[ARCHIVED THREAD] - MK12 Mod 1 SPR? (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 11/7/2014 9:47:23 AM EDT
|
Whats your view on the MK12 Mod 1? Is it becoming a little dated? I wanted to setup a SPR style rifle for a maximum of 600 yard shootng. I was considering ordering a upper and AE suppressor from high caliber sales to put on one of my lowers. But I just wanted to get some thoughts and views on the MK12 rifles to see if they are worth it.
Thanks |
|
It will shoot just as good as any other "SPR", aside from being heavier. If you like the idea of an SPR, want a a conversation piece, and a little history to go with your gun, the Mk12s have that. If you want to shave a little weight and the above doesn't matter to you, build any other SPRish rifle and go shoot. |
|
Quoted:
I actually find the accurate 18" SPRish guns to be the best and most flexible of the ARs I've owned. Maybe it's just my size but I had zero problems with handling mine when I had it. One of the very few guns I really do regret getting rid of. I really like the SPR's also, great all-around rifle |
| When I was on active duty we had the MK12, both the PRI versions as well as the later ones with the KAC components. They came with a ops inc suppressor and a leopold TS-30 3-9 scope.We exclusively used 77 gr MK262 ammo with them.They were fairly accurate and fun to shoot, but they could have done better on the scope, and the crappy ARMS rings that came with it IMO.Often the scope/rings were replaced with better versions, and the M16 stock was replaced with either a collapsible M4 type or later on the magpul PRS. That being said, I didn't think they were a very good rifle for combat use in the role of a precision rifle due to the limitations of the 5.56, as far as terminal performance due to loss of energy at distance, the wind effects on a 5.56 round, and the overall poor performance of 5.56 on glass. These factors are obviously significant in a combat role, esp. in a place like Afg., where longer shots and a windy environment are normal. For these resons, primary snipers generally carried a bolt gun (M24 or MK13) or SR25. The SPR was generally passed to the spotter, or just not used. Since you will probably just be using it for recreational purposes (like I do with mine) get it and have a blast! |
|
I was on the range with my Mod1 yesterday and made hits out to 800y using 77gr IMI Mk262. Hell, I might've gotten a hit or two out to 1000y but it was just too dark to see the splash by that point. I love the Mk12 - all variants. I love the history behind the rifle. For my wants and needs, the Mk12 is perfect. Are there better parts out there to build a lighter SPR? Absolutely. But as far as accuracy, I doubt you'll find much better in a suppressed gas gun shooting 5.56mm. Don't like the ARMS / Leupold combination? Use NightForce glass and rings or an LT104 and you're still technically clone-proper. Any rifle that sports a FF handguard, 18" barrel, bipod, and a variable powered optic can be called an "SPR". It really boils down to how accurate of a clone rifle you wish to build, because there's only three variants capable of wearing the Mk12 designation.  |
|
I just finished building an SPR-ish rifle. It's definitely heavy for a 5.56 gun, even with an 18" barrel and glass. I've only shot it out to 50 yards with a red dot sight just to verify function. It was my very first total build, and I'm thinking it's a win that it didn't blow up on me.
Thanks to technology, there are better options to the Mk-12. You can have a 16 or 18 inch 7.62 gun for the weight of a Mk-12. And for real Mk-12 prices, you could probably buy a pretty good 7.62 semi auto. Either way, good luck, and have fun! |
|
Quoted:
I was on the range with my Mod1 yesterday and made hits out to 800y using 77gr IMI Mk262. Hell, I might've gotten a hit or two out to 1000y but it was just too dark to see the splash by that point. I love the Mk12 - all variants. I love the history behind the rifle. For my wants and needs, the Mk12 is perfect. Are there better parts out there to build a lighter SPR? Absolutely. But as far as accuracy, I doubt you'll find much better in a suppressed gas gun shooting 5.56mm. Don't like the ARMS / Leupold combination? Use NightForce glass and rings or an LT104 and you're still technically clone-proper. Any rifle that sports a FF handguard, 18" barrel, bipod, and a variable powered optic can be called an "SPR". It really boils down to how accurate of a clone rifle you wish to build, because there's only three variants capable of wearing the Mk12 designation. http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r249/RTUtah/ARs/mod1_zps0f32ce08.jpeg 
OP, who cares if MK12's are dated, they will always be Epic Freedom Dispensers... PERIOD 
|
|
Quoted:
I was thinking about doing a true clone rifle, but I wouldn't be happy unless I had every part perfect. I decided to do an updated SPR-ish rifle and I couldn't be happier. <a href="http://s1235.photobucket.com/user/Anthony_Kirby/media/Mobile%20Uploads/20140706_202537_zpsqwmrnghn.jpg.html" target="_blank">http://i1235.photobucket.com/albums/ff431/Anthony_Kirby/Mobile%20Uploads/20140706_202537_zpsqwmrnghn.jpg</a> Nice SPR! What rail is that? |
|
Recce/SPR guns - awesome!
Clones - meh. For anyone to purposely limit themselves to the same parts Crane came up with in the 90s it beyond reason to me. Collecting the most accurate clone imo is not what shooting is about, it's what collecting is about. I don't collect. A light weight rail, good optic, properly made and gas port sized barrel, a good trigger, good to go. Paying PRI $300 for their very obsolete rail, ha. At the same time, 18" is fine, but I have had zero issues at 750y with my 16". If for some reason I didn't feel like 16 was enough, I'd go 20". 18" was a comprise at Crane. |
|
Quoted: Recce/SPR guns - awesome! Clones - meh. For anyone to purposely limit themselves to the same parts Crane came up with in the 90s it beyond reason to me. Collecting the most accurate clone imo is not what shooting is about, it's what collecting is about. I don't collect. A light weight rail, good optic, properly made and gas port sized barrel, a good trigger, good to go. Paying PRI $300 for their very obsolete rail, ha. At the same time, 18" is fine, but I have had zero issues at 750y with my 16". If for some reason I didn't feel like 16 was enough, I'd go 20". 18" was a comprise at Crane. Because a Camry with a Ferrari motor in it looks like the rest of the 20 million Camrys you pass on the way to work.
|
|
Quoted:
Recce/SPR guns - awesome! Clones - meh. For anyone to purposely limit themselves to the same parts Crane came up with in the 90s it beyond reason to me. Collecting the most accurate clone imo is not what shooting is about, it's what collecting is about. I don't collect. A light weight rail, good optic, properly made and gas port sized barrel, a good trigger, good to go. Paying PRI $300 for their very obsolete rail, ha. At the same time, 18" is fine, but I have had zero issues at 750y with my 16". If for some reason I didn't feel like 16 was enough, I'd go 20". 18" was a comprise at Crane. i'de put my meh clone up against any SPR why is PRI's handguard very obsolete? because its not key-mod or m-lok? it wasnt a full quadrail before it was cool to not have a full quadrail. 18 wasnt a compromise, it was selected so they didnt have to settle with the junk that they would have been told to use at 20". specifying 18" allowed them to get a brand new barrel, not hand me downs. but please, tell everyone how the douglas barrels are not properly made and gas port sized. |
|
Quoted:
i'de put my meh clone up against any SPR why is PRI's handguard very obsolete? because its not key-mod or m-lok? it wasnt a full quadrail before it was cool to not have a full quadrail. 18 wasnt a compromise, it was selected so they didnt have to settle with the junk that they would have been told to use at 20". specifying 18" allowed them to get a brand new barrel, not hand me downs. but please, tell everyone how the douglas barrels are not properly made and gas port sized. Quoted:
i'de put my meh clone up against any SPR why is PRI's handguard very obsolete? because its not key-mod or m-lok? it wasnt a full quadrail before it was cool to not have a full quadrail. 18 wasnt a compromise, it was selected so they didnt have to settle with the junk that they would have been told to use at 20". specifying 18" allowed them to get a brand new barrel, not hand me downs. but please, tell everyone how the douglas barrels are not properly made and gas port sized. Trust me buddy, I'm about zero point zero interested in arguing with you about clones. If you bought into the idea that Crane selected the world's most righteous combination of parts that ever was and ever will be, and you should restrict and limit yourself to nothing but those parts - right on. USMC and Army requested an SPR M16 platform, one wanted 20" (SAM successor) and one wanted 16". Compromise for 18". I don't know who told you they would have been limited to just any old barrel - while they clearly had free range on every other part except the lower receiver, but that is not correct. Or it is... Maybe you're right! Maybe Crane got to choose a unique trigger, gas block / front sight / handguard / optic / mount / suppressor / charging handle / etc... But when it came to barrels, they had to go with an 18" to not have to buy from the bins of things they already had - that makes a lot of sense. Let's go with that. PRI's handguard is obsolete because of the cost, the attachment method to the upper, the weight which is FAR more than aluminum handguards now, the construction, and yes the way attachments work. The PRI handguard is LITERALLY obsolete. Not like, "well, it's not my preference" but "There is nothing this does as well as a modern handguard". But again, I can tell you're going to be offended at that, so, the PRI is best handguard out there currently, it's amazing. See, no argument. Perhaps you could try a little reading comprehension? To the point I talked about properly gassed, I was talking about NON-MK12 barrels. That any quality 16"-20" precision barrel that's accurate and properly gassed is a better choice over a specific brand that happens to be uncompetitively expensive. But yet again... Those Douglas barrels are the best barrel that's ever been. No one has made a better barrel in 20 years, end all, be all. In order to have a quality SPR - you must buy exactly what Crane had available to them in the 90s. You and me pal, same page! Quoted:Because a Camry with a Ferrari motor in it looks like the rest of the 20 million Camrys you pass on the way to work. And THERE it is. A valid reason to have a clone... One that I think is a bit silly, I don't care what my guns look like. My SPR shoots excellently and is far lighter than a Mk12 but you're right... It doesn't LOOK like a Mk12. If only everyone could be so honest about clones. |
|
Quoted: Trust me buddy, I'm about zero point zero interested in arguing with you about clones. If you bought into the idea that Crane selected the world's most righteous combination of parts that ever was and ever will be, and you should restrict and limit yourself to nothing but those parts - right on. USMC and Army requested an SPR M16 platform, one wanted 20" (SAM successor) and one wanted 16". Compromise for 18". I don't know who told you they would have been limited to just any old barrel - while they clearly had free range on every other part except the lower receiver, but that is not correct. Or it is... Maybe you're right! Maybe Crane got to choose a unique trigger, gas block / front sight / handguard / optic / mount / suppressor / charging handle / etc... But when it came to barrels, they had to go with an 18" to not have to buy from the bins of things they already had - that makes a lot of sense. Let's go with that. PRI's handguard is obsolete because of the cost, the attachment method to the upper, the weight which is FAR more than aluminum handguards now, the construction, and yes the way attachments work. The PRI handguard is LITERALLY obsolete. Not like, "well, it's not my preference" but "There is nothing this does as well as a modern handguard". But again, I can tell you're going to be offended at that, so, the PRI is best handguard out there currently, it's amazing. See, no argument. Perhaps you could try a little reading comprehension? To the point I talked about properly gassed, I was talking about NON-MK12 barrels. That any quality 16"-20" precision barrel that's accurate and properly gassed is a better choice over a specific brand that happens to be uncompetitively expensive. But yet again... Those Douglas barrels are the best barrel that's ever been. No one has made a better barrel in 20 years, end all, be all. In order to have a quality SPR - you must buy exactly what Crane had available to them in the 90s. You and me pal, same page! And THERE it is. A valid reason to have a clone... One that I think is a bit silly, I don't care what my guns look like. My SPR shoots excellently and is far lighter than a Mk12 but you're right... It doesn't LOOK like a Mk12. If only everyone could be so honest about clones. Quoted: Quoted: i'de put my meh clone up against any SPR why is PRI's handguard very obsolete? because its not key-mod or m-lok? it wasnt a full quadrail before it was cool to not have a full quadrail. 18 wasnt a compromise, it was selected so they didnt have to settle with the junk that they would have been told to use at 20". specifying 18" allowed them to get a brand new barrel, not hand me downs. but please, tell everyone how the douglas barrels are not properly made and gas port sized. Trust me buddy, I'm about zero point zero interested in arguing with you about clones. If you bought into the idea that Crane selected the world's most righteous combination of parts that ever was and ever will be, and you should restrict and limit yourself to nothing but those parts - right on. USMC and Army requested an SPR M16 platform, one wanted 20" (SAM successor) and one wanted 16". Compromise for 18". I don't know who told you they would have been limited to just any old barrel - while they clearly had free range on every other part except the lower receiver, but that is not correct. Or it is... Maybe you're right! Maybe Crane got to choose a unique trigger, gas block / front sight / handguard / optic / mount / suppressor / charging handle / etc... But when it came to barrels, they had to go with an 18" to not have to buy from the bins of things they already had - that makes a lot of sense. Let's go with that. PRI's handguard is obsolete because of the cost, the attachment method to the upper, the weight which is FAR more than aluminum handguards now, the construction, and yes the way attachments work. The PRI handguard is LITERALLY obsolete. Not like, "well, it's not my preference" but "There is nothing this does as well as a modern handguard". But again, I can tell you're going to be offended at that, so, the PRI is best handguard out there currently, it's amazing. See, no argument. Perhaps you could try a little reading comprehension? To the point I talked about properly gassed, I was talking about NON-MK12 barrels. That any quality 16"-20" precision barrel that's accurate and properly gassed is a better choice over a specific brand that happens to be uncompetitively expensive. But yet again... Those Douglas barrels are the best barrel that's ever been. No one has made a better barrel in 20 years, end all, be all. In order to have a quality SPR - you must buy exactly what Crane had available to them in the 90s. You and me pal, same page! Quoted:Because a Camry with a Ferrari motor in it looks like the rest of the 20 million Camrys you pass on the way to work. And THERE it is. A valid reason to have a clone... One that I think is a bit silly, I don't care what my guns look like. My SPR shoots excellently and is far lighter than a Mk12 but you're right... It doesn't LOOK like a Mk12. If only everyone could be so honest about clones. Here is how I view what I think he may have meant... And I get to use another car analogy: The Mk12s are like a Ferrari F40. Some of the stuff may be outdated, there may be some lighter options, some a little faster, but it will still run with almost anything new that is mass produced. It will do this while looking better doing the same thing, being more nostalgic, and costing way more than most anything new in its class. You also don't see them everyday. To be fair, "SPR" specifically refers to the Mk12 series of rifles, which kind of limits you to stuff that Crane used. It all boils down to what you really want or need. Besides being lighter and cheaper, any new precision AR isn't really going to do anything else better than a Mk12.
|
|
Quoted:
To be fair, "SPR" specifically refers to the Mk12 series of rifles, which kind of limits you to stuff that Crane used. It all boils down to what you really want or need. Besides being lighter and cheaper, any new precision AR isn't really going to do anything else better than a Mk12. To be fair, SPR means Special Purpose Rifle, which to me does not at all "mean" Mk12 which is "A" special purpose rifle. It's entirely synonymous with "Precision Carbine" as far as I'm concerned. You're right, a newer style precision carbine can beat out three out of four major qualities on the Mk12 and match the fourth. Cost, Weight, Availability, Performance. Hence the reason, bringing this all full circle, unless you're specifically into collecting a design - if you are actually building something to use, clones are "meh". In my opinion of course. If you want a Mk12 to say you have one, or show it off in a picture thread, great. Otherwise, one can do better now. Now, I suppose for the couple hundred of people who maybe carried a real Mk12 in the mil, I would very much understand the defensive emotional attachment. But as just a design to an ordinary person it all seems illogical to me. |
|
Quoted: To be fair, SPR means Special Purpose Rifle, which to me does not at all "mean" Mk12 which is "A" special purpose rifle. It's entirely synonymous with "Precision Carbine" as far as I'm concerned. You're right, a newer style precision carbine can beat out three out of four major qualities on the Mk12 and match the fourth. Cost, Weight, Availability, Performance. Hence the reason, bringing this all full circle, unless you're specifically into collecting a design - if you are actually building something to use, clones are "meh". In my opinion of course. If you want a Mk12 to say you have one, or show it off in a picture thread, great. Otherwise, one can do better now. Now, I suppose for the couple hundred of people who maybe carried a real Mk12 in the mil, I would very much understand the defensive emotional attachment. But as just a design to an ordinary person it all seems illogical to me. Quoted: Quoted: To be fair, "SPR" specifically refers to the Mk12 series of rifles, which kind of limits you to stuff that Crane used. It all boils down to what you really want or need. Besides being lighter and cheaper, any new precision AR isn't really going to do anything else better than a Mk12. To be fair, SPR means Special Purpose Rifle, which to me does not at all "mean" Mk12 which is "A" special purpose rifle. It's entirely synonymous with "Precision Carbine" as far as I'm concerned. You're right, a newer style precision carbine can beat out three out of four major qualities on the Mk12 and match the fourth. Cost, Weight, Availability, Performance. Hence the reason, bringing this all full circle, unless you're specifically into collecting a design - if you are actually building something to use, clones are "meh". In my opinion of course. If you want a Mk12 to say you have one, or show it off in a picture thread, great. Otherwise, one can do better now. Now, I suppose for the couple hundred of people who maybe carried a real Mk12 in the mil, I would very much understand the defensive emotional attachment. But as just a design to an ordinary person it all seems illogical to me. Lol. You sure have a blind hatred for clone guys. The term SPR originally meant "Special Purpose Receiver", due to the fact that a Mk12 was made from the best components available at the time, and thrown on an M16 or M4A1 receiver. It morphed into "Special Purpose Rifle" when Crane stopped using the old lower receivers. "SPR" is owned by the Mk12 program because the term was created by the Mk12 program, and is now used by enthusiasts to describe any free floated accurized AR. I disagree with you, and know that you will be hard pressed to beat the performance of a Mk12 with anything. That was the point of my two posts..... You can do it cheaper, lighter, and easier, but you will be hard pressed to beat the performance of a Mk12. Accuracy is never dated. |
|
Quoted:
Lol. You sure have a blind hatred for clone guys. The term SPR originally meant "Special Purpose Receiver", due to the fact that a Mk12 was made from the best components available at the time, and thrown on an M16 or M4A1 receiver. It morphed into "Special Purpose Rifle" when Crane stopped using the old lower receivers. "SPR" is owned by the Mk12 program because the term was created by the Mk12 program, and is now used by enthusiasts to describe any free floated accurized AR. I disagree with you, and know that you will be hard pressed to beat the performance of a Mk12 with anything. That was the point of my two posts..... You can do it cheaper, lighter, and easier, but you will be hard pressed to beat the performance of a Mk12. Accuracy is never dated. Yea, I'm aware SPR was receiver initially now means rifle. That's why I wrote RIFLE and explained how SPR is not explicitly MK12. Thanks. There is nothing "blind" about my opinion on clones, and it's not hatred, it's unemotional educated opinion. I worked with a rifle builder, none of this is magic. But, go ahead and explain to me if you like; If you can get a lighter, cheaper, more available AR that shoots 3/8th to 1/2 MOA, what is it about the Mk12 is better? Nothing. Unless you want to argue mythical "accuracy" standards that one can't put on paper. There is nothing special about a douglas barrel. A Lilja, or Noveske, or Bartlein or whoever could easily shoot as good or better. There is just nothing special about that selection of parts that make the Mk12 - EXCEPT - that they were available in the 90s for the people at Crane to select from. Let's put it this way... If the Mk12 were selected and specified today from scratch, there is almost zero chance it would have a Douglas barrel. And that's not to say it's good or bad, it's just how the political and influenced selection of military parts works now and worked then. Same goes doubly true for that Ops Inc suppressor even if Ops was still around. Don't get me wrong, Mk12s are cool in a that's neat type of way, but not a this is and always will be the best so I should copy it exactly type of way. |
|
The nice trigger and ability to use the open sights in a pinch make it very versatile.
Hind sight being 20/20 I would opt for the 18" barrel. This is the only thing I would change. The LT-104 mount has been removed several dozen times over the years. Never has there been a change of impact. 
|
|
Quoted:
When I was on active duty we had the MK12, both the PRI versions as well as the later ones with the KAC components. They came with a ops inc suppressor and a leopold TS-30 3-9 scope.We exclusively used 77 gr MK262 ammo with them.They were fairly accurate and fun to shoot, but they could have done better on the scope, and the crappy ARMS rings that came with it IMO.Often the scope/rings were replaced with better versions, and the M16 stock was replaced with either a collapsible M4 type or later on the magpul PRS. That being said, I didn't think they were a very good rifle for combat use in the role of a precision rifle due to the limitations of the 5.56, as far as terminal performance due to loss of energy at distance, the wind effects on a 5.56 round, and the overall poor performance of 5.56 on glass. These factors are obviously significant in a combat role, esp. in a place like Afg., where longer shots and a windy environment are normal. For these resons, primary snipers generally carried a bolt gun (M24 or MK13) or SR25. The SPR was generally passed to the spotter, or just not used. Since you will probably just be using it for recreational purposes (like I do with mine) get it and have a blast! Though I agree with the fact the 308 is a better performer for long range (Over 600yds ) and better for barrier penetration there are plenty of documented cases of the Mk12's serving in Afghanistan and Iraq very well. I have been using a Custom M-1A NM for years with a Douglas air gauged NM barrel and fixed 10X Leupold so the 308 concept is not lost on me. |
|
To those who are being silly about the "archaic nature" of the mk12, have you every owned one? Have you ever shot a mk12 Douglas barrel? Have you ever ran one with an OPS INC 12th (AEM5)?
Because it sounds like some of you haven't. OP, the Mod 1 is a great platform. I'm not a fan of ARMS rings so i run a LaRue mount, but that aside a mod 1 is good to go. I have an HCS Mod1 and it is boringly accurate and consistent. Well worth the money. |
|
Quoted:
To those who are being silly about the "archaic nature" of the mk12, have you every owned one? Have you ever shot a mk12 Douglas barrel? Have you ever ran one with an OPS INC 12th (AEM5)? Because it sounds like some of you haven't. OP, the Mod 1 is a great platform. I'm not a fan of ARMS rings so i run a LaRue mount, but that aside a mod 1 is good to go. I have an HCS Mod1 and it is boringly accurate and consistent. Well worth the money. I'm in exactly the same boat. I'd call mine a "near clone". I have a HCS Mod1, LaRue mount, NF 2.5-10x32 scope with mil-dot and Ops 12th suppressor. When I shoot BH red box 77g ammo (MK262) the rifle is....boringly accurate and consistent is a great way to phase it. Like a laser. Its a system, you have to have all the parts...upper/rifle, suppressor, ammo. I have it sighted in at 100 yrds, but using Shooter for ballistics app, come ups for 200 and 300 its been spot on. Every shot in the head of a normal USPSA target at 300 yds. I'm attending a certification class this weekend at my range so I can shoot on the 500/600 distance and while I don't plan to qualify with the MK12, I'll have it in the car ready to go. I want to play with it at that distance and see how it does. |
|
I think the MK12 is a little dated, their are parts available that function as well or better than the original parts chosen while saving some weight. Here is my take on the MK12, not a true clone, but very similar in appearance.  The major changes I made were a Geissele trigger, Larue rings, KAC flip up rear, PRI top rail, Spikes receiver extension, Noveske end plate, Battlecomp and DPMS  mk12 barrel. (I could never get my Douglas barrel from Superior Barrels to group well and decided to give the cheap DPMS a try.) |
|
Quoted:
Yea, I'm aware SPR was receiver initially now means rifle. That's why I wrote RIFLE and explained how SPR is not explicitly MK12. Thanks. There is nothing "blind" about my opinion on clones, and it's not hatred, it's unemotional educated opinion. I worked with a rifle builder, none of this is magic. But, go ahead and explain to me if you like; If you can get a lighter, cheaper, more available AR that shoots 3/8th to 1/2 MOA, what is it about the Mk12 is better? Nothing. Unless you want to argue mythical "accuracy" standards that one can't put on paper. There is nothing special about a douglas barrel. A Lilja, or Noveske, or Bartlein or whoever could easily shoot as good or better. There is just nothing special about that selection of parts that make the Mk12 - EXCEPT - that they were available in the 90s for the people at Crane to select from. Let's put it this way... If the Mk12 were selected and specified today from scratch, there is almost zero chance it would have a Douglas barrel. And that's not to say it's good or bad, it's just how the political and influenced selection of military parts works now and worked then. Same goes doubly true for that Ops Inc suppressor even if Ops was still around. Don't get me wrong, Mk12s are cool in a that's neat type of way, but not a this is and always will be the best so I should copy it exactly type of way. Quoted:
Quoted:
Lol. You sure have a blind hatred for clone guys. The term SPR originally meant "Special Purpose Receiver", due to the fact that a Mk12 was made from the best components available at the time, and thrown on an M16 or M4A1 receiver. It morphed into "Special Purpose Rifle" when Crane stopped using the old lower receivers. "SPR" is owned by the Mk12 program because the term was created by the Mk12 program, and is now used by enthusiasts to describe any free floated accurized AR. I disagree with you, and know that you will be hard pressed to beat the performance of a Mk12 with anything. That was the point of my two posts..... You can do it cheaper, lighter, and easier, but you will be hard pressed to beat the performance of a Mk12. Accuracy is never dated. Yea, I'm aware SPR was receiver initially now means rifle. That's why I wrote RIFLE and explained how SPR is not explicitly MK12. Thanks. There is nothing "blind" about my opinion on clones, and it's not hatred, it's unemotional educated opinion. I worked with a rifle builder, none of this is magic. But, go ahead and explain to me if you like; If you can get a lighter, cheaper, more available AR that shoots 3/8th to 1/2 MOA, what is it about the Mk12 is better? Nothing. Unless you want to argue mythical "accuracy" standards that one can't put on paper. There is nothing special about a douglas barrel. A Lilja, or Noveske, or Bartlein or whoever could easily shoot as good or better. There is just nothing special about that selection of parts that make the Mk12 - EXCEPT - that they were available in the 90s for the people at Crane to select from. Let's put it this way... If the Mk12 were selected and specified today from scratch, there is almost zero chance it would have a Douglas barrel. And that's not to say it's good or bad, it's just how the political and influenced selection of military parts works now and worked then. Same goes doubly true for that Ops Inc suppressor even if Ops was still around. Don't get me wrong, Mk12s are cool in a that's neat type of way, but not a this is and always will be the best so I should copy it exactly type of way. Interesting. Have you read up on the SPR/Mk12 development, as far as the other barrels the Douglas competed with? Krieger, Douglas, and Snider were used in batches of 50 each. Guess which was selected as a balance between performance/cost? Are you implying that if things were done right now or anytime between the late 90's and 2005, Crane would not compromise on cost and only select the barrel that printed the tiniest groups or lasted the longest, without concern for cost AND delivery availability? I don't even have a Douglas on mine, but those comments struck me as a bit off. In terms of current manufacturers that offer barrels meeting the Mk12's specs and can produce them in volumes, I don't think much would change. FN, MAYBE Daniel Defense could throw barrels into the mix from, but I doubt any of the other small manufacturers would even have made it on the dockett. Even then, FN and DD's precision barrel offerings have only popped up more recently. What barrel maker did you have in mind whilst sniping the Douglas' reputation? But to be blunt, using the argument that "if it happened now" is kinda silly. That specific requirement came and went based off of combat experience, so it wouldn't happen now anyways. I'm a Mk12 fan and I know quite well an "updated" Mk12 makes no sense, nor does the 18" barrel IMO. The final iteration of the Mk12, an unofficial conversion to 16" barrels by one Army unit, is the ultimate expression of the origin of the concept. Very accurate within practical 5.56 distances, shorter, more "handy". Those used Noveske barrels from the John era, but if done now I'd almost put money that Barne's Precision or some other little manufacturer that caters to beardy dudes would have landed the job. |
|
The USAMU Custom Firearms Shop has made many rifles for a range of USSOCOM, USASOC, and conventional Army customers.
If it's a small lot of rifles we could use what we had on-hand in the supply room as long as it didn't interfere with the unit's particular mission requirements (i.e., keeping the USAMU's 200 rifles as well as Army Reserve teams' rifles in-service). This could mean anything from Krieger, Obermyer, Satern, Schneider, etc., etc. ad infinitum. If there was a time suspense involved (i.e., "We deploy in 4 months and we need 500 rifles and here's the check for rifles and 1,000 rounds of ammo for each weapon") then we went contract shopping. Typically the outfit that could produce barrels in time and quantity that passed our precision standards was Douglas. Gene Barnett chambered the barrels while we contoured, fluted, and threaded them (to OPSINC prints for suppressors, if required). Each barrel needs to pass GI high-pressure proofing as well as grouping tests (at least 3 sub-MOA groups from a mechanical rest at 300 Meters firing either USAMU contract 77s or Black Hills). History with FN was they make very, very good chrome-lined barrels -- but not all of them in a batch of 500 will or can pass the sub-MOA standard. My history with Daniel Defense is also very good, but that is a sample of only maybe a half-dozen personally-owned barrels. |
|
Quoted:
interesting! so after a given FN chrome lined barrel passes the 3 sub moa group test, whats the typical barrel life before it can no longer pass that test? Hard to say -- very few pass sub MOA. Cherry-picked chrome-lined barrels generally go to AFSAM (Armed Forces Skill-at-Arms Meeting) Match rifles as the rules say guns must be in "As-issued" configuration. Those rifles are shot only a few weeks out of every year by maybe a dozen guys.. A properly-done stainless barrel generally out-shoots a chrome-lined any day of the week. |
|
Quoted:
1,000-yard AR-10s: http://www.armalite.com/images/Events%5CCamp%20Perry%202010%5Carmymarksmen.JPG I recognize Jeremy, as usual, he kicked some butt this year in long range at Camp Perry. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10152844675804734 Of course in the case of him and the others at AMU, it is as much about the Indian as it is the Bow & Arrow! Thanks for sharing, you know that you and some of the other folks need to write a book that covers AMU & USASS. M Richardson |
|
Oh hey, an archaic Mk12 Mod 1 with an ACOG, still being used. Huh. |
Thank you.
|
Quoted:
http://i572.photobucket.com/albums/ss168/BS68280/ab4e581f86f7767d1397fcc8c7f0dd55_zps081ad1dc.jpg My 14.5" LaRue Predatobr SBR. You too?! 
|
|
I have had a few of the PRI mark12mod0 platforms and think for the purpose they are intended for you will be hard pressed finding a cheaper more plentiful platform that will equal its performance. I am currently running one with a LMT Defender 2000 Lower, Giessele SSA-E trigger, LMT SOPMOD, 18" Mod0 upper from PRI and Nightforce 2.5-10 in arms rings. I have never had a hicup, and as another said earlier, boringly accurate.
I also have a Knights SR15 Mod1 and an LPR, both shoot amazingly accurate, lightweight and just great shooting guns. If I am going to be doing a lot of running and gunning or long distance and a lot of shouldering the Knights may have my vote by a slim margin. But if I am prone or at a distance range there is no other platform for me in 5.56. My current rifle opened up a little after about 2k rounds but has tightened back up a to 3/8-1/2 MOA. PRI has told me that they have experienced this with many Mod0 and has been documented at the proving grounds. I don't really understand what the outdated items are, hand guards. Maybe because they don't have the new trendy key-mods but seriously, what the hell do you run on your gun, optic, handstop/grip and maybe a light or bipod? What exactly about the hand guard makes it outdated, appearance??? It is carbon fiber, it is very lightweight. The weight of the MK12 is all in the barrel, not the components used in the construction such as hand guards etc, it is carbon fiber. The extra weight and full length rifle gas system makes for a smooth, accurate low recoil platform. Just man up a little, I can shoulder it all day long but again will admit for action bays or 3 gun my SR15 wins by a small margin. I would post some pictures but am not sure how... |
|
Its a cool platform, but its too heavy. I dont want want to rock a 10lb 556 rifle.
OP, keep the SPR concept itself (like an 18" barrel with a 1:7 or 1:8 twist, great trigger, bipod, glass etc) but ditch that heavy rail system it comes with. Buy a KMR rail and you save an entire pound over the allegedly superior carbon tube, which is heavier when stripped 
|
|
Quoted:
Its a cool platform, but its too heavy. I dont want want to rock a 10lb 556 rifle. OP, keep the SPR concept itself (like an 18" barrel with a 1:7 or 1:8 twist, great trigger, bipod, glass etc) but ditch that heavy rail system it comes with. Buy a KMR rail and you save an entire pound over the allegedly superior carbon tube, which is heavier when stripped Its not necessarily the rail that makes that platform so heavy, it is the barrel. The mod0 swan sleeve does add some weight but the hand guard is very very lightweight, carbon fiber, mostly barrel. Even my Knights LPR is nearly as heavy in feel of the Mod0 I have as the Krieger barrel is very similar to that of the Douglas. You can get a standard contour 18" barrel that will shave some weight but slightly suffer from accuracy. Honestly, if it is the only AR platform you are going to own, then I may lean more towards a M4 profile 16" as it will still provide great accuracy and a very all around platform where MK12 is going to limit you slightly due to size and weight. |
|
Quoted:
OP, who cares if MK12's are dated, they will always be Epic Freedom Dispensers... PERIOD http://i.imgur.com/CkWiOXu.jpg Quoted:
Quoted:
I was on the range with my Mod1 yesterday and made hits out to 800y using 77gr IMI Mk262. Hell, I might've gotten a hit or two out to 1000y but it was just too dark to see the splash by that point. I love the Mk12 - all variants. I love the history behind the rifle. For my wants and needs, the Mk12 is perfect. Are there better parts out there to build a lighter SPR? Absolutely. But as far as accuracy, I doubt you'll find much better in a suppressed gas gun shooting 5.56mm. Don't like the ARMS / Leupold combination? Use NightForce glass and rings or an LT104 and you're still technically clone-proper. Any rifle that sports a FF handguard, 18" barrel, bipod, and a variable powered optic can be called an "SPR". It really boils down to how accurate of a clone rifle you wish to build, because there's only three variants capable of wearing the Mk12 designation. http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r249/RTUtah/ARs/mod1_zps0f32ce08.jpeg
OP, who cares if MK12's are dated, they will always be Epic Freedom Dispensers... PERIOD http://i.imgur.com/CkWiOXu.jpg THIS Here is my trio  ][URL=htt
|
|
Why not do an "updated" MK12? Centurion Arms offers what they call a MK12E DMR. It is considerably lighter than a mod1, but uses the same barrel. Heck, if you want an ops inc collar, you could always add that on to it.
http://www.centurionarms.com/product-p/mk12edmr.htm |
|
Quoted:
Whats your view on the MK12 Mod 1? Is it becoming a little dated? I wanted to setup a SPR style rifle for a maximum of 600 yard shootng. I was considering ordering a upper and AE suppressor from high caliber sales to put on one of my lowers. But I just wanted to get some thoughts and views on the MK12 rifles to see if they are worth it. Thanks The idea of a long range, accurate 5.56 rifle is a great concept, but I feel there are better options for less money now than what was used on the MK12. I recently built a SPR and very few of the parts match the MK12, but they ended up looking somewhat similar anyway. |
| 10 pounds is heavy? I'm getting fat, hit the gym never, run once a year and I can carry my 12lb+ "SPR" hunting and to a shooting spot up and down hills in WV without issue. That's on days where I don't feel like humping my 20lb M25 or bolt gun. What are you guys doing with your rifles where 10lbs is too heavy? |
|
Quoted:
10 pounds is heavy? I'm getting fat, hit the gym never, run once a year and I can carry my 12lb+ "SPR" hunting and to a shooting spot up and down hills in WV without issue. That's on days where I don't feel like humping my 20lb M25 or bolt gun. What are you guys doing with your rifles where 10lbs is too heavy? Add on average 80lbs of associated gear, throw in doing 100 degree head and top if off with having to pay extreme amounts of attention to where you step to avoid having parts blown off you, do day in a day out for weeks at a time and than every ounce counts.. |
|
Quoted:
Add on average 80lbs of associated gear, throw in doing 100 degree head and top if off with having to pay extreme amounts of attention to where you step to avoid having parts blown off you, do day in a day out for weeks at a time and than every ounce counts.. Quoted:
Quoted:
10 pounds is heavy? I'm getting fat, hit the gym never, run once a year and I can carry my 12lb+ "SPR" hunting and to a shooting spot up and down hills in WV without issue. That's on days where I don't feel like humping my 20lb M25 or bolt gun. What are you guys doing with your rifles where 10lbs is too heavy? Add on average 80lbs of associated gear, throw in doing 100 degree head and top if off with having to pay extreme amounts of attention to where you step to avoid having parts blown off you, do day in a day out for weeks at a time and than every ounce counts.. I was referring to the civilian posters. I should have mentioned that. I'd imagine a military SPR may have a PEQ and perhaps other stuff on it as well. |