It's a stupid statement with no mention of loadings, shot groups, distance or shooter ability.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
It's a stupid statement with no mention of loadings, shot groups, distance or shooter ability.
One of the things that always makes me laugh at myself when the SR-15E3 comes up is the fact that I had something of a "Saul on the road to Damascus" experience with them myself. I saw folks extolling the virtues of the gun on the various boards and thought that I understood the hype fairly well, but I had a hard time seeing how any of that was relevant to me. Stoner improved a few things on his carbine while working for KAC. Got it. No big deal. I didn't need another competent AR.
That was more or less my stance. Didn't dislike them, but neither was I going to shell out two-plus bills to join the club. KAC stuff was nice, but expensive, and I was already tired of playing that game as a 1911 shooter. I've recounted the story before, but I was passing through the gun shop one day at lunch because I wanted to see an A3 AUG. They had an SR sitting right next to it, which I didn't really care about, but since it had ambi features that I hadn't seen before (I'm a southpaw), I asked to take a quick look. An afterthought, really. 30-seconds later, I was in the market for an SR.
Now, granted, this is all anecdotal, and we've discussed the parts and design features that make the KAC special, but the part that initially floored me was how they managed to make a competent 16" rifle feel more like a much smaller and lighter gun. Ignoring for the moment the actual shooting characteristics of the SR, it balances incredibly well, feels extremely light in the hand, and leaves an immediate impression of tight integration. Everything just fits and works together beautifully, and while that is admittedly hard to quanify, if you've ever built a nice rifle that still struck you as sort of clunky or forced-together when you were done, then you can appreciate why the SR comes across as something in an entirely different class.
Didn't necessarily mean to focus on intangibles here, but I think the metrics and specs are fairly well-known, as is the reputation of the gun where reliability and accuracy are concerned. That data is easier to quantify. The subjective stuff is a bit more elusive sometimes. I'm not in the employ of KAC, have never really been shown any special favor by the guys in Vero Beach, and stand to gain nothing from sharing these thoughts. Don't even have a t-shirt or Velcro KAC patch.
I do, however, like these rifles.
AC
Stand your ground; don't fire unless fired upon, but if they mean to have a war, let it begin here. -- Captain John Parker, Lexington, 1775.
Spot on. I had a similar experience. It is hard to explain, but KAC represents the current quality and engineering high water mark for an out-of-box AR rifle. This truly is a case where the whole is greater than the sum of the parts.
If you are constrained by the notion that mil spec is your benchmark, then it also becomes your ceiling. Knight's makes mil spec the floor and then evolves the design further by considering what can be done free of such limiting constraints. While the differences may seem small nuances to some, it really does represent state-of-the-art in an AR.
Whether a person wants/needs or is willing/capable of paying for this state-of-the-art AR design is an entirely separate issue. The fact remains: Knight's SR-15E3 is the current industry benchmark in terms of quality and evolving the AR design beyond mil spec.
Last edited by Desert Dog; 08-06-13 at 12:03.
"People have always been stupid. The Internet just makes it easier for us to know about them." - donlapalma
I liked mine so much, I bought a second.
Op, I can't comment for two of your three, but I have purchased 2 SR15's and ran them in 3gun. I have since sold one completely and sold the upper off the other. I agree with the comments about a KAC's accuracy. They are more of a fighting purpose gun than precision purpose gun. Depending on your intended use, keep that in mind.
The lower I kept is part of my SBR. KAC lowers are top notch. I really like the placement and nature of the ambi controls. Compared to my first AR - an M&P - my KAC has a feel that says quality. Mine have accepted any and all accessories I've attached to it. I've tried several different uppers on my KAC lower and they all lock up tight. The attention to spec definitely sets these apart.
The uppers and barrel systems are okay. Sure the intermediate gas system is smooth. The weight and design of the upper/lower is balanced. But, so is my rifle length Noveske set up. Noveske also offers an intermediate gas system. What's more, the upper components are proprietary. Contrary to most KAC lovers, it is a pain in the ass to have to source "special" replacement parts. In a SHTF scenario, I'd rather rummage for spare parts that are more common than less. Add to that, if you want to change out your rail system, then be prepared to spend a wad on a proprietary barrel wrench and or to send off your upper to someone that has one.
The price you quoted is a good deal for a KAC. I'd have to see how it's spec'd out to know how good of a deal you're getting. The newer Knights rails are better than their old quad rails. I haven't shopped Knights in a while and am not aware of the typical package being offered. However, before committing to anything, check this out and see what you think. http://www.gungalleryjax.com/armory/...-NSR-24p40.htm Enjoy.![]()
Here in America we are descended in spirit from revolutionists and rebels - men and women who dare to dissent from accepted doctrine. ~Dwight D. Eisenhower, address, Columbia University, 31 May 1954
Bookmarks