MSR vs SLR?

no-one special said:
I had the guys at ATRS remove the chicken manure helicoil and install a machined insert. It looked FAR more professional. After trying to get the safety in, which would not fit, I dumped it my SLR project and am happy to wait a little longer for the upper to complete my MS.
Maybe in time Crapabee will get their stuff sorted out but all the hype and hot air would have been better off being used to heat their shop, but for now they seem to be in the same league as NEA in so far as quality of product goes. Some of the SLR's are ok and many others not so much. Maybe I just was unlucky, but it seems there are quite a number of us in that same canoe.
Click to expand...

So you couldn't get the safety to fit in either eh. Why am I not surprised I wasn't the only one.

Here's what I had to do to mine just to get the safety installed. Right down to bare aluminum. I wiped a little grease in there so it wouldn't wear as bad and put the safety in. So far so good but I should have never had to do this to a $1000 receiver.

View attachment 235871
 
All Billet receivers are snug AF. Zero wobble. Even NEA got that right. Ignorance is claiming Zombie attack ideas or SHTF scenarios are the only reason for wanting/needing simple tool less takedowns for cleaning or swapping different calibers/ barrel lengths uppers. It’s easy to dismiss people as crazy instead of having valid debates/arguments. One of the sole purposes of these forums is just that. I truly am happy for those who purchased the SLR. It’ll give MDI the capital it needs to innovate forward. Even if they took a step back. We need more companies pushing that envelope. We all win in the end.
 
In two or three years when the Canadian market is ‘saturated’ with these rifles the value will be apparent. I’m betting a Macdumb SLR receiver set will be worth half of a ATRS MS set.

The BCL102 reduced the value of a ATRS Modern Hunter and the STAG 10 has destroyed all the other NR .308 win rifles

I’m sure there is some importer / business working with a American manufacturer and we’ll see some US made NR receiver set in the next few years. And the value of both SLR & the MS will be reduced.

Moral of the story, buy a rifle, use it, enjoy it, these type of rifles will depreciate when something better comes along.
 
mileageman said:
In two or three years when the Canadian market is ‘saturated’ with these rifles the value will be apparent. I’m betting a Macdumb SLR receiver set will be worth half of a ATRS MS set.

The BCL102 reduced the value of a ATRS Modern Hunter and the STAG 10 has destroyed all the other NR .308 win rifles

I’m sure there is some importer / business working with a American manufacturer and we’ll see some US made NR receiver set in the next few years. And the value of both SLR & the MS will be reduced.

Moral of the story, buy a rifle, use it, enjoy it, these type of rifles will depreciate when something better comes along.
Click to expand...

You contradicted yourself by stating that a superior product of the Modern Hunter was relegated to a reduced price by the inferior BCL, but that and inferior SLR will keep the Modern Sporters value up.

Also I wouldn’t hold my breath on an American company working on a NR Canadian Receiver set because the US couldn’t give two f’s about our small market.
 
If you can get yourself an SLR above 300 you'll be very happy with the quality and finish. I have well over 3000 rounds through mine now, I never had any issue with the takedown bolt loosening (even after 6-700 rounds in a single day). All my metal mags seat, even on a closed bolt, the brand new ones don't drop free until they are ran threw a few dozen times (BFD).

Building the rife, some of the roll pins were tight and needed some light sanding on emery cloth and a little oil. Everything else was just fine.

There is so much hate for these rifles coming from people who got burned with early productions models, and I'd be too, but we all knew it was a gamble to begin with (people bought them before an FRT even). The bottom line is both the SLR and the MS are very cool NR "AR style" rifles and just be happy there are people out the grinding to provide our community with these great options. If another Canadian manufacturer offers something similar I'll f*****g buy that too.
 
jiffx2781 said:
FYI, tension screws and accu wedges for the AR were only invented to shut up the whiners who couldn't grasp the concept that the wiggle has no negative effect on accuracy or function.

They serve no beneficial purpose whatsoever as the bullet will have exited the muzzle of the rifle long before movement of the receivers produces any measurable effect.

Degradation in the AR's accuracy due to receiver wiggle is a myth. Likewise an increase in the SLR's accuracy due to a snug receiver fitment is nothing more than another myth.

Thank you for admitting that it has everything to do with the mind set of the shooter and nothing to do with the platform.

if you actually think zombies are coming you're... :onCrack:
Click to expand...

visalrail02x600.jpg


No effect...you talk like there has been some kind of definitive study to prove otherwise. Please don't post some link to some AMU paper proving otherwise, it is not proof. The proof is in the pudding, or in this case the picture. As for any retort you may craft, here is my reply, see picture. That sir is real world proof that rigidity matters, if it didn't no one would be dragging that boat anchor up to the bench Saturday morning. Perhaps you're thinking apples, to oranges, absolutely, but only in the intended purpose. I'd bet my right arm, and eye that if you made a flat bottomed DI, rotating bolt, 75 lbs, semi-auto bench rest rifle, it would shoot sub 1/4 moa 10 shot groups as well, rigidity matters.

We get that you're unhappy with your SLR, I'd be a wee bit pissed if I received what you described, I'd also send it back as soon as I realized that the holes were sized wrong...no mill in my "shop". Educating us regarding "myths" relating to tension screws and accuwedges smacks of doctrine, not facts though. "They serve no beneficial purpose whatsoever as the bullet will have exited the muzzle of the rifle long before movement of the receivers produces any measurable effect.", maybe I'm mistaken, but I'm sure there isn't a bunch of peer reviewed papers on the subject, so we're down to opinions on the topic. What makes me so sure I'm right...see picture.

As for Zombies, I'm pretty sure the vast majority of the people who use the term (even here!) are strictly using it as a metaphor for the break down of society. Something that could happen, if you doubt it, who's hitting the pipe?
 
I'll simply go with whatever one is cheaper..... cus I'm still a supporter of the notion there is a healthy markup on both of these products. Really hoping BCL, Stag or somebody releases a set more practically priced by the time I'm able to afford one of these.
 
redshooter said:
visalrail02x600.jpg


No effect...you talk like there has been some kind of definitive study to prove otherwise. Please don't post some link to some AMU paper proving otherwise, it is not proof. The proof is in the pudding, or in this case the picture. As for any retort you may craft, here is my reply, see picture. That sir is real world proof that rigidity matters, if it didn't no one would be dragging that boat anchor up to the bench Saturday morning. Perhaps you're thinking apples, to oranges, absolutely, but only in the intended purpose. I'd bet my right arm, and eye that if you made a flat bottomed DI, rotating bolt, 75 lbs, semi-auto bench rest rifle, it would shoot sub 1/4 moa 10 shot groups as well, rigidity matters.

We get that you're unhappy with your SLR, I'd be a wee bit pissed if I received what you described, I'd also send it back as soon as I realized that the holes were sized wrong...no mill in my "shop". Educating us regarding "myths" relating to tension screws and accuwedges smacks of doctrine, not facts though. "They serve no beneficial purpose whatsoever as the bullet will have exited the muzzle of the rifle long before movement of the receivers produces any measurable effect.", maybe I'm mistaken, but I'm sure there isn't a bunch of peer reviewed papers on the subject, so we're down to opinions on the topic. What makes me so sure I'm right...see picture.

As for Zombies, I'm pretty sure the vast majority of the people who use the term (even here!) are strictly using it as a metaphor for the break down of society. Something that could happen, if you doubt it, who's hitting the pipe?
Click to expand...

A pic of a sled used for benchrest shooting is not proof. As stated before bolt guns are not the same animal. And squeezing every bit of accuracy and consistency out of pet loads and match barrels is not the same as assessing the practical accuracy of a semi auto service rifle with production ammo.

The AMU tests(with real data) show that upper/lower fitment has no appreciable effect on accuracy. What's interesting is that the wobble people talk about is absent with a magazine inserted and/or when the rifle is properly mounted. It has been my experience that people who get wrapped around the axle about the wobble have in fact never tested the theory and often times never shot an AR type rifle.
 
ColinD said:
There is so much hate for these rifles coming from people who got burned with early productions models, and I'd be too, but we all knew it was a gamble to begin with (people bought them before an FRT even). The bottom line is both the SLR and the MS are very cool NR "AR style" rifles and just be happy there are people out the grinding to provide our community with these great options. If another Canadian manufacturer offers something similar I'll f*****g buy that too.
Click to expand...

You mean the first 200 people? MDI i.e. 2 guys in their basement collected TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS off their 'early production' ones, and theyve been riddled with problems. Must be nice.
 
redshooter said:
visalrail02x600.jpg


No effect...you talk like there has been some kind of definitive study to prove otherwise. Please don't post some link to some AMU paper proving otherwise, it is not proof. The proof is in the pudding, or in this case the picture.
Click to expand...

If you put an AR upper in a similar contraption and light off rounds, you essentially have the same thing. Not apples to apples of course, but broad stokes.

The caveat to upper/lower fitment having no effect to poa/poi is that the lower and upper both need to be held (and thus pressure is applied) such that the hammer follow doesn't affect the point of aim.
If one is shooting from a bipod and not holding onto the upper at all, and there is play between upper and lower, hammer follow can upset the poa/poi on fired rounds.
 
Yycbulletsandbrass said:
A pic of a sled used for benchrest shooting is not proof. As stated before bolt guns are not the same animal. And squeezing every bit of accuracy and consistency out of pet loads and match barrels is not the same as assessing the practical accuracy of a semi auto service rifle with production ammo.

The AMU tests(with real data) show that upper/lower fitment has no appreciable effect on accuracy. What's interesting is that the wobble people talk about is absent with a magazine inserted and/or when the rifle is properly mounted. It has been my experience that people who get wrapped around the axle about the wobble have in fact never tested the theory and often times never shot an AR type rifle.
Click to expand...

A Bolt Gun, and Semi may be "different animals", but they are still subject to physics. The more things can move about, the more variables you introduce, more variables = less consistency = bigger groups, that's it, that's all.

Regarding the AMU, I have great respect for the AMU, but one study does not equal factual results, or likely in this case the flex doesn't matter for the purpose of the study, which I think we can all agree wasn't shooting bug holes with a Service Rifle.

It has been my experience that people who get wrapped around the axle about the wobble have in fact never tested the theory and often times never shot an AR type rifle.
Click to expand...
Most of the knowledgeable members who regularly post in Black Rifles have experience that far exceeds mine with this platform, that said pretty much all of them don't spend much time behind a rest trying to get their AR to shoot as tight as possible. Trinimon had a challenge going for several years, few tried, https://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php/1517769-3rd-Annual-2017-My-Black-Rifle-shoots-sub-MOA-groups-all-day-long-challenge!.



beltfed said:
If you put an AR upper in a similar contraption and light off rounds, you essentially have the same thing. Not apples to apples of course, but broad stokes.

The caveat to upper/lower fitment having no effect to poa/poi is that the lower and upper both need to be held (and thus pressure is applied) such that the hammer follow doesn't affect the point of aim.
If one is shooting from a bipod and not holding onto the upper at all, and there is play between upper and lower, hammer follow can upset the poa/poi on fired rounds.
Click to expand...

I can't sign my name the same way twice in a row, not a chance I'm going to hold my rifle exactly the same way every time. Stiffen up the upper/lower fit and I can compete with the dude with the beautiful flowing signature...
 
redshooter said:
A Bolt Gun, and Semi may be "different animals", but they are still subject to physics. The more things can move about, the more variables you introduce, more variables = less consistency = bigger groups, that's it, that's all.
Click to expand...

From ignition to the point of when the round leaves the barrel, there are no more moving parts in an AR than there are in a bolt gun.


redshooter said:
not a chance I'm going to hold my rifle exactly the same way every time.
Click to expand...

You don't necessarily need to hold them exactly the same to prevent hammer follow upsetting the apple cart, however principals of marksmanship of course apply to setting up, releasing and follow through of the shot - but those principals apply to bolt guns too... Unless you are bolting your rifle to a concrete table cemented into a foundation, which isn't shooting at all....but then you open up a whole other argument...:)
 
redshooter: all you accomplished by bringing a rail gun into the discussion is show off a platform that's main performance advantage is removing inconsistencies in a shooter's shooting technique.

There's NO mechanical gain simply because it weighs 80lbs. Put a cheap barrel on it and shoot crappy ammo out of it and then come back and tell me if it still shoots 1/4 moa just because it still weighs 80lbs.

Shooting an 80lb rail gun and shooting a 7lb ar platform (or most firearms for that matter) is in no way comparable. The largest factor in accuracy deficiency is the shooter's inability to maintain consistency from shot to shot, something the rail gun does for you.

.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom