PDA

View Full Version : XCR Assault rifle



goldman
10-27-2004, 01:27 AM
In this site there are good info given about the assault rifle:
http://www.robarm.com/xcr_faq_answers.htm

pics
http://www.riverstyx.com/images/discuss/XCR.jpe
http://www.riverstyx.com/images/discuss/XCR%20Vert%20Grip.jpe
http://www.riverstyx.com/images/discuss/XCR%20Heavy%206.8.jpe

Midav
10-27-2004, 01:36 AM
<img src=http://www.riverstyx.com/images/discuss/XCR.jpe>
<img src=http://www.riverstyx.com/images/discuss/XCR%20Vert%20Grip.jpe>
<img src=http://www.riverstyx.com/images/discuss/XCR%20Heavy%206.8.jpe>

ZoneOne
10-27-2004, 01:37 AM
that FAQ site looks like its home made

Sir Zach of R.
10-27-2004, 01:39 AM
I like it better than the XM8. woot

American Patriot
10-27-2004, 01:41 AM
Yes, it's better than the XM8 albeit 1 pound heavier. I really wish the Army would adopt this rifle. Slap a collapsible stock on it and it's ready to go.

Midav
10-27-2004, 01:54 AM
Question: Is this the rifle that the SOF units are looking at?

American Patriot
10-27-2004, 02:06 AM
Question: Is this the rifle that the SOF units are looking at?

I think it was dropped from SCAR after it showed up at the trials without a blank firing adapter. rofl

Midav
10-27-2004, 02:09 AM
SCAR.. that's the name of it!! Ty!

That would be a stupid reason to disqualify a weapon. Too bad :|

American Patriot
10-27-2004, 02:21 AM
<img src=http://www.riverstyx.com/images/discuss/XCR%20Heavy%206.8.jpe>

rofl Nice eye relief.. what were they thinking.

Ratamacue
10-27-2004, 02:24 AM
http://www.riverstyx.com/images/discuss/XCR%20Heavy%206.8.jpe

rofl Nice eye relief.. what were they thinking.
Does it look like it'd be terribly hard to maybe, perhaps, just possibly, move the sight up along the rail?

American Patriot
10-27-2004, 02:29 AM
Does it look like maybe, just possibly, the people who took this photo have no idea what they're doing?

Ratamacue
10-27-2004, 02:31 AM
Is that really important though? The pictures are to showcase the rifle, nothing more. More than likely the rifles weren't sighted by anyone before being pictured.

superpeltor
10-27-2004, 02:57 AM
this rifle reminds me a lot of K-1, K-2 rifles that I used to use when I was in service. Pretty much same concept, uses AR15 type lower receiver and uses AK47 type gas piston, adjustable gas piston system... foldable stock (well, everyone is doing this one)

Looks good!

Riafdnal
10-27-2004, 04:06 AM
I visit the Robinson Arms head quarters once and a while for business and have been able to hold this rifle.

The engineer told me they took the best aspects to the top assault rifles and developed this.

The charging handle is on the left side and is round. The rail system comes stock.

The bolt catch switch is at the bottom front of the trigger guard.

With the bolt open you can use the switch or hit the butt (like an AR) and it will close.

They are currently looking at modifying the stock.

It is very easy to disassemble too.

fcstech
10-27-2004, 11:08 AM
" I really wish the Army would adopt this rifle. Slap a collapsible stock on it and it's ready to go."

It is reeady to go, it has a FOLDING stock. Is there a reason why you would want a collapsible one instead? And with the rail system the sights are totally ajustable, its like the C7a1 or C8 that way.

I like the gas piston system, should be much cleaner and easier to keeper clean than the AR system.

Ratamacue
10-27-2004, 03:14 PM
It is reeady to go, it has a FOLDING stock. Is there a reason why you would want a collapsible one instead?
Collapsable stocks are preferred because you can adjust their length for people of just about any size and don't have to worry about the rifle being too long to handle when wearing body armor.

Bluezoo
10-27-2004, 03:23 PM
Very Nice. Looks like a hybrid of an FNC and galil to me. :D

Kekkonen
10-27-2004, 03:28 PM
It is reeady to go, it has a FOLDING stock. Is there a reason why you would want a collapsible one instead?
Collapsable stocks are preferred because you can adjust their length for people of just about any size and don't have to worry about the rifle being too long to handle when wearing body armor.
Itīs just stupid to have a collapsable only stock on a weapon like this, collapsable
stocks are of course a must on M4īs and weapons like that, because of their
mechanism. And folding doesnīt rule out collapsable in any way, see for example
the new Polish Berylīs or the AK5C.

http://unwanted.silentheroes.net/bilder/v%e4nster%20sida%20butt.jpg
Folding AND collapsable.

Ratamacue
10-27-2004, 03:30 PM
It is reeady to go, it has a FOLDING stock. Is there a reason why you would want a collapsible one instead?
Collapsable stocks are preferred because you can adjust their length for people of just about any size and don't have to worry about the rifle being too long to handle when wearing body armor.
Itīs just stupid to have a collapsable only stock on a weapon like this, collapsable
stocks are of course a must on M4īs and weapons like that, because of their
mechanism. And folding doesnīt rule out collapsable in any way, see for example
the new Polish Berylīs or the AK5C.

http://unwanted.silentheroes.net/bilder/v%e4nster%20sida%20butt.jpg
Folding AND collapsable.
No one said that it has to ONLY be collapsable.

Kekkonen
10-27-2004, 03:38 PM
Btw that XCR looks like a really nice rifle IMO. Just make it a little more ergonimic
á XM8 and put a collapsable and folding stock on it and I would buy it (if I could :))





It is reeady to go, it has a FOLDING stock. Is there a reason why you would want a collapsible one instead?
Collapsable stocks are preferred because you can adjust their length for people of just about any size and don't have to worry about the rifle being too long to handle when wearing body armor.
Itīs just stupid to have a collapsable only stock on a weapon like this, collapsable
stocks are of course a must on M4īs and weapons like that, because of their
mechanism. And folding doesnīt rule out collapsable in any way, see for example
the new Polish Berylīs or the AK5C.

http://unwanted.silentheroes.net/bilder/v%e4nster%20sida%20butt.jpg
Folding AND collapsable.
No one said that it has to ONLY be collapsable.
Of course you didnīt, but I would any day take a non-collapsable folding stock
over a collapsable non-folding M4/XM8. Why the XM8 has a non-folding stock
is really so beyond me. The whole point with issuing M4īs to US troops have
been that they are compact. They kind of take away that with the XM8, and the
compact version of that doesnīt have a stock at all. So... retarded, what kind of
pride they are defending when refusing to issue folding stocks is also beyond
my understanding. And Iīm sure (hope) that the US military a long time ago
understood that folding doesnīt mean non-collapsable.

Itīs not like a professional soldier would start shooting fully automatic fire with
his stock unfolded like some Rambo just because he CAN do it.

Damian
10-27-2004, 08:14 PM
it's very ugly... :roll: :roll: :roll:

Ratamacue
10-27-2004, 08:17 PM
it's very ugly... :roll: :roll: :roll:
I disagree.

PJ
10-27-2004, 08:21 PM
it's very ugly... :roll: :roll: :roll:
I disagree.


Me to, I think it looks cool, I want one woot

GLax
10-27-2004, 09:30 PM
just a couple of things to make it better from my standpoint...

1. dustcover, no sence in getting dust in it just walking around the FOB

2. i'd also like a collapsable buttstock too, you wouldnt have to move the bolt spring or anything. we dont shoot like gheeto thugs, with no buttstock, in its 'compact mode', you'd be able to aim better with it stabalized on your sholder than if you had it held out like some kind of Iraqi insurgent...

3. pop up backup sights blow, they break to easy (theyre ok if you have a CCO). just get a good old m16 'handle'. thatd be better for POGs who dont have aimpoints or anything like that.

nothin wrong with an m4, why replace something that doesnt suck.

yiorgo
10-27-2004, 09:41 PM
the XCR has NOT been droped from the SCAR program there still in it .....also Alex is working on a Folding/Collapsable stock....the greatest thing about this weapon is not the fact that it takes 5 min to clean and has a gas piston(exactly like an AK), unlike the ARs, but the fact that it will be able to shoot .223, 7.62x39 and the new 6.8 round out of the same rifle......the only thing that has to be changed is the bolt and barrel.....I LOVE ROBARMS.......i have there M96 and i also have there KTR03 vepr tweeked from Krebs customs.......that is the absolute hands down best AK i have ever shot..1in groupings at 100yrds consistantly

yiorgo
10-27-2004, 09:44 PM
the XCR has NOT been droped from the SCAR program there still in it .....also Alex is working on a Folding/Collapsable stock....the greatest thing about this weapon is not the fact that it takes 5 min to clean and has a gas piston(exactly like an AK), unlike the ARs, but the fact that it will be able to shoot .223, 7.62x39 and the new 6.8 round out of the same rifle......the only thing that has to be changed is the bolt and barrel.....I LOVE ROBARMS.......i have there M96 and i also have there KTR03 vepr tweeked from Krebs customs.......that is the absolute hands down best AK i have ever shot..1in groupings at 100yrds consistantly

Lt_Crooks
10-27-2004, 10:31 PM
it's very ugly... :roll: :roll: :roll:
I disagree.

me also, what are they selling these rifles for? I think it is great that it can fire 3 caliber of ammo, anyone know about its jamming rate ?

yiorgo
10-27-2004, 11:14 PM
the rifle has not gone out yet....they will start to ship in Dec or Jan....suggested retail is going to be probably around $1200....right now Robarms is just making a list of names to call when they start to sell.....and if this rifle is anything like there other products....there wont be any jamming issues like i said i own 2 of there rifles and they work flawless....gas piston rifles rock

Hiroshima
10-28-2004, 05:43 AM
The XM-8 is a MODULAR weapon. It's supposed to be multi-roled, which is how the US Army is heading for, with plug-n-play capabilities in equipment. The military took bids for contracts, and what you see in the current XM-8 is what the folks at http://www.natick.army.mil/soldier/WSIT/ want to have for our soliders in the furture. So care to explain to me how you folks can say that this little toy is better than the XM8 while the folks at Natick say Hey-nani-nani and go with this: http://www.military.com/NewContent/0,13190,Gear_051104_XM8,00.html ?

Edit: And before you start talking bullet size, H&K is willing to produce the XM-8 that uses what ever round the USARMY and SOCOM want.

J-10
10-28-2004, 06:38 AM
I just like that rail.

Hiroshima
10-28-2004, 06:43 AM
I just like that rail.

Fair enough..though, why?

tenda
10-28-2004, 06:55 AM
very nice....look more " classical".... :P

Hiroshima
10-28-2004, 09:30 AM
Donno....I think the XM-8 look 100x better than this thing....and US SpecOps does get it's choice in operational gear, but they'll end up training with the XM-8 (When it finally clears all the testing and alteration phases), plus all the other weapons that the SpecOps boys already use.

thatguy96
10-28-2004, 10:35 AM
The XM-8 is a MODULAR weapon. It's supposed to be multi-roled, which is how the US Army is heading for, with plug-n-play capabilities in equipment.
I love how I keep hearing this. The XM8 is modular, and that's why we should replace the AR-15/M16 pattern with it. Between the US Army and the USMC, the US military has fielded rifles, carbines, marksman rifles, squad automatic weapons, and ultra-shorts, almost all of which simply involve swapping out the upper reciever. XM320 EGLM compatibility? Easy, the XM320 was originally designed to expand HK's AG36 into the AR-15/M16 arena anyhow. XM26 MASS compatibility? Its already being fielded, and was tested on the AR-15/M16 pattern first. Calibers? The AR-15/M16 has been able to be caliber converted by usually doing nothing more than swapping out the upper, bolt carrier, buffer, and main-spring, for years now.

The XM8 is a good piece of kit, no doubt. But it just doesn't represent any set of improvements or additional capabilities. Even if you're looking to go back to the gas-piston, it would be far cheaper to simply go and purchase gas-piston uppers and retrofit every weapon in service, rather than replace them all to no real gain.

Ayura
10-28-2004, 11:02 AM
Donno....I think the XM-8 look 100x better than this thing.



I doubt looks will be the first thing you think of in times of warfare....

J-10
10-28-2004, 11:10 AM
I just like that rail.

Fair enough..though, why?

Hehe, I think the rail is characteristic, the rest parts are "classical".

Hiroshima
10-28-2004, 12:13 PM
J-10: Ok! That works for me.

Ayura: No, it wouldn't be, but from what else I've seen about the XM-8, I'd rather be using that than a hybrid of russian/american rifles.

thatguy96: So? And the weapon is an improvement over the current weapons in stock, an allows for use of all the current laser sights, lights, and additional stuff the rail system uses. Plus, I like the submersion in water, burial in sand gimmick H&K was doing while showing off their rifle.
And if I remember correctly, it involves changing out the barrels....

But this hasn't answered the questions I posed (Well..J-10 did somewhat):
What makes the XCR better than the XM-8?

Azide
10-28-2004, 12:16 PM
J-10: Ok! That works for me.


But this hasn't answered the questions I posed (Well..J-10 did somewhat):
What makes the XCR better than the XM-8?

well for one thing it doesn't look like a toy :)

RomanS
10-28-2004, 12:21 PM
You guys should adopt AK-100 series !

Initiative
10-28-2004, 12:38 PM
Alex Robinson told me this:

"The rifle was not disqualified. We did not send the standard Blank firing adapter on time - a shipping error and pure technicality. I've got documentation to prove it.

It's clear to me that USSOCOM already had it's favorite before any submissions. CRANE NSWC in my opinion is only considering M4 variants. This is truly a mistake. This is how poor systems like the M16 and Beretta pistols get into service - lobbying power rather than performance."

Hiroshima
10-28-2004, 01:13 PM
Azide: That doesnt count...


Initiative: Yeah, sounds like SOCOM to me...most of the branches of the military do that alot actually....

thatguy96
10-28-2004, 01:39 PM
thatguy96: So? And the weapon is an improvement over the current weapons in stock, an allows for use of all the current laser sights, lights, and additional stuff the rail system uses. Plus, I like the submersion in water, burial in sand gimmick H&K was doing while showing off their rifle.
And if I remember correctly, it involves changing out the barrels....
How is the weapon an improvement over current stock? No one's been able to show that conclusively. If you want to talk about reliability associated with a gas piston, the Army tested a gas-piston M16 completed as a joint project between Colt and Olin/Winchester and was not interested, saying it showed no significant improvement over the system at hand. I'd like to see how long the "submerged" the rifle in that barrel too, not to mention the rifle was placed in the dirt with the bolt closed, face down, meaning that it would've been hard to get an grit in the action anyways (people still wonder why HK didn't add an ejector port cover like the AR-15/M16 already has).

The XM8 provides a neglidgable weight reduction (especially with the availability of polymer AR-15/M16 lower recievers), and a debatable increase in functional reliability. Not to mention a non-STANAG magwell at the moment (which would invalidate the stock of thousands upon thousands of magazines), and the fact that with a 10.5" or a 14.5" barrel does nothing to solve the issue of the M4/A1's poor range performance using a 1:7" barrel and standard M855 ammunition.

And caliber conversion cannot be achieved by a simple barrel change unless the case diameter is roughly the same. I doubt the XM8, let alone any system, could go from 5.56x45mm to 6.8x43mm Rem SPC with just a barrel change.

If the AR-15/M16 pattern was such a horrible system, and with all the people using it, I think I'd be hearing more complaints. From a entity like the Pentagon, who's championing the XM8 and has a history of getting their way no matter how many rules they have to bend (or outright break), I've yet to see massive documentation that the AR-15/M16 is performing poorly.

PROJECT MANAGER SOLDIER WEAPONS SOLDIER WEAPONS ASSESSMENT TEAM REPORT 6-03 (http://www.bob-oracle.com/SWATreport.htm)

Small Arms and Individual Equipment Lessons Learned 6-10-03 (http://www.sftt.org/article06102003a.html)

MARCORSYSCOM Liason Team Field Report 20 April to 25 April 2003 (http://www.sftt.org/PDF/article05122003a.pdf)

All the signs are that the Pentagon is for the XM8. So you'd assume they'd be blocking stuff like this and touting up all the reports that show the funtional unreliability of the AR-15/M16 pattern. Where are those reports?

Hiroshima
10-28-2004, 01:53 PM
And so my que!

Thatguy96: Again...doesn't answer the question.

Now, for what your talking about: go to www.defensereview.com and do a search on the XM-8 or the Blackwater Shootout. You'll find links there that take you to movie clips of all the stuff H&K was doing to showcase their XM-8.

Now the Pentagon want's to hear from the average infantry man about thier concerns. The M-4/M-16 in current use isn't plauged by the stuff it was origionally plauged with, it's the eventual evolution of the weapon system. You're gonna see this with the XM-8, concidering millions of dollars have already been spent on this....gotta love congressional reports...

BUT I'm not here to discuss the finer points of the XM-8....I want to know why people like American Patriot concider the XCR is better than the XM-8.


EDIT: Small note: This is what I like to hear:: Interceptor Body Armor: Soldiers have great confidence in their body armor. As one battalion commander stated "soldiers felt comfortable 'trolling for contact' because they felt their body armor provided sufficient protection." There were numerous comments about comfort and weight but, in general, comments were positive.

/McH\
10-29-2004, 04:40 PM
Its look like a Galil and M16 all Together...

goldman
12-25-2004, 07:10 PM
http://www.robarm.com/XCR%2014%20RS.jpg
http://www.robarm.com/XCR-L%20CQC%20RS%20copy.jpg
http://www.robarm.com/XCR-L%20CQC%20LS%20copy.jpg


Vidoes

The last two vidoes very cool
http://www.robarm.com/xcr_videos.htm

MEGR
12-25-2004, 08:10 PM
How aboot taking all the m16 uppers and replacing them with Barret 6.8mm uppers.

REMOV
12-25-2004, 08:27 PM
How aboot taking all the m16 uppers and replacing them with Barret 6.8mm uppers.The most economical way? ;)

MEGR
12-25-2004, 08:40 PM
I suppose. BTW, I'm not economic expert, but I think that 5.56mm days are over. I think it's time to change, and instead of replacing all the m16s, just give the soldiers a different upper!

BTW, I plan on buying a 6.8mm upper during the spring.