I'll take what I can find.Originally Posted by HeavyDuty
I'll take what I can find.
Posting to both the MCX and Rattler threads - there was question at the SIG Academy Pro Shop about what works with what, they suggested I contact customer support. I just heard back:
So, with that I’ll start keeping an eye out for a complete 11.5” 5.56 upper assembly.Thank you for contacting Sig Sauer
For Clarity: The upper receiver from all MCX models, including the Rattler, are compatible with all other MCX lower receivers. (Including a Rattler lower). The barrels from the Virtus can be used on older, Legacy MCX rifles, as they include the tapered lug bolt that will need to be used. The Rattler upper will work with a standard MCX lower, but cannot accept other MCX length barrels as the upper is unique in design in regards to recoil and gas management. Rattler barrels cannot be used with other MCX models either.
Kindest,
Ken
BBI: ...”you better not forget the safe word because shit's about to get weird”...
revchuck38: ...”mo' ammo is mo' betta' unless you're swimming or on fire.”
I just ordered MCX Virtus in 16” and 11.5” for 5.56.
Supposedly the 11.5” is back in production. I’ve had a complete 11.5” upper on order for about a month now, hopefully it will show up before I’m too old to enjoy it. And I’m waiting for my Rattler Form 1 to finish processing.
Ken
BBI: ...”you better not forget the safe word because shit's about to get weird”...
revchuck38: ...”mo' ammo is mo' betta' unless you're swimming or on fire.”
That was fast! I was on the phone with SIG CS today on an unrelated issue, and the rep said that he thought my upper would be in stock sooner rather than later.
Ken
BBI: ...”you better not forget the safe word because shit's about to get weird”...
revchuck38: ...”mo' ammo is mo' betta' unless you're swimming or on fire.”
“I love you, you love me, we’re a happy family!”
As an aside, apparently the Virtus and Rattlers can have pretty bad deflection/shift of the handguard, thus making it a crapshoot as to its viability for use with an MFAL:
Source: https://www.ar15.com/forums/Armory/M...1647/#i5614629Its been pretty hashed over here and other places. It really comes down to the individual rail/gun. Some have voiced concern/issues, others say there are no issues with theirs.
Ultimately, the MCX/LVAW hand guard is attached to the weapon system using high-tolerance rails and your forward takedown/pivot pin. It doesn't use an attachment that interacts with a barrel nut (there isn't a barrel nut), it doesnt interact with the upper/lower receivers. It's primary mission is to have sturdy-enough real estate for your offhand to interact with.
The fix is easy - mount your laser to the upper receiver. It's even referenced in this video you linked, where he adds that the "unit" operators he saw had their lasers mounted to the rear. Great idea. Individual testing of your rifle/handguard will tell you whether or not you can mount to your rail and those results can help you make the decision on how to config your rifle based on your tolerance to those results.
I have a couple of rails - both commercially available and as-issued LVAW - that have ZERO issue with POA/POI shift. I have ran over them, dropped them, banged them, you name it. Will they all be like that? No, its not realistic to expect this system to do that. Including the LVAW - the LVAW is really no different, in this regard. It has some changes to it vs the commercially available version.
Some of you have seen the "Gen3" MCX upper that's been floated around several different media mediums. You can probably draw your own conclusions about where those visible changes are being referenced from and therefore how they are/will be implemented.
ETA: This is not an identified "issue" that is driving platform change. Just clarifying based on my statements below.
This kills a lot of my interest in the platform, though it's been pretty low ever since I slapped a LAW onto my 10.3" build.
One of the things I do on my MPXs is I use adhesive foam in the mating between the handguard and the upper to add tension and remove wiggles.
I am curious as to how that affects POA/POI shifts and deflection; the foam might take out obvious rattling and perhaps help with light pressure (I believe one of the P&S modcasts had a speaker say that even resting their handguard on something, no loading, caused very noticeable shifts), but I would assume that its compressibility would mean that overall POI/POA shifts and deflection would still occur when loading the handguard (bipod, barricade bracing, etc.).
Obviously, there are other options to get around this whole issue, but would depend on the MFAL in use as to its viability (e.g., a MAWL on a GBRS mount would kill a lot of the advantages of the MAWL).
Reply With Quote