Black Creek Labs AR180 based rifle SVR2 Siberian approved for Non restricted FRT
- Thread starter Northern Shooter
- Start date
DaveMachine
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- That one place with a cowboy complex
Yes, there are a couple of screws to take out to access the piston.
I've been eagerly waiting the release of the BCL Siberian while trying to learn about the semi-auto world, this rifle looks nice and really wanting to handle one to see how it feels. I've been trying to find a Templar but the EE just snaps them up before I even can catch one.
If I've got this right, the wk-180s rattle the gas blocks loose and destroy themselves. The mcr has other quality issues.
The issue stated the most here has been that the Siberian has set screws in the bottom of the gasblock and the piston is not field strippable.
Understandably people want a rock solid platform, and would like to see at least a tapered pin to keep the piston true and not self destruct.
I was digging around the web and found some gasblock tampered pin toolsets that had jigs, bits, and a reamer. That could be a option, it would be something I'd consider for the gas block.
The other option I came across were AR15 piston conversion kits. If the Siberian has a fitting profile to match the gasblock of the kit and maintains a slim profile to retain the handguard as free floating that could be an option.
The other idea that is way more involved would be if a user who was meticulous could take some measurements of their rifle, and post a set of drawings online and crafty people could come up with an aftermarket system.
The handguard on the BCL is a nuisance with requiring an allen key, pins also would be nice, I just wonder with those components being aluminum how well they'd hold up to repeated take down. I would suppose they'd have to be sleeved.
If I've got this right, the wk-180s rattle the gas blocks loose and destroy themselves. The mcr has other quality issues.
The issue stated the most here has been that the Siberian has set screws in the bottom of the gasblock and the piston is not field strippable.
Understandably people want a rock solid platform, and would like to see at least a tapered pin to keep the piston true and not self destruct.
I was digging around the web and found some gasblock tampered pin toolsets that had jigs, bits, and a reamer. That could be a option, it would be something I'd consider for the gas block.
The other option I came across were AR15 piston conversion kits. If the Siberian has a fitting profile to match the gasblock of the kit and maintains a slim profile to retain the handguard as free floating that could be an option.
The other idea that is way more involved would be if a user who was meticulous could take some measurements of their rifle, and post a set of drawings online and crafty people could come up with an aftermarket system.
The handguard on the BCL is a nuisance with requiring an allen key, pins also would be nice, I just wonder with those components being aluminum how well they'd hold up to repeated take down. I would suppose they'd have to be sleeved.
Bolivar
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
I handled a Siberian demo at one of my local shops today.
1) Not clear if a replacement ambidextrous would be possible. That's important for me as a left eye dom, left handed shooter.
2) The charging handle is tiny, and has sharp edges.
3) The charging handle is held forward by a (presumably spring loaded) ball detent that rests in a dimble in the upper. My impression is that at some point the aluminum is going to wear and the charging handle will no longer stay in place.
Otherwise, from a look at a gun store....it seemed okay. Weight was fine, a little muzzle heavy which makes sense for a rifle with no optic on the receiver.
Overall the build felt solid. No strangle play or rattling.
Just my impressions.
1) Not clear if a replacement ambidextrous would be possible. That's important for me as a left eye dom, left handed shooter.
2) The charging handle is tiny, and has sharp edges.
3) The charging handle is held forward by a (presumably spring loaded) ball detent that rests in a dimble in the upper. My impression is that at some point the aluminum is going to wear and the charging handle will no longer stay in place.
Otherwise, from a look at a gun store....it seemed okay. Weight was fine, a little muzzle heavy which makes sense for a rifle with no optic on the receiver.
Overall the build felt solid. No strangle play or rattling.
Just my impressions.
Last edited:
I was strongly considering buying this rifle, however after I learnt about gas block - no way. It is not how the firearm should be designed. Even permanently fixed gas block as on SVT would solve the problem and would allow to clean gas system (except the port in the block and barre, but there yoiu can squirt some CLP). Unscrewing HG is also drawback in my books. Will only consider after revision or aftermarket solution.
You guys are missing the point.
Gas guns that are decently designed and executed and utilize pistons are field serviceable - being able to easily field strip for cleaning without the use of the most basic tools (like the tip of a bullet).
Cleaning that involves scrubbing the built up carbon deposits from the piston and gas block are essential qualities in keeping it reliable.
Everything else is a compromise for poor design and corner cutting.
Neither the gas block or the gas tube on an AR is meant to be taken off or 'field servicable', so these comparisons are not relatable.
Fiddle-f*cking with allen keys to remove hand guards and gas blocks is not field serviceable.
Referencing Bartok's post, even the makers of the R18 acknowledge this and are planning on making corrections.
Ultimately, this is a civilian firearm, meant primarily for sports shooting and varmint defense, so given that the decision to make it tool-sevicible makes sense in context. You are not humping the firearm around Afghanistan or Ukraine, without a good facilities to take care of that. If you do need a field serviceable firearm because you spend your days varminting constantly a long way from a bench, by all means, get a Bren 2 NR or Tavor.
Last edited:
This, its a $1600 semi, I for one am happy to take the compromise for the 7 lb weight. Curious on accuracy though, I might just buy one to see.
R18 might be better but its also 3 lbs heavier. That is a huge difference.
Then if you want a NR Bren which doesnt even exist from factory yet thats a $3800 rifle. You could buy two Siberians and keep one for spare parts and still have some money left over for ammo.
i agree completely, but would note that all current canadian 180 clones that i am aware of (including the r18) require a tool to access the piston (whether it is to remove the handguard or the gas block) so it seems odd that the siberian is getting singled out for this. i mean, why were folks not in the r18 or wk180 threads screaming that they would never buy one as long as the heinous design oversight of needing a tool to access the gas system existed? you said yourself it is not an AR - the gas block is not pinned but the barrel is dimpled so gas block removal/reinstallation is a 30 second task. otherwise i've not seen actual weights yet, but would suspect that siberian + allan key < r18 in weight. but hey, get an r18 and your wallet will be lighter ... ps, not trying to pick on the r18, but everyone seems to be comparing the two even though they exist at two very different price points.
being devils advocate however i'll also come in on the other side of the argument. if like me you tear your gun apart quite frequently then the handguard and gas block will be on/off a lot. and if the siberian is anything like my rwa then the fasteners are (a) tiny, and (b) gotta be tight or sh!t will get loose fast. and my experience with torque, thread sealer and small fasteners is that they wallow-out almost immediately and create problems. so, if these things have to come off, please use a fastener fit for purpose.
I think all of the 180 clones suck in this department equally - It is cutting corners, no two ways about it.
If someone is relying on on their rifle for varminting or competition, those people will want to ensure there is no build up of carbon that would hinder operation before they head out - while not labour intensive to remove a few components, this area like the threads of components and the fasteners now start to see high milage use with the constant torque and re-torquing wearing out items that should have had a better interface and fastening method from the outset.
Field serviceable does not equate to being able to do it in a hurry, it is a recognition through the design that the rifle will be broken down often into its component pieces, and those parts will be serviced (cleaned) often.
Being able to do it tool-less, with speed, with repeatability (like you can't do it backwards or upside down or the like) are all attributes that are shared by good engineering.
https_://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c65w-SRrtKc
If someone is relying on on their rifle for varminting or competition, those people will want to ensure there is no build up of carbon that would hinder operation before they head out - while not labour intensive to remove a few components, this area like the threads of components and the fasteners now start to see high milage use with the constant torque and re-torquing wearing out items that should have had a better interface and fastening method from the outset.
Field serviceable does not equate to being able to do it in a hurry, it is a recognition through the design that the rifle will be broken down often into its component pieces, and those parts will be serviced (cleaned) often.
Being able to do it tool-less, with speed, with repeatability (like you can't do it backwards or upside down or the like) are all attributes that are shared by good engineering.
https_://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c65w-SRrtKc
Last edited:
My point was that needing tools to disassemble has been obvious since post #2 of this thread, this was never a tool-less field service rifle and it was unrealistic to expect tool-less disassembly. Lots of good guns require tools for service and many (maybe most) free float hand guard piston guns require tools for disassembly.
Wearing out the fasteners and threaded socket is definitely a concern if someone cleans frequently, especially on the aluminum handguard. For 7.62x39mm, is there enough clearance in the handguard for the gas block and piston to come out the front, if you had a port in the handguard to access the fasteners on the gas block? Someone could replace the gas block fasteners with wingtip thumbscrews if they wanted it field serviceable in that case. Thanks!
DaveMachine
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- That one place with a cowboy complex
Good summary of the issue. Personally, I can get over needing an allen key for the handguard - the gun will still run even if the handguard is a bit loose. I think even the gen 2 BRN went from having a qd/toolless removal to needing to remove one hex screw. Needing to remove the gas block is something else entirely, as I'm sure you know. For those that are unaware, constant removal is going to lead to issues like worn out screws/gb, misalignment, the gas block coming loose and shifting during firing, poor sealing, etc which is going to cause unreliability. There's a reason that reliable firearms have pinned gas blocks. The fact that they literally have a designs to work from (SVT, AR18, HK416, etc) but instead went with this lazy work around is just sad.
