Xcr-wtf?

I suppose I should have posted this in the "Grendelize the new RobArm XCR" area, but it appears to be a dead thread--or, more appropriately, a "Time Warp". Since I began reading the thread very early in the morning, I kept reading and rereading the dates (fall '04-Feb '05)--doubting the evidence of my senses, since the "status updates" on the new rifle would still have made perfect logical sense if they had been made over the same span of time a full year later. Like this one (Blukownaz, 12-03-2004, 11:26 PM):

I talked to Alex Robinson earlier today at the Phoenix gun show. He’s very personable, and had several superb products on display. Including the XCR.

I expressed my interest in the XCR (actually, I signed up for one), they should be in production in late January.

Now, from the robarm.com site:

13 February 2006. The XCR™ was shown in Las Vegas during the Shot Show. . . Rifles are almost ready to ship."

Uncanny! In the near-to-mid future, I wonder if this freaky, Groundhog-dayesque experience will recur in 2007. Beyond that I wonder if, if and when they ever get around to Grendelizing the XCR, shooters will be clamoring for a lug to accept a lightsaber bayonet, and a barrel length that doesn't hang up on the cockpit door of a TIE fighter.

Must caffeinate before work,
Mike

Fear not, I spoke to Alex Robinson at the SHOT show two weeks... he was very interesed in the Grendel and wanted to work with me on it.. He is on the follow-up list next week per our discussion.

Arne

IIRC, the new 6.5 angstrom Grendel light saber has left-hand lugs so all that lugging doesn't Tie up your right hand fighter :D

Fear not, I spoke to Alex Robinson at the SHOT show two weeks... he was very interesed in the Grendel and wanted to work with me on it.. He is on the follow-up list next week per our discussion.

Arne

Arne,
While I admire your faith in your fellow man, interest is one thing and product is another. I do not doubt that Mr. Robinson is interested in the 6.5 Grendel cartridge, which you and Bill Alexander developed; presumably he is also interested in the XCR, which his own company developed, but that interest has not translated into production in anything resembling a timely fashion. IIRC, he was also "interested" in belt feed since the late 90s, in keeping with the 96 system's Stoner roots. The Shrike is roundly criticized in shooting circles (including this board) as vaporware after repeated failures to deliver, but I can cut Ares some slack because they're developing a brand-new and fairly innovative system. Robarm, by contrast, could have cornered the lucrative belt-fed market simply by resurrecting the tailor-made feed module Stoner designed forty years ago--and didn't. I'll believe in the Grendelized XCR when that three-lug bolt slams into battery on a 6.5 case--and not a moment before.

Thanks,
Mike

As one of the posters to the XCR thread, I have to say I agree. I have been very dissapointed in the "just two more weeks" progress from Robinson. I probably wouldn't mind if they would just EXPLAIN the delays. As much as it irks me, I can completely understand thier delay on getting me my knew 7.62x39 Vepr because they explained why (Molot is filling alot of MILITARY orders right now).
Instead of giving a nebulous "we are having supply problems" and "it should be cleared up in a couple more weeks" they could explain what the issues were. Wouldn't take much to satisfy alot of us.

And for cryin out loud, PLEASE tell us if there is an issue with the rifle itself? For one thing, it engenders trust in the company to be upfront with flaws. For another thing, it lets us know what to look for when we finally DO get one, just in case the flaw slips through the system and gets to an end user.

I have a feeling the XCR is going to be a colossal commercial failure if SIGARMS gets the 556 off the ground on schedule and at the rumored MSRP of $1500 or so.

if I'm not mistaken the 556 has been in use by the Swiss militia for around a decade or more in various incarnations. Its already a proven arm which means all then need to do is get it manufactured here. Yah, if they don't do something quick and get the XCR out 6 months ago they are, to use a phrase from a show I am fond of, "humped"

I think the acronym I chose for my thread title could be better expressed as "XCR-Why the F" rather than the more usual "what". I have e-mailed that question to Robarms (politely, of course). Their website describes their M-96 as "the most awesome .223 rifle available to civilians"; I tend to agree, and based on postings on this forum and elsewhere, books and magazines, and conversations with military colleagues I think the 96 tends to sum up what most shooters are looking for in a military-style rifle: AK-like, long-stroke piston-driven simplicity and reliability; use of familiar AR ergonomics, magazines, and accessories; the best of both worlds, with quick-change barrels, stainless construction, and modularity to boot. It even has a belt-feed system specifically designed for it--well, its parent Stoner 62, but close enough! As I mentioned previously, if Robarms would ever get off their butts and tool up for it, they could not only tap into the market of belt-fed addicts who've been throwing cash at Ares for ten years, but would also be well on their way to cornering the military contract requiring both an assault rifle and an LMG.

Saying that, I don't own a 96, both because I don't normally associate "awesome" and ".223" in the same sentence, and because the design retains the basic AR bolt--which I regard as trinkety, fragile, and subject to grit-induced stoppages. It looks as though the XCR's bolt (provided it works, i.e. doesn't feed bullet noses into the lug raceways) is the perfect compromise between all-around case support for accuracy, and a small number of large lugs for strength/grit tolerance. It's difficult to make any solid judgment, due to some of the mysteriousness on the Robarms site (i.e., is the XCR long-stroke or short-stroke?), but it would seem that if both rifles are essentially "AR-ish", it shouldn't be that hard to add an XCR bolt/carrier assembly, barrel extension, and ejector to the basic 96 platform. Since the XCR seems to offer no other improvements than its bolt (and the modular rail forend, which has already been fitted to the RAV02 military version of the 96), it is unfathomable to me why Robinson chose to develop a completely-new design. It boggles the mind when the 96, assembled from stampings, is so obviously easier to manufacture, why the company would tool up for the intricately machined casting/forging XCR (which they're listing for a lower price!), diminishing consumer confidence along the way with countless unfulfilled delivery milestones. Who knows? All I do know is that if Robinson made a 96 in 6.5, with the XCR three-lug system, I'd buy it tomorrow.

Take care,
Mike

The Robarm M96 was a commercial failure. Does anyone know the reasons why?

word through the ether was mechanical failure of the piston rod (correctable design flaw) quality issues, quantity issues, and poor customer service

word through the ether was mechanical failure of the piston rod (correctable design flaw) quality issues, quantity issues, and poor customer service
Then the future looks pretty bleak for the XCR.

...or they could simply licence their design, and let other companies take care of the flaws...

Then the future looks pretty bleak for the XCR.

Oh, I don't know. Since it's (cosmetically, at least) somewhat of a SCAR clone, and FNH doesn't seem to be marketing the SCAR to civilians any time soon, if nothing else that should make it sell OK (if, that is, any are ever actually shipped . . . ) Now, for the (better, in my opinion) 96, on the other hand, it seems as though even Robarm is hanging it out to dry.

Mike

My impression of the situation is that even though the M96 is a completely different product and could, theoretically, be marketed in its own right, it's looked upon as "last year's" model and will be phased out.

Only from what I've read about the XCR, I was impressed by its attempt to incorporate every lesson we've learned about assault rifles in the past 50 years, by its attempt to incorporate each feature that has proven successful in the evolution of the assault rifle into one new gun.

I think the XCR is trying to give AK reliability with AR ergonomics and accuracy Ñ a worthy goal. I wish Robinson the best. (Oh, yes, please chamber it in 6.5 Grendel: The World's Greatest Assault Rifle Cartridge!) :D

John

P.S. I should add that I'm excited about gas-piston conversions of the AR for the same reasons. Did y'all see that Grendel piston movie clip? ;)

John,
I agree with all your positive comments regarding the XCR, and must admit that my prejudice in favor of simple sheet stampings over intricate machining was, in the case of the 96, purely academic and somewhat misplaced--since it costs twice as much as a competing AR. It's just sad to see an updated version of a great design fade away.

Mike