PDA

View Full Version : Robinson Armiment XCR MWS....



SinnF駟nM1911
06-15-06, 11:30
I知 just curious...

I was in DC last night with USMS and USSS, and there was a individual there that said that this was the coolest thing since SPAM.

Now having loved SPAM as a kid and hating it as a adult... I wonder if this is a good system or just a semi flavor of the week.

Has anyone had any experience with it and how does it match up to:

POF
HK416
LW
or any others.... I知 not to familiar with it .. trying to read on it now..

Any thoughts ?????? :confused:


http://www.robarm.com/XCR%20Brochure%209Feb06.pdf

olds442tyguy
06-16-06, 21:44
As I'm sure you're aware, the XCR was developed with the SOCOM SCAR trials in mind. Very few people have received their rifles, even after multiple years of waiting so experience based facts will be hard to come by.

I like the concept, but I'm not all that impressed with RobArm's excecution of it. I don't like wire stocks, I don't like manufacturers going out of their way to make their rails out of spec, and I don't like the troubles they are having with production. I like the thought of owning one some day, but it's a little too early in my opinion. With the production delays, it's obvious RobArm's has some quirks they need to get worked out.

variablebinary
04-06-08, 00:13
I知 just curious...

I was in DC last night with USMS and USSS, and there was a individual there that said that this was the coolest thing since SPAM.

Now having loved SPAM as a kid and hating it as a adult... I wonder if this is a good system or just a semi flavor of the week.

Has anyone had any experience with it and how does it match up to:

POF
HK416
LW
or any others.... I知 not to familiar with it .. trying to read on it now..

Any thoughts ?????? :confused:


http://www.robarm.com/XCR%20Brochure%209Feb06.pdf

I've got tons of experiance with the XCR and I think its an outstanding weapon.

It was made with the SCAR trials in mind, which you know all about obviously, so it has some similar features to the FN SCAR.

It's got a good following considering the company is made up of like 5 people, which means they've sold about 1000 units per employee. Not sure about so-called production delays. All my local dealers are well stocked.

www.XCRforum.com is a good place to get info and such. You'll find that many XCR owners are very interested in the SCAR as well as the two seem to go hand in hand. And yes I would take an XCR over any piston AR15

Some of my fav pics

http://i109.photobucket.com/albums/n67/toddmkelly/IMG_3275.jpg

http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k5/Prizm1/_MG_8111opt2.jpg

http://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff132/AussieArms/RoysXCR.jpg

http://www.robarm.com/images/Customer%20Images/XCR_SBR_SUPP_LG.jpg

Jeremy
04-06-08, 05:25
I got one of the first ones and have probably 8 to 10 K through mine in the last two years. It is my duty gun and has been through quite a bit. I can have a department issued AR or a micro Galil and I choose to carry my XCR. What would you like to know about the gun?

sully0812
04-08-08, 16:59
As I'm sure you're aware, the XCR was developed with the SOCOM SCAR trials in mind. Very few people have received their rifles, even after multiple years of waiting so experience based facts will be hard to come by.

I like the concept, but I'm not all that impressed with RobArm's excecution of it. I don't like wire stocks, I don't like manufacturers going out of their way to make their rails out of spec, and I don't like the troubles they are having with production. I like the thought of owning one some day, but it's a little too early in my opinion. With the production delays, it's obvious RobArm's has some quirks they need to get worked out.

Just curious, how many people do you know that are actually waiting on one?

I have had my XCR for over a year. I got the itch to buy one, I ordered it, and it was at my dealer within the week. If that's a long wait, then you and I have much different thresholds for patience.

I really like my XCR. It is smooth shooting, and once it got past the 300 round break-in period (as well documented in the manual), it has been 100% reliable. It's has a pleasant recoil, and more accurate than I am. I've got thousands of rounds through it now.

I have a few minor issues, that I wish i could change, but there are things I wish I could change on all my guns.

The trigger isn't the best. Robinson however, is working on a new "match trigger" that should be released soon.

It's a little front-heavy, but most piston guns seem to be. That makes it easy to keep on target for followups, but not as snappy to handle as my SBR AR. (I think a short barreled XCR would be the cat's ass!)

The folding stock relies on friction, not a positive mechanical engagement to remain in the folded position. Again, Robinson is supposedly developing a new "SCAR"ish stock for it. Hopefully that will remediate that complaint.

I would have liked to see QD Sling attachments integrated into the design, front and rear.

I would have liked for the gas block to have a bayonet lug on it. (That's my stupidest complaint. I have no use for the lug, and would likely never attach a bayonet to it. But if it makes Feinstein and Kennedy lose sleep at night, then I want one on every gun I can.)

Otherwise, I think it is a great weapon system. It's fun, and it's great to have something a little different. My AR is still my "go-to" gun, but the XCR is one of the toys I pull out first when I'm headed to the range to have fun.

sully0812
04-09-08, 11:24
The friction lock folding stock was designed by RobArms after taking operator (USA & USN) input on cold weather & low visibility operations. When a carbine is pulled from concealement, or slung folded while skiing/climbing(gloves), one need to get the stock out fast with minimal gross motor skills.

That makes sense.

I never said any of my complaints had any merit! :D

Boomer10
04-09-08, 16:52
Sully - I'm not defending olds442's comments, but his post was from June 2006. Two years ago his comments may have been appropriate. Variablebinary brought back a topic that was almost 2 years old.

scottryan
04-09-08, 20:24
I don't like manufacturers going out of their way to make their rails out of spec


Ain't that the truth and is precisely what is keeping me from buying one.

ITSTOCK
04-13-08, 17:38
Ain't that the truth and is precisely what is keeping me from buying one.

I wonder just how far out of spec they are. My XCR has no problems with any 1913 attachment. :confused: Who told you they were out of spec? I'm sorry that a made up problem is keeping you from buying such a complete rifle.

variablebinary
04-13-08, 22:54
I wonder just how far out of spec they are. My XCR has no problems with any 1913 attachment. :confused: Who told you they were out of spec? I'm sorry that a made up problem is keeping you from buying such a complete rifle.

Technically they are not true spec. Either a rail meets the 1913 standard or not, and the XCR does not. It features a weight savings canal. The XCR is compatible with all the devices I personally have used which is all that matters to me personally

Some people have said the KAC VFG has play when attached. Beyond that, I havent heard of any other devices not working, which in my mind makes it non-issue.

I like the weight savings, and it does what I need it to do

ITSTOCK
04-14-08, 07:31
I was considering that was his "issue", but since I have heard of no problems with the canal, and experienced none (I have a KFG vg "knock off", same design), I just don't see it being a problem.

The same person who reported the KFG problem on another board, also said that he tightened it again, and has had no play since. He first said that the grip slid all of the way off. This problem was posted probably a year ago, and it's the only instance I have heard, which I personally attribute to him not tightening it the first time.

markm
04-14-08, 08:29
Some guy had one in class yesterday. It dropped out due to double firing, I think. But he had another XCR that he finished the class with.

ITSTOCK
04-14-08, 11:09
That was a problem on the very first releases (serial numbers in the 100's, not many at all actually got out, only 50 or so and there is a list on their website if you see the guy again), and there has been a recall on it.

I do have over 10,000 trouble free rounds through my XCR though, and can attest to it's durability.

flanntastic
04-14-08, 12:02
other than it being front heavy and a heavy trigger pull, its a great gun, and mine will shoot any crap i put through it.

flanntastic
04-14-08, 12:02
AND Bill Springfield can fix the trigger on them for pretty cheap.

http://img382.imageshack.us/img382/8451/xcrab9.png

markm
04-14-08, 12:27
(serial numbers in the 100's, not many at all actually got out, only 50 or so and there is a list on their website if you see the guy again

I doubt I'll see the guy again. He bought it off one of the auctions. I'm sure he'll get in touch with the manufacturor since it was a new gun.

flanntastic
04-14-08, 13:04
Some guy had one in class yesterday. It dropped out due to double firing, I think. But he had another XCR that he finished the class with.

when i first got mine back from Bill Springfield mine would double fire, the disconnector wasn't put back in right

scottryan
04-14-08, 18:08
The friction lock folding stock was designed by RobArms after taking operator (USA & USN) input on cold weather & low visibility operations. When a carbine is pulled from concealement, or slung folded while skiing/climbing(gloves), one need to get the stock out fast with minimal gross motor skills.



They should have used a passive detent to hold the stock. The user could pull the stock open with a firm tug.

With this method, the user would still have instant opening without manipulating a mechanical latch.

This would be more secure than a friction hold. The friction hold will get worn out over time and loosen up.

ITSTOCK
04-15-08, 15:11
They should have used a passive detent to hold the stock. The user could pull the stock open with a firm tug.

With this method, the user would still have instant opening without manipulating a mechanical latch.

This would be more secure than a friction hold. The friction hold will get worn out over time and loosen up.

I believe the intent was more that it is now a movement operation, you can swing the stock open without moving the hand back to the stock to release it. It's how most of the rifle was designed, you can do almost everything while ready to fire.

If you ever played with folding stocks like that on the ZM LR300, or in general, the ACE folder, you really start to appreciate the Rob ARms folding stock design when compared side by side.

If you have, I apologize, but have you had the chance to handle an XCR? Your opinion would most likely change on the folding mechanism.

olds442tyguy
04-15-08, 15:49
......but his post was from June 2006. Two years ago his comments may have been appropriate.....
Thank you.

I'm quoting that again as I'm sure someone will be along to call me names over my two year old post. :D

Oh, and the rails are still out of spec. I can shoot with a non channeled rail system bare handed, but I can't with the "canal" rails. I can't remember the last time I shot a railed rifle with out a VFG, but it's still a possible issue to me. That and I think the canal looks really dumb.

And if someone gave me an XCR I'd run it. I really like the way they look with short barrels too.

ITSTOCK
04-15-08, 16:19
Oh, and the rails are still out of spec. I can shoot with a non channeled rail system bare handed, but I can't with the "canal" rails. I can't remember the last time I shot a railed rifle with out a VFG, but it's still a possible issue to me. That and I think the canal looks really dumb.


...could you explain that one a bit better to the apparently less intelligent? I'm not understanding how you can shoot a gun with "non-channeled" rails but can't shoot them bare handed with "canals"? And also, what are you getting at with the VFG that works 100% on both systems?

Thanks, I'm just dumbfounded by your post.

Jeremy
04-15-08, 16:43
I agree with Itstock that the folder is pretty slick. COmpared to folders on my HK, AK, or micro galil, the B&T and the XCR are tied for tops. Both are adjustable for lockup and folding tension. None of the other designs I have used offer that. Both are just as solid as fixed when open.

olds442tyguy
04-15-08, 16:44
...could you explain that one a bit better to the apparently less intelligent? I'm not understanding how you can shoot a gun with "non-channeled" rails but can't shoot them bare handed with "canals"? And also, what are you getting at with the VFG that works 100% on both systems?

Thanks, I'm just dumbfounded by your post.
On a Mil Spec rail I can grip it on the flats of the outward rail slots.

Mil Spec rails have smooth flats on the outward rail slots that are more easily gripped. Canaled rails have crevices with four more sharp edges where a Mil Spec rail is flat and smooth.

As for using VFG's primarily on railed hand guards (out of spec or not), there was no secret coding. I primarily use VFG's, but I still prefer a Mil Spec rail because there's always a chance I'll be shooting with out a VFG, and I find out of spec rails more degrading to my bare handed shooting comfort.

sully0812
04-15-08, 16:50
On a Mil Spec rail I can grip it on the flats of the outward rail slots.

Mil Spec rails have smooth flats on the outward rail slots that are more easily gripped. Canaled rails have crevices with four more sharp edges where a Mil Spec rail is flat and smooth.

As for using VFG's primarily on railed hand guards (out of spec or not), there was no secret coding. I primarily use VFG's, but I still prefer a Mil Spec rail because there's always a chance I'll be shooting with out a VFG, and I find out of spec rails more degrading to my bare handed shooting comfort.


My Rail covers feel exactly the same on my XCR with channeled rails, as they do on my M4 with apparently "mil-spec" rails. ;)

ITSTOCK
04-15-08, 16:57
On a Mil Spec rail I can grip it on the flats of the outward rail slots.

Mil Spec rails have smooth flats on the outward rail slots that are more easily gripped. Canaled rails have crevices with four more sharp edges where a Mil Spec rail is flat and smooth.

As for using VFG's primarily on railed hand guards (out of spec or not), there was no secret coding. I primarily use VFG's, but I still prefer a Mil Spec rail because there's always a chance I'll be shooting with out a VFG, and I find out of spec rails more degrading to my bare handed shooting comfort.

I'm sorry again, I know I said this to another poster, but have you handled an XCR? I can guarentee that the edges of the XCR are a million times smoother than the Midwest industries edges that I have, or any other rail that I have felt.

Here are a couple of quick pictures I took to give you a better idea...note the vertical fore grip, which I just got done carrying the gun by. No signs of slippage what so ever.

http://img147.imageshack.us/img147/5008/xcr001if3.jpg

http://img178.imageshack.us/img178/4484/xcrrail001px1.jpg

http://img501.imageshack.us/img501/6348/xcrrail002ig5.jpg

http://img253.imageshack.us/img253/2378/xcrrail003fp8.jpg


As you can see, there are CLEARLY no edges that make bare handing the gun uncomfortable by any stretch of the imagination.

olds442tyguy
04-15-08, 17:15
Well piss on me, I was wrong. Looks like RobArms angle cuts them inwards. I wish other makers would take that route when they go out of their way to make un-Mil Spec rails.

That said, channeled rails still look extremely stupid. :D

ITSTOCK
04-15-08, 17:28
Well piss on me, I was wrong. Looks like RobArms angle cuts them inwards. I wish other makers would take that route when they go out of their way to make un-Mil Spec rails.

That said, channeled rails still look extremely stupid. :D

I guess "looking extremely stupid" is a valid argument IF that's your opinion. I don't see it.

As to making them "un-mil spec", how EXACTLY, are they "un-mil spec"? I understand that they have a channel unlike other traditional rails, but I don't see them not meeting mil spec requirements? They are the correct width, spacing, and depth to meet the MIL-STD0-1913 requirements. If I'm wrong, please feel free to correct me. However, as far as I'm concerned, "looking stupid" :confused: doesn't make the rails "un-mil spec".

So you have never seen an XCR, never handled an XCR, and obviously have done little reading on the XCR. Could I ask what is your dislike with the XCR? Curiosity has the best of me. I understand if that was your opinion 2 years ago, but you might want to reconsider what you are stating. That's just my suggestion.

Tom_Jones
04-15-08, 17:49
deleted

ITSTOCK
04-15-08, 18:13
I suspect people are saying that they are not in accordance with MIL-STD-1913 because the channel causes the profile to differ from what is laid out in the standard.

http://www.biggerhammer.net/picatinny/1913_specs.pdf

I just read through, and there is no section that states that a channel puts the rail out of spec. There wasn't much to read, but I clearly could have missed it. I didn't see any section that required that profile to go from point to point, however, I suppose that the "wedge shape" as defined puts this out of "Mil-STD-1913" (however, that would have nothing to do with cutting the groove/channel in the rail, they could have retained the wedge shape and still cut grooves, and it would have 100% satisfied MIL-1913 requirements). Thanks for sharing that. According to the initial acceptance in to the SOCOM/SCAR trials, I guess "MIL SPEC" isn't that important any more. It's ashame people will find flaw in it. Perhaps that is because it was back in 1995, or for other un-known reasons.

Lastly, I'm fairly certain that RA claims this rail to still be MIL-STD-1913, if not, it's still claimed, AND MORE IMPORTANTLY IS, a 1913 rail. So they found a more effective way to do a 1913 rail, and some consider this a problem? (unmil-spec???? If it is the case, THIS is what you care about?????)

olds442tyguy
04-15-08, 18:29
I guess "looking extremely stupid" is a valid argument IF that's your opinion. I don't see it.

Yes, the rails looking stupid is my opinion. Do you think my opinion is not valid to myself, or are you just trying to get more exposure by arguing my own opinion you can't change? :confused:


As to making them "un-mil spec", how EXACTLY, are they "un-mil spec"? I understand that they have a channel unlike other traditional rails, but I don't see them not meeting mil spec requirements? They are the correct width, spacing, and depth to meet the MIL-STD0-1913 requirements. If I'm wrong, please feel free to correct me. However, as far as I'm concerned, "looking stupid" :confused: doesn't make the rails "un-mil spec".

So you say they are Mil Spec? Tell me where in the M1913 requirements they list a channel. Could you also provide drafting pictures that oppose the original M1913 drafts and show a canal?

Didn't think so. Here's the original military draft of the M1913 rail, as the military envisioned it.

http://www.frfrogspad.com/m1913-2.jpg


So you have never seen an XCR, never handled an XCR, and obviously have done little reading on the XCR. Could I ask what is your dislike with the XCR? Curiosity has the best of me. I understand if that was your opinion 2 years ago, but you might want to reconsider what you are stating. That's just my suggestion.
Did I ever say I shot an XCR, or are you just instigating as usual? :rolleyes:

I said I don't like out of spec rails and wire stocks. That opinion still stands, no matter how much propagandic arguing you do.

What the hell would I reconsider? Did I ever say the XCR was a bad rifle, or are you just instigating yet again. Seriously, you might want to "reconsider", because I don't think you'll be selling any more XCR's by showing your ass here, pal.

Tom_Jones
04-15-08, 18:38
deleted

ITSTOCK
04-15-08, 18:42
Yes, the rails looking stupid is my opinion. Do you think my opinion is not valid to myself, or are you just trying to get more exposure by arguing my own opinion you can't change? :confused:



There is nothing wrong with YOUR opinion, but it is OPINION. I said that I disagree with your opinion, just as you disagree with mine. No arguing there.




So you say they are Mil Spec? Tell me where in the M1913 requirements they list a channel. Could you also provide drafting pictures that oppose the original M1913 drafts and show a canal?

Didn't think so. Here's the original military draft of the M1913 rail, as the military envisioned it.

http://www.frfrogspad.com/m1913-2.jpg



I said that the channel does not put the XCR out of spec. Your posting implies that the channel puts the XCR out of mil spec. In the drawing that you posted, and the document Tom Jones posted, it does not include ANYTHING about the channel, it doesn't make it an issue.




Did I ever say I shot an XCR, or are you just instigating as usual? :rolleyes:


No, but you said that it has sharp corners on the "un-mil spec" rails. I was simply asking if you have handled an xcr, as it was apparent that you did not. Nothing more, nothing less. Don't read in to it too much. Again, no arguing there.




I said I don't like out of spec rails and wire stocks. That opinion still stands, no matter how much propagandic arguing you do.


Fair enough. I don't like a lot of stocks that come on standard AR's either, so I change them out. They ARE mil spec and can be switched (just an FYI). As you can see, my XCR doesn't have a wire stock, and it came 100% stock with the rifle. You can get a couple of different options factory stock, including the VLTOR that is pictured (again, just an FYI, and also again, no arguing).



What the hell would I reconsider? Did I ever say the XCR was a bad rifle, or are you just instigating yet again. Seriously, you might want to "reconsider", because I don't think you'll be selling any more XCR's by showing your ass here, pal.

Actually, you clearly stated that if someone gave you an XCR, you would run it. Not only that, but TWO YEARS AGO, you listed the problems of than, and said that it was TOO EARLY to decide. Well things have changed and I pointed them out.


I like the thought of owning one some day, but it's a little too early in my opinion. With the production delays, it's obvious RobArm's has some quirks they need to get worked out.[/QUOTE]


I never stated that you thought the XCR was a "bad rifle". But you were under the influence that....

A) The rails are sharp and hard to hold (they aren't sharp at all)
B) The rails aren't mil spec because they have a channel (they aren't "mil spec" because of the channels)
C) There is no longer a "waiting" period

However, your biggest grief seemed to be A, that the rails were sharp. They are not, so I was simply stating, if that is your biggest problem, perhaps you should reconsider since it was a false assumption. Again, no more, no less.


On a Mil Spec rail I can grip it on the flats of the outward rail slots.

Mil Spec rails have smooth flats on the outward rail slots that are more easily gripped. Canaled rails have crevices with four more sharp edges where a Mil Spec rail is flat and smooth.

As for using VFG's primarily on railed hand guards (out of spec or not), there was no secret coding. I primarily use VFG's, but I still prefer a Mil Spec rail because there's always a chance I'll be shooting with out a VFG, and I find out of spec rails more degrading to my bare handed shooting comfort.



As to selling XCR's, that's not my job. The rifle sells itself ;) .

ITSTOCK
04-15-08, 18:44
Paragraph 5.1 "Accessory mounting rail profile" in section 5 "DETAILED REQUIREMENTS" states:



In addition, paragraph 3.5 provides the definition of "profile":



Figure 1 does not show a channel, but rather depicts it as solid crosshatched area:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6a/M1913A_Rail_CrossSection.svg

(Image linked from wikipedia article on Picatinny rail (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Picatinny_rail))

Opps. olds442tyguy beat me to posting the image.

I looked at the picture, and re-read the definition. Please point out where it stated that it is solid, without a channel. Better yet, please state the dimension. Again, I fully admit that I might be missing it, but with your post, and the previous, it does not have any mention of a channel, whether present or not. I guess it's a moot point, not 100% mil spec is not 100% mil spec. I really wanted to just point out that the XCR does not have sharp edges, and the channel causes zero problems (well, I guess other than being ugly).

SHIVAN
04-15-08, 19:04
That's the prettiest weapon I've ever seen with 10,000 rounds on it.

olds442tyguy
04-15-08, 19:05
I said that the channel does not put the XCR out of spec. Your posting implies that the channel puts the XCR out of mil spec. In the drawing that you posted, and the document Tom Jones posted, it does not include ANYTHING about the channel, it doesn't make it an issue. The wedgeshape is what puts the XCR out of the "mil spec".
Not Mil Spec is not Mil Spec, so there's no need to discuss it further.


No, but you said that it has sharp corners on the "un-mil spec" rails. I was simply asking if you have handled an xcr, as it was apparent that you did not. Nothing more, nothing less. Don't read in to it too much. Again, no arguing there.
So you dragged it out legitimately? :rolleyes: I admitted my impressions were incorrect, so why did you keep on nagging?

Fair enough. I don't like a lot of stocks that come on standard AR's either, so I change them out. They ARE mil spec and can be switched (just an FYI). As you can see, my XCR doesn't have a wire stock, and it came 100% stock with the rifle. You can get a couple of different options factory stock, including the VLTOR that is pictured (again, just an FYI, and also again, no arguing).
Two years ago I don't think they were available, and now I suspect it's at an extra cost. Regardless, I'd much prefer a stock that's similar in features to the SCAR or ACR. Not that a good AR stock with a folding mechanism is lacking, but I'd like to see more options for them that take advantage of the design.

No, but you were under the influence that....

A) The rails are sharp and hard to hold (they aren't sharp at all)
B) The rails aren't mil spec because they have a channel (they aren't "mil spec" because of the channels)
C) There is no longer a "waiting" period

However, your biggest grief seemed to be A, that the rails were sharp. They are not, so I stating, if that is your biggest problem, perhaps you should reconsider since it was a false assumption. Again, no more, no less.

As to selling XCR's, that's not my job. The rifle sells itself ;) .
You replied to my post where I took back my comments about them being sharp, then drilled me for it twice afterwards as if you refused to acknowledge that post.

If the rails are out of spec, they're out of spec so there's no sense in you arguing it to me.

My post about production issues from two years ago should have never been a current issue.


This isn't the place to drag this BS out any further though, so I won't comment on these events in this thread anymore. You can rant and rave all day, but my opinions are solid. If you don't agree to my opinions that's fine and dandy, but please refrain from out right making shit up and dragging out semantics.

ITSTOCK
04-15-08, 19:08
You have just stated exactly what I posted, so you are correct, it is all done. As to "making shit up", pot, kettle, black? Let's let it go.

However, this thread is about the XCR, so getting all of the information ABOUT the XCR is pretty damn relative. Hopefully you learned a couple things about the XCR, just as I have. ;) It actually turned about being a productive thread, information wise.

olds442tyguy
04-15-08, 19:10
I looked at the picture, and re-read the definition. Please point out where it stated that it is solid, without a channel. Better yet, please state the dimension. Again, I fully admit that I might be missing it, but with your post, and the previous, it does not have any mention of a channel, whether present or not. Figure 1 and 2 are BOTH a side profile. I do succeed that the wedge shape describes makes the XCR rail "un-mil spec". I guess it's a moot point, not 100% mil spec is not 100% mil spec. I really wanted to just point out that the XCR does not have sharp edges, and the channel causes zero problems (well, I guess other than being ugly).
The picture the Military provided does not show a channel, nor did they list it in their specification requirements. It's that simple.

If Colt started drilling holes in their uppers and lowers it might not technically violate Mil Spec, but that doesn't mean that it is Mil Spec. There's no barrel specifications that say anything about fluting, but go flute a government profile barrel and try to sell it as Mil Spec.

As you've stated they're not Mil Spec in other areas anyways, so it's a moot point anyways. They're not Mil Spec, so let's move on.

ITSTOCK
04-15-08, 19:12
That's the prettiest weapon I've ever seen with 10,000 rounds on it.

Thank you, I try to take care of my guns, and it's only ever been at an outdoor range one time. However, pictures like that don't exactly tell the whole story anyway.

ITSTOCK
04-15-08, 19:13
As you've stated they're not Mil Spec in other areas anyways, so it's a moot point anyways. They're not Mil Spec, so let's move on.

:confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:

AGREED.

SHIVAN
04-15-08, 19:15
However, pictures like that don't exactly tell the whole story anyway.

I'm sure they don't. I've never seen a gun with 10,000rds on it, other than pistols. Though I've got a few with 3,000-6,000 on them and they only look about 1/4 that good.




Corrected: I've seen a couple M16's that Marines brought out at WTB Quantico for a Pat Rogers class.

ITSTOCK
04-15-08, 19:18
I'm sure they don't. I've never seen a gun with 10,000rds on it, other than pistols. Though I've got a few with 3,000-6,000 on them and they only look about 1/4 that good.

"NEVER" seen a gun with 10,000 rounds on it? Interesting. Also, 3000-6000 rounds and they look 1/4 as good? What kind of guns do you own??? :confused: Did you buy them from an owner who stored them outside? I could post up a couple of my other AR's with between 3000-6000 rounds and they all look just as "new" as the XCR. None the less, probably 90% of the ammo has been cheap, dirty WOLF.

SHIVAN
04-15-08, 19:26
"NEVER" seen a gun with 10,000 rounds on it? Interesting.

How has the accuracy changed over time? Any degradation in grouping @ 100yds now that you have 10,000rds on the clock?

I just have too many AR's to get any one of them up to 10,000 in any reasonable amount of time. With the M16, and $180/K M193, I got 6,000+rds on one upper in 5 months....but that was a fluke.

ITSTOCK
04-15-08, 19:32
How has the accuracy changed over time? Any degradation in grouping @ 100yds now that you have 10,000rds on the clock?

I just have too many AR's to get any one of them up to 10,000 in any reasonable amount of time. With the M16, and $180/K M193, I got 6,000+rds on one upper in 5 months....but that was a fluke.

I shoot at 25 yards , only had the XCR to 100 yards one time. The 5 shot grouping was about 1.5"s at about 4000 rounds, right after the trigger job nearly a year ago. Actual round count is probably between 8,000 and 10,000, haven't been counting how many cases of wolf I go through. :mad:

Tom_Jones
04-15-08, 19:32
deleted

ITSTOCK
04-15-08, 19:37
Figure 1 clearly shows the profile not having a channel. Figure 1, as stated in paragraphs 3.5 & 5.1, is the required profile.

FWIW, I like the XCR. I do not own one but I may buy one in the next few months. I do wish the rails were in spec. :)


I got it. Monkey see, monkey do. Picture shows it, says it has to look like picture, it's got to be there. Easy enough.

Once you own one, you won't care about the rails being "mil spec"!

Jeremy
04-15-08, 20:23
Everything I have ever bolted onto my XCR has fit and worked fine. I have not tried everything byt any means, but what I have has worked.

scottryan
04-15-08, 20:59
Rails with the slot cut in them are out of spec, period.

Some mounts need a full rail to properly and securely engage the rail. Larue mounts have the studs on the bottom of the mount that block against the middle meat of the rail. Cutting the channel at an angle makes this even worse.

The KAC VFG has the nipple in the middle of it to block against the middle of the rail. Without the middle part, the VFG is held purely by a friction fit which is totally unacceptable.

The XCR was suppose to be the SOPMOD issue gun and it is not even compatible with the standard SOPMOD VFG.

Anything else is spin.

scottryan
04-15-08, 21:03
There is absolutely no good reason to cut this slot down the middle of the rail.

The negligible weight savings is far offset by now having an out of spec rail that is hard on the hands and the extra machine time.

The slot down the rail is purely cosmetic and is a mentality thing that manufactures cannot get away from that started with ARMS rails.

ITSTOCK
04-15-08, 21:32
The negligible weight savings is far offset by now having an out of spec rail that is hard on the hands and the extra machine time..

Apparently we are taking steps backwards.

IrishDevil
04-15-08, 21:37
I got it. Monkey see, monkey do. Picture shows it, says it has to look like picture, it's got to be there. Easy enough.

Once you own one, you won't care about the rails being "mil spec"!

It's hard for me to agree with this statement, and I do understand YMMV. I have an XCR, current round count is at 3,562 according to my records. It's been a good rifle so far. I like the design, some things are lacking, but overall it's decent. Honestly, I prefer the AR, I'm way faster with it. The rails aren't mil-spec, and it's not the best thing since sliced bread either. If it works best for you, great! Drop the UTG stuff though!

ITSTOCK
04-15-08, 21:45
It's hard for me to agree with this statement, and I do understand YMMV. I have an XCR, current round count is at 3,562 according to my records. It's been a good rifle so far. I like the design, some things are lacking, but overall it's decent. Honestly, I prefer the AR, I'm way faster with it. The rails aren't mil-spec, and it's not the best thing since sliced bread either. If it works best for you, great! Drop the UTG stuff though!

I don't have a reason to drop the UTG stuff. They are comfortable, and cheap. For the light duty shooting that I do, I hardly see a point on paying more for what personally amounts to less comfort. I'm not doing courses where I run around with the gun and need? rail covers to stay on.

But honestly, is your first thought when grabbing your AR over the XCR, "Well, the XCR doesn't have MIL-STD-1913 rails, so I'll grab the AR". :D

(the 9mm AR works best for me BTW :) )

scottryan
04-15-08, 21:46
Apparently we are taking steps backwards.


When ARMS came out, they had the center slot. Every other recent maker of rails uses a full rail. KAC, Larue, DD, Samson, etc. Almost every new product coming out has a full rail.

IrishDevil
04-15-08, 21:57
My reasons for prefering the AR are mainly about manipulation of the bolt release, I think the XCR is slower in this regard. I also don't have a problem with the out of spec rails, I just admit that they are, everything I've used on the gun fits nice and tight(mostly Larue). I just wish there was a way to attach a sling to the rear of the receiver, and still utilize the folding stock.

variablebinary
04-15-08, 23:21
That's the prettiest weapon I've ever seen with 10,000 rounds on it.

indeed

I wish I had pics of my XCR before I traded it. It was chewed up pretty good. My chest rig zipps and mag edges alone left some nasty SCARS. (Get it...SCAR)

I miss the gun though. It was awesome. I cant wait to get another one.


My reasons for prefering the AR are mainly about manipulation of the bolt release, I think the XCR is slower in this regard. I also don't have a problem with the out of spec rails, I just admit that they are, everything I've used on the gun fits nice and tight(mostly Larue). I just wish there was a way to attach a sling to the rear of the receiver, and still utilize the folding stock.

Interesting. I found the XCR to be faster than my AR15 in class. The bolt release is in a great location for those that tug on their mags after inserting. I dont like mags hitting the deck in class, so I tug my mags after changes (slap/tug). With the XCR I would use my thumb to hook the bolt release on the tug. It requires less motions to make the gun ready for use. Try it when you are at the range again. It works great

Jeremy
04-16-08, 00:04
I prefer the XCR bolt release to an AR but to each his own. I find the XCR release much quicker and even more so when shooting from the left side. With an AR shooting lefty I either remove my left hand to hit the release (which I don't like doing) or have to reach over the gun. With the XCR I can hit it with the trigger finger on its way back to the trigger or catch it with my right thumb after I insert the mag (usually what I do). Either of this methods are much faster for me over an AR.

Right handed, I am much quicker on reloads as well with the AR. After I insert the new mag, the left hand can go straight for the VFG while the trigger finger hits the release on the way to the trigger. This way I find that my left hand has grabbed the gun much quicker than having to hit the release and then grab. My reload times are consistently faster with the XCR when measured with a shot time.

I am not trying to put anyone down as we are all different, but better explain why I prefer one to the other.

What problem do you have with the sling attachment with the stock folded?

IrishDevil
04-16-08, 00:36
When I insert a mag in an AR, I do tug it to check. I then go up and hit the bolt release with my left thumb. I'm able to keep my weakhand in contact with the gun by cradling the mag well with my fingers. After pressing the bolt release with my thumb, I can extend my weakhand straight out and never take it off the gun. As far as using the trigger finger to manipulate the bolt release on the XCR, that's fine, I just think it opens up more chances for an AD. With my XCR, I use my thumb when tugging the mag like stated above. I'm just faster with an AR. I don't care for the rear sling point on the XCR, you have to use the HK style hooks, which I don't care for. Biggest problem with it is that it puts the sling in the way of the charging handle slide when retracted. It has happened to me a few times in the past. I currently have the sling attached at the front of the stock using the BFG UWL. By using this attachment method, you can't keep the stock folded while slung. Not a real big deal though.

Jeremy
04-16-08, 00:47
I kinda ran into the same problems with the sling attachment point and made a one inch spacer out of nylon zip ties. It is low profile and keeps things out of the way of the charging handle. The sling point would have been better below the path of the charging handle if you ask me.

In fact, I made a sling mount to do just that for the M4 stock adaptor. I took a stock AR back plate and drilled out the indent that indexes on the back of the receiver. Using a file I opened up the whole indent and filled off the locating lug so I could rotate it around the stock tube. When mounted between the stock adaptor and the castle nut, I rotate it out slightly to the left and it works perfectly and is real low profile. I could have bought an AR mount that does the same, but this was cheap and easy. Not to mention the AR mounts may or may not have worked as the XCR does not have the indention as the AR does.

I am anxiously awaiting the new stock for the XCR that folds and telescopes. Hopefully the sling points will be improved on this one.

I will be adding an ambi safety in the next week or so and hopefully they will make an ambi mag release for it. If they do, the XCR will be pretty darn close to perfect for me.

KevinB
04-16-08, 11:48
That's the prettiest weapon I've ever seen with 10,000 rounds on it.


:D

If that is 10k....

Well lets just say I don't believe it.

ITSTOCK
04-16-08, 17:00
:D

If that is 10k....

Well lets just say I don't believe it.

The actual round count is somewhere between 8,000 to 10,000. The gun has been shot outside one time, the rest were all at an indoor range (classic pistol). The gun has seen no carbine courses, nor has it been thrown in the dirt. Imagine if your guns were only taken to indoor ranges, and only got to see daylight once. I think that you are assuming that everyone takes their rifles to the nearest tactical courses, rolls in the dirt with them, and throws them around.

My Glock 26 also has around 8000 rounds through it and looks brand new though also. I guess that is what happens when the guns aren't abused or ran hard in the least bit (as well as all of my AR's that all have over 3000 rounds).

Lastly, I STILL don't know how you can see jack shit in the crappy pictures that I posted.

Here is my bolt, followed by hammer....

http://img245.imageshack.us/img245/5742/xcrboltpq3yq7.jpg

http://img366.imageshack.us/img366/5445/xcrhammergq8jm8.jpg

It's a little different than what the exterior finish leads you to believe, huh?

ITSTOCK
04-16-08, 21:47
Tomorrow I will have to do a side by side with my 3,000-6,000 round stag AR, as well as my 3000+ round 9mm ar.

Jeremy
04-16-08, 23:59
Mine's got north of 8K rounds on it and I am not aware of any blems to the external finish. In fact, I have been very pleased with the external finish as mine has been low crawled through the woods on many occassions, shot in pouring rain, snow, and whatever Missouri weather can throw at it. It has been well used, not abused, and looks really good. The internal wear looks like Itstocks.

KevinB
04-17-08, 08:10
Yes it does look a little different.

Can you do me a favor - and resize the last pics?

ITSTOCK
04-17-08, 11:36
Sure thing.

My only question is, do I still get the "prettiest gun with 10k rounds" award? :confused:

flanntastic
04-17-08, 13:24
my hammer has some wear on the face but my bolt looks nothing like yours and mine has had 1500rds through it. i would say you have put a ton of ammo through it.

redsox20
04-18-08, 11:14
quick question can you put an ambi selector and mag catch on an xcr?

ITSTOCK
04-18-08, 11:46
quick question can you put an ambi selector and mag catch on an xcr?

Ambi-selector is an option, ambi bolt catch release is standard, and am ambi mag release is already designed, but not yet produced, no time line on when it will, and ejection is in the 2-3 o'clock position.

variablebinary
04-18-08, 12:43
Ambi-selector is an option, ambi bolt catch release is standard, and am ambi mag release is already designed, but not yet produced, no time line on when it will, and ejection is in the 2-3 o'clock position.


And dont expect to ever see that brass again. The XCR flings shells like a G3 :p