Knights Armament SR-25 show us your setup / discussion thread

[Boba Fett v2]

Nice set up, by chance do you have a weight on that, I am still going back and forth on optics for my CC. some days


what are your thoughts on it vs your LMT set up?

Just under 12 lbs (11.9 lbs) empty.
Nearly 14 lbs (13.8 lbs) will a standard 20 round KAC magazine and sling.
You're looking at a 16 lbs rifle setup (approx.) once you add a suppressor and bipod, which is not factored into the weight here.

The LMT is a solid platform that I would prefer to keep on the ground since it weighs more due to the design of the barrel extension and monolithic chassis. For that reason I think it's better suited for precision shooting. The ACC/CC offers a lighter package that excels at being a dual-role capable rifle (not that the MWS is any less capable, just heavier). Accuracy suffers somewhat as a result of continuous strings of fire through a light weight profile barrel, but can make solid hits at distance when called upon to do so. It's more than capable with the heavier profile stainless steel barrels, but does not offer the ability to swap barrels/calibers if that's important to you. Honestly the weight savings isn't huge all things considered, and it boils down to which rifle company you prefer overall. My uneducated and unscientific assessment is that the MWS offers everything you could want in a reliable large frame platform at a cost significantly less than the SR25. You have to remember that KAC pricing is largely driven by R&D and contractual pricing (and I'd argue the Eugene Stoner pedigree that comes with it).

[Bulletcooker]

[m4hk33]

Just under 12 lbs (11.9 lbs) empty.
Nearly 14 lbs (13.8 lbs) will a standard 20 round KAC magazine and sling.
You're looking at a 16 lbs rifle setup (approx.) once you add a suppressor and bipod, which is not factored into the weight here.

The LMT is a solid platform that I would prefer to keep on the ground since it weighs more due to the design of the barrel extension and monolithic chassis. For that reason I think it's better suited for precision shooting. The ACC/CC offers a lighter package that excels at being a dual-role capable rifle (not that the MWS is any less capable, just heavier). Accuracy suffers somewhat as a result of continuous strings of fire through a light weight profile barrel, but can make solid hits at distance when called upon to do so. It's more than capable with the heavier profile stainless steel barrels, but does not offer the ability to swap barrels/calibers if that's important to you. Honestly the weight savings isn't huge all things considered, and it boils down to which rifle company you prefer overall. My uneducated and unscientific assessment is that the MWS offers everything you could want in a reliable large frame platform at a cost significantly less than the SR25. You have to remember that KAC pricing is largely driven by R&D and contractual pricing (and I'd argue the Eugene Stoner pedigree that comes with it).

Yeah, that's pretty much how I view them, I want to see what if any interesting LPVO are introduced at shot this year, more recently, I have been giving the LPVO a little more consideration. The weight difference between an Eotech XPS and one of the lighter LPVO's such as the Mk6, NX8 or Khales is around 8 to 10oz. Although I would like to keep the CC lighter, I think that the precision and range gained for is a good trade off, and think that my original views on want to run an RDS on the SR25 has shifted.

I definitely have no plans to sell either one, I think that I will eventually dump the Scar 17 upgrade some optics at some point.

[LMT/556]

Not specific to the SR25 platform, but having had both ATACR (21oz) vs NX8 (17oz) 1x8s, go ATACR despite the extra weight. The glass quality, more generous eye box, hold over reticle, and .1mil adjustment make the ATACR worth the weight penalty and price premium. While red dots are OK and fast, having even a modest 2x or 3x magnification is advantageous shooting at range. These modern 1x8s especially this ATACR are tough to beat on overall performance. I will say I'm not a fan of the method NF uses to illuminate the reticle as it causes a doubling effect when looking straight through, something I noticed on the NX8 also.

[Boba Fett v2]

Yeah, that's pretty much how I view them, I want to see what if any interesting LPVO are introduced at shot this year, more recently, I have been giving the LPVO a little more consideration. The weight difference between an Eotech XPS and one of the lighter LPVO's such as the Mk6, NX8 or Khales is around 8 to 10oz. Although I would like to keep the CC lighter, I think that the precision and range gained for is a good trade off, and think that my original views on want to run an RDS on the SR25 has shifted.

I definitely have no plans to sell either one, I think that I will eventually dump the Scar 17 upgrade some optics at some point.

I'm super happy with the MK5HD 3.6-18x CCH. Just wish Leupold would offer an illuminated version of this reticle as i prefer it over the Tremor 3. The NF 1-8x is a very capable optic, but I experienced some of its limitations when I ran it in a class earlier this year. We were shooting in less than idea weather conditions with some significant rainfall and the glass wasn't as protected from the elements as it could've been, which had a negative impact on being able to clearly ID targets under harsh conditions (I suppose this can be said about most LPVOs out there). Although it is very capable of 800 yard engagements, I found myself wishing I had an additional 2x or more on the top end. The MK5HD is relatively lightweight, compact and you can throw on a sunshade for added protection against the elements, which IMHO is critical if you plan to use this as your primary for real world applications. YMMV

[CAMagnussen]

Please post up pics of your best groups at 100 yards, indicating type of ammo, trigger, etc. Thanks.

[Firefly]

I kinda want a URX4 now....

[Boba Fett v2]

I kinda want a URX4 now....

It might seem very shallow and shortsighted, but I wasn't originally down with the URX4 primarily because of the aesthetics of the Keymod, which was the only available option when it was first introduced. That all changed once the MLOK URX became a thing. I've grown to really appreciate it for its simplicity and functionality, and the aesthetics has certainly grown on me as well. I will always harbor an affinity for the legacy KAC rifles and carbines, but the URX4 is currently where it's at.

[Firefly]

It might seem very shallow and shortsighted, but I wasn't originally down with the URX4 primarily because of the aesthetics of the Keymod, which was the only available option when it was first introduced. That all changed once the MLOK URX became a thing. I've grown to really appreciate it for its simplicity and functionality, and the aesthetics has certainly grown on me as well. I will always harbor an affinity for the legacy KAC rifles and carbines, but the URX4 is currently where it's at.

Like will it work with my ECC block or would I need a new block?

[trauma]

Like will it work with my ECC block or would I need a new block?

I would keep the ECC factory as it is a modern art masterpiece.

You could pick up an ACC upper, I see them quite a bit now.

Do you have the long or short diving board on the URX3.1?