WS-MCR - first look, just arrived.

I once had an old Colt HBar that had been converted from a carry handle to a weaver rail, and I too used it in SR. It was an absolute champ at 300m and under, but when it got to the 500m line it would consistently shoot left. I wracked my brain with loads and windage for half a season until I finally figured out the rail was oh-so close to being true, but out a hair.

I suspect not many would pick a 180 clone for SR or longer range stuff, but with a rail that is added in such a manor, it is plausible a similar situation could arise.

anyhoo, I like my 180c for plinking and carrying the bush - what transpired to make this new model?
 
Picked mine up, very happy with it. Machinist friend of mine looked at it and was quite impressed with what you get for the $$
Everyone needs to keep in mind this is a $1300 gun. They’ve also worked hard to get it to market quickly because of our precarious political system. Not sure why everyone hates plastic so much. Must hate Glock and Benelli then too?
Are there some “cost cutting corners”? Yes. Keep in mind those savings are passed onto the consumer. This is the same crowd that will criticize a new firearm if they are above a perceived price point without any knowledge of running a business or machining/manufacturing.
So we can criticize minor details to make ourselves feel better or encourage and work with the manufacturer. Your choice.

Great job wolverine and spectre
 
beltfed said:
I once had an old Colt HBar that had been converted from a carry handle to a weaver rail, and I too used it in SR. It was an absolute champ at 300m and under, but when it got to the 500m line it would consistently shoot left. I wracked my brain with loads and windage for half a season until I finally figured out the rail was oh-so close to being true, but out a hair.

I suspect not many would pick a 180 clone for SR or longer range stuff, but with a rail that is added in such a manor, it is plausible a similar situation could arise.
Click to expand...

I dont understand the separate piece rail gripe. Many guns have this.... almost every manual action. And many many semi autos.

Only difference here is that in most cases, rails are held in place by fasteners rather than this epoxy pin method.

I also dont understand the physics behind ur rail misalignment experience with the HBAR. If it was successfully sighted in at close distance, how could it loose zero further out?
 
Based on the detail received from John(Mr. Wolverine) above, I have updated my comments in post #6.

[FONT=Verdana,Arial,Tahoma,Calibri,Geneva,sans-serif]https://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php/1978460-WS-MCR-first-look-just-arrived?p=16736717&viewfull=1#post16736717

Please review this change/update - note, I referenced an old AR-15 receiver that was pinned/epoxied in place that I used for 15 years with no loss of accuracy.

Knowing that it's not a weld, rather, it's pinned (6 pins) plus a bonding agent...I am much more hopeful for durability.

I'm off to PEI for the weekend with one of my minions for hockey - I'll see if I can get out next week to test-fire!

NS

[/FONT]
 
WS-MCR steel side plates. These were not designed or installed with the view to having customers remove them. The plates are made of precision ground 01 tool steel, the left side plate is also nitrate hardened They are a precession fit and red Locktite is used. The left hand plate is inserted from the inside of the receiver and would be very difficult to access. The right hand plate is inserted from the outside of the rifle, three sides are "dovetailed" and she is inserted from the front, there are two retaining screws here, blue Locktite is used.

We see no requirement to remove these side plates and any attempt to do so will void warranty.
 
Murray 3-D said:
I dont understand the separate piece rail gripe.
Click to expand...

Not a gripe at all, just a simple observation.
I've got zero issues with this new design and have no concerns whatsoever with Wolverine's stance behind their products.


Murray 3-D said:
also dont understand the physics behind ur rail misalignment experience with the HBAR. If it was successfully sighted in at close distance, how could it loose zero further out?
Click to expand...
I'm not sure to be honest. It may have had an induced cant. All I know is when I replaced the stripped upper receiver my issues with it disappeared.
 
Mr Wolverine said:
The side plates are made of precision ground 01 tool steel, the left side plate is also nitrate hardened. They are a precession fit and red Locktite is used.
Click to expand...
Just curious the reason you chose ground tool steel over just using steel plate (stainless or other)? I thought the original press release said they were stainless side plates? This made more sense to me than tool steel.

The original sheet metal AR180 design seemed to handle the wear just fine. Tool steel seems like over kill, in my opinion.
 
Last edited:
Armedsask said:
Just curious the reason you chose ground tool steel over just using steel plate (stainless or other)? I thought the original press release said they were stainless side plates? This made more sense to me than tool steel.

The original sheet metal AR180 design seemed to handle the wear just fine. Tool steel seems like over kill, in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Nothing wrong with overkill!
 
Thank you so much OP for a thorough description of the firearm. Looks awesome!

My apologies if this has been asked but is the rail on the "original wk-180" also bolted/pinned/epoxied on or is it integral? I am not trying to stir anything up I am just weighing my options as to which one to purchase. Definitely would rather purchase this new one given the history behind the old one and I strongly support Wolverine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom