M+M M10x FRT 153447
- Thread starter Northern_guy111
- Start date
- Status
I wouldn't use AK to set example of reliability in mud condition, ARs are more protected. M10x design with this huge opening behind the carrier is probably somewhere in-between. For me personally the only advantage of this platform is a flat rail. There's no improvements with magazine - no quick dump, there's no quick carrier release (because there's no BHO). Accuracy twice better than twice more expensive x95, so that's good. Ugly look, however beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Interesting design to try and really affordable price but I would trust cz858 more. And for competition I still would run AR.
Forgot another thing I like about M10x - the drama. We, gun enthusiasts in Canada are so hungry for anything that has slipped through the cracks of our draconian laws that we turn every new gun arrival into huge drama show. B&T APC, Italian Garands, x95s, Type 81 and now M10x. I stopped watching TV, CGN is more entertaining.
Last edited:
A few more thoughts about the M10X based on some of the recent discussion on this thread and others.
Unless I've missed something, M+M aren't looking to supplant the AK series with international military contracts, so much as they aim to produce an innovative (but relatively low cost) "every man's carbine" as an alternative to the AR for the North American market. Comparisons to the AK are as relevant as comparisons to the SIG 550, FAL, or any number of other designs that the hybrid M10X draws from. Should it meet or exceed the reliability of the AK while providing increased accuracy, a monolithic MLOK rail, refined ergonomics, improved magazine compatiblity, a better trigger and other enhancements? In an ideal world, yes. But in order to achieve full ambidexterity, a compromise was made with open cooking handle slots on both sides of the Receiver. Reliability may suffer as a result when the rifle is fully immersed in sand, soil or mud. A set of dust covers would resolve the issue, but at the expense of added complexity and fabrication cost. What sort of civilian use involves the rigors of "torture testing" over plinking at the range or running and gunning in the woods anyways? At the end of the day, how reliable is reliable enough?
The M10X represents just one possible evolutionary path for the AK design in the traditional (and cheap) 7.62x39mm chambering. That said, it is an interesting hybrid in its own right. I personally believe that it brings much more to the table than just the extended top optics rail. In addition to the aforementioned improvements, one must also consider the benefits of modern surface treatments and finishes (eg. Nitride), a standard muzzle thread, an integral brake, MLOK modularity, an adjustable gas system, improved ease of field disassembly and assembly, the use of standard Magpul furniture, overall improved fit and finish, and the list goes on. When you consider the current US and Canadian pre-sale Price of the M10X, that all adds up to a lot of value for your dollar. While the fit and finish may not be up to Swiss or German standards, they are certainly better than the workmanship found in the average AK, which is what the M10X seeks to improve upon (and succeeds in doing). While I have not yet fired the M10X, I have handled it at SHOT and had a look under the hood so to speak. The build quality appears to be fine, just às you would expect for a modern design built on state of the art US tooling.
Comparisons to other 7.62x39mm designs on or (presumably soon) entering the Canadian market make for great entertainment, but are ultimately futile. There has been some chest-thumping in other threads about the superiority of the T81 due to its "battle proven" heritage, which is of course, utter hogwash. Less vocal comparisons have been made to the VZ58/CZ 858 series, which is a known quantity and probably closer to the M10X in terms of build quality and other characteristics. If the T81 is anything like the old Norinco AKs and SKSs from the 1980s, they will be full of sharp edges and finished in a crappy salt-blue that rusts when handled and must be kept constantly oiled. That may or may not be that case with current CHICOM production - we shall (hopefully) soon see. But to proclaim that a 40 year old Chinese AK product improvement project is automatically superior to a modern US (or Romanian) international hybrid design? That is quite honestly laughable. The T81 shows its age as a dead-end branch of AK evolution, whereas the M10X reflects forward thinking with unlimited future potential. The M10X offers Integral modularity whereas the T81 cannot even mount an optic or light without an awkward and fugly bolt-on rail system. Enough said about that.
I don't think for a second that the M10X is the "second coming of the AK47". It is rather, an interesting civilian hybrid design in its' very early stages of fielding and future development. M+M have demonstrated that they are very open to incorporating user feedback into their product improvement cycle. This bodes well for future enhancements to the existing design. The M10X is not intended to be a military service rifle and is currently marketed as an international civilian "defensive" carbine aimed at North American sales. Any comparison to bonafide military service weapons is therefore moot - apples and oranges. Fun debate,, but ultimately nothing more than mental masturbation. Còme to think of it, that's kind of like my rambling on about firearms that aren't even in Canada yet! What can I say? I'm retired and it's a slow, cold day here in Edmonton.... ��
Unless I've missed something, M+M aren't looking to supplant the AK series with international military contracts, so much as they aim to produce an innovative (but relatively low cost) "every man's carbine" as an alternative to the AR for the North American market. Comparisons to the AK are as relevant as comparisons to the SIG 550, FAL, or any number of other designs that the hybrid M10X draws from. Should it meet or exceed the reliability of the AK while providing increased accuracy, a monolithic MLOK rail, refined ergonomics, improved magazine compatiblity, a better trigger and other enhancements? In an ideal world, yes. But in order to achieve full ambidexterity, a compromise was made with open cooking handle slots on both sides of the Receiver. Reliability may suffer as a result when the rifle is fully immersed in sand, soil or mud. A set of dust covers would resolve the issue, but at the expense of added complexity and fabrication cost. What sort of civilian use involves the rigors of "torture testing" over plinking at the range or running and gunning in the woods anyways? At the end of the day, how reliable is reliable enough?
The M10X represents just one possible evolutionary path for the AK design in the traditional (and cheap) 7.62x39mm chambering. That said, it is an interesting hybrid in its own right. I personally believe that it brings much more to the table than just the extended top optics rail. In addition to the aforementioned improvements, one must also consider the benefits of modern surface treatments and finishes (eg. Nitride), a standard muzzle thread, an integral brake, MLOK modularity, an adjustable gas system, improved ease of field disassembly and assembly, the use of standard Magpul furniture, overall improved fit and finish, and the list goes on. When you consider the current US and Canadian pre-sale Price of the M10X, that all adds up to a lot of value for your dollar. While the fit and finish may not be up to Swiss or German standards, they are certainly better than the workmanship found in the average AK, which is what the M10X seeks to improve upon (and succeeds in doing). While I have not yet fired the M10X, I have handled it at SHOT and had a look under the hood so to speak. The build quality appears to be fine, just às you would expect for a modern design built on state of the art US tooling.
Comparisons to other 7.62x39mm designs on or (presumably soon) entering the Canadian market make for great entertainment, but are ultimately futile. There has been some chest-thumping in other threads about the superiority of the T81 due to its "battle proven" heritage, which is of course, utter hogwash. Less vocal comparisons have been made to the VZ58/CZ 858 series, which is a known quantity and probably closer to the M10X in terms of build quality and other characteristics. If the T81 is anything like the old Norinco AKs and SKSs from the 1980s, they will be full of sharp edges and finished in a crappy salt-blue that rusts when handled and must be kept constantly oiled. That may or may not be that case with current CHICOM production - we shall (hopefully) soon see. But to proclaim that a 40 year old Chinese AK product improvement project is automatically superior to a modern US (or Romanian) international hybrid design? That is quite honestly laughable. The T81 shows its age as a dead-end branch of AK evolution, whereas the M10X reflects forward thinking with unlimited future potential. The M10X offers Integral modularity whereas the T81 cannot even mount an optic or light without an awkward and fugly bolt-on rail system. Enough said about that.
I don't think for a second that the M10X is the "second coming of the AK47". It is rather, an interesting civilian hybrid design in its' very early stages of fielding and future development. M+M have demonstrated that they are very open to incorporating user feedback into their product improvement cycle. This bodes well for future enhancements to the existing design. The M10X is not intended to be a military service rifle and is currently marketed as an international civilian "defensive" carbine aimed at North American sales. Any comparison to bonafide military service weapons is therefore moot - apples and oranges. Fun debate,, but ultimately nothing more than mental masturbation. Còme to think of it, that's kind of like my rambling on about firearms that aren't even in Canada yet! What can I say? I'm retired and it's a slow, cold day here in Edmonton.... ��
Last edited:
The M10X is basically an economic way of making a SG 55X in 7.62 Russian, the lower receiver is just an AK blank without the barrel trunnion wielded to it. It turns the AK receiver from a "receiver" to just a trigger housing. With that, it comes the rather so-so ergonomics of AK.
Let's look at it this way.
As a non-restricted rifle, M10's price point of 1500 is certainly appealing as a general sporting rifle.
As a "military weapon", VZ58 and Type 81 have been mass produced so any issues would have been sorted out long time ago.
For example, M10X uses a single stranded recoil spring inside the gas tube. Well, Swiss Arms uses a double stranded spring because it was discovered single stranded spring loses tempering when they are subjected to high heat.
This is the type of things that you cannot bet a new firearm against systems that have gone through trials and been mass produced for years. The cycles of feedback and adjustments are just not there for any new systems that don't have either the promise of a big contract or the potential of being field in 10,000+ in a single organization with a single maintenance system and training.
At the end of the day, if you want a sporting rifle with some military linkage, VZ58 and Type 81 are the way to go. If you just want a sport rifle at a good price point, I don't see any issues with the M10X. It is like the XCR, it is a good sporting rifle but it is not a sporting rifle with any military linkage - and hence you will keep seeing minor adjustments here and there constantly.
Let's look at it this way.
As a non-restricted rifle, M10's price point of 1500 is certainly appealing as a general sporting rifle.
As a "military weapon", VZ58 and Type 81 have been mass produced so any issues would have been sorted out long time ago.
For example, M10X uses a single stranded recoil spring inside the gas tube. Well, Swiss Arms uses a double stranded spring because it was discovered single stranded spring loses tempering when they are subjected to high heat.
This is the type of things that you cannot bet a new firearm against systems that have gone through trials and been mass produced for years. The cycles of feedback and adjustments are just not there for any new systems that don't have either the promise of a big contract or the potential of being field in 10,000+ in a single organization with a single maintenance system and training.
At the end of the day, if you want a sporting rifle with some military linkage, VZ58 and Type 81 are the way to go. If you just want a sport rifle at a good price point, I don't see any issues with the M10X. It is like the XCR, it is a good sporting rifle but it is not a sporting rifle with any military linkage - and hence you will keep seeing minor adjustments here and there constantly.
They are claiming that bringing them up north costs them more
. it seems to me like they are trying to price fix with the pissed off dealer, that's what it seems to me. Only time will tell, if they #### us there are other options to purchase this from in the future for sure, not just the dealer claiming exclusive rights.![-[Crosshair]-](/forum/data/avatars/m/31/31565.jpg?1718745216){kind=avatar}
I told ya, better than telly...
How could someone do that, just lie on the internet?
Right now it looks like it would be a WISE decision for Wanstalls to eat crow and swollow the "additional costs" and honor the pre sale pricing they committed to for the customers that have already committed.
It will be cheaper for them in the long run to suck it up right now rather than piss off and lose this many dedicated repeat and first time buyers. The risk of losing reputation and future business from the already committed customers far outweighs a potential loss of a few bucks right now.
But being the reputable company that thus far they are, I'm sure they will do the right thing.
I particularly enjoyed the spiteful PM's and name calling I got on cgn when I floated that this was happening.
Awesome. Next time I'll quietly sit back and let someone else figure it out. Not worth the vitriol directed at me for pointing out the obvious.
Awesome. Next time I'll quietly sit back and let someone else figure it out. Not worth the vitriol directed at me for pointing out the obvious.
Canada tail
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Of course. It is called NR tax.
- Status
