B&t apc 223 pic thread-range report page 4

Not enough pictures in this picture thread....

Taking it out this weekend to finally shoot. Maybe I'll get some pics of it not on the floor
33493970900_5587024ce3_k_d.jpg

33749419331_2e372c8362_k_d.jpg

Looks pretty good but why mount that big laser on top? Isn't it just adding weight for very little practical function?
To me it looks like you will need an optic with a much lower mounting height, that stock design looks like you'll be resting your chin on it to get a sight picture through the optic.

Nice looking rifles though, I'm looking forward to seeing more range reports
 
Looks pretty good but why mount that big laser on top? Isn't it just adding weight for very little practical function?
Uhh for tacticool pictures of course! I took it off my mk18 since I have a peq15 coming in for that, so I just slapped on to see how it looks and for photos. I doubt it will stay on, I don't have any cats to tease with it.

To me it looks like you will need an optic with a much lower mounting height, that stock design looks like you'll be resting your chin on it to get a sight picture through the optic.

Nice looking rifles though, I'm looking forward to seeing more range reports

It's not as bad as it looks, I don't find it's any different then say, running a side rail mount on an 858 with an Eotech, He'll with the wire stock I have the same cheekweld running a super low rmr. It's the difference between the stock lower on my cheek vs actually pressed into my cheek. That being said I do like the acog, but let me actually shoot it before I make definitive claims.
 
White Knight,
Are you going to move the ACOG up a bit to allow clearance for the buis?
And, can you co-witness the buis to the ACOG? I've shot some ACOG equipped rifles but never noticed if they co-witness with buis.

I don't know how you could co witnesses with a magnified optic, the front sight would be a complete blur. That being said the acog unique design allows you to use the "pistol sights" through the mount which I found funny. Also the acog has terrible eye relief, so the last you want to be doing is moving it away from your face.

I'll try to take a pic of the buis
 
I don't know how you could co witnesses with a magnified optic, the front sight would be a complete blur. That being said the acog unique design allows you to use the "pistol sights" through the mount which I found funny. Also the acog has terrible eye relief, so the last you want to be doing is moving it away from your face.

I'll try to take a pic of the buis

Ah, roger that! I don't use magnified optics and ACOGs are a little rich for my blood! You're right about fuzzy front sights! LOL!
You'll still need pretty low back up sights to sight through a mount, like a 1/3 co-witness, I guess....
Thanks for the reply.
 
Ah, roger that! I don't use magnified optics and ACOGs are a little rich for my blood! You're right about fuzzy front sights! LOL!
You'll still need pretty low back up sights to sight through a mount, like a 1/3 co-witness, I guess....
Thanks for the reply.

amazingly its like a sight channel that makes it rear aperture-ish. it works perfectly and the base of the rear lines up with the base of the channel.
_DSC8500 by AV12G, on Flickr
 
This is the nicest racking gun I've ever seen...it definitely feels like there's roller bearings hiding inside. Not as heavy as I expected, either. Remove the foregrip and crappy sights and it's pretty sleek
 
The lack of a front sling point seems like a strange oversight, considering there are 5 rear sling points.

I put a Cadex QD mount up front and a Magpul QD mount in the rear. The supplied sling isn't what I was expecting :-( . So I'll have to use my Savvy sniper
 
I'm not too picky on slings, and the supplied one holds fine and is easy to adjust. The stock seems to be designed for the HK hooks, so I was thinking of just putting a Magpul RSA up front and using what came with the rifle. Probably support side setup to bear some of the rifle weight.
 
Well, I've ordered up the $500 retractable and folding buttstock with the all-important cheek-riser for my forthcoming, used APC223. To think that this would be standard-issue on just about any other modern carbine design is most definitely annoying. Especially when the Swiss are charging $3k(+) per copy with a circa 1980 fixed LOP buttstock... c'mon fer Chrissakes - get with the bloody program! Especially when you tout a key selling feature of this carbine as being the ability for a single unit to serve different police officers of differing stature and dexterity, from one shift to the next. An adjustable LOP might just be useful as a standard feature, eh?!?

I will post pics and a brief review when the stock and carbine come together in a couple of weeks. I highly doubt that the retractable buttstock is sufficiently sloppy so as to compromise accuracy, as is suggested in some of Wolvrine's early literature about the APC right here on this site. That sounds like a poor excuse for a cheaper and inferior fixed LOP buttstock to me. But hey - what do I know? No doubt had Wolverine insisted upon the retractable stock from the get-go, we'd be paying $500 more on the base-price. As always, it seems that we must pay a premium to play here in Canada. Sucks to be so small as to be practically irrelevant in contrast to our Southern neighbors' buying power/bargaining position....
 
Last edited:
Well, I've ordered up the $500 retractable and folding buttstock with the all-important cheek-riser for my forthcoming, used APC223. To think that this would be standard-issue on just about any other modern carbine design is most definitely annoying. Especially when the Swiss are charging $3k(+) per copy with a circa 1980 fixed LOP buttstock... c'mon fer Chrissakes - get with the bloody program! Especially when you tout a key selling feature of this carbine as being the ability for a single unit to serve different police officers of differing stature and dexterity, from one shift to the next. An adjustable LOP might just be useful as a standard feature, eh?!?

I will post pics and a brief review when the stock and carbine come together in a couple of weeks. I highly doubt that the retractable buttstock is sufficiently sloppy so as to compromise accuracy, as is suggested in some of Wolvrine's early literature about the APC right here on this site. That sounds like a poor excuse for a cheaper and inferior fixed LOP buttstock to me. But hey - what do I know? No doubt had Wolverine insisted upon the retractable stock from the get-go, we'd be paying $500 more on the base-price. As always, it seems that we must pay a premium to play here in Canada. Sucks to be so small as to be practically irrelevant in contrast to our Southern neighbors' buying power/bargaining position....

Yah I'll need to order that as well, I find the stock too short for me. But later, putting too much money in firearms these days, need to slow it down.

I don't think a few hundred rifles is an unsignificant order for B&T, they are not a huge company.
 
Back
Top Bottom