XCR Opinions

Here's a different twist: what would you change on your XCR to make it the ultimate black rifle? A lighter 18.6" barrel? A folding/collapsible ACR-SCAR style stock? A lifetime supply of loctite...? (kidding, kidding... ;) )

It is barrel heavy. I already have a folder for it. As far as carrying a rifle into combat, I would sooner have a bolt and stand off a little ways.
 
What I would change:

-Slimmer barrel profile for batter balance
-Making the two halves hinge farther apart to ease cleaning operations (Can be modified easily with a file and I did...).
-Making the front pin easier to remove and replace the small and easily lost clip by another system...

Thats about it... I like the ergonomics and with an adapter, you can put any AR stock on it and fit any grip you like...
 
...you have to question why the rifle was designed to operate by direct impingement rather than by piston. Its not like piston rifles were not around when it was being designed. Hell, the russians made the AK with a piston system, and the russians aren't exactly engineering geniuses (hello Chernobyl). A lot of the early teething problems of the AR were a direct result of that design choice.

The nonsense that gets posted on this site is better than ever.:jerkit:

...Now, a lot of newer AR's are designed to be piston driven, a good change, but it doesn't change the fact that the original design choice was not the ideal one
 
What I would change:


-Making the front pin easier to remove and replace the small and easily lost clip by another system...

You may have installed the pin incorrectly ... when I got my rifle it waslike that too. The pin doesnt actually come out, you just push it to one side with your finger. The spring clip always stays on and holds the pin in
 
Here's a different twist: what would you change on your XCR to make it the ultimate black rifle? A lighter 18.6" barrel? A folding/collapsible ACR-SCAR style stock? A lifetime supply of loctite...?

Honestly, not much. I wouldn't mind a lighter barrel (shorter too, but we'd need to get the government safety nazi problem fixed first). I have a folding stock on mine. I love the ergonomics actually. I like the thin stock (fits the shoulder nicely). I changed the grip for a slightly fatter SAW grip, added an EOtech.

I don't need, nor have I ever needed loctite.

Mine eats ammo like a champ and spits it down range in lovely tight groups. I don't have to take my eyes off the target to drop a mag and reload, nor to charge it.
 
The nonsense that gets posted on this site is better than ever.

Say what you like but the direct impingement system deposits more fouling on the internals. This is part of the reason why, at least initially, the AK appeared to many people to be superior (it isn't, but it appeared to be when the AR was first deployed).

Moreover, I'd point to the charging handle system. Whose idea was it to have the charging handle on the rear? You have to point the rifle downwards to charge it. Its not like a side charging handle was a new idea (garand, M-14, AK, FAL all have side charging handles).

This is not to say its a bad rifle, its just some of the design choices are questionable.
 
I'd like to see an ambi mag release, as well as the M.

Parts, well I get mine from Wolverine, so it's not a big deal. That being said, I haven't been #####ed out by anyone at Robarms either.

As far as bucks spent, my kid has an M15A4 that's creeping up over 2k with the front rail etc, not bad for a 14 yr old's range runner( I "own" it, he shoots it). So even if the AR was non restricted again, you'd still be, after hot rodding, around the same price. So it's back to Chevy vs Dodge vs Ford.

Funny, I don't seem to have these pissing matches with my shooting buddies, we just shoot.
 
Perhaps you could email or write Eugine Stoner and try to school him in firearms design.:onCrack::jerkit:

That could pose a challenge seeing as how he's been dead since 1997... Found this on Wikipedia (not sure about the validity). "The Stoner Weapons System used a piston-operated gas impingement system, though Stoner himself believed direct gas operation was the ideal method for firearms."
 
This is not to say its a bad rifle, its just some of the design choices are questionable.

Since Stoner isn't available, maybe ask Reed Knight about why the direct impingement system is 'questionable'.

Maybe he just needs someone to tell him that all his SR-15 and SR-25 guns are made with out of date and questionable engineering.

Let us know how that goes.
 
So... it seems the AR fans are just as defensive as anyone else. Proves my point. We don't have this sort of BS in every AR thread because there are no AR haters who stalk AR threads like we do XCR haters.
 
Since Stoner isn't available, maybe ask Reed Knight about why the direct impingement system is 'questionable'.

Maybe he just needs someone to tell him that all his SR-15 and SR-25 guns are made with out of date and questionable engineering.

Let us know how that goes.
WTF?? again what does this have to do with XCR...
 
Another thing I like about my XCR-L is I have caliber choices I'm just not stuck with the anemic 223/5.56 I can also choose the 7.62X39 or the awesome 6.8SPC that does everything that the other 2 rounds mentioned can and everything they can't...

I do have a wish for something to be different with my XCR-L I want a 458 SOCOM barrel and I would like to replace my 223 barrel with a .224X6.8 (6.8 SPC case necked down to .224") would be an awesome coyote round...

These guns are accurate out of the box here is a pic of a 347 yard 3 shot group I shot off the back of my quad cross wind was about 5 - 7 mph guessing by the cloud movement.

The shot + 6.8 SPC 95gr TTSX @ 2825fps + target rock was 20' or so to the left of the top of the light coloured log on the bank I did not hold for wind = first shot hit just a little low left next two well you can see where they hit...

and so there is no misunderstanding this was shot from a stock XCR-L only changes I had made to it were a Magpul MIAD pistol grip yep another example of these rifles being what they are the best non-restricted black rifle available to us in Canada. :p

img_9307.jpg


img_9308.jpg
 
What would you change to make the XCR the ultimate black rifle?
My major concerns lie with the basic things about design. To me, they came off as half-assed solutions to get the rifle out the door. I can envision the designers at Robarm sitting around and saying, "Ah f**k it, that will be good enough, get it out the door!"

- "Hair Pin" spring clips holding the trigger components in. They are too fragile, mine failed after 50 rounds. I would have preferred something stronger, "E-clips" would have been better. Some with the front pivot pin.

- The barrel retention system. A single bolt interfacing with a divot in the barrel just doesn't sit right with me. It's not a symmetrical force and is too easy to misuse and launch the barrel (like the M96). Something that actually pulled the barrel back into the trunnion would have been preferred.

- The folding stock. No positive means to hold the stock in the folded position. Numerous solutions out there that could have been done.

- The shell ejector. Almost seemed like an after thought. As a by-product of the design, the bolt carrier with a big slit down the side also bugs me. Undermines the structure integrity of the whole bolt carrier, in my opinion.

These are my opinions only. Take them for what you feel they are worth.

This is true, however, there are not a handful of people who pursue every mention of either on this forum with an unending desire to attack them.
If you didn't get so excited and defensive, most of us "haters" probably would have ignored these threads long ago. Instead, it's just too much fun.
 
My major concerns lie with the basic things about design. To me, they came off as half-assed solutions to get the rifle out the door. I can envision the designers at Robarm sitting around and saying, "Ah f**k it, that will be good enough, get it out the door!"

- "Hair Pin" spring clips holding the trigger components in. They are too fragile, mine failed after 50 rounds. I would have preferred something stronger, "E-clips" would have been better. Some with the front pivot pin.

- The barrel retention system. A single bolt interfacing with a divot in the barrel just doesn't sit right with me. It's not a symmetrical force and is too easy to misuse and launch the barrel (like the M96). Something that actually pulled the barrel back into the trunnion would have been preferred.


- The folding stock. No positive means to hold the stock in the folded position. Numerous solutions out there that could have been done.

- The shell ejector. Almost seemed like an after thought. As a by-product of the design, the bolt carrier with a big slit down the side also bugs me. Undermines the structure integrity of the whole bolt carrier, in my opinion.

These are my opinions only. Take them for what you feel they are worth.


If you didn't get so excited and defensive, most of us "haters" probably would have ignored these threads long ago. Instead, it's just too much fun.

Funny, I just wrote this long piece on the XCR...it was almost like rereading it for a second there.

Although the ones I shot did not have folding stocks, and actually the ejector did not occur to me.

What would concern me, though, is a company with a history of abandoning platforms.

On the plus side I think Canadians are lucky in that we'd be dealing with Wolverine who DO have a great track record when dealing with customer service issues.
 
Oh come on you guys are ignoring my common sense/rational/positive comments thats just not fair...

:p
you know better than that, this is the internet we will browbeat you to death, with the same stuff I heard from my bus driver's best friend over and over again until you give up or get banned. If that doesn't work than than you must be ghey or something :p
 
Back
Top Bottom