploy.

Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •