Mental Masturbation: XCR-M in something other than .308 - Page 2
Like Tree5Likes
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 17 of 17

Thread: Mental Masturbation: XCR-M in something other than .308

  1. #11
    XCR Guru Sean K.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    21,730
    Quote Originally Posted by TomAiello View Post
    Let us know how the E-Landers work for you. I've been out the last two days trying to work through magazine/ammo/suppressor/malfunction combinations (on an AR-9 that takes Glock magazines), and I know how frustrating that is.
    It really hasn't frustrated me this time around. I really enjoy the 6.5G.....noticeably lighter recoil than my x39 XCRs...more like 5.56....follow ups are really fast.

    But, I do wonder if it's a gas problem or mag issue. Hopefully the Elanders will help me figure that out.

    I have read that Mr. Guns and Gear was testing 6.5G in an AR platform with Elanders and it ran the Wolf 6.5G fine, but not the Hornady or other more "match" type ammo without undergassing/failures to feed problems.
    "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human liberty. It is the argument of tyrants; the creed of slaves."-William Pitt the Younger

  2. #12
    XCR Guru fmunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Kahleefonia
    Posts
    3,220
    Quote Originally Posted by Sean K. View Post
    And I wonder how much of the seeming accuracy issue is attributable to the bbl attachment set up.
    Check out the LMT MARS and the way it retains the barrel. It's a monolithic upper as well.

    https://youtu.be/DGCpAOojaqE?t=693
    Fool-proofing serves only one purpose: identify bigger fools.

  3. #13
    XCR Guru Sean K.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    21,730
    Quote Originally Posted by fmunk View Post
    Check out the LMT MARS and the way it retains the barrel. It's a monolithic upper as well.

    https://youtu.be/DGCpAOojaqE?t=693
    Unfortunately, other than showing there are two Torx head bolts (which I fucking HATE)....the video doesn't really explain how the clamping system works.

    I think there are probably a number of ways to potentially improve the XCR's bbl retention design. The question is: Is a redesign really necessary? Is the current, very simple design the reason why many users experience less accuracy than that from their ARs?

    I can't answer that question. Bedding the bbl to the upper in some way is probably the only way to really tell.

    I've never had any XCR bbl shoot or come loose. I have had to rezero after pulling bbls....but they weren't drastically off....maybe a 1/2 MOA...which could just be my shitty inability to accurately shoot too.

    I'm just not sure that a new bbl retention design would solve the accuracy issue and wonder what kind of weight penalty would be required to do so.
    Last edited by Sean K.; 06-27-2020 at 05:29 PM.
    "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human liberty. It is the argument of tyrants; the creed of slaves."-William Pitt the Younger

  4. Remove Advertisements
    XCRForum.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #14
    XCR Guru mjorin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    3,555
    The tight firing buried gas block on the newer rifles are the second point of contact and was intentional. I think we'll see a second hard contact point.
    "Spes Mea in Deo Est"--My hope is in GOD
    The antidote for fifty enemies is one friend.--Aristotle

  6. #15
    XCR Guru fmunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Kahleefonia
    Posts
    3,220
    Quote Originally Posted by Sean K. View Post
    Unfortunately, other than showing there are two Torx head bolts (which I fucking HATE)....the video doesn't really explain how the clamping system works.

    I think there are probably a number of ways to potentially improve the XCR's bbl retention design. The question is: Is a redesign really necessary? Is the current, very simple design the reason why many users experience less accuracy than that from their ARs?

    I can't answer that question. Bedding the bbl to the upper in some way is probably the only way to really tell.

    I've never had any XCR bbl shoot or come loose. I have had to rezero after pulling bbls....but they weren't drastically off....maybe a 1/2 MOA...which could just be my shitty inability to accurately shoot too.

    I'm just not sure that a new bbl retention design would solve the accuracy issue and wonder what kind of weight penalty would be required to do so.

    Here's a better look: https://youtu.be/0k2tIzjlRdI?t=459. He shows the underside of the upper at 11:42: https://youtu.be/0k2tIzjlRdI?t=702

    Looks like the upper pinches the barrel extension as the two bolts are tightened. Extension has a relief cut/slot for the forward bolt to pass through. Not sure why they did this; so the extension rests on it? So aside from the straightened DI gas tube, the whole barrel free floats. I don't think a total redesign of the XCR upper would be necessary. But, the cost (to RA) to benefit ratio is probably not great. Accuracy with the XCR is probably a combination of many things: barrel retention, quality of barrels, and having a lot of reciprocating mass (which they sorta tried to addressed with Type 3).
    Last edited by fmunk; 06-29-2020 at 08:29 PM.
    Sean K. likes this.
    Fool-proofing serves only one purpose: identify bigger fools.

  7. #16
    XCR Guru Sean K.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    21,730
    Quote Originally Posted by fmunk View Post
    Here's a better look: https://youtu.be/0k2tIzjlRdI?t=459

    Looks like the upper pinches the barrel extension as the two bolts are tightened. Extension has a relief cut/slot for the forward bolt to pass through. So aside from the straightened DI gas tube, the whole barrel free floats. I don't think a total redesign of the XCR upper would be necessary. But, the cost (to RA) to benefit ratio is probably not great. Accuracy with the XCR is probably a combination of many things: barrel retention, quality of barrels and having a lot of reciprocating mass (which they sorta addressed with Type 3).
    The Type 3 is actually a little heavier than the Type 1, IIRC.


    Yeah, watching the video....seems like something RA could incorporate pretty easily if they wanted....but as Lance just pointed out...they seem to be going away from free float with the extra point of contact at the gas block area.

    Thanks for taking the time to post that video though.....I had a few LMTs and they've definitely good kit.
    "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human liberty. It is the argument of tyrants; the creed of slaves."-William Pitt the Younger

  8. #17
    XCR Guru fmunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Kahleefonia
    Posts
    3,220
    Quote Originally Posted by Sean K. View Post
    The Type 3 is actually a little heavier than the Type 1, IIRC.


    Yeah, watching the video....seems like something RA could incorporate pretty easily if they wanted....but as Lance just pointed out...they seem to be going away from free float with the extra point of contact at the gas block area.

    Thanks for taking the time to post that video though.....I had a few LMTs and they've definitely good kit.

    My pleasure. It was a much needed distraction from work BS. On a side note, the B&T APC223/300 doesn't seem to have gotten much press but looks fantastic (the price, not so much).
    Fool-proofing serves only one purpose: identify bigger fools.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Sponsors

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •