Alright this is super impressive!

It looks like they took the 308 poor accuracy reports seriously and did a deep dive.  I am impressed they were transparent enough to report 2.5 moa accuracy for the 308 mdrx unsuppressed with their best ammo.  Presumably minimizing most of the issues they talked about that are shooter induced.

That is exactly the data that KS ARG showed years ago.  I am glad they are being transparent in the caliber with the greatest issues.  Hopefully this means they invest in the areas to fix it.

It looks like they took that info seriously after they took care of the fastener issues.

Minute mark 16 and 28



So it looks like it needs a rifle gas system and heavy barrel for improved performance in 308 and it really is the low stiffness barrel and hammering of the piston causing the issues.

That slow mo barrel harmonic shot of the 308 is wild.  That barrel is whipping around like a noodle.

@LazyEngineer

Did he really say that chrome lined barrels are generally 4 moa barrels?

I suspect he is referencing that chrome lined barrels are used in infantry guns where 4 moa is acceptable.  For comparison the standard 308 Lake City m80 military ammo is 3 to 4 moa by design.  Similar goes for rack ammo in a rack m16.

They aren't designed for precision guns.  They are there for making sure the gun still works when abused over 40 years.

Criterion uses some kind of special proprietary magic to apply their chrome lining and still get high accuracy.

Pre-ban Austrian made AUGs with chrome lined barrels also have no issue being 1 MOA-ish guns, even with the 1.5x optic. I've posted many 10 round groups here with both match and fmj ammo that prove it

Haven't had time to watch the video yet.  But I will say this, apparently the guy speaks with an awful lot of authority for a guy who makes a rifle with that terrible of out-of-box accuracy.  And "but if you do all these extra tricks it gets better", again isn't the most impressive direction from a guy who who is the project lead on a $2600 3MOA accuracy rifle.  Sure, it shoots better if you take that .30 cal rifle and shoot 22 cal rounds with 1/2 the bullet mass and half the powder charge for which it was designed and marketed for - yea, I bet it does.

Don't know where he's getting his barrels, but all my rifles but one are chrome-lined, and they all do a lot better than 4 MOA.

yootoob.

Ok, finally sat down and watched the video.  First off, it wasn't a bad video and had lots of good points.  And also some bullshit.  For the TLDR - Again, as noted above, my biggest frustration is YOU ARE THE CEO!  - WHY DID YOU NOT MAKE A MORE ACCURATE RIFLE?   They do an accuracy comparison test in a way to try and show that they are good at this and the MDR is the most accurate tested, in a manner that's pretty gamed, and even with that, I call BS on.  Honestly, the rest of the video wasn't bad.

OK, first off:
They set ad frequency revenue generation to maximum.  The thing pops ads like every 5 minutes (which they control that frequency).   Niiiicccce.

Anyway, the breakdown on this and his key points:
Accuracy test target protocol:  best done on a target with 5 diamonds, and fired in groups of 5 onto each diamond (25 rounds).  NO sight adjustment in this process, to determine if POI moves as the gun heats up.   TBH, this is a actually a pretty great test protocol, and I very well may adopt it going forward.   I also note he doesn't use a LEAD SLED or other devices, but instead a bipod and rear support, which I also do.  (I agree, not a fan of leadsleds personally, I think they create more problems than solve)

Trigger - a good trigger makes a good difference, but for a field-semi-auto, you can't do a 2 lb trigger.  Sure, he's right, which is why every high-power competitor runs a CMP approved safe 4.5 lb trigger, in a 2-stage configuration so that the actually break (stage 2) is about 2 - 2.5 lb.  Which gives the same effect of running a 2# trigger for accuracy, while the total weight is 4.5LB.  As someone who understands the importance of this, Why did you not do this?  KelTek sort of did so in thier $700 RDB (ish), why can't you?

Lock time - 6ms is about typical for a semi-auto (ish), and a good bolt action which is striker fired, is a faster 2 ms (with some variation model to model).  And this can have an impact.   Which is true off-hand in the field (which is why Geissele's are so popular in High Power - they are faster).  But on the bench where accuracy testing is done, that impact isn't huge, IMHO, but he's right, and it was a neat section and discussion.

Hammer impact - a strong hammer impact can create motion in the gun and throw off a shot.  Which is true.  Not much you can do about that, though striker guns have this less so.  He's right, neat technical tidbit, and true.

Gun hold - there will be a natural movement of the gun, even at the bench, and doing a figure 8 or U shape known cycling of that and being sure to fire with that motion consistently accounted for, helps with groups.  Which is definitely true, so neat detail.  Nobody does sling shooting anymore, but in some ways you can actually be more consistent in a sling, than a bench, and it takes time and a skill set to master each of those.  Right now, I'm probably better in a sling, than I am at the bench. (High Power does that)

Semi-Auto gas system - Yea... this one.    OK, pistons are less accurate and induce a variable vertical force on the barrel and cause vertical stringing.   I call semi-bullshit on this.   Oh he's right, with the MDR and some other guns that have a poor execution of a piston system, you bet!  Do a half-assed gas system with the gas port in the completely wrong place, and that's going to the flex the crap out of your Barrel on firing - which he showed.    But there are plenty of piston systems that shoot lights-out accuracy too.  But hey, let's say I'm not fair and in the .308 class (I don't care about 5.56 class in this convo); with all that force involved, it really is a big deal.  To his point, the SFAR is DI operated, and interesting to see in their accuracy tests it performed the best of all the guns (except for their BS claims of their MDR).  Glad I have one on order right now in fact, a nice 20" 6.5CM SFAR is on the way. and we'll get to this.  But again, if I may ask: You're the CEO.  DI is not exotic.  Why did you pick a piston system for your gun, if you know DI is better?  Why did you stick with the Piston system for your 3rd attempt of a semi-auto gun, if you know DI is better?  Why did you stick with it located WAY too close to the chamber?  (that one I know the answer to - because you wanted one gas position to serve everything, including SBR'd .300 BO all the way to 20" 6.5CM DMR.  Turns out, that doesn't actually work).

Also, by the way, I can physically move the barrel in my MDRx with my bare hands.  I shit you not, I grab the end of the barrel, and move it, and watch the goofy mono-rail above the gas block move in relation to the receiver when I do that with my hands.  So maybe make a more secure barrel mount (which I think they did with WLVRN, but see the comparison notes below)

-Plastic tip bullets deform and semi-auto actions beat up ammo, causing accuracy issues.  Maybe so, was interesting to see the plastic tip Hornady's had so many problems.  FWIW, in High Power service rifle, almost all competitors to use HPBT all metal, and not plastic tip bullets as a general rule.  So OK, interesting point.  That said, the single best shooting bullet in my MDRx, is the Hornady 129gr SST (plastic tip), loaded down to basically Grendel power, because of the gas-system and the barrel spring noted above.

-Semi-auto chambers are sloppy which hurts accuracy.  You know, I've always suspected semi-auto chambers are cut fatter, which nobody talks about, and none of the tools even test, but it was good to see a confirmation.  And yes, that can hurt accuracy too.  Which I totally agree, if you are trying to get 0.5 MOA, that's going to blow your right out to 0.7 MOA.  It ain't going to be what blows you out to 3 MOA.

-Chrome vs Moly - ahh this one is fighting words.  To be honest, I completely agree with everything he said there, with possible exception of the MOA cost might be a bit exaggerated.  And why yes, Austrian made AUG barrels done by dudes who think Germans are sloppy and pride in their work - do really good in early generation AUG's.  And other custom high end ones can do OK.  But his base point is actually true, sorry CL bro's.  Though, a common trend in High Power Service rifle is to use a Stainless steel barrel, which are easier to cut and smooth out more consistently, and then malanite that.  Not sure why he's not doing that.  He should do that.

Bipods - Harris bipods are out of date.  I actually agree, and don't run one anymore.  They are goofy with big springs that he says cause weird jumping behavior, and just clunky.  I actually just run a knockoff of the MagPul bipod now, and am happy with that.  A lot cleaner too, I use a knock-off that folds, and has a quick-release lever that I just pop on and off.  My biggest problem with a bipod, on a semi-auto, is that it's supposed to be Patrol Rifle or field DMR rifle, and now it's got this big goofy heavy crap on the bottom front that's a fucking nightmare if you actually want to patrol.  So, I do a quick release system.  They do make an integrated system for the MDRx, that lets you do both, it's kind of cool.  For $500.  And worse, an extra pound.  Fuck that, I'm not putting that much mass on my gun.  Solution: I mount a cheap 2-slot plastic pic-rail on the front of the gun, and keep a quick-release simple $25  magpul knock-off bipod in the back.  I have about 6 of those know, so cheap I just dedicate one to each relevant guns bag now.  His bipod is better, and the clever bore-centered rotation stuff does make sense, but I'm not doing that.

Oh, one detail I did appreciate, the further out the bipod, the better the stability and controlling of the natural rotation the gun will always do while trying to get on target.  Good to know - might be relevant to my field-hunting-standing height monopod usage practices (which I suck at at, actually)

Rear-pod point.  I agree, I've learned the hard way a good front rest doesn't mean shit if the rear is still swinging around all over the place.  I use a bag and squeeze technique and am happy with that.  But sure, a monopod back there sounds even better.  I'm not actually doing that, this is a field gun, not a benchrest rig with all kinds of shit hanging off of it, but sure.

Match HBar - you bet, a better barrel is always going to do better, for all kinds of reasons.  Especially if you have a gas system that tries to bow your barrel like it's date-nite at the recurve bow range.  Also adds weight, but we can talk.  Speaking of weight, who the Hell wrote the spec for the MDR Barrel cut anyway?  It's just a goofy cut, and a tiny bit more weight here, even taken from a tiny bit there, can make it work better.  My 16" Faxon GUNNER barrel shoots MOA, and is pencil thickness at the very end.  Do that, and move that weight to the back, where it's flexing.  (oh, and strengthen the rigidity of that Trunnion FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, MAN - holy crap).

Match ammo - certainly no disagreement here.  

Torqueing the gun at the bench - I will admit, shooting a 14lb National Match AR15 in 223 with a sling, will spoil the absolute crap out of you, as that is the most forgiving semi-auto on the planet.  And that sling forces you to address the gun the exact same every shot, with your head in the same place, every shot.  Now go to the bench with a bipod and a heavy recoiling .308 class gun, and things change.  There is a skill to mastering that, that I'm up to "decent" at, and am still trying to improve.  It's hard to shoot an AR10 accurately and some of that is actually on me.


Suppressors - they improve accuracy.   I'm surprised so many consider that a contended statement - this has been well known for a while.  Well.  the RIGHT suppressor mounted rigidly, that is.  Well no shit, add a lb of steel and 8" of a steel stabilization bulb on the end of the barrel, and the whole gun stays on target better, and the barrel can't whip as much, because there's another lb of steel hanging off the end.  Not a big surprise.  Of course, if it's not the right suppressor, and the mount isn't perfect, it will fuck everything up.  I'm not a suppressor guy, I know lots of good people I respect are, that's cool- but not me (I'll rant on that later in this paragraph, because this is my post and I'll rant if I want to).  But expecting people to pay $2600 for his gun, and then spend another $1000 for an NFA registered suppressor to get it actually shoot, is pretty much bullshit.  Also, I've been around enough suppressors in real life, to say: I'm not saying Suppressors are Problems Problems, but what I'm saying is Suppressors are Problems Problems.  Fuck that, PITA maintenance, oh it got loose, oh it just launched down range, oh my gun's jamming because my gas isn't right anymore, oh I can't see because gas in my coal-face now, oh this, oh that - fuck that.  And it adds 8" and a lb of fucking metal to the end of my gun.  Fuck that, I thought this was a patrol rifle.  And if that's OK, how about I add 8" of barrel to my gun, get a quieter gun that hits a lot harder?  how about that?     But OK sure, suppressors help accuracy.  Especially on guns with shitty gas systems and ports mounted way too close to the chamber with springy barrels that need a big weight to counter that.

Accuracy testing chart (and suppressors):
OK WTF, WHY was an MDR (gen 1) used as the baseline representative for this testing??  That's not a typo, he even shows that in the video clip, it's an MDR.  I thought the new WLVRN was the new hotness for accuracy.  This raises all kinds of questions - biggest being it looks like they cherry picked the one gun with thousands of dollars of tweakage, as the test gun.  Which he then suppresses for that bench benefit, but didn't give any of the other guns the same benefit.  And there are some items on that chart that are just straight up wrong.  For example, his comparative price of an SFAR is $2300.  Where the F did he pay $2300 for an SFAR??  Mine on order was $905.  6.5 Creedmoor with a 20"BBL.   The accuracy performance reporting on most of the guns on that chart I actually believe (and I also am not nearly as enamored with the SCAR as many others are, and got a chuckle on that).  Except I don't buy those MDR results.  I call total bullshit on that.  Here's how my MDRx shoots.

IF you load it with full strength ammo, it will fling rounds all over the place.  If you download it to weak ass power, it can shoot a lot better, which I do.  And note that's lateral, not vertical; that's the weak trunnion system right there.

In summary, it wasn't a bad video, but the accuracy reporting of their own unit is seriously gamed.   Go grab a rack grade WOLVRN, put it on sandbags as-is, get full power ammo in the .308 class, and show me it can do that.   five 5-shot groups in a row.  The reason I have an SFAR on order right now, is because they can't, and it can.   I want to believe, and look forward to the BTMAN release in 2035, where they finally fix the gas system and barrel profile and trunion system and barrel spec.  I'll pay their $2600 price when they do that and it shoots 1.5 MOA.