Important information on the SF configuration

[dont_tread_on_me]

Aesthetics aside, it's not just the piston but the tube.  Those are both fairly hefty parts that are farther out on the rifle.  I would think that should make more of a difference than cutting the upper back.

  I don't know what part your looking at but the tube isn't what I would call "beefy".Substantial enough not to dainty and/or easily damaged,but it's certainly not heavy.I highly doubt the two inches of tube would weigh more than an ounce.I understand that you mean that and the combined weight saving of a shorter op-rod would be enough to be worth doing,however not at the cost of reliability.I don't care either way to be honest,because if I want it with the original configuration I can order a standard hider 14.5 with a perm/flash hider and use it on the mid-size upper.I do think there will continue to be pressure issues due to the gas port location and to me it's not worth the aggravation when what they had worked.
  Not throwing stones at anyone here,but in my personal opinion I think fiddlefucking with relatively unimportant shit like this is one reason the stock is not done,which in my mind will have more bearing on un-XCR initiated peoples first impression of the rifle than does another rifle configuration.

[LurpyGeek]

Aesthetics aside, it's not just the piston but the tube.  Those are both fairly hefty parts that are farther out on the rifle.  I would think that should make more of a difference than cutting the upper back.

  I don't know what part your looking at but the tube isn't what I would call "beefy".Substantial enough not to dainty and/or easily damaged,but it's certainly not heavy.I highly doubt the two inches of tube would weigh more than an ounce.I understand that you mean that and the combined weight saving of a shorter op-rod would be enough to be worth doing,however not at the cost of reliability.I don't care either way to be honest,because if I want it with the original configuration I can order a standard hider 14.5 with a perm/flash hider and use it on the mid-size upper.I do think there will continue to be pressure issues due to the gas port location and to me it's not worth the aggravation when what they had worked.
  Not throwing stones at anyone here,but in my personal opinion I think fiddlefucking with relatively unimportant shit like this is one reason the stock is not done,which in my mind will have more bearing on un-XCR initiated peoples first impression of the rifle than does another rifle configuration.

Got to agree with DTOM on this one.  I think innovation is a great thing and is important to keep interest in a business and its products, but speaking for myself, I've already got an XCR and don't have the resources to purchase multiple different versions (much congratulations to those who do).  Thus, while I watch the development of the SF configuration and other RobArm developments with interest, I would be much more likely to actually plunk money down for something like the new stock.

[Underground]

Aesthetics aside, it's not just the piston but the tube.  Those are both fairly hefty parts that are farther out on the rifle.  I would think that should make more of a difference than cutting the upper back.

  I don't know what part your looking at but the tube isn't what I would call "beefy".Substantial enough not to dainty and/or easily damaged,but it's certainly not heavy.I highly doubt the two inches of tube would weigh more than an ounce.I understand that you mean that and the combined weight saving of a shorter op-rod would be enough to be worth doing,however not at the cost of reliability.I don't care either way to be honest,because if I want it with the original configuration I can order a standard hider 14.5 with a perm/flash hider and use it on the mid-size upper.I do think there will continue to be pressure issues due to the gas port location and to me it's not worth the aggravation when what they had worked.
  Not throwing stones at anyone here,but in my personal opinion I think fiddlefucking with relatively unimportant shit like this is one reason the stock is not done,which in my mind will have more bearing on un-XCR initiated peoples first impression of the rifle than does another rifle configuration.

I was never particularly interested in having one setup like that either.  I just thought it was an interesting problem to consider.

I doubt that takes anything away from the stock though, they've already stated it's designed and they're just waiting on bids.

[Sean K.]

Aesthetics aside, it's not just the piston but the tube.  Those are both fairly hefty parts that are farther out on the rifle.  I would think that should make more of a difference than cutting the upper back.

  I don't know what part your looking at but the tube isn't what I would call "beefy".Substantial enough not to dainty and/or easily damaged,but it's certainly not heavy.I highly doubt the two inches of tube would weigh more than an ounce.I understand that you mean that and the combined weight saving of a shorter op-rod would be enough to be worth doing,however not at the cost of reliability.I don't care either way to be honest,because if I want it with the original configuration I can order a standard hider 14.5 with a perm/flash hider and use it on the mid-size upper.I do think there will continue to be pressure issues due to the gas port location and to me it's not worth the aggravation when what they had worked.
  Not throwing stones at anyone here,but in my personal opinion I think fiddlefucking with relatively unimportant shit like this is one reason the stock is not done,which in my mind will have more bearing on un-XCR initiated peoples first impression of the rifle than does another rifle configuration.

Got to agree with DTOM on this one.  I think innovation is a great thing and is important to keep interest in a business and its products, but speaking for myself, I've already got an XCR and don't have the resources to purchase multiple different versions (much congratulations to those who do).  Thus, while I watch the development of the SF configuration and other RobArm developments with interest, I would be much more likely to actually plunk money down for something like the new stock.

I agree with DTOM that the stock is more important....but I don't think the SF configuration is slowing down the stock release.  From everything I read, it seems that the stock will not appear until the 308 XCR-M is released and if that's the case, the 308 is what's holding up the stock. What I can't figure out is why.  Why not release a fix for a known weak spot in the L's platform, especially if the stock is actually done or close to it.

[dont_tread_on_me]

they've already stated it's designed and they're just waiting on bids.

  I've heard that too,but it's been done several times before if memory serves,and then only to be redesigned again.If that's true then obviously no it should not be holding up anything.I'll believe it when I see it....I ain't from the "show me" state but that's where I'm at with this one.

[traveler]

How much shorter does the barrel need to be for reliable function?  Can it just be made that length with a longer flash hider to get it to 16" ?  Like the flash hider on the PS90:

[DSM]

they've already stated it's designed and they're just waiting on bids.

  I've heard that too,but it's been done several times before if memory serves,and then only to be redesigned again.If that's true then obviously no it should not be holding up anything.I'll believe it when I see it....I ain't from the "show me" state but that's where I'm at with this one.

Do a search on the "new" trigger from back in '07, right when the forum started.  You'll see a similar trend from official sources as well.  I'm glad they changed procedure regarding updates.

[dawg180]

Dang, hopefully you can get the kinks worked out on the SF, it shaves just the right amount of weight off the front end IMHO.  Certainly thought reliability needs to come first.

[marinewmu911]

I can honestly say I like the exposed gas tube, it looks a little reminiscent of an AK or Galil and obviously didn't cause issues with those guns. As I get closer to the purchase point on an XCR all the options are assailing me, and I honestly don't need 8-9 inches or rail on the original when I can save weight and utilize the 6ish of the mini.

Anyone know what a Mini upper with standard heavy barrel (16") and lower with the non folding MOE stock (thinking of putting a UBR on eventually) would run?

Can Robarms upgrade the product page on the site to allow you to truly configure your own XCR.. just an idea, that you'd pick from the lists like you do now but have the additional options of choosing your upper size? Also is there anyway that they could set up a visual interface? like the build you own AR sites have in some cases? the options are great but sometimes hard to visualize.

If not I can obviously just call and order

Just an idea

[DSM]

Can Robarms upgrade the product page on the site to allow you to truly configure your own XCR.. just an idea, that you'd pick from the lists like you do now but have the additional options of choosing your upper size? Also is there anyway that they could set up a visual interface? like the build you own AR sites have in some cases? the options are great but sometimes hard to visualize.

There's a thought.

[dawg180]

Any more word on a resolution of the SF brass tearing issue?