LMT .308 MWS Pictures show us your setup

[duece71]

I have both and while i have much more time on the MWS, I can opine that from going from the 18 inch SS and the 16 inch CL to the Std 13.5, I saved 12 and 5 ounces respectively off the front end of the rifle. The MLK saves around 4oz of the front end as well.

so although stripped down the 13.5 MWS noticeable heavier than the ACC, taking almost 1lb off the front of the gun is significant in terms of how it handles. the LW 13.5 would save an additional 8oz. So at that point you are within a half pound of the ACC. Can the Lighter MWS handle as well as an ACC, no but then again the ACC can't do nearly as well long range.

I think Chuck Pressberg best said it on a modcast once, once that you don't want to ask a Mk48 to do M240 stuff nor do you want to use a 240 for Mk48 stuff.

Stick with the 25 for anything mobility based, and the MWS for anything that is going to be more static. Life is good.

If running both are not an option, I think capabilities that the MWS can give you at extended ranges, is worth the 8oz hit you take in the rifles weight still make it very appealing.

I wonder if it would be worth having some of the unused rail space on the standard MWS upper milled off to reduce some of the weight. Would doing that affect some of the structural strength? Are there any comparisons on weight between the M-LOK and the standard rail version uppers?

[m4hk33]

The weight difference between the standard tailed chassis and the M Lock is 4 ounces.

If its worth it can only be determined by the shooter.

I like both. My Mloc will wear the 13.5 and the standard will be built eventually turn into a second rifle

I think that if one wants to do a lighter weight MWS, the shooter really needs to think about how they are going to be using that rifle and be mindful of everything that is on that rifle. once we start down, triple redundancy on sights, and combine it with CQB, Night fighting, and long range capability, we are left with some pretty heavy rifles that don't exactly excel in any particular area.

If one cant afford a dedicated second rifle, and wants to avoid re configuring their rifle, I would recommend just picking up a second upper and running two uppers. LMT has sales on there Chassis during the holidays and but you can put together a dedicated complete MWS upper for around 2 grand, or one has the funds they can usually find SR25 CC uppers for around 3k

[duece71]

The weight difference between the standard tailed chassis and the M Lock is 4 ounces.

If its worth it can only be determined by the shooter.

I like both. My Mloc will wear the 13.5 and the standard will be built eventually turn into a second rifle

I think that if one wants to do a lighter weight MWS, the shooter really needs to think about how they are going to be using that rifle and be mindful of everything that is on that rifle. once we start down, triple redundancy on sights, and combine it with CQB, Night fighting, and long range capability, we are left with some pretty heavy rifles that don't exactly excel in any particular area.

If one cant afford a dedicated second rifle, and wants to avoid re configuring their rifle, I would recommend just picking up a second upper and running two uppers. LMT has sales on there Chassis during the holidays and but you can put together a dedicated complete MWS upper for around 2 grand, or one has the funds they can usually find SR25 CC uppers for around 3k

Ok, sounds like I could be throwing away money. I have a 13.5 barrel but my MWS is not SBR’d so I can’t really use it until I get something pinned and welded to the front of the barrel. I might just go the SBR route with my current MWS or wait for funds and buy a second one to SBR. It’s nice to have options.

[Pappabear]

I wonder if it would be worth having some of the unused rail space on the standard MWS upper milled off to reduce some of the weight. Would doing that affect some of the structural strength? Are there any comparisons on weight between the M-LOK and the standard rail version uppers?

For me, it would be throwing $$$ away, YMMV. Not much weight to shave and could be pricey then ceracote.. I would look for another platform to drop weight. I was lucky to grab one of those Colt CM’s in 6.5 to fill that role. It’s no LMT, But lighter and more handy to me. Good luck Duece

PB

[JoshNC]

I have both and while i have much more time on the MWS, I can opine that from going from the 18 inch SS and the 16 inch CL to the Std 13.5, I saved 12 and 5 ounces respectively off the front end of the rifle. The MLK saves around 4oz of the front end as well.

so although stripped down the 13.5 MWS noticeable heavier than the ACC, taking almost 1lb off the front of the gun is significant in terms of how it handles. the LW 13.5 would save an additional 8oz. So at that point you are within a half pound of the ACC. Can the Lighter MWS handle as well as an ACC, no but then again the ACC can't do nearly as well long range.

I think Chuck Pressberg best said it on a modcast once, once that you don't want to ask a Mk48 to do M240 stuff nor do you want to use a 240 for Mk48 stuff.

Stick with the 25 for anything mobility based, and the MWS for anything that is going to be more static. Life is good.

If running both are not an option, I think capabilities that the MWS can give you at extended ranges, is worth the 8oz hit you take in the rifles weight still make it very appealing.

The MWS LW barrel is similar (a little heavier) contour overall than the KAC APC/PC. I am very tempted to have a MWS LW barrel turned down to match the CC barrel profile.

[Boba Fett v2]

The weight difference between the standard tailed chassis and the M Lock is 4 ounces.

If its worth it can only be determined by the shooter.

I like both. My Mloc will wear the 13.5 and the standard will be built eventually turn into a second rifle

I think that if one wants to do a lighter weight MWS, the shooter really needs to think about how they are going to be using that rifle and be mindful of everything that is on that rifle. once we start down, triple redundancy on sights, and combine it with CQB, Night fighting, and long range capability, we are left with some pretty heavy rifles that don't exactly excel in any particular area.

If one cant afford a dedicated second rifle, and wants to avoid re configuring their rifle, I would recommend just picking up a second upper and running two uppers. LMT has sales on there Chassis during the holidays and but you can put together a dedicated complete MWS upper for around 2 grand, or one has the funds they can usually find SR25 CC uppers for around 3k

For me, it would be throwing $$$ away, YMMV. Not much weight to shave and could be pricey then ceracote.. I would look for another platform to drop weight. I was lucky to grab one of those Colt CM’s in 6.5 to fill that role. It’s no LMT, But lighter and more handy to me. Good luck Duece

PB

Sound advice.

[duece71]

For me, it would be throwing $$$ away, YMMV. Not much weight to shave and could be pricey then ceracote.. I would look for another platform to drop weight. I was lucky to grab one of those Colt CM’s in 6.5 to fill that role. It’s no LMT, But lighter and more handy to me. Good luck Duece

PB

Curious as to why you didn’t just get a 6.5 CM barrel for your MWS?

[Sabre675]

I think it’s funny that when the MWS came out it was compared to the SR25 mainly do to weight. A fair comparison at the time based on them being genetically comparable. At the time their weight was similar on the upper end, pre and post knights ball milling, my favorite knights SR25 era. But no one really complained to much about the KAC at the time and it was consider the mobile platform...Weight isn’t so much the issue with the two platforms as is balance. The MWS or MRP platform is alway going to have a higher perceived weight because of the indexing collar. Additionally, while I can’t find the post anymore, the current ACC SR25 lineage has a lighter profile barrel than the current LMT “light weight “ barrel offerings iirc.... I believe if you were to go profile similarly you would end with similar weight at same lengths, obviously with the addition of 3-5 ounces for the indexing collar. That collar is going to always be the bane of perceived feel do to placement. The handiest 7.62 gasser I’ve felt is a coworkers predatober set up with t1+irons and it has what I would consider a pencil profile barrel in contrast to cartridge. I need to go handle that rifle again in direct comparison to my MLOK MWS. His is 14.5 pinned from LArue and mine is 14.5 milled and pinned. I’m sure his will still reign supreme, but I think my worked MLOK feels quite handy sans bipod and glass. If you want pure mobility you could run a red dot and achieve it. My work Colt sbr M16 w/full kit is 8lbs iirc, but it doesn’t feel it do to center of gravity based on it’s reduced footprint. I would be truly curious to see a current MLOK MWS, with a light weight barrel,chopped 14.5, pinned, reprofifled to pencil-ish and see where it compares in weight and performance to its peers.

[m4hk33]

I think it’s funny that when the MWS came out it was compared to the SR25 mainly do to weight. A fair comparison at the time based on them being genetically comparable. At the time their weight was similar on the upper end, pre and post knights ball milling, my favorite knights SR25 era. But no one really complained to much about the KAC at the time and it was consider the mobile platform...Weight isn’t so much the issue with the two platforms as is balance. The MWS or MRP platform is alway going to have a higher perceived weight because of the indexing collar. Additionally, while I can’t find the post anymore, the current ACC SR25 lineage has a lighter profile barrel than the current LMT “light weight “ barrel offerings iirc.... I believe if you were to go profile similarly you would end with similar weight at same lengths, obviously with the addition of 3-5 ounces for the indexing collar. That collar is going to always be the bane of perceived feel do to placement. The handiest 7.62 gasser I’ve felt is a coworkers predatober set up with t1+irons and it has what I would consider a pencil profile barrel in contrast to cartridge. I need to go handle that rifle again in direct comparison to my MLOK MWS. His is 14.5 pinned from LArue and mine is 14.5 milled and pinned. I’m sure his will still reign supreme, but I think my worked MLOK feels quite handy sans bipod and glass. If you want pure mobility you could run a red dot and achieve it. My work Colt sbr M16 w/full kit is 8lbs iirc, but it doesn’t feel it do to center of gravity based on it’s reduced footprint. I would be truly curious to see a current MLOK MWS, with a light weight barrel,chopped 14.5, pinned, reprofifled to pencil-ish and see where it compares in weight and performance to its peers.

LMT list MWS Configurations it in their spec sheet/ pdf
https://lmtdefense.com/media/2018/11/MWS-Spec-Sheet.pdf


13.5” Light 7.62 (.308) 1:10” Chrome Moly or 1:11.25” Stainless 5R CUT 32.1” / 816 mm 35.4” / 899 mm 8.74 lbs / 3.96 kg
MLK Chassis subtracts -0.262 lbs / -0.119 kg

Listed Total weight of a LW 13.5 MLK 8.5lbs
Listed weight of a ACC, 8.4lbs

So its going to be close. There are going to be trade offs with everything, so while neither the SR25/MWS are ever going to be as light as say a purpose built light weight Predatar or maybe a POF revolution, those rifles are not going to be as robust as the KAC/LMT. With the KAC you are getting a slightly lighter rifle that is a little smoother. With the MWS you gaining flexibility at a cost of weight. both are great rifles

[Sabre675]

LMT list MWS Configurations it in their spec sheet/ pdf
https://lmtdefense.com/media/2018/11/MWS-Spec-Sheet.pdf


13.5” Light 7.62 (.308) 1:10” Chrome Moly or 1:11.25” Stainless 5R CUT 32.1” / 816 mm 35.4” / 899 mm 8.74 lbs / 3.96 kg
MLK Chassis subtracts -0.262 lbs / -0.119 kg

Listed Total weight of a LW 13.5 MLK 8.5lbs
Listed weight of a ACC, 8.4lbs

So its going to be close. There are going to be trade offs with everything, so while neither the SR25/MWS are ever going to be as light as say a purpose built light weight Predatar or maybe a POF revolution, those rifles are not going to be as robust as the KAC/LMT. With the KAC you are getting a slightly lighter rifle that is a little smoother. With the MWS you gaining flexibility at a cost of weight. both are great rifles

Agreed. But as stated, they could be tit 4 tat on specs and the LMT would still feel heavier. Mine feels pretty good and it came in a few posts back in 8.7 w/ magazine on board. I think most people would say it’s favorable in feel based of context of platform. Beyond that I think the platform still has options with questions to be answered via data with even lighter profiled barrels if that is the means to an end you seek... The proof research picture on TOS, is the extreme example of a means, but I have no data to support as to whether the means was justifiable. Such ventures tend to cost at a questionable outcome when other avenues with data already exist... Even so, I’d be curious to see my proposed LW penciled 14.5 variant for both weight and accuracy.