ARX160 -how it is working out with an ACOG

greentips

greentips

Administrator
Moderating Team
Rating - 100%
261   0   0
Location
Pluton
Based on the video, it doesn't work out too well. Looks like the stock is too low and the poor guy could not even get a "chin" wield.

But seriously, I am not sure how anyone can hit anything with the face wobbling around the rifle like that. They need to put a cheek riser on the stock if they issue optics.

 
Having actually handled one I know the rail is abut the same offset from the stock as an AR so I don't see there being a rifle issue. Looks to me that the guy is having trouble making it work with all his gear on. Probably his first time shooting the thing and not comfortable with the gun yet. Sorry I just don't see it.
 
At 1:32 it looks like he would have a perfect cheek weld if he actually put his cheek on the stock. He's keeping his cheek to the left of the stock even though the height looks fine. This appears to be shooter error and or some sort of gear (chin strap, helmet etc) issue.
 
I'm hoping this is the case. However, if it turns out to be another +/- $3,000 range queen, I'm definitely not interested.
 
2bad4u2 said:
I'm hoping this is the case. However, if it turns out to be another +/- $3,000 range queen, I'm definitely not interested.
Click to expand...

To be perfectly honest, while I'm stile somewhat intrigued with the ARX-160 - my experience with the complete and total lack of barrel assemblies and components for the ACR from Bushmaster still reads as a cautionary tale.

The quick-change barrel assembly on the ARX-160 is really only beneficial if it returns relatively close to zero. And due to the way our bizarre firearms laws are written, you can't have both a restricted and non-restricted firearm - so the only way this works is if you can get separate uppers (and assuming the upper is the registered component).

I think the tool-less disassembly, ergonomics and complete ambidextrous capability are definitely selling points. I don't think there is much of a market for restricted $3k+ (non-AR) black rifles anymore, so unless this comes in NR for under $3k - I just don't see it having wide appeal (same as the ACR, while everyone waits for the $2,700 factory NR version).
 
Nothing of decent quality is going to be cheap. However, begging to be ass raped is another issue. Canadians as a whole seem to feel "better" when they pay more for what they buy. Frack that!

A lot of guys seem to like Beretta CX4 Storms and you can routinely pick them up for +/- $900. The 92 Series pistols appear well made and comparatively priced with other offerings in the market. I dunno? Do you find most of their stuff over priced, generally speaking?
 
2bad4u2 said:
Nothing of decent quality is going to be cheap. However, begging to be ass raped is another issue. Canadians as a whole seem to feel "better" when they pay more for what they buy. Frack that!

A lot of guys seem to like Beretta CX4 Storms and you can routinely pick them up for +/- $900. The 92 Series pistols appear well made and comparatively priced with other offerings in the market. I dunno? Do you find most of their stuff over priced, generally speaking?
Click to expand...

Benelli MR1 is a good example of overpriced. I like the M4 as well, and it's apparently a great shotgun - but kind of nuts @ $2k...
 
tootall said:
The real deal, or the .22LR copy by Umarex?
Click to expand...

badboybeeson said:
why would i be talking about the 22 :)
Click to expand...

Its the only one I have played with.
DSC_4493.jpg

DSC_4496.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom