Wow do i ever hate my XCR....

Play between an upper and lower is a non-issue for an AR. Some do it, some don't. It doesn't affect anything. I'm not sure if this is the same on an XCR. To be honest, I thought all you XCR owners just loctited the upper and lower together anyway.
 
Problems with xcr :eek:

Did you loctite the fasteners? i hear it solves everything.

Just a quick little tidbit for those of you with a FAST stock for your XCR.

Dunno about the rest of you but on my FAST stock, the two truss screws that hold the sliding portion of the stock in are METRIC... not imperial. Kinda surprised me and I almost stripped one of mine out so be aware that RA did some mixing and matching (probably due to lack of availability in certain screw styles).

Also, the stock may not lock into the rearmost position. Mine didn't, which is why I took it appart. The tollerances between the position slots and the spring loaded tab are pretty tight. I took the screw out of the bottom and pulled it apart... this was a mistake. Trying to get that spring and tab back in is a HORRIBLE BASTARD! Anyway, when I finally did get it back together it would lock into all of the slots without any trouble so it may have just needed some lube or a jiggling.

As usual, YMMV

Wow are you one thick individual!!!
 
While in general play between upper and lower should not affect accuracy, if the play is extreme it is possible. Imagine a gun with a half inch of play side to side and up and down...it would be very, very difficult to get consistent control of the recoil in that case and I think odds that the accuracy would suffer would be very high.

So while under NORMAL circumstances it should not be an issue, there is the possibility that ABNORMAL play might actually generate issues...accuracy, or possibly feed issues. I have not looked at an XCR for a couple of years so I can't remember the design well enough any more to know whether there could be potential feed issues from extreme U/L play.

Definitely not a normal issue, but I would be hesitant to say that it will definitely NOT be an issue.

It sounds like you have a fairly extreme example of RA quality control. Assuming you bought it new, I would probably contact the seller and ask them to have a look at it.

We're fortunate in Canada that many of the retailers are as responsible, or more responsible, than the manufacturers themselves. Depending on where you got it, they may well go to bat for you and get it sorted/replaced/etc if they look at it and agree that yes, this is excessive slop.
 
I'd rather not have any of my guns rattle around when I shake them....foam earplug seems simple enough and I've used them as shims before.
 
While in general play between upper and lower should not affect accuracy, if the play is extreme it is possible. Imagine a gun with a half inch of play side to side and up and down...it would be very, very difficult to get consistent control of the recoil in that case and I think odds that the accuracy would suffer would be very high.

So while under NORMAL circumstances it should not be an issue, there is the possibility that ABNORMAL play might actually generate issues...accuracy, or possibly feed issues. I have not looked at an XCR for a couple of years so I can't remember the design well enough any more to know whether there could be potential feed issues from extreme U/L play.

Definitely not a normal issue, but I would be hesitant to say that it will definitely NOT be an issue.

It sounds like you have a fairly extreme example of RA quality control. Assuming you bought it new, I would probably contact the seller and ask them to have a look at it.

We're fortunate in Canada that many of the retailers are as responsible, or more responsible, than the manufacturers themselves. Depending on where you got it, they may well go to bat for you and get it sorted/replaced/etc if they look at it and agree that yes, this is excessive slop.

Good post. I should have qualified my original statement.
 
Some guns are tight, yet others are this loose?
Modern manufacturing processes should not allow such a deviation between two of the same product, unless the tolerances are very large. If that's not the case, then it's obviously a QC issue. Either way for a $2500 gun it's a problem, whether it affects accuracy or not.
 
Some guns are tight, yet others are this loose?
Modern manufacturing processes should not allow such a deviation between two of the same product, unless the tolerances are very large. If that's not the case, then it's obviously a QC issue. Either way for a $2500 gun it's a problem, whether it affects accuracy or not.


This is exactly what im saying.
 
Good post. I should have qualified my original statement.

As my dad used to say, "the truth of a statement can often only be gauged by following it to its extreme."

But I agree with the whole line of reasoning that under any normal circumstances it's a non-issue.

Some guns are tight, yet others are this loose?
Modern manufacturing processes should not allow such a deviation between two of the same product, unless the tolerances are very large. If that's not the case, then it's obviously a QC issue. Either way for a $2500 gun it's a problem, whether it affects accuracy or not.

Tend to agree.
 
there's also the non-AR/proprietary magazine that's limited to 5 rounds, as well.

Some would consider this to be an advantage.

The frequency, and commonality of AR mags is UN-questionable. They are EVERYWHERE, and most black rifles/military rifles use AR mags. However, even with the MAJOR improvements that have been achieved over the years, the AR magazine in all of it's forms is still inherently flawed. That is why they've been trying to fix them for such a long time.

Swiss mags on the other hand, have been flawless since they were designed, in function, but they have there disadvantages as well, like being Bulky, from what I have heard, the biggest complaint among unit's these rifles are issued to around the world, is the magazines, and trying to fit them in pouches.
 
Back
Top Bottom