PDA

View Full Version : RRA Gov Model Observations



ST911
08-04-06, 12:16
Observations from a session with some Rock River Arms Government Carbines. Example herein representative of others on hand. Sorry, no photos for public posting this time.


Lower Receiver:

Marked for model nomenclature, with GM serial prefix. Marked for LE/gov restriction. Receiver bears typical assembly marks, otherwise without apparent flaw or defect. USGI magazine fit and seating unremarkable. Trigger pull of 6-7# (estimated), quality consistent with USGI units. Trigger group is conventional USGI type, select-fire, three position (safe-semi-auto). Pistol grip secured with allen screw of undetermined dimension.


Buttstock Group:

Six position collapsible. Marked, “Rock River Arms” at toe. No excessive play in stock on receiver extension. Commercial receiver extension with angle cut end. Drain hole in receiver extension. Standard carbine buffer spring. Extension includes “H” buffer. Weight of buffer unverified. Castle nut staked.


Upper Receiver:

Railed upper “A3-type”, with keyhole forge marking. Extended feed ramps cut post-anodizing, and unfinished. Ramps cut neatly. No addressing within rails. GG&G flip-up rear sight, Eotech 552 sight mounted. Otherwise unremarkable.

Mating and detachment of upper and lower accomplished easily. Fit is typical to any AR-type carbine, and neither excessively tight nor loose.


Bolt Group:

M16-type bolt carrier with full tang, shrouded firing pin. M16 firing pin. No markings on bolt or carrier. Carbine extractor spring assembly, black insert, spring appears stainless and is silver in color. Carrier key staking is poor, minimal indentation on one side and virtually none on the other.


Barrel:

16” length. Undetermined twist. Appears chrome lined throughout. No barrel markings forward of the FSB, undetermined markings beneath hand guard. No apparent chamber or feedway flaw. Compensator/flash hider A2-type, timed correctly. FSB alignment near-center, slightly right. Front sight mechanically zeroed.

Hand guard is Surefire quad variant, non-floated.


Accessory Pack:

NHMTG 30rd magazines, USGI type, current green anti-tilt follower. Marked for date of manufacture and LE restriction. Viking VTAC sling. Surefire 951-type weapon light with tail cap click switch and pressure paid. GG&G vertical fore grip. USGI-type cleaning kit. Eagle Industries discrete carry case.


No gauges or other instruments utilized.


Features, merits, and liabilities of the various accessories are discussed in previous reviews and elsewhere.


When stripped of their accessories, these RRA GM’s are indistinguishable (except for markings) from similarly configured models in the balance of the RRA catalog, and from other production from commercial competitors. This model, offered as RRA’s principle icon and flagship of their AR-type production, is really rather underwhelming.

USMC03
08-04-06, 13:58
Skintop911,



If these RRA's are new, is there any chance that you can try a Magpul MIAD or Tango Down pistol grip on these guns and see if there is a gap between the front of the pistol grip and the receiver (directly behind the trigger).

I recently purchased a RRA that was exhibiting this problem and sent it back to RRA twice, they kept blaming the pistol grips, even though I had taken several Magpul MIADs and Tango Down pistol grips off of other guns (that the pistol grips fit perfectly on) and tried them on the new RRA and all grips exhibited the same problem on the RRA.

It seems as if the pistol grip screw hole in the receiver is either further back than it should be or was drilled at the wrong angle.



Thanks

Snake RAH
08-04-06, 14:11
I'm not skintop, but purchased a new RRA lower (SN CM 71xxx) back in May, and had the same issue with the TD grip I have.

The only grips that I have gotten that don't overhang a RRA or SNS LF lower are Cavalry Arms C9 grips (colored A2 grips) and Colt SP1/M16/M16A1 grips. All the LPKs I've used (Stag, DPMS, RRA) have varying degrees of overhang.

Renegade
08-04-06, 20:29
Not sure what your point is?

USMC03
08-05-06, 09:28
Not sure what your point is?


Who are you talking to?

Renegade
08-05-06, 09:37
Who are you talking to?


Skinhead, it was a detailed review, and I was unsure what point he was trying to get across.

Rmplstlskn
08-05-06, 10:31
I thought it was a cut and paste from RRA web site... :p

Rmpl

ST911
08-05-06, 15:51
Sorry, didn't really have a point. I was just sharing observations of a product encountered in the field and the topic of discussion from time to time.

SuicideHz
08-05-06, 15:54
I'm also sort of left wondering what these reviews are for. The first I read was comparing two different rifles and I found it interesting to see some differences, but this one seems pretty pointless- less info than RRA provides even.

Couldn't you have removed the handguards to look for markings or such?

No offense Skintop911...

Vinh
08-05-06, 18:29
I happen to appreciate Skintop's posts. They seem to present the current state of the products the respective manufacturers are selling.

For instance, I learned quite a few things from this thread. RRA's bolt carriers may (still) not be staked properly, and the receiver extension nuts are now staked. Last I knew, adhesive was used. The other details were enlightening as well.

Much more useful than "flawless fit and finish" style evaluations.

SuicideHz
08-06-06, 01:13
I guess I should wait until this review is complete before saying anything anyway.