ATRS Modern Sporter build

bananarama said:
Jeez what is going on here!!!!
Click to expand...

oa2VHTBh.jpg
 
Let's compare apples to apples here... a restricted Bushmaster ACR with a barrel length the same as a comparably set up Bushmaster AR are NOT identical in capabilities. I'm a hard-core AR guy, and I really don't care about the quick-change barrel or caliber swaps, or the NR-ness. What I care about is reliability, ergonomics, accuracy, and weight. Based on the VASTLY superior ergos, ACR is better. The only reason I don't train with an ACR is because I'm so accustomed to the manual of arms for the AR platform, and I'd rather just refine those skills as they're more useful to me day-to-day.

ACR reliability, in my experience just as good as the high-end ARs I've seen them put up against.

ACR ergonomics are damn near perfect:
ACR charging handle design and ergonomics are far superior.
ACR ergonomics in bolt catch, far superior
ACR ergonomics in bolt release, far superior
ACR stock design is FAR superior, without that stupid-assed fixed AR buffer tube.

Accuracy is adequate, but the AR may well have an edge

Weight is comparable in a comparable configuration.

ACR is a more modern, BETTER design. Agreed that Bushmaster isn't the right company to produce it, but comparing ACR to a Bushmaster AR I'd take an ACR in a second. If Colt Canada was producing the ACR instead of Bushmaster, I probably wouldn't even own an AR... I'd switch over to the ACR wholesale.

And the only reason "it isn't mass produced to drive down cost" is because BUSHMASTER OWNS THE DAMN THING SO NOBODY ELSE CAN.

And finally, with regard to Dilligaf "completing a nondescript amount of use with an ACR" (and I think you meant "indeterminate"?)... fact is he's trained with the ACR actually quite a lot. It has definitely shown its strengths in hard use.

But whatever. You can base your opinion on your very brief experience with a heavy, non-resticted ACR that you haven't actually trained with. Who am I to argue with you.


yohann160 said:
Considering the AR and ACR have identical capabilities, yes the superior option is the one that is cheaper and lighter. The ACR is more expensive because nobody wants one therefore it isn't mass produced to drive down cost.

If the ACR had something worthwhile to offer, it would have greater success. Not just a cult following on the ACR forum and a few dozen Canadians who occasionally shoot their custom NR ACRs outside of a range.
Click to expand...

Oh, wait, crap, this thread was supposed to be about the ATRS gun! I'll shut up now.
 
Last edited:
CobraGT said:
But whatever. You can base your opinion on your very brief experience with a heavy, non-resticted ACR that you haven't actually trained with. Who am I to argue with you.
Click to expand...

This is another thing. Guys always pick up a factory DMR or even the factory 16" with the tri-rail, and say its too heavy. They never consider how it could be improved upon. Its rediculous because the same guy has no problem swaping parts on an AR to to lighten it from its factory quad rail DMR version.

One thing I will say the AR and other DI designs have as an advantage is a more even weight distribution, which especially helps with our Canadian 18.5" barrels for NR.
 
yohann160 said:
Meanwhile, with every announcement of a NR AR15 clone, more and more ACR's appear on the EE at the 1800$ mark. Grab 'em while they are hot!
Click to expand...


So, just because people are doing what they do every time there is an announcement of a new non restricted rifle coming soon that makes the ACR a POS?
I really don't know what it is you don't like about it, the entire design philosophy was to keep the best parts of the AR-15 and improve everything else, to build a rifle that was superior to the AR-15 in every way.
I think they accomplished that even though it's a little heavier than a standard AR. Is the ACR heavier than an XCR? a SCAR? a Swiss Arms Black Special? APC? Any other modern battle type rifle?
You could take any rifle available and put it up against any other rifle and find something about it that someone would find better or more suitable to their needs than the other one, that doesn't make the other one crap, it just means that for that persons perceived needs that rifle is a better fit for them.

Going by your own criteria does being lighter, cheaper, just as accurate, and just as reliable make my AR180B-2 better than an AR-15?

You act like there can be only one good rifle and all the rest have to be crap. Are you not capable of seeing the positive attributes at all? Liking the AR doesn't mean that you have to hate everything else, it's called new technology and it's a good thing. I love the AR as well but that doesn't make me shut my eyes to other options and say that everything else is garbage. You held and maybe shot one example of an ACR and that happened to be the silliest version with the fixed stock, heavy barrel, and stupid quad rail, then you compare it to a what? A 16 inch M4 profile barreled base model AR with plastic forend? Of course it feels heavy compared to that. Try comparing it to an AR with a PRS stock, 20 inch heavy barrel and quad rail forend and then compare balance and weight.

I love my ACR, I love my AR180B-2, and I love my AR's, when I buy a MV-s receiver set I won't be selling any of the others, I can love them all for their individual strengths and forgive them for their weaknesses.
 
Last edited:
cr5 said:
So, just because people are doing what they do every time there is an announcement of a new non restricted rifle coming soon that makes the ACR a POS?
I really don't know what it is you don't like about it, the entire design philosophy was to keep the best parts of the AR-15 and improve everything else, to build a rifle that was superior to the AR-15 in every way.
I think they accomplished that even though it's a little heavier than a standard AR. Is the ACR heavier than an XCR? a SCAR? a Swiss Arms Black Special? APC? Any other modern battle type rifle?
You could take any rifle available and put it up against any other rifle and find something about it that someone would find better or more suitable to their needs than the other one, that doesn't make the other one crap, it just means that for that persons perceived needs that rifle is a better fit for them.

Going by your own criteria does being lighter, cheaper, just as accurate, and just as reliable make my AR180B-2 better than an AR-15?

You act like there can be only one good rifle and all the rest have to be crap. Are you not capable of seeing the positive attributes at all? Liking the AR doesn't mean that you have to hate everything else, it's called new technology and it's a good thing. I love the AR as well but that doesn't make me shut my eyes to other options and say that everything else is garbage. You held and maybe shot one example of an ACR and that happened to be the silliest version with the fixed stock, heavy barrel, and stupid quad rail, then you compare it to a what? A 16 inch M4 profile barreled base model AR with plastic forend? Of course it feels heavy compared to that. Try comparing it to an AR with a PRS stock, 20 inch heavy barrel and quad rail forend and then compare balance and weight.

I love my ACR, I love my AR180B-2, and I love my AR's, when I buy a MV-s receiver set I won't be selling any of the others, I can love them all for their individual strengths and forgive them for their weaknesses.
Click to expand...

It means that they are dropping the gun they bought solely based on classification in favour of the gun they would have bought in the first place. If it weren't for our silly laws, the appeal of the ACR in Canada would be much like its appeal to Americans. That is, much less and restricted to a very small niche market who believe it has something to offer that the AR15 doesn't provide.

AR180B-2... I haven't looked into those much but I suspect the AR15 is superior in every way.

You mention the SCAR. The SCAR program was prompted by US SOF being sick of relying on the Big Army to authorize every minute change they wanted to make on the M4. Colt owned the M4 and would only change what the Big Army required them to change. Alas, even though the FN SCAR-L was adopted it was also promptly dropped when it became obvious that it didn't out-perform M4's enough to justify its existence.

When I compare the bushmaster ACR to a bushmaster AR15, I compare them both at their factory 16'' bbl ''vanilla'' states.

To sum up, ATRS is going to make a metric ton of money if they mass produce these receiver sets.
 
yohann160 said:
It means that they are dropping the gun they bought solely based on classification in favour of the gun they would have bought in the first place. If it weren't for our silly laws, the appeal of the ACR in Canada would be much like its appeal to Americans. That is, much less and restricted to a very small niche market who believe it has something to offer that the AR15 doesn't provide.

AR180B-2... I haven't looked into those much but I suspect the AR15 is superior in every way.

You mention the SCAR. The SCAR program was prompted by US SOF being sick of relying on the Big Army to authorize every minute change they wanted to make on the M4. Colt owned the M4 and would only change what the Big Army required them to change. Alas, even though the FN SCAR-L was adopted it was also promptly dropped when it became obvious that it didn't out-perform M4's enough to justify its existence.

When I compare the bushmaster ACR to a bushmaster AR15, I compare them both at their factory 16'' bbl ''vanilla'' states.

To sum up, ATRS is going to make a metric ton of money if they mass produce these receiver sets.
Click to expand...

AR180B-2 vs AR, you'd be wrong. Eugene Stoner designed the AR-18 to replace the AR-15/M-16 as a more reliable and cheaper to produce rifle but by the time it was ready for military trials the US military had already invested in the M-16 and just like the SCAR and every other rifle that's come along since adopting the AR it may have been better but it wasn't so superior to the AR that it was worth starting over with a new platform. The AR is a great rifle but it is far from the best rifle available. The military not replacing it has little to do with it's combat effectiveness and a lot to do with politics and finances.

I only mentioned the SCAR as a similar platform that is generally well received that weighs about the same as the ACR that you say is too heavy.

So a 55 year old design, base model direct impingement rifle with plastic handguard is a fair weight comparison to a piston driven modern rifle that weighs very close to other similar rifles? Sure, if you just look at weight the AR is superior but the ACR beats it badly in ergo's. The way you're comparing things a Kel-Tek SU-16 is superior to many of the rifles available today.

I think ATRS will continue to sell their products as fast as they can produce them but it's no different than them making the Modern Hunter or the Modern Varmint. Once the initial rush passes things will settle out and it will just be another option most people pass on because it's going to cost them $2000+ to build one. I'm glad they're going to be producing these receiver sets and I'll be buying one myself but they won't be selling thousands of them like you seem to think they will. I use $2000 as a price even though I know a rifle could be put together for less but if you are going to pay $1000 for a receiver set I can't understand why anyone would put a $100 Norinco barrel in it or any other crap parts.
Just remember, a few years ago the Swiss Arms rifles were one of the most sought after non restricted rifles we could buy and after 15ish years of importing them there was only about 1500 of them in circulation in Canada according to the importer. We just don't have the market here to support shops becoming millionaires manufacturing a single rifle.
 
Last edited:
yohann160 said:
It means that they are dropping the gun they bought solely based on classification in favour of the gun they would have bought in the first place. If it weren't for our silly laws, the appeal of the ACR in Canada would be much like its appeal to Americans. That is, much less and restricted to a very small niche market who believe it has something to offer that the AR15 doesn't provide.

AR180B-2... I haven't looked into those much but I suspect the AR15 is superior in every way.

You mention the SCAR. The SCAR program was prompted by US SOF being sick of relying on the Big Army to authorize every minute change they wanted to make on the M4. Colt owned the M4 and would only change what the Big Army required them to change. Alas, even though the FN SCAR-L was adopted it was also promptly dropped when it became obvious that it didn't out-perform M4's enough to justify its existence.

When I compare the bushmaster ACR to a bushmaster AR15, I compare them both at their factory 16'' bbl ''vanilla'' states.

To sum up, ATRS is going to make a metric ton of money if they mass produce these receiver sets.
Click to expand...

People always want the forbidden fruit. People will always sell their current rifle to try something new, its the spice of life.
 
cr5 said:
AR180B-2 vs AR, you'd be wrong. Eugene Stoner designed the AR-18 to replace the AR-15/M-16 as a more reliable and cheaper to produce rifle but by the time it was ready for military trials the US military had already invested in the M-16 and just like the SCAR and every other rifle that's come along since adopting the AR it may have been better but it wasn't so superior to the AR that it was worth starting over with a new platform. The AR is a great rifle but it is far from the best rifle available. The military not replacing it has little to do with it's combat effectiveness and a lot to do with politics and finances.

I only mentioned the SCAR as a similar platform that is generally well received that weighs about the same as the ACR that you say is too heavy.

So a 55 year old design, base model direct impingement rifle with plastic handguard is a fair weight comparison to a piston driven modern rifle that weighs very close to other similar rifles? Sure, if you just look at weight the AR is superior but the ACR beats it badly in ergo's. The way you're comparing things a Kel-Tek SU-16 is superior to many of the rifles available today.

I think ATRS will continue to sell their products as fast as they can produce them but it's no different than them making the Modern Hunter or the Modern Varmint. Once the initial rush passes things will settle out and it will just be another option most people pass on because it's going to cost them $2000+ to build one. I'm glad they're going to be producing these receiver sets and I'll be buying one myself but they won't be selling thousands of them like you seem to think they will. I use $2000 as a price even though I know a rifle could be put together for less but if you are going to pay $1000 for a receiver set I can't understand why anyone would put a $100 Norinco barrel in it or any other crap parts.
Just remember, a few years ago the Swiss Arms rifles were one of the most sought after non restricted rifles we could buy and after 15ish years of importing them there was only about 1500 of them in circulation in Canada according to the importer. We just don't have the market here to support shops becoming millionaires manufacturing a single rifle.
Click to expand...

At 1000$ for stripped receivers I agree it's a tough proposition to make, especially with Wolverine's new offering coming in at the 1000$ mark for a complete rifle. Especially when you know how cheap actual AR receiver sets are.

As far as the other rifles you mentioned, I will have to default to my previous comment; had they anything worthwhile to offer they would crush AR sales in the US civilian market. Of course, as of now they still don't.
 
The WK180-C looks horrible and cheap. The only reason guys are in love with it is the price point. Nothing more.

Ive tried real 180s and you dont see me lining up to buy one.

Its a nice novelty rifle, im sure it will bring smiles to new shooters or people that just like pinking.
 
Last edited:
yohann160 said:
At 1000$ for stripped receivers I agree it's a tough proposition to make, especially with Wolverine's new offering coming in at the 1000$ mark for a complete rifle. Especially when you know how cheap actual AR receiver sets are.

As far as the other rifles you mentioned, I will have to default to my previous comment; had they anything worthwhile to offer they would crush AR sales in the US civilian market. Of course, as of now they still don't.
Click to expand...

You don't understand that the AR is as popular as it is in the US because it's the rifle their military uses, it's cheap, and the aftermarket is insane. It's not because it's the best rifle ever created by mankind.

DILLIGAF said:
The WK180-C looks horrible and cheap. The only reason guys are in love with it is the price point. Nothing more.

Ive tried real 180s and you dont see me lining up to buy one.

Its a nice novelty rifle, im sure it will bring smiles to new shooters or people that just like pinking.
Click to expand...

Lol, the pics posted looked better than I was expecting. The SKS chassis I handled from Kodiak was way worse.
Agree that the biggest selling point is the price.
I like my 180B a lot and I doubt that I'll ever sell it but I do realize it's not a high end rifle, the 180C is nice being all CNC aluminum but I'm guessing it will be heavier than my rifle at 6.8 pounds dry and I have decent built in irons so no need to add weight with an optic like the 180C.
 
Last edited:
cr5 said:
You don't understand that the AR is as popular as it is in the US because it's the rifle their military uses, it's cheap, and the aftermarket is insane. It's not because it's the best rifle ever created by mankind.



Lol, the pics posted looked better than I was expecting. The SKS chassis I handled from Kodiak was way worse.
Agree that the biggest selling point is the price.
I like my 180B a lot and I doubt that I'll ever sell it but I do realize it's not a high end rifle, the 180C is nice being all CNC aluminum but I'm guessing it will be heavier than my rifle at 6.8 pounds dry and I have decent built in irons so no need to add weight with an optic like the 180C.
Click to expand...

There is a strong correlation between being the service rifle since the 1960s, huge aftermarket support and being a superior rifle.
 
Well took a different direction with my build. Half the stuff I ordered was on B/O so I decided to switch up some components.

They had all this stuff in stock :cool: and it fit on 2 orders :)

Strike Industries Ultimate Dust Cover
Raptor Ambidextrous Charging Handle Black
Battle Arms Development Lightweight Ambidextrous Safety Selector
Battle Arms Development Enhanced Bolt Stop
Primary Weapons Systems Enhanced Gen 2 Buffer Tube Ratchet Lock Nut End Plate
V Seven Weapon Systems Ultra-Light Takedown & Pivot Pin Set Blk
Brownells Lightweight Bolt Carrier Group 5.56x45mm Nickel Boron
V Seven Weapon Systems Ultra-Light Magazine Catch
JP Silent Captured Spring Gen 2
MFT Battlelink Minimalist Stock Collapsible Mil-Spec BLK
WMD Gas Tube Nitromet Mid-Length
JP 2-PC Detent Gas Block Low Profile .750 Steel Black
Midwest AR-15/M16 12.625" Free Float M-lok Handguard
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom