ATRS MV-S “Sporter” - Stripped “AR” Non-Restricted Reciever

cr5 said:
They've already said that due to the number of proprietary parts needed to assemble a MV upper you would have to buy pretty much everything but the bolt and handguard.
If you really like the rifle but want a caliber not on the menu then I see absolutely no reason you couldn't buy a complete upper with whatever barrel you think would be the easiest to sell then have a new barrel installed by Herron or some other smith willing to build you whatever caliber you want. If all you needed was a barrel and bolt installed it would be an easy conversion for any experienced AR smith.
Click to expand...

If this new MV-S is based off the Mv then the upper/lower would have to be compatible. This would then offer the opportunity of uppers that would work with the MV only without the priority stuff? Could offer some interesting solutions.

Contrary to the "hater" garbage and victim status crud that is spewed around I am actually interested in this MV-S. If it's a good competitive priced product that takes all the regular AR stuff then it's a good thing.

A BCL 102 for 308 and either a SLR or the MV-S for 223 etc. Good times for AR owners. The BCL 102 is a done deal for me in 308. I'm just waiting for the IOP and hopefully NEA/BCL does't screw things up. But the AR223/5.56 is still open for a spot in my safe. We will see.
 
cr5 said:
They've already said that due to the number of proprietary parts needed to assemble a MV upper you would have to buy pretty much everything but the bolt and handguard.
If you really like the rifle but want a caliber not on the menu then I see absolutely no reason you couldn't buy a complete upper with whatever barrel you think would be the easiest to sell then have a new barrel installed by Herron or some other smith willing to build you whatever caliber you want. If all you needed was a barrel and bolt installed it would be an easy conversion for any experienced AR smith.
Click to expand...

Ya, I realize that now.

It's just I could get a CFW barrel and 6.5 BCG for about $1000.
So if the stripped upper is worth $400 to $500 and I had a CFW barrel,BCG, gas block for $1000 to $1100.
Well you get the picture.. $1600 to $1800 .

Similar build from ATRS is about $3200.

So it's a substantial difference.

Unless I'm missing something,in my estimate.

In any event,I'm not gonna harp on it to much.
If I want a 6.5 bad enough, I'll just get the upper/lower combo.
 
Brianma65 said:
Ya, I realize that now.

It's just I could get a CFW barrel and 6.5 BCG for about $1000.
So if the stripped upper is worth $400 to $500 and I had a CFW barrel,BCG, gas block for $1000 to $1100.
Well you get the picture.. $1600 to $1800 .

Similar build from ATRS is about $3200.

So it's a substantial difference.

Unless I'm missing something,in my estimate.

In any event,I'm not gonna harp on it to much.
If I want a 6.5 bad enough, I'll just get the upper/lower combo.
Click to expand...

You may have to sell the Varmint and buy the new MV-S if you want to go that way.
The MV gets hand built and fitted where the MV-S sounds like it will be a receiver set that takes milspec parts so it's just a simple assembly. This is where some of the extra cost comes from.
You would also have to have your new carrier machined for the side charger.

I'll be following the MV-S and hopefully purchasing if/when they become available, I already have everything needed to build a nice NR 300BLK, just need a receiver set :)
 
Brian46 said:
Could have said something was in the works on a new model and stripped upper and lowers in the past when questions were asked even just a few days ago.

Seems like only threat of competition taking market share has forced the design of the MV-S........
Click to expand...

Brian46 said:
I don't need to, I asked only a few days ago about purchasing and incomplete rifle and told no by yourself, now here it is coming available. I know it wasn't me that forced your hand to reveal this to the public.
Click to expand...

alberta tactical rifle said:
You asked about a MV, which we still won't sell as stripped uppers and lowers. That has not changed along with the fact we still won't offer a 30RAR that you have been griping about for some time now.

I can pretty much assure you that we will not be the first out of the gate as we have not sent out a rifle yet for classification. We prefer to test thoroughly, then get the FRT.
Click to expand...

So he didn’t mention the word sporter which somehow caused this “miscommunication”? Was Modern Varminter vs Modern Varminter Sporter really such a big leap when asking about a product that fits the exact parameters of this new unknown product?
 
Last edited:
It is a race to see who gets my money. First manufacturer that (physically) has product on retailers shelves for me to fondle and purchase will get my money.

Then send it out to get the 30 RAR parts built.
 
Epoxy7 said:
So he didn’t mention the word sporter which somehow caused this “miscommunication”? Was Modern Varminter vs Modern Varminter Sporter really such a big leap when asking about a product that fits the exact parameters of this new unknown product?
Click to expand...

It’s ok man, relax. I think we can all read between the lines about how this came about.
 
Epoxy7 said:
If this new MV-S is based off the Mv then the upper/lower would have to be compatible. This would then offer the opportunity of uppers that would work with the MV only without the priority stuff? Could offer some interesting solutions.
Click to expand...

The MV-S is not compatible with the Modern Varmint due to the deletion of many of the proprietary parts.
 
Epoxy7 said:
So he didn’t mention the word sporter which somehow caused this “miscommunication”? Was Modern Varminter vs Modern Varminter Sporter really such a big leap when asking about a product that fits the exact parameters of this new unknown product?
Click to expand...

YOU were a large part of the reason we have kept quiet about what we have been working on for many months. Don't take this the wrong way. We learned that divulging info on projects still in the works can go completely awry, yet again.
The Sporter does NOT have an FRT yet and we are not finished testing so at the time of the call, I felt it would only create more issues. Then the competitor came out with their offering and a couple of clients who knew we had something in the works outed the project.

We still do not know IF the Sporter will get NR status, hence no pre-orders or hype. Yet
 
Brian46 said:
Then how do you honestly believe It will get a quick approval as a child to the original MV?
Click to expand...

My guess is that it's LINEAGE traces back to the current MV. Not the AR-15

As long as it carries the same family name and the same receiver shape as the current MV, a few little features being changed aren't as relevant.
 
Last edited:
Epoxy7 said:
So he didn’t mention the word sporter which somehow caused this “miscommunication”? Was Modern Varminter vs Modern Varminter Sporter really such a big leap when asking about a product that fits the exact parameters of this new unknown product?
Click to expand...

If you were in Rick's shoes knowing that the guy already owns a Varmint model and has been hounding you for some time about a caliber that you do not support in your platform would it make much difference if he did say that an incompatible product is in the works.
The new MV-s upper/lower will not work with the Modern Varmint so why release info about a product in development before the company is ready to release info.
The way CGN members have been behaving lately I wouldn't have released any information until I had a NR FRT assigned and production was underway. Now all he's going to get is a bunch of calls and email about it asking silly questions that will just bog things down.
 
Brian46 said:
Then how do you honestly believe It will get a quick approval as a child to the original MV?
Click to expand...

He said before that it is based off the MV but is not compatible as the spring loaded rear takedown has been removed to make room for standard AR triggers. It will still have the same geometry as the MV meaning it is still also incompatible with an AR upper/lower.
 
Brian46 said:
Then how do you honestly believe It will get a quick approval as a child to the original MV?
Click to expand...

It is a DIRECT variant ( yes I will play the variant game against them if need be), only some of the features and proprietary parts have been deleted or altered. The shape is the same and manner of mating is similar but different and less costly to make.
I am NOT going to get into all of what we have done different on a forum for obvious reasons.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom