XCR initial review


PDA






PvtPyle
May 21, 2006, 07:48 PM
After shooting several hundred rounds thru the XCR, I have a basic review pre-paired. The long detailed one will be published very soon, hopefully in one of the trade magazines. In short, it is a pretty good weapon system.

The good:

• Coming to the XCR as a long time M4 shooter, the ergonomics are very good. The bolt release is in the right spot and the selector lever is in the familiar spot.
• For such a pencil thin barrel, it is quite accurate. I have gotten the weapon zeroed and the barrel broken in with green tip, but I have not had a chance to bench the gun to see what kind of groups I can get at 100M and 200M.
• The stock is very comfortable. But it won’t be with armor on, for big people or for short people. It has an average length of pull. A stock with an adjustable length of pull and cheek piece would make it much nicer.
• Trigger pull is nice with a crisp break.
• The way the recoil spring locks the two receivers is very clever.
• The gas system keeps the receiver very clean inside.
• The forward assist, while not original is very clever too.
• The single point sling attachment point on the back of the receiver is nice.

The bad:

• The barrel is too thin for mounting a suppressor on. The Ops Inc can uses a sleeve at the back of the can to block and gasses and keep the suppressor from moving as it heats up. This allows the hole for the bullet to be smaller in diameter. The current barrel makes it impossible to use one on it because it steps down behind the flash hider to the pencil thin diameter. Maybe mounting a Tactical Innovations can on it will work, but I am skeptical that the results will be good adding that much weight on a barrel that thin.
• The twist rate for LEO’s that use 55gr 5.56 ammo is wrong. For heavier rounds it is going to be fine, but many agencies are required to use the 55gr round. If RA made one for the LEO customer base in a quicker twist rate, it would make it more attractive to the LEO community.
• The receiver does not rock open very far to clear a shell or wipe out the action. Another 15-20 degrees would make a HUGE difference.
• The “peg” on the back of the recoil spring needs to be tapered on the bottom so that a soldier or officer could snap it shut in a hurry. As it is, it needs to be pushed in while you close the receiver.
• The bolt design sucks in that when you pull the carrier out, the bolt just falls apart and away from the carrier. That means you need to have your hand ready to catch it when you extract the carrier group. It just is a pain in the butt and slow. In a rifle made for combat the way it works is not user or speed friendly.
• There are a lot of brass shavings inside the receiver. I have not inspected the spent cases yet, but I bet based on the amount of brass shavings that it chews them up pretty good. Not good for re-loaders.
• The YHM rear sight is ok, but not nearly as good as the Matech. I am going to swap the YHM sight for the Matech because it flips up, has windage and elevation adjustments.
• There is no sling attachment point on the front of the rail.
• The top of the stock needs to be raised to even with, or nearly even with the top of the receiver. This would aid in recoil management and give a better cheek weld when using the BUIS and optics that sit higher.
• There needs to be a hammer block in the lower receiver. Just firing the weapon once with the receivers apart bashed up the lower pretty good.

Other changes or options that the system needs besides the heavier barrel is a 20” barrel, 12” barrel and a different stock.

More details are coming, as are pics.

If you enjoyed reading about "XCR initial review" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
PaladinX13
May 23, 2006, 10:47 AM
Thanks, awaiting your pictures and further impressions!

Don't Tread On Me
May 23, 2006, 06:12 PM
Sounds like a POS. I'll stick with my "dirty" AR-15. For some reason, it works, and works when dirty. The few dislikes/negatives mentioned are enough to make me totally turn away from that rifle.


Thanks for the informative review of the XCR. It is very much appreciated. I think that the SCAR (if it ever becomes civvie) and the Sig 556 are far more interesting rifle platforms.

Correia
May 24, 2006, 09:42 AM
I'm going to take this out on Saturday and beat it up at the carbine match.

Moving to rifle forum.

LoadAmmo
May 24, 2006, 05:24 PM
No intended disrespect to PvtPyle, but I seriously believe Robinson Armaments is running a propaganda campaign ended at stopping the "going to be released in two weeks" jokes.

I've seen several posts on different gun forums where people have recently said, I OWN ONE! And yet only one, 1 person! has posted pictures.

WHERE - ARE - THE - PICTURES ?

If I just got a new rifle pictures would be posted immediately, digital cameras are under $100 these days. Most cell phones have cameras.

Thus endeth my ranteth. I don't buy these have been released in more numbers than mabye 5 or 6.

bcm3087
May 24, 2006, 05:39 PM
Thanks for the initial review. Looking forward to hearing more about accuracy (some pics of your groups would be nice), and especially reliability. I have put off buying two ARs and decided against the SIG 556 in favor of waiting for an XCR, so I hope it proves to be a good weapon. I've decided to wait for some of the magazines, etc. to do some real testing and reviewing before I buy one. We'll also see if Robinson has any bugs that need to be worked out and improved. Any updates you provide will be appreciated in the meantime. Thanks.

Car Knocker
May 24, 2006, 06:10 PM
LoadAmmo,

Who needs pictures? All you have to do is show up at the store and they'll let you fondle it! :neener:

Correia
May 24, 2006, 06:22 PM
Loaded, we've had it up on the wall of our store now for a couple of weeks and even took it to the gunshow. So a few of these actually exist.

As for how many have actually shipped? Beats the hell out of me. This one has a serial number under 100. What number he actually started on, I can't say. :p

And yes, the 2 weeks thing for the last year and a half was just plain asinine, and is no way to communicate with your customers.

LoadAmmo
May 24, 2006, 06:49 PM
You guys are stand up folks with those replies. :)

I guess I'm just pissed because I want to see pics darn it! Give us some pics of the rifle in action w/Utah scenery ! :)

iohk
May 24, 2006, 07:00 PM
I picked up mine a couple of weeks ago, serial number > 100. I'll try to post some pics a little later.

iohk
May 24, 2006, 08:12 PM
Here's a pic of the left side, the right side, the open receiver and a closeup of the open receiver.

Since I've had to muck around in the guts of the rifle already, I must agree with PvtPyle that it would be nice if it opened up a few more degrees.

I've only had it out to play once so far and I did not manage to finish a full mag in the time I had available due to a hardware issue. The Hammer Axis Retaining Pin, the top of which is shown in the closeup with a red arrow pointing at it, was either not installed properly at the factory (hopefully) or came out by its lonesome (let's hope not) while I was sighting in the irons. Regardless of how it came to be there, it ended up floating around in the bottom of the lower underneath the trigger mechanism. This kept the trigger from functioning properly on a periodic basis depending upon which side of the lower it happened to be hanging out in.

The good news is that during the timeframe that the stray Retaining Pin wasn't actively messing up the works the rifle ran great and seemed to be extremely accurate with the iron sights.

Foxtrot427
May 24, 2006, 08:19 PM
lookin good! If only it didnt cost $1600

bcm3087
May 25, 2006, 12:48 AM
iohk-

Is that a Samson FFS front BUIS? How do you like it? I was planning on using that sight and an ARMS #40L-SP on my XCR (whenever I actually get one). Thanks.

beerslurpy
May 25, 2006, 01:56 AM
Sig 556 is like 1200 list price, so robinson armaments gets close but no cigar award.

1600 is a hell of a lot of money to pay for what is basically an FNC. If I had a full auto lower already, I might consider one. Is that their target market?

iohk
May 25, 2006, 10:38 AM
bcm3087 -

Yes, that's a Samson FFS front BUIS and I think it's great. I looked at the ARMS rear BUIS in the store before deciding to go with the GG&G. Then I got to use a buddy's ARMS at the range and realized I probably should have gone with the ARMS instead of the GG&G. Live and learn.

As far as the cost of the XCR goes, for the last few years I've been collecting HK rifles so, in comparison, the XCR seems like a bargain ;)

Gary G23
May 25, 2006, 11:48 AM
WHERE did you find the XCR? I have never seen anyone actually say where they could be found.

iohk
May 25, 2006, 12:47 PM
Gary G23 -

I found mine at Jensen Arms in Colorado, although it's doubtful they have any at the moment. I don't know how many they got in but I'm fairly certain they were all gone within, literally, a day or two. I have to imagine they have a list going for their next allotment ...

Coronach
May 25, 2006, 05:18 PM
Sounds like a POS. I'll stick with my "dirty" AR-15. For some reason, it works, and works when dirty. The few dislikes/negatives mentioned are enough to make me totally turn away from that rifle.I agree that the negatives are disappointing, and that they might well turn some people off. But POS? It sounds like it goes bang every time and puts metal on target. That hardly sounds like a POS to me.Thanks for the informative review of the XCR. It is very much appreciated. I think that the SCAR (if it ever becomes civvie) and the Sig 556 are far more interesting rifle platforms.This is, of course, personal preference. I think a civie SCAR would be interesting. I'm not sure what the hoopla about the Sig 556 is, besides the Forbidden Fruit sex appeal. That, also, is just me.

Pyle and/or Larry- what are the chances that some/any of these shortcomings will be addressed by Robarm in the future?

Mike

Oleg Volk
May 25, 2006, 06:12 PM
SCAR prototypes I habdled were full of sharp edges and questionable ergonomics, but the overall design seemed sound.

bcm3087
May 26, 2006, 02:21 AM
iohk-

Thanks for the response. Glad to hear that the Samson and ARMS are the way to go. Now I just need an XCR to put them on!

trbon8r
May 27, 2006, 02:45 AM
I still don't see what the big deal is about the XCR, Sig 556, or whatever the newest wonder rifle is. None of them do anything an AR-15 won't do. I guess, if you just want something else different than the other guy has then more power to you.

When it comes to making a 5.56 black gun, technology has pretty much hit the wall. Barring some major technological breakthrough, they are more or less all the same.

Coronach
May 27, 2006, 03:28 AM
I agree, to a point. The XCR really does not seem to do anything an AR cannot do, besides fold its stock (which the BTDT types say is not a big plus, anyway). It is, however, sort of a refined package; it is a little bit better in a lot of ways. How much better it is, and whether that is worth the price of admission, are the big questions.

I'm hanging back to see if they are durable/reliable, if the company is going to support them, if they address the shortcomings, and if there will be after-market doodads for them.

The rumors of an XCR-L in 7.62 NATO is enough to make me really pay attention, though.

Mike

Gary G23
May 27, 2006, 10:02 AM
"I still don't see what the big deal is about the XCR, Sig 556, or whatever the newest wonder rifle is. None of them do anything an AR-15 won't do."

GAS PISTON operating system (like the AK). Therefore more reliability. I know the way most of us use our rifles we can get 100% reliability out of an AR but operating in the desert is a different story.

Coronach
May 27, 2006, 12:35 PM
The immediate reposte to that is that there are now plenty of gas-piston ARs out there, too. Again, this is nothing that an AR cannot do. The XCR seems to combine a lot of things that ARs could do, into one slick *cough*expensive*cough* package. It's like the designers took everything the AR has evolved into and built it into the basic package of the XCR.

I really like the rifle (on paper); I'm just waiting to see if it is worth the loot.

Mike

PvtPyle
May 27, 2006, 01:34 PM
I still don't see what the big deal is about the XCR, Sig 556, or whatever the newest wonder rifle is. None of them do anything an AR-15 won't do.

Actually it does. It allows you to change barrel length and twist in a matter of seconds for various missions, WITHOUT having to change out your optics or your accessories.

That is it's biggest plus side. For the civilian market that may not be a big deal, or a deal at all. But for the military and LEO's it is a very nice feature to have.

Zak Smith
May 27, 2006, 01:45 PM
The barrel is too thin for mounting a suppressor on. The Ops Inc can uses a sleeve at the back of the can to block and gasses and keep the suppressor from moving as it heats up. This allows the hole for the bullet to be smaller in diameter. The current barrel makes it impossible to use one on it because it steps down behind the flash hider to the pencil thin diameter. Maybe mounting a Tactical Innovations can on it will work, but I am skeptical that the results will be good adding that much weight on a barrel that thin.
There are many suppressors which do not use 2-point mounting systems like the OPS INC cans do. In fact, the majority of centerfire rifle suppresors are single-point, and use one of the following mounting systems:

1. screw directly onto the 1/2-28 threads
2. connect over any NATO 22mm flash hider (e.g. A1, A2)
3. replace the flash-hider with a proprietary flash-hider, which the suppressor then connects to

Any of these would work fine on the XCR. A Gemtech HALO (mount type #2 above) would connect directly without even needing to take the flash-hider off.




As for general comments, I handled the XCR and the FN SCAR-L/H at the SHOT Show and I was a lot more impressed by the FN than the R.A. (or the 556 for that matter)-- ergonomics, controls, weight. 'Course, the FN isn't yet available to serfs....

Coronach
May 27, 2006, 04:24 PM
It allows you to change barrel length and twist in a matter of seconds for various missions, WITHOUT having to change out your optics or your accessories.Yes, but will POI/POA still coincide?

Mike

trbon8r
May 27, 2006, 08:33 PM
The direct gas system versus piston system has been debated to death on the internet. While everyone on the net debates ad nauseum, the AR continues to serve as the number one choice among special forces units that could opt for a wide array of weapons, including weapons with piston driven gas systems. I'm not even a big AR guy. The M14 is more my speed, but I do recognize the AR for being an effective piece that has served well for 40 years now.

Quick change barrels to me sound like one more thing that could loosen up or otherwise go FUBAR. As I recall the previous Robinson experiment with a quick change barrel didn't work so well. Most LE or federal agencies are going to pick one barrel length and that will have to suffice for a wide variety of missions.

Correia
May 28, 2006, 01:02 PM
Zak, it isn't the single point attachment method, as much as it is that I'm scared to hang a can on the end of something that thin. I'll probably try it with an AAC or a TacInv can and see what happens, but it seems awfully thin, and I don't know if it was ever tested. I think Pyle wanted to use the OpsInc, because since it was a reflex, the weight would go back over the muzzle and be distributed, as opposed to all hanging off the end.

I used the XCR in the UDPL carbine match yesterday. Have much feedback, but ya'll will have to wait for my article in SWAT. :p

Zak Smith
May 28, 2006, 01:08 PM
Correia,

I wouldn't worry too much about the weight vs. thin barrel. POI will shift when you put the can on, but that happens almost always anyway. Of course, my preference is for lighter (yet effective) suppressors.

-z

DMK
May 28, 2006, 01:34 PM
The twist rate for LEO’s that use 55gr 5.56 ammo is wrong. For heavier rounds it is going to be fine, but many agencies are required to use the 55gr round. If RA made one for the LEO customer base in a quicker twist rate, it would make it more attractive to the LEO community. Doesn't this thing have a 1/9 twist (http://www.robarm.com/XCR_Specifications.htm)? If so, it should shoot 55gr. just fine. 99% of the ARs on the market today have 1/9 twist and LEOs have no trouble with shooting their ammo through them.

IMO, you don't want to go with a slower twist as it will limit your ammo choices considerably.

I don't think a heavy barrel is a good idea either. It's a carbine. Keep it light. How many owners will suppress it? Maybe offer a different barrel for them.

Zak Smith
May 28, 2006, 01:38 PM
With the improvements in ballistics and terminal effects from Mk262 and other 75-77gr loadings in the last 5 years, I don't understand why anyone would want a 223/556 carbine with a twist slower than 1:8.

PaladinX13
May 30, 2006, 02:32 PM
I'm going to take this out on Saturday and beat it up at the carbine match.So how was it?

Correia
May 30, 2006, 02:41 PM
Had some mag related malfunctions, pulled that mag, and no further problem. All together between me and everybody else, put another 400 through it.

Coronach
May 30, 2006, 07:00 PM
You know? The last thing I need is another gun that shoots 5.56 NATO. I mean, I already own an AR. I have no use for this. I'm trying to build a house.

Will you shut up already about this gun? :cool: ;)

Mike

PS Since I know you'll ignore me and talk about it anyway, does POI/POA coincide if you remove the barrel and remount it? If it rezeros properly, I could envision scheme where you keep track of clicks up/down/right/left to maintain zero with various barrels and calibers, thus making the one-optic option that much more useful...

iohk
May 30, 2006, 07:10 PM
Just FYI, regarding availability, I'm looking at a post on Sturmgewehr that reads:

"XCR Robinson Armament .223 New In Case $1299 I have recvd 3 rifles,more are shipping today 17 more coming in next 3-4 weeks(8 of these are presold)....I do have front and rear YHM flip up sights in inventory for $69.95 and $84.95 respectively,MAD rear also available for $89.95, Caliber conversions will not be available for a couple of months (I must confess the first rifle was mine and after 3 times on the range it is a KEEPER)"

I am not affiliated with this guy in any way ...

ny32182
May 31, 2006, 11:53 AM
I've been watching this platform with interest since news of it first broke... if it proves to be reliable, solid, etc, the only thing putting me off about it is price. I used their "build your rifle" page to put one together... turns out that (any) sights, stock, ambi-controls, etc cost extra. So, the list price of $1200 or whatever it is is quite decieving. By the time I added mine up, it was pushing $2k. The Sig 556 has flip up front and rear sights included in its base price of $12XX. I suppose that once you add a full length rail system to the 556 (SWAT model, like comes standard on the XCR) the prices pretty much even out, and I would want to put a better stock on the 556 as well. Just a matter of priority I guess. Either one will be pretty pricey once everything is tallied up.

One more thing about the weight... it is rumored that all the 556's that people have handled so far have been equipped with heavy barrels. Hopefully, Sig would release their own lightweight barrel, or, worst case scenario, someone in the aftermarket would hopefully be able to profile a Sig barrel to drop some of that front end weight that everyone is complaining about.

The 1:9 twist doesn't bother me so much, as 99.9+% of my shooting is with 55 or 62gr bullets, and if I need to shoot something heavier, my AR carbine is 1:7 anyway. As long as the barrel is chrome lined and 5.56 chambered, I'll be OK with it.

Looking forward to more personal experience with all of the above, as it becomes available.

chevrofreak
June 2, 2006, 04:57 AM
I still don't see what the big deal is about the XCR, Sig 556, or whatever the newest wonder rifle is. None of them do anything an AR-15 won't do.

Infact they do do something the AR15 wont do. They'll keep their actions clean.

Coronach
June 2, 2006, 05:02 AM
Untrue. Even if you believe that direct gas impingement is a bad idea (I'm a fence sitter on it, personally), there are plenty of AR uppers with pistons now. So, ARs can also keep their actions clean.

Mike

chevrofreak
June 2, 2006, 06:09 AM
But then when you throw a gas piston upper on an AR the price difference disappears.

Coronach
June 2, 2006, 02:06 PM
Well, at least some of it disappears. I agree. Remember, one can build an AR from scratch with a piston upper, which should bring you in under, or at the very least at, the price of a fully-equipped XCR.

However, once again, it's not doing anything substantially different than what an AR can do, or really doing it any better. There are ARs with quick-change barrels, too, though I dunno how they're priced. It is just a more elegant solution to the problem.

Believe me, I want to like this rifle, too. I do like this rifle. I just cannot see me paying $1300-1600 for one when I can buy a different upper for my AR, which runs like a top, for $400-500. The only way I will is if the rifle becomes established, has a good track record, and is generally not fielded/supported like the M-96 Expeditionary Rifle. Do a search on here and TFL for discussion of that rifle, including comments by the head of the company himself. :uhoh:

2-3 years down the road, if Robarm is making them, fixing problems, being receptive to customer input and companies have started to make accessories for them (different stocks, different grips, triggers, safety selectors, barrels/caliber kits, etc), I'm totally in. This is a seemingly ingenious design, elegantly executed. But right now? I just dunno. It has to not be another non-starter.

Mike

chevrofreak
June 3, 2006, 09:08 AM
There are other things I consider to be advantage as as well.

1) Side folding stock. AR's can't have this because of the buffer tube.

2) The XCR was designed from the begining to use a gas piston. All of the AR gas piston upper I've seen are using a standard AR bolt carrier and a simple gas piston and modified gas block to get the job done. The XCR gas system is more like that of an AK.

3) Side cocking handle instead of that silly over-the-stock junk the AR uses.

Langenator
June 3, 2006, 10:05 AM
Most gas piston ARs use the short-stroke gas piston design, like that of the SKS, SVD, and FAL. A well proven, reliable design that gets the job done, albeit with a couple more parts than the long-stroke style used in the AK (and PKM, M249, and M240).

Correia
June 5, 2006, 01:58 PM
Got the results from the rifle match back:

http://www.udpl.net/results/2006/Rifle-CarbineResultsByTime5-27-06.pdf

Not bad for a guy who hasn't been able to shoot a match in 5 months because of opening a gun store, using a rifle he has never shot before, with a optic he has never used before, zeroed by somebody else. :p

rbernie
June 5, 2006, 02:12 PM
Most gas piston ARs use the short-stroke gas piston design, like that of the SKS, SVD, and FAL. A well proven, reliable design that gets the job done, albeit with a couple more parts than the long-stroke style used in the AK (and PKM, M249, and M240).Is there a visual compare/contrast on what you just said available somewhere?

Langenator
June 5, 2006, 03:24 PM
In a short stroke, the piston and the bolt carrier are separate parts, as opposed to the long stroke, where the piston is attached to the carrier.

In a short stroke, a short, sharp rearward motion by the piston imparts rearward momentum to the bolt carrier sufficient to cycle the action. The piston does not travel through the full range of motion.

In a long stroke, the gas pressure is pushing the piston and attached bolt carrier rearward through the entire range of motion.

Tony Williams and Max Popenker's book Assault Rifle (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1861267002/sr=8-2/qid=1149535174/ref=pd_bbs_2/103-7876599-6367853?%5Fencoding=UTF8) has good illustrations, but I don't know of any online off the top of my head.

BrennanKG
September 28, 2006, 06:30 PM
but I figured it was better than starting up a new one.

Do any of THR XCR owners have any updates on their rifles after a little more mileage?

Does anyone know if RA has ramped up production at all?

This rifle has some features I admire (side-cocking and piston-driven) I'm looking for, but I've never seen one in person.


Thanks,
B.

MTMilitiaman
September 28, 2006, 07:49 PM
With the improvements in ballistics and terminal effects from Mk262 and other 75-77gr loadings in the last 5 years, I don't understand why anyone would want a 223/556 carbine with a twist slower than 1:8.

I am with you there. Never understood it myself.

Correia
September 28, 2006, 10:12 PM
The article that spawned from this gun is in SWAT on newstands now. That's PvtPyle on the cover.

Evil Monkey
September 28, 2006, 11:07 PM
Recently I have realised that the $1,300 XCR Robarm advertises does NOT come with iron sights.:what: :scrutiny:

That's messed up.

But...it's so cool. What other rifle has AR15 ergonomics, a piston, and a FAL style charging handle?:D

BrennanKG
September 29, 2006, 12:12 AM
Correia,

Thanks I'll check it out.


EM,

That's my thinking as well, both on the pricing/sights issue and the groovy features.


B.

LoadedDrum
September 29, 2006, 06:46 AM
Corriea-
Great article in SWAT. I have to agree with your comments about the bolt falling out and the reciever opening angle. However, my trigger does not seem to suffer the problems yours had. Mine s/n is in the low 300's and I noticed yours was 58. Have you tried latter production models and what did you think of them? Also, in your review, when you mentioned the recoil being different, but not lighter than an AR, what gas port setting did you use?

Correia
September 29, 2006, 09:51 AM
Off the top of my head, I can't recall what the port setting was at. I left it at factory standard and never tweaked it. Reliability was fine except for Wolf, so I didn't want to play with it.

I haven't tried the trigger on a later one, just this one that I had. My understanding is that they issued a recall on the first ones out because something was breaking in the trigger group. At that point I had already sold the gun.

BrennanKG
September 29, 2006, 10:32 AM
To be honest, the XCR's appeal to me is not that it isn't an AR15.
I love AR15s.
They're easy to shoot, easy to maintain, and fun to accessorize.

The XCR's appeal is in the features which will make it well-suited for shooting suppressed: piston-driven and side-cocking. I realize that ARs can be set up in a related fashion: piston upper and a PRI gas-buster to minimize the nose/eye splatter, but a rifle actually designed for this has a certain sexiness.

That's why I'm interested in the XCR and why I'm interested in the Sig 556.


Just my 2 cents.

atblis
September 29, 2006, 12:35 PM
Superb Side folding stock
Piston driven adjustable gas system
Good sights
Has provisions for a optics rail.
Uses M16 mags
etc.
etc.
Basically has all the features these newfangled guns have (except the quick change barrels).

The Koreans did it first.

BrennanKG
September 29, 2006, 12:40 PM
atblis,

A local gun store here has both the K1 and K2.
I think they're part of the owner's collection he's selling off.

The K1 has a sliding wire stock and an AR-style DI system.
The K2 has the folding stock and a piston system.

Cool little rifles.



B.

Civilian Armory
September 30, 2006, 11:46 PM
The XCR has always looked a lot like the HAC-7c to me.

BrennanKG
October 1, 2006, 12:03 AM
HAC-7c?

http://www.biggerhammer.net/hac7/pictorial/

Huh, you're right.
Something like an XCR and something like a Daewoo, in a retroactive way.



B.

LoadedDrum
October 1, 2006, 07:07 AM
Off the top of my head, I can't recall what the port setting was at. I left it at factory standard and never tweaked it. Reliability was fine except for Wolf, so I didn't want to play with it.

I haven't tried the trigger on a later one, just this one that I had. My understanding is that they issued a recall on the first ones out because something was breaking in the trigger group. At that point I had already sold the gun.



You really owe it to your self to try one with a lower port setting. They ship on the max setting whose recoil IMHO is not as pleasant as a rifle length AR. However, there is a world of difference just by setting the gun at the next setting down. The recoil becomes soft with M193 and AE rounds. The muzzle jump is greatly diminished. Several AR shooters that tried mine have commented to me that they can keep the sights on target during rapid fire. Supposedly, the hot stuff (Q3131,XM193, and even AE) will run just fine on the #2 setting which is even lighter recoiling still but I have yet to try it.

BrennanKG
December 4, 2006, 11:03 AM
I finally found a copy of the SWAT magazine with the XCR article.
:)

Also, good news for some of us...it looks like the XCR is going to be offered with a medium contour, fluted barrel! Between this and the stock adapters now offered, I'm contacting my local Robarm dealer this week.

Later,
B.

TOU
August 17, 2007, 01:35 PM
I know.....old thread, but I liked it.

Evil monkey wrote:

But...it's so cool. What other rifle has AR15 ergonomics, a piston, and a FAL style charging handle?

Daewoo (except the FAL charging handle)

atblis wrote:

Superb Side folding stock
Piston driven adjustable gas system
Good sights
Has provisions for a optics rail.
Uses M16 mags
etc.
etc.
Basically has all the features these newfangled guns have (except the quick change barrels).

I sooooo agree.....it has everything but the left sided charging handle and the quick change barrels but has some other unique design features. Interchangeable triggers with AR's (IE RRA match triggers). Did we also mention that it also has FAL/XCR style gas adjustment.

I do like these new XCR's wit the left side charging handle, flip up sights (at additional cost) and quick change barrels and potential for additional calibers. But...unfortuately when I first looked at one and hit the lever to open it up, everything clattered on the gun shops glass counter before I could stop it. I felt like such an idiot as anyone in the store swung around to look at the moron (me) at the counter. :rolleyes: I wished the worker would have warned me...anyway I put back together as quick as possible. Realistically the Daewoo is similar in how it opens up, but the Daewoo has an added feature that the XCR doesn't that I never thought much of until this happened to me on the XCR. I actually initially thought it was a PITA until now but now I know why and it make so much sense and I am impressed with their foresight. What it is, is that the charging handle works as a safety to stop this from happening and you remove it (handle) on a slot on the side. Until it is, crap isn't flying all over and when you do, you are usually prepared for the ejection of the contents. I still say (besides the right handled bolt) it was waaaay ahead of it's time and is a highly under rated and under appreciated rifle.

The Koreans did it first.

Correct you are, it was actually designed 30 years ago!

I can't believe it hasn't ever been licensed for manufacture in the US...that would have solved a ton of problems and allowed it to flourish and develop in the States consumer markets.

If you enjoyed reading about "XCR initial review" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!