ATRS modern hunter?

[Epoxy7]

Oh and one more teeny tiny thought: it's Les Baer, NOT Les Bauer.... And yes, I have one of those too. Had it for going on 15 years, and no it will never hit the EE in spite of its retricted status.

This just makes your rant above even stranger....

Thank you for clarifying my point that an AR with a good barrel
And trigger should be a good shooter. Which is why I brought up the Stag 6. .5 moa guarantee due to a good trigger and barrel with solid BCG etc. It doesn't have to be expensive to shoot. Also that it's not difficult to get an AR based rifle to shoot. We are in complete agreement there!

Glad you're happy with yours and it fits your expectations/use. Thanks for noting many of us post on phones with auto correct!

 

[Epoxy7]

I have, repeatedly... but sadly I don't count. Best customer group I've seen posted was 0.384", 5 shots at 100 yards with a 260 using 140gr ELDs. I took his name off the picture as I believe the post has since been deleted and it's not my place to put customers names out where they don't want to be.

I remember that post. I recall
The author put his up for sale on the EE. I gather it sold.

 

[oaktree]

This just makes your rant above even stranger....

Thank you for clarifying my point that an AR with a good barrel
And trigger should be a good shooter. Which is why I brought up the Stag 6. .5 moa guarantee due to a good trigger and barrel with solid BCG etc. It doesn't have to be expensive to shoot. Also that it's not difficult to get an AR based rifle to shoot. We are in complete agreement there!

Glad you're happy with yours and it fits your expectations/use. Thanks for noting many of us post on phones with auto correct!

How does one propose to take an AR hunting in Canada? I truly don't understand why some have such negativity toward the ATRS product. They fill a niche and do it very well with a product that is well made and very accurate. An MH gives away nothing in the accuracy or reliability dept to the best ARs yet they are totally legal as a field gun.

And the price? ARs are cheap because development costs have long been ammortized and the only costs remaining are the commodity assembly line costs. (Well, maybe most ARs are cheap - my LB wasn't by any stretch inexpensive). An MH can't be cheap until and unless volumes and ubiquity reach similar commodity levels which is unlikely to happen given that Canada is really the only market they can logically play in. The US market is already saturated with dozens of manufacturers competing with "me too" AR products and stiff pricing competition. Economics 101.

If there are other non-restricted, well made, cost effective, reliable and accurate self loaders in the Canadian market, they are very well hidden. Some may hit one or more of these 5 design criteria, but please enlighten me as to which product hits all 5. Make that 6 if one also is looking for a .308 family cartridge.

No rants here. Just common sense and logic.

 

[cr5]

How does one propose to take an AR hunting in Canada? I truly don't understand why some have such negativity toward the ATRS product.

I guess he only ever shoots at a range so status makes no difference for the shooting he does. For the rest of us who have crown or permission to shoot on private land things are a little different. I love my AR's but if I could shoot them on my private range in my yard I'd love them more.

 

[oaktree]

I guess he only ever shoots at a range so status makes no difference for the shooting he does. For the rest of us who have crown or permission to shoot on private land things are a little different. I love my AR's but if I could shoot them on my private range in my yard I'd love them more.

That pretty much sums up where I landed. I wish things were different but they aren't. Unfortunately we live with Libtard rule and law here in Canada.

 

[beltfed]

If there are other non-restricted, well made, cost effective, reliable and accurate self loaders in the Canadian market, they are very well hidden. Some may hit one or more of these 5 design criteria, but please enlighten me as to which product hits all 5. Make that 6 if one also is looking for a .308 family cartridge.

No rants here. Just common sense and logic.

Reading this from the sidelines. I've got no horse in this race at all and while I have certain feelings about the MH, I do try and support, and have supported Rick's shop in the past, present and future.

Your posts are right out of there.
Firstly the MH is nowhere near 'cost effective'. ATRS and anyone who has put the cash down for one don't make bones about it.
It's a custom rifle and the Owner is in it to make a profit. Customers have the disposable cash and want it.I get it, and all the power to them.
'Reliability' has been debated and beaten to death. Bottom line is if there are caveats to running certain ammo and light primer strikes, it isn't reliable. Timney drop in triggers was a horrible decision - IMHO.
The Springfield M1A, and FNAR are just two that spring to mind and have already been mentioned in this thread that are as good or better in a lot of respects and cost a fraction of the MH when all is said and done.
There are others that may not come with the same accuracy potential, like the XCR or Keltec but could be perfectly suited to hunting and accurate enough for that purpose.
I shake my head at guys who drop $4-6k on this rifle and claim it is value for money, or that other rifles cannot compete with it - you are delusional and dreaming in technicolor if you think this.

 

[Rstjean]

Reading this from the sidelines. I've got no horse in this race at all and while I have certain feelings about the MH, I do try and support, and have supported Rick's shop in the past, present and future.

Your posts are right out of there.
Firstly the MH is nowhere near 'cost effective'. ATRS and anyone who has put the cash down for one don't make bones about it.
It's a custom rifle and the Owner is in it to make a profit. Customers have the disposable cash and want it.I get it, and all the power to them.
'Reliability' has been debated and beaten to death. Bottom line is if there are caveats to running certain ammo and light primer strikes, it isn't reliable. Timney drop in triggers was a horrible decision - IMHO.
The Springfield M1A, and FNAR are just two that spring to mind and have already been mentioned in this thread that are as good or better in a lot of respects and cost a fraction of the MH when all is said and done.
There are others that may not come with the same accuracy potential, like the XCR or Keltec but could be perfectly suited to hunting and accurate enough for that purpose.
I shake my head at guys who drop $4-6k on this rifle and claim it is value for money, or that other rifles cannot compete with it - you are delusional and dreaming in technicolor if you think this.

Just for comparison of price an xcr-m costs $3359.99 and a base model modern hunter is $3650 not a big difference. It only gets retarded expensive when you overpay for options.

 

[j_06]

Reading this from the sidelines. I've got no horse in this race at all and while I have certain feelings about the MH, I do try and support, and have supported Rick's shop in the past, present and future.

Your posts are right out of there.
Firstly the MH is nowhere near 'cost effective'. ATRS and anyone who has put the cash down for one don't make bones about it.
It's a custom rifle and the Owner is in it to make a profit. Customers have the disposable cash and want it.I get it, and all the power to them.
'Reliability' has been debated and beaten to death. Bottom line is if there are caveats to running certain ammo and light primer strikes, it isn't reliable. Timney drop in triggers was a horrible decision - IMHO.
The Springfield M1A, and FNAR are just two that spring to mind and have already been mentioned in this thread that are as good or better in a lot of respects and cost a fraction of the MH when all is said and done.
There are others that may not come with the same accuracy potential, like the XCR or Keltec but could be perfectly suited to hunting and accurate enough for that purpose.
I shake my head at guys who drop $4-6k on this rifle and claim it is value for money, or that other rifles cannot compete with it - you are delusional and dreaming in technicolor if you think this.

The endowment effect is out of this world!

 

[oaktree]

Reading this from the sidelines. I've got no horse in this race at all and while I have certain feelings about the MH, I do try and support, and have supported Rick's shop in the past, present and future.

Your posts are right out of there.
Firstly the MH is nowhere near 'cost effective'. ATRS and anyone who has put the cash down for one don't make bones about it.
It's a custom rifle and the Owner is in it to make a profit. Customers have the disposable cash and want it.I get it, and all the power to them.
'Reliability' has been debated and beaten to death. Bottom line is if there are caveats to running certain ammo and light primer strikes, it isn't reliable. Timney drop in triggers was a horrible decision - IMHO.
The Springfield M1A, and FNAR are just two that spring to mind and have already been mentioned in this thread that are as good or better in a lot of respects and cost a fraction of the MH when all is said and done.
There are others that may not come with the same accuracy potential, like the XCR or Keltec but could be perfectly suited to hunting and accurate enough for that purpose.
I shake my head at guys who drop $4-6k on this rifle and claim it is value for money, or that other rifles cannot compete with it - you are delusional and dreaming in technicolor if you think this.

Who claimed an MH to be cost effective? That is exactly the point. Cost effective doesn't seem to exist in the Canadian marketplace for this type of rifle. If there was such a thing that also hits all the other points, it would surely sell like hot cakes. Reliable? I have thus far tried 4 different types of bullets and all functioned flawlessly but granted I wouldn't shoot corrosive or other el cheapo surplus ammo in any of my firearms. Accurate? I've had 3 high end M1A rifles and I've yet to see better than 2 MOA out of any of them, although no doubt others will surely have a different experience. In any event I love my M1A and appreciate its service parameters.

You are certainly right though. Why drive a Porsche when a Lada will also get you to the grocery store? And you won't need premium gas!!!

 

[cr5]

Just for comparison of price an xcr-m costs $3359.99 and a base model modern hunter is $3650 not a big difference. It only gets retarded expensive when you overpay for options.

This ^^^
The MH is not cheap but none of our current non restricted options are. It will be interesting to see what the NEA102 does when it hits the market.
Cost effective? None of us "need" any more than a 308 bolt action for all our hunting and plinking needs. I don't look at the MH or any of the other non restricted options as a hunting rifle, I have a bolt action for those duties, my non restricted semi auto rifles are for fun on my property and when shooting with friends on their property or on crown land. I love AR's but just don't find myself going to the range at all any more so anything restricted doesn't really appeal to me anymore, the consequence is I have to pay more for a similar rifle that has the non restricted stamp.

Also try comparing apples to apples, sure a cheap assembly line AR-10 (which is still a decent rifle) can be had for $1500-$2000 but throw a CNC matched upper/lower, high end trigger, match grade stainless barrel and see where you fall for a final price. Probably not far off the price of a base model MH and you've still got a rifle you can only use at a range.
My last AR-10 was all those things and it was well over $3000 and even though we all know there are some people (probably more than some) who don't like Rick, regardless of personal feelings he's bringing a high quality rifle to the market, it may have some bugs to be worked out but it's still a good product and as Beltfed pointed out ATRS is a business and has to sell for a price that makes them money so they can pay bills and salaries of employees.

 

[Epoxy7]

This ^^^
The MH is not cheap but none of our current non restricted options are. It will be interesting to see what the NEA102 does when it hits the market.
Cost effective? None of us "need" any more than a 308 bolt action for all our hunting and plinking needs. I don't look at the MH or any of the other non restricted options as a hunting rifle, I have a bolt action for those duties, my non restricted semi auto rifles are for fun on my property and when shooting with friends on their property or on crown land. I love AR's but just don't find myself going to the range at all any more so anything restricted doesn't really appeal to me anymore, the consequence is I have to pay more for a similar rifle that has the non restricted stamp.

I agree about the NEA102. I think most of us understand the "non restricted tax" but this seems to be on the high side. If NEA lives up to their price etc (providing they get the non restricted FRT for the commercial version), then you have an almost fully made in Canada rifle (except the barrel blank) in the $1500 range. Not just off the shelf parts assembled. If they can deliver on that, then this negates the "cost" argument and Canadian made etc. I can understand not wanting restricted in your case. I shoot the odd time on Crown land but mostly at a range. Personally if shooting $2 a round match ammo, I want the rifle to be an accurate problem free shooter. I can tolerate the shortcomings with my DPMS LR308 as it was the cheapest commercial AR308 available. No one was trying to make it out as a high end product as it wasn't. That being said, if I didn't get it to shoot like my high end stuff, it would be gone. There is no place for an only 1 moa AR target rifle in my collection.

]Also try comparing apples to apples, sure a cheap assembly line AR-10 (which is still a decent rifle) can be had for $1500-$2000 but throw a CNC matched upper/lower, high end trigger, match grade stainless barrel and see where you fall for a final price. Probably not far off the price of a base model MH and you've still got a rifle you can only use at a range.
My last AR-10 was all those things and it was well over $3000 and even though we all know there are some people (probably more than some) who don't like Rick, regardless of personal feelings he's bringing a high quality rifle to the market, it may have some bugs to be worked out but it's still a good product and as Beltfed pointed out ATRS is a business and has to sell for a price that makes them money so they can pay bills and salaries of employees.

The whole "personal issue" is a red herring. It's used to play victim to gain sympathy/support and to try and dismiss the points brought up in the debate. Let's be honest here, if the MH performed how I would expect it to, I would already own one. As would many others that I know. Whether they "liked" the company or not. Even with the current price, many would find a way.

We had a lot of similar debates with the XCR-M. This included the owner, the accuracy and reliability. This is sort of deja-vu. I almost bought one. But pre purchase research made it clear that this wasn't the non restricted AR308 style rifle I was hoping for. The same goes for the MH. If you go back to the original threads on the MH creation, I actually was fully onboard. I really wanted a non restricted AR10. I still do... NEA102 is the next hope. But again it will have to deliver. There has been a rocky history of over promising, under delivering with NEA as well. If it delivers and the price remains reasonable then I will buy one, regardless of what I have thought of that company in the past. That's the reality. Not the "personal issue" vendetta garbage dismissal claims.

 

[beltfed]

Who claimed an MH to be cost effective? That is exactly the point. Cost effective doesn't seem to exist in the Canadian marketplace for this type of rifle.

Apologies - misread your post. I thought you were suggesting a competing design to the MH would need to hit all of those attributes, and through extension, the MH met those parameters.
Of the six you mention though I'd say by all accounts the FNAR hits them for sure. A decent M1A, and a mildly worked over M-305 too.

 

[oaktree]

Apologies - misread your post. I thought you were suggesting a competing design to the MH would need to hit all of those attributes, and through extension, the MH met those parameters.
Of the six you mention though I'd say by all accounts the FNAR hits them for sure. A decent M1A, and a mildly worked over M-305 too.

No worries Beltfed, I was not entirely clear. wrt to the M1A, I am on my third Springfield M1A loaded. This one with a stainless barrel, a good solidly constructed and tightly attached picatinney scope rail on the receiver over top of the breech, and it does an honest 2 MOA with good match grade ammo and good glass. The other two were also good shooters but financial circumstances saw them go down the highway. My question is related to the accuracy level...... do others shoot much better than this? It's an honest question with no malice intended.... I truly am curious because I have not personally experienced this myself. I struggle with believing that I am the only person cursed with owning Springfields costing over $2k that can't do better than 2MOA..... Widely different purchase times and highly likely different production runs.


Between the rifle @ $2200, scope mount @ $200, and one of those funky carbon cheekpieces on the stock at $100, the M1A Loaded rifle comes in at $2500 before tax..... Easily a thou cheaper than the MH but not exactly a cheap rig. My experience shows quite a difference though in accuracy levels with the MH soundly in the accuracy winners circle.

 

[beltfed]

I think a consistent, practical 2moa is pretty damned good...and honest....

 

[oaktree]

An NEA102 would be a very interesting proposition at $1500 CDN however it really feels like vapour ware with lots of promises to hit the Canadian market but little substance. If and it's a big if it gets non restricted FRT status, then it would offer a cheap starting point for a build your own AR10 project. Like staring with a Norinco M1A, there would be a cheap entry point wherein one can start adding accurizing components to. You'd still have an upper and lower of the quality and precision that you started with, but you'd be in the game. How much $ it would take one to get to the place that an MH starts at is of course the million dollar question, pardon the pun.

 

[Epoxy7]

An NEA102 would be a very interesting proposition at $1500 CDN however it really feels like vapour ware with lots of promises to hit the Canadian market but little substance. If and it's a big if it gets non restricted FRT status, then it would offer a cheap starting point for a build your own AR10 project. Like staring with a Norinco M1A, there would be a cheap entry point wherein one can start adding accurizing components to. You'd still have an upper and lower of the quality and precision that you started with, but you'd be in the game. How much $ it would take one to get to the place that an MH starts at is of course the million dollar question, pardon the pun.

Well keep in mind that the NEA102 is currently at the same point that the MH was being advertised and pre sold as none restricted. I give them credit for waiting g to get the non restricted frt for the comercial version rather than starting to sell as non restricted based on the prototype non restricted frt status. Especially with the current political environment.

The stock NEA 102 vs the base model MH ie without the upgrades appear pretty equivalent. So half the cost or less to get it to an equivalent MH as it starts out equivalent. May least from what we know so far and from what we know about the MH innards. I don't know which I prefer ie low end DPMS LPK and BCG, buffer tube and DPMS stock furniture in the MH or NEA in house LPK and BCG etc. I suspect the trigger will need to be upgraded along with commercial buffer tube (same as MH) and stock. Hand guard looks fine and barrel blank is SS suspected Green Mountain which is also decent.

 

[ATRS Shaun]

Well keep in mind that the NEA102 is currently at the same point that the MH was being advertised and pre sold as none restricted. I give them credit for waiting g to get the non restricted frt for the comercial version rather than starting to sell as non restricted based on the prototype non restricted frt status. Especially with the current political environment.

The stock NEA 102 vs the base model MH ie without the upgrades appear pretty equivalent. So half the cost or less to get it to an equivalent MH as it starts out equivalent. May least from what we know so far and from what we know about the MH innards. I don't know which I prefer ie low end DPMS LPK and BCG, buffer tube and DPMS stock furniture in the MH or NEA in house LPK and BCG etc. I suspect the trigger will need to be upgraded along with commercial buffer tube (same as MH) and stock. Hand guard looks fine and barrel blank is SS suspected Green Mountain which is also decent.

Not going to get into the rest of your post, because I honestly don't know enough about the internals of the NEA25 / NEA102, I find their argument incredibly interesting and wish them luck with it, however unlikely I think their chances are. (not a fault of their argument but of the SFSS, the same section that called the CZ 858 with engraved stocks prohib keep in mind).

However, they(the SFSS, who issue the classifications) are the only ones who could put forth an informed opinion on what state the Modern Hunter was at, in contrast to what state the NEA102 is at. So I find you trying to draw parallels between them quite frustrating, and slandering us for "pre-sale of a yet-unclassified gun", when we had a classification and the only condition attached to it was to make "a faithful reproduction" of the original prototype.

And what parts out of a LPK are you complaining about? Seriously, we have to make a different bolt catch, we use a timney trigger with only a hammer pin and our made-in-house "retaining claw", the safety utilises a captured ball-bearing/spring system, so there's not a whole lot of parts still needed at that point... You want a custom front take-down pin ? Supply one, not a problem, long as it fits. Mag release and safety both have available upgrades, and even the ambi-safety is made in house..

"Especially with the current political environment" That I believe may be the biggest downfall for the NEA102. Nobody backing them up politically.

 

[clg]

If NEA lives up to their price etc (providing they get the non restricted FRT for the commercial version), then you have an almost fully made in Canada rifle (except the barrel blank) in the $1500 range. Not just off the shelf parts assembled. If they can deliver on that, then this negates the "cost" argument and Canadian made etc.

I think you're being willfully dishonest by comparing these as the same, when anyone who's handled an NEA AR15 as well as an ATRS build (I have) can tell you it's not apples to apples. It's akin to comparing a high trim Ford to an S-Class. That because they both have leather, navigation and dynamic cruise control they're in the same category. There is a base cost to the manufacture of parts, especially in machining, NEA chooses to stick to that base from what I've experienced and not travel very far from what gets the job done. To improve on that base level requires a significant investment in man/machine hours, but the end product does represent that investment. If you chose to ignore that, you also need to step regurgitating the same nonsensical argument.

 

[oaktree]

I think you're being willfully dishonest by comparing these as the same, when anyone who's handled an NEA AR15 as well as an ATRS build (I have) can tell you it's not apples to apples. It's akin to comparing a high trim Ford to an S-Class. That because they both have leather, navigation and dynamic cruise control they're in the same category. There is a base cost to the manufacture of parts, especially in machining, NEA chooses to stick to that base from what I've experienced and not travel very far from what gets the job done. To improve on that base level requires a significant investment in man/machine hours, but the end product does represent that investment. If you chose to ignore that, you also need to step regurgitating the same nonsensical argument.

Putting lipstick on a pig still leaves one with a pig - but with nice lipstick. High quality uppers and lowers are expensive to make. Period. My LB is a fine example of this, as is my MH. My Colt HBAR wears a new 1" thick Lilja barrel and a very nice Jewell trigger but the upper and lower are all Colt and there's just no getting around that. Not a bad thing but it isn't a LB or MH upper/lower and the fit and finish and refinement are visibly not there with the Colt. It does shoot and after buying it used and adding the go fast parts, it cost me a tad over $3k. And it's STILL a Colt.

 

[Epoxy7]

I think you're being willfully dishonest by comparing these as the same, when anyone who's handled an NEA AR15 as well as an ATRS build (I have) can tell you it's not apples to apples. It's akin to comparing a high trim Ford to an S-Class. That because they both have leather, navigation and dynamic cruise control they're in the same category. There is a base cost to the manufacture of parts, especially in machining, NEA chooses to stick to that base from what I've experienced and not travel very far from what gets the job done. To improve on that base level requires a significant investment in man/machine hours, but the end product does represent that investment. If you chose to ignore that, you also need to step regurgitating the same nonsensical argument.

These aren't AR15 rifles. These are AR308/AR10 rifles. The NEA 102 is said to have their new forged 7075 upper/lower with built in trigger guard etc. Barrel blanks are rumoured to be Green Mountain SS. The rest is window dressing and easily modified by the user with off the shelf parts. Whether it's AR10 or AR308 parts, who knows at this time. It will be interesting to see. Hopefully we get the chance to see these as non restricted. We are going to disagree on your car analogy in this case.