Like my Siberian a lot

Testing can be cumulative with many range trips or it can be intensive. How a rifle performs, its accuracy, ergonomics are worth exploring.
Burning a thousand rounds through a rifle not even equipped with sights does test basic function. I am looking forward to a detailed explanation for what allowed over insertion of magazines, caused light primer strikes and "double feeds". Without a determination of the specific root causes of these failures not much is gained apart from justifying a catchy header like "awful results".
I have no great amount of personal experience with AR-18 based rifles. First one I handled was a Costa Mesa. That was when they were first on the market. Since that time I've had contact with Sterling and Howa made versions. No experience whatsoever with 180Bs or any of the Canadian made versions. A non-restricted rifle is appealing. So, I am interested in learning about them.
 
2" at 100 sounds pretty good actually, that's nice to hear considering the unexciting accuracy reported with these other 180 clones. But is that every time, or an average, or did you have the occasional flyer you decided didn't matter? Some target photos would help. If you keep us updated with round counts and problems/lack thereof by editing the first post, it'd be interesting to see how it does over time.

I had a remlin that didn't even survive one range outing so I don't see anything wrong with a "first impressions review"
 
Last edited:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/18LDJaUb5LaiAx2gdqGpgPp9Sx0objbfh/view

Basically what it says, also indicating that people will not leave a negative review due to incentives received.

I have yet to see a more biased and accusatory review, as Tiriaq also pointed out, there is no analysis of reasons for the encountered problems.

I think most people already realized that you are very biased, for whatever reason and indicating that people are getting paid to leave good reviews (or not negative ones) is just the tip of the ice berg.

You failed, most people don't believe your "unbias", get over it.
 
fritzhanzel said:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/18LDJaUb5LaiAx2gdqGpgPp9Sx0objbfh/view

Basically what it says, also indicating that people will not leave a negative review due to incentives received.

I have yet to see a more biased and accusatory review, as Tiriaq also pointed out, there is no analysis of reasons for the encountered problems.

I think most people already realized that you are very biased, for whatever reason and indicating that people are getting paid to leave good reviews (or not negative ones) is just the tip of the ice berg.

You failed, most people don't believe your "unbias", get over it.
Click to expand...

English is my first language and I can't confidently say I understand your comment. Mind providing context or a rewrite for our ESL users?

Thanks

-Mansour
 
fritzhanzel said:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/18LDJaUb5LaiAx2gdqGpgPp9Sx0objbfh/view

Basically what it says, also indicating that people will not leave a negative review due to incentives received.

I have yet to see a more biased and accusatory review, as Tiriaq also pointed out, there is no analysis of reasons for the encountered problems.

I think most people already realized that you are very biased, for whatever reason and indicating that people are getting paid to leave good reviews (or not negative ones) is just the tip of the ice berg.

You failed, most people don't believe your "unbias", get over it.
Click to expand...

Someone posts a positive "review" after putting basically no rounds through a rifle you like: "Ah yes this is fantastic, the gun is amazing."

Several people test the rifle over a few thousand rounds and find out that it is made like crap and fails a lot: "You are biased and you just hate the gun."

There's definitely someone biased here, and I don't think it's MeatShower.
 
Yes it is a review. 100 is not basically no rounds.

I just wanted to provide my initial impressions of this rifle to counter a lot of negative reviews and comments. Some of these come from people with no personal experience and do not supply any background information about themselves that would allow a reader to determine if their view has any worth.

I fully expected a lot of negative comments but it hardly encourages me to post further. I am always perturbed when these threads get personal and go way off topic. We are supposed to be a supportive like minded community of enthusiasts promoting our chosen interest. We are at a time when our sport is under great threat yet we seem more interested in fighting among ourselves than being respectful.
 
MrMeatShower said:
I'd say the hypocrisy is quite frustrating. I am not discounting the OPs review. What he posted was his experience. Although in my opinion (and quite a few others would agree), 100 rounds is not a lot of ammo nor is it enough rounds to get a true feel of what the rifle can and will do when it comes to reliability or characteristics. But the community seems to praise that type of review for some reason, even though there is no real evidence that the test/review even took place. Techninally it's just hear/say. I will admit though, that I don't deny the dude went out and shot 100 rounds with no failure. But someone posts a video showing each and every failure that a rifle has in a stress test and the community instantly tries to discount it or call it fake or find a way to discredit it, even though it was all caught in 60fps-1080p for all to see. I am well aware not all will like the presentation or personalities displayed in the video. But every single round sent through the rifle was filmed as was every failure.

But for some dude who was leaving comments like "Do a Bren 2 and I will you serious" or "no monie" or " always love new user accounts claiming to be experts." and then make a post saying "
What you are doing now is disruptive and essentially trolling.".........bruh pick up the phone because the pot is calling you with some information on colour.
Click to expand...

You guys looked like you were having fun doing your review.... I wouldn't worry about it too much, if you post something your going to get comments good and bad, that's just the way things go online..... try and keep an open mind and some of the negative posts might help you improve if the plan is to build a youtube channel.

As far as the 100 rounds goes, I have a hard time believing that anyone would disagree that it's not a lot of ammo. That seems obvious, even without the OP pointing it out himself.

I've had new guns that choked on the first magazine and needed a break in period to run smoothly, so the first 100 shots with out a hickup is not nothing that's for sure.

Not everyone needs a go to war rifle, I think many are happy to shoot a box or 2 of ammo in between a few other guns and then take it home, clean it and admire it..... and who am I to suggest that there's anything wrong with that? Fortunately we are not in a war at this moment in Canada and there are plenty of lee enfields kicking around though the ammo is getting kind of scarce.... :)
 
MrMeatShower said:
I'd say the hypocrisy is quite frustrating. ... Techninally it's just hear/say. ...
Click to expand...

Here comes the semantics police...

It is not hypocrisy: It's double standards. (And it's not personal, it's the world we live in. Unfortunately, you can't live in a glass house and expect people not to throw rocks at you.)

It is not hearsay, it's a first-hand report. Same thing as testimony in court.


The main "problem" with this review and with your review on the other thread is the type of generalizations that are drawn from the observed data. It seems to be human nature that people often try to generalize beyond the limitations of the data. Very often, it is not the people providing the data that are making the (incorrect) generalizations. Those who take the time to collect the data are usually more aware of its limitations.

Study X (with its own method and a sample size of 1), when added to Study Y (with its own method and a sample size of 1) tells us nothing more than two marginally useful results: This review tells us that BCL might be capable of making one good rifle. Your review tells us that BCL is capable of making one lemon. In either case, so what? The same could be said of almost any production run of any item in any industry.

You usually don't need to burn up 1000rds to be able to make either of these observations. But you'd think BCL would be very interested in anyone doing large round count beta testing for them, for free.
 
55recce said:
... We are supposed to be a supportive like minded community of enthusiasts promoting our chosen interest. We are at a time when our sport is under great threat yet we seem more interested in fighting among ourselves than being respectful.
Click to expand...

That's my wish as well. But if wishes were horses, beggars would ride.

For lots of people (here and everywhere), stroking their ego by creating conflict and controversy is the goal.

Thanks for posting your review, and thanks for remaining constructive.
 
MrMeatShower said:
I'd say the hypocrisy is quite frustrating. I am not discounting the OPs review. What he posted was his experience. Although in my opinion (and quite a few others would agree), 100 rounds is not a lot of ammo nor is it enough rounds to get a true feel of what the rifle can and will do when it comes to reliability or characteristics. But the community seems to praise that type of review for some reason, even though there is no real evidence that the test/review even took place. Techninally it's just hear/say. I will admit though, that I don't deny the dude went out and shot 100 rounds with no failure. But someone posts a video showing each and every failure that a rifle has in a stress test and the community instantly tries to discount it or call it fake or find a way to discredit it, even though it was all caught in 60fps-1080p for all to see. I am well aware not all will like the presentation or personalities displayed in the video. But every single round sent through the rifle was filmed as was every failure.

But for some dude who was leaving comments like "Do a Bren 2 and I will you serious" or "no monie" or " always love new user accounts claiming to be experts." and then make a post saying "
What you are doing now is disruptive and essentially trolling.".........bruh pick up the phone because the pot is calling you with some information on colour.
Click to expand...

watched the clip, was wondering how many of those stoppages can be magazine or ammo related? as a high standard pistol owner the magazine can make or break the function of the gun. magazines that cause issues get put into the spare parts bin. I'm also quite selective with ammo, why run stuff the gun doesn't like. could your siberian test be something of a selection process the same way, with failures being pinpointed to certain magazines or ammo? the hammer pin? have broken a few, could very well be dubious quality, I always used DD or aero stuff, dpms works if you can't find anything else. go back and review your notes and get back to us. if the failures are random the test is legit, but if it can be traced to crap magazines or ammo rerun the test with suitable magazines/ammo.
 
i think the problem is that the op is obviously a boomer fud. otherwise the gun would have broken and he would have hated it.

fundamentally, he does not understand the modern manual of arms.

firstly, to understand the modern manual of arms, you must subscribe to the concept 'in video games things have no weight'. this is similar to the related 'in airsoft things are made of plastic'. once you understand this you can make comments like:

- the receiver should have an extra 1.5" of metal on top so that i don't have to buy a riser. because in video games things have no weight.
- they say it is made for the backcountry, which means it should run thousands of rounds without cleaning. because i can carry thousands of rounds into the backcountry on my back (but no cleaning kit). because in video games things have no weight (and don't require cleaning).

with that covered we can move on to the modern manual of arms:
1) do a five round mag dump from the hip. optional: folded stock (this allows you to complain later if the gun cannot fire with stock folded, which is a problem because, you know, parachuting and stuff).
2) limp wrist the charging handle on reload and cause misfire, because in the modern manual of arms you don't need to understand how the firearm actually operates.
3) stare blankly at jam for minimum one minute in hopes that it fixes itself, because in the modern manual of arms you don't need to know how to clear jams.
4) if staring doesn't work add too much oil, because in the modern manual of arms the only thing you should need to do is add too much oil.
5) if adding too much oil doesn't work move on to P00PY PANTS operation.

P00PY PANTS operation:
1) log on to reddit, instagram, tiktok, facebook, etc.
2) whine that poly took your AR away because the fools think that all black rifles are 'military grade'.
3) whine that the black rifle you just bought is a piece of crap because it isn't 'military grade'.
4) make sure everyone knows your credentials are bonafide because once a year you sleep outside in the dirt with your rifle.
5) if anyone questions you encourage echo chamber entourage to log in and shout down criticism.

if the boomer fud op had followed the modern manual of arms he would know that the rifle is a piece of crap and this thread would be full of agreement and brothership. instead it has degenerated into angst and ridicule. sad.
 
OP, glad you like your new rifle! Any chance you can try shooting supported off the mag (mag-podded) next time out? I've yet to talk to anyone who has a Siberian who can do this without stoppages and the same happened to me on a few samples that I tried. I'm trying to figure out if it's a design issue or an issue with specific samples (or specific brands of mags although I tried quite a few). In my experience, metal USGI mags performed the best (2 failures in a dozen or so mags) and Pmags were much worse (1 failure per mag, generally). Mostly it's a failure to go fully into battery although sometimes it's a failure to strip and chamber a round.

I'd also suggest checking your mag release and potentially removing the "pad" and reinstalling with loctite. It's fastened on with a tiny allen screw and tends to come loose.
 
barsik said:
watched the clip, was wondering how many of those stoppages can be magazine or ammo related? as a high standard pistol owner the magazine can make or break the function of the gun. magazines that cause issues get put into the spare parts bin. I'm also quite selective with ammo, why run stuff the gun doesn't like. could your siberian test be something of a selection process the same way, with failures being pinpointed to certain magazines or ammo? the hammer pin? have broken a few, could very well be dubious quality, I always used DD or aero stuff, dpms works if you can't find anything else. go back and review your notes and get back to us. if the failures are random the test is legit, but if it can be traced to crap magazines or ammo rerun the test with suitable magazines/ammo.
Click to expand...

Ammo type and mags used are discussed in the video as well as the other Siberian thread started by Bratwurst
 
I am assuming that when stoppages occurred the magazine and ammunition being used were recorded. This information would be important when analyzing stoppages to determine their causes.
 
tiriaq said:
I am assuming that when stoppages occurred the magazine and ammunition being used were recorded. This information would be important when analyzing stoppages to determine their causes.
Click to expand...

I feel like we’ve hijacked 55recce’s thread enough and we should continue this on the other thread. But yes, they both were
 
.....and it was so much fun being told that maybe I made up the whole thing, that the new math suggest that 100=0 and that we should continue to knock the scheisser out of each other rather than trying to respectfully promote our sport

I am thinking of starting a new thread on good things that the liberals under Trudeau have done for our country...what do you think......
 
55recce said:
.....and it was so much fun being told that maybe I made up the whole thing, that the new math suggest that 100=0 and that we should continue to knock the scheisser out of each other rather than trying to respectfully promote our sport

I am thinking of starting a new thread on good things that the liberals under Trudeau have done for our country...what do you think......
Click to expand...

Read my reply to the other thread as meaty suggested (rightfully) not to ruin this one.

Just read it.

And meaty, btw, my name scianna is as fake as 54, I am not born in 1954, no need to call me grandpa, thank you.

Kind of hard if you are an honest person, go to reddit, type guns Canada, and you will see.

My experience with BCL is documented here:

https://www.canadiangunnutz.com/for...o-buy-insurance-at-Canada-Post-update-post-48

That's why I asked in the other thread the questions I asked.

And to huntinggearguy:

I watched the video you posted and your comments, also comments from users. I also watched many of your other videos. You lost credibility with your review about the Siberian. Nobody is saying that it did not have birthing problems but did you verify everything you were told? Did you contact BCL about your issues or did you just take one man's word for granted? - sure he is a big talker and poster and can influence a lot people. Be careful whom you listen to. Always verify and do your own homework.
 
Last edited:
scianna54 said:
Read my reply to the other thread as meaty suggested (rightfully) not to ruin this one.

Just read it.

And meaty, btw... (proceeds to hijack thread with more drama)
Click to expand...


The proper response to someone giving their first impressions of a gun should be something along the lines of

"Others have reported problems with the rifle, so be sure to keep us posted! Glad you're enjoying yours so far!"

One of our members has enthusiastically shared their experience and all half of you can think to do is throw mud at him and eachother. Give your heads a shake because it's embarrassing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom