Why isn't or wasn't the XCR more popular?
Posted by BullMooseFox@reddit | Firearms | View on Reddit | 87 comments
Especially in more recent times. Adjustable gas block, piston, different barrel lengths. Seems like a good fit for the suppressor trend.
Or with the caliber conversations. It basically delivered what the ACR promised.
Or competing with the SCAR 17. Takes SR25 mags out of the box. Good trigger. Not voiding warranty when using a suppressor?
The intro model is only slightly more than the JAKL cost wise and tons of those sold.
Unlike the Bren or SCAR seemingly Robinson actually has and supplies spare parts.
What am I missing? Why was this not more popular? I'm liking mine a lot so what am I missing that everyone else knows?
Gullible-Scholar5587@reddit
The XCR just wasn't in front of enough eyeballs to get popular, it wasn't used by any cool go-fast types, and the owner was an absolute jackass to people on the gun forums which at the time, was where any new guns lived or died.
They also had early parts consistency and supply issues and their customer service was fairly poor at that time. People just had a bad taste in their mouths over Robinson, which directly affected sales.
Also Robinson is a Mormon and in 2008 he supported fellow cultist Mitt Romney who had signed anti-gun legislation during his time as governor of Massachusetts. Naturally this angered nearly the entire gun-owning internet.
BullMooseFox@reddit (OP)
You support not doing business with someone due to their religious affiliations?
Gullible-Scholar5587@reddit
I'm just providing the context you asked for in the OP.
BullMooseFox@reddit (OP)
Yeah. Fair enough. Supporting an anti gun politician is obviously bad and contemptible. I don't know to what extent he supported Romney because I was a child at that time. But I'm going to assume it was more significant than just because he was the Republican candidate if he made so many people mad.
Also yeah. Robinson seems to not have done great at marketing. No one knows it exists outside of niche groups of gun guys.
Gullible-Scholar5587@reddit
Religious and political affiliations are perfectly acceptable reasons to avoid a business, though. Some people don't buy Kahr pistols because of their connection to the Moonies, for example. I don't buy products from companies and people who work against causes I support. Religion isn't exempt from that.
changen@reddit
Peasant infantry got shitty colt m4s that met their needs. Special forces dudes used SCAR-H and L and realized they were doodoo and got 416s because when you put 10k hours in handling an AR, having a different gun with different manual of arms is bad when people start shooting at you.
Reality has shown with m7 being adopted as big army's gun is that if anything is does not work like an AR15, it will not get military adoption, especially with how entrenched it is.
The form for the military rifle at this point is basically solved. Until we get laser guns, guns are gonna have work like an AR15. And I am assuming that even if we do get laser guns, they are gonna make look and work like an ar15.
BullMooseFox@reddit (OP)
I think everything having to be an AR15 is a bit overblown and the SOF guys are a bit pampered and whiny. They were soldiers out there who started their careers on 1903 Springfields and ended on M16s with the Garand and M14 in between. If the tech advancement is worth it you can just make soldiers adapt.
I just don't think anything is that much better than the AR15 to force that change. Yet.
Most to many modern guns have the AR safety and similar mag release and bolt release. Those are the important controls and they are close enough. Mostly just the charging handle is different and the AR charging handle objectively kinda sucks.
That being said I was more asking why it wasn't more popular in a civilian context. I understand how fickle and corrupt procurement can be.
changen@reddit
I think it's the same that has happened to game controllers. 1st gen controllers were whacky and innovative and completely different to each other. There has been massive convergence evolution towards everything being and working the same, because people EXPECT it to work the same. Now EVERY controllers looks and works the same way. The innovations is now the materials and the software, not the form.
Gun innovation is heading in the same way. Give me more accuracy, more range, more stopping power, more reliability, etc. But it needs to look and work like an AR15 to your crayon eaters.
And reality is that gun ownership before the industrial revolution was basically only for the rich (and government). Mass production wasn't there, so designers could design whatever ergonomics they wanted. I think the M1/M14 was the peak of convergent evolution with that old ergonomics.
What we are at now is that AR15 is pretty much the peak for modern firearms.
It is kinda disheartening, but when you make and sell 10x-15x of any other platform, people are kinda expect everything to feel the same way.
MarryYouInMinecraft@reddit
No contracts, costs a lot, owner of the company is a lunatic.
JuggernautOk1433@reddit
Price sucks
BeenisHat@reddit
Welcome to my TED Talk on US Military Rifles. Please take your seats and hold applause to the end.
The XCR was defeated by two main events.
Robinson Arms didn't deliver a blank firing adapter in time for the submission deadline. The Military is pretty strict on these things which was the stated reason for DQ.
Robinson Arms didn't throw an FN-sized pile of money at the right generals which could have fixed event #1.
What really strikes me as odd is that the US Army has been so intent on sticking with the AR15 platform because of organizational inertia and cost, that it has now embarked on a boondoggle of a project with the M7 rifle and 6.8x51 ammo in order to answer a deficiency that arguably doesn't exist or doesn't matter. Especially with modern battlefields being shaped by drone warfare.
Had SOCOM adopted the 6.8SPC and the XCR back in the early 2000s, it would have been the express ticket to a modernized rifle platform and cartridge(s) that would serve the US military better than what they're presently trying to do.
The XCR with it's easily changed barrels is the easy choice, primarily because of its gas system. This one factor offers the US Army more flexibility for all of its operations than 11ty different rifles. The US Army has steadily been pushing towards shorter barrels and the 6.8 SPC excels at short barrel performance compared to the 5.56. The 6.8 SPC already offers better terminal performance than the 5.56 NATO at all the ranges the 5.56 NATO is intended to operate, plus it gives you the option for heavy bullets. So if you want door kickers and SpecOps dudes to have 11" or 12" barrels and still have excellent bullet performance instead of just .223" ice pick wounds, 6.8 SPC from a 12" XCR makes a lot of sense. Especially with a suppressor. For your average grunt, the 14.5 or 16" barrel is perfect. A little-known trick of the 6.8 SPC is that it performs almost as well at longer ranges as the 6.5 Grendel. The Grendel is a little more efficient pushing past 800m, but for DMR stuff, out of a similar length barrel, 6.8SPC and 6.5 Grendel are VERY close. So with little more than a barrel change and an LPVO, you now have a DMR with the same base rifle and gas system. Remember that gas system I mentioned? The XCR corrects the deficiency in the M4 Direct Impingement operation. Yes I know some of you will complain that I call it D.I. but 1. You're Wrong. 2. It's the gas tube that's the main issue anyway.
The gas piston system is much more tolerant of sustained automatic fire than the Stoner gas tube setup. That's not a knock against the AR15, it's just a simple fact. It's part of the reason Larry Vickers gave in an interview about the HK416. Why is that pertinent here? Because with the average squad now using 6.8SPC XCRs with 14.5 or 16" barrels, you can do exactly what the USMC did with the M27 IAR. Now that everyone is an automatic rifleman, you no longer need to field the M249 SAW. The USMC went this route a decade ago and hasn't really looked back. They maintain the M249 in inventory, but by and large, the M27 handles intermediate caliber automatic fire and they kept the M240B for when bigger calibers are needed.
Remember how I mentioned a longer barrel allowing a squad to have a DMR man? The USMC does that too. The M38 is actually just a re-configured M27, set up for precision shooting.
All of these options are available to the XCR with nothing more than a barrel swap because it retains the same gas block location. A company armorer would only have to switch the barrels for the mission. Magazines are the same. Ammo is the same. Bolt and carrier is the same. Gas piston and op-rod is the same. For all XCR-L's in 6.8SPC from 12" to 18", the only difference is the barrel. The same base rifle for every single mission from Navy SEALS kicking doors in anti-piracy missions, to a grunt taking long shots at a sentry, to a whole squad hosing down a convoy without needing an M249 and having a significant improvement in terminal effectiveness than the 5.56 NATO.
Thank you for coming to my TED Talk.
BullMooseFox@reddit (OP)
Very interesting read. Seemingly the XCR could have been the future proof rifle the US was looking for. And it's American made and designed to boot.
My intent in this question was asking why it's not more popular in the civilian space but your answer really sells the XCR as a military rifle.
BeenisHat@reddit
The answer to the civilian space thing is that ARs are dirt cheap. XCRs are 3x-4x the price of a beginner AR. The military never adopted them and Robinson Arms doesn't really advertise them nor do they have distributors set up. The only place to get a new is from Robinson Arms and they'll ship it to your FFL.
BullMooseFox@reddit (OP)
Fair point. For what my perspective is worth I never saw the XCR as an AR competitor. More so a competitor in the SCAR, Bren, MXC, Spear type arena. The higher tier piston gun category.
That being said I chose the Bren in 5.56 and I would have chosen the Bren in 308 if it was an option or the SCAR if it was more affordable.
BeenisHat@reddit
I only mention the AR because the general public is so cost conscious. The two naturally get cross-shopped even if the XCR is in a whole different class of next-gen rifles.
I've been seriously looking at an XCR-L but with PSA coming out with the Mixtape that has the ICAR magwell, I put the purchase on hold to wait and see if they make it in 6.8SPC.
Also, the wife wants a new car so that might stop me from any purchases for a while.
BullMooseFox@reddit (OP)
Having a family is why I don't have a SCAR. Completely understand. Gonna start saving for one again since it's "uncancelled". Or a Bren 308 if that ever makes it here.
But, right now having a stay at home wife who cooks a lot, is always down, and doing a good job with my kids is cooler than a SCAR.
OOzder@reddit
The hardest part of having a .308 gas gun right now is the price of any ammo that isn’t m80 ball. The hammer on my .308 vepr just snapped in half recently and it’s been a blessing in disguise on my wallet lol.
OOzder@reddit
I think currently the amount of people in the buying market for guns that are over $1000 is not even a full percentage of people who partake and observe the firearms hobby. I’m the “gun autist” in my friend group and early this year I had half a dozen friends ask me for buying advice and a few friends of friends ask me about purchasing firearms around that time. When I showed them what I consider a decent “low budget” ar-15 parts list, that was around $1300 they turned their nose up to the idea. Even when PSA had its sale and they could piece together something for roughly $600 as a “better than nothing” build only one of my friends bit down on that opportunity. I even showed a few of my friends who inquired maverick shotguns and cz p10s for $400 and that was STILL too much. People are just not buying stuff rn.
BullMooseFox@reddit (OP)
I understand that. That's why I don't consider is an AR competitor. Its an option for people like us. I've been buying and selling to make my collection smaller but more high quality.
Strong-Platform786@reddit
A lot of the firearm business and influences dislike the owner. He is supposedly hard to talk to and be around
BullMooseFox@reddit (OP)
He comments on the XCR subreddit and chews out people who mod his rifle in ways he doesn't like.
Strong-Platform786@reddit
Haha sounds about right
BlueOrb07@reddit
Never even heard of it. Cool though. Where’s the charging handle?
BullMooseFox@reddit (OP)
Left side. Lower than some competitors. Mid frame. Non reciprocating.
arfarf15@reddit
A user experience anecdote I came across once was that the takedown lever is too easily actuated when the rifle is slung on a right handed shooter. It apparently is susceptible to snagging on gear and will spontaneously split your rifle.
Given that most civilians will use it as a range toy, maybe not a huge deal. But I could definitely see that as a strike against widespread adoption.
BeenisHat@reddit
I'm guessing if it had won a military contract, that would have probably been replaced with a pin setup.
BullMooseFox@reddit (OP)
I could see that being possible.
Beebjank@reddit
It's not a bad rifle by any means and is actually one of the better future proof rifles. However, it's not as good as a Scar. They sell for about as much as the legacy Scars now which is almost a no brainer.
BullMooseFox@reddit (OP)
Where can I get a legacy SCAR for 2500?
Beebjank@reddit
PSA has deals every so often where they go for that or $100-200 more.
BullMooseFox@reddit (OP)
2700? If so I feel robbed to have missed it and will be watching out. I would pay that for a SCAR. Or trade my XCR for a SCAR.
Beebjank@reddit
I see them go for those prices on gundeals every so often. Keep an eye out
BullMooseFox@reddit (OP)
Bruh. Okay. Good to know. I'll watch out. At the very least the SCAR still also needs the SR25 lower as well
CapnCurt81@reddit
My take is the ACR and XCR were both pretty cool rifles. They simply were brought to market at the wrong time by the wrong people. They were designed with military adoption in mind and that check never came. Magpul couldn’t handle production, and Bushmaster didn’t do a good job of convincing the public.
All the while AR/M4s were just getting better and better as that platform matured. ARs solved a lot of the problems the ACR was designed to, and the rest of the problems turned out to never be problems at all. Caliber and barrel modularity never really became a thing. Adjustable gas is less important when things are really standardized and purpose built.
TL;DR: they answered questions no one was asking anymore and were produced by the wrong company at the wrong time.
dreadeddrifter@reddit
To add on, piston rifles are so popular now because suppressors have become popular. Very few people had suppressors back when the ACR and XCR came out so no one cared about that benefit.
BullMooseFox@reddit (OP)
Appreciate your perspective. Seemingly adjustable gas and caliber conversions were desirable in the civilian market in recent years. But your answer makes sense for the military and earlier times.
guynamedgoliath@reddit
Honestly the AR does calber conversions even better. Its 2 pins and you can slap a whole different caliber, barrel length, and optic (probably gonna have to rezero on other platforms anyway) on your gun.... but most people don't even do that.
I think calibers conversion stuff is cool in theory but nobody actually wants it in practical. Look at stuff like the RXM or P365 and their chassis systems. Nobody is actually switching those all the time, they just buy a second gun.
The reality is what I want from different calibers is gonna change the way the rifle is set up. A 300blk set up is gonna look different then my 5.56 SPR or even Mk18.
Haruspex_Rex@reddit
Why was it more popular? The price. While I think almost anything with a piston is better than a direct impingement, not many people are going to spend $2300 when you can find a plethora of ARs for $500 or cheaper.
BullMooseFox@reddit (OP)
Sure. But there is a different market for these things. Everyone with a SCAR, BREN, Spear, MCX, Perun, or similar is demonstrating they are willing to spend extra for a piston gun. I don't think this gun is an "AR killer" for the reasons you stated above. But it's overlooked in the piston world. In 5.56 though I went with the Bren.
I think the XCR M platform is a little more competitive. Compared to other piston 308s.
irattlecannedmycan@reddit
Scar bren and acr were all around before the xcr
BullMooseFox@reddit (OP)
SCAR (FN SCAR): Developed in 2004; first issued to units in 2009.
ACR (Adaptive Combat Rifle): Prototyped ~2007; commercially released in 2010.
XCR (Robinson XCR): Prototyped in 2004 for the socom SCAR trials. Commercially available since 2006.
Bren (CZ Bren / CZ 805 Bren): Produced from 2009; first deliveries in 2011.
BullMooseFox@reddit (OP)
I'm positive that the XCR beat the ACR to market and the XCR went up against the SCAR in SOCOM trials. Idk how long the SCAR was around before the trials though. Check your dates
Joice_Craglarg@reddit
If I'm buying a gun that expensive, I'm 100% going to save a little longer and get the much cooler SCAR.
BullMooseFox@reddit (OP)
Its not a little longer.
JefftheBaptist@reddit
Like most 5.56 AR alternatives, they have the problem that the AR is very good and very cheap. Its basically impossible to compete with the AR on price because of economies of scale that favor the AR. So you were stuck paying significantly more money just to get a gun with slightly worse accuracy, slightly better reliability, a side folding stock, and better handles the suppressor that most shooters don't own.
forrest1985_@reddit
So it actually competed against the SCAR in whatever program that was and should have won. Unfortunately the requirements included a blank fire adapter, but whoever packed the kit forget it ,so the XCR was disqualified.
shringing277@reddit
So fucking expensive
Mdmrtgn@reddit
No matter the innovation or feature, it's an AR. Only so much you can do to the platform and it's mainly to keep prices up. You can build something that will shoot the same size groupings as a kac at the same distances and cost anywhere from 1/3 less to 1/10. You wanna spend stupid money spend it on something stupid. If you want business build it for 1500 or less and throw your high end optic of choice on it.
OOzder@reddit
I do agree with this statement for the most part. However a nice shorty 10.5 .300blk long/short stroke system with no buffer tube out does the AR-15 in vehicle situations in my experience (which honestly is still only just an anecdote based on minimal pedigree).
Allow me to go off on some bullshit. As someone who used to march order and emplace heavy equipment and camps as a combat support guy I apply that logic to my own hyperbole in an on the move preparedness situation where I’m setting up a camp and boogieing fast. And damn a tiny buffer-less carbine has made my dry runs way more cozy than my runs having that buffer sticking out inside a vehicle on me while I’m driving. But can I really justify a creature comfort like that for an additional 500 800 bones? Its still hard to say.
Mdmrtgn@reddit
Right but that's not an AR. The bufferless systems were seeing I think are gonna topple ars as the cheap easy to build systems with thousands upon thousands of option flooding the market.
OOzder@reddit
Exactly my point. I’m talking about justifying a non AR buffer-less option over the proven and currently affordable meta.
Mdmrtgn@reddit
But you can get good bufferless options cheaper already. Like people shit on bca all day long cuz they're cheap and the qc is meh. But my range bought a handful and went through them and threw different optics and stocks on them and they flew out the door. No one's brought any back for problems and people are asking them when they're gonna get some more. You can get those for around 400 bucks and provided there's no screws loose, they'll just run and run. It goes back to the demand vs the cost.
Mdmrtgn@reddit
Granted that's 9mm but I think a few make 308 bufferless now and cmmg being one iirc. Still a big price difference
OOzder@reddit
Thats a great point, I too believe it will only be a matter of time until buffer-less carbine systems will drop in price and improve in quality, which is also what I’m alluding to that the creature comfort of going buffer less in the last year while also having something with AR like controls and with better reliability and quality is a bit of a higher cost than what it might be worth to dissuade getting an AR-15, but in a few years that likely wont be the case.
Mdmrtgn@reddit
Exactly. So the original question, the demand just isn't there compared to similar designs available. Is it cool? Yeah but the options available for it specifically don't have an effect on the consumer except for the people that enioy the really niche stuff.
Mdmrtgn@reddit
Like I would get a dissent over anything else available just cuz it's cmmg and it's simple.
BullMooseFox@reddit (OP)
The XCR is not an AR at all. Zero parts in common aside from the grip. Totally different design.
Mdmrtgn@reddit
But after reading up you can say the same thing about aks. It's a hybrid, cool. And the barrels interchange but still gimmicks.
lique_madique@reddit
I mean a long stroke gas piston system with adjustable gas, rapid caliber swaps, and phenomenal ergonomics is not a gimmick
Mdmrtgn@reddit
By gimmick I mean non-business, a rifle like this would be fun to take to the range and show off and barrel swap and oos and aaahs but they're not gonna have the demand that say an mk-18 will. I'm sure as many people own these as lots of other unique offerings you see on here but with everything else more readily available and cheaper, eh.
Mdmrtgn@reddit
Ah I thought you were talking about that one the military didn't want. Discord was arguing earlier and someone else said almost the same thing I did about it.
Osight_Zach@reddit
I had one for a time about 12 years back. I think they would have done well to advertise the .308 XCR-M more, it's a better gun than the 556 version. It was cool, and the BoA was nifty, but the smaller XCR was a little portly back then given it was pre-mlok. I recall mine had a very light weight barrel but weighed as much as my LWRC M6 at the time. It was hefty. The guy I got it from said he'd waited forever to get it, if I recall, which always hurts take-up on a gun. A lot of gun sales are impulse buys, and people aren't pumped to buy it now if they don't take delivery for 36 months.
For a little while too people told me they worried about future support. Robinson is on top of things now, but in 2009 or so it wasn't guaranteed. I think they had a stoner design like the Model 63 that they discontinued and that made the buyer leery of long-term support.
XCRs are much more competitive now that they've slimmed down, and I'd be giving one a very close look if I were shopping in the battle rifle market. I'd take this over the Bren, and maybe over the SCAR 17, too. I really liked how it shot.
BullMooseFox@reddit (OP)
Appreciate your input. I really like my M in 308.
Osight_Zach@reddit
You made me start shopping for one again, they should give you an affiliate link!
BullMooseFox@reddit (OP)
Haha. That would be nice! My intent was the learn and chat, not to sell. But I hope you love it if you buy it!
kapitalnoir@reddit
Ugly
BullMooseFox@reddit (OP)
Fair. I don't actually like the receiver shape that much and like the blockier rifles.
NoOnesSaint@reddit
I don't like that configuration personally but I do like the looks in general. Also black...
BullMooseFox@reddit (OP)
The XCR has little in common with the AR180. Long stroke vs short stroke.
NoOnesSaint@reddit
It's a joke
kapitalnoir@reddit
Yeah, I’m just kidding. People that like XCRs really, really, really like them and I figured some boomer that owns fifteen of every variant ever made will come in and see my comment and aggressively shed some more light on the subject 🤣
kapitalnoir@reddit
Actually, I’m kidding. People have been arguing about this for years. The price point, issues with the company for various reasons, bad customer service, poor dealer support. idk. I couldn’t tell you but sure enough someone will come along and tell us exactly why sooner or later.
BullMooseFox@reddit (OP)
I actually do think it is a fair point. I really don't like the receiver shape. Not as cool looking as the SCAR or orhers. Anyway, hoping to hear some thoughts from others as well. Like I said, I like it so I wonder what Im missing
kapitalnoir@reddit
I have had limited experience but when I held one and shot one it seemed about the same weight as an AR platform rifle but had a really solid battle rifle feel.
I don’t know how to explain but it looks a lot better in your hands than it does on a computer screen if that makes sense ?
BullMooseFox@reddit (OP)
It does make sense. I feel the same. I enjoy using it a lot more than looking at it, especially on a screen. It shoots really nice as well.
Mine is a 308. Definitely heavier than a basic AR10 but feels lighter than a JAKL. Also way better balanced than the later.
JustSomeGuyMedia@reddit
This individual has a good breakdown on what the differences in the SCAR and XCR for an end user are. The SCAR seems a much more matured design.
I think part of the other reason the XCR didn’t really catch on is expense, and relatively unknown. It wasn’t really in gun mags or any sort of media. Unlike the ACR, which was in gun mags and FutureWeapons as the Magpul Masada and then in MW2 / 3 and multiple Battlefields. Or the SCAR, which has it’s own storied media history.
BullMooseFox@reddit (OP)
I'll watch the video when I have the chance. Appreciate your perspective. I wanted a SCAR 17 since I was like 15. I ordered my XCR when FN announced the SCAR was canceled and I was sick of saving.
Without seeing it on Garand Thumb and being reminded it exists when searching for SCAR alternatives I wouldn't really have known about the XCR either.
JustSomeGuyMedia@reddit
I hope you enjoy the video! The presenter is maybe a little dry but it’s not bad info as far as I can tell.
Yeah I bet GTs video spiked XCR searches lol.
OOzder@reddit
I love this design so much, I came really close to purchasing one but I went with the Perun X16 because it has a lot of parts compatibility with the AR-15. If the Perun didn’t exist I’d have one of these.
Have you tried a suppressor on yours yet? If so hows the gas? Any blow back?
BullMooseFox@reddit (OP)
I have not tried a suppressor. I don't have any yet. But I would like to try one eventually.
I have never heard of the Perun X16 but it looks super cool based on a quick Google search. I actually am really fascinated by the AR18 style bolt and gas system. I desperately wish the Bren was available in 308 because I love my 5.56 version.
OOzder@reddit
The Bren rifles are amazing too. Bren 2s were going for nearly 3k when I was in the market a few years ago. I just checked pricing and I’m very surprised how much more affordable they’ve become! Damn.
BullMooseFox@reddit (OP)
I just bought one for 2200 within the last 90 days. Love it. Just hard to find in stock. Had I known about the Perun I would have considered it instead.
What Im learning in this thread is that there are a lot of super cool designs that being just don't know about if they aren't mil adopted or in games or something.
SilenceDobad76@reddit
No military, Hollywood or videogame adoption. Had this rifle been carried by Soap back in 2009 people who arent gun nerds would still want one today.
BullMooseFox@reddit (OP)
Fair enough. Its why I wanted, and still want, a SCAR. Too bad Robinson didn't get it in some sort of media. It is a neat and well thought out design
Equivalent-Region895@reddit
I’ve never seen one for sale honestly
BullMooseFox@reddit (OP)
I'm not sure if they are for sale new outside of Robinson. I know they pop up used now and then.
FortyMaximus@reddit
Great Rifles, especially the 308 SBR