Sig Cross rifle pics and a few words

I think we need some clarification on what was done to the gun to make it non-restricted and what the FRT says. The rumour is there’s a new entry in the FRT listing, but that means there’s now two entries in the FRT for the 308… one is restricted, one is not.

At least a couple of retailers selling this gun do not say on their website whether it’s restricted or not. How do we know? How do they know? What’s the difference?
 
Virtual.Chris said:
I think we need some clarification on what was done to the gun to make it non-restricted and what the FRT says. The rumour is there’s a new entry in the FRT listing, but that means there’s now two entries in the FRT for the 308… one is restricted, one is not.

At least a couple of retailers selling this gun do not say on their website whether it’s restricted or not. How do we know? How do they know? What’s the difference?
Click to expand...

We know because a non-restricted reference number was created for them. And so they're being sold as such too.
 
Hypox!a said:
We know because a non-restricted reference number was created for them. And so they're being sold as such too.
Click to expand...

I guess if they don’t need to register it, we don’t either. It’s all a bit mysterious though as to what has changed exactly. On one hand, the rumour is the new FRT entry has the barrel length at 422mm vs the existing entry at 406mm but someone suggested the new entry is the result of a spacer on the stock hinge. No one seems to know for sure. It will be interesting to hear from someone who actually gets their hands on one of the 308s.
 
Mine arrived, I can't see any additional spacers anywhere. So far I really like it, very light and comfortable.

OHUoFvl.jpg

37ajXyo.jpg

9ntwS7Q.jpg
 
UkrainianSnowKing said:
By looking at your pictures and the picture from the sig website it actually looks like the barrel is longer.
Click to expand...

Yep. That would be consistent with the rumoured new entry in the FRT someone reported that had the barrel at 422mm vs 406 for the original 308 that is restricted. Very interesting that they actually got a slightly longer barrel for this market. I’m surprised.
 
Virtual.Chris said:
Yep. That would be consistent with the rumoured new entry in the FRT someone reported that had the barrel at 422mm vs 406 for the original 308 that is restricted. Very interesting that they actually got a slightly longer barrel for this market. I’m surprised.
Click to expand...

I am also very surprised, cant wait until mine shows up!
 
Virtual.Chris said:
Yep. That would be consistent with the rumoured new entry in the FRT someone reported that had the barrel at 422mm vs 406 for the original 308 that is restricted. Very interesting that they actually got a slightly longer barrel for this market. I’m surprised.
Click to expand...

Simple programming change on Sig’s to make the rifle non restricted for Canada.
 
What height of rings are you all running on the Cross? I have a bunch of AR height mounts (1.5") but would like something lower than that...running a Razor LH so only a 44mm objective
 
Wanting one of these but have no chance to handle one. Do they carry ok with your hand in front of the mag? Would like to use as a hunting rifle.
 
I swear mine carries slightly rear heavy holding just in front of the mag. 6.5 creed which should have even more Barrel weight then the 308.
But it handles well in hand.
I hunt a lot of mountains and it’s going to be a backcountry rifle for me. I also do not run a sling. So it’s mostly in hand I’m mainly worried about the aluminum just sucking the heat out of my fingers lol.
I’m also running a 2.5-8 36mm with luepold low 1 inch backcountry mounts and it barely clears the hand guard
 
Jeffk said:
I swear mine carries slightly rear heavy holding just in front of the mag. 6.5 creed which should have even more Barrel weight then the 308.
But it handles well in hand.
I hunt a lot of mountains and it’s going to be a backcountry rifle for me. I also do not run a sling. So it’s mostly in hand I’m mainly worried about the aluminum just sucking the heat out of my fingers lol.
I’m also running a 2.5-8 36mm with luepold low 1 inch backcountry mounts and it barely clears the hand guard
Click to expand...

The gun is so light, I expect the optic and it’s positioning will impact the weight bias front or rear. What about using the Sig branded (or any other) pads that attach to the M-lok to keep your hands from the bare aluminum?
 
Virtual.Chris said:
The gun is so light, I expect the optic and it’s positioning will impact the weight bias front or rear. What about using the Sig branded (or any other) pads that attach to the M-lok to keep your hands from the bare aluminum?
Click to expand...

Did not know there was such a thing as m lok hand pads? I’ll look into it, I was just gonna wrap it with cork tape if it became an issue late season.
And actually I have probs about 6mm of clearance between the scope and hand guard I thought it was a lot closer for some reason.
 
Jeffk said:
Did not know there was such a thing as m lok hand pads? I’ll look into it, I was just gonna wrap it with cork tape if it became an issue late season.
And actually I have probs about 6mm of clearance between the scope and hand guard I thought it was a lot closer for some reason.
Click to expand...

I think the proper term is rail covers… not hand pads. :)
 
Jeffk said:
Did not know there was such a thing as m lok hand pads? I’ll look into it, I was just gonna wrap it with cork tape if it became an issue late season.
And actually I have probs about 6mm of clearance between the scope and hand guard I thought it was a lot closer for some reason.
Click to expand...

I was thinking a suppressor cover for a forend pad/hand insulator would work well given the size of the forend.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom