This. 7075 t6?
Troy 102 !! EXCLUSIVE PHOTOS !!
- Thread starter TSE_Sales
- Start date
This. 7075 t6?
See my post above. The Troy 102 isn't modeled after his generation of the BCL. His comparison is completely irrelevant
For the record.
JR at TSE: explicitly confirmed "this is not a joint venture, and BCL selling troy the FRT is false."
JR, please clarify your statements as made in your threads. When did this change
Thankyou
Last edited:
The lower is clearly 99% the same. The bottom of the upper is cut a little different from the bolt catch forward. Looks like Troy just cleaned it up a bit to simplify machining. Pretty easy to see that the Troy is based on the Gen 1, thankfully.
Last edited:
Iām interested in hearing about the rifle and reviews when they become available.
I really donāt give a schiat about an in depth investigation into what a retailer may have said months ago. The rifle is either good or itās not.
I really donāt give a schiat about an in depth investigation into what a retailer may have said months ago. The rifle is either good or itās not.
Not really, IMHO, as the BCL Gen1, Gen2 and the Troy 102 all share the same (or very similar) FRT, which I was lead to believe, was the topic under (contentious) discussion.
If my assumption is not correct, then I apologize in advance.
Rick
Last edited:
Not really, IMHO, as the BCL Gen1, Gen2 and the Troy 102 all share the same (or very similar) FRT, which I was lead to believe, was the topic under (contentious) discussion.
In the sense that they all share the same basic FRT you would be correct. And I think that's what has caused some of the confusion for some people and lead to this discussion.
Both BCL and Troy have obviously made some cosmetic changes since the original FRT which is what I got caught up in comparing (or trying to find which two share the most similarities).
No need to apologize to some random internet guy who may just as well have made the wrong assumption as to what the main topic of discussion was. It's all good
If it's not explicitly stated the it's safe to assume it's not 7075.
Good greif, the FRT is a legal document that Troy used as a starting point and then Troy clearly made many changes in the actual rifle.
Here is my, rather nicely put together, and well shooting BCL 102.
Note the following changes from the Troy 102:
All the furnature is different, but nobody cares.
Gone is the BCL Ambi bolt release, and the trigger guards also changed, so the lower is different.
The upper is similar but again different, notice the different lines.
The handguards are very different.
The barrel is completely different.
Most importantly, but not shown clearly is the that BCG is very different in who makes it.
It was the BCG and extractor issues that gave most people issues with their BCL 102.
I was lucky enough not to have any issues with my BCG.
So while both rifles follow similar AR10 patterns, claiming a Tory is a BCL is, in my mind, like claiming a Norinco AR15 is the same rifle and my Colt Canada MMR.
With no disrespect to BCL as they have given me no reason for complaining. The fit, finish, and tolerances of my BCL 102 upper, lower, and handguard are spot on, and on par with my CC MMR.
What stock is that??? I like
FAB Defense GL-SHOCK AR15/M16 Shock Absorbing Butt-Stock with a FAB Defense āMBAā Deployable Mono-Pod Butt-Stock Add-On.
I picked this set up before I installed the Precision Armament, M4-72 Tactical Compensator, 308/7.62mm.
With the PA M4-72 installed the Shock-absorbing stock becomes rather redundant, however, I still use the monopod all the time at the gun range.
Edit I forgot to mention the FAB Defense Adjustable Cheek Rest for GL-SHOCK Butt-Stock, which is also rather redundant now that I have the lower Burris XTR Signature Scope Rings.
Last edited:
This never changed. Call BCL if you want proof. NEA and BCL parted ways. After that: An exchange of IP to Troy was brokered from NEA's ownership to Troy Industries so that Troy could build a firearm for Canada based on an already approved FRT. Therefore speeding things up considerably.
Once Troy has the IP, they did their own magic to the design, but maintained enough similarities so that the RCMP stayed happy.... nuff said...
I don't know what scandal people are trying to find here.
Never the less... in less than a week, there will be a steady supply of yet another non-restricted option for Canadians by a quality manufacturer.... at a reasonable price.
JR
Now,can you convince them to make some receiver sets for us?
Pretty stoked to see this rifle,but why couldnāt they make that upper receiver contour line up with the lower,itās killing my OCD.
Which would explain why the Troy rifle is based on the original Gen 1 design that was originally brought to market by NEA.
BCL and their subsequent generations of the design have absolutely nothing to do with anything. It would make no sense at all for BCL to sell a design to another unrelated manufacturer when doing so would directly affect their own interests in the firearms market.
Thanks for clearing this up JR. Hopefully now some people will start to get it. There is no BCL/Troy conspiracy happening here.
And that right there is really all that matters
Last edited:
