The R18 Mk2 Review Pt 2 Live Fire Reliabllity and Accuracy Results

Status
Not open for further replies.
Actually we're discussing every point raised here. The wonderful thing about dealing directly with the manufacturer on a new project is that issues can be discussed and if/where appropriate, sorted.

Especially if it has to do with usability, functionality and endurance.

However, we also want a rifle that looks as good as it feels.

The standard features we think are important:

Weight under 7.5 lbs
Standard AR style barrel interface for ease of customization and replacement down the road
Non proprietary trigger group
Rifle length gas system with the gas system designed for long life
Beavertail grip use
Picatinny rear interface to allow maximum use of aftermarket adapters / stocks from many manufacturers... growing daily.
Usable flared magwell
Ability to use many different manufacturers mags
Ambi-controls
and...
a non-reciprocating ####ing handle... this was a must for this project.

There are a lot of things that were also added, but they were not KEY features.

Regardless, I think the package we've come up with ticks almost all of the boxes for those looking for a rifle at this price point.

JR

How about roll out two barrel options: pencil/sporter contour in 1:8 twist, and Heavy varmint in 1: 7 ?

I think pencil will out sold heavy, but still lot of people need to have heavy barrel.

And please do not flute the barrel. Fluting with small ball head endmill takes to much time and efforts(cost); creating more QC issues(cost); and introducing more stress into metal (accuracy)
 
Regardless of profile, I'd want a rifle with A) either a quality barrel, or B) one with a cheap POS that is otherwise just getting swapped out.
Putting on a so-so quality barrel is just a detractor which most people that are serious about shooting will factor into the cost of the rifle in their minds when it comes time to purchase, but it could be a draw insofar as lowered initial pricing.
That is to say, 'am I getting a rifle that is more or less done, or am I buying a rifle and a tomato stake'.

I'd go on a hunch that lots of guys have a few barrels kicking around on newly prohibited guns ready for the swap.
Something for the originators to mull over.
 
Regardless of profile, I'd want a rifle with A) either a quality barrel, or B) one with a cheap POS that is otherwise just getting swapped out.
Putting on a so-so quality barrel is just a detractor which most people that are serious about shooting will factor into the cost of the rifle in their minds when it comes time to purchase, but it could be a draw insofar as lowered initial pricing.
That is to say, 'am I getting a rifle that is more or less done, or am I buying a rifle and a tomato stake'.

I'd go on a hunch that lots of guys have a few barrels kicking around on newly prohibited guns ready for the swap.
Something for the originators to mull over.

Just my personal opinion, but I much prefer that a rifle come equipped with a decent barrel from the factory. I am not in a position (yet) where I am stripping down MSRs for sacrificial parts. Pencil-weight is the preferred factory option, assuming that it is properly stress-relieved so as to avoid "wandering" or "stringing" groups when warm. Thus far, that appears to be the case with the R18, however I will confirm with additional accuracy testing over the next week once I receive my test R18 back from JR Cox with the heavier Operating Springs installed. I have 3 expensive boxes of 5.56mm Match ammo in various weights to test out as well, which ought to wring as much practical accuracy out of the rifle as is possible.

All of the SAI elements combined have the potential to produce a definite, high-quality barrel - precision CNC-machined in Canada from premium GB CrMV Steel Blanks, button-rifled 6-groove with a 1/8” twist rate, lapped and stress-relieved. The “Pencil” profile blanks are air-gauged during final inspection and feature a precision-cut Chamber, Gas Port and an 11-degree “Target” Crown. Furthermore, the Chamber "Root" has been extended to limit flex and add strength to the Pencil-Barrel profile with a Nitride coating inside and out.

There is a dearth of true lightweight and accurate MSR 18.6" barrels on the Canadian market as opposed to medium or heavy-weigh profiles. To me, the "one and done" approach to R18 Barrel manufacturing by SAI and TSE makes emminent sense. There is no need to pump out a multitude of medium and heavy-weight Barrel profiles, thus increasing the unit cost and adding complexity to the manufacturing and assembly lines. The R18 is intended as a modern utility firearm - the .30-30 Winchester Model 94 of the modern age. As such it deserves a Barrel light enough to comfortably carry for hours on end, with the first-round accuracy required of varmint hunting on the Prairie. Subject to further accuracy testing, I believe that the R18 Design Team have hit the nail on the head with the current R18 Barrel profile. Those who want to turn their R18s into longer-range tack-drivers typically know where to shop for medium and heavy-weight 18.6" barrels.
 
>Moaning and groaning how an adapter adds an inch on the LOP on an adjustable stock. Just like...move it in one more or dont be a manlet ?

Very mature lol. The distance wouldn't effect me personally but I know smaller framed folks who run stock to the base who would have their comfortable LOP extended. But screw them right?

Length of Pull on an firearm equipped with a Retracting Buttstock is moot if a single, quick adjustment of the Buttstock resolves the issue. What is of far more interest to me is the abillty to raise or lower the Comb Height by adjusting the height at which we mount the Stock to the Rear Picatinny Rails. This is why i think that the R18 needs a longer Rear Rail - to permit that advantageous vertical adjustment of the comb height. At least one additional slot at the top end of the Rail is an absolute must, as this is the height at which I am the most comfortable in the Wheelchair. Just my $.02

I'm inclined to agree with the height of the rail, as long as it's moved up and not extended one up. Seems strange to have a length of rail poking out the top or bottom. But in the name of preference, I guess extension makes sense.

All in all I see your points. Maybe I'm grumpy to change. My point was more an amalgamation of all my smaller points as a whole. Screwing into a receiver seems more stable in my head than screwing into an adapter on a rail. Maybe the solution is just more loctite? Idk. Checked out midwest, as was suggested. Certainly saw more than I thought was avail, albeit 9 or so examples, combo'd between fixed, folding, and skeletonized. Maybe I wasn't aware of an industry shift at the top, but google either isn't my friend in trying to find picatinny stock examples or it's not as prevalent as it's being presented.

Either way, happy to put the matter to bed.
 
I'm inclined to agree with the height of the rail, as long as it's moved up and not extended one up. Seems strange to have a length of rail poking out the top or bottom. But in the name of preference, I guess extension makes sense.

When we first broached this project with SAI, the lower was going to be cross compatible with the WK / WS rifles. But as features were added; like the bolt catch, it became clear that this was an impossibility.

Without that hindrance, this is something we could look at in the next run of rifles, but the first hundred (as they are almost complete) are as-is.
 
Would it compromise the stock rigidity too much if you added a picatinny riser with a longer rail to the picatinny mount, for those who need higher scope mount position? If the idea works, it would highlight the flexibility of the 1913/Picatinny stock interface. This would not preclude TSE/Sterling modifying later iterations of the design, but may help those with first production run guns who need a higher mount, like Bartok5.

Optics Planet Dot Com said:
A1AD5Zkl.png
 
Last edited:
When we first broached this project with SAI, the lower was going to be cross compatible with the WK / WS rifles. But as features were added; like the bolt catch, it became clear that this was an impossibility.

Without that hindrance, this is something we could look at in the next run of rifles, but the first hundred (as they are almost complete) are as-is.

ETA? Thanks
 
As a potentially intersting aside for some of you, I have just received a Midwest Industries Folding Picatinny Buttstock Interface from TSE for $150 CAD (plus shipping). The unit itself is very nicely machined out of steel stock, resulting in an extremely strong hinge and locking system. The unit folds reasonably easy and locks up rock-solid like a bank vault door.

I will be installing the Folding Adapter on my Test R18 when I receive it back from JR Cox with the extra power Operating Springs installed. For now, I have it mounted on my house-bound SIG MCX Lightweight Carbine so that I can check it out.


20211117-224142.jpg



20211117-224527.jpg



20211117-224150.jpg



20211117-224042.jpg



20211117-224355.jpg



I have also ordered up a Midwest Industries Folding Extruded Stock from Brownells, which ought to arrive within the next 2-3 weeks provided that there are no CBSA shenanigans to hold things up. The Midwest Stock has zero application to the AR15 platform, but unfortunately the mouth-breathing antis know no limits on their often contracictory idiocy. Anyhow, here's the Folding Picatinny Busttstock that I ordered:


p-100042916-3-1-1.webp



p-100042916-2.webp
 
That Midwest Industries Folding Picatinny Buttstock Interface looks very nice.

I have also ordered up a Midwest Industries Folding Extruded Stock from Brownells, which ought to arrive within the next 2-3 weeks provided that there are no CBSA shenanigans to hold things up.

My recent order from Brownells was held by CBSA for 19 days (and not opened apparently as there is no tax/fee attached to the CP tracking still enroute from Mississauga).
It contains 1 x 1911 slide stop and a micrometer top for a reloading die.....

A Numrich order which has Mauser parts has been there for 18 days 'so far'.

Good luck with yours as they may decide it can fit on an AR and prohibit it from entering.
 
That Midwest Industries Folding Picatinny Buttstock Interface looks very nice.



My recent order from Brownells was held by CBSA for 19 days (and not opened apparently as there is no tax/fee attached to the CP tracking still enroute from Mississauga).
It contains 1 x 1911 slide stop and a micrometer top for a reloading die.....

A Numrich order which has Mauser parts has been there for 18 days 'so far'.

Good luck with yours as they may decide it can fit on an AR and prohibit it from entering.

I am well aware of the risks posed by a capricious, authoritative bureaucracy being permitted to make item classifications based on appearance and emotion. I've been living under such conditions for the past 35 years when it comes to the ever-shifting goalposts of firearms classification, which now obviously involves any aluminum or Steel part with a matte black finish...

It will be pretty hard to state that the Midwest Folder will fit and function on the AR15, when it patently will not. The Buttstock requires a closed rear end with Picatinny Rail to mount to. The AR15 requires that space open and unimpeded for rearward movement of the Bolt-Carrier and Operating Spring. The two are entirely incompatible.
 
Last edited:
Would it compromise the stock rigidity too much if you added a picatinny riser with a longer rail to the picatinny mount, for those who need higher scope mount position? If the idea works, it would highlight the flexibility of the 1913/Picatinny stock interface. This would not preclude TSE/Sterling modifying later iterations of the design, but may help those with first production run guns who need a higher mount, like Bartok5.

Now Ive seen it all
 
Bartok. I had to laugh and shake my head at the comment directed at you about proper lubrication. Knowing who you are makes that comment shockingly insulting. I figured out who you are by a previous post on cgn. We crossed paths once on 1-08. I was a young C9 gunner with the PRT FP coy.

Great review, thanks for taking the time to do this.

JR, looks like you have a solid product on the go. I appreciate your efforts.
 
Bartok. I had to laugh and shake my head at the comment directed at you about proper lubrication. Knowing who you are makes that comment shockingly insulting. I figured out who you are by a previous post on cgn. We crossed paths once on 1-08. I was a young C9 gunner with the PRT FP coy.

LOL - good to have met you!
 
Folding Buttstock Options

Today we take a look at 2 folding buttstock options for the R18, both of which are either currently available from TSE or are under development by SAI for eventual TSE sale.

The first option is the Magpul Zhukov Buttstock, which mounts to the Picatinny Buttstock Rail by way of a 1" Adapter Block. Combined with the 1" Mount integral to the Zhukov Stock system, this results in a 2" non-folding projection immediately behind the rifle.

The second option is the Midwest Industries Folding Picatinny Adapter which adds 1" to the Length of Pull. This Folding Adapter is reversable, which is required to get the Buttstock to fold flat against the Right side of the R18 (rather than hung up on the ####ing Handle on the Left side).

In my view, the Midwest Industries Folding Adapter is the least obtrusive, most streamlined and better looking option of the two. It is also the least expensive option at $150 CAD for the Adapter (in stock now at TSE). Note however that you will have to reverse the direction of fold by flipping the stock over so that it folds to the Right. The Midwest Industries adapter adds exactly 1" to the existing Length of Pull, which is remedied for shorter firing postures by collapsing the Buttstock one adjustment notch.

The Magpul Zhukov Buttstock adds 2" to the overall Length of Pull, requiring that the stock be fully-collapsed to accomodate people of shorter stature. The Zhukov Stock Adapter offers an QD Sing Socket on either side of the adapter whereas the Midwewst Industries Adapter lacks that feature.


20211120-105532.jpg



20211120-105832.jpg



20211120-110518.jpg



20211120-110329.jpg



In term of incremental upgrades, the 2 x Test Rifles were returned to me with stiffer/stronger Recoil Springs (exhibiting a slightly "snappier" return to battery) as well as some revised Bolt and Carrier parts. Specifically the Bolt Cam Pin has received additional chamfering of the exposed end to aide in smooth cycling and manual operation of the action. Likewise, the end of the Firing Pin Retaining Pin has been rounded-off to ensure smooth cycling within the Upper Receiver. rIn both cases, the revised part is shown to the Left of the original version.


20211120-111251.jpg



20211120-125048.jpg
 
Last edited:
Looks strong enough to beat a dead horse with and more accurate at 100m than I am at 1m with a sharp stick.

So I've just noticed and read this entire thread for the first time today, I think this rifle looks great. I like the features its bringing to the table. I am interested in picking one up in the spring.
 
Looks strong enough to beat a dead horse with and more accurate at 100m than I am at 1m with a sharp stick.

So I've just noticed and read this entire thread for the first time today, I think this rifle looks great. I like the features its bringing to the table. I am interested in picking one up in the spring.

Welcome to the discussion of this exciting new hybrid platform!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom