Lockhart Tactical Raven Platinum Edition, .223 Wylde
- Thread starter Bartok5
- Start date
That's the beauty of having internal piston of Stoner system vs external piston of conventional design where gas force is applied at the same axis as the barrel. True DI system would have approximately the same kick as conventional piston system, because gas force is applied at the axis about an inch higher than bore axis.
Here are my accuracy results from yesterday. First off, for those who believe that only 10-round groups count, here is a 3" / 3 MOA grouping of 10x PMC.223 55gr "Bronze" Bulk ammo:
Here are some typical 5-rd groups with the same PMC .223 55gr "Bronze" Bulk ammo:
2.5" / 2.5 MOA:
2.4" / 2.4 MOA:
Here are groups with PMC XTAC .223 62gr FMJ:
- 2" / 2 MOA:
- 1.8" / 1.8 MOA
- 1.75" / 1.75 MOA:
Nosler Match .223 77gr HPBT - 1x declared flyer, remainder = 1.25" / 1.25 MOA:
Barnes Match .223 69gr HPBT - 2" / 2 MOA:
Hornady Match .223 77gr ELD - 1.3" / 1.3 MOA:
Based on the above, I would say that the Raven demonstrates typical accuracy for an AR15 equipped with a medium-weight Barrel, turning in 2 MOA groups with PMC XTAC ammo and <1.5 MOA with Match ammo that it likes.
Here are some typical 5-rd groups with the same PMC .223 55gr "Bronze" Bulk ammo:
2.5" / 2.5 MOA:
2.4" / 2.4 MOA:
Here are groups with PMC XTAC .223 62gr FMJ:
- 2" / 2 MOA:
- 1.8" / 1.8 MOA
- 1.75" / 1.75 MOA:
Nosler Match .223 77gr HPBT - 1x declared flyer, remainder = 1.25" / 1.25 MOA:
Barnes Match .223 69gr HPBT - 2" / 2 MOA:
Hornady Match .223 77gr ELD - 1.3" / 1.3 MOA:
Based on the above, I would say that the Raven demonstrates typical accuracy for an AR15 equipped with a medium-weight Barrel, turning in 2 MOA groups with PMC XTAC ammo and <1.5 MOA with Match ammo that it likes.
Last edited:
The Frogge
CGN Regular
- Location
- Prince George, BC
I had the same problem. Not quite as bad as Bartok5's though.
There is a noticeable bulge roughly 1/4" from the base. Some time with a file shows no thinning of the case and the bulge is also visible from the inside.
I think that you will find the Bolt Heads that encircle the Upper Receiver will interfere with the contours of the Raven's angular Upper Receiver. The billet Raven Upper is considerably thicker than the forged DD equivalent, such that I suspect the DD RIS will not fit at all.
A bit like a toy or DYI. Personally I don't have a problem with that since I am quite handy but for some people this may be a problem.
There is also a fb forum led by the owner of the company. I think it is worth joining if you own the rifle. I am just following and reading.
If you are not particular receptive to the AR features of this rifle, the BCL Siberian is definitely the best choice, customer service is very good. They don't worry much about shipping costs for example, they send you a prepaid label and a new rifle is back within 2/3 weeks. That's more for the crowds and I am sure their sales are high also because of this.
As to accuracy, they probably all shoot the same.
There is also a fb forum led by the owner of the company. I think it is worth joining if you own the rifle. I am just following and reading.
If you are not particular receptive to the AR features of this rifle, the BCL Siberian is definitely the best choice, customer service is very good. They don't worry much about shipping costs for example, they send you a prepaid label and a new rifle is back within 2/3 weeks. That's more for the crowds and I am sure their sales are high also because of this.
As to accuracy, they probably all shoot the same.
Factory Sierra 69 SMK, on sale at cabelas currently so I thought I'd try some before I loaded some. Shot two groups of similar size. Interesting to note, the bolt hold open catches on gen 2 pmags, gen 3 and cross mags are no problem.
Pretty sure my point of aim changed on the top one so I have very high hopes for this barrel.
They don't and that has been well documented countless times over decades of use.
DI systems like that used in an AR have a decisive advantage over most every service rifle fielded in this regard - all other things being equal.
It is one of the things I was attempting to show by spinning on a match quality Stainless Steel barrel on the R18 in the R18 accuracy thread.
There is only so much you can do before the mechanical operation of a piston driven rifle eats into the statistical ability of the rifle to maintain precision.
All other considerations such as gas port size and Barrel length being equal, the shorter gas system will provide a longer dwell time wherein the Barrel and gas system remains pressurized for a longer period as the bullet travels from the Gas Port to the Muzzle. That in turn, enhances reliability by stretching the time available for the extraction/ejection/reloading cycle resulting in a less violent operation of the operating mechanism. At least that is the basic premise as I understand it.
Last edited:
Took advantage of the decent November weather (+7C) to put some more rounds through the Raven. Fired another 160 rounds for a total of 440 rounds to date with zero stoppages. No need for any adjustments today - just shot as a continuation of the last session. I continue to be impressed with the Raven. It is without question a step above every other Canadian manufactured rifle, all of which are based on the AR180B piston operating system. Just as the AR15 was a step above other designs, so too is the Lockhart Raven DI rifle.
How is it better? It is not DI, but is as dirty as DI. Being expansion, or hybrid piston/DI it requires perfect timing and quality powder. Having buffer and spring in stock does not allow full feature stock folding. How about screws! in the carrier? The only two good things about this system is accuracy because of piston integrated in bolt and that it is so perfected by after market and available customisations. AR180 as design is more progressive, most modern piston designs are more progressive. I emphasise on systems, designs, not on implementations. Because Canadian implementations of AR180 design should be studied in the book "How to fail in firearm manufacturing".
Last edited:
There's also the slightly less felt recoil, slightly less weight, less front heaviness, less heat on the handguard.
But in my opinion I don't see one being superior to the other. Each have their advantages and disadvantages, but to be perfectly honest all of the difference is marginal at best.
Even in terms of accuracy I think the advantage is marginal. There are short stroke rifles out there that will keep up in terms of accuracy, like the Volquartsen Evolution, HK MR series, even SL8. There's a video on YouTube where a guy shoots multiple 10 shot groups with match ammo between a HK MR762 (short stroke) against some of the best "DI" DMRs like the KAC SR-25 and LMT MARS and also a SCAR. THE HK MR762 was by far the most accurate, leaving the rest in the dust. Although the MR762 was also the only one with a non chrome lined barrel. But anyway at the end of the day, the barrel, the specs of the barrel, the trigger, and how well made the rifle is in general matters far more than simply whether it uses an AR180 derived gas system or a Stoner "DI" system.
I use "DI" in the conventionally accepted manner to describe the AR's hybrid piston/DI operating system. My comment regarding the superiority of the Raven versus the "competition" in the form of the various AR180B derivative designs was more directed towards the quality of manufacture ("implementation") than the selection of any particular operating system. That said, it could be argued that the Raven does benefit from 60 years of DI system development, whereas the most successful of the Canadian AR180B derivative designs such as the Sterling R18 Mk 2 still make use of the original AR180 3-piece Gas System. It is pretty difficult to argue that the AR180 design is more progressive than DI when Canadian implementation of the operating system has seen little to no development since the 1960s....
How important is a folding Buttstock versus a retracting Stock? The US M4 and its variants seem to have done pretty well for themselves in terms of international sales and adoption, so I'm not seeing that as critical. The same goes for the screws securing the Gas Key to the Bolt-Carrier. So what? They have worked well enough for 60 years now.
I will not argue about implementation, because I share the same opinion as you on Canadian AR180s. As for drawbacks of design - sure they usually don't pose issues for most of civilian use, but they are important for prolonged or military use and also for cost of manufacturing. It is cheaper to make modern piston system components, rather than manufacture AR style components).
I agree that from Canadian "legal" options DI (in colloquial sense) guns such as ATRS and Raven are the best options. With 556 I think they need one-two more gens to iron out the issues, for 9mm they could make it in one gen (change bolt and beef up firing pin)
I agree that from Canadian "legal" options DI (in colloquial sense) guns such as ATRS and Raven are the best options. With 556 I think they need one-two more gens to iron out the issues, for 9mm they could make it in one gen (change bolt and beef up firing pin)
That is the valid point about accuracy, I also wanted to mention SL8, but decided to keep post short.
