Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 51

Thread: M6IC

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    169
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by doro19 View Post
    More attractive to me, is for some one to post pictures and detail how one failed. Thus far, I've read numerous reports of these supposed failures on this forum without any real proof. I have several thousand rounds through mine without issue, and the only negative is that my LWRC M6 is nowhere as accurate as my Colt, BCM, or PSA. I also don't like the recoil 'sensation' compared to DI. I'm not saying that the stories and claims aren't true, but they are contrary to my experience with the system. Until a detailed report of the system's failure is posted, I believe that LWRC owners will look at these claims as unjustified bashing. Just MHO. If or when mine fail, I will post it in a detailed report with pictures.
    Seeing how most of us with negative experiences are "past/previous/prior owners" I doubt most will have detailed pics of the failures. I don't hang onto pics of items I have no sentimental attachment to after the photographed item has left my possession, especially with a rifle that I didn't like. If I kept every single photo I have taken over the past 10+ years I would have to have a lot of spare hard drives to store everything and what would be the point in hanging on to that?

    There a plenty of reports with documented photos of the failures on the LWRCi rifles, you are a current owner and apparent staunch defender of the platform so you probably better than most where to find those threads. Carrier tilt, gas key screw problems, piston springs wearing out in low round count numbers, piston cups breaking, are just some of the issues documented on the web.

    A few I found by googling "LWRC issues"

    https://www.ar-15.co/threads/62804-L...-shoot-DI-guns

    http://www.ar15.com/archive/topic.ht...f=126&t=511351


    Every single maker out there has had some bad press and QC issues at some point in their history but some were due to poor manufacturing, others relying on third party vendors for parts, and some "like the piston design in the LWRCi" are based on an inferior design. LWRC like all competent manufacturers has made attempts to fix and improve their design when issues arise and for the most part have done a pretty good job.

    I am not bashing the LWRC brand or it's rifles as there are a large amount of fanboys out there that will stand behind them devoutly but I can't recommend the rifle over 3-5 other makers other there and this is based on my prior experiences owning the rifle. The great thing is that we can all choose where and how we spend our money and LWRC has provided some great advances in terms of the AR platform as well as many others, I just don't think that the system is the Bees Knees as most LWRC owners would have you believe.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,157
    Feedback Score
    38 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by doro19 View Post
    More attractive to me, is for some one to post pictures and detail how one failed. Thus far, I've read numerous reports of these supposed failures on this forum without any real proof. I have several thousand rounds through mine without issue, and the only negative is that my LWRC M6 is nowhere as accurate as my Colt, BCM, or PSA. I also don't like the recoil 'sensation' compared to DI. I'm not saying that the stories and claims aren't true, but they are contrary to my experience with the system. Until a detailed report of the system's failure is posted, I believe that LWRC owners will look at these claims as unjustified bashing. Just MHO. If or when mine fail, I will post it in a detailed report with pictures.
    6th post down.

    http://forum.lwrci.com/viewtopic.php...14145&start=75

    You may also want to read the entire thread. It's not flattering. It's also hilarious (and frustrating) how quickly the fanboys are to rationalize away the problem. "Oh yeah, it's probably just the magazines ha ha ha! We don't know yet what the real problem is ha ha ha! I've shot 300 rounds through my gun with 5 magazines it's ok ha ha ha!" No, the problem is obvious: the IC bolt catch is too small, and if PMAG M3s were truly the culprit, they would cause the same issues in other "mil-spec" lower receivers as well. They don't. The issue isn't even close to prevalent in BCM and Colt lowers, as well as a friend's DD I tried. To make matters worse, LWRC was 15+ months late on delivering the IC, it shipped with this problem, and they STILL haven't fixed it. How did this problem make it through their grossly-tardy design process, and how hasn't it been fixed yet?

    When 2/3 of my LWRC rifles had problems that LWRC couldn't or refused to fix (but had an obvious solution staring them right in the face), you're damned right our complaints are justified. I used to defend LWRC a lot on this site (read past posts if you don't believe me), not because I was a fanboy, but because a lot of people bashed them without having firsthand experience. Well, I have the firsthand experience. Their quality is questionable at best, and I refuse to risk my life on guns like this. If you choose to stick your head in the sand, that's fine, and I wish you the best, but until you have 3,000+ rounds through the gun and have run it through a few carbine courses, it's hard for us who have to take your word seriously.

    P.S.: to be fair, the AXTS AX556 also displayed the problem, though the bolt catch still engaged regardless. That said, the bolt catch on the AXTS was also noticeably smaller than mil-spec, and I don't consider it a mil-spec platform to begin with (because it's most definitely not). It's a boutique lower that deviates greatly from the norm. In the end, the M6IC was the only lower that would not engage the follower and would fail to lock back if the right circumstances were present. It's a bad design that LWRC is sweeping under the rug, just like Glock and their post-2010 extraction problems. Like the Glocks, it also looks like fanboys are willing to rationalize the problem away to weirdly and blindly defend their chosen gun.
    Last edited by DreadPirateMoyer; 11-23-13 at 16:11.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,157
    Feedback Score
    38 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by watercop08 View Post
    The only gripe I have with the rifle is with regards to the rail. The removable portion of the rail which allows access to the piston system and supports the front sight is secured by 2 thumb screws with O rings. Interesting design choice, but flawed in the sense that after shooting approx. 100 rounds the screws loosen and allow the top of the rail to wiggle fore and aft. This is more of an annoyance then a problem as I have not noticed any adverse results while shooting irons with the screws tight or loose. I may not notice it primarily because most of my shooting is done 100 yards and in. For a rifle that cost over 2k I would have expected something more secure. On a side note if you try to "overtighten" the screws to solve the aforementioned issue you will eventually destroy the O rings and cause the screws to loosen after 20 rounds. Good thing LWRCi will send replacements for free!
    I tightened my screws hand tight, and then went a quarter turn more with a screwdriver. They never came loose, and they never wore out either. You'd have to take the rail on/off hundreds to thousands of times to wear them out, or severely overtighten them. LWRC's have problems, but I don't think this is one of them.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    44
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    My issue isnt so much the screws as it is the o rings. It is completely my fault that I destroyed one O ring, I dont blame that on the design (I over tightened one screw to the point that is sheered through the ring). For whatever reason mine does come loose when they are tightened in the same manner you described. No big deal to me. It is still one of my favorite rifles to shoot. Each gun has quirks just like cars and women, you just have to use it enough to find it.

    I also purchased a few backup piston components incase there is a failure. At this point the gun has been awesome and I wouldnt get a poor taste if something did fail. I seem to have decent luck with "questionable" guns like my duty p226 that was manufactured in 2007... no failures until I tried Mecgar extended mags... but thats a whole different story.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    94
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by DreadPirateMoyer View Post
    6th post down.

    http://forum.lwrci.com/viewtopic.php...14145&start=75

    You may also want to read the entire thread. It's not flattering. It's also hilarious (and frustrating) how quickly the fanboys are to rationalize away the problem. "Oh yeah, it's probably just the magazines ha ha ha! We don't know yet what the real problem is ha ha ha! I've shot 300 rounds through my gun with 5 magazines it's ok ha ha ha!" No, the problem is obvious: the IC bolt catch is too small, and if PMAG M3s were truly the culprit, they would cause the same issues in other "mil-spec" lower receivers as well. They don't. The issue isn't even close to prevalent in BCM and Colt lowers, as well as a friend's DD I tried. To make matters worse, LWRC was 15+ months late on delivering the IC, it shipped with this problem, and they STILL haven't fixed it. How did this problem make it through their grossly-tardy design process, and how hasn't it been fixed yet?

    When 2/3 of my LWRC rifles had problems that LWRC couldn't or refused to fix (but had an obvious solution staring them right in the face), you're damned right our complaints are justified. I used to defend LWRC a lot on this site (read past posts if you don't believe me), not because I was a fanboy, but because a lot of people bashed them without having firsthand experience. Well, I have the firsthand experience. Their quality is questionable at best, and I refuse to risk my life on guns like this. If you choose to stick your head in the sand, that's fine, and I wish you the best, but until you have 3,000+ rounds through the gun and have run it through a few carbine courses, it's hard for us who have to take your word seriously.

    P.S.: to be fair, the AXTS AX556 also displayed the problem, though the bolt catch still engaged regardless. That said, the bolt catch on the AXTS was also noticeably smaller than mil-spec, and I don't consider it a mil-spec platform to begin with (because it's most definitely not). It's a boutique lower that deviates greatly from the norm. In the end, the M6IC was the only lower that would not engage the follower and would fail to lock back if the right circumstances were present. It's a bad design that LWRC is sweeping under the rug, just like Glock and their post-2010 extraction problems. Like the Glocks, it also looks like fanboys are willing to rationalize the problem away to weirdly and blindly defend their chosen gun.
    I'm neither a 'fanboy' nor am I a defender of the system; neither am I 'married' to a particular system. What I am is a sceptic about the overwhelming anecdotal postings about the negative traits of any system to the point of bashing someone who seeks legitimate answers about it, without any proof to substantiate them. Personally, I prefer DI guns. I own one piston AR variant that just happens to be a LWRC. I have owned half a dozen Colts in my lifetime and still have several in my safe. That's more than any AR variant I do own. If I'm to be accused of being a fanboy of any one variant, it's not LWRC. I just want to know why I've never experienced a fraction of the defects that are posted- ( a new piston rod every 1,000 rounds?). If, however, I do happen to own the only fully functional and reliable LWRC, maybe I'm one of the lucky few....though I doubt it.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    858
    Feedback Score
    0
    I bought into the LWRC hype in 2006 or so and bought an M6A2. Had numerous issues with it. The spring cup shattered one day, the piston spring took a really bad set, the lower was out of spec in the grip area and required me to modify the magpul grip to get it to sit in the right place, the rail was canted (not to mention, it was a bad design in the first place and would move around throwing off the zero of my irons), the increased recoil impulse made follow up shots slower, and the forum culture when I sought out help was condescending and full of screechy fanboys and mods with incredibly bad attitudes towards their customers. Every time I've purchased products from them I've regretted it. YMMV, of course.

    The main thing these days is that I don't like that they're supplying the Saudis with weapons. I disagree with sending weapons to a government that allows slavery, treats women like property, and supports terrorism (9/11, and more recently Syria). LWRC won't be getting any more money from me, but I must say I think their rifles look nice aesthetically and they have some cool ideas. Just wish the execution was up to par, they had better customer relations with their forum, and that they didn't export rifles to people I consider to be enemies of the United States.
    Crossing the Noobicon

  7. #27
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    down by the river
    Posts
    543
    Feedback Score
    15 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Tejasmtb View Post
    IMHO it was a huge design flaw in their piston system, still is, there's no need for a spring in the piston design.
    That's surprising, since HK, who makes the "6920" (read, "standard by which all others are judged") of piston ARs, uses a spring in the op-rod assembly. LWRCI guns are different from the HKs in that the HK has a piston (G36 style) that strikes the op-rod. The LWRCI (if memory serves, it's been years since I've stripped one) is more like the FAL, in that there are not two separate pieces; gas comes out and pushes a rod, same rod hits the carrier and propels it rearward. FAL uses a return spring as well. BCGs have more important things to do than return op-rods to their resting positions.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Herndon,VA
    Posts
    964
    Feedback Score
    11 (100%)
    We have approximately 200 LWRC's at my work. The M6A1S. I have test fired more than half of them prior to issue.
    They work for a LE patrol rifle. Officers never clean or lube them like they should so the piston system and the coated BCG work for the lazy cleaner. The only issues we have had are one was delivered with an extractor that wasn't machined completely and wouldn't chamber a round. I just replaced the extractor with another. (half the weapons have a normal bolt and half have thay stupid proprietary extractor that is a bitch to get back together). Another rifle was shipped with some issue with the prtprietary LWRC rear sight where the front sight post was to far out of the well to zero. They replaced the sight with a Troy after I returned the upper. (half of the weapons have Troy sight the other half have the LWRC buis which I actually like)

    Not my choice for a rifle, but that's what we have. Some love them some hate them. The midlength is heavier than the Colts we have. We issue Pmags and some won't drop free from the LWRC lowers until some use. The most rounds I have seen through one was 2000 rounds in two days. A new SWAT officer was shooting his Colt commando that went down while shooting Ultramax ammo. He switch to his old patrol rifle (LWRC) and didn't have an issue. I looked at both guns after the training and the Ultramax made the gun filty. The Colt was bone dry as usual and it appears the LWRC was able to power through the course when dry. The LWRC's seem to function better with Sims rounds also. We haven't had any issues with the springs or spring cups but I try to inspect them every quarter.

    These are typical LE weapons that get banged around but not shot alot. I gave mine up to a rookie earlier this year since I'm no longer in patrol. I now have a Colt with a bushmaster barrel. OP if your LWRC works for you, great, go shoot some more and enjoy it. Remember pistol guns need lube too. David
    Last edited by dwhitehorne; 11-24-13 at 19:03. Reason: non typer

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    NM
    Posts
    3,988
    Feedback Score
    10 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by SamM View Post
    Unbelievable! I have no problem with my rifle and somehow I'm a troll! And how am I going off? I just posted about my new rifle.
    Enough bandwidth is already taken up by people basically misplacing a 'look what I got' facebook post, but there was some constructive discusion on what you should look out for, for people that have run their M6's hard enough to find out what breaks if they get used.
    عندما تصبح الأسلحة محظورة, قد يملكون حظرون عندهم فقط
    کله چی سلاح منع شوی دی، یوازي غلوونکۍ یی به درلود
    Semper Fi
    "Being able to do the basics, on demand, takes practice. " - Sinister

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Occupied Colorado
    Posts
    220
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by SamM View Post
    Unbelievable! I have no problem with my rifle and somehow I'm a troll! And how am I going off? I just posted about my new rifle.

    There's been about 600 rounds put through my rifle. Mostly at the local range and in my backyard. All with Gen 3 PMAGs. No, I have not run it that hard. No, I have not shot the rifle with it resting on the magazine.
    Seriously??? I ran my Noveske through a 1,000 round class and another 1,000 at the range in the first month I had it before I considered it reliable. 600 is a low, low number to say a gun is gtg.
    “Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”

    -C S Lewis

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... 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
  •