WS-MCR - first look, just arrived.

[NavyShooter]

Good evening all.

Last week I saw the notice about the WS-MCR. Having been a long-time satisfied customer of Wolverine Supplies, I called as soon as they went 'live' on sales, and ordered one. Note, I bought it - I was not given any incentive to do a write-up about it, so this feedback is unsolicited, but I think will be of value to those who are building the rifle, selling the rifle, and those of us who are buying the rifles.

My background. For those who don't know me, I will note that I've been called a RKI when it comes to firearms...that's a Reasonably Knowledgeable Individual. I've been shooting since my teen years, and am now in my 40s. I've shot service rifle in both NSCC and CAFSAC, placed as high as the runner up for the QM (first loser) have shot Bisley 6 times, and Coached Bisley twice for the CAF RegF team. I've been shooting AR-15 type rifles since 1992. I've owned an AR type rifle since 1995. I have competed in IPSC, PPC, Service Conditions, Precision Rifle, F-Class, Sniper matches (with a C-3A1), Mapleseed and the Canadian Precision Rimfire Series. I have built my own dedicated .22 barrel for my AR, I have the 3rd legally registered Semi-Auto Sten that was built in Canada in my home shop (3 CFO meetings and inspections...the saga is recorded on here.) I have a plethora of experience in small arms firing everything from the C-7, P-90, MP-5, 1919, Maxim, Razorback, C-96 Broomhandle, Steyr AUG, SA-80, G-36, Dutch C-7s, Enfields of various marks, and many more. I have been referred to as a 'serious student of the rifle' and I appreciate accurate, well built firearms. In terms of my personal collection, I've actually lent from my collection to local museums...so...yeah. That's a bit about me for those of you who don't know me.

After I ordered last week, this afternoon I picked my rifle up at the post office. My serial number is over 100, and less than 150. I expect that probably puts my rifle within the first week of production for the manufacturer (Spectre Ltd. of Canada.) That means that they are probably looking for some customer feedback - I hope this helps.

The box I picked up was slightly larger than I anticipated - the reason for that was that it contained not just the rifle, but the rifle within a Wolverine Supplies marked Plastic Case.

Within the case, I found the rifle, a warranty card, a letter sample to send to my Member of Parliament, and QTY 2 magazines.

My initial impression was that the rifle felt quite solid. The word that came to my mind was 'heft' and the balance is quite good. I was pleased with the feel, and the look as it came out of the box. This compares to the rifle I got from a former 3 letter acronym manufacturer in Canada that has since re-branded - that rifle came loose in a cardboard box, and had a part that fell off in the box during shipping. I will give the Wolverine team kudos for packing the rifle properly for shipment.

In looking at the rifle once I got it out of the box, I note the following:
-6 position collapsible stock
-standard AR pistol grip
-gas system is inaccessible without removal of the handguard
-Charging Handle on the bolt can be switched to the left side
-edges are all chamfered at least a bit (nothing sharp that I've found yet)
-front take-down pin was not completely flush - it was raised a bit (more on this later)
-trigger weight estimated at about 7-8 pounds with some creep (more on this later)
-checking the chamber area - the rifle has been test-fired (brass residue on the bolt face - more on this later too)
-the usual 'fence' around the magazine catch is absent - there is a slightly raised bump in front of it that gives some 'protection'
-there is no bolt catch (this is normal on the -180B)
-there is a 3D Printed spent casing deflector
-Finish on the rifle - black coating, and blueing on the barrel are very nicely done.

The above points give me an overall good first impression, and for the price paid, are about what I expected.

Cycling the action gives a nice 'ring' so the free-floated barrel is working right.

I then did some holding/grip/pointing and such to see how it 'feels' and found that coming in 2 clicks on the stock lets me find the right length of pull for my standing position, but my typical 'high hold' grip that I use with my right hand is not as natural/comfortable on this rifle. Looking at the area above the pistol grip, and comparing that to an AR makes it clear why - that's not a problem, it's just a preference and a slight change to my usual grip/hold as compared to the 'standard' AR pattern.

 

[NavyShooter]

To follow this up, I started with disassembly of the rifle. Field strip, followed by detail strip, and then right to the bones to have a look at the trigger mech as well.

So.

Here we have the rifle completely stripped to nothing:

Some notes on disassembly - in order to get to the gas system, you must remove the handguard completely. There is, however, a small alignment pin in the front of the receiver/rear of the handguard so that they return to correct alignment fairly closely. The three screws on the bottom of the handguard were snugged nicely, but were easy to get out to dis-assemble. There is a 3D printed part that goes at the rear of the handguard and acts as a spacer at the rear of the handguard, and between the clamping portion where the bolts go. It seems...slightly...fragile. I have my own 3D printer at home and have a bit of experience with printing - I'm not thrilled with the durability of 3D printed parts - and this one seems like it's likely to not survive well. See images of the above info below:

3D printed spacer:

3D Printed Spacer in place on the handguard: (you can see the alignment pin on the handguard)

Here you can see the front of the upper receiver where the pin goes in to align things:

 

[NavyShooter]

Here are some pictures of the gas system. As mentioned, the rifle appears to have been fired (test fired) before it was sent out - not sure if that was done by Specter, or by Wolverine - either way, the rifle was not cleaned afterwards. You may be able to see the powder residue on the face of the gas piston, and on the gas plug. Note, the gas plug was very tightly installed. I'm not sure if that's by design, or because of the firing - I don't know. It took a LOT of oomph using a 10" wrench with the gas block supported in a soft jawed vise to get it out.

Gas Plug:

Gas Piston:

 

[NavyShooter]

With the gas system apart, I took the bolt apart. I was disappointed to find that the firing pin retaining pin was actually a split pin - it's not solid. I realize it's not a heavy load bearing spot, and that because of the need to make the rifle ambidexterous it leaves both sides of the receiver open so a regular cotter pin such as is found on an AR wouldn't work, but it seems...odd...for it to be a split pin. Note, it needed just a little bit of pushing with a punch to get out - no hammer, just slightly tight to push out by hand with the punch. You can see the brass chips on the bolt face. The extractor seems...weak...in the spring. I tried fitting an AR-15 extractor that I had handy to it to compare, but it was then too tight to properly go in place...so...the original is in, we'll see how it performs on the range. I'm thinking that a stronger extractor spring might be needed.

As I pushed on the rear of the firing pin to relieve the spring pressure to remove the firing pin retaining pin, I noted that there was a 'sticking spot' as you push in the firing pin. Almost like there's a small step or edge that it has to overcome. I cannot see it after disasembly, but it is something I'm going to look at a bit better on my second go-around with the rifle later.

Here's some photos of these bits as mentioned above:

Split pin firing pin retaining pin:

Rear of the bolt carrier - the step sees the firing pin move 'up' from where it's at here. I'm not sure if it's a step inside deeply, or what. I'll need my calipers to do some measuring:

Here's the bolt face with the brass residue. Good to know that it shoots!

And here is the bolt carrier group stripped apart (note, the split pin is in place in the carrier in this picture)

 

[NavyShooter]

From here, I dove into the trigger mech. The hammer, trigger and disconnector as well as the associated springs appear to be standard AR parts - so they should be directly interchangable. The hammer spring legs are...cockeyed...as are the trigger spring legs. Those are minor issues that I'm very familiar with fixing up. The trigger cross pins are simply extended length AR pins - the detents in them for the springs are in exactly the same spots that you'd find on an AR - so if you align them right, you could use AR Pins - they'd be recessed though.

This was my first time looking at an AR-180B trigger mech - so I was a bit disappointed to see that there is a bolt hold open, but no bolt catch. You have to rack the bolt to drop it. That's not a big deal, just slightly different. The metal of the bolt catch seems fairly substantial, as does the axis pin that it's riding on. I think they'll last.
I had a look at the face of the trigger (where all good AR Trigger jobs happen...) and noted that it looks like it was surface ground in 3 separate vertical passes, as opposed to the normal single cross-pass horizontally that I'm used to. Running my fingernail along it I could feel the rough points - I've got a 1200 grit hone that I'll be taking to it to tidy it up. My estimate of the trigger pull is about 7-8 pounds. not bad for a factory trigger. It was nice to see that the rifle has the rounded face hammer as opposed to the ones with the stupid notch at the top...that's a legacy of the old style Colt AR-15 SP1 bolts that had a part of the underside of the bolt milled away and a larger diameter firing pin to prevent inadvertant automatic fire in case the sear was damaged.

Anyhow, here's pictures of the trigger group:

Bolt Catch:

Trigger group disassembled:

And here is the face of the trigger. You can see the tool marks from the three vertical passes in the surface grinder:

 

[NavyShooter]

So. That's the tear-down, and detailed look at some of the parts.

I have to go and pickup my son, but I'll be back with some more detail that I'll add in this post...I'll edit to add a few things, focused on the rail.

I'm updating this again with additional detail that Mr. Wolverine (John) has supplied. The scope rail is not welded - it's a steel rail that is bonded and pinned to the receiver body. So, epoxy of some sort plus six pins holding it together. Based on that, I'm going to re-write a bit of this info below.

Ok, I'm back and have updated the other posts...this is the one that is going to be toughest to write, because this one is concerning/disappointing.

So - I'll start with a history lesson. Back in the 80's and early 90's, there were no flat-top upper receivers for AR-15's. They didn't exist for the military let alone civilians...or if they did exist, they were literally tool-room examples. (I can probably go digging in my copy of The Black Rifle and find a Colt Model 615 or something that had them...but...whatever...they weren't on the civilian market to buy.)

What was the solution back then? Well, I have an example of the work-around in my collection. The solution was to mount the upper receiver in a milling vise, and mill off the carrying handle with the exception of a couple of small studs - one at the front, the other at the rear. Those studs were used to mount a section of Weaver scope rail onto the upper - in some cases, pinned, others were pinned and JB Welded (or Acra-Glass Gel bedded) into place. Observe the photos below:

In this photo, you can clearly see where the front and rear stems of the carrying handle were cut off, and then the rail added:

And now examine the side of the rail - the pin that was inserted through the segment of weaver rail to hold it in place (note also the screw in the center of the rail):

This upper receiver was used by me for almost 15 years before I retired it. It was used mostly for .22 LR shooting with a Ceiner conversion kit. It worked well, and lasted, but eventually I got a proper upper for it.

The use of this upper has given me some confidence in the durability of such a conversion...I note that the rifle maintained consistent zero through its life-span, and I regularly printed sub 1" groups at 20m in the standing position with the sub-cal kit in a 1-14" twist M-16 barrel that I found.

So....that's the leadup to my concerns with the scope rail on the WS-MCR.

The rail is NOT a part of the upper receiver - it too is added on. Looking back at the photo of the alignment hole for the fore-end rail from up above, you can see the rail and the receiver are clearly two separate pieces. The receiver body has a square profile with a rib along the top where the gas piston rides. You can see the brass/bronze bushing that the piston goes through. I had though on initially seeing the rifle that the rail and receiver were all one piece - it was only when I took the handguard off and saw the front of the receiver and gas piston bushing area that I realized this is not the case.

Once I saw this, it gave me cause to look in more detail at the rest of the rail, and you can clearly see points where it has been pinned and bonded into place along the side of the rail. I see 3 clear spots where the pins are on each side - front (about 1/4" back from the front) middle (just above the 3D printed spent casing deflector) and a third at the rear, below the 2nd last rail slot approximately.

So. There are 6 mechanical pins, plus a bonding agent (epoxy) holding this together.

That...concerns me (with mechanical connection in addition to the epoxy, I'm less concerned than just the welding I initially thought was there.) When using a heavier optic, that will place stresses on the rail and welds. The Elcan Specter DR that I have is a fairly heavy optic...(still lighter than an EOTech + Magnifier though!) so...I guess I'll see how it holds up. Additionally, since it's not a monolithic rail/upper such as is found on modern manufactured AR's, it has me wondering what kind of whip and movement I'd see if I had a high-speed camera to record it with.

The proof will be in the pudding I guess, and I'll have to fire a bunch of ammo to see how well it will stand up. I'm guessing that Wolverine went with this because it's a simplification of manufacturing processes, but it is...concerning. *HOWEVER* for 15 years, I fired the other referenced upper receiver with the pinned/bonded rail, and it had no problems...and it's still solid today...so I might just be making a mountain out of a mole-hill.

Attempting to change this would also be problematic. I have more than just a basic understanding of machining, and by this point, Specter Ltd has machining fixtures and CNC programs in place to manufacture these rifles this way. I cannot see them changing this in mid-stream. It'd be a HUGE change to their production run, and disrupt that line for a while. Changing the fixtures...well...this is a blueprint level change...so I know it'd take a lot of work.

I understand that Wolverine has indicated they do not plan to sell upper receivers on their own. I will ask politely if they may wish to consider changing their mind on that, and consider building and offering for sale a monolithic upper receiver with the rail machined right into it. Yes. I know that'd cost a bunch of money and take a bunch of time, and for a rifle that is supposed to print about a 2 MOA group...it may not be necessary. However. Without that one-piece rail/upper, I suspect that there may be challenges getting high levels of accuracy out of these rifles.

 

[NavyShooter]

And in this post, I'm going to add some detail about the front take down pin.

I think the detent hole has been drilled slightly high, and I'll point out why I think that's the case.

Please have a look at the first picture below:

In this photo, you can see that the front take-down pin is rolled slightly. This indicates to me that the retaining pin hole is drilled slightly above the center of the take-down pin, causing it to roll slightly up, preventing it from going all the way into place.

Now, looking at the next picture below, you can see that having manually rotated the take-down pin a bit, I am able to push the pin all the way home. However, you can see how the pin is still being pushed at the top, causing the bottom to touch, and the gap at the top. This makes me think that the hole is offset slightly high, rather than centered on the take-down hole.

This is not a 'show-stopper' by any means. It's a minor point that is probably barely noticeable in the grand scheme of things, but based on the fact that the pin had backed out in the case during transit to me, I'm thinking that it will continue to do this.

I'll keep an eye on it.

 

[NavyShooter]

Lastly I'll look at the Spent Casing Deflector - it's 3D printed and I'll zoom in on it a bit.

My experience with 3D Printed items is that they tend not to be durable in circumstances when it gets struck - this could be a non-issue, and I saw something from Wolverine earlier today about a metal replacement part?

Here is the 3D Printed spent casing deflector. I guess people worry a lot about the little bit of brass left on the side of their rifle for some reason. ????? I don't know why...it's honest use and wear. Anyhow, this is the deflector that's been added.

My concern is the durability of 3D printed items that I've encountered so far in my life (and those I've made myself) and if this is meant to be a 'sacrificial protector' that can be replaced quickly by the end user, then that makes sense...it wears out...install a new one. However, that would imply that they'd include replacements with it against that eventuality. There were none included.

So.

Either there's nothing to worry about because it's a lot more durable than I thought.

Or.

It's a sacrificial part to save the finish on the rifle that I'll have to buy (or create) replacements for.

 

[NavyShooter]

Oh, and I'll include a couple of photos of the rifle with the Spectre DR that I had hanging around...it fits nicely I think.

Here's the rifle with the Specter DR hanging onto the rail:

Overall - I'm pleased with the rifle. Concerned about the rail. Not thrilled with the 3D bits. But overall pleased.

The finish is nice, the fit is good (except that front take-down pin!) and I think there is potential for accuracy here.

I was concerned about having to remove the hand-guard to be able to clean the gas system, but I have realized that the only 'stuff' that should be on a handguard are things whose exact zero doesn't necessarily need to return to exactly the same .001" accuracy...a light, a bipod, a sling swivel, that sort of thing. And for me, I don't toss that junk on my rifles...I don't need the bling to make it shoot, or blame it for not shooting. It's the dummy pulling the trigger.

We'll see how it does on the range...

NS

 

[Armedsask]

3D printed parts is extremely disappointing. Deal breaking.

 

[dead meat]

Awesome critique, thanks NavyShooter

 

[Hrcboy]

Wow such a detailed review! Thank you!

 

[nosman]

Nice to see someone rip apart a brand new firearm and provide such a great detailed review. Thanks for sharing

 

[Milofficer]

What an excellent detailed look at the MCR. Awesome post

 

[SeamusMac]

Thanks NS - an excellent and honest review! Going to check-out your sten build now...

 

[Mik123]

Fantastic thread. Thanks for taking the time to document in detail your initial impression of the rifle.

 

[Hornychief]

Thank you for the review. I dont see a need for this over my 180c. I'd like to see some measurements of the gas piston. They said they reworked the has system but only thing I see is the bushing is metal over my nylon

 

[GreenBob]

Good breakdown. Thanks!

 

[Boomer686]

Well done! Great write-up and pics.

This rifle is on my possible future purchase list but I think because of the rail and 3d printed parts it dropped quite a few notches in its placing.

 

[AMET]

3D printed parts is extremely disappointing. Deal breaking.

Only think I would worry about is the handguard spacer. The deflector should be fine. And could be easily upgraded with a drill press and file.