XCR Modular Weapon System - I want one!


PDA






C-Note
September 14, 2004, 01:18 AM
Check out the new XCR Modular Weapon System from Robinson Armament.
http://www.robarm.com/xcrtm_modular_weapon_system.htm

http://www.robarm.com/XCR%20.223%20L.jpg

Available in 5.56, 6.8 Remington and in .308 later this year. Wow.

If you enjoyed reading about "XCR Modular Weapon System - I want one!" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Zak Smith
September 14, 2004, 01:26 AM
Is this their SCAR entry?

C-Note
September 14, 2004, 01:31 AM
From their website:

The XCR(TM) Modular Weapon System was designed specifically for the U.S. Special Forces. It consists of an Upper an Lower receiver. The lower receiver is the serialized part containing the fire-control components. The upper receiver has an integral rail system and quick change barrel mechanism. The XCR(TM) is almost completely new. While the magazine well, trigger, and pistol grip are reminiscent of the AR15/M16 rifle, the components are completely different internally.

The XCR(TM) has a completely new bolt system which is more durable than the Stoner AR15/M16 bolt. It was specifically made to fire 5.56x45mm (.223) and the New 6.8 Remington Cartridge. It is available now in both these calibers. A .308 version will be available later this year. Pictures of more configurations will be posted on this website in the next few days. The following is a list of some of the important features of the .

FEATURES:

The XCR(TM) is designed to be the finest assault rifle available anywhere. The XCR(TM) is a multi-caliber, piston-driven, gas operated rifle with a proprietary bolt which provides unmatched reliability and durability.

Usually, weight is sacrificed for durability. However, the XCR(TM) is both durable and light at just under 7.0 lbs. empty.

The rifle has 1913 spec. rails machined right into the upper receiver at the 3, 6, 9, and 12 O’clock positions. These rails are machined parallel to the bore for easy mounting of sights, lights, grenade launchers, and other accessories.

The sights (optional) are in the right position for quick target acquisition and can folded against the receiver when not in use.

Furthermore, the XCR(TM) has ambidextrous controls which are very intuitive. The magazine release, bolt hold open, and selector controls can be easily controlled by either hand. The charging handle is on the left side of the rifle and contains a forward assist mechanism.

Caliber changes only require the replacement of the barrel, bolt, and magazine. The change can be made in less than 5 minutes with little loss of zero. Available in 5.56 NATO and 6.8 calibers in barrel lengths of 11.5”, 14.5”, 16.2, 18.5” , and 20”. The rifle uses standard M16 magazines for .223 and 6.8 magazines for 6.8.

Of course the folding stock (locks in and out) and a flash hider are standard equipment.

The XCR(TM) is simply the finest assault rifle available today. It is available in select-fire for military and law enforcement and in semi-auto only for civilian collectors. To order yours, contact us immediately. More pictures and information to be posted the week of Sept. 14, 2004.

Marketed by Robinson Armament Co.
PO Box 16776, Salt Lake City, UT 84116
Tel: 801-355-0402; Email: zdf@robarm.com

Specifications Subject to Change without Notice.

Copyright 2004, Robinson Armament Co., All Rights Reserved

Correia
September 14, 2004, 11:26 AM
Ahh...

Looks like I can finally talk about this baby. :)

I've been one of the beta-testers.

It's simply an awesome weapon.

The design is very straight forward. Very light. Recoil is mild. Gas system blows the doors off of the AR. Barrel is removeable with a wrench, allowing you to change calibers in a few minutes.

The one that I played with was easy to shoot, and we got some remarkably good groups considering that the barrel on that speciman had gone through about a zillion rounds on full auto.

It is ambidextrous. The safety is cut down on one side so that it does not irritate your hand like an ambi AR safety.

The receiver design is excellent. It is a solid chunk of aluminium. The bolt and carrier are probably the neatest semi-auto design I have ever seen.

wasrjoe
September 14, 2004, 11:29 AM
They should have figured out a way to make the mag well a part of the upper. Oh well, still looks quite nice.

Uhhhh, BTW... where do you sign up for beta-testing guns? :D

Darkmind
September 14, 2004, 11:33 AM
What i wouldent give to get my hands on one of thouse.:rolleyes:

Zak Smith
September 14, 2004, 11:37 AM
Why is the stock stock comb to iron sight distance so high? That dimension looks similar to the M96 or a FAL. One of my big complaints about the M96 was that when you mount a combat optic such as a ACOG, the sight axis is now way higher than is ergonomically feasible based on the stock design.

-z

Correia
September 14, 2004, 11:50 AM
Wasr, negative on that. It is caliber changeable. You can't swap out the mag well if it is attached to the reciever.

Zak, I tried it with both the flip up irons (same height as AR) and a Leatherwood knockoff scope in that height mount, and it worked fine either way. I did not however try it with an ACOG. With a tube style dot like an Aimpoint it seems just right. I have not tried it with something taller like an EoTech.

This is one of the things that I discussed with Alex. When I first handled it I thought it was going to be too tall, but after shooting it, I believe that it is a pretty decent height. Doing a little run and gun style stuff and some improvised hoser style stuff it handled very well and was comfortable to shoot.

The stock is like an ACE folder. I would imagine that if you wanted to you could swap out the top bar of the stock for something higher, like their padded version.

Schuey2002
September 14, 2004, 11:55 AM
Price? ;)

Zak Smith
September 14, 2004, 12:04 PM
Zak, I tried it with both the flip up irons (same height as AR)

The irons will be higher relative to the stock than on an AR15? It's using AR15 flip-up sights - GG&G rear and Troy front, but the distance from stock comb to the top of the flat-top looks more like 1.5" - 1.75". On the AR, that dimension is under 1".

-z

Correia
September 14, 2004, 12:04 PM
I can't say on price. I'm not privy to that.

wasr, how did I get to beta test? Beats me. :) I'm just a local 3gun nut. Got to know the employees because I've been using one of their Veprs for the last year in matches. The guys are Robarm are a really nice bunch though, and I say that in all honesty.

Zak Smith
September 14, 2004, 12:08 PM
I'm surprised nobody else remembers this thread:
http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=116942

atek3
September 14, 2004, 12:09 PM
any idea on accuracy?

atek3

atek3
September 14, 2004, 12:19 PM
Hah, smooth move there Alex...insulting an Old-school TFL/THR'er.

thats pretty funny.

atek3

Correia
September 14, 2004, 12:23 PM
Zak, it is a GG&G rear. (which I broke when I was playing with it by the way, and then we put on a Matech, I'm not a fan of the GG&G rear now) :) I don't think it is that much higher. I had no problem using it. But like I said, I did not try it with an ACOG. Keep in mind that the ACOG mount is specific to the AR, so it is going to be higher.

Zak, I remember that thread. It was before I met Alex. I know George, and I know Alex. I'm friends with both of them. With that said however, both of them are really proud people. That is an old thread, and Robarms is still around and doing fine. I have never had anything but good experiences with them.

atek, using a 14 inch, light weight barrel, with 5,000 rounds of full auto through it, at 100 yards from the bench using a Chinese Leatherwood knock off, I would put three rounds touching, and then have two others that would open the group up to a little over an inch. This was using PMC ammo. I repeated this several times, first few shots would be really close together, and then it would open up. I did not know if this was a function of the light barrel, or how hot I had it, or how hammered it was, but it was still very promising.

Keep in mind that I am not by nature a bench rest kind of shooter. With patience and in the hands of a better rifleman than I you should be able to get some excellent accuracy. The barrel is fully floated. want to get the 18 inch for myself.

atek3
September 14, 2004, 12:35 PM
nice, now if only they could open up the bolt face and swap the barrel with one chambered for 6.5 grendel I'd be REALLY interested.

atek3

Correia
September 14, 2004, 12:51 PM
Done. The first version is swappable. I have spoken with them and they have done a 6.8 version. I have not seen or shot it yet.

Zak Smith
September 14, 2004, 12:52 PM
But like I said, I did not try it with an ACOG. Keep in mind that the ACOG mount is specific to the AR, so it is going to be higher.

Sort of. The ACOG was originally designed to mount on the carry handle, and the TA51 mount is the standard way to connect it to a rail. We've got a problem if the ergonomics suck when we use the most popular magnified combat optic in US Service.

-z

Correia
September 14, 2004, 12:53 PM
Oops, you said 6.5. They did a 6.8. No 6.5 yet that I'm aware of.

Harry Tuttle
September 14, 2004, 12:57 PM
lets hope the build quality of the shipping versions matches the beta test guns

they had some issues with the M-96

Mad Dog was an early advocate that went quite cold on the shipping m-96s

Correia
September 14, 2004, 12:58 PM
Zak, like I said, I have not used an ACOG with it so I can't tell you how that is going to be.

I have however used an ACOG on an FAL, and I did not find that uncomfortable either. (DSA mount, L1a1 stock)

Since the Robarm gun is modular I would thing that swapping the top of the stock would be a piece of cake if the ACOG is too high. I don't really see the conflict here. This is not a flat top AR, so why should it be criticised if a scope designed for an AR does not work? If this gun wins the SCAR contract then there will probably be an ACOG made for it if the demand is there. Optics stay the same, all they have to do is change the housing.

Zak Smith
September 14, 2004, 01:03 PM
The root issue is not that the ACOG on an TA51 is "designed" for an AR15. A TA51 puts an ACOG sight axis about 1.4" above the rail -- just like iron sights. The XCR picture is using GG&G and Troy rail-mounted sights designed for an AR15, so they are also at that height.

On an AR15, it is possible to get a good cheeck weld with the stock height vs. the rail height, and then the 1.4" above that. On this rifle, the stock is way lower relative to the rail, but they are still using the soght-axis-above-rail dimensions of an AR15.

-z

Correia
September 14, 2004, 01:24 PM
Zak, the irons in that picture were just what got slapped on for use. I don't believe that those are the final iron sights that are going to be shipped with the gun. They set out to design the weapon first, the iron sighting system comes after.

I have not seen the final iron sights. But to the best of my (very limited) knowledge, those were just sights that are used on the prototype and not the sights that are going to ship with it.

With that said, I still got a good cheek weld with the GG&G. (before I broke it).

There is more of a gap between the stock and the base of the rail on this gun. That is true. this gun has an operating rod like an AK as opposed to just the gas key. It sits higher than the bolt carrier of an AR. You cannot see in this picture, but if you flip the gun to the other side, you strip the gun by pushing in a button which actually holds the base of the recoil spring. You push that in the and gun falls open like an FAL. If I recall correctly that button is in that space.

When you strip it, it is different than the M96 by quite a bit. The op rod is connected to the carrier, not seperate. The bolt, which has a few great big lugs, instead of the AR style bolt, does not have a cam slot hole. Instead it is a solid chunk of metal that sticks out.

Zak Smith
September 14, 2004, 01:32 PM
Any chance on connecting a decent telestock (e.g. a Magpul)?

-z

Correia
September 14, 2004, 01:47 PM
Zak, I know of such a thing, but can't speak about it. Sorry.

Ktulu
September 14, 2004, 01:58 PM
I certainly want one!

MrAcheson
September 14, 2004, 02:16 PM
Yeah, but the big question is cost for me. I'll probably be able to get on with a 16" barrel and with decent sling mounts for stabilizing it.

MrAcheson
September 14, 2004, 02:19 PM
Double Tap

atek3
September 15, 2004, 01:35 AM
The designer said he wasn't opposed to 6.5 grendel, which would open up a world of possibilities for the rifle IMHO.

atek3

Andrew Wyatt
September 15, 2004, 11:57 AM
for acog mounting, the hot setup would probably be slotting the rail and drilling and tapping the reciever like JP has done on some of their guns.

JackStraw
September 15, 2004, 12:35 PM
Correia,

Isn't the last "beta testing" you did on the MR96 which devloped into a unuseable rifle...it came apart in pieces...

It's not the only Robinson product I've seen have catastrophic failures...

I'll keep my AR of which serves me very well in all the Utah three gun matchs...don't you think so...The top 3 gun shooters in the world all use AR variants. The best military in the world uses AR variants.

Or maybe it's not the rifle at all...

I will bet this RobArms rifle is about the same...:D

Badger Arms
September 15, 2004, 12:37 PM
Isn't the last "beta testing" you did on the MR96 which devloped into a unuseable rifle...it came apart in pieces...Most guns come apart in pieces. Please illustrate how you think the M96 is defective?

Zak Smith
September 15, 2004, 12:39 PM
If you search on TFL for the old threads on the M96, there are reports of several types of failures, and how they were addressed by RobArms.

-z

JackStraw
September 15, 2004, 12:45 PM
Most guns come apart in pieces. Please illustrate how you think the M96 is defective?

When I saw the bolt in several pieces when it shouldn't be I am a bit skeptical...and this was a production gun well after it was released for sale.

Badger Arms
September 15, 2004, 12:50 PM
I do recall seing a drum full of broken M16 parts one time, what does that prove? I'm all for hating the company if the owner is a bit less than sociable, but a deliberate smear campaign seems a bit excessive. Their products have design flaws traceable to the original Stoner design. To make a sarcastic suggestion that Correia might be to blame is in bad taste.

Zak Smith
September 15, 2004, 12:53 PM
Sure, parts will break eventually on any rifle. The two salient questions then are: how often, and how easy is it to get replacement parts?

JackStraw
September 15, 2004, 01:06 PM
To make a sarcastic suggestion that Correia might be to blame is in bad taste.

Your high pal...and inferring something that is untrue...Correia and I know each other very well...Better than either of us know you pal...your out of your league...as a shooter or debater...

atek3
September 15, 2004, 01:54 PM
ahhh, "the high road"...seems to be the road less traveled these days.

atek3

Correia
September 15, 2004, 01:56 PM
Guys chill out.

Jack is a friend of mine. We shoot together in the same club. He was with me when I broke an M96.

Jack, the the M96 that I had was one that they loaned out to me to try out before this XCR was in existence. It wasn't a new gun either, it was their barrel testing gun. The M96 is a totally different gun/design. It was a bad bolt that broke at the cam slot hole. Bad piece of metal, sheared right through at the biggest stress point.

That is one of the reasons that this new gun does not have a cam slot hole or cam slot pin. It is a solid piece of machined metal that sticks out of the bolt and rotates in the carrier.

I'm not bashing ARs, heaven knows you have beaten me enough times with one. But it took the AR 40 years to get to where it is today. The top shooters use them, and they work very well.

This is a totally different gun, one which I believe has tons of real potential to be an excellent weapon.

And AR bolts break also. And when they do it is usally one of the lugs. It happens. The M96 bolt is similar to the AR bolt. The XCR bolt is very different.

A few big lugs. Big extractor. Fixed ejector. No cam slot hole. Gas piston attached to the bolt carrier.

George Hill
September 15, 2004, 03:08 PM
I'm just glad someone finally fixed the AR-15.
:D

YammyMonkey
September 15, 2004, 06:34 PM
I like the looks, have to wait and see how it functions though. If it turns out to be a good, solid gun this one might find a way onto my rack.

Glock Glockler
September 15, 2004, 07:37 PM
Correia,

Is the extractor a fixed blade like on a Fal? Please, tell us about the gas system.

thanks

Ian
September 15, 2004, 09:14 PM
Correia - The web site said a .308 version is coming out this year - do you know qanything about that? What mags it will use, what the weight will be, anything?

cookhj
September 15, 2004, 10:05 PM
nice looking rifle. not trying to dog on robinson, but if their other rifles are any indication, this one will probably have a descent price tag on it. still wouldn't mind having one.

Correia
September 15, 2004, 10:11 PM
Glock, it is a fixed ejector like the AK or FAL. And one neat feature is that it is positioned further forward, so that unlike the FAL you cannot get double feeds. (i.e. bolt comes back slowly for some reason, round is not kicked out, new round is stripped, empty and new case try to feed at same time)

I believe that the regular production version will not have adjustable gas. Which will keep the cost down. It works off of a piston that is attached to the bolt carrier, similar to the AK. Very simple and straight forward.

I have not seen the .308 version yet. I'm not sure about which magazines it will be using. There was some discussion about it, but I do not know what was decided upon. I believe that the it is going to be very similar to the .223 version, and that the weight will be pretty low. You really need to handle the receiver to see what I mean. It feels solid, and is very thick aluminum in all of the right places, but it is not a heavy rifle at all.

cook, like I said, no idea on price. I hope that it is low because I want one. :)

C-Note
September 15, 2004, 11:55 PM
I'm hoping the .308 version uses M1A/M-14 mags. They're much sturdier than FAL mags.

Plus, and here is the most important reason, I already have about 40 M-14 mags! :D

atek3
September 16, 2004, 12:54 AM
hopefully the death of the awb will improve the avail. of cheaper m14 mags

atek3

Kaylee
September 16, 2004, 06:35 AM
Gosh that looks like a good design. No swoopy space-gun carry handles, nice big internals, no frou-frou.. just all business.

I like it. :)

Hey Larry.. looks like your buddies do good work.

Glock Glockler
September 16, 2004, 08:17 AM
From what Falman posted on Glocktalk they will be releasing a .308 version and it will use G3 mags:D

C-Note
September 16, 2004, 03:02 PM
http://www.robarm.com/XCR%20Vert%20Grip.jpg

http://www.robarm.com/XCR%20Heavy%206.8.jpg

Zak Smith
September 16, 2004, 03:05 PM
Why does the second new picture have a OPSINC muzzle connector, but no barrel collar?

-z

atek3
September 16, 2004, 03:19 PM
that one with the acog looks majorly rad

Correia
September 16, 2004, 03:21 PM
Unknown. I have not seen that barrel on it yet.

Andrew Wyatt
September 16, 2004, 03:34 PM
The second new picture is photoshopped.

Correia
September 16, 2004, 03:40 PM
Unknown. I'll ask tomorrow if it is just a mockup.

I forgot one thing that is pretty nifty. The bolt release.

Look just in front of the trigger guard. There is a shelf there. The bolt can be released by pushing down on it with the trigger finger, or it can be pulled down with the thumb when you pull on your magazine to make sure it is fully seated. The bolt can be locked to the rear by pushing up on the shelf with your trigger finger while pulling the charging handle to the rear.

He needs to put up a picture of the other side of the gun.

Gabe
October 14, 2004, 04:47 PM
I want one in 7.62x39.

The Rabbi
December 30, 2004, 04:39 PM
Will it fire 37 different calibers while maintaining match grade accuracy? Will it be adjustable so I can make it fit my exact requirements for trigger pull, length etc? Will it be more durable than an AK so I can beat it on a rock or use it to mill flour? Will it be as accurate as the best sniper rifles after that? Will it have the ability to fold up and fit in my shirt pocket, but easy enough to deploy in 3 seconds or less? Will Ibe able to buy spare parts and uppers at the local Wall-Mart? You mentioned optics. What about audio? Will it come with an MP3 player and internet access? And I hope it doesnt cost too much because I can buy a Mosin for $75 and it will do almost all of those things. :banghead:

Zak Smith
December 30, 2004, 08:02 PM
It will be interesting to find out how the SCAR winning entry (FN) differs from the XCR.

If you enjoyed reading about "XCR Modular Weapon System - I want one!" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!