Battle Rifle Time Trials - Episode 5 - FINAL RESULTS
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 1 ก.ย. 2019
- InRangeTV and Primary & Secondary teamed up in this collaboration in which we combined multiple "battle rifles", 5 shooters, and 4 drills in an effort to use time based metrics to determine the best of the breed of battle rifles:
H&K G3
FN FAL
FN SCAR-17
Brownells' BRN-10 AR10
Sons of Liberty Gunworks MK10
Desert Tech MDR
M1A/M14
Robinson Arms XCR-M
Each drill was fired multiple times by each shooter and the worst and best runs were thrown out to normalize the results. At the end of each drill we declare the winner, along with the placement of the remaining other 7 rifles, based on those results.
Special additional thanks to:
J.W. Ramp for his filming and assistance
Gary Hughes from M.O.D. Outfitters and Survival Armor
InRange is viewer supported with no ad monetization whatsoever, please consider it!
/ inrangetv
Next time: Garand VS G43 vs SVT vs Ljungman vs FN49 vs MAS 49? ...and bring Ian.
Colburn F a garand with en bloc clips is gonna obliterate the competition
why not mas 44?
And a Johnson rifle.
@@shermonruler Try finding one. Not many were made and the difference isn't that big between the 44 and 49 so it would be fair to use the 49 instead.
Yes. Please. Maybe swap the ljungman for a hakim. Hakims were used more in combat than their Swedish counterparts.
I'm actually kind of bummed that the lefthanded guy isn't here to talk about his experience. None of the old guns are designed intentionally to be ambi, and it would have been cool to hear in what ways some of the older designs either were or were not leftie friendly.
I'm left handed it's not that big of a deal really I have more trouble with ar10 honestly the g3 is still slow but it's not a big deal
Im a lefty and have a ptr 91...its really not a problem at all. These folks were slow on that platform because they arent comfortable with it. No matter the platform you choose...train.
And yes the g3 will never be as fast as an AR...but you can be serviceable for a combat situation. And its stupidly reliable. Competition? Go with the fastest thing.
@@roadrunner681 I can understand that. I'm also leftie. You can blade you left hand out or wrap your right hand around the magwell to hit the paddle an ar-15, but the AR-10 lower is dimensionally large enough that that might be problematic. The g3 would still be bottom of the barrel. The rankings would have probably would be consistent between left and right handed shooters, but little stiff would have been interesting to hear. I didn't realize how easy it would be to grab the bolt stop on the FAL with the left trigger finger. That sort of thing
@Wayne Smith we are used to adapting to a right handed world? I felt that way with the m4 too. Lol
Finally some recognition for the XCR-M, would love to see you guys do a full review on the rifle. Its been my fav rifle for years and its hard seeing it never get thought of.
XCR guys here. Proud owner as well
Same here…… love it, especially the new ones. They are awesome, took a bit of getting used to the gas system but once you get it dialed in to the ammo your using it’s a very accurate light recoiling rifle. Used to be an FN guy until I shot a xcr.
The XCR: "I like the AK piston, let's make it better. The ridiculous simplicity of the FAL to take it apart and its internal design, its charging handle, let's make it better. AR pistol grip and ergonomics, it also looks fantastic, I'll put this into my cart. The ACR/Masada modularity? Absolutely and let's actually propose the conversion kits and make it even more simple. Let's not forget to pay a visit to Daewoo because they know how to put the best ideas together." There you go that's the XCR.
Dang, I was hoping the "Lefty" was going to be in the final observations. Don't know his experience, but he had to overcome a lot on the controls due to their placements. This was a "slam dunk" of a series! Great job IR Team!!!
That was me. The only thing that really gave me any trouble was the G3 and I fully admit that most of it is down to lack of training and practice. The safety lever is a bit of a reach and when you do get on it, there isn't very much tactile feedback so being sure that it was set to semi and not somewhere in between safe and semi felt like a guessing game. It never actually failed to go off safe for me so perhaps that is just lack of familiarity with the mechanism on my part which did not inspire confidence. The charging handle was a bit awkward, as it was for everyone who doesn't have any proper training on the G3, but especially as a lefty it's easy to accidentally put it into the notch that holds the charging handle back (3:48). If I had more time to spend with it and figure out the most efficient way to operate it (longer than one afternoon) then I think I could work both of those issues out. Aside from just being a total G3 novice and that causing some issues, the FAL magazine well comes to mind. One wall of it is cut away to make it easer to insert for a right handed shooter which means as a left handed shooter I am inserting the magazine into a place where the side that I can see extends further than the side that I can't see, that could lead to a magazine getting hung up or being tilted a little left or right and not fully seating which you can see me do in the video (15:10). Again, something that could be overcome with more practice. Lastly, I regret not making more of an effort to take full advantage of how the controls on each rifle could be most efficiently employed. You will see in the videos that I made a conscious effort to use the bolt release on all of the rifles where it was available (22:09) except for the XCR even though I did use the lefty mag release -- after seeing that I missed that opportunity that was a bit of a face-palm moment for me (31:48). Guns with ambi controls are helpful but not required and I tried to do the best I could to remember to use them for you guys so that I could give each gun the best possible showing but I did goof once or twice, my bad. Finally, thanks to Karl for the good editing and JW for the good camera work which specifically captures a lot of the issues that I mentioned above.
Matt thank you for the detailed extra info!
Can we get a mud test on the Robinson XCR-M?
I was expecting this comment.
mud test on all these battle rifles! Replace the mdr with the tavor7, bren2, and/or the galil ace, and we have a dream team!
A mud test, water test, sand and ice have been done with the XCR. It passed just like the scar, because of the long travel piston and gas system. The internals are similar to an AK.
@@mountainmanjim6366 dude that’s bullsheeeeet. 😂😂😂😂😂. The only video I’ve ever watched was a guy mud testing his xcr-m and it failed to fire IMMEDIATELY. 😂😂😂🤣😂😂🤣. Sorry don’t mean to come across all douchey but I laughed hysterically when I saw that video. “Ok we’re going to test my XCR-M …”slosh..slosh”. “CLICK”.
You _KNOW_ that as soon as the cameras were off, Sandy and Karl spent two hours gushing about pegacorns.
What
You mean alacorn?
Alicorn.
....... what are you nerds talking about????
@lzydwg im a terribly under sophisticated individual...... youll just have to tell me
I really like the ergo of the g3.
I like the ergonomics as well, and funny thing is I do run some drills with my friends who usually bring AR’s and I’m not far behind them with my G3
@@sevensinsvelocityshop7563 the issues with these tests is that they are taking at shooters, and shitting on the only 2 weapons that require a different manual of arms. Anyone who trains constantly with their rifles wouldn’t have the issues they complain about.
The XCR is a great platform. I'm not surprised to see it score high.
great in what way? have specifics?
@@addictedtopussy69long stroke piston system, fully ambi controls, 8-position adjustable gas system, relatively lightweight considering fully metal makeup, generally a 2moa gun so right on par with most battle rifles and extremely reliable with a lot of different ammo types due to action and also takes sr25 mags so easy to source magazines for
.308 rifles are known for their long range effectiveness. I was disappointed that they had no accuracy tests or timed shots at targets 300 yards away. Otherwise, it was an awesome series. keep up the good work.
I only own a G3 and get 4 moa with really old surplus but sub moa with hand loads. I am also surprised they mentioned malfunctions with the G3, I never had one with mine. The only con I see with the G3 is the weight and ammo cost.
@@tim8938 I honestly feel this test a bit biased since they fired only for timing but not for comfort, able to stay on target without losing sight picture. For example the one where they shot two targets you could see they missed the target on a few rifles however since they just fired rapidly the second shot those rifles still scored good in timing.
The Robinson would likely be a lot lower if accuracy was a factor. It is notoriously inaccurate on every review I have seen. The SCAR is supposed to be very accurate from the same perspectives, so it would likely climb the list.
@@tim8938 They clearly ride the cocking handle with the G3. You never release the cocking handle with your thumb, it needs an actual slap to reliably allow the bolt to engage the rollers. This is a user error.
Also these tests mean nothing. No one was given any time to practice or familiarize themselves with the guns over time. The ability to use a gun effectively the moment it is handed to you is nice, but it doesn't mean much when you are experienced with a platform. Things people call unergonomic about the G3 are things that will keep the gun running when other guns will fail. The low sights will keep your head less exposed. The cocking handle not being attached to the bolt allows you to easily mortar it and clear malfunctions. It is a simple gun, and reliable.
An experienced person can load a G3 in basically the same amount of time it takes an experienced person to load an FAL. Reload speed is not even that important anyways. You should be reloading from cover or at worst concealment. If you aren't in either chances are you are already dead.
Also, on the cold start, they completely neglect the manual of arms for the G3.
If you ask people that have owned or own the modern XCR series, they will tell you, they are not surprised. The older models had some issues, but the modern XCR system is phenomenal. Thank you for the video series and wish I could have participated. Hell, even the optics test the xcr would be among the top! Thanks again!
I would like to express my gratitude to everyone who supports InRange on Patreon. As I'm a poor boy I personally don't, but I really appreciate that I can watch this because others do.
Not surprised the FAL ranked that high , it is a rifle that has lasted the test of time. It is still in service to this day witch says alot.
So is the G3.
I drink the fal kool-aid. I hate hearing them say "Stoner" 100 times an episode
The G3 is better at handling mud.
G3 is the more reliable and durable gun. Also cheaper to make. Its basically the german experiences of total war made into a battle rifle. The caliber was pressed on everybody by the US, with a shorter round, it might have been even better.
Very few if any countries use the FAL anymore. The G3 is in service with multiple first world countries and even more third world. Germany, Norway, Sweden, Portugal just to name a few. The Germans didn't even like the FAL (G1) that much, they actually liked it so little that after the G3 was adopted they gave their remaining FAL's away.
Excellent test. I love my FALs and this just reaffirms that feeling. And I love the retro AR10 . Thanks
Really interesting concept with professional execution and surprising results. Thanks for a very interesting and engaging series.
Thank you for doing these collaborations. They are amazingly informative and entertaining. I can't wait to see what's next. I will contribute to the Patreon because I want to see a continuation of these types of videos. Thank you again.
woot Love my XCR. amazing gun
This series was criminally underrated. Great job!
Thanks for all the work you did producing these rifle videos as the information was eye opening.
Another point of mention - the SCAR also is missing a large section of barrel *and* the brake that would have come on the gun. It's interesting they mentioned the weight - as the MK20 does ALL of the things they talk about with the SCAR
I think it would be interesting to add a long range accuracy portion to the test.
This is an intersting set of tests for determining the "floor" of how they could be expected to preform. it would be interesting to also see a "practical ceiling" with a number of experienced shooters with each rifle and how they compare to more modern intermediate rifles e.g. ar15/ak.
As a long time XCR-L owner, the results don't surprise me! The ergos for the XCR platform are very intuitive if your an AR user. The XCR stock is robust and easy to adjust to the shooters needs, plus if you really have to butt-stroke some one in the head, it won't break....
It is worth pointing out that the XC-R was the only rifle with a brake. While I'm not a big fan of brakes on .223 rifles, there is a reason the SCAR ships with one and I suspect it would have moved up a place or two if the factory brake had remained intact. Also, as you pointed out, optics would have re-stacked the deck a bit. All that being said, this was very interesting and fun to watch.
The SCAR brake is widely hated for it's violent gas blast
the 17 is known for its soft recoil when shot in Stock configuration.
I was also amazed for the lack of muzzle compensators. like wow lol
The SCAR was a victim of the trials it was designed for. SOCOM specified a reciprocating charge handle, which was stupid. John Browning had it right when he put a non-recip charging handle on the BAR in WW1 - no excuse for that, SOCOM. Also, the XCR-M is more solidly built -all metal except pistol grip, and has better ergonomics. The team didn’t really show it here, but the XCR’s bolt release is fantastic, and even better than the AR-15.
@@Spectre407 I recall Robinson being mediocre.
I hope to see more of the Robinson XCR-M. The moment I saw this gun my first thoughts were that it looked interesting and that I had never heard of or seen it before. The XCR-M is the only gun in the testing that I had never seen personally yet it out performed everything. I’m very interested in this gun now!
It's a great platform. The M is a little heavy IMO, but it's rugged AF, just like it's little brother, the XCR-L.
Very cool series. Great job. So many battle rifles in one place, awesome.
That is an excellent series! Thanks!
Glad you like them!
I can't believe this has so few views for the quality of video that it is. Thank you for taking this scientific approach toward comparing and contrasting different battle rifles. I would love to see this same trial conducted on striker fired polymer 9mm pistols and perhaps a mix of high end, mid, and low end ARs along with other carbines.
Great video series!
The series was great. Bring more on if you can.
I don't care what anyone says, I love my CETME/G3 platform! 7.62x51 fo life!
@Robert Sears 6.5 grendel is the best of both words. slighty more recoil than a 5.56 but retains equal or slightly less energy and a flat ballistic arc than a 7.62x51 from comparable rifle. of course you could hot load a 7.62x51 and use a 28" barrel to get a superfast speed but in comparison to standard rounds the 6.5 grendel looks to be a good compromise.
G3 for life , got mine in the 90s and it's still slinging lead
yeah but you really need to make a few changes for it to shine, by default it's eh. Get a better trigger and stock and it's really great.
I have the PTR 91 18” Hvy Bbl and LOVE IT! I’m an M1A guy,have 2 of em,but that PTR is a rugged battle rifle.If you know anyone wanting a trigger job on a G3 type,send to Bill Springfield in Colo Springs Co. Offers an improved recoil buffer and he can extend the safety. You won’t recognize your rifle when he does his magic.Trigger will be PHENOMENAL in comparison to what you send him.
I hunt hogs w/mine here in CentralTx.
The M1A’s are set up for long range work.
@@mynameisnobody5462 I have the PTR91 and it’s my go to in a hurry and I’m an M1A guy-have 2 Natl Match but they’re set up for Long Range.
Thank you guys for a truly unexpected but fascinating collaboration. It's really good to still get battle rifle content in the day of the AR-15.
That being said, can we all take a moment to appreciate today's true winner:
THE COMBO OF BOLT HOLD-OPEN AND BOLT-RELEASE
pretty sure you could implement it on any gun and it will just perform better. Hell, imagine a G-3 or FAL with that combo, you kill half the complaints right there.
I think it was quite expectable where most of the guns landed. Nonetheless, thank you guys for going through the trouble of organizing this so the internet can see a good comparison instead of sticking to endless theorizing.
While I am sad to see the G3 receiving such bad times, I will agree the charging handle feels impossible if you are not practiced with them and have a good deal of upper body strength..
I've love to see this redone or something similar but different done and have a three or four day "event" where the shooters can all train with the "weird" MDR and maybe do the data collection on the first day and the last day. The tricky thing would be that ideally, the four days would be consecutive to maximize the benefits of train-sleep-train cycles. You might also throw in red-dots or some other "modern" twist.
I still wouldn't expect the MDR to win, but the difference in results between "no training" and "training" on the MDR and the deltas to the winners might be interesting.
that's actually a great match idea
This is an amazing idea that will never happen because of how expensive it would be
Excellent vid!
Could u do a full review on xcr-m. Accuracy, reliability, torture test...
Awesome video! Thank you for all the hard work! This is a great premise, and really useful info for me. I've dreaming about buying a .308 rifle. This provides a wealth of more info, and makes it easy to digest and compare. Thank you InRange!!
You know a rifle's great when you have to keep telling your audience the video ISN'T sponsored by them.
Interesting results indeed! Thanks folks :)
I was thinking.......wtf no mas 49/56 I expect Ian is not impressed XD
Not .308, and wasn't used by many other people except the French.
@@HAACKER45 ...you say that like the rest of the world doesn't want to be French! :)
@@HAACKER45 It was used by ~30 states in ~20 wars. From Rhodesia an the Bush Wars over the 1982 Lebanon war to and the Eritrean War of Independence (used by both side) to the Vietnam war. The French didnt produce a quarter million of them just for fun.
There's a few guns I would have liked to see, but they aren't in .308. The MAS-49/56 and SVD come to mind.
Just shows what you’ve grown up with.Their last 2 are my first 2.
If there is an Optics, Round 2, Event, In Range should bring the DSA modernized FAL to test whether it was an optimal platform for modernization.
Great series. When I joined the CAF I was issued an FN C1A1. Loved it. Then four years later we moved to the Colt C7, then C7A1 and finally the C7A2. I can get more rounds on target with any of the C7s than the C1…but for reliability and functionality and IAs and Stoppages, The C1 will win in most of the time. Especially with the stripper clip adapter on the feed cover. Reloading is faster. But then I’m an old man who will be retiring soon. Thanks for the series and it was nice to see the old girl in action. Cheers 🍻
Hey, video on Labor Day, thanks.
Love to see a test with the POF Revolution and Larue Tactical and some the Gucci brands!
Nice to see Robinson getting some love. It was already on my list for my next 308.
It has a real quality build to it.
Given a 5.56 got the most love, maybe a 22LR would have done even better.
While watching the tests and seeing how well it did I became surprised I don’t see more buzz around it
Just saw the Tavor 7 video on Military Arms Channel. Now I'm sad that it wasn't in this test to give another perspective on the bullpup.
AR-15 vs AR-180 vs mini 14 vs AK-74 vs the AUG! That would be an interesting video! Also a video with just bullpups would be awesome!
Aug wins easily
I'd like to to see this test repeated with a bunch of AK shooters who are used to rock 'n lock. I just can't help but wonder if that would change anything. That seemed to be the number one struggle people had with a lot of these guns.
Granted, it'll be difficult to gather up that many AK shooters.
It doesn’t change anything for me, and I’ve worked with AKs extensively.
InRangeTV Sure, but that's a sample size of one. Also, here's another question. Is there as big a disparity between your reload times with the two mag types as we saw here?
The rock n lock on the ak is pretty easy in comparison and gary and sandy also shoot to s of ak’s.
The lack of a hold-open and bolt release is a bigger problem with the AK than the rock'n lock.
Rock n' lock is problematic from a speed standpoint no matter what. I'm a more experienced AK shooter than I am with an AR, and the AR is simply faster. That alone is telling to me, but to take it a step further, not all rock n' locks are created equal. For example, the AK is easy-peasy as far as reloads go for me, but I can't reload a mini-14 fast to save my life. Hell, I can run my CETME faster than I can my mini if we're talking from-empty (reloading the mini for me is too precise to be fast).
I guess my point is that being experienced with AKs doesn't mean you'd be better with any rock and lock out there. The same style of lockup does not equate to the same muscle memory, or manual of arms.
XCR-M happens when we mash AK,FAL and AR. It has the piston of the ak, charging handle of fal and bolt plus modularity of ar.
The Robinson did have a large muzzle brake. That probably helped, especially considering the other rifles had flash hiders.
Tuning the XCR gas system for the ammo is a plus the SCAR does not have and helps a ton with recoil.
Look at the data. The XCR’s brake did help it do well in split times, but its ergos and simplicity are what carried it into first. It is telling that a bunch of AR shooters did better with a platform they were less or completely unfamiliar with.
This series put the XCR on my radar. I thought that gun was dumped on the wayside for Forgotten Weapons to pick up in five years. I like what Robinson Armament did with it, so it's on my wishlist after a few things.
chzzyg269 move it up your list as fast as possible!!! Lol I love mine. I got and early model and updated it with all the new parts for less $$ than a new model
Robinson XCR - I really thought the Magpul Backup Sights were amazing. Really topnotch.
Gooood Stuff!!!
Nice thing about the Robinson is you can configure it to be classified as a non restricted rifle in Canada. This means you can take it into the woods, hunt with it etc. The ARs are all too scary and can only be taken to and from the range. Changing ink battles and caliber is also a snap with the Robinson.
I have 2 of the rifles on this list: the M1A and SCAR-17. I got the M1A for the historical aspect and yeah it’s a heavy ergonomically challenged rifle that really doesn’t mount optics well. The SCAR on the other hand I think is an accurate rifle that with a little work is a great platform, I have a 3-9 on it and its a great hog gun, I’ve never had an issue with the recoil. Great job y’all and keep up the great work.
Thanks! A lot of fun to watch. Most interesting thing heard - “7.62 NATO is outdated and was outdated when it was designed.” I know some dudes who spent some time in the sandbox who would totally disagree with that statement. Course that’s his opinion but the round just keeps coming back. Must be a reason. If I’m not mistaken the Indian Army just ordered nearly half a million rifles all in 7.62 NATO. Not bad for an outdated round.
Y'all should do a series with intermediate rifles. From the retro A1, A2 HBAR, to the AK, SKS, 416 and others and see how they compare.
I just wish you guys would have put a test with the prone shooting position. I would like to have seen the results, if anything would have changed.
I'm not the least bit surprised. I own 8 XCR rifles for good reason. Robinson arms went through some learning curves in the beginning but today build a superior rifle. You should see me kill the competition in 3 gun matches!
This video is a year old? How the F!!! Did I miss this gem.
I’m a proud G3 owner. It’s so cool. As far as the ergonomics, for me personally it’s not so bad, even though I don’t have a paddle mag release or tac-latch yet. I have a video on my channel of me shooting it for the very first time and I had no issues with it whatsoever. It could just be I happen to have long arms and fingers that I don’t have very many issues with it, and it may also be that because I’ve obsessed over this thing for years before I bought it and I knew how to take it apart and the best way to load it before I bought it though. These were people far less familiar with the platform which I suppose would naturally put them at a disadvantage when using it. Going in knowing a thing or two about it significantly changed the game for me.
There actually IS a heavier than heavy SCAR called the Mod. 20. It features a longer upper-receiver, barrel and handguard. Much beefier rifle, does not bounce as much.
@Nick 718 it's 1.5 lb bolt throws it forward and down on the shooter from what I've learned?
My 17S is a total pussycat...not sure what’s up with theirs recoil wise. Maybe the stock brake being replaced? The replacement might not be nearly as effective. Hard to say. Doesn’t noticeably lurch forward or anything like that either.
Yeah this 17 is overgassed. Being overgassed is what gives them the reputation of being bad suppressor hosts as well. Mine is the softest shooting .308 I've ever fired, it has a very precisely balanced operating system that is somewhat sensitive to changes in gas port diameter and barrel length.
@@soulshot96 I came here looking for this comment. All the brakes have been replaced with some unknown quality. The standard Scar 17s brake is key to the recoil mitigation. I feel like the spirit of the test that required running irons should have also dictated that stock brakes were used.
InRange needs to develop he Gun version of the "old" Top Gear, with the evaluations and ratings. I know Karl and Ian have had others appear with them on the show, but honestly I haven't seen an appropriate third commentator.
Kind of in line with that, you could formalize the testing benchmark with their version of Gun Stig. Gun Stig could do mud test, dust tests and a new additional test, the snow test. Snow test could be done by the Gun Stigs northern cousin, Artic Gun Stig. or maybe Finnish Gun Stig.
What I don't like about this is, that the results are sort've arbitrary; there are different sizes/variants/chassis for all of these rifles. That, and I don't think that the judges assessments were particularly impartial; they are all accustomed to AR platforms...and though they did mention this, I think it still colored their opinion.
I'm looking at the final results, and I think that if the MK10 had some tweaks to its weight, it would be superior; it struggled with those splits. Still, for the XCR-M and the ar10s to be basically neck and neck, thats good showing of just how excellent and flexible the designs are
Very interesting tests and results. I would love to see something that tries to limit the bias of shooter skill and AR-15 familiarity. Maybe a convoy dust test with each of these rifles.
Agreed...I've never shot one, and it seemed heavily biased.
@@WellDressedCaveman heavily biased is an understatement to say the least
After shooting 6 years 2019 is my first year I’ve ever shot an AR-15 and personally I don’t really like it. I can understand why it is where it is. Very ergonomic gun. Since I’ve had experience with a lot of other types despite the ar-15 maybe I’m biased. All this said I’ll continue to own my AR
Where would they have to go to find shooters who aren't biased towards ARs? In the US that might be hard unless you ask for people who mostly like bolt actions.
@@hardwire1013 I can understand what you mean, I keep my Glock for the same reason. XD
Love the Brownell so cool
I know this is an old video but I think many people would be interested in seeing a follow-up time trial competition in which the rifle setups are more standardized. I noticed several shooters complained about recoil on guns with flash hiders, and praised other guns with muzzle brakes. Some shooters also noted that some (more modern) guns weren’t particularly well suited to iron sights.
I believe a follow up trial could be done in which each gun is fitted with an identical red dot sight and muzzle device. Shooters nowadays regularly choose optical sights and modify muzzle devices to suit their particular needs, so standardizing those would be a more fair comparison.
Additionally, if possible I’d love to see a couple more designs tested such as the HK417 and the Galil ACE .308, but this isn’t really necessary.
Would a small clear panel near the ejection port of the MDR make it easier to check clear? I know they added a small slot in the revision Inrange got... but maybe something bigger and easier to see? Also if some of the plastic in the area was clear it would allow light into the general vicinity. Lol. To be honest if all the plastic was clear the MDR would be neat to watch :p
Conclusion: "use intermediate cartridges."
"Again no bias" also Karl "we all shoot ARs". My not helpful thoughts is it'd be nice to see some way to limit AR bias. Maybe actually give shooters some time to practice the drills to be more familiar with each gun
The final list is kind of in order of AR-likeness.
Yeah, agreed. This was cool to watch, but when you take a bunch of people who mostly shoot AR pattern rifles and ask them to compete with themselves using that type of rifle against a bunch of other very different guns, it’s pretty predictable what the general result will be. I don’t think there was much to be learned from this test, really, other than the fact the the AR-15 is a very popular rifle.
Yeah, not really surprised for G3. I've never shot it, but had handled AK4 (Swedish made version of G3) of our armed forces. Trying to pull charging handle doesn't do anything. Try again... Aha! It worked this time! Why? No idea. I wasn't pushing harder, it just happened. Put it down. Pick up, try again. Damn thing is stuck... stuck... Uh, now it works. F...!
Heh. You need to follow the manual of arms. You use your right hand, both to change mags and grasp the charging handle. That way, you get max leverage on the handle, and your left hand keeps the foregrip in the correct position.
no clue what issue you had, you pull it back and let it snap, I never had any issue with any G3 I used
Like I've read any manuals on that! XD
Besides, those were old ex-Swedish rifles still used by our National Guard, but even they are transitioning to H36KV3 carbines, and army did so years ago, so it _supposedly_ doesn't matter anymore, however those AK4 / G3 and even some ex-American M14 rifles are still in stock.
Latvia or Lithuania? I only noted seeing the G3 not being loaded properly by any of these shooters. They kept "rocking" the magazine in place. I think because of this, it had a disadvantage. I've never had problems with my G3 clone.
@@petercarmody4897
Doesn't matter in my case, as
1) I wasn't instructed,
2) I was not in service,
3) there were no magazines in those rifles at all.
I sure wish the Sig AMT had of sold better. I've shot one and it would have done fairly well in this test.
not the SIG AMT, let's go for the real deal, the Stgw 57 (SIG 510 for non-Swiss) I was issued with this from 1983 till 1991. Afterwards we were issued the Stgw 90 (SIG 550) The 57 was a really smooth shooting rifle even controllable in full auto. Disadvantage: heavy - 5.7 kg empty (12.6 lbs) and the fire selector is on the left side of the action. Needs a little bit of training. But the Swiss Army provided ample time for getting familiar with this weapon. The only real downer was shooting rifle grenades, kicking like a mule, in comparison a .50 Barrett is like a .22 LR.
Ex NCO, Mountain Infantry, Swiss Army.
@@TheTejanoJose Well it is a lightweight automatic rifle not a heavy battle rifle.
I wonder what the fal would be like in it's intended 7mm NATO cal, instead of the US forced 7.62mm NATO in these tests
@Nick 718 .280 british was wayyy better than 7.62 nato, lol. why are all the militaries looking onto 6mm (roughly .280 or so) now?
@@marcusborderlands6177 Militaries are always "looking" into things. I can guarantee you 5.56 is not going away lol.
280 British is SIGNIFICANTLY more powerful than 7.62x39, and yet despite that 5.45 still was better with way lower power. I have no doubt that people would prefer 5.56
@Nick 718 .280 doesn't exist because the US had a hissy fit about it a) not being 30 cal, b) not having a 700 yrds range and c) not been disigned by them and demanded that everyone else accomidate them
@@weasle2904Its not that they are just looking into things, the LSAT programs have been accepted, and are on the way to being put into production right now.
@@MrTrilbe If it really mattered in the grand scheme of things on the European battlefield, the Brits could have bucked NATO standards and kept the EM2 and .208. But Churchill ditched it when his administration came to power.
Also, nevermind the .280 made a poorer machine gun round, something the Brits even admitted to. What really killed NATO standards was everyone's insistence on having a universal round, unlike the Soviets who chose to keep the 7.62X39 and 54R.
Now you have a few left out like the newly released IWI Tavor 7
It will be interested to test how a Spuhr G3 will perform compared to the standard one.
I had the spuhr upgrades. I think it makes the weapon worse. The kick is greater. Its better to get a M4 buffer tube adapter and a custom M4 buttstock. really is.
@@Holret The only upgrade that really matters for the g3 is the heavy recoil buffer. It makes the recoil 50% less.
@@chadington6029 I have it, I have to go out and shoot to see and feel the reduction. Will report back once im done.
@@Holret It worked great for my PTR-91. It's quite nice now to shoot.
Do this test with a variety of bullpup rifles to see if there are any redeemable ones out there.
I'd also love to see one for 9mm and one for .45 pistols.
I know I'm late to video but... why are they running the scar with an aftermarket flash hider instead of the factory muzzle brake? It's a significant contributor to recoil mitigation and drastically alters the shooting characteristics.
People had so many problems with sight height. Also I feel that the Robinson and perhaps FAL had an unfair advantage due to muzzle brakes. I would love to see a remake of this eliminating these factors. Don't get me wrong - Awesome series!
Interesting comments on the Robinson XCR-M and the military trials.
Yes, it seems it was disqualified for a silly oversight. But, that is part of what the trials are intended to uncover. If a manufacturer can’t be relied upon to remember to send a component needed for testing, can you rely on the manufacturer to meet other production expectations?
No question that the design has merit - and likely exceeds the design of the SCAR. But the failure to deliver on a clear (and simple) test parameter calls into question the manufacturer’s ability to meet its commitments.
It was a good video but I would have liked to see an SR25. Either a Knights SR25, LMT MWS or LaRue OBR.
Yeah the HK G3 platform us really cumbersome when it comes to reloading but it is a nice shooting rifle due to the delayed roller bolt. It's also reliable AF and can run whatever shit steel ammo you feed it which you're going to want to do anyway after you see what the fluted chamber does to your brass.
The main reason why the Robinson and the BRN (AR) - 10 came in first and second, is simply that they each had a barrel that matched the cartridge. They are both true rifles. The carbines, SBR´s in 308 are compromises in accuracy vs. handling, and I favor accuracy. The panel is right in suggesting that the G3 is accurate, but it is only a trained shooter that will benefit from the G3.
Put a AR style dirt cover on the Robinson XCR-M and - sold !
My experience is WAAAY different with several of these weapons, especially with the SCAR 17. It’s the lightest recoiling .308 I’ve ever fired. 🤷🏻♂️
Why would you remove the muzzle break??? It came that way. Leave it on there.
In Range can you please add the "POF Revolution" in this series at a later time? It's gaining fame quickly and it should get a torture test as well lots of people would love to see that tested good job guys!
I would’ve liked to, but they failed to send one.
@@InrangeTv Can or will you guys do it later to add to this review? I can't wait if so!
What barrel did the m1a have? Those match versions can be pretty heavy compared to the standard version.
I need to get an xcr. I have a scar and the xcr would be a cool brother for it.
Overall I'm not surprised that the classic rifles (with the exception of the AR10) ended in the bottom half of the results. It would be disturbing if they ended up at the top, because would mean we hadn't learned anything about rifle design in the last 60 years. Trying to avoid fanboyism, here's some thoughts on these results in the context of when these classic rifles were designed and adopted (the 1950s and early 60s).
I'm not surprised that the G3 ended up at the bottom. As said, the rifle was designed primarily with ease or production in mind and ergonomics as secondary. I think it's also worth noting the context of West Germany (and to a lesser extent Spain) in the 50s when the rifle was designed: West Germany was the literal front line of WWIII in Europe, and everyone in NATO knew that any Combloc push across the border was going to involve tactical nuclear strikes, and that NATO would retaliate with their own nukes. In that scenario entire infantry divisions were going to be turned into vapor before they even had a chance to engage the enemy, so it made little sense to spend tons of money building the perfect infantry rifle. Better to give the troops something reliable, idiot proof, and cheap. The way the G3 is built tells you the rifle was intended to be disposable, as the barrel can't be replaced without cutting the trunnion out of the sheet-metal receiver. I know gunsmiths in the US offer this service, but that is because HKs are now worth a fair amount of money, in military service a G3 with a worn barrel would have been discarded.
It seems appropriate that the FAL ends up in the middle of the overall pack. I would say in the late fifties it was the best option available (including the AR-10, see below), with good ergonomics and reliability if the gas system is adjusted properly. I would say that one of the mistakes that FN made when designing the FAL was making the gas regulator accessible without disassembling the rifle. On it's predecessor, the FN49, the regulator is hidden under the upper handguard. FN should have designed the FAL handguard to cover the regulator so that it could be set by the armorer and then soldiers in the field couldn't fool with it. With regard to the controls, with the exception of the rock and lock mag you can run the other controls of an FAL just as fast as an AR with some practice. The later paratrooper models with a shortened barrel and aluminum trigger housing (and folding stock!) solve some of the weight and balance issues. However, there are three Achilles Heels that mean the FAL can never be competitive as a service rifle today. 1. It's expensive to produce (second only to the M14), since it's an all steel gun with many machined parts. 2. The accuracy is fairly poor, usually around 3moa. A 2moa FAL is a keeper, and anyone who tells you they have a 1moa FAL is full of shit. The accuracy issues are the result of a number of factors, including the tilting bolt lockup, short stroke piston, and the way the trigger housing attaches to the receiver; nobody has found a consistent way to improve accuracy. 3. Finally, and the biggest issue with the FAL in the modern context, is there is no good way to mount an optic. FN produced scope mounts replacing the dust cover, but each had to be fitted to an individual rifle by filing to get a tight fit. The modern aftermarket mounts (DSA etc.) are not military grade: they have clamping plates that lock onto the inside of the receiver in the bolt pathway to lock the mount in place, and if one of those clamping plates come loose it jams the gun (this is not a theoretical issue, look at the FALFiles and you'll many firsthand accounts of this happening). Overall, the FAL was a great gun for its time, but the sun has set on it as a combat rifle.
The M14 is one of the classic examples of nepotism and mismanagement, and I agree with almost all that was said here. The only quibble I have is the idea that the clip system of the M1 is superior to the box mags of the M14, which seems to have become a meme recently. I agree that in a match environment the clips of the M1 are simpler to use than the M14, because you are either shooting the gun dry or don't care about retaining your partially expended clips/mags. I would suggest that in the field, when you need to keep your partially expended ammunition, the M14 mags are far superior to the M1 clips. The M14 mags can be swapped with the rifle on the shoulder, while manually ejecting and retaining an M1 clip requires the rifle to be taken off the shoulder and fine motor control fiddling. More importantly, partially expended M1 clips don't securely retain the remaining rounds, and the soldier is likely to end up with a bunch of loose ammunition rattling around their pockets and on the ground. Partially loaded M14 mags can be thrown in a pocket without much concern about ammo retention. If I were going into the field I would definitely choose the M14 over the M1 for this reason. Overall, I would still say the M14 is by far the weakest of the classic rifles, as it doesn't even have the economy of production found in the G3.
Finally the AR10. In hindsight it's easy to see that the AR10 was the way of the future, but in the late 50s I don't think this would have been so apparent. The main benefits of the early AR10 over the FAL are the straight in mags and lighter weight. In theory it is cheaper and easier to produce, but the novel materials and production methods meant that could only be realized in industrially advanced nations like the US and western Europe. The FAL was able to be produced in second tier economies like South Africa, Argentina, Brazil, and Israel, using more conventional tooling. But the most important factor, which was glossed over in the discussion in the video, was that the early AR10 had the worst magazines of any of the 7.62x51 service rifles. If they were starting to fail from mere range use in the test, they would only fare worse in the field. Yes, in theory they were disposable, but no military has ever implemented this practice in the real world with box mags. Yes, the US did this with M1 clips in WWII, but even then they occasionally had issues with not having clipped ammo available for resupply and troops having to save and reload used clips. Basically, in real world usage you can't expect that "disposable" magazines will not be reloaded. Also, as the feed lips are so flimsy there is a distinct possibility that they may suffer deformation when stored loaded (potentially for decades), so even "fresh" mags may have malfunctions. Because of these issues, I can definitely see why a military in the late fifties would choose the FAL over the AR10, and I don't think they are stupid or short sighted for doing so.
natasigmundhi wonderful summation. In my opinion the m14 is a good rifle. Just not a military rifle.
While I agree with almost everything you say I have seen an FAL that consistently shoots 1 inch groups. One of my good friends bought one, went to the range and sent me a pic of his target at two hundred yards less than two inches wide. Naturally I called bullshit and went to the range with him next time. It was seriously shooting one inch groups. It only done it with PPU for some reason. Federal, Winchester, and anything else averaged 2.5-3 but that damn PPU just shot great. I've never ever ever seen another FAL that shoots that good and I've owned quite a few and shot a lot more. He just found a unicorn
BavarianPanzerBallett I don’t understand all this M14 talk I have used several REAL m-14s extensively and they worked great! The selector switch is utterly useless but we all knew that. However in semi I found them to be reliable accurate rifles that I can combat reload super fast. Just as fast as an AK.
In other words if they had 20 round mags and a day to practice the M1A would definitely faired better
Chase Ferguson the thing is. Compare the m14 to other battle rifles of the era. Like the FAL. The FAL is ergonomically way superior. The m14 has its strengths, but it was just outdated for a service rifle in the 50s. Not just because of the basic concept of a battle rifle. The soviets were well going on intermediate cartridges and assault rifles. But also because of its comparison to other rifles of the era like the fal, mas49/56, g3... It really had no place as a service rifle. As a specialized weapon maybe.
MDR question. Can you use the gun without the ejection port? Just thinking it might make it easier for showing clear.
Yes you can. Desert tech even has it part of a video say it can.
th-cam.com/video/iclf2JAlPqk/w-d-xo.html
.308 is not obsolete. A $500 PSA AR-15 will beat all of these guns in this set of tests. If the context puts terminal performance through barriers or at ranges past 200 yards ahead of speed drills, then the guns tested here that easily accept LPVOs and are the most inherently accurate are the most interesting.
The XCR-M might be the best in that context, too. Interested in learning more about its reliability and accuracy potential.
The guns tested are dramatically more expensive than something that would beat them all in this test.
Nick 718, Maybe. They didn’t test that and every one of them malfunctioned. Heck, the MDR arguably “broke” if it had to be taken apart to clear.
I’ve had a PSA break. I’ve had much more expensive guns break, too. I’ve also had a PSA run a carbine class and several hundred rounds since with no problems of any kind while shooting more accurately than my BCM.
My point was that .308 is not obsolete and the test wasn’t focused on the strengths of battle rifles vs AR-15s.
I feel like modern battle rifles are designed to have attachments put on them (peq-15/lights/pressure switches for radio etc) in the context they are designed for which would affect the balance and recoil of the weapon.
Which in turn could of affected the scores, like a scar 17 in service would have a minimum of night aiming device (peq) and up to a GLA (grenade launcher attachment) or shotgun attachment plus maybe a sure fire light or something.
Chris S - A bi-pod and PEQ-15 are realistic add-ons, but the grenade launcher attachment, and especially the shotgun, are not even close to the norm on the SCAR 17 in field use.
I'm surprised the MDR didn't do better. I know that a lot of people have bugged you about it, but you genuinely might want to look at the Kel Tec RFB. Seeing the MDR in this test, I can positively say the RFB is less violent, has a very good stock trigger, balances well. It does, however, have dial-a-gas. If your quest for a decent bullpup has to continue, I highly recommend giving it a shot.
Hey guys! Great video, do you remember what the specifications were on the XCR-M? I'm wanting to order one and im trying to decide on the options
Did you ask about lead times? I’ve heard horror stories about how back logged they are. I really want one in 6.5 myself
would like to see a battle rifle test again, but with no mag swapping and 20 round max test.
The DT MDR has no way to show clear? Ummm, yes it does. There is a small rectangular window at the ejection port that looks right at the chamber if the gun is pointed at an angle. If a round is in the chamber the case head can be seen. Maybe DT should have included a manual with the gun. I just double checked to make sure I wasn't posting incorrect info since I haven't had to "show clear" and probably never will. With .223 the case head can be seen, in .308 it would be even easier due to the larger head. If that isn't enough, when a live round is in the ejection spring on the panel and the bolt carrier is run forward the live round will be ejected and can be seen or caught by the RO. Then the bolt is brought back again and a chamber flag is inserted through the empty mag well and into the chamber. Can't insert a chamber flag if a round is in the chamber. But the onus is entirely on the shooter and not on the RO. If the shooter says it's clear it is and if the gun goes off it's a DQ, but my point is that it's the shooter who knows how to operate the gun and not the RO. But even if he says it's clear and the gun goes off it's still on the shooter.
BTW, Someone needs to make bullpup specific chamber flags. I use the one I got with my RDB. They need to have a long flag that sticks out of the mag' well.
I'd like to see the tests run again, this time with the modern guns set up with the proper sights as they were intended to be and not handicapped with iron sights. I expect the MDR or maybe the G3 to still come in last sincve all that will be a factor is familiarity with the controls and such. But at least the guns will be properly shouldered. Due to the controls I was surprised that the MDR didn't come in last overall this time. It would be too much to expect to get a test with experienced operators for each gun. But proper sights and experienced operators would be the best test IMO, in a perfect world which this one isn't. There is a learning curve.
Just curious, the malfunctions that were experienced, were they from a failure to pull the charging handle smartly to the rear to properly clear the chamber and get the bolt carrier back? If not when did they occur? Again, just curious.
Carl wants the MDR to be a thing so badly
not only him
mud test for xcr !!
That's so weird y'all were experiencing malfunctions; I have 2 ArmaLite AR-10Bs (carbine with midlength gas system and full-length rifle), out of which I have tens of thousands of round in some very nasty conditions through these rifles (30,000+ with the rifle, far less with the carbine, as it is a much newer addition to my collection), and I have literally never experienced a malfunction of any kind with either.
The only rifle I wish you guys could've included would be the POF Revolution DI
Tried to get one for the series but they didn’t respond.