Any MSAR owners?
- Thread starter TIMC
- Start date
- Status
I would also add that I was never too thrilled with how the lower was pretty much spliced together at a very narrow point. That always seemed like a very real potential weakpoint, especially in combat. Unfortunately the M17S never really went through much if any course of development or improvement too much beyond the original rifles. While I liked mine while I had it it always seemed to me to be a work in progress that never progressed. I must also confess that it looked too darn much like the push-bar on an emergency door. There was one smith who was doing good things with the M17, but I believe that he passed away.
One thing that I like about the MSAR is that it is a continuation of a proven design, and some might even argue an improvement in some ways. Steyr sat on their hands for too darned long, which is typical for them.
Justin
Moderator Emeritus
Finding out that the newer E4 version of these rifles will take standard AR magazines just moved one of these up on my Do Want list by several spots.
Maverick223
Member
I agree that it should have been a monolithic lower, but to be honest I am unaware of any problems that were a result of this connection. There was a problem with the size of the captured take-down pins, but that was resolved with a factory recall (and only present on certain SNs).
I agree, and both to aid in balance with optics and improve cooling I milled slots in the sides of my receiver. I believe this not only improves the balance, weight, and cooling, but the aesthetics as well. Another problem was a weak mount on the carry handle, I resolved to remediate this issue with a custom picatinny rail and a charging handle similar to an AR. The problem of gas being blown out the top was fixed with the addition of a plastic seal, though this only partially solves the problem because the ejection port is too close to the face.
Indeed he did; that was Curtis from Kurt's Kustom Firearms. I have continued his work and come up with several modifications and improvements myself. I won't bore everyone with the details, nor take up space and bandwidth with photos, but there is a thread detailing some of these modifications available here.
Absolutely; I am really looking forward to the new MCS. I would also like to see an offering in something like 6.5mmGrendel, 6x45mm, or even 6mmSAW, as well as .357Sig and/or 7.62mmTok. in the MCS.
got mine from RATWORX, and right now they have a rebate deal going on until the end of the year so that MSAR can liquidate the stg 556 stock and i guess make room for the new E4 variant. Rifle runs great.....and had awesome customer service!
My rifle so far has only had 200 rds so far and i've seen that the only way it will cycle is if its gas plug is on the "H" heavy setting. Anyone know if there is a certain round count break in period before it will start cycling on "S" standard setting?
My rifle so far has only had 200 rds so far and i've seen that the only way it will cycle is if its gas plug is on the "H" heavy setting. Anyone know if there is a certain round count break in period before it will start cycling on "S" standard setting?
CarbineKid
Member
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
- Messages
- 173
I brought a limited Edition STG last November. The rifle has been flawless, and it's one heck of an attention getter.
The Limited edition case with goodies
My new limited edition STG-556 in Tan
I have since added an E4 rail and aimpoint.
The Limited edition case with goodies
My new limited edition STG-556 in Tan
I have since added an E4 rail and aimpoint.
mbogo
Member
I think I am going to have to buy one of these, especially if they're down to $1000 or so.
I'm a lefty and having the ability to switch the bolt for port-side ejection is a major plus for me.
mbogo
I'm a lefty and having the ability to switch the bolt for port-side ejection is a major plus for me.
mbogo
mbogo
Member
Eh. What's a couple of hundred bucks when you can have that rifle?
mbogo
mbogo
took mine back out to the range and it runs flawlessly now on the "S" standard setting. I guess the break in only needed a couple hundred rounds and a good cleaning and lube. Either way the rifle ran great on "H" Heavy. Now I have to start looking for an optic. Perhaps a Leupold CQT?????
Too bad the AUG Nato stocks won't fit the MSAR. Might have bee alternative to the E4 for those who already have the MSAR but want to use AR mags.
http://www.cdnninvestments.com/staugmcostne.html
Might have bee alternative to the E4 for those who already have the MSAR but want to use AR mags.http://www.cdnninvestments.com/staugmcostne.html
Maverick223
Member
Don't know the price, but I believe that MSAR sells replacement stocks to convert to the E4 configuration.
boricua9mm
Member
Wow! I've been away for a while, but I now I see the circles you run to try and justify your arguments...We will see your contradiction below...
Hmmm. Looks like another backpedaling claim here. You attacked the MSAR design as being fragile, then were called out in that it was, in fact, directly based on the AUG design (with a few small improvements) and you eventually agreed to that fact. You then try to spin that same angle in your favor to boast the alleged merits of the M17 as seen below:
Sorry, but there is a LOT of comedy in that statement, irrespective of the contradictions in reference to the MSAR/AUG argument. You are putting the M17s on a pedestal because it is based on the high and mighty SA80? Are you at all familiar with the history of the British assault rifle, and why H&K had to step in to fix it's many problems, which ultimately led to the same re-vamping evaluation of our own service rifle? Now what, pray tell, don't I know what I'm talking about??
Maverick223
Member
No contradiction, only stating the FACT that the MSAR never has and likely never will be a battle proven design. The MSAR is not an AUG just as much as the M17 isn't an SA-80.
Has the bright lights from video cameras had deleterious effects on your ability to read? As I stated the M17 does not have ANY of the problems (or even components) that the SA-80 had. I only stated the fact that there are nations that are using designs very similar to the M17 platform (though that counts for just as much as nations using platforms similar to the MSAR). So, yes I am very familiar with the design flaws not inherent to the M17 platform that were formerly present in the SA-80 weapons system.
Most everything it seems, lets review in your previous post alone:
1. The use of any MSAR design by any nation's military force.
2. The lack of any nation to use a rifle based upon the same design as the M17.
Hammerhead6814
Member
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2009
- Messages
- 701
I would love to own one. However I've read some horror stories about the accuracy. It's a .223 and some reviews claim 3-4 MOA at best! For the $1000-$2000 they can cost (used-new) I'd rather just buy an AR or AK. Well, for that kind of money I'd buy a nice FAL or PTR.
I totally agree; I would not have the MSAR for a first rifle. I find mine to be about 2-2 1/2" at 100 yards with Federal 55 grain FMJ ammo. I do find the gun good enough for a CQB rifle and it is fun to shoot. I have several AR's and a couple of AK's but I have always wanted a bullpup rifle or two. Now I have the MSAR and a Kel Tec RFB so my bullpup rifle itch has been scratched!
yongxingfreesty
Member
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2005
- Messages
- 1,396
what color were the original steyr augs and lenght? im thinking od green, but need confirmation before i start searching. i am hoping it is od green and 16" because that is what i really want!
Maverick223
Member
I believe OD Green is correct, but I am almost certain that the original had a 20in. bbl to maximize the velocity without the expense of a greater OAL (the purpose of all bullpups). Shortly thereafter they came out with a 16in. carbine length variant.
lobo9er
Member
in a hurry didnt rea through all of the thread. SO forgive me if this was covered, id there any way to convert this to accept AR mags. that was the reason i went fs2000 route when a bull pup got in my head, the fs2000 uses AR mags.
- Status
