So buy a Beretta ARX100 or a Non Restricted ACR next year?
- Thread starter Ebola
- Start date
- Location
- Durham Region
ACR gets my vote.
keltec makes crap. And rugers aren't much to write home about. Berretta uses much higher level of qc than those two. This one will feature a chf barrel, those two I am almost certain did not have chf barrels. The profile of a barrel for the most part doesn't have that much to do with the initial accuracy, and after watching someone burn through 6 mags in reasonably rapid succession on a tikka t3 lite with negligible poi shift, I no longer buy in that it needs to be the fattest barrel so it maintains repeatability. I would be shocked if either of these two 1.5 moa or worse. My question to you is are you a 1 moa shooter? Because if I give you an Accuracy International and you only chuck out a 1.5 moa group, I have some news for you. Why not wait till both come out then decide?
And take the swiss as another example. While there are a couple examples of less than exemplary accuracy, most swiss rifles are ridiculously accurate, their barrels aren't very fat either
Last edited:
Here we go again.
These are battle rifles people, expecting MOA from them with the factory barrel is ridiculous, if you get one that shoots MOA then you got lucky. Having a heavier barrel from the factory isn't going to make it any more accurate unless they use a higher quality (more expensive) blank. If they do that then everyone complains that the rifle is too expensive.
If you expect more you will be disappointed, if you want a sub MOA shooter it's time to buy a high end AR or to look into some quality bolt guns.
A fat barrel has nothing to do with accuracy, it is the quality of the barrel and it's manufacturing as well as the platform it is mounted in that determine the accuracy of a firearm. A quality pencil barrel will outshoot a cheap heavy barrel 99% of the time.
Lonewolf,
What did you mean when you said it depends on the distance if you can shoot MOA?
MOA is MOA regardless of distance. approx 1 inch at 100, 2 inch at 200, etc... As long as you are using magnified optics to take aging eyes out of the equation you should be able to shoot whatever your capable of at 100yds all the way out to where you become limited by the cartridge you are shooting.
These are battle rifles people, expecting MOA from them with the factory barrel is ridiculous, if you get one that shoots MOA then you got lucky. Having a heavier barrel from the factory isn't going to make it any more accurate unless they use a higher quality (more expensive) blank. If they do that then everyone complains that the rifle is too expensive.
If you expect more you will be disappointed, if you want a sub MOA shooter it's time to buy a high end AR or to look into some quality bolt guns.
A fat barrel has nothing to do with accuracy, it is the quality of the barrel and it's manufacturing as well as the platform it is mounted in that determine the accuracy of a firearm. A quality pencil barrel will outshoot a cheap heavy barrel 99% of the time.
Lonewolf,
What did you mean when you said it depends on the distance if you can shoot MOA?
MOA is MOA regardless of distance. approx 1 inch at 100, 2 inch at 200, etc... As long as you are using magnified optics to take aging eyes out of the equation you should be able to shoot whatever your capable of at 100yds all the way out to where you become limited by the cartridge you are shooting.
andrew3081
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Vancouver, BC
Except Bushmaster do not make quick change barrel kits yet?
And I highly doubt we will see the ARX100 anytime soon.
If we get lucky, the non restricted ACR might be here by the end of 2014 (the expected deliverying time given by manufactures are always not accurate).
Athrun[Zaft
CGN Regular
- Location
- Oakville, Ontario
I'd vote for the ACR if I HAD to buy one of the two; I don't like that the ARX-100's barrel MUST be removed to field strip the rifle. Given the option, I'd leave both in favour of a Tavor (only because I can't have an AUG! 
).
).
I'd vote for the ACR if I HAD to buy one of the two; I don't like that the ARX-100's barrel MUST be removed to field strip the rifle. Given the option, I'd leave both in favour of a Tavor (only because I can't have an AUG!
What's wrong with removing the barrel to field strip a rifle? All you have to do in the Beretta's case is lock the action back, push two buttons and pull the barrel out. Done in less then 5 seconds. It makes it easy for running the rod through and cleaning the barrel out. Certainly its a whole lot better then cleaning the barrel of my Tavor which I despise doing. Easy barrel removal is the greatest thing since sliced bread in my opinion.
I do agree about the Aug though. I would much rather have one then my Tavor.
Athrun[Zaft
CGN Regular
- Location
- Oakville, Ontario
My problem isn't with the difficulty in removing the barrel; Beretta's done quite a good job in designing the QD mechanism, by all appearances. My problem is with the fact that opening the barrel-receiver interface creates a very real possibility of allowing foreign particulate into the very tightly toleranced barrel trunnion. It reminds me of installing cutters in a milling machine; having chips, or dirt on one of the tapering surfaces throws out the accuracy of the assembly. I appreciate QD barrel systems, but I think that making the removal of the barrel a necessary part of FIELD cleaning operations, where the cleanliness of your workspace cannot be guaranteed, is inadvisable, at best.
Both the C6 and C9 machine guns have quick detach barrels. This is the US version of the C6, the 240B
Last edited:
Machine guns are meant for throwing down supressing fire, we as civilians do not have those needs and look at repeatable accuracy more.
Swapping barrels on a machine gun is also a requirement if you want to continue firing full auto for sustained periods of time
Swapping barrels on a machine gun is also a requirement if you want to continue firing full auto for sustained periods of time
Last edited:
??? I dont understand why you need to remove the barrel on a Tavor to clean it. Cleaning the barrel on a Tavor is the easiest thing ever! 3 steps:
1 Take out the butt by pushing pin,
2 Take out the bolt-piston assembly by pulling on it,
3 Run rod through barrel.
I've never had an easier way to clean a barrel on a firearm ever! If you despise doing these 3 simple steps, I'm not sure cleaning firearms is for you...
Sorry, but the original poster's objection to a removable barrel was getting, "allowing foreign particulate into the very tightly toleranced barrel trunnion". My response was meant to address the "#### in barrel trunnion" issue as a non-issue. You are now raising a repeatable accuracy issue. Do believe that the ARX will suffer from a loss off accuracy due to the removable barrel?
Athrun[Zaft
CGN Regular
- Location
- Oakville, Ontario
Potentially, yes. I don't think that it's impossible that the ARX will be completely fine on this front, but it makes me a bit uncomfortable. As I said in my original post, the issue is that allowing junk into the space between the trunnion's ID and the barrel extension's OD could potentially lead to the angular accuracy of the assembly being thrown out to some degree. It just feels like an unnecessary risk to expose the firearm to, especially considering that it's highly unlikely that an infantryman would carry spare barrels for his assault rifle the way that an MG crew would for their weapon.
in a machine gun you have to swap barrels or you can not comtinue to fire it as it will overheat, this is not a common problem in a semi auto sporting rifle that requires a quick barrel change to continue firing.
accuracy will be effected if crud gets in the barrel trunnion, that is a fact, does that accuracy loss matter on a machine gun where it's primary military role is to maintain supressing fire on a battlefield for many hours if needed? No, It is more important that that gun keeps firing for the duration of the battle keeping the enemy supressed. Does the accuracy matter to you or I in our sporting rifle?, yes it would matter to me.
I don't take off the barrel to clean my tavor. What I meant to say it was a pain for me because I go in through the but and I need a longer rod to do it. Generally if I can I will run the rod though both ends of the barrel when ceaning it. In the end its just laziness on my part because I'm to lazy to go find and thread in the third piece on my rod.
