Kodiak Defence 180NSR .223/5.56 Non-Restricted Rifle

lmar said:
I can't say I'm a big fan of the new design.
Last time I saw something that tall it was a bullpup with a sight bridge on top.
It looks like an abomination - something that was put together by a committee whose members weren't all on the same page.

I don't understand why the time and effort wasn't spent refining the WK180 to meet the original objectives.

1. Get rid of left side port (Right hand ejection only). Less machining costs.
2. Cut the hammer spring down to improve pull weight (without sacrificing ignition).
3. Add a bolt release (aka RWA).
4. Fix the Picatinny rail issue.
5. Add the brass deflector (and if you are maching it anyways add the ejection port cover mounting tabs).
6 Add ejection port cover.
7. Tolerance the carrier hole for the charging handle correctly and add a bigger magnet. Reduced cost as you are now only doing one side.
8. Fix the relationship between the pistol grip angle.
9. Index the charging handle so it can't rotate - you can then add flats to the handle so the required slot in the upper can be a smaller diameter (Less crap to get in when you are crawling around foxholes).
10. Alternatively, remove the bolt release (extra cost) and have the charging handle on the left side. Good for both left and right-hand shooters.
11. These changes could be incorporated for the same price as having to add additional material (height), machining (longer machining time) , and components (bolt release, AR charging handle, modified carrier (for AR charging handle)).

This thing reminds me of RWA's franken bolt side opening design. May work - but it is ugly as sin.
Click to expand...

Or perhaps take the proven design we all know and love, and change it up just enough to satisfy the RCMP. One would thought Maccabee and ATRS would have rattled Kodiak's cage by now.
 
What are the problems with wk180c? I have one but I’ve only pumped a couple hundred rounds through it. Anything I should know about? Link would suffice. I remember some #####ing with the charging handle but mine seems to stick ok. Never fell off or anything crazy. I’d there a fix for that?
 
awesomealvin said:
Or perhaps take the proven design we all know and love, and change it up just enough to satisfy the RCMP. One would thought Maccabee and ATRS would have rattled Kodiak's cage by now.
Click to expand...

I'm not too sure about the "all know and love" thing :)
This coming from someone who has owned 3 AR's - went to WK180-C because it wasn't an AR and like the ergonomics of the 180B.
Just in process of upgrading carrier to new version with the threaded charging handle. Guess that will be its final configuration.........

Cheers,
 
awesomealvin said:
Or perhaps take the proven design we all know and love, and change it up just enough to satisfy the RCMP. One would thought Maccabee and ATRS would have rattled Kodiak's cage by now.
Click to expand...

The issue with that is getting it approved. Could be a couple years, we might only have months before semi autos are banned.
 
The only reason it has such a high sight over bore is because the staff decided to mount that optic with an AR cantilever mount! (Probably for cosmetic reasons) The cheek weld location still appears to be like that of an AR 15 and directly inline with the bore. Mount the optic with lower conventional rings and i bet u end up with the sight over bore that an AR has. Only limitation will be objective lens size.
 
lmar said:
I'm not too sure about the "all know and love" thing :)
This coming from someone who has owned 3 AR's - went to WK180-C because it wasn't an AR and like the ergonomics of the 180B.
Just in process of upgrading carrier to new version with the threaded charging handle. Guess that will be its final configuration.........

Cheers,
Click to expand...

The WK feels like an arrange marriage. Yeah...she comes from a good family, yeah the parents approve, yeah it's good for community moral, and yes it makes financial sense. She's not what you wanted right now, but maybe...maybe you can change her bits and pieces at a time. Or perhaps you can convince yourself to accept and adapt to her imperfections several years into the marriage.

BUT...she's just not that women you've met who's constantly on the edge of the crazy/hot line. Think Vesper from Casino Royale.
 
I hate it. AR charging handle is a huge step backwards, and raising the sight plane to accommodate ambi-charging is a terrible compromise. The original looked a lot better.
 
Was the original charging handle too convenient or something? They're replacing it with a less effective pattern
 
Redneckwarrior said:
I knw right, at least the original charging handle also doubled as a forward assist if you had a sticky mag. This seems like a change for just the sake of change, with no real benefit.
Click to expand...

They stated the benefit..... it was to remove the charging handle slots in the receiver. I dont get all the hate for the AR charging handle system. It works for the military, it works for law enforcement, it works for hunting and it works for competition shooting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom