ATRS Modern Sporter... Some Initial Observations

[PinaKaleada]

I agree with many posters pointing out that people are thinking this is an AR when it isn’t.

I don't fully understand you guys' explanation to the likes of: "this is not an AR, therefore you can't expect it to function like an AR".

If it's a problem inherent in the design, I.E. "why isn't it compatible with a real AR15 upper", then the above is a valid answer.

But if a charging handle doesn't work, and would've otherwise worked with a simple change of a line of CAD programming code, then the matter really isn't due to tolerance, not due to AR vs non-AR, not due to billet vs non-billet, it's just simply an error in the drawing, and I'd like to see the line of code fixed, wouldn't cost much either.

 

[Master-G]

Thank you for the review. Great thread.

Agreed, and especially the photography! I missed this one first time around—thanks for posting!

 

[Epoxy7]

Thanks. I appreciate that.

I hope I hear back from ATRS sooner or later, and I hope that they take my observations to heart. As a business owner my self, if a customer has comments on our tactical gear, I always wanna hear them! Good or bad. It's the only way to improve things.

As for the B5 stock, the whole rifle is just gonna get painted...as soon as I'm 100% set on the parts! Using the break fluid to clean the paint, does that mess with the polymer at all? I remember we used something to strip a bunch of rifles of paint and the plastic looked fugly after.

Don’t leave it for more than 10 minutes and it will be fine. If you leave it too long then yes it will damage the plastic. Alternatively use acetone. Acetone is just more of a pain.

 

[cr5]

Thanks. I appreciate that.

I hope I hear back from ATRS sooner or later, and I hope that they take my observations to heart. As a business owner my self, if a customer has comments on our tactical gear, I always wanna hear them! Good or bad. It's the only way to improve things.

As for the B5 stock, the whole rifle is just gonna get painted...as soon as I'm 100% set on the parts! Using the break fluid to clean the paint, does that mess with the polymer at all? I remember we used something to strip a bunch of rifles of paint and the plastic looked fugly after.

Don't worry, Rick and the guys at ATRS do listen to their customers.
When the Modern Hunter came out a buddy of mine was one of the early owners and after an afternoon with the rifle I sent Rick an email explaining any issues I had with it. The next batch/run addressed many of the issues I pointed out. Most were small tweaks, they do listen and adjust for the next run.
I now own a Modern Hunter and a MS and am very happy with my rifles. I see a couple little things with the MS but nothing that I can't work around. I already know that the second batch will address the bigger issues that people have found and I'm sure there will be some other small tweaks.


My experience with their customer service was very positive, the barrel extension on my Proof Research 6.5CM barrel was scratching my brass so I dropped it off at the shop in the morning and by 4 they had it ready for me to pick up. They didn't charge me anything to take it apart and smooth out the extension lugs.

 

[PPCLI-Jim]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XpR5SuDYl7o

The Varmiter in 6.5 grendel. Not mine but next year I'll be picking one up. very nice NR rifle.

 

[angryeyebrows]

Don't worry, Rick and the guys at ATRS do listen to their customers....My experience with their customer service was very positive...

That’s great to hear. Either way, I’m diggin the rifle, and it'll be interesting to see what my next receiver set will look like in comparison.

 

[beltfed]

Just read through this thread from start to end and I really appreciate the in-depth review.

For guys complaining about the minor 'peeves' like the magwell and the sharp trigger guard, consider that ergonomics are a big factor in how a rifle shoots. Carrying and shooting with a magwell hold isn't just an AR phenomenon. Lots of semi-auto, mag fed rifles are carried and shot this way - so it is very much a legitimate issue from an ergonomics perspective. So much so that I think these two areas are bigger concerns (for me) than the take down pin fitment.

Having the cutout for the charging handle directly below where the tabs on the handle will ride when the bolt is locked to the rear, I see as a poor design choice. If the normal cutout in the upper had to be relocated forward due to dimensional changes, why not remove it all together and have the handle pull directly out the rear? Is there a requirement for the cutout?

I'd like to hear more on this for sure. Sounds like a fatal flaw.

Overall heck of a review...
I personally appreciate your review for a couple of reasons:

1) Hopefully small things that could be improved will be. This is a big seller for ATRS

2) I plan on eventually buying one. That's right, the "hater" crap is exactly that. It's crap. If something is decent and not priced ridiculously then I will definitely consider getting one. I've stated this from the beginning. I have no brand loyalty. Right now this product offers the best option for a non restricted as close to the AR15 as possible. The price is competitive, and I get to use my own parts, so I don't get price raped on that end either. It's a decent solution from what I'm seeing.

From your review it seems that a few minor tweaks and it will be an excellent solution.

I also use the magwell when shooting AR carbines for prone without a bipod and even kneeling. Not all the time, as I also use a stubby vertical grip for standing etc. But the magwell hold has it's advantaged from certain shooting positions. It's not obsolete and should be retained.

Agreed!

 

[onetwentyish]

THIS. In addition to what is mentioned in this post, the tabs prevent the gas tube from being pinched, should the rail come loose and rotate with great force. All of the TOP manufacturers, military contractors or not, have engineered some form of anti-rotation into their designs. Noveske use a pin, DD uses machined tabs on the bolt up collar, Geissele uses tabs on the rail with set screws, BCM uses a totally separate steel insert. All of these companies would not waste time and money if they didn't see a need for the system.



You are correct about some of my observations. If ATRS loves their sharp mag well due to aesthetics, then so be it. I don't, and I'd prefer to have something more friendly to grab. This can for sure fall under the "to each, their own" category. However, there should be no gap when installing the front take down pin. The shoulder of the pin should make contact with the side of the lower when fully closed. I see that as an error. Having the cutout for the charging handle directly below where the tabs on the handle will ride when the bolt is locked to the rear, I see as a poor design choice. If the normal cutout in the upper had to be relocated forward due to dimensional changes, why not remove it all together and have the handle pull directly out the rear? Is there a requirement for the cutout?



With exception of the two things I mentioned above, I think ATRS made it very well...of course some things I would have done differently, but that is their call. I'm not a firearms manufacturer. I actually tried REALLY hard to not be combative in the initial post! I guess I'm just an abrasive person. I didn't mean for the post to come off very negative at all, but instead, just wanted to share my opinions/observations. This post is exactly what I experienced when building my rifle with their receiver sets. I really do like the rifle and I GREATLY appreciate ATRS for bringing it to market. People on this forum get all triggered when the read something even remotely critical, especially when they've invested their own money into the product. I've seen it here a thousand times over the years. In any case, I'm curious as to what specifically you agree with? Do you own one of these things? I've sent ATRS an email and linked the post, but no reply yet...probably too busy cranking out receivers which is good. No one has replied about my charging handle observation.

I do have several sets, both in my posession and on order. Some are built, most are projects waiting for future funding allocation. Wouldn't be suprised if I am one of, if not the largest sole end user purchaser with my name on approx 3.4% of total production from run 1 and 2.

As for how I feel about the various design cues:
MAGWELL - I like the flared magwell for 3 gun etc, and I dont find it to be very sharp at all, I was actually admiring the other day how ATRS actually cleaned up all the sharp edges and corners, its nothing like my BCL102's magwell, it is litterally an overly exaggerated sharp edge with no bevelling, enough so that one could probably say that is the most dangerous part of that rifle. Haha. That said I wouldn't mind a more subdued flare, especially for things like my C7 clone.
RECESSED PIN - The whole modern series has had this design, it provides a clean look on the push side while leaving you a gap to get hooked into to pull it out on the pull side. My personal thoughts on this are that I would prefer it sit flush and stick out the other side, as often I find I need to push the pin to get it started and I don't always have a bullet laying around to do that.
TRIGGER GUARD - I do like the design, but at the same time I hate having the choice made for me, and once again doesn't really fit my C7 clone, but again, big whoop. It does keep one from having the trigger guard gap from biting into your finger which in the end is worth it on 80% of my builds.
MAG RELEASE FENCE - This was one of the things I agree with most, it is rather large and over baring, a nice beveled edge all the way around would be perfect. That said I am glad they left the material as I plan to pick up several of their MV ambi bolt releases, and mill them into some of my sets. It was in my opinion one of the best features on the MH, MV, and BCL102 G2, as I hate the idea of a BAD lever style bolt release.

An unmentioned here issue is that G1 uppers have a sharp forward edge that needs some bevelling to stop square mags (mostly steel lipped ones, Lancer) from hanging up on during insertion. I believe this will be OEM resolved on all future runs, and G1 owners can take theirs in for a update.

Honestly, I am thoroughly impressed overall with the product and I may order a couple more lowers yet in order to keep me busy until C71 is repealed and business can go on like normal yet again.

 

[PinaKaleada]

Eliminating the cutout may not work, reason is that I believe the tracks for the charging handle ear is milled by a tool dropping down to the right depth(creating this cut out), and this tool then run the length of the charging handle to create this said track.

I have not seen/measure where this cut out is located, perhaps someone can post a picture?

As a half fix, I might file the 4 bottom corners on the ears just enough so that even if the charging handle drops, this angle will allow for the charging handle to divert upwards back into the tracks. Not the best fix, but I’ll try when I do receive my upper on the FA run. But hopefully ATRS will listen and come up with a genius idea.

 

[alberta tactical rifle]

Eliminating the cutout may not work, reason is that I believe the tracks for the charging handle ear is milled by a tool dropping down to the right depth(creating this cut out), and this tool then run the length of the charging handle to create this said track.

I have not seen/measure where this cut out is located, perhaps someone can post a picture?

As a half fix, I might file the 4 bottom corners on the ears just enough so that even if the charging handle drops, this angle will allow for the charging handle to divert upwards back into the tracks. Not the best fix, but I’ll try when I do receive my upper on the FA run. But hopefully ATRS will listen and come up with a genius idea.

In an effort to constantly improve on our products we DO listen to feedback. In our shop the mentality is that many brains will always be smarter than just 1.

Some of the raised concerns have already been addressed and once we get back to making lowers will try and address the concerns on them.
Not all are possible but we are trying to make thee very best product possible.

 

[PinaKaleada]

Great response from a great company! Is the charging cut out on the #2 and #3 run upper addressed? Curious to hear!

 

[Dietz]

Great response from a great company!

Yes they are great folks.

 

[angryeyebrows]

Just read through this thread from start to end and I really appreciate the in-depth review.

For guys complaining about the minor 'peeves' like the magwell and the sharp trigger guard, consider that ergonomics are a big factor in how a rifle shoots. Carrying and shooting with a magwell hold isn't just an AR phenomenon. Lots of semi-auto, mag fed rifles are carried and shot this way - so it is very much a legitimate issue from an ergonomics perspective. So much so that I think these two areas are bigger concerns (for me) than the take down pin fitment.

Thanks and good point. I personally value ergonomics in a firearm. Luckily, a competent machinist can zip those edges off and I'll simply Cerakote it.

MAGWELL - I like the flared magwell for 3 gun etc, and I dont find it to be very sharp at all, I was actually admiring the other day how ATRS actually cleaned up all the sharp edges and corners, its nothing like my BCL102's magwell, it is literally an overly exaggerated sharp edge with no bevelling, enough so that one could probably say that is the most dangerous part of that rifle. Haha. That said I wouldn't mind a more subdued flare, especially for things like my C7 clone.

I personally like the Noveske mag well. It has a pretty serious opening, but it's very comfortable to grab. Even the ATRS well is fine, it just needs a bit more material taken off, to take a little of the "bite" out of it.

RECESSED PIN - The whole modern series has had this design, it provides a clean look on the push side while leaving you a gap to get hooked into to pull it out on the pull side. My personal thoughts on this are that I would prefer it sit flush and stick out the other side, as often I find I need to push the pin to get it started and I don't always have a bullet laying around to do that.

I did not know this gap and extra thickness was common across the whole line. Again, and as you've noted, I'd much prefer to not need a poking implement to get my pin started. I'm sure the gap at the head of this pin doesn't harm anything, but my OCD is triggered for sure!

TRIGGER GUARD - I do like the design, but at the same time I hate having the choice made for me, and once again doesn't really fit my C7 clone, but again, big whoop. It does keep one from having the trigger guard gap from biting into your finger which in the end is worth it on 80% of my builds.

Not sure on this comment. I don't have any issue with a built in trigger guard. I like it, and prefer it over the AR15's standard guard. I just found that with the MOE SL, I noticed the two little machining points at the rear. That being said, the standard AR guard with gap is super annoying, and anyone who was done a ton of shooting with the issued rifle can attest that after a few hundred rounds in a session, that gap can chew away at your finger.

MAG RELEASE FENCE - This was one of the things I agree with most, it is rather large and over baring, a nice beveled edge all the way around would be perfect. That said I am glad they left the material as I plan to pick up several of their MV ambi bolt releases, and mill them into some of my sets. It was in my opinion one of the best features on the MH, MV, and BCL102 G2, as I hate the idea of a BAD lever style bolt release.

I detest the bolt-on levers. I'd very much like to see this ambi-bolt mod if you ever get that done.

An unmentioned here issue is that G1 uppers have a sharp forward edge that needs some bevelling to stop square mags (mostly steel lipped ones, Lancer) from hanging up on during insertion. I believe this will be OEM resolved on all future runs, and G1 owners can take theirs in for an update.

I also did not know this. I have a bunch of pmags right now, but I'm gonna be using a boat load of Lancers in the future...

Eliminating the cutout may not work, reason is that I believe the tracks for the charging handle ear is milled by a tool dropping down to the right depth(creating this cut out), and this tool then run the length of the charging handle to create this said track.

I have not seen/measure where this cut out is located, perhaps someone can post a picture?

As a half fix, I might file the 4 bottom corners on the ears just enough so that even if the charging handle drops, this angle will allow for the charging handle to divert upwards back into the tracks. Not the best fix, but I’ll try when I do receive my upper on the FA run. But hopefully ATRS will listen and come up with a genius idea.

That makes sense as to why the cutout is present. There must be another way to ensure a smooth, uninterrupted track for the charging handle. I think there are some other ARish rifles on the market that have handles that insert from the rear.

In an effort to constantly improve on our products we DO listen to feedback. In our shop the mentality is that many brains will always be smarter than just 1.

Some of the raised concerns have already been addressed and once we get back to making lowers will try and address the concerns on them.
Not all are possible but we are trying to make thee very best product possible.

Thanks for the response. I look forward to getting my second set to see what is different. If you guys can think of a work around for the charging handle, I'd be all over some new uppers too!

 

[ATRS Shaun]

Thanks. I appreciate that.

I hope I hear back from ATRS sooner or later, and I hope that they take my observations to heart. As a business owner my self, if a customer has comments on our tactical gear, I always wanna hear them! Good or bad. It's the only way to improve things.

As for the B5 stock, the whole rifle is just gonna get painted...as soon as I'm 100% set on the parts! Using the break fluid to clean the paint, does that mess with the polymer at all? I remember we used something to strip a bunch of rifles of paint and the plastic looked fugly after.

I've prepared a detailed response to your email but Rick wanted the opportunity to address your concerns personally when, he returns to the office on Monday.

I do have several sets, both in my posession and on order. Some are built, most are projects waiting for future funding allocation. Wouldn't be suprised if I am one of, if not the largest sole end user purchaser with my name on approx 3.4% of total production from run 1 and 2.

As for how I feel about the various design cues:
MAGWELL - I like the flared magwell for 3 gun etc, and I dont find it to be very sharp at all, I was actually admiring the other day how ATRS actually cleaned up all the sharp edges and corners, its nothing like my BCL102's magwell, it is litterally an overly exaggerated sharp edge with no bevelling, enough so that one could probably say that is the most dangerous part of that rifle. Haha. That said I wouldn't mind a more subdued flare, especially for things like my C7 clone.
RECESSED PIN - The whole modern series has had this design, it provides a clean look on the push side while leaving you a gap to get hooked into to pull it out on the pull side. My personal thoughts on this are that I would prefer it sit flush and stick out the other side, as often I find I need to push the pin to get it started and I don't always have a bullet laying around to do that.
TRIGGER GUARD - I do like the design, but at the same time I hate having the choice made for me, and once again doesn't really fit my C7 clone, but again, big whoop. �� It does keep one from having the trigger guard gap from biting into your finger which in the end is worth it on 80% of my builds.
MAG RELEASE FENCE - This was one of the things I agree with most, it is rather large and over baring, a nice beveled edge all the way around would be perfect. That said I am glad they left the material as I plan to pick up several of their MV ambi bolt releases, and mill them into some of my sets. It was in my opinion one of the best features on the MH, MV, and BCL102 G2, as I hate the idea of a BAD lever style bolt release.

An unmentioned here issue is that G1 uppers have a sharp forward edge that needs some bevelling to stop square mags (mostly steel lipped ones, Lancer) from hanging up on during insertion. I believe this will be OEM resolved on all future runs, and G1 owners can take theirs in for a update.

Honestly, I am thoroughly impressed overall with the product and I may order a couple more lowers yet in order to keep me busy until C71 is repealed and business can go on like normal yet again.

Minor correction to the bold/italic part. The actual issue you are referencing is two part, biggest part has nothing to do with the front ledge not lining up as we've seen in a couple of pictures. And I'll start by saying that this has been accommodated in all future uppers, and doesn't affect all first run uppers either.
The biggest culprit is actually to do with the corner radius' in the upper differing from the corner radius in the lower magwell. The most common mags that have encountered issues are the black metal mags with orange followers. Now, there have been two or three people that we had to resolve other mag issues for, and we address them as well, but where a pmag for example, has a rounded corner at the front, those black metal mags with orange followers tend to have almost zero radius to the front corners.

Images of the mags I'm refering to: (pics are snagged from all over the web, none are my own)

In contrast to the more rounded corners of a lot of mags (including most metal mags) look at the top front corners to see how it is more rounded.

 

[GUNNZ]

So has this issue been corrected in the first batch of FA uppers? All I run is LAR 15 mags so hope this is not an issue with the two uppers I have in order.

I can’t quite determine from your post. Thank you.

 

[ssapach]

I use those metal mags with orange followers and I don't seem to have an issue. A full mag needs a little more firm push to lock in place as opposed to a Pmag, but they still lock in and drop free without issue. They are actually my preferred mag for being 10 rds and not unnecessarily long for no reason.

 

[angryeyebrows]

I've prepared a detailed response to your email but Rick wanted the opportunity to address your concerns personally when, he returns to the office on Monday.

Shaun, that is great thanks. Looking forward to it. Thanks for taking the time to post here too.

 

[ATRS Shaun]

So has this issue been corrected in the first batch of FA uppers? All I run is LAR 15 mags so hope this is not an issue with the two uppers I have in order.

I can’t quite determine from your post. Thank you.

Most lar mags are no issue, but it seems recently there's been a large shipment of "orange follower" mags, which have a ninety degree (or on a couple I saw) even sharper corner. My personal opinion from looking at them is somethings out of spec on machine folding the specific problem mags, and then stacking tolerances mixed with our wider radius in the upper, they didn't drop free.

TLDR uppers have tighter radius to accommodate wider tolerances from different magazines dropping free. If you're having issues with one email info@albertatacticalrifle.com

 

[DILLIGAF]

Those LAR mags are junk anyways. I had some issues with them in my X95 and ACR.

The 10/30s havent given me any issues across all my platforms. same as my old school ATRS gen 1 mags by CAA

 

[Armedsask]

Luckily, a competent machinist can zip those edges off and I'll simply Cerakote it.

Be careful you don't get suckered into sending your lower to some guy with an old mill in his garage who claims he knows what he's doing.