WS-MCR - first look, just arrived.
- Thread starter NavyShooter
- Start date
So do I
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
I’ve had an original AR180b since the came available in the early 2000s And the only issue I had was the spot welded on slip together scope mount that had bad welds on the original receiver and with the oem scope mount limited scope selection. After the receiver was promptly replaced once by Williams/Wolverine I ground off the original spot welded mount and put a rail on with very fine machine screws threaded into the sheet metal receiver and mounted with JB weld and to date with many types of scopes and even larger night vision units have never had an issue with movement or breaking loose.
Also out of interest if you come across some Federal 69 grain gold match try it and let us know how it works as it’s my rifles off the shelf tight grouping ammo. —-Dieseldog!
FWIW, a drop-in Trigger Tech trigger will not fit without modifying its housing as it interferes with the BHO. I suspect this would be the case with most other drop-in triggers.
Any traditional trigger, like Giessele, will fit.
Any traditional trigger, like Giessele, will fit.
I'm generally pleased with the MCR so far. I've put about 60 rounds of 55 gr. handloads and 62 gr. Magtech through it. Function has been 100% and the Magtech grouped just over an inch at 50m, shooting off my range bag with no rear bag.
There are two issues, one minor and a result of the basic 180 design, the other more significant and, I believe, directly related to the rush to get these guns to market.
1) The tab on the bolt hold open is significantly wider than on the AR15. This means that mags with a narrow slot at the rear will activate the hold open, even when loaded. You can either open up the slot or just use mags with a wide slot, like USGI. Not a big deal.
2) Even when torqued down tight, the handguard will slide forward when shooting, in as little as 10 rounds. I believe this is because the tab that locates the 3D printed spacer fits in the slot between the bolt tabs at the rear of the handguard and does not permit the handguard to be tightened enough. This should be able to be fixed by either removing the tab altogether or thinning it down. Not sure if the spacer will stay in place with the tab completely removed. Had they used a proper fitting handguard, I don't believe this would have been an issue.
I'll try it tomorrow with the spacer removed completely and see if the handguard stays in place.
There are two issues, one minor and a result of the basic 180 design, the other more significant and, I believe, directly related to the rush to get these guns to market.
1) The tab on the bolt hold open is significantly wider than on the AR15. This means that mags with a narrow slot at the rear will activate the hold open, even when loaded. You can either open up the slot or just use mags with a wide slot, like USGI. Not a big deal.
2) Even when torqued down tight, the handguard will slide forward when shooting, in as little as 10 rounds. I believe this is because the tab that locates the 3D printed spacer fits in the slot between the bolt tabs at the rear of the handguard and does not permit the handguard to be tightened enough. This should be able to be fixed by either removing the tab altogether or thinning it down. Not sure if the spacer will stay in place with the tab completely removed. Had they used a proper fitting handguard, I don't believe this would have been an issue.
I'll try it tomorrow with the spacer removed completely and see if the handguard stays in place.
The top rail is longer than the rest of the handguard and the spacer fills the gap. Here's a pic of it slid forward. You can see the spacer at the receiver end, below the pic rail.
Removing the spacer did allow the handguard to be tightened sufficiently to not slip. It just looks bad now. Though I'm not sure it's really any worse than the 3D-printed part.
https://flic.kr/p/2iCKorohttps://www.flickr.com/photos/162118399@N03/
Hornychief
CGN Regular
- Location
- Saskatchewan
That's probably worse option of the two. Cuz then if you swap it with a different hand guard you'll have a hole in your receiver
That's probably what I'll end up doing. I'd drill the hole for the anti-rotation pin deeper before milling it off to avoid having to drill it without a guide after.
Interesting idea. The slot in the receiver side would have to line up properly and you might still have galling on the aluminum of the WK.
it would awesome if everything lined up! here’s hopeing... i really like the idea of a non magnetic or threaded handle
For sure. The WS charging handle is far superior to either WK option.
As long as the original AR180 dimensions are followed they should at least be interchangeable however from the looks of the photos and in comparison to the WK it looks as though the charging handle is retained in the bolt carrier by the inner receiver wall. This also explains the need for the steal inserts.
i think you're right and i'm SOL! haha
