For how much you defend them you must have got one of the three rifles they've sold that actually works as advertised.
Come back and tell us how well it's running after 5000+ rounds. My guess is that it won't even make it that far.
Even if you win the lottery and get one that works right 6061 with no anodizing will be worn through the Cerekote and rattling away long before any properly made AR-10 style rifle is showing signs of wear.
How can you discount all the negative experiences people have had with them just because you got one that works? Your rifle is the anomaly not the norm.
When the 102 was released I was really hoping that it was going to be a winner but I was skeptical because of NEA's history so I waited to see how the initial reports sounded. Glad I waited as there were so many threads with guys having issues and that was before they had even made 100 rifles. Then gen 2 came out and it was no better, just different and less compatible with aftermarket parts.
If you watch you can still find plenty of 102 problem threads popping up.
Why would anyone spend their hard earned money on a BCL when there are better options out there now for only a little more money? When it was the only option other than a Modern Hunter I understood people taking the gamble but now it just seems silly that anyone would trust BCL to make a quality product.
The biggest problem with Canadian made firearms is the firearms community. Anyone pay any attention to anything these days?
Here is the typical list of requirements I see people type on this site about non restricted semi auto rifles.
1. It has to be cheap, if it costs more than $2000 it's overpriced. This is a pretty tall order for a Canadian company considering the costs involved like North American skilled labor and shop overhead costs.
2. It has to be accurate, if it won't shoot sub moa it's no good for most. This is pretty hard to do considering a quality barrel is typically $500+ and accuracy has a lot to do with ammo selection and shooter skill as well.
3. It has to look awesome and have a nice free float forend with lots of options to hang junk off of it.
4. It has to be 100% reliable (this one I agree with)
5. It has to be light, any more than 7 pounds and guys are complaining.
So add all that up and you may figure out why corners are cut in the design, R&D, and finishing stages in order to get these things to market at the right price point. Stag is able to do it because they are a large and experienced US company, Canadian companies can't do that which is why the ATRS rifles are so expensive. If you want quality and built in Canada you have to pay for it. The BCL and Kodiak offerings are decent entry level guns but they are not high quality high end products. They were brought to market to fill a void which was an affordable non restricted semi auto battle rifle styled rifle that all the guys who wanted but couldn't afford could get into the game.
Unfortunately many new owners have never owned a rifle like these and knew nothing about maintenance, lubrication, or ammunition selection before purchase and first trip to the range which led to a lot of problems that were operator induced and blamed on the manufacturer. I see that in the posts on all these sub $2000 NR rifles not just the 102, BCL just seems to have the most problems which actually are manufacturer errors.
I have nothing against the 102 or the Stag other than what their performance history has taught me. I have experience with a Stag 10 assisting a friend with load development watching it shoot pretty small groups and run 100% reliably which is fairly common with the platform, the odd loose gas block or other small issue but nothing terribly out of the norm on average.
BCL on the other hand seems to have about five guys on here that bought one that actually works who swear it's just as good as the others and think that the reputation is unfair, I think the experiences of the majority of owners is that it is not a quality product which is evidenced by looking at the EE and seeing guys tying to sell them for a big loss and them still not selling.
You don't have to own one to have an opinion either, if someone is capable of reading and has an open mind to acknowledge the good and bad reports one can form a pretty accurate opinion of the product without owning one. Yes, there are BCL 102's that work but it sure doesn't seem like it's rare to find one that does from day one without having to be sent back.
For myself, I can see the pictures posted and read guys posts and I know which guys know nothing about their rifle other than which end the bullet comes out of and which ones truly are having issues which are manufacturer defects. I don't need to own one to be able to look at a picture posted of the inside of a bolt carrier to know that the machining is terrible and it's no wonder it burned through gas rings in 100 rounds.
Don't like what I've posted? Go back a few pages through this section and read through every thread that has something about the BCL 102 then come back and prove me wrong. How could that many people possibly have that many problems with one company's product and it all be BS just because your rifle seems to work fine for now?
Last edited:
