QD Review - M+M M10X-Z DMR 7.62x39
- Thread starter Wolverine .303
- Start date
I will be doing further testing this week hopefully, with more ammo types, different optic, and playing with the settings as well trying to print on paper, thats also if i can correct the barrel issue....
Well that "guy" is myself ( Wolverine .303 AKA: Ty )..... Yes we have them for sale on the website? What I experienced here in this video I truly hope we are able to correct, we shall see in the upcoming weeks.
We set out to do QD reviews on a variety of firearms, this particular one didn't go well for it, for now hopefully. I refuse to get half way through something and then just scrap it because I don't like the outcome. It is what it is, I'm hoping in the upcoming weeks we can have a functional firearm that performs better, but we will have to wait and see!
I like a "thumb over grip" and with it mounted in that position I can easily still activate the light and still be able to get a good consistent hand placement on the forend. Another gentleman at the shop here would curse me for not directly mounting it to the M-LOK section with a proper scout mount, but in the end its functionality is the same.
The charging handle was properly installed, so don't know what to tell ya there, its clear on the video that it came out...
Correct, BUT I have "extra" magazines that are supplied by the same company for this rifle, I didn't have 4x AK PMAGs to fart around with, but that was the smallest problem honestly as the magazines that are sold for this are generally surplus anyways so you may are may not come across issues.... This is small fries in the grand scheme of things..
Are they now? Good to know!
Be skeptical if you wish to be, that's your right as an end user and good on you not trusting everything you see on the internet as gospel..
Nope, brand new.
Follow up sessions Imma try a few different ammos hopefully. But this is not super relevant unless we can correct the barrel issue.
Did check this, regardless of being properly torqued in place, it will not properly align with the handguard.
Because I am an honest person? Or I try to be anyways..
100% absolutely NOT....... that type of business practice is trash. Seriously don't approve of that type of comment, hurt me right in the feels.
Not fibbin', it took a little while there were some problems in the beginning. We worked closely with RA ( being their distributer and warranty center ) so we saw ALL the problems. There were a few for sure, some silly ones, some that made you scratch your head. But I believe we did our best to turn every problem or warranty claim around in the best manner possible. Once RA had things moving those rifles were honestly superb.. I regret never getting my hands on one for myself...
In addition to what .303 said, I would point out the closest rifle Wolverine carries to the M10x, the WS-MCR in 7.62x39mm, is both rare as hens teeth and takes Stanag mags, not AK mags, so given the volumes involved there is no reason to fudge the M10x review, and every reason to do so, since they've probably sold more M10x rifles the 7.62x39 mm rifles. It is refreshing to see this honesty from Wolverine.
It would be interesting to see a head to head QDR against the MCR, if and when the issues with the M10x can be addressed.
It would be interesting to see a head to head QDR against the MCR, if and when the issues with the M10x can be addressed.
Tomasaurus
CGN Regular
- Location
- SW Ontario
What is the alternative you are suggesting? Delete the video and let some poor unsuspecting person end up with this lemon? I applaud Wolverine for not taking the path of the shill and liar, but that should go without saying.
Since this rifle first came out Ive really wanted to like it. Felt great when I handled it in store but from what I can tell a type 81 is more worth your money.
Happy that you guys did an honest review though, that is pretty uncommon now-a-days.
Happy that you guys did an honest review though, that is pretty uncommon now-a-days.
Shorerider
CGN Regular
- Location
- British Columbia
The whole charging handle thing can happen pretty easily. Since all you have to do is lightly press the end and rotate simply charging the rifle can cause it to become unlocked. Then once it’s unlocked you really wouldn’t know it until it decides to become detached. So even when you were just demonstrating how the handle can be swapped side to side if you weren’t deliberate in ensuring the lock was back at 90° you could easily have unlocked it the next time you charged it. Then it’s just a matter of time. I don’t necessarily think it’s a flaw as much as something they should look at improving. As in it works but it could be better.
I agree 100%, my current theory on her is that by handling it and charging the firearm with gloves on I somehow managed to unlock it, and if that is correct by simply handling it I am surprised more handles haven't gone "bye-bye" into the unknown.
That Barrel alignment issue is what would concern me the most were I the owner of one of these trouble-prone firearms. Wow - I am simply amazed that such rifles passed through whatever M+M does for post-assembly/pre-shipping QC inspections. That is very telling in and of itself! I am personally a loooong ways away from purchasing an M10X based on that video and owner comments both here and elsewhere. More's the pity, as it has terrific potential as an interesting amalgam of various designs, and is chambered in a calibre that is under-represented in terms of ccompeting platforms chambered in the same 7.62x39mm calibre. I'd really like to like this rifle, but in its present state of reliability I simply cannot.
Pass, do not consider, even in moments of weakness...
Pass, do not consider, even in moments of weakness...
Yep, agreed. I REALLY like the concept, and really want to like this rifle, but failure to make sure the barrel aligns with the handguard is... well, a pretty fundamental failure. I haven't heard back from M+M re my rifle yet. The other issues are concerning as well, but the barrel... sheesh.
Yep, I did something similar to measure the deviation of mine. My rifle's barrel is off to the right by about the same amount his is. I suspect the threads on the barrels or more likely the receivers were manufactured at a slight angle, which resulted in this problem when the rifles were assembled. I'm betting that his, Wolverine's, and mine are NOT the only three.
EDITED TO ADD:
After pulling my upper apart, I'm pretty sure I know what the problem is. The barrel threads into the steel upper receiver. My barrel/upper receiver install appears to be fine, but when you lay the steel upper receiver on a flat surface, the barrel is canted to the right 1-2mm at the gas block. As everything APPEARS fine at the point where the barrel and upper receiver meet, I think the threads milled into the receiver for the barrel to screw into are canted slightly, resulting in the problem I see.
The one-piece aluminum 'shell' that includes the picatinny top rail and handguard slides onto rails on the outside of the steel receiver. The tolerances between this shell and the steel upper receiver are not particularly tight, which is is something I would NOT see as a positive, as it allows potential movement between the shell (where the frigging SIGHTS are mounted) and the receiver where the barrel is mounted.
As a result of these loose tolerances, by loosening the grub screw and pushing the barrel to the left, it is possible to adjust the position of the barrel within the handguard and re-tighten it, which I did. This doesn't FIX the problem of the barrel not being in line with the upper receiver, but does allow the barrel to more-or-less end up aligned with the optic rails. There will still be some left-to-right discrepancies between POI at various ranges, but this should help.
So, the loose tolerances between the upper steel receiver and aluminum 'shell' are sort of a feature, for rifles with ####ty quality control and off-line barrels, as it allows you to force the aluminum shell to closer match the crooked barrel.
What M+M SHOULD do as a design change, if they can manage to get their barrels in straight,is tighten the tolerances between the steel receiver and aluminum upper, press-fit the two together, and permanently pin them together. This would result in more consistent accuracy.
Last edited:
Not good. Nothing is actually "bent", rather I suspect that the Barrel Hole or Threading was misaligned during the manufacture of a batch of Upper Receivers. Those Receivers are going to have to be replaced under Warranty. Best of luck to the owners of the Gen 2 M10Xs with misaligned Barrels.....
I’ve been holding off leaving my experience with the M10x. Let’s rewind a couple months back, I like a fool bought a used first gen M10x (was a really good price). First time bringing it out I had nothing but issues, light primer strikes, failure to eject and the hammer sticking after each shot. I contacted M+M industries, they promptly responded and let me know what they thought was needed to rectify the issues at hand. I had to purchase a new trigger group (hammer/trigger/trigger spring) as well as a new firing pin (gun was long off warranty). I have since received all said parts and changed them out, the gun runs flawless now and is a absolute treat to shoot, it’s actually very accurate and has shot all types of ammo I’ve thrown at it. Moral of my storey is that these rifles “Can” be great but unfortunately the quality control of M+M doesn’t seem up to par and they get a bad rep because of it.
