First-off, I actually
do like the XCR; I think it's one hell of a rifle, and I have a personal affinity for the Robinson Arms b/c the
System 63 is - in my opinion - one of the bolder and cooler designs ever offered.
But I still like to joke around,
all the same !
Regarding the MR-1, it's a bit of a weird situation
: the accuracy is there right from the "stock" rifle, but the cheek-weld ain't. That's never really bothered me b/c I comfortably chin-weld almost instinctively, but I do understand where others are coming from on that point !
The key to understanding the rifle is to realize that, first and foremeost,
it's really a giant middle-finger to civilian firearm laws. While there's a whole lot of talk about the ARGO system and the shotgun-stock (give me a minute to get to that), the
real thought process seems to have been "how can we get a .223/5.56 rifle into every one of the American states?" - and, to their credit, Benelli succeeded. It's California-good-to-go, as well as Canada-good-to-go as a non-restricted, and will fly under just about every "we hate the .223/5.56" rule. Now, that accomplished, the rest is kind of odd...
Having made the MR-1 completely (legally) accessible to everyone, Benelli effectively decided to configure it as a "plinker". Now, try not to get wrapped-up in connotation with that term: the rifle can acquit itself very well in the accuracy dept. ! But the thing is that every
configuration aspect of the rifle seems to shout "plinker", from the way the MR-1 "guides" you to its iron sights, to the overengineered recoil-reduction setup of the buttstock, to the ARGO system to minimize cleaning, to the STANAG magazine well and the "un-AR" fire controls and mag-release. You can
reliably "run" the 'piston-powered' rifle for a pretty long time without cleaning it, but scoping and "AR-drill" considerations seem to have been relegated to secondary or even tertiary importance.
And now here's the further oddity: with its MSRP, the MR-1 is actually too expensive to be "just" an plinker. It's a good, solid, accurate & reliable iron-sight rifle, but for its MSRP it ought to be more "scope-friendly" (the fire-controls are what they are, not a
huge deal, IMHO). So it comes-off as a bit of a Rolls-Royce .223/5.56, a compromise of a rifle at a price a bit too high for its
functionality.
For all that (and apologies to anyone who bothered to sift through it all ! ), I really do like the MR-1. The iron-sights came zeroed from the factory, and forced me to use extra-high see-though rings (albeit of the
NcStar variey ! ) that afford me a reliable and very pleasant iron-sighted experiance (which was what that stock was really designed for), with the option of just "lifting my head" to use the scope for longer/more precise shots. And one thing you will
not have to worry about is the MR-1 falling apart (sorry, sorry, it's
not a Loctite comment, this time it's a statement to contrast against some detractors of the Kel-Tec SU-16 ! ). A well-built, stable and accurate, STANAG-magazine non-restricted platform (did I mention how little it needs to be cleaned ?
), for Canadians the MR-1 is a pretty good "black" rifle, even at its MSRP (though buying one used will definitely save you some coin).
Just had to add something here: the trigger is a wonderful aspect of the MR-1.....
.....it's got to be handled to be believed (and appreciated).
Once you understand what the MR-1 was actually designed to do, and
then consider what it
is capable of doing, I think many will actually come to love this firearm. So, like others have said, "try before you buy" !
How original
Awwww....
....it's like a rite of passage
, to be able to make the first Loctite comment in an XCR thread !....
Tell you what
, if it irks people
that much I'll give them a "free pass" to $hit all-over my AR-180B's breakable lower.....
