VLTOR MUR

glock40cal · #1 08-14-06, 15:41

Who has the VLTOR MUR upper? Was it worth the $$$? Looks prettty. How bulky compared to a CMT? THANKS!!!

mtdawg169 · #2 08-14-06, 16:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by glock40cal

Who has the VLTOR MUR upper? Was it worth the $$$? Looks prettty. How bulky compared to a CMT? THANKS!!!

I'll let you know this afternoon. Mine should be here within the next hour or so.

As far as being worth the $$, well that will probably depend on your purpose for the upper IMO. I planned a build to be accurate and fairly quick handling with a 16" Noveske bbl., a double duty gun of sorts. For a precision build I think the MUR will be quite beneficial.

Grant (G & R), Steve (Adco) or Eric from Vltor are probably better equipped to discuss the pros of a billet upper, though. From what I have gathered, the tolerences will hold very closely to the mil-specs & it has the benefits of a machined monolithic platform, but offers flexibility in rail choice and better heat dispersion than mono designs.

In the end, I think most buyers will have a specific reason for choosing a billet upper over a standard one. For me, I had a "mil-spec" upper and wanted to build a precision rig. The MUR seemed like the perfect platform to build from.

glock40cal · #3 08-14-06, 21:18

Thanks for the info.

It looks really solid. Hope your build goes well. I wonder the benefits if someone wants to build your average M4gery? This is by no means a bash of VLTOR. God knows I would not trade my modstock for anything. I am curious as to the niche this fills? Someone tell me why I need it so I can justify wanting it. Otherwise I am going to chaulk it up to having the disease!

9DivDoc · #4 08-14-06, 22:34

Form should follow function....imo

But this sucker looks like the 'Stealth' equivilant of an AR upper..

An if I was VLTOR that is how I would market it

Hoplophile · #5 08-16-06, 23:33

While it is visually 'bulky' you won't notice any difference from behind the stock. The difference in both weight and size is minimal.

9DivDoc · #6 08-17-06, 00:04

Anyone have the figures for how the MUR with a DD light rail will compare
to the VIS?

inquiring mindless would like to know...

THellURider · #7 08-17-06, 00:53

Apparently I've missed the boat on this,

But what are supposed to be the benefits of the MUR besides its the newest "gotta-have-it" toy?

MudBug · #8 08-17-06, 03:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by THellURider

Apparently I've missed the boat on this,

But what are supposed to be the benefits of the MUR besides its the newest "gotta-have-it" toy?

It's kinda like (I said kinda) having the reciever on your Rem 700 blue printed. The MUR and the Larue Billet upper that's coming out are square, strait, true to spec. Not a big deal for a battle carbine, but should help squeeze a bit more accuracy out of a precision AR build.

I'm waiting for the Larue (If I can).

THellURider · #9 08-17-06, 09:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by MudBug

It's kinda like (I said kinda) having the reciever on your Rem 700 blue printed. The MUR and the Larue Billet upper that's coming out are square, strait, true to spec. Not a big deal for a battle carbine, but should help squeeze a bit more accuracy out of a precision AR build.

I'm waiting for the Larue (If I can).

Well, that's fair. My precision upper built on an LMT upper shoots 0.5 MOA so I won't worry about it. I guess the QC is just supposed to by higher on these new "blueprinted" uppers.

Thanks for filling me in.

Hoplophile · #10 08-17-06, 11:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by THellURider

Well, that's fair. My precision upper built on an LMT upper shoots 0.5 MOA so I won't worry about it. I guess the QC is just supposed to by higher on these new "blueprinted" uppers.

Thanks for filling me in.

It's not the QC that is different. They are cut from a billet instead of being forged. Take a look at the various threads around here with "MUR", "VIS" and/or "billet" in the title for more info.

Your receiver used for your precision LMT upper was most likely either hand picked or was had machine work done to it by the builder. Wes at MSTN has often made comments about how high his rejection rate is on forged uppers for precision weapons because of the many problems that come with using a forged part for this.

bigbore · #11 08-17-06, 11:59

I've thought about building with a MUR many times. I have one in hand, ready to put in the vise, and realize it offers me nothing over regular flat top receivers that cost half as much. It is absolutely "better" made and a quality product, but wheres the value add?

Maybe I'm the only one, but I have never had a problem that was diagnosed to the upper receiver. Maybe its because it doesnt matter to me that my handguard doesnt perfectly align with the top rail. Maybe thats my problem - I consider a handguard as nothing more than a handguard no matter how much it cost or what you can bolt to it.

What problems are you guys having with regular flat top receivers that you choose to upgrade?

bigbore · #12 08-17-06, 12:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hoplophile

Wes at MSTN has often made comments about how high his rejection rate is on forged uppers for precision weapons because of the many problems that come with using a forged part for this.

Some people believe everything they read. I would love to get a hold of all those "rejected" parts to see why they were rejected. It would truely be a learning experience.

And out of the box RRA, Bushmaster, Armalite, Colt, etc, with good ammo is usually a 1 MOA gun.

How does a different receiver help with accuracy? When all the lugs lock up in the barrel extension its a done deal.

Theres a fine line many cross when it comes to the "mechanical accuracy" of an autoloader. Once that line is crossed, about all you get is a lighter wallet.

Hoplophile · #13 08-17-06, 15:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigbore

Some people believe everything they read. I would love to get a hold of all those "rejected" parts to see why they were rejected. It would truely be a learning experience.

Some of the reasons he listed sounded trivial to me. So long as the rails on top of the receiver are square and the face of the receiver where it contacts the rim of the barrel extension is both even and square to the barrel to that everything locks up properly I'm cool with it. But I've had receivers that failed that test. You won't see me replacing all of my uppers with MURs but I'm very happy with the one I bought.

Nitrox · #14 08-17-06, 18:35

I don't know of many manufacturers that would accept 3/4 of their products to be returned when there is nothing wrong.

C4IGrant · #15 08-17-06, 18:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nitrox

I don't know of many manufacturers that would accept 3/4 of their products to be returned when there is nothing wrong.

I think those numbers are exaggerated. While I don't think a MUR is needed on a chrome lined barrel, I do think it is on a quality SS barrel. The reason is that people generally run magnified optics on these and a receiver that is canted to one side or another can affect the accuracy potential of the optic.

How many threads have we seen on the other forum with people having EOTech canting issues? The EOTech is part of the problem (on how it grabs the rail), the other problem is the receiver being canted.

All my personal builds from here on out will be on a billet receiver of some sort.

C4

SuicideHz · #16 08-17-06, 19:49

Well I've got a MUR on the way for my SS WOA and I plan on using my Eotech until I gather up the funds for a good low power magnified optic. Where does that place me on the scale?

Nitrox · #17 08-17-06, 20:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by C4IGrant

I think those numbers are exaggerated. While I don't think a MUR is needed on a chrome lined barrel, I do think it is on a quality SS barrel. The reason is that people generally run magnified optics on these and a receiver that is canted to one side or another can affect the accuracy potential of the optic.

How many threads have we seen on the other forum with people having EOTech canting issues? The EOTech is part of the problem (on how it grabs the rail), the other problem is the receiver being canted.

All my personal builds from here on out will be on a billet receiver of some sort.

C4

I would love to see pictures of a canted Eotech or Troy BUIS that was attributed to only the receiver.

SuicideHz · #18 08-17-06, 20:28

That is a good point. I've seen some really bad troy BUISs and a few Eotechs that were way beyond help...

I do appreciate Wes trying to do everything he can to get as much perfect as possible. I also believe in the point of diminishing returns theory and I know that with me, that point starts a lot sooner on my upper than it may for someone else. I'm not that great of a shooter but I appreciate him trying his hardest.

bigbore · #19 08-17-06, 20:39

Would a salesman tell people what they wanted to hear if they thought it would lead to more sales?

Nitrox · #20 08-17-06, 20:53

That depends on whether or not the information being provided was truthful or a lie.

Not all salesmen lie...and not all liars are salesmen.