Light Infantry
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Can I go in halvsies on that!! We can split the non existent shipping too.
QD Review - M+M M10X-Z DMR 7.62x39
- Thread starter Wolverine .303
- Start date
Can I go in halvsies on that!! We can split the non existent shipping too.
JeffMan
CGN frequent flyer
I’d like to know why some run so well and others don’t. Dimensional issues in the receiver, chamber, barrel, or is it about spring tension in various springs? Or maybe it’s all of that…
It’d be interesting to see what needs to be done to the lemons to run properly. If North Silva had a competent gun smith, these videos could be a thing of the past.
It’d be interesting to see what needs to be done to the lemons to run properly. If North Silva had a competent gun smith, these videos could be a thing of the past.
Apparently I did as well, required me changing parts out but I have non of those issues that this individual has anymore. I also get better grouping from 100 yards with a strike fire II red dot….
- Location
- Glorious Alberta!
Excellent review, Lucas Precision Riflecraft (LPR) - thanks very much for the time, effort and evident patience that went into crafting that outstanding video production! If only the M10X and/or the combined Customer Service from M+M or North Sylva were even remotely as good as the video. Alas, that was clearly not the case....
After watching the LPR video I believe that we have to add "Feed Geometry" to the llist of common shortcomings with the M10X. There is really no other way to explain the repeated double-feeds and (in particlular) the stoppages where the bullet tip was mis-aligned with the Chamber. This strongly suggests to me that the angle of the feed ramp and/or the magazine presentation in the rifle is manufactured out of specification. That being the case, no matter how many differnt bolts you try you will not fully eliminate the feeding issues. At that is where we ultimately end up at the end of the LPR Video Review - with the rifle performing marginally better than it first did (now 15 rounds between failure), but far from "perfect" as M+M claims in their promotional liiterature.
The LPR Video Review reinforces my belief that both M10X production and QC are wildly inconsistent, resulting in shipped rifles with fundamental problems like the example featured in the video. In my view it is highly unlikely that further "tinkering" and parts replacement will result in reliable function with that particular firearm. Nothing short of a full rebuild with extensive QC testing will resolve the feeding problems plaguing the rifle in the video. M+M Industries really needs to step up its Customer Service and embrace responsibility for malfunctioning M10X rifles. They must be prepared to write-off complete rifles as unworkable, scrapping the Receivers as necessary. Inadequatedx Fixtures and Jigs used in the manufacturing process may be responsible for inconsistent Feed Ramp Angles, much the same way that different rifles have recently been found to exhibit varying degrees of Barrel misalignment due to off-true drilling of the Trunnions. This can only result from Receivers being improperly mounted or secured in the drilling jig, or problems with the accuracy of the jig itself. Either way, Barrels are being mounted off-center on production rifles approved for factory release by the M+M QC "process" - whatever that consists of. It therefore stands to reason that far more subtle Feed Ramp geometry issues may also entirely escape the final QC process.
It seems to me that M+M must fundamentaly revisit their approach to Customer Support, while at the same time adopting and living the motto that "the customer is always right". Instead of frequently blaming the owner/operator for M10X failures (eg. incorrect gas setting), the company must accept that it is the rifles and not the end-user who is at fault for persistent failures to feed or function. Therer are clearly a host of manufacturing problems leading to inconsistent interoperability of parts on the M10X rifles. M+M Industries needs to "own" the M10X problems by completely revisiting its manufacturing and assembly processes. Ditch the Grub Screw and tighten the tolerances between the steel Receiver and the aluminum Monolithic Rail such that there is zero/minimal slop. Ensure that the Barrels themselves are mounted True in the Trunnion of each Receiver, so that a consistent feed angle is achieved in each rifle that passes final QC. And so on, and so forth. If M+M Industries revisits and tightens up its manufacturing processes and the fixtures/jigs that it is using to manufacture the rifles many of the issues may just resolve themselves. It is certanly worth a try, as the current inconsistency in rifle manufacture and resultant performance is completely unacceptable. Indeed, much damage has already been done to the M+M Industries brand as a function of the rifle's inconsistent performance and poor accuracy, as well as the company's indifferent Customer Service. It may very well be too late to salvage the firm's reputation at this point. Only time will tell...
Thanks (and congratulations) once again to LPR for producing such a comprehensive overview of the various problems plaguing the M10X platform. Hopefully M+M Industries is paying close attention to the Video and this discussion Thread (among the many others). Notwithstanding end-user efforts to resolve the particular problems plaguing their individual rifles, responsibility for addressing and resolving the consistency problems plaguing the M10X platform belongs entirely to M+M Industries. It remains to be seen whether the company will rise to the occasion or fade into obscurity as a failure footnote in firearms design history.
I will report my findings after I put first rounds downrange with my own shiny new M10X tomorrow. I am not anticipating perfection. Watch and shoot...
After watching the LPR video I believe that we have to add "Feed Geometry" to the llist of common shortcomings with the M10X. There is really no other way to explain the repeated double-feeds and (in particlular) the stoppages where the bullet tip was mis-aligned with the Chamber. This strongly suggests to me that the angle of the feed ramp and/or the magazine presentation in the rifle is manufactured out of specification. That being the case, no matter how many differnt bolts you try you will not fully eliminate the feeding issues. At that is where we ultimately end up at the end of the LPR Video Review - with the rifle performing marginally better than it first did (now 15 rounds between failure), but far from "perfect" as M+M claims in their promotional liiterature.
The LPR Video Review reinforces my belief that both M10X production and QC are wildly inconsistent, resulting in shipped rifles with fundamental problems like the example featured in the video. In my view it is highly unlikely that further "tinkering" and parts replacement will result in reliable function with that particular firearm. Nothing short of a full rebuild with extensive QC testing will resolve the feeding problems plaguing the rifle in the video. M+M Industries really needs to step up its Customer Service and embrace responsibility for malfunctioning M10X rifles. They must be prepared to write-off complete rifles as unworkable, scrapping the Receivers as necessary. Inadequatedx Fixtures and Jigs used in the manufacturing process may be responsible for inconsistent Feed Ramp Angles, much the same way that different rifles have recently been found to exhibit varying degrees of Barrel misalignment due to off-true drilling of the Trunnions. This can only result from Receivers being improperly mounted or secured in the drilling jig, or problems with the accuracy of the jig itself. Either way, Barrels are being mounted off-center on production rifles approved for factory release by the M+M QC "process" - whatever that consists of. It therefore stands to reason that far more subtle Feed Ramp geometry issues may also entirely escape the final QC process.
It seems to me that M+M must fundamentaly revisit their approach to Customer Support, while at the same time adopting and living the motto that "the customer is always right". Instead of frequently blaming the owner/operator for M10X failures (eg. incorrect gas setting), the company must accept that it is the rifles and not the end-user who is at fault for persistent failures to feed or function. Therer are clearly a host of manufacturing problems leading to inconsistent interoperability of parts on the M10X rifles. M+M Industries needs to "own" the M10X problems by completely revisiting its manufacturing and assembly processes. Ditch the Grub Screw and tighten the tolerances between the steel Receiver and the aluminum Monolithic Rail such that there is zero/minimal slop. Ensure that the Barrels themselves are mounted True in the Trunnion of each Receiver, so that a consistent feed angle is achieved in each rifle that passes final QC. And so on, and so forth. If M+M Industries revisits and tightens up its manufacturing processes and the fixtures/jigs that it is using to manufacture the rifles many of the issues may just resolve themselves. It is certanly worth a try, as the current inconsistency in rifle manufacture and resultant performance is completely unacceptable. Indeed, much damage has already been done to the M+M Industries brand as a function of the rifle's inconsistent performance and poor accuracy, as well as the company's indifferent Customer Service. It may very well be too late to salvage the firm's reputation at this point. Only time will tell...
Thanks (and congratulations) once again to LPR for producing such a comprehensive overview of the various problems plaguing the M10X platform. Hopefully M+M Industries is paying close attention to the Video and this discussion Thread (among the many others). Notwithstanding end-user efforts to resolve the particular problems plaguing their individual rifles, responsibility for addressing and resolving the consistency problems plaguing the M10X platform belongs entirely to M+M Industries. It remains to be seen whether the company will rise to the occasion or fade into obscurity as a failure footnote in firearms design history.
I will report my findings after I put first rounds downrange with my own shiny new M10X tomorrow. I am not anticipating perfection. Watch and shoot...
Last edited:
yeah, i was wondering why the manufacturer asking the owner to check for burr in the chamber after two warranty claims, shouldnt a competent gunsmith at NS have done that?
CobraGT
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- The rainy part of BC
Great video, if not a reassuring one! Not that it matters, given your shocking accuracy results, but I'm curious as to whether your barrel was canted at all, in addition to all of your other problems. My M10 functions 100% with pmags on gas setting 1 (it would generally fail to strip rounds out of anything other than a pmag on setting one), 100% with any mag I've tried on gas setting 2, and is printing groups at 50 of only a couple of inches with a red dot, but given the canted barrel on mine, the POI varies left-to-right depending on distance. It sounds like I won the lottery with the limited issues I have...
Regarding lucas's video, has anyone every seen patterning happen like that before with a different rifle design ?
Weird how it would put one left of center 3" then right 3" of center than back and forth 1 after the other, then occasionally go left, right, left, right before putting 5th dead center.
Is it something like the receiver/scope rail shifting due to harmonics and stopping left and then after firing again settling to the right and back and forth ?
Weird how it would put one left of center 3" then right 3" of center than back and forth 1 after the other, then occasionally go left, right, left, right before putting 5th dead center.
Is it something like the receiver/scope rail shifting due to harmonics and stopping left and then after firing again settling to the right and back and forth ?
Cromagn0nMan
New member
I have one, and I have had none of these problems.
Its actually alot of fun to shoot, and runs reliably. The only issues I've had is poor ammo (surplus).
Its actually alot of fun to shoot, and runs reliably. The only issues I've had is poor ammo (surplus).
JeffMan
CGN frequent flyer
Yup. Same here. 200-300 without a single malf.
Right out of the box, load, fire, repeat.
The trigger is so light the first round spooks me.
My barrel is slightly canted, in relation to the handguard tho - I'm not too worried about it. My rear sight is slightly drifted to the left but I had a Stag AR15 that the rear sight was ALL THE WAY to the left. - dealer said it was fine and was just tolerance stacking (shrug)
I think I measured my barrel is out by .27mm or something. I could probably loosen the grub screw and straighten it but I'm reluctant to screw with it when its running so well and accuracy is acceptable.
Last edited:
CobraGT
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- The rainy part of BC
I think the aluminum shell upon which the optic is mounted is moving on the steel receiver, back and forth with each shot. The design of this rifle features loose tolerances between the aluminum shell and steel receiver... given the somewhat random QC on these rifles, I suspect the tolerances on his rifle are looser than most, resulting in his issue.
JeffMan
CGN frequent flyer
I suspect you’re correct.
I’ve tried to move my receiver inside the aluminum and it won’t budge. I’ve not undone the grub screw tho as I’ve got it zeroed.
Part of me wants to disassemble and reassemble using some JB weld but I can’t bring myself to do it while it’s working well and holding zero.
CobraGT, did you manage to get your barrel straight?
Last edited:
apexanimal
CGN Regular
- Location
- Vancouver Island
Seen some guys saying their m10x's are reliable, but not with surplus ammo. Just a thought to challenge that statement. If a service type rifle (inherently obvious this rifle is meant to be an AK competitor...) isn't reliable with service type ammunition, is it reliable at all? Surplus ammunition isn't inherently "poor ammo". Rather i think it's some of the more consistent ammunition available broadly and historically speaking, especially when you consider long term reliability. You have to keep in mind what the consequences were to workers and management in factories who produced unreliable batches of ammunition...
Sure their accuracy requirements werent as high as today, but the accuracy a surplus round is inherently capable of is beyond what most people or rifles that chamber them can shoot (2 moa from a CZ 527, far beyond acceptable for service rifle accuracy)
All this to say, i am totally agnostic when it comes to firearms. Whatever sins M+M may have committed with the m10x in the past i am willing to forgive if they are truly committed to fixing the gun. If they make it run, i will buy it again. However, this sin i will not forgive; that they should not have it run surplus ammunition reliably. If you market a gun as a competitor to, or superior to, an AK, you better have it include the AKs most endearing quality, reliability. No other attribute you could give to a rifle is worth a trade off in reliability. Also nothing against anyone who doesn't like shooting surplus/corrosive ammo, more power to you, i just think the option to have it function with said ammo is a must.
Sure their accuracy requirements werent as high as today, but the accuracy a surplus round is inherently capable of is beyond what most people or rifles that chamber them can shoot (2 moa from a CZ 527, far beyond acceptable for service rifle accuracy)
All this to say, i am totally agnostic when it comes to firearms. Whatever sins M+M may have committed with the m10x in the past i am willing to forgive if they are truly committed to fixing the gun. If they make it run, i will buy it again. However, this sin i will not forgive; that they should not have it run surplus ammunition reliably. If you market a gun as a competitor to, or superior to, an AK, you better have it include the AKs most endearing quality, reliability. No other attribute you could give to a rifle is worth a trade off in reliability. Also nothing against anyone who doesn't like shooting surplus/corrosive ammo, more power to you, i just think the option to have it function with said ammo is a must.
I was curious about that too. I wonder if it has something to do with the side of the magazine the round is fed from as it is chambered? Like it comes in at a super significant cant or something?
That's whats weird about the rifle in the video by LPR, it doesn't seem to be random, it puts first round far left, then 2nd round far right, third round far left, fourth far right then maybe 5th round dead center but it groups ok for shots #1&3, and #2&4 in their respective hemisphere lol
Maybe it's a spray and pray option, aka "shotgun mode" on the selector....
If the barrel is askew of the receiver it is likely causing horizontal "whipping" of the barrel and randomly tossing bullets left and right.
- Location
- Glorious Alberta!
Well, I had my (then) unfired M10X out today for the first time. I put 160 rounds through it, mostly Norinco Red Box copper-washed steel case, but also some bulk surplus copper-wash steel case and 20 rounds of brass case. My rifle started off strong, but after 25 flawless rounds it started having a stoppage emptying every other 5-round mag. The mags were a mix of 5/20 and 5/30 AK PMags which worked fine. The stoppages were mostly failures to eject or stove-pipes. I cranked the gas over to the Adverse setting and the stoppages went away except for the last round in about half of the mags that I fired. Those last rounds would either stove-pipe or hang-up inside the Receiver, which was very odd as the rifle fed and ejected perfectly for 4 out of every 5 rounds fired. It choked ejecting the last round when there was no ammo in the magazine. It was no big deal to clear the last round if it hung up, but it would seriously slow down a competition reload! Sorry, no photos - I was too busy shooting and clearing the last round!
Overall, I was reasonably satisfied with the rifle's reliabiity once I cranked up the gas setting. The occasional hang-up ejecting the last round is troublesome and worthy of further investigation, although I suspect that it would take a high-speed camera to get to the bottom of it. Perhaps I will try the slow-motion settings on my phone camera the next time I am out if I have an assistant to do the firing for me. I remain hopeful that as the rifle breaks in and the action smooths out it will perform as well on the Normal gas setting as it currently does on the Adverse setting. Time will tell. Ejection was pretty consistent at the 4:00 O'Clock position, so no issues with Bolt/Carrier velocity nor is the rifle apparently over-gassed - even on the Adverse setting. My rifle's chamber seems to be tight on the Norinco Red Box fodder, as evidenced by 2 hard-extractions, one of which had to be "mortared" to clear. The other was so stuck that the Extractor was tearing off the rim of the empty casing in the chamber. I tapped it out with a cleaning rod and inspected the casing for anything out of the ordinary, but nothing - no evidence of a burr or anything else that would cause the casing to stick to the Chamber walls. Cycling the Norinco ammo through a tight chamber might just be enough to cause those last-round ejection issues, a theory that the use of different ammo will either support or disprove the next time I get out. I have 200 rounds of Barnaul 7.62x39mm ammo inbound, which I will add to the experimentation mix.
A detailed inspection of the rifle post-shoot indicated no areas nor points of accelerated wear. Everything appeared to be normal for a mere 160 rounds down the pipe. Accuracy was disappointing, but no worse than the first M10X I owned a few years ago when they first came out. The groups looked great at 25m as I zeroed my 1-8x Vortex Strike Eagle LPVO, with rounds frequently stacking on top of each other. However, when we moved over to 100m those groupings expanded from 1" to 4" and sometimes 5" on average (with declared flyers). So, typical performance in my experience for an M10X firing Norinco copper-washed steel-case ammo. I'd have liked tighter groups, but am not keen to pay for premium ammo just to find out if the M10X is capable of better than 4" groups at 100m. That is acceptable to me for plinking steel out to 200 and maybe even 300m, which is all I wanted the M10X for. I have other rifles that reach out and touch things far away. The M10X is a plinker, notwithstanding its ludicrous "Designated Marksman Rifle" moniker assigned by the manufacturer. Wishful thinking, LOL!!
Well, that's it for now. I will have more to say when I get out with the M10X again using Barnaul ammo and a mix of Steel magazines just to keep things interesting....
Overall, I was reasonably satisfied with the rifle's reliabiity once I cranked up the gas setting. The occasional hang-up ejecting the last round is troublesome and worthy of further investigation, although I suspect that it would take a high-speed camera to get to the bottom of it. Perhaps I will try the slow-motion settings on my phone camera the next time I am out if I have an assistant to do the firing for me. I remain hopeful that as the rifle breaks in and the action smooths out it will perform as well on the Normal gas setting as it currently does on the Adverse setting. Time will tell. Ejection was pretty consistent at the 4:00 O'Clock position, so no issues with Bolt/Carrier velocity nor is the rifle apparently over-gassed - even on the Adverse setting. My rifle's chamber seems to be tight on the Norinco Red Box fodder, as evidenced by 2 hard-extractions, one of which had to be "mortared" to clear. The other was so stuck that the Extractor was tearing off the rim of the empty casing in the chamber. I tapped it out with a cleaning rod and inspected the casing for anything out of the ordinary, but nothing - no evidence of a burr or anything else that would cause the casing to stick to the Chamber walls. Cycling the Norinco ammo through a tight chamber might just be enough to cause those last-round ejection issues, a theory that the use of different ammo will either support or disprove the next time I get out. I have 200 rounds of Barnaul 7.62x39mm ammo inbound, which I will add to the experimentation mix.
A detailed inspection of the rifle post-shoot indicated no areas nor points of accelerated wear. Everything appeared to be normal for a mere 160 rounds down the pipe. Accuracy was disappointing, but no worse than the first M10X I owned a few years ago when they first came out. The groups looked great at 25m as I zeroed my 1-8x Vortex Strike Eagle LPVO, with rounds frequently stacking on top of each other. However, when we moved over to 100m those groupings expanded from 1" to 4" and sometimes 5" on average (with declared flyers). So, typical performance in my experience for an M10X firing Norinco copper-washed steel-case ammo. I'd have liked tighter groups, but am not keen to pay for premium ammo just to find out if the M10X is capable of better than 4" groups at 100m. That is acceptable to me for plinking steel out to 200 and maybe even 300m, which is all I wanted the M10X for. I have other rifles that reach out and touch things far away. The M10X is a plinker, notwithstanding its ludicrous "Designated Marksman Rifle" moniker assigned by the manufacturer. Wishful thinking, LOL!!
Well, that's it for now. I will have more to say when I get out with the M10X again using Barnaul ammo and a mix of Steel magazines just to keep things interesting....
Last edited:
aftermidnight
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- West Kelowna BC
My random thoughts... I am wondering if it is a heat expansion differential between the aluminum and steel upper..
Thinking back I seem to recall issues when guys started putting aluminum heads on iron engine blocks.
Also seem to recall issues with the early carbon fiber wrapped barrels and the steel barrel heat issues.
Maybe something like this?
Thinking back I seem to recall issues when guys started putting aluminum heads on iron engine blocks.
Also seem to recall issues with the early carbon fiber wrapped barrels and the steel barrel heat issues.
Maybe something like this?
- Location
- Glorious Alberta!
In my experience, the M10X is an inconsistent grouper even when cold. It doesn't start out accurate and then fall apart accuracy-wise as it heats up. The cold-bore groups still measure 4" or more, just like the hot-barrel groups. And those results are with the infamous Grubb Screw at 50 in/lbs....
aftermidnight
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- West Kelowna BC
So not a 'got hot once and dims are now pooched' situation.
Thanks, Bartok, great first look! Did the last round feeding issue still exist if you loaded the magazines with four rounds? I remember reading about a rifle, but I can't remember which one, where they had to re-pin the magazine's spring to a different tension to get it to work properly with a "full" Canadian round count.
