Wk 180c problem, mounting eotech mount

Status
Not open for further replies.
Paul_T said:
To be honest you are the only one that I have read about having to pay for a return for warranty work. Myself and others here that sent our rifles back got pre-paid CP mailing labels from Kodiak. YMMV I guess
Click to expand...
Nope he’s not the only one. Me and a friend both had to send our rifles back bc of the gas block coming loose. Mine was after 200 rounds and his 500, and I’m talking they were really loose. Last kick at the can for this rifle for me. List of faults and stuff it needs is growing rapidly.
 
What problems did you have with the rifle that necessitated it being sent back?

We should make a list of problem areas, that way others can be on the watch for similar problems and solutions to resolve them.
 
6ohmoney said:
Nope he’s not the only one. Me and a friend both had to send our rifles back bc of the gas block coming loose. Mine was after 200 rounds and his 500, and I’m talking they were really loose. Last kick at the can for this rifle for me. List of faults and stuff it needs is growing rapidly.
Click to expand...

I stand corrected thanks. That sucks.

FYI I got a very early rifle - my initial contact with Kodiak was 9 August and they had just started to work with CP to get a better account (Canpar was their shipper). On the 18th August I received my prepaid mailing label.

Went back for chamber reaming (mine had a tight chamber probably due to an out of spec reamer they had) and relieving gas block dimensions to clearance for the handguard. Turn around was a week.
 
Cee-8 said:
What problems did you have with the rifle that necessitated it being sent back?

We should make a list of problem areas, that way others can be on the watch for similar problems and solutions to resolve them.
Click to expand...

Chamber way too tight and feed ramps extending past the inner face of the receiver.
Rounds would jam into the edge of the bottom of ramps or even under the ramps when using steel mags.
All mags sat too low in the rifle but I didn't realize this initially. If the rounds made it up the ramp they would barely chamber because of the squeeze on the ass end of cart case.
Sent it back 60 bucks out of pocket..they fixed chamber and machined ramps back to be flush with inner receiver.
Rifle fed with hera mags then but no go at all with lar15, Colt, NATO 5/30s, norinco, old Colt 5/20s etc all these mags sat too low in the receiver. Projo hits bottom of feed ramp too low. Bolt pushing from the rear and mag is too low so round just jams and seizes in place.
They said it was the mags....the mags thy worked in every single AR, tavor, ar180b, xcrl I've owned over the years.
Said I had to pay shipping back again on my dime and if the mags were found faulty they can't be held responsible for defective magazine issues....
I saw were it was going and sold the damn thing with full disclosure. It DID function 100% with the Hera and MFT mags I had to waste money on after the warranty work

The other thing I noticed was the charging handle when inserted into the left side of the rexeiver was literally eating away and mangling the inside track of the receiver every time it was fired.
There was also developing hard impact marks on the inside rear of the receiver behind the op rod guide plate. The rifle was over gassed for sure as I felt moderate trigger slap every time firing. Much like my old xcr if you set the gas to hard/adverse.

Those were the only true issues I noted in my brief time owning one.
Just left a bad taste in my mouth. I chalk it up to hopefully rifle to rifle quality control problems, early prototype guns (seems to be the trend on any and all new Canadian guns sadly) and a hard revision required of forcing a customer to pay shipping for warranty work on a defective product.....
The mag thing....I'm far from the only person who has this exact issue. I'm not seeing transparency on this. Not many people may have sent theirs back for this reason because they were fine just using pmags or hera or mft etc which all sit higher in any rifle they go in. But from users on these forums alone it's clearly an issue whether they want to pretend it's the mags or whatever. Another user was told exactly this; it's the mags not the gun sorry....the....mags that work in every single AR pattern magazine rifle in the country which for the first time now suddenly don't lolol it's laughable.
I'm just speculating here, but guessing it's a strong reason why a rifle they were so keen on keeping the cost down to the point of not even shipping it with a cheap pair of iron sights, had to come specifically with 2 plastic Hera mags....

I hope they are at least listening and applying lessons learned to their production to improve the product and address the obvious issues that exist. The rifle has a lot of promise but I ain't coming back for a long time until I see they've been hammered out.
I picked up a type 81 and I couldn't be happier. Its crude and rough but its built like a ####ing tank and so far unstoppable. Back to good old tried and true comm bloc reliability once again!
 
Last edited:
Well they may have sorted the issue as mine has zero issues feeding from 10 round pistols mags, magpul gen 2 and 3, tapco, as well as 10/30 pistols mags. Nor is mine beating itself to death with the charging handle.

Also, most rifles that don’t have fixed sights do not come with folding iron sights just like the majority of modern bolt actions.

Now please realize that I don’t mean to downplay your experience as I’ve also suffered from being an early adopter of another rifle. It doesn’t feel great to be excited for something new only to find out you’re paying to be the test pilot / quality control.
 
Well said gentlemen!

So here is a list of issues that I have compiled from reading all the sites:

1. Chamber problems. (Original 223 Wylde chambered rifles had some issues in feeding some factory ammo; namely; american independence ammo. Problem was traced back to an out of spec chamber reamer. This was resolved by changing to 556 chamber.)

2, Magazine feeding problems. (See Travis Bickle post above and there is a video on youtube by Zee 705 that demonstrates it doesn't work will all mags. Apparently this has been resolved according to highbeam's post but it still may be QC issue and appear in other rifles.)

3. Charging handle is galling/gouging the inside of the raceway when operated on the left side of the receiver. (Maybe a design issue or possibly the gun is being over gassed.
Unfortunately, to keep the prices down, there is no way to adjust the gas system. I will be on the watching for this in my rifle as the round count goes up.)

4. The gas block touches the hand guard. (No free float here if there is contact. I haven't heard any recent complaints about this and there was a mention that the company may be milling the block down to overcome this issue.)

5. Not a true 1913 picatinny rail. (The top of the rail is to spec but not the sides. This is creating a issue in which some optics and mounting systems do not work. Not an easy fix as the receiver would have to be redesigned as well as the hand guard. Apparently, the company has only addressed this in the specs by calling it 1913 type rail or something to that effect.)

6. Pistol grip angle is not conducive to proper trigger finger placement (Not a real problem, but the trigger finger doesn't fall naturally to the sweet spot in the trigger. People have resorted to modifying various grips with a dremel tool or purchasing the Magpul MOE K which is designed to be more vertical. )

The only other comments I would make is the overall look of the firearm. The short hand guard with ample barrel sticking out the front makes the rifle look unbalanced. People have overcome this by purchasing aftermarket hand guards that are 13.5 to 15" in length. They reduce the length of the barrel protrusion by installing faux suppressors that thread over the barrel concealing its length. Nice touch. Problem with increasing the length of the hand guard is that it complicates your access to the gas piston system. The use of those faux suppressors move the balance point further forward and may affect the accuracy. A true fix would be new barrel with rifle length gas piston and a new longer hand guard. Hey why not throw in an adjustable gas system. Not going to happen for an under $1,000 rifle.

Hey she may be a bit ugly but as long as she performs I'm happy.

Not sure there are any further issues, but feel free to update the list.

Please don't take this post as being a criticism of the rifle. It's just an information page outlining some of the problems that some new owners may experience with this rifle.
 
The charging handle gouging the receiver is the biggest issue I have with the rifle. Maybe a rubber lip around the raceway wwhich double as a dust-cover would solve the issue.
 
With over a a 1000 rounds on my WK’s I noticed last time I cleaned them the inside of the receiver is getting pretty chewed up from the charging handle.
 
Great compilation Cee-8, I have one of these rifles on order (pre-order) and had not read the forums for a while, surprised at at the deficiencies, especially the chamber reaming issue which is not good, please keep up the list and will check back regularly. Would rather eat part of my deposit than get stuck with a nightmare.
 
wrxs said:
Great compilation Cee-8, I have one of these rifles on order (pre-order) and had not read the forums for a while, surprised at at the deficiencies, especially the chamber reaming issue which is not good, please keep up the list and will check back regularly. Would rather eat part of my deposit than get stuck with a nightmare.
Click to expand...

The chamber issues should have been resolved if you dont have one of the first 100-150 rifles, so I wouldnt worry.
 
The issue about the receiver getting chewed up is a major one for me as well. Is Wolverine and Kodiac defence aware of the problem?

Is it only happening when the charging handle is inserted in the left side or does it also happen on the right as well?
 
Cee-8 said:
The issue about the receiver getting chewed up is a major one for me as well. Is Wolverine and Kodiac defence aware of the problem?

Is it only happening when the charging handle is inserted in the left side or does it also happen on the right as well?
Click to expand...

I only ever ran it on left side and it was bad.

I forgot actually; another issue more in line with you scope and battery powered sight types; I only use iron sights.
I put a pair of Magpul MBUS flip up sights on mine.
The rear sight slid on the rail with a bit of tightness but it did fit.
However the square shape of the receiver and the space from the receiver top and top of the rail would not allow the sight to be folded or flip up as the lever that actuates when this happens would contact the receiver top and go no further.
I had to slowly file away flat material from the bottoms of the push button releases to allow ebough clearance to release the sight.
Not a huge issue but again another overlooked spot on this thing.
Probably not a huge issue to most of you scope guys but the MBUS flips are one of the most common ones used that ice seen as backups or primary open sights.
 
Updated list of issues with the WK180C (Further to the original posting). I have included Travis's issue with the Magpul Mbus polymer sights.

So here is a list of issues that I have compiled from reading all the sites:

1. Chamber problems. (Original 223 Wylde chambered rifles had some issues in feeding some factory ammo; namely; american independence ammo. Problem was traced back to an out of spec chamber reamer. This was resolved by changing to 556 chamber.)

2, Magazine feeding problems. (See Travis Bickle post above and there is a video on youtube by Zee 705 that demonstrates it doesn't work will all mags. Apparently this has been resolved according to highbeam's post but it still may be QC issue and appear in other rifles.)

3. Charging handle is galling/gouging the inside of the raceway when operated on the left side of the receiver. (Maybe a design issue or possibly the gun is being over gassed. Unfortunately, to keep the prices down, there is no way to adjust the gas system. I will be on the watch for this in my rifle as the round count goes up.)

4. The gas block touches the hand guard. (No free float here if there is contact. I haven't heard any recent complaints about this and there was a mention that the company may be milling the block down to overcome this issue.)

5. Not a true 1913 picatinny rail. (The top of the rail is to spec but not the sides. This is creating a issue in which some optics and mounting systems do not work. Not an easy fix as the receiver would have to be redesigned as well as the hand guard. Apparently, the company has only addressed this in the specs by calling it 1913 type rail or something to that effect.) * FURTHER: *** MAGPUL MBUS POLYMER SIGHTS CAN BE MOUNTED BUT THE REAR SIGHT HAS TO BE MODIFIED SO IT CAN BE FLIPPED UP AND DEPLOYED***

6. Pistol grip angle is not conducive to proper trigger finger placement (Not a real problem, but the trigger finger doesn't fall naturally to the sweet spot in the trigger. People have resorted to modifying various grips with a dremel tool or purchasing the Magpul MOE K which is designed to be more vertical. )

FEEL FREE TO COPY THIS POST AND INCLUDE ANY OTHER ISSUES THAT HAVE BEEN ENCOUNTERED.
 
Last edited:
Cee-8 said:
2, Magazine feeding problems. (See Travis Bickle post above and there is a video on youtube by Zee 705 that demonstrates it doesn't work will all mags. Apparently this has been resolved according to highbeam's post but it still may be QC issue and appear in other rifles.)
Click to expand...

Do you have a link to highbeam's post? I'm curious as to what the solution is.

Cheers
 
GUB said:
So what is it ?? Prepaid shipping label from Kodiak or customer pays to Kodiak
Click to expand...

I had to pay out of pocket the first time as did many.
I have emails direct from Kodiak stating this is the policy despite my stating how it's utter BS...
Apparently some people got prepaid shipping labels at some point. Maybe they changed their tune after so many rifles had to go back. Who knows.
When I enquired about sending it back again, they said I pay the shipping once again.
It's ####ing BS. That's my opinion there obviously.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom