Hi Steve. Appreciate the quick response and will reach out to you this evening. Thank you.
Crusader Arms Templar quality control issues and response
- Thread starter JayCorbett
- Start date
Hi Steve. Appreciate the quick response and will reach out to you this evening. Thank you.
Now you guys are just being mean! Steve, I hope you take those comments in jest, as they were no doubt intended.
I cannot fire the AR-180 as it is a named 12(5) Prohib. It is the OG precursor to the still NR AR-180B with the ill-fated polymer Lower Receiver.
Just a note that a 1300 round torture test was done on at least one Templar, and the HK-style slappable charging handle survived the abuse. In the Code of Arms promotional video (see main Templar thread), they said the Tempar in is out to US GunTubers as well as Canadian. Looking forward to hearing what people who have access to high end AR-15s, the BRN-180, and the SIG Spear LT think of the Templar in that very competitive market.
Last edited:
So many "reviewers" put 500 rounds at most through the gun, read off the sales pamphlet then collect those sweet sweet views & ad money
Curtis.G.Stade
Member
- Location
- Edmonton, Alberta
ive been waiting over a week to get a refund from crusader ams on a templar yet to ship. they happy to take the money slow and non responsive giving a return.
Thanks for the update, Forwardsh - much appreciated! That is a promising live-fire follow-up to your initial impressions post. That said, I can certainly understand why you were so disappointed with the initial shortcomings and lack of final QC that you identified. For $2K+ you ought to at least receive a rifle with properly finished parts (eg. radiused edges, machine-cut springs) and certainly no broken parts installed! The latter is unacceptable at any price, but perhaps that's just my opinion? I dunno...
In any case, I am glad to hear that the live-fire experience was much more posiitive for you! It sounds as though the Templar offers reasonable accuracy on par with the 14" Bren 2 for instance, with 1.5-2 MOA. It is a shame about the Buttstock'a shortcomings as there is nothing much that you can do about those. The fact that it does not lock when folded is a non-starter to me. I absolutely have zero use for a folded buttstock that flops around unsecured. Hopefully there are no aluminum shavings from the Upper Receiver mixed in with those non-ferrous Brass shavings! It seems odd that there should be so many shavings of any sort in a brand new rifle, as their presence suggests sharp edges bearing on soft metal(x) somewhere. That is generally a "bad thing", even if it is just brass from the cartridge casings. Shavings = sharp edges, which IMHO equates to unfinished parts. The "brushed-Finish" on the exterior of the aluminum Lower Receiver seems kind of odd as well. None of my modern sporting rifles with aluminum construction have similar hand-tooling marks beneath the finish. I am not quite sure how to explain those marks.
Thus far, the Templar sounds like a product-improved WS-MCR with many commendable features, but also with sub-standard final finishing and post-assembly QC. Those shortcomings (and a manual) need to be addressed by Spectre/Crusader ASAP if they are to avoid a negative impaact on sales. Hopefully they are paying attention to this brutally honest thread, as they have the potential to offer a great product at a perfect (for the Canadian market) price-point. They just need to tighten up the exterior finishing and "soften" any sharp edges.
In any case, I am glad to hear that the live-fire experience was much more posiitive for you! It sounds as though the Templar offers reasonable accuracy on par with the 14" Bren 2 for instance, with 1.5-2 MOA. It is a shame about the Buttstock'a shortcomings as there is nothing much that you can do about those. The fact that it does not lock when folded is a non-starter to me. I absolutely have zero use for a folded buttstock that flops around unsecured. Hopefully there are no aluminum shavings from the Upper Receiver mixed in with those non-ferrous Brass shavings! It seems odd that there should be so many shavings of any sort in a brand new rifle, as their presence suggests sharp edges bearing on soft metal(x) somewhere. That is generally a "bad thing", even if it is just brass from the cartridge casings. Shavings = sharp edges, which IMHO equates to unfinished parts. The "brushed-Finish" on the exterior of the aluminum Lower Receiver seems kind of odd as well. None of my modern sporting rifles with aluminum construction have similar hand-tooling marks beneath the finish. I am not quite sure how to explain those marks.
Thus far, the Templar sounds like a product-improved WS-MCR with many commendable features, but also with sub-standard final finishing and post-assembly QC. Those shortcomings (and a manual) need to be addressed by Spectre/Crusader ASAP if they are to avoid a negative impaact on sales. Hopefully they are paying attention to this brutally honest thread, as they have the potential to offer a great product at a perfect (for the Canadian market) price-point. They just need to tighten up the exterior finishing and "soften" any sharp edges.
Ditto, me as well.
Kinda makes the $1200 WK180C look a lot better doesn't it?
