M6IC

[thmpr]

I've had many LWRCI rifles in my time, including one of the first 500 M6-ICs, an M6A5 SPR, and an M6A2. Don't have any anymore for a variety of reasons.

1. Primarily, after this last gun rush, I decided that having a proprietary operating system on my rifle wasn't advantageous in the long run. If a ban were to go into effect, thereby killing LWRCI because it doesn't have many domestic government contracts to fall back on, parts would be almost impossible to find and/or would carry an insane premium. Same situation would happen if LWRCI ever tanked for any other reason as well. Getting spare parts would leave you at the mercy of the mob. With a mil-spec DI gun, however, that issue isn't nearly as pressing. There are tons of mil-spec parts out there. If a ban would happen or any one company would shut down, there would still be a ton of parts out there or other companies to provide them. There is A LOT less risk in owning a DI gun.
2. After having the time and resources to put thousands down the pipe of both my DI guns (Colt, BCMs) and my piston guns (LWRCI), there was really no advantage to the piston operating system. The DI guns are equally as reliable and the parts last just as long. Piston guns are also equally as disgusting to run as a DI gun when running suppressed, which I do a lot on my guns.
3. I don't trust LWRCI's QA/QC anymore. My M6A2 was perfect. My M6A5 had a canted rail that was making contact with the gas block and would ruin its free-floatedness, which on a "precision" rifle, is a big deal (could throw my shots as much as 1/2 MOA depending on how much load I applied to the bipod); LWRCI refused to fix it, saying that they couldn't fix it due to the way the rail attaches to the gun, and also because such a cant was within spec. Oddly enough, Wilson Combat fixed it for me when I sent it to them for Armor Tuff; so much for the cant not being able to be fixed. My M6IC was not compatible with PMAG M3s. 20% of the magazines (4/20 magazines) would not engage the bolt catch because it was too small and would slide right behind the PMAG followers. LWRCI said their bolt catch was to Colt's spec and that it was most likely Magpul's problem because of the change in follower design (which is at least partially true). However, the magazines didn't have the same problem in any other of my BCM or Colt lowers, so I find that excuse to be incredibly lacking. LWRCI still hasn't offered a fix for their stumpy bolt catches that are obviously too short.

Combining all of this, I grew to doubt my rifles in many ways. I doubted LWRCI's QA/QC and didn't have faith in my rifles any longer (if they couldn't fix a canted rail or design a properly-functioning bolt catch, what else is wrong with the rifle?), and I also doubted their longevity in the case of a ban or company shutdown. I now own nothing but Colts and BCMs, and I couldn't be happier.

ETA: I didn't post to turn this into a "why I hate LWRCI" thread. You asked for comments from people who owned their rifles, so those are mine. I'd advise you test your M6IC with M3 PMAGs. I'd bet a few won't work. Just wiggle them around a bit once in the lower. It'll happen.

This is where I am leaning as well. My 5 IC (special 500 run) shows the same gen 3 pmag issue which I believe all of them shows some degree of compatibility issue. I sold 2 out of the 5 and will sell the remaining 3 within 2014. I will replace them with LMT, KAC, Larue PredOBR, JP rifles, and GAP10.

[DreadPirateMoyer]

Sorry, but that has not been my experience! I have 10 Gen 3 windowed PMAGs that I use with this rifle. All work perfectly in my IC. I appreciate your experience and I appreciate you posting about it. Too bad you didn't stick with the rifle and work through the problem. If I had a bad experience that I could attribute to a magazine, I'd probably just use different mags in it. I will say that I have not tried the non-windowed Gen 3 mags in it yet. I have 10 of them for my Tavor.

I understand if you haven't had the same experience as I have, but at least be honest with us with how many rounds you've run through your rifle and how hard you've used it. Your experiences might not actually reflect the entirety of the rifle's capabilities (or lack thereof). If you want a true discussion of LWRCI rifles, we should all be honest here so we can both strengthen the community's knowledge base and learn something from each other.

On top of that...

Too bad you didn't stick with the rifle and work through the problem. If I had a bad experience that I could attribute to a magazine, I'd probably just use different mags in it.

Are you kidding me? How would I work through the problem? LWRCI made a shitty bolt catch that isn't compatible with the latest generation of the most popular magazine on the market...and isn't replacing the bolt catch or doing dick about it. That's not my problem. It's not mine to work through. It's theirs and they didn't. If PMAG M3s work in every other mil-spec gun but the M6IC, what does that tell you? Oh, yes, that it's the attributable to the gun, not the magazines. And then to say that you'd just use different magazines is asinine. Going forward, M3 PMAGs are the magazine. That's like saying "Don't use Sunoco, Exxon, or Hess gasoline in your car!" Give me a break. Any gun that works with every magazine but the PMAG M3 is not a good gun. It has a problem and LWRCI won't fix it.

[SamM]

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.

[Col_Crocs]

600 rounds is a loooooow number.

[doro19]

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.

There is no love here for LWRC, so don't expect the warm and fuzzies. I have a LWRC M6-SL, and it been as reliable as my Colts and BCMs. I will not post anything about LWRC or my experiences with the system for the reasons that you are now finding out. Eat it. Chalk it up as a lesson and move on.

[Tejasmtb]

I had a M6A2 SPR 14.7 and it went through op rods and gas piston springs every 1000 rounds. Lwrc always made good on it but IMHO it was a huge design flaw in their piston system, still is, there's no need for a spring in the piston design. I ended up replacing the LWRC with a POF and I have had a much better experience and believe it has a superior piston design. It is heavier with a much chunkier rail but that's attributed to the heat sink barrel nut. POF has a much better barrel and trigger stock too.

I think LWRC and POF make some of the best piston AR's out there but they are still very
proprietary systems that will run into modularity and parts availability issues if the market ever crashed or the company's dissolved. I haven't noticed much benefit in a piston while shooting suppressed either so I am slowly making my way back to DI guns. I do like their ambi bolt catch and release which is above most since almost everyone else only offers an ambi bolt release and not a catch too. I also like their smaller profile rail but I hate that you have to remove half of it to get to the piston.

You won't get much love outside of KAC, BCM, DD, Colt, LaRue, and Noveske here and you even mentioned that in your original post so I'm not sure why you would even bother posting this here or expect any other outcome. You have received several responses from real life owners and their not so glamorous experiences with the product and I believe you will only continue to see more the longer this thread survives.

If you like/love your LWRC rifle then great man, it has some really good features and marked improvements over the standard AR and for $2100+ you should be a believer in the rifle and it's maker, but in no way is it the best AR put there like a lot of LWRC owners think it is. I'm glad to hear that you have a stellar track record with yours so far, but come back and post up on its status after you've run it through a multi day carbine course and/or have a few thousand rounds through it. That'll prove a more fair assessment to your particular rifles reliability than a few hundred rounds fired from the bench at the range.

[JoshNC]

I bought the LWRCi because I wanted the best. At the time I really bought into the AR being unreliable because of its gas system. So much so I had an original Steyr AUG A1 as my go to gun. I sold the Steyr AUG to fund the LWRCi. I believe it was a 1895$ upper straight from LWRCi after a 9 month wait.

Oh man, I am sorry you sold your AUG A1 to fund a LWRCI. I was very close to buying a LWRCI upper to use on my M16. I am very glad I did not buy one.

[RogerinTPA]

Good info and glad to hear from those who've actually owned them. There have been tons of anecdotal stories on LWRC guns since inception.

Some are passionately attached to the brand for no apparent or rational reason. For every one gun that's actually reliable, you hear 10+ that are unreliable for some reason or another.

I'd be interested to hear from those who have run these guns in a 1K+round count 2 or 3 day carbine course, and what their opinions were after the fact.

[watercop08]

I have no experience with the LWRCI IC line but I have owned an M6A2 SPR in 14.7 for around a year now. That particular gun has around 4,000rds (give or take) through it with no malfunctions of any kind. Said rifle has not seen a class yet but I in no way "baby" it. I shoot mostly xm193 in my rifles and the majority of my shooting is in the form of drills. Mags used are a mix of gen 2 pmags and d&h aluminums with magpul followers.

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!

Specs:
LWRCi M6A2 spr 14.7
Eotech Exps2
bcm gunfighter ambi CH
BCM mod 1 grip
B5 bravo
Fortis qd receiver endplate (or what ever it is actually called)
Badass ambi safety (I am a southpaw)
HSP Thorntail offset mount
surefire m951 body, kx4 head, momentary tailcap
magpul sling

[doro19]

Good info and glad to hear from those who've actually owned them. There have been tons of anecdotal stories on LWRC guns since inception.

Some are passionately attached to the brand for no apparent or rational reason. For every one gun that's actually reliable, you hear 10+ that are unreliable for some reason or another.

I'd be interested to hear from those who have run these guns in a 1K+round count 2 or 3 day carbine course, and what their opinions were after the fact.

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.