ACR's are now for sale...

[jobu07]

So who's going to jump on this one? AIM surplus has them in stock:

http://www.aimsurplus.com/product.aspx?item=F1BMACRBB

for a measly $2400. I'll pass myself but they're available now.

Edit - sorry mods, didn't realize they were talking about this in the ACR auction thread.

 

[longdayjake]

That looks nothing like the ACRs I was looking at when I went to shot show. Those just look wrong.

 

[Zak Smith]

Here's an original Masada:


Other than the stock, they look very similar in outward appearance.

 

[1KPerDay]

Cool-looking stick.

 

[Z-Michigan]

$2400 gets you a three-pack, right?

I mean after all, the design was made with current technology to be easier to manufacture than the early 1960's design of the AR-15. It should be cheaper.

 

[wojownik]

IMHO, that stock is really dissappointing. I like the early Bushmaster/Masada suggested config much better.

 

[ny32182]

The adjustable stock and railed forend are supposed to come on the "advanced" model released at a later date. The $16k ACR included both.

 

[CoRoMo]

Does this mean Mr. James won't get anything near the $16,000+ he was hoping for? Poor guy probably paid a lot more than $2,400 for his.

 

[ny32182]

The one that hit 16k on GB and didn't sell already had a firm offer from a collector that was higher than that number, which is why it didn't sell on GB, but was sold to the collector instead... per the description.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Hmmm, mere coincidence that the ACR is listed for sale on April 1st? And at $2,400 for a fixed stock, basic, 1:9 barrel, 8.2lb version no less?

 

[One-Time]

I wanted a MASADA, Not what it became as the ACR, and especially not for that absurd cost. It uses the same barrel as AR15s(on the 'civvie' version as I recall) and has way less metal in it than an AR yet is 3 times the cost

Ill buy a SCAR first, maybe when they are down to 1k or so Ill play w/ an ACR

 

[One-Time]

ANd all that weight...yeah PASS

 

[nwilliams]

I really wanted a civilian Masada up until I heard the price and who was making it.

The ACR is manufactured by Bushmaster and it's selling for around the same price as the SCAR which is made by FN.

I'd be much more comfortable spending $2k+ on an FN product over a Bushmaster one. Nothing really against Bushmaster, however it's not a company that makes top tier AR's so why would I want to spend over $2k on an ACR manufactured by them.

Bushmaster makes a good low budget AR, I actually owned one for a couple years and it was fine. However if the ACR was made by a company such as LMT, Colt, Daniel Defense or Noveske I would probably be more willing to spend $2k on it.

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

Sorry, but the thread just ain't complete without this link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BB0Pu-rvFjs

 

[C-grunt]

Jeeze.... 2400 bucks?

You could buy one of those RRA M4gery package deals and a Savage 10FP with McMillan?HS Precision stock and a Super Sniper or Bushnell 3200 scope for that price.

 

[TexasRifleman]

Hmmm, mere coincidence that the ACR is listed for sale on April 1st? And at $2,400 for a fixed stock, basic, 1:9 barrel, 8.2lb version no less?

It really is sad that the rifle doesn't have a single desirable feature isn't it? What are they thinking exactly?

What exactly is the target market for this?

 

[Zak Smith]

I don't understand some of the complaints about the ACR that I have read in the past few days, specifically that the ACR [now] has no desirable features. I honestly do not understand that comment coming from anyone who has an interest in fighting/practical carbines. Using the AR-15 as a baseline, it's trivial to list improvement features on the ACR.

That is not to say the ACR is perfect or it's a great price. But let's put the cost in perspective. Your average entry-level AR-15 is around $800. Add a UBR stock: +$250, add sling swivel hardware $80, add BUIS $100 (minumum), add MIAD/TG $50, add ambi controls $80, add float tube / top rail system $200. Just considering those changes you're at about $1500. Gas-piston AR-15 uppers start at about $1100 and go up from there, figure a price differential of $600 over a DGI upper, so that's +$600. Something with an uninterrupted top rail like the LMT MRP is about $1100 again, so there is a price differential there as well. I think if you look at it this way, the ACR's price is not way off.

However, I would have liked to see it come in around $1600-1900 retail.

 

[GunsBeerFreedom]

I don't understand some of the complaints about the ACR that I have read in the past few days, specifically that the ACR [now] has no desirable features. I honestly do not understand that comment coming from anyone who has an interest in fighting/practical carbines. Using the AR-15 as a baseline, it's trivial to list improvement features on the ACR.

That is not to say the ACR is perfect or it's a great price. But let's put the cost in perspective. Your average entry-level AR-15 is around $800. Add a UBR stock: +$250, add sling swivel hardware $80, add BUIS $100 (minumum), add MIAD/TG $50, add ambi controls $80, add float tube / top rail system $200. Just considering those changes you're at about $1500. Gas-piston AR-15 uppers start at about $1100 and go up from there, figure a price differential of $600 over a DGI upper, so that's +$600. Something with an uninterrupted top rail like the LMT MRP is about $1100 again, so there is a price differential there as well. I think if you look at it this way, the ACR's price is not way off.

However, I would have liked to see it come in around $1600-1900 retail.

That's the problem though. It's not offering anything new to the market. If it were around the original quoted price($1500) then it would be awesome. As is, if you want it, you may as well buy a SCAR or AR.

 

[Zak Smith]

As is, if you want it, you may as well buy a SCAR or AR.

This is as true as saying if you want a Sig you might as well buy a Glock, M&P, Kimber, etc (or vice versa). Markets are full of choices at same and near price points. All choices are not the same and people choose different options for different reasons.

 

[TexasRifleman]

don't understand some of the complaints about the ACR that I have read in the past few days, specifically that the ACR [now] has no desirable features. I honestly do not understand that comment coming from anyone who has an interest in fighting/practical carbines. Using the AR-15 as a baseline, it's trivial to list improvement features on the ACR.

My firearms are simply bullet delivery mechanisms. That is the most important thing they do.

I want to use 69gr or 75gr TAP in a tactical/fighting rifle and with 1:9 I'm pretty much out. Now, we all know that some rifles will stabilize bullets in that weight range, I have one myself, but it's not consistent and can't be counted on so, this rifle is off the list from the get go in my opinion.

Seriously, 1:9? What were they thinking? Put 1:8 or even better 1:7 on this and it's a different thing altogether. Or at least offer me a choice.

That's really the biggest problem I see with the rifle. That and the price tag of course, but that's a separate issue. I suspect that will drop down to the $1800 or so street price after a while, so that will work itself out.

Folding/collapsing stock of some kind would have been nice for transport purposes too, but the twist rate really ruins it for me. 1:9 is perfect for people who want to go to the range and shoot 55gr milsurp all day.

 

[Zak Smith]

1:9 is fine with 69gr projectiles.

But I agree with you on the twist. 1:8 would have made a lot more sense.



-z

 

[LRS_Ranger]

While it's true that it DOES offer upgrades to the existing base AR system, they are marketing to the premium quality and feature market. Why they don't put a 1:7 barrel on it is beyond me. I think that the bitterness comes from the way they promised a certain product, got everyone excited about it, and then took forever to release it. When they finally did release it, it was higher priced, less features, and weighs a bit more than it was supposed to. If they hadn't made all those promises, I'm sure that nobody would be ticked off about it.

 

[nwilliams]

delete

 

[TexasRifleman]

But I agree with you on the twist. 1:8 would have made a lot more sense.

Ruger did the same 1:9 silliness with their 556. I suspect they are too hung up on being able to say it's "milspec" maybe?

 

[stubbicatt]

I wish them well. I would like to see Magpul succeed. I'm sure they get royalties or some arrangement with Bushmaster. I will not be spending that kind of money on what for me is simply a toy, something to play around with and leave in the gun safe.

I have no need for such a weapon, and since I have settled on 308 as a cartridge for my EBR type uses...

I am disappointed tho.