Because full ambidextrous controls is a requirement for the IC program that they designed this to compete in, and a side charger is not fully ambidextrous.



 

this is what I mean!!!



I'm in with that spiral fluted barrel for better cooling!

4 - 6 weeks out. Pre-order is open now.

http://www.northwesttactical.us.com/store/lwrci-16-spiral-fluted-reper-deposit.html

Already got one REPR, waiting on separate spiral uppers before I go there.

Please tell me that the entire system slides out the front of the gas block...does it?

Or is that an adjustment piece only?

Bryant

LWRC's piston system is accessed through the top of the rail. The front of the IC is just a gas regulator I believe

I just bought a ARD from yall. I know what you mean. I keep coming back to this thread to look at the lower that I want to do a Form 1 on.

This is definitely a very slick looking rifle.  Can't wait to fondle one ;-)

I want that lower.

You know that they sell factory SBRs, right?  



Once this is publicly released, I wouldn't be surprised to see their usual assortment of barrel lengths.



 

Yeah but I may want to use this ambi lower for several of my SBR uppers. I look at this piece as the end all be all of AR15 lowers.

It is an AAC.... think it is a 90T.  I'm a little annoyed i've got several 51Ts waiting on an 762-SDN-6 and looks like 90T is the latest and greatest mount.  

i'm a lefty and it's a good thing that they are making more ambi features as it should be. But get rid of the forward assist. I have never used it.

Military specified the forward assist, I have actually used the FA in the past. It was pretty handy when you need it.

man that thing is freaking beautiful.  I would love to have it, but I would probably just not let myself use it.  beautiful work-almost looks unreal somehow

forward assist is something some use and some don't,  I have always thought that if the carrier group can't put it in there then why should I help it because something ain't right.  Stoner didn't design it at first, they made him put it on there, I have only used it one time at knob creek in a machine gun shoot and someone gave me some god awful reloads.  The chamber just wouldn't close, and it hurt the palm of my hand so bad to beat that bastard closed, well it didn't blow up but I broke my rule luckily that day but I will never again.  Sometimes a carrier will just gimp off the bolt catch no matter how crisp you are with the button and won't get the round in the chamber, in that case the forward assist is nice....

but I am an idiot because I love reciprocating charging handles, I mean from the shooters perspective, how else do you know you have a jam before pulling the trigger to find out, or even when the magazine is locked back, and it is the forward assist.

Army requires a forward assist partially to conduct quiet loading in the field.

Middle of the night, in a patrol base, where actions need to be silent, fully charging a weapon after cleaning it is... a bit loud. Ride the charging handle then press the FA

Looks like some good innovations with the ambi-bolt catch and charging handle - but I'm gonna have to call shennanigans on that Troy ambi-mag release.  

While it's going to be great for lefties, for righties issued that weapon, when slung at low ready, your gear *will* bump the magazine release, there's going to a lot of embarrassing "fire one shot - loaded magazine falls out of the rifle to the deck" in field testing.  

I mean, it happens even with the Norgon mag-catch, and that's about as low profile as they get.  

Having gone through all the trouble to redesign and reprofile the lower, I don't understand why they didn't re-design the magazine release, or at least add a "fence" for the Troy to prevent accidental activation.  I would bet better than even money that if the LWRC IC survives the first round of downselects that will be among the revisions requested.  

I'm also interested to see how the removeable top rail section does in repeatability tests for the ATPIAL.  I realize most users and LWRC insist that this isn't an issue, but we all know interesting things (and not necessarily correct) happen in Army tests.  As it stands, the KAC RIS had to be redesigned to pass repeatability tests for the ARS - and the top rail of the M4 MWS isn't meant to be user-serviceable.  

The upper is also going to be interesting because I'm under the strong suspicion that most other competitors are going to come to the table with a monolotic receiver / top rail design.

Finally, with a non-removeable lower rail, it would appear to be incompatible with legacy M203 systems and the M26 MASS, as well as complicating other under barrel attachment options.

~Augee

Next year is NOT SOON  

Then you'll be happy to know that, as per Darren, LWRC VP, the M6IC will be both showcased at and released after SHOT 2012. Which is only about three months from now, two if you don't count November. Not far off at all.

It's my understanding that the new AAC mounts shown are currently only for military sales. I may be a while before civilian sales take place.

The removable top rail has been tested time and time again both internally and with our governmental customers most noteably TSWG during the MURG trials, DEA Endurance testing, Pentagon Force Protection evaluation testing plus others, in addition to our overseas customers and it has been deemed return to zero in every case.

The requirements called out that the IC submission be compatible with the M203 and/or the M320. You will note our gas-block on the rifles shown have a large diameter hole running through it left to right. This is for the M320 interface. The M26 is installed using a bracket kit which is allowed per the requirement. The requirement called out that the interface between the IC and M26 must be able to survive 75 rounds of standard "00" military buck-shot. We stopped our test at 800 rounds (400 x 2 rifles) as no damage or other issues to the rifle, rail or interface was noted.

In regards to the mag-release we wanted to utilize our own design as found on our new proprietary 6.8 platform (photos and videos of this are floating around on the net) but due to stead fast deadlines we had to settle for an off the shelf solution or risk not having the lowers in on time.

Pre-sale of civilian configuration with start around Shot Show with deliveries slated around March/April timeframe. Forging dies are currently underway and will feature our proprietary ambi-mag release w/fence.

Will be be able to purchase just the lower???  No that I don't want the entire rifle, there are just a lot of guns I'd like to upgrade...

We are currently not a paying advertiser so I don't want to turn this thread into a sales pitch/ad. But yes we plan on selling just lowers. Please no questions on lowers or civilian configurations of our I.C.. I will be more then happy to answer questions pretaining to the purpose built Army I.C. rifles as I do not want to over stay my welcome here.

but have you let the avg joe try it out, cause lets face it, they can break anything

Nonsense Jesse, you can't overstay your welcome here. Speak freely.

There ARE folks who frequent this particular section of the boards who get VERY butthurt over LWRC, Snake, you know that.  I'm all for Jesse exercising a modicum of care and NOT getting the hammer because some asshat hits their report button for him "advertising".





ETA:  As for you, Jesse, my wallet's going to be very stressed over the holidays and into the new year.  Either the FDE SCAR 17 that my dealer's trying to set up will fall through, and I'll use the money for an M6IC, or I'll have to figure out how to turn around from buying the SCAR right into getting an M6IC right away, PLUS I still want an SPR for 3-gun, and I'm still hoping that you guys release the spiral REPR as a separate upper...  Too much good stuff, not enough money or time!





 

Jesse,

Thanks for your response - particularly about the attachment brackets for the M320 and M26.  

I know the top rail has gone through a lot of testing, and I'm not "calling out" LWRCi over its design.  What I was pointing out, however, is that the KAC RIS and its attachment method was apparently more than sufficient for SOF and the SOPMOD kit, yet was determined to be insufficient for the conventional forces ARS - necessitating its re-design as the RAS.  

Not that I think that that is a problem, I think most people now agree that the RAS is a superior design to the RIS, and thanks to those trials, we now have a better product available, until the RIS II came on line, most SOF that I had seen still using a KAC rail system were using the RAS not the RIS.  

If you're referring to the ambi-mag release design on the PSD show at SHOT 2011, I think that is unquestionably a superior design, particularly if this rifle is going to be used by both righties and lefties wearing full kit.  I understand the need to have product to compete with - which is why I say I can see this being something that eventually changes as the IC program continues.  Again, I've had personal experience with the Norgon ambi-catch doing the same with my gear - and one of the things that has always made me weary of the KAC and Troy ambi-release designs is how much more easily and more often this could happen when issued to a right handed user.  

Remember the XM16E1 was re-designed with a mag release "fence" after testing revealed the same problem with lefties.  

~Augee