AR Sponsor
Joined:
May 2022
Posts:
72
EE: 100% (34)
FL, USA
Posted: 8/18/2026 10:42:39 AM EDT
|
Does anyone on here have one? I guess I'm trying to either talk myself into or out of buying one. 1. Is it awesome? 2. Looks like the lower is the same as the MARS-H. Is there any difference in the upper compared to the MRP-H? Just looks like a QD socket and some light styling changes...and a notched bolt carrier + foward assist? 3. What's the length of the forearm on the MRGG upper? It looks somewhat between the 12.5" and the 15.3" MRP-H upper. |
Joined:
Sep 2022
Posts:
3262
EE: 0% (0)
USA
|
I asked a rep at the NRA expo. I think the barrel profile was different too. But honestly, all the changes seemed to be cosmetic to minor to me. I wouldn't spend the extra money, unless clone correctness makes you happy. MRGG-S is at least interesting for its chrome-lined but accurate barrel. |
Joined:
May 2022
Posts:
73
EE: 100% (34)
FL, USA
|
I have one. I can't answer some of your questions as this is my first and only LMT. Edit- the lower doesn't have any special markings that I know of, so it may be just a normal lower. Hand-guard is 14" if measured from the mag well forward. Bolt carrier is notched. I've seen some listed as 1:8, but it is 1:7.5". I haven't done anything with it yet as I'm deciding on ATACR 1-8 or maybe the AMG 1-10. Either with RDS piggybacked. I even had the harebrained idea of just an EXPS3-4 with a 5x magnifier. Can is still up in the air. Hux or LMT is contract / clone correct though. |
|
Originally Posted By voyager3: I asked a rep at the NRA expo. I think the barrel profile was different too. But honestly, all the changes seemed to be cosmetic to minor to me. I wouldn't spend the extra money, unless clone correctness makes you happy. MRGG-S is at least interesting for its chrome-lined but accurate barrel. |
|
I have one. Executive summary: No failures on the initial outing. The gun demonstrates a range of acceptable to good accuracy with a variety of factory loads. I took the MRGG-A out for its maiden voyage after installing a Geissele SSA-E and the Vortex AMG 1-10X 2 days ago. The factory birdcage was swapped for a Surefire SOCOM brake and alignment with a 7.62 RC2 suppressor was conformed with a reaction rod although all of today's work was done without a suppressor to minimize variable during accuracy testing. The gun was lubed but nothing else was done or adjusted (ie no torquing the barrel, cleaning the bore, etc.). I used the factory supplied MagPul DT Carbine Stock. Magazines were the supplied Magpul SR25 20-round magazine. A variety of ammo was shot totaling 56 round. They were largely fired in 3-10 round strings during the zero process, and no cleaning or bore break-in process was performed. All groups were fired from a Caldwell rest with rear sandbag. The conditions were: 94F, 54% RH, 29.97 inHg, and 3 mph westerly wind with only 5 mph gusts. Accuracy determinations were measured using Ballistic-X software. First up was to confirm my laser bore sight zero. This optic and mount combo came from a previously zero'ed DD AR15, so I only needed about 2X 3-round groups of S&B 140 grain FMJ and about 2 mil elevation to be rough zero'ed at 100 yards. Of note, this inexpensive round demonstrates marginal to poor accuracy of 3.459 MOA at 100 yards with a 5-round group. More to follow in a subsequent post due to forum limits. |
|
After 11 rounds rough zeroing with the S&B, I confirmed my zero with a 5-round group of 120 grain Federal AE OTM which produced a encouraging 0.976 MOA group with a mean velocity of 2707 +/-20 fps (ES 2688-2727). I was initially testing this load as a training round and wasn't expecting such a tight group. I'll shoot a 10 round group next session. The least accurate load tested was Federal 130 grain Gold Medal Berger Hybrid OTM which was a bit surprising since this Berger bullet and its 140 grain cousin gets a lot of attention from SOCOM (granted in the BH loading). Regardless, it came in right at 2.043 MOA and 2538 +/- 13 fps (ES 2505-2551) for a 10-round group which is acceptable but not great. A slightly better performer was the Hornady 147 ELD Match at 2478 +/- 19 fps (ES 2442-2506) at 1.880 MOA for 10 rounds. The Black Hills loading of the 147 grain ELD Match was even a tad tighter at 2425 +/- 24 fps (ES 2389-2467) producing 1.706 MOA for 10 rounds. However, the gun really liked the 140 grain ELD Match from Hornady that came in at 2461 +/-16 fps (ES 2438-2493) and a 1.160 MOA 10-round group. So, the gun seems to favor intermediate weight bullets in the 120-140 range. Now, I know that a lot of people are going to hold their collective noses at 1.1-2.0 MOA. However, remember that these are 10-round groups; not cherry picked 5-round groups on the 5th try. Every 10-round group was fired sequentially with no do-overs or make-ups. The gun only rested and cooled for the time necessary to load another magazine and record the velocity. Moreover, the gun is equipped with a LPVO having a center reticle that does not lend itself to precision shooting at 100 yards. So, 1.1-2 MOA for factory stuff under these circumstances is actually good; not excellent or very good - just good. Later this weekend or early next week I plan to re-shoot the 120 grain Federal AE and then see how a suppressor impacts the groups with the above loads. |
|
Originally Posted By @lanesmith: After 11 rounds rough zeroing with the S&B, I confirmed my zero with a 5-round group of 120 grain Federal AE OTM which produced a encouraging 0.976 MOA group with a mean velocity of 2707 +/-20 fps (ES 2688-2727). I was initially testing this load as a training round and wasn't expecting such a tight group. I'll shoot a 10 round group next session. The least accurate load tested was Federal 130 grain Gold Medal Berger Hybrid OTM which was a bit surprising since this Berger bullet and its 140 grain cousin gets a lot of attention from SOCOM (granted in the BH loading). Regardless, it came in right at 2.043 MOA and 2538 +/- 13 fps (ES 2505-2551) for a 10-round group which is acceptable but not great. A slightly better performer was the Hornady 147 ELD Match at 2478 +/- 19 fps (ES 2442-2506) at 1.880 MOA for 10 rounds. The Black Hills loading of the 147 grain ELD Match was even a tad tighter at 2425 +/- 24 fps (ES 2389-2467) producing 1.706 MOA for 10 rounds. However, the gun really liked the 140 grain ELD Match from Hornady that came in at 2461 +/-16 fps (ES 2438-2493) and a 1.160 MOA 10-round group. So, the gun seems to favor intermediate weight bullets in the 120-140 range. Now, I know that a lot of people are going to hold their collective noses at 1.1-2.0 MOA. However, remember that these are 10-round groups; not cherry picked 5-round groups on the 5th try. Every 10-round group was fired sequentially with no do-overs or make-ups. The gun only rested and cooled for the time necessary to load another magazine and record the velocity. Moreover, the gun is equipped with a LPVO having a center reticle that does not lend itself to precision shooting at 100 yards. So, 1.1-2 MOA for factory stuff under these circumstances is actually good; not excellent or very good - just good. Later this weekend or early next week I plan to re-shoot the 120 grain Federal AE and then see how a suppressor impacts the groups with the above loads. I used to shoot 18" one year, then 28-30" the next. 123SMKs always performed very well regardless of barrel length. FYI, if you can, try some BH 143ELD-X, not 140M. Not sure why, but they always performed slightly better (more consistent) than the M variant for me. I replicated that load with my hand loads for a season of PRS with very good results. Boringly accurate and consistent. How do you like the AMG? I've been a NF user since the early 2000s and probably put a few of the NF execs kids' through college, but have been looking at the AMG lately. The extra 2 power would be nice. |
|
Originally Posted By Twitchy: I used to shoot 18" one year, then 28-30" the next. 123SMKs always performed very well regardless of barrel length. FYI, if you can, try some BH 143ELD-X, not 140M. Not sure why, but they always performed slightly better (more consistent) than the M variant for me. I replicated that load with my hand loads for a season of PRS with very good results. Boringly accurate and consistent. How do you like the AMG? I've been a NF user since the early 2000s and probably put a few of the NF execs kids' through college, but have been looking at the AMG lately. The extra 2 power would be nice. Thanks. If you’re the one funding the mortgages and tuition, then I must be bank rolling their hookers and blow. When it comes to LPVOs, the ATACR is the standard against which I measure other optics. The AMG beats the ATACR on magnification, size, weight, and turrets. They are equivalent on glass quality, red dot brightness, and eyebox constraints at maximum magnification. The ATACR has a better reticle; the AMG reticle has a thick center circle at 10X that hampers precision and a grey appearance that washes out against dark backgrounds. At retail price, the ATACR wins hand down. However, Botach has been running specials on the AMG that brings the price down to $2900 + tax and slightly inflated shipping (I paid around $3200 total shipped). At that price, the two optics have equivalent value and it all comes down to priorities. I will say that the AMG would be the best 1-8X or 1.5-12X on the market had Vortex made some concessions on the extremes of magnification. More in a subsequent post. |
|
Yesterday, I made it back to the range. This time I brought along a Surefire SOCOM 7.62 RC2. Executive Summary: The gun maintains reliability albeit a little over gassed with the suppressor but accuracy was maintained if not a little improved with most loads. The gun was not cleaned or adjusted aside from adding the suppressor. The same mags were used. I decide to shoot with the AMG's illumination activated at a daylight bright setting. Since the AMG's center reticle flickers at max magnification with off-axis head position, the illumination had the added benefit of insuring consistent cheek-stock-optic alignment. Today's conditions were a little more reasonable: 85F, 65% RH, 29.86 inHg, 9 mph NE wind with gusts up to 15 mph. First up was a full 10 round group of the Federal 120 grain American Eagle OTM. That load was on track for a roughly 1 MOA 5-round group in my last range session. Well, 10-round groups are a bitch, and the 10-round group was 1.998 MOA. A 12 o-clock cold bore shot didn’t significantly impact group size due to more horizontal dispersion of the other 9 rounds. Mean 10-round velocity for that load was 2719 +/-22 fps (ES 2679-2759). A 5-round suppressed group was fired with the remaining ammo in the box and produced a 1.378 MOA group at nearly identical velocity. Next, up was the Federal 130 Gold Medal Berger Match Hybrid. It was the least accurate unsuppressed load from a couple of days ago at 2.1 MOA. Well, that load really liked the Surefire RC-2 and produced a velocity of 2544 +/-15 fps (ES 2526-2575) along with very good 1.129 MOA 10-round group. I’ll post more group reports in a subsequent post later today. |
|
The BH 147 ELD Match was next. At 2.114 MOA, the 10-round group was not better than yesterday thanks to a single flier (#10). On the other hand, the other 9-rounds produced a 1.210 MOA group. By the end of that string, the mirage coming off the suppressor was oppressive and likely contributed to that 10th round flier. I had forgotten my suppressor cover. So, I let things cool for 10 minutes while the shooting line went dead for targets to be exchanged. Next up was the Hornady 140 ELD Match. That was the best group from the first session shooting unsuppressed, and was on track for similar performance today if not for another late flier that opened things up a little bit; the first 9 rounds was 1.204 MOA and the 10th round opened it up to 1.673 MOA. Velocity was 2486 +/-16 fps (ES 2465-2510). Mirage and fatigue seemed to contribute to that slight flier. Finally, the Hornady 147 ELD Match continued the trend of lack-luster performance from the heavier loads right at 2 MOA and no obvious shooter induced fliers to blame. Final thoughts from the day. The gun with the suppressor felt a little over-gassed compared to unsuppressed. There was not the typical reduction in recoil that I've come to expect when adding a suppressor. Having said that, the recoil impulse of this gun is generally tame and mechanically accuracy was a little improved. When it comes to recoil, this gun reminds me a of a stout 6.8SPC, and I say that as a 6.5CM newbee. It is noticeably more mild than a my 16" MWS in 308 or 20" LWRC REPR. I was also pleased that the addition of the SF can caused minimal zero shift. I 'm really looking forward to SF's release of the low back-pressure SOCOM RC-4 in 30 cal and would love to see them make a can optimized for 6.5-6.8mm - especially geared for the new high-pressured ammo coming down the pipe. I'll still need to vet its reliability before making final judgments but the gun is very interesting. That's a lot coming from a SCAR-H and 308 guy. |
|
Originally Posted By lanesmith: Thanks. If you're the one funding the mortgages and tuition, then I must be bank rolling their hookers and blow. When it comes to LPVOs, the ATACR is the standard against which I measure other optics. The AMG beats the ATACR on magnification, size, weight, and turrets. They are equivalent on glass quality, red dot brightness, and eyebox constraints at maximum magnification. The ATACR has a better reticle; the AMG reticle has a thick center circle at 10X that hampers precision and a grey appearance that washes out against dark backgrounds. At retail price, the ATACR wins hand down. However, Botach has been running specials on the AMG that brings the price down to $2900 + tax and slightly inflated shipping (I paid around $3200 total shipped). At that price, the two optics have equivalent value and it all comes down to priorities. I will say that the AMG would be the best 1-8X or 1.5-12X on the market had Vortex made some concessions on the extremes of magnification. More in a subsequent post.  I'm glad to hear the AMG is as good as the ATACR. I sort of measure other optics based on them as well. And one thing I rate very important is the ruggedness. I've used NF down range for over a decade. Beat the absolute piss out of them. In fact, on one particularly bad day, my MK-11 took a hard impact and rather than the optic breaking, it pealed the optic/mount of the top rail. Optic still worked. That was back in the NXS days. As far as the center donut/reticle, I generally hold over or zero in a way that makes the more distant shots not as issue as I'm using one of the lower stadia lines. Standing by for more. I'm hoping things tighten up a bit after break in. I used to use the first 200ish rounds as break in and load development. Usually just to get a good idea on pressure/velocity and then as the gun broke in I'd start working on groups. If all you're using is factory ammo, I'd say there has to be something better out there...I hope. Although, we do have to acknowledge this is an "assaulter" rather than a "sniper" variant. |
|
Unfortunately (or perhaps fortunately), I’ve not been bitten by the hand loading bug. Thus, I’m purely a factory loading guy. When I look upon the landscape of accuracy testing modern ARs and variants, I feel like we are still impacted by the fallacy of the 3 to 5-round sub-MOA group. That fallacy has people believing that 1 MOA is a reasonable standard for guns like the MRGG-A or its predecessor, the SCAR-H, based on 3 to 5 round groups. Yes, there are sub-MOA gas guns out there. However, that list is remarkably small when shooting 10 to 30-round groups, and tiny when shooting those numbers with factory ammo. This really hits home when looking at well conducted testing from people like Molon who frequently report 1.2-1.7 MOA 10-round groups using factory spec ammo, fired from precision barrels, with high magnification glass, and a proper benchrest. I’m just some dude with a cheap Caldwell rest, a rear sandbag, and LPVO glass. I cannot over-emphasize the fact that I probably suck compared to lifelong benchrest shooters. Keep in mind that James Reeves / TFBTV recently accuracy tested multiple DMR rigs (SCAR-17, MCX Spear, and Steyr DMR) and got 1.2-1.8 MOA with 5-round groups of factory match ammo; I bet that would be averaging closer to 2 MOA if he was using 10-round groups. Thus, the fact that I’m finding a few factory loads producing around 1.1-1.3 MOA 10-round groups with this gun is quite good. It’s not excellent, just good. I think that the accuracy standard for the MRGG-S variant is 1 MOA with the contract suppressor and ammo (BH 140 grain Berger Hybrid I believe). The fact that I’m getting 1.1 -1.5 MOA with a similar Federal load in an assaulter rifle is acceptable in my book. |
AR Sponsor