ATRS Modern hunter specs, pics and range reports

Just picked one up today in 7mm-08 from a member here. I took it to the range after paying my respects to our fallen. I will get better photos and do a proper range report in the future.

This group was my best of the day. Haven't measured it, but its definitely sub-moa. Only 3 rounds though. I should be able to get some more repeatable groups once I get a proper optic on it, for today I slapped on my burris ar-332.


And the rifle:
 
What kind of compatibility for stocks and buffer tubes do these have? Forgive my ignorance as I am new to DI guns and associated part compatibility.
 
driller212 said:
What kind of compatibility for stocks and buffer tubes do these have? Forgive my ignorance as I am new to DI guns and associated part compatibility.
Click to expand...

Mil spec or comm spec tubes. Rifle or Carbine. They are all good.

Only PDW stocks and Law Tactical folders fall into question.

As for normal stocks, the collapsible style all fit as long as you run them at least one position out when you use the CH. The PRS fits, but the UBR requires a groove filed to for the CH to clear.
 
^ mixed reviews on the imi mags. They do work and I've had no issues using a couple of them but it seems some others have. I think it comes down to trying individual mags in your rifle.
 
griffin86 said:
I think people are getting bad groups because of user error and/or factory ammo. I am not a precision reloader and shooter and I got these groups.

If it shot poor I would post results too. I would hate for someone to buy a $6k+ rifle and have mediocre results when I could have said something.

Not sure how anyone could say anything negative from .6 MOA especially from a semi-auto. I'm really happy. The critics will soon chime in that it's not 5 round groups.
Click to expand...

griffin86, those are some nice groups...wish more people would post what these rifles are capable of for those like me that are patiently sitting on the fence. These groups of yours are more in line of what ATRS claimed the rifles would do.

I think the negativity about groups came from some the"early" guys posting 1.5-2 MOA groups and then bragging about the accuracy of their rifles and then going on with the ridiculous and extremely annoying "haters will hate BS" when people questioned those dismal results.

Anyways, thanks for posting...would like to see more from others as well. :)
 
cr5 said:
Has anyone tried these mags in the MH?
https://www.canadaammo.com/product/detail/imi-defense-g2-7-62x51-magazine-for-ar10-blk/

Figured they might be an option for those that can't find a magpul Gen2 and want a polymer magazine.
Click to expand...

We brought in a ton of those with the thought of solving the pmag gen 2 change of spec. The problem we found is that dimension-ally these mag vary from mag to mag, so 1 mag will work but the next 1 we grab out of the box does not.
I believe IMI is using several molds, which would explain the minor differences in dimensions we are seeing. To root through a few thousand mags to find 1s that function perfectly is simply a logistical nightmare for us.

Some guys have employed them and have reported back that a bit of tape on the spine of the mag solves the reliability of feed problem, others have epoxied some material to the spines which has also worked. I would prefer just to be able to grab a mag from a box of mags and have it work.
We are looking at options still.
 
onetwentyish said:
I think what he was reading into it was a possible change in mag well geometry, at least thats what it seemed like to me that was hinted at, and ultimately that is how I would prefer the issue resolved.

I know you have not been receptive to the idea, but it would greatly improve the rifle to clone the mag well geometry of the rifle the mags you wish to use are designed around, this way all future iterations of the mags would be good to go.
Click to expand...

Maybe I am missing something. When we initially designed the rifle we made the magwell to fit the Gen 2 Pmags and the XCR-M mags. In the time that it took to get the FRT, Magpul changed their mag design yet again. Now we have 500 plus of these rifles out in circulation that work fine with the mags the rifle was designed around and we are now to redesign the rifle to only accept 1 mag, being the Gen 3 Pmag?
FWIW we are seeing a VERY high failure rate on Gen 3 Pmags, which is a concern to us. Knowing Magpul is fairly proactive I would speculate that Gen 4 is not too far off. Then what?

We have made a few revisions in the latest production run. But then the decision to be made is whether to go with a revision that eliminates the use of any mag save the Gen 3 because the geometry is just different enough to preclude the use of other mags. Then we catch flack from guys who don't like polymer mags or mags that won't hold 10 rounds. The fact is, like with many other rifles, the rifle is designed to work best with 1 mag simply due to the fact that 4 or 5 different mag manufacturers will have 4 or 5 different tolerances and dimensions.

Appearances of late is that the company we went to to manufacture mags specifically for our rifle and that would also fit the XCR-M are not going to fulfill this need.
This is why we are again looking into options for having mags specifically made to fit our rifles. If these mags also happen to fit another rifle, great, if not oh well.
 
Ok. I own one of these rifles. I have 1 mag that works with it. I am on the waiting list for the mag's you said were coming. Last you said was middle of October and we are patiently waiting. But I am starting to wonder if these guys aren't right. Why didn't you just clone the mag well of an existing problem free ar 10? Then if you had problems so would the rest of the ar world and magpul would fix it for you. Am I missing something here?
 
alberta tactical rifle said:
Maybe I am missing something. 1*When we initially designed the rifle we made the magwell to fit the Gen 2 Pmags and the XCR-M mags. In the time that it took to get the FRT, Magpul changed their mag design yet again. Now we have 500 plus of these rifles out in circulation that work fine with the mags the rifle was designed around and we are now to redesign the rifle to only accept 1 mag, being the Gen 3 Pmag?
FWIW we are seeing a VERY high failure rate on Gen 3 Pmags, which is a concern to us. Knowing Magpul is fairly proactive I would speculate that Gen 4 is not too far off. Then what?

2*We have made a few revisions in the latest production run. But then 3*the decision to be made is whether to go with a revision that eliminates the use of any mag save the Gen 3 because the geometry is just different enough to preclude the use of other mags. Then we catch flack from guys who don't like polymer mags or mags that won't hold 10 rounds. The fact is, like with many other rifles, the rifle is designed to work best with 1 mag simply due to the fact that 4 or 5 different mag manufacturers will have 4 or 5 different tolerances and dimensions.

Appearances of late is that the company we went to to manufacture mags specifically for our rifle and that would also fit the XCR-M are not going to fulfill this need.
This is why we are again looking into options for having mags specifically made to fit our rifles. If these mags also happen to fit another rifle, great, if not oh well.
Click to expand...

To clear up my previous post, what I meant was that unlike you suggested (1*), I was not implying to redesign the lower to Gen 3 pmags, I was saying the MH magwell geometry should be modeled after the gold standard of .308 stanag pattern of rifles, the KAC SR25. This rifle is what Magpul and most other manufacturers are going to use as the bench mark of tolerances. Designing a rifle to one mag is silly just like you suggest, but unfortunately in essence that is almost what has been done thus far with the MH. I am relegated to hunting down mythical G2 pmags and XCR mags. If the MH had the same internal dimensions as an SR25, the Gen 3 pmags would not be an issue, and Gen 2 could still be used as well, along with a duffle bag full of other off brand manufacturers.

I am also curious what all the revisions are for the most recent batch that you hint at in 2*

Lastly I would like to offer the suggestion in reference to 3*, you could find a couple SR25's to measure up, and base your geometry and tolerances off of. This should be an adequate compromise of tolerances and geometry to allow for a reliable use of a wider variety of .308 stanag mags. If it works for the KAC SR25, it should be transferable to the MH since they share so many basic characteristics together.

Lastly, in my opinion, I would rather improve upon the design, rather than have a work around. Always room for improvement, and this would be a good step.
 
onetwentyish said:
To clear up my previous post, what I meant was that unlike you suggested (1*), I was not implying to redesign the lower to Gen 3 pmags, I was saying the MH magwell geometry should be modeled after the gold standard of .308 stanag pattern of rifles, the KAC SR25. This rifle is what Magpul and most other manufacturers are going to use as the bench mark of tolerances. Designing a rifle to one mag is silly just like you suggest, but unfortunately in essence that is almost what has been done thus far with the MH. I am relegated to hunting down mythical G2 pmags and XCR mags. If the MH had the same internal dimensions as an SR25, the Gen 3 pmags would not be an issue, and Gen 2 could still be used as well, along with a duffle bag full of other off brand manufacturers.

I am also curious what all the revisions are for the most recent batch that you hint at in 2*

Lastly I would like to offer the suggestion in reference to 3*, you could find a couple SR25's to measure up, and base your geometry and tolerances off of. This should be an adequate compromise of tolerances and geometry to allow for a reliable use of a wider variety of .308 stanag mags. If it works for the KAC SR25, it should be transferable to the MH since they share so many basic characteristics together.

Lastly, in my opinion, I would rather improve upon the design, rather than have a work around. Always room for improvement, and this would be a good step.
Click to expand...

I use DPMS brand SR25 pattern mags, work flawlessly. (Damned expensive though)

According to Magpul, they've worked with several firearm manufacturers to "Improve the design" of the magwell, hence the Gen 3 mags. If KAC wants to be compatible with Gen 3 mags, they're going to have to change their magwell design too.

IMI mags are designed for SR25 pattern but the dimensions aren't consistent from one mag to another.

ATRS isn't the only manufacturer that's been thrown through a loop due to Magpuls decision, google "308 Pmag issues"
 
onetwentyish said:
To clear up my previous post, what I meant was that unlike you suggested (1*), I was not implying to redesign the lower to Gen 3 pmags, I was saying the MH magwell geometry should be modeled after the gold standard of .308 stanag pattern of rifles, the KAC SR25. This rifle is what Magpul and most other manufacturers are going to use as the bench mark of tolerances. Designing a rifle to one mag is silly just like you suggest, but unfortunately in essence that is almost what has been done thus far with the MH. I am relegated to hunting down mythical G2 pmags and XCR mags. If the MH had the same internal dimensions as an SR25, the Gen 3 pmags would not be an issue, and Gen 2 could still be used as well, along with a duffle bag full of other off brand manufacturers.

I am also curious what all the revisions are for the most recent batch that you hint at in 2*

Lastly I would like to offer the suggestion in reference to 3*, you could find a couple SR25's to measure up, and base your geometry and tolerances off of. This should be an adequate compromise of tolerances and geometry to allow for a reliable use of a wider variety of .308 stanag mags. If it works for the KAC SR25, it should be transferable to the MH since they share so many basic characteristics together.

Lastly, in my opinion, I would rather improve upon the design, rather than have a work around. Always room for improvement, and this would be a good step.
Click to expand...

Just to set the record straight here, I lent ATRS my SR25 specifically so they could use it to help in the reverse engineering several years ago. I know they had a DPMS and an ASA rifle in stock back then so I would assume that they used those as well to compare dimensions with.
My SR25 does NOT work well with gen 3 Pmags yet functions perfectly with gen 2s.
I also remember them asking to borrow and XCR-M so as to check magwell dimensions specifically on that rifle as well. How many XCR owners are able to run Gen 3 Pmags I wonder? I ask that as the only experience I haveis with my shooting partners XCR-M, maybe he has a lemon?
Personally I find the metal XCR mags not only function flawlessly in my Modern Hunter, but they also allow for a bit longer OAL than plastic mags do. Maybe that is 1 of the reasons they work well, longer internally so a better chance of navigating the feed path?
 
no-one special said:
Just to set the record straight here, I lent ATRS my SR25 specifically so they could use it to help in the reverse engineering several years ago. I know they had a DPMS and an ASA rifle in stock back then so I would assume that they used those as well to compare dimensions with.
My SR25 does NOT work well with gen 3 Pmags yet functions perfectly with gen 2s.
I also remember them asking to borrow and XCR-M so as to check magwell dimensions specifically on that rifle as well. How many XCR owners are able to run Gen 3 Pmags I wonder? I ask that as the only experience I haveis with my shooting partners XCR-M, maybe he has a lemon?
Personally I find the metal XCR mags not only function flawlessly in my Modern Hunter, but they also allow for a bit longer OAL than plastic mags do. Maybe that is 1 of the reasons they work well, longer internally so a better chance of navigating the feed path?
Click to expand...

Interesting, thanks for chiming in, I was under the impression that they had based the magwell off of a few AR10's, but not went to the extent of using an SR25. Its interesting that you mention the issues with Gen 3 pmags in your SR25, it seems like many Americans use Gen 3 with out issue which is why I was under the impression this was not exclusively the Gen 3 pmags causing these issues.
 
onetwentyish said:
Interesting, thanks for chiming in, I was under the impression that they had based the magwell off of a few AR10's, but not went to the extent of using an SR25. Its interesting that you mention the issues with Gen 3 pmags in your SR25, it seems like many Americans use Gen 3 with out issue which is why I was under the impression this was not exclusively the Gen 3 pmags causing these issues.
Click to expand...

There was an issue back around 2012/2013 with the initial release of the gen3 SR25 Pmag. Magpul put out a notice, recalled the mags and made sure their SR25 pattern mags worked with the LMT MWS. The LMT MWS and KAC SR25 share the same lower design. The Geometry is the same. Hence the recall. The mag is designed around the SR25/LMT MWS geometry. Not the other way around. So unless you have one of those few still in the wild original gen3 pmags then they work very well with either the LMT or the KAC.
 
Last edited:
aakoksal said:
Sorry to jump into the discussion, I've been away for some time. I do have a MH, and don't have any magazine to feed it. Any suggestion as to which magazine I could source here in Calgary?

Thanks...
Click to expand...

The XCR-M mags are your best bet, we can hook you up. we also have some IMI mags and if you brought your rifle in we can find some that will fit. The IMI mags have varying tolerances so for non local folks not the best alternative.
 
Mine uses the xcr mags, 10 and 5, without a mag failure over some 600+ cycles. I have some IVI but have not used them yet as I like the metal xcr.
 
when you've finished with Christmas rush and your bored and want to go shoot something.
that is the perfect time for your co-worker to bring his Modern Hunter in 308 out with hand rolled tuned rounds and shoot some ice off the river!!!
was mid -20's with the sun going down when we did this.
was the 2nd time ive gotten to shoot his gun, i wish the wife would green light me to buy one, bloody thing is a work of art!
we where shooting at 115m than went out to 250m than he went out further after that (i didnt catch what the range finder had it at) sure is fun to watch ice chunks explode!


2nd vid

 
I know these aren't designed for cheap ammo but has anyone tried an MH with 147gr. PMC FMJBT. I was thinking it would be good plinking ammo. If it's no good I'll just handload like crazy but the PMC is nice and cheap.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom