Bushmaster responds to questions about ACR

[Gunslinger]

Well on the bright side we've got more options than ever before. If Remington wants to screw customers we can always buy from the Italians (potential availability of the ARX), and I think Beretta's quality control is streaks ahead of Remington, especially since Cerberus bean counters have been involved. Then again we should also support guys like Robarm, smaller companies producing unique products on their own steam at reasonable cost with good service. Interesting stuff comming out the last few years.

 

[RaTa]

It is another case of Beta by fire using consumer.

Can you tell me a situation where this was not the case?

Companies to the best they can to deliver sound products they cannot anticipate how all the details will work out in the real world. Look at the G36, M16, and pretty well every other rifle made the trials are done by somebody and the company adjusts to make up for the issues that may arise. If Bushmaster doesn't make sales from the venture early on then they will lose their market interest and their investment may never be returned.

I was pretty impressed with the ACR but for the safety selector and this was only an issue with some of the ones at SHOT, I did like the SCAR better and the Beretta looked promising as well. Heck the only one that any of us can even chance owning is the SCAR right now. Give the ACR 5 years to develop and I bet you have a really nice solid gun. The firearms industry is in a state of transition now and I think things are about to take another fundamental leap.

I want this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T912cir0njs&feature=related

Apparently it will be released in 2011 as the latest edition of their new vehicle line, first a motorcycle and now a truck. WHAT WILL THEY THINK OF NEXT!?!?

 

[Raytheon]

Because that is what end-users asked for - what people want and the reality of what it delivers may not be 100% aligned. The mechanism of a a reciprocating charging handle is much simpler and can be used as a FA.

AK, SIG, FNC, FAMAS, SA80, G36, Beretta ARX 160....all have reciprocating charging handles on the left or foldable - it is just that the American vision (or obsessions) of "right side" reciprocating handle does not work out, which was probably figured out to be unworkable by the Europeans long time ago.

The simple remedy is to put the handle on the left instead of the right, which is readily doable with SCAR.

Thanks for the information greentips. My opinion is that firearms generally should not have a forward assist. I think it would better to clear the round instead of trying to jam a round into battery. Using forward assist to help close the bolt after doing a press check is probably all I would consider but would not be needed if people did not "ride" the charging handle and instead just release it.

I've heard unconfirmed reports that the reciprocating charging handle can cause some problems interfering with cycling when firing in unconventional positions such as some urban prone positions as well as kicking up dust and dirt in front of the shooter.

Give the ACR 5 years to develop and I bet you have a really nice solid gun. The firearms industry is in a state of transition now and I think things are about to take another fundamental leap.

Unfortunately, I have to agree that it will likely take at least 5 years to develop into a solid combat rifle. I think it does take time especially for combat rifles to fully meet and exploit the design potential.

If you can elaborate, what transition and fundamental leap are you referring towards? Modular systems? Conglomerates, like the Cerebus/Freedom group? Or licensing of production of designs?

 

[RaTa]

My guess and its just that, is caseless ammo. Soldiers as always are carrying too much weight so the goal is gonna be finding ways to reduce that. Beware however, the first attempts are gonna suck .

Modular is great for guys like us who are into firearms and upper tier guys who have the skills, ability and training to make use of it, but for the average soldier the practical limits are quickly realized. Complexity is a killer. Gun guys always think in terms of what would be cool, militaries think in terms of what the soldier can understand. Successful rifles have and continue to appeal to the lower common denominator.

I see a caseless fed rifle in a compact bullpup type format, but thats a long way off. By that time the Antichrist will have brought us all peace and we won't need guns.

 

[RaTa]

The pricing is BS. How can a small company like RobArms develop and bring to market the XCR for less than the ACR. The ACR has many more molded parts so should be a lot cheaper. I call BS! They can keep it at anything over $1500.

The XCR although cool is hardly an example of forward thinking. If all you wanna make is an aluminum one trick pony for only the civilian market the development costs are pretty low. If you wanna make a rifle that includes modern materials and manufacturing techniques targeted to the military the development costs climb fast.

 

[Raytheon]

My guess and its just that, is caseless ammo. Soldiers as always are carrying too much weight so the goal is gonna be finding ways to reduce that. Beware however, the first attempts are gonna suck .

Modular is great for guys like us who are into firearms and upper tier guys who have the skills, ability and training to make use of it, but for the average soldier the practical limits are quickly realized. Complexity is a killer.

If the next generation of combat rifle (4th generation?) or modified 3rd generation rifles such as the ACR using caseless ammo would be interesting. Didn't HK experiment with caseless ammo with the failed G11. I saw an old video on it supposedly they went with caseless ammo because it allowed for them to achieve an extremely fast burst fire rate that allowed small three round groups at longer distances. Since there was no delay to eject empty cases they could increase the rate of fire.

I wonder how well the ACR will initially sell? The steep cost per unit I would think put off many individuals and governments. For the basic $2700 cost one could get a reliable and accurate Noveske N4 with some change to spare. A BCM build would leave one with money to spare for either ammo, targets, optics and or a mix other gear.

I pretty sure some will buy it just like some are buying the FN SCAR at such high prices but likely not the average shooter.

 

[FPembleton]

Can you tell me a situation where this was not the case?

I'd rather a government or the company do the testing for me at this kind of price. At the price Bushmaster has put on the ACR, it should be bug free. It doesn't help that every disappointing change that Bushmaster has made has been made as a cost-saving measure on the production side. How can anyone with a brain in their head not feel like they're being ripped off? That civilian "enhanced" handguard is a POS, and every selector switch that I flipped at SHOT was awful.

There's no point in even thinking about ACR this year, or maybe even next year. I've lost all interest and for now, it's only good for entertainment value to see how bad of a job Bushmaster is doing in damage control.

 

[Tbolt]

Yeah but with the G11 I thought it was cost considerations due to reunification that stopped it and not a failure on the part of the rifle?

If the next generation of combat rifle (4th generation?) or modified 3rd generation rifles such as the ACR using caseless ammo would be interesting. Didn't HK experiment with caseless ammo with the failed G11. I saw an old video on it supposedly they went with caseless ammo because it allowed for them to achieve an extremely fast burst fire rate that allowed small three round groups at longer distances. Since there was no delay to eject empty cases they could increase the rate of fire.

I wonder how well the ACR will initially sell? The steep cost per unit I would think put off many individuals and governments. For the basic $2700 cost one could get a reliable and accurate Noveske N4 with some change to spare. A BCM build would leave one with money to spare for either ammo, targets, optics and or a mix other gear.

I pretty sure some will buy it just like some are buying the FN SCAR at such high prices but likely not the average shooter.

 

[RaTa]

Yeah but with the G11 I thought it was cost considerations due to reunification that stopped it and not a failure on the part of the rifle?

This is my understanding as well.

I do agree about the price, there is really no reason not to just buy the SCAR at this point.

 

[RaTa]

Beretta ARX 160....all have reciprocating charging handles on the left or foldable - it is just that the American vision (or obsessions) of "right side" reciprocating handle does not work out, which was probably figured out to be unworkable by the Europeans long time ago.

The ARX 160 charging handle and ejection path can be moved to whatever side the user wants.

It would be brilliant if the ARX came to market with a price point sub $2k and before the ACR.

 

[Paul Morrison]

lol... ACR price is raised to pay Robinson Arms their royalty on the bolt release!

 

[greentips]

You cannot have all the best of the world sometimes. From a mechanical point of view, a reciprocating charging handle is much easier to design with fewer parts. It allows the charging handle to be directly connected to the bolt group - so 100% of the force is transmitted to the bolt group when it is need to be forced open or close for whatever reason when it jammed up. You can tug the bolt group both ways to get it going if it needs to.

A non-reciprocating side charging handle involves one more part - the charging handle is not directly connected to the bolt group. it just pushes it one way. Right the way, the system needs one more part and the receiver needs to have some sort of "gliding recess or rail" for this part to slide on.

I am not saying one is better than the other, but there is a rationale for going either way.

Thanks for the information greentips. My opinion is that firearms generally should not have a forward assist. I think it would better to clear the round instead of trying to jam a round into battery. Using forward assist to help close the bolt after doing a press check is probably all I would consider but would not be needed if people did not "ride" the charging handle and instead just release it.

I've heard unconfirmed reports that the reciprocating charging handle can cause some problems interfering with cycling when firing in unconventional positions such as some urban prone positions as well as kicking up dust and dirt in front of the shooter.

 

[Raytheon]

You cannot have all the best of the world sometimes. From a mechanical point of view, a reciprocating charging handle is much easier to design with fewer parts. It allows the charging handle to be directly connected to the bolt group - so 100% of the force is transmitted to the bolt group when it is need to be forced open or close for whatever reason when it jammed up. You can tug the bolt group both ways to get it going if it needs to.

A non-reciprocating side charging handle involves one more part - the charging handle is not directly connected to the bolt group. it just pushes it one way. Right the way, the system needs one more part and the receiver needs to have some sort of "gliding recess or rail" for this part to slide on.

I am not saying one is better than the other, but there is a rationale for going either way.

Interesting point greentips! I was curious because of the hype they made of the ACR having a non-reciprocating charging handle versus the FN SCAR.

I would be curious if any LEO/GOV groups pick up the ACR given the hefty price tag. However some LEO's have paid quite a bit for HK 416/MR223's so it could happen.

 

[greentips]

I know in one instance, if my AR charging handle could force the bolt group forwards, I would not have needed to use a hammer and a punch to unjam the rifle at home. I could possibly free it at the range by tugging the bolt group back and forth a few times to move the foreign object away that was stuck on the cam pin path.

 

[Raytheon]

I know in one instance, if my AR charging handle could force the bolt group forwards, I would not have needed to use a hammer and a punch to unjam the rifle at home. I could possibly free it at the range by tugging the bolt group back and forth a few times to move the foreign object away that was stuck on the cam pin path.

Oh man! That sucks! I bring a punch set, Chapman tool kit with G adapter kit, and a three piece cleaning rod always in my range bag in case of a serious jam or malfunction. I've had to use it a few times and usually help out others at the range every now and then.

I can see your point for a reciprocating charging handle in that situation. However, if you could force the bolt carrier group forward would it perhaps cause another problem? I'm not sure but I would guess that it would depend on the type of jam that occurred.

But like you said "You cannot have all the best of the world sometimes" . It doesn't mean we can strive and try for it.

 

[greentips]

lol... ACR price is raised to pay Robinson Arms their royalty on the bolt release!

And apparently CZ805 as well.

 

[raks]

Yeah but with the G11 I thought it was cost considerations due to reunification that stopped it and not a failure on the part of the rifle?

AFAIK the G11 was not perfected and ready for production. There were still problems with heat etc... Cheaper to rearm with a new, simpler weapon. I don't think we'll see caseless ammo any time soon. ACR pricing sucks, but I still think it's a good looking rifle. Love to handle one in person and then I'll make up my mind.

 

[Tbolt]

AFAIK the G11 was not perfected and ready for production. There were still problems with heat etc... Cheaper to rearm with a new, simpler weapon. I don't think we'll see caseless ammo any time soon. ACR pricing sucks, but I still think it's a good looking rifle. Love to handle one in person and then I'll make up my mind.

Didn't it make it to limited production? Test issued to some smaller elite units?

 

[Reaper]

This is my understanding as well.

I do agree about the price, there is really no reason not to just buy the SCAR at this point.

The G11 was on the verge of being issued wholesale to the German military, in fact it had been issued in small scale to certain NATO QRF units and some Airborne units again in very small numbers,the rifle was ready to go but was killed by politics and the fact West Germany would have to deal with unification at a national level including the Military. It's no wonder the G36 uses a modified AK74 bayonet,as they inherited thousands of AK74 (MPi-AK-74N, MPi-AKS-74N, MPi-AKS-74NK) from the former East germany.

This has nothing to do with the ACR,which while a it had a brilliant design and near perfect marking strategy,is destined to become the HAC-7 of our time. I am sure the fine folks at Magpul are wishing they hadn't handed this concept over to the incompetent boobs at Bushmaster, but they also stood to make a killing on this rifle as well by providing all the furniture so no tears here.
Had the product been delivered on time perhaps a higher price would have been justified, but 3 years too late and the rifle being a shadow of it's advertised potential (non AR Barrel, non chrome lined, short rail,and fixed stock). I was looking forward to this as a new toy, now these funds will go elsewhere (no not an XCR..never and XCR).

The SCAR is not without it's issues as well although FN has been very proactive in sorting them out as reports from the field come in, I doubt Bushmaster could react so fast in sorting the ACR out,time will tell but yes I can see it achieving it's potential in another few years.

 

[greentips]

Why pay 3000 bucks to beta for bushmaster while you can buy something that is beta-ed already with government money, like SCAR, Swiss Arms, TAVOR, etc.