lol for that cash I will just go with a Cadex
lol for that cash I will just go with a Cadex
Id Rather Be Judged By 12 Than Carried By 6
Way too expensive for what it is, Cadex and PGW are much better options.
Also, those options provide work to some extremely talented Canadians, who Will be there
If ever a problem should show up.
I guess my question is what makes them better than their competitors in that price range? I don't doubt they are very good rifles. I'm far from an expert, but I've yet to come across anything other than lighter weight as an advantage. Since I don't really hunt, that has less value to me than something like a Cadex, PGW, or Barrett. I'm always open to learn something new though, if anyone can lay out advantages I'm not aware of.
Casio, Timex, Citizen, Breitling, Rolex. Honda, Toyota, Lexus, Jaguar, Rolls Royce, Bugatti. Savage, CZ, Lithgow, Vudoo, Zermat.... Cooper.... Gunwerks... same as everything in life. For everything that is cheap there is going to be a "boutique" type item for the other guy. Sweet rifle.
So not a SINGLE person can answer my question?
The last example is horrible btw, I can name a plethora of things that are better on a Mercedes than a Kia.. that is the price increase, with some of the name.. but there is something tangible.
I can’t find one single thing this gun brings to the table that is better than the MPR or Cross and both are way cheaper, one half the price..
Maybe OP could enlighten us ?
The MPR is just there Remington 700 footprint in a lightweight chassis with a lightweight barrel (nothing groundbreaking). Reading on here will show some barrel problems from some trustworthy members, and with the warranty problem they voiced I would avoid one.
The Sig Cross and the Q both have the action machined directly into the chassis, so that is one difference. The Q takes AR10/SR25 Mags while the Cross takes AICS.
This was really the only choice until the Sig Cross became announced. However, the Sig Cross has not made it out in the world enough to have enough reviews for anyone to answer if The Q is worth the price increase. However the Q has lots of positive reviews out there, so you can take the gamble on the Cross or buy the Q with more confidence I guess?
Personally, if it wasn't for the Cross being around the corner I would be buying this instead. For the savings, I will be a Guinea Pig for the Cross when it lands and hope for the best. I want to use this rifle and not baby it, the MPR being mostly Carbon and the FIx being a Beautiful expensive gun would make me shy away from using it the way I want.
The CA MPR is still a chassis built around a rem 700 action. To bring the entire rifle's weight down to under 7lbs requires weight saving on the chassis, carbon wrapped barrel etc. Some people don't like the concept of carbon wrapped barrel and it seems like some other people on different forums have had problem with the build quality of MPRs. Plus, that rem 700 action does not allow a AR-type selector safety.
Now when it comes to the Fix vs. Cross I personally feel it's like a boutique vs. big box store type of deal where the fit and finish on the Fix is going to be a bit better than that of the Cross. And that is why I, a person who does not have a huge budget, decided to opt for the Cross. Folks with higher budget would choose the fix for its better finish, Q's reputation, and the cool factor of the blue accent.
Edit: Exactly what cwblackwell said.
I really want to like it, but to me it looks like it hasn't left the prototype stage. Just seems unfinished and doesn't look like a rifle in its price range. I'm sure it's a great shooter though as the reviews state.