The R18 Mk2 Review Pt 2 Live Fire Reliabllity and Accuracy Results

TSE JR said:

I have 4 barrels enroute from IBI of various profiles in the MW to HW to test with the SAI system as well... We may have just taken a little too much material away.... We'll see. Even if we run with the SAI pencil barrels, it will be good to see what other options will produce.
JR

Click to expand...

Im very excited for this. Combined with the above mentioned 7076-T6 recievers... wow.. Awesome. I see a lot about 7075-T6 online. Is there a big difference?

Also, for what it's worth, I'd be willing to be a guinea pig individual tester of any future models. I can cover shipping back and forth, and can do testing with whatever off the shelf ammo required from a bench/bag at 50/100/150m.

My comments, concerns, criticisms, commendations aside, I'm already budgeting for a production model in the future and would love to be a part of bringing this thing to market and getting local feedback from whomever I cross paths with at the range, if that sort of thing interests you. Let me know.

Jacobean said:

Fair. Heard, maybe seen, yes. Rejected? Not likely. More ignored since it seems to have been decided on already by the manufacturer. To be fair it doesnt have to be "buy or move on". Along with your review I'd hope they'd enjoy community recommendations for what will obviously be a moderately retweeked mk3, which this thread is chalk full of.

Not everyday the consumer can directly engage in convo with the manufacturer. Always good to hear out your target demographic.

With all do respect, you seem to be mighty defensive over a rifle you're independently reviewing and have no affiliation with. Upset or not, your msgs come across to casual posters a bit intense when most of us are just sharing opinions or represent the masses. Lighten up a bit. We're all pumped for this rifle (14pgs and counting) and all want it succeed. Its clearly looking to be a top tier option for our very Canadian problem.

Great ideas like culling the fluting, strengthening some parts, reducing machining/extra parts. etc have been thrown out and most seem fairly relevant to what I'd hope a manufacturer wants to know from those who affect the profit margins.

Click to expand...

Personally, I think that you assign far too much importance to your personal opinions and desires for the R18. Direct feedback to the developer is all well and good, however to expect deletion of a key feature of the rifle with a well-considered eye to future Buttstock compatibility? Completely unreasonable. Which circles back to my first comment.....

As for my alleged excessive defense of the R18, sorry, I don't see it. I have "insider knowledge" of the developmental process behind the rifle from interviews with JR Cox. I have endeavored to pass that information to the target demographic through my review. When it comes to issues like the decision to go with the Picatinny Buttstock, JR and I have already had that conversation, the outcome of which I passed along. JR Cox is a busy man, and my ability to answer basic questions about the rifle on his behalf has beven helpful. If you perceive any of that as untoward bias in favour of the R18, that is your problem. I have zero financial stake in the rifle and stand to benefit in no way from helping out an old friend by agreeing to do the review. Am I excited about the R18? Yes, as I stated in the first sentence of my review. It therefore stands to reason that I am supportive of JR Cox's effort to bring the R18 to market. That's it, that's all there is to it.

I am currently on a deer hunting trip, so my ability to respond and contribute to the thread will be somewhat limited this week. Accuracy and Reliability testing will continue next week.

TSE JR said:

I have 4 barrels enroute from IBI of various profiles in the MW to HW to test with the SAI system as well... We may have just taken a little too much material away.... We'll see. Even if we run with the SAI pencil barrels, it will be good to see what other options will produce.

JR

Click to expand...

For the love of God man, please ship these with the pencil barrels. I'm sick and tired of having to replace barrels on NR rifles so they aren't front heavy pigs. If I want to build a precision rig I'll buy a quality aftermarket barrel.

TSE JR said:

the fluting is not, but the pic rail was.

To be frank, the fluting only adds an insignificant more to the machining when running 500 barrels at a go...

I have 4 barrels enroute from IBI of various profiles in the MW to HW to test with the SAI system as well... We may have just taken a little too much material away.... We'll see. Even if we run with the SAI pencil barrels, it will be good to see what other options will produce.

JR

Click to expand...

I personally am more than happy with pencil barrels , its not the 1960s anymore and modern material and manufacturing has made pencil barrels more than acceptable.

Maybe Im in the minority but Im very happy to hear there is an open dialog SAI over any ideas with future iterations of the platform.

Bartok5 said:

deletion of a key feature of the rifle with a well-considered eye to future Buttstock compatibility?

Click to expand...

Im still not really convinced of this. What future buttstocks are out there or being released that this option benefits? Only thing Ive seen in this thread is the ability to fold.. which buffer tube adapters allow, unless its a cater to the skeletonized market. This isnt sarcasm, genuinely curious and would love to see examples of stocks ppl would want and use compatible with the rail.

The Picatinny Buttstock may be a "flash in the pan" as you said. Unable to tell the future (like you apparently can), JR had to make design decisions based on the info available too him from industry insiders. It is a done deal, so please stop posting about your personnal disdain for the Buttstock system in my review thread. It has reached the point of distraction and is effectively pointless at this juncture. You got your say (and then some), so please move on now.

I personally think the idea of the grippod buttstock is the final evolution of the buttstock

FYI, the What Would Stoner Do AR-15 retailed by Brownell's and developed by the team at InRangeTv, Forgotten Weapons, and others, has a pencil barrel. The firearm seems to be doing well, so a pencil barrel would likely also likely work well for the R18.

diemaco said:

For the love of God man, please ship these with the pencil barrels. I'm sick and tired of having to replace barrels on NR rifles so they aren't front heavy pigs. If I want to build a precision rig I'll buy a quality aftermarket barrel.

Click to expand...

We will be going forward with the pencil barrel (including the fluting). However, I am going to try other barrels basically to see what the system is "capable" of. In my opinion, I feel all of this chatter about poor accuracy with the PMC XTac shooting under 2 MOA is simply noise at this point: The XTac is the PMC version of the M855; a NATO ball round specified to shoot in the 2 to 2.5 MOA range. The fact that Bartok5 kept it consistently under this, makes me happy. I am curious as to his findings with match and hunting ammo and will wait for his results as they are independent of anything I produce.

The point being: The rifles Bartok5 shot functioned with multiple magazines and multiple ammo selections; including the VERY loud and messy barnaul 55gr ball. You won't have to shoot premium ammo to have fun. The last round fired also produced 100% success for the bolt to catch at the rear.

While this is an expectation; sometimes reality doesn't mirror desires.

JR

2moa is more than acceptable accuracy for a rifle of this type. The pencil profile is the best choice, and i think most will appreciate the weight savings. Also glad to see the picatinny stock system being adopted more ubiquitously. It's advantages over the antiquated and unnecessary buffer tube are numerous.

Bartok5 said:

The Picatinny Buttstock may be a "flash in the pan" as you said. Unable to tell the future (like you apparently can), JR had to make design decisions based on the info available too him from industry insiders. It is a done deal, so please stop posting about your personnal disdain for the Buttstock system in my review thread. It has reached the point of distraction and is effectively pointless at this juncture. You got your say (and then some), so please move on now.

Click to expand...

Trying to drive discussion and gain knowledge, hence why I asked the question of what else is out there. I obviously cannot tell the future, it was an opinion, but thanks for the jab. If youve been able to read passed any of the assumed criticism you see, you'd be able to see how much Im actually excited about this project.

I think a review thread is the perfect place to discuss various aspects of a rifle subject to changes and alterations, and so far Im not the only one to express it. Manufacturers wont know unless the purchase population speaks up and theyve done a great job so far discussing points brought up by the community, so kudos to them. Ive hardly been aggressive or condescending, so should I feel like engaging in further conversation about something "pointless" and "a done deal", then I will. Basically the reason for existence of forums.

TSE JR said:

We will be going forward with the pencil barrel (including the fluting). However, I am going to try other barrels basically to see what the system is "capable" of. In my opinion, I feel all of this chatter about poor accuracy with the PMC XTac shooting under 2 MOA is simply noise at this point: The XTac is the PMC version of the M855; a NATO ball round specified to shoot in the 2 to 2.5 MOA range. The fact that Bartok5 kept it consistently under this, makes me happy. I am curious as to his findings with match and hunting ammo and will wait for his results as they are independent of anything I produce.

The point being: The rifles Bartok5 shot functioned with multiple magazines and multiple ammo selections; including the VERY loud and messy barnaul 55gr ball. You won't have to shoot premium ammo to have fun. The last round fired also produced 100% success for the bolt to catch at the rear.

While this is an expectation; sometimes reality doesn't mirror desires.

JR

Click to expand...

We in the gun community sometimes get distracted with chasing fractions of an inch and forget what an achievement sending pill sized projectiles 100 meters into the size of a fist is lol

raypoh said:

This is like settling for the consolation prize instead of our right to the first prize. A proper AR15

Click to expand...

I'll take a very nice consolation prize that the government doesn't know I own vs a government owned restricted rifle any day of the week and twice on Sundays, thank you very much.

Bartok5 said:

I should have the same Test Rifle back in my hands with strengthened Operating Springs by the end of the week, with further testing to follow. I have some different brands of ammo to try (eg. Win White Box 55 gr) as well as 3 different factory Match 77 gr loads. That ought to answer the accuracy potential question more conclusively.

Unfortunately my returned Test Rifle will not have all of the other improvements that are now part of the Production Drawings. An Adjustable Gas Block to "balance" the increased Operating Spring tension comes immediately to mind as a desirable addition.
However, Accuracy, Reliability and Wear/Tear testing will continue regardless. I will leave it to JR Cox and SAI to conduct their promised 1000-round, time-lapse video reliability test with the Production model of the R18 Mk2.

Click to expand...

Looking forward to the review

Jacobean said:

Trying to drive discussion and gain knowledge, hence why I asked the question of what else is out there. I obviously cannot tell the future, it was an opinion, but thanks for the jab. If youve been able to read passed any of the assumed criticism you see, you'd be able to see how much Im actually excited about this project.

I think a review thread is the perfect place to discuss various aspects of a rifle subject to changes and alterations, and so far Im not the only one to express it. Manufacturers wont know unless the purchase population speaks up and theyve done a great job so far discussing points brought up by the community, so kudos to them. Ive hardly been aggressive or condescending, so should I feel like engaging in further conversation about something "pointless" and "a done deal", then I will. Basically the reason for existence of forums.

Click to expand...

Honestly, the pic rear rail makes a ton of sense. There are more and more stocks that attach to that interface coming out (check out what Midwest Industries has) both folding or not as well as everything from straight up pic to buffer tube adapters (like what comes on this rifle), folding pic to buffer tube adapters and folding pic to integrated (ie no need to add the tube) buffer tube adapters. Basically you can still use any buffer tube/stock combo you want as well as use different stocks you couldn't (without the addition of an adapter) use.

The idea to use the alternative butt stock interface makes a lot of sense, with the previous points made. I think it's a wise decision.

rugbydave said:

Honestly, the pic rear rail makes a ton of sense. There are more and more stocks that attach to that interface coming out (check out what Midwest Industries has) both folding or not as well as everything from straight up pic to buffer tube adapters (like what comes on this rifle), folding pic to buffer tube adapters and folding pic to integrated (ie no need to add the tube) buffer tube adapters. Basically you can still use any buffer tube/stock combo you want as well as use different stocks you couldn't (without the addition of an adapter) use.

Click to expand...

Nailed it!

>Moaning and groaning how an adapter adds an inch on the LOP on an adjustable stock.
Just like...move it in one more or dont be a manlet ?

Ceiferiro said:

>Moaning and groaning how an adapter adds an inch on the LOP on an adjustable stock.
Just like...move it in one more or dont be a manlet ?

Click to expand...

Seeing as how we are still stuck on discussing the Buttstock, it is only fair that I continue to invite input from Jacobean. So by all means, Jacobean - feel free to contribute as you see fit.

Length of Pull on an firearm equipped with a Retracting Buttstock is moot if a single, quick adjustment of the Buttstock resolves the issue. What is of far more interest to me is the abillty to raise or lower the Comb Height by adjusting the height at which we mount the Stock to the Rear Picatinny Rails. This is why i think that the R18 needs a longer Rear Rail - to permit that advantageous vertical adjustment of the comb height. At least one additional slot at the top end of the Rail is an absolute must, as this is the height at which I am the most comfortable in the Wheelchair. Just my $.02

Bartok5 said:

Length of Pull on an firearm equipped with a Retracting Buttstock is moot if a single, quick adjustment of the Buttstock resolves the issue. What is of far more interest to me is the abillty to raise or lower the Comb Height by adjusting the height at which we mount the Stock to the Rear Picatinny Rails. This is why i think that the R18 needs a longer Rear Rail - to permit that advantageous vertical adjustment of the comb height. At least one additional slot at the top end of the Rail is an absolute must

Click to expand...

Agree 100%