>PSA
It’s fine as a starter or upgrade gun, but they definitely have some more issues and don’t have the features that other rifles do. I also like a few of their other products besides the AR’s but you have to give them a year to work kinks out. The problem is “justasgood.” Like there’s a reason they sell both a basic line of ARs and the Sabres. One is simply better. The question is do you really need all of the advantages other rifles offer? Do you go shooting enough or have a use case rigorous enough to justify something verifiably nicer?
Going to the gym won’t make a unbalanced gun less unbalanced. An unbalanced gun is slower to get on target than a balanced one if your a 5’ twink or a 7’ Chad compared to a balanced gun
Overpriced for what it is
Little benefit over existing designs. No real reason to exist
As for the newly adopted Army version, the round is arguably a step backwards for a standard issue infantry rifle
In that angle and lighting, it looks good. But the rail is just fat as fuck when that shadow is not there.
Honestly, it’s not that I hate the gun, it’s just that I know nuSig already has a version 2.0 in the works.
There's a thread up right now about how slightly expensive guns like the SCAR trigger normies and poorfags even more than super expensive ones because they're only just out of their reach. I think the MCX falls into that category.
If knowing a bunch of techbro normies is anything to go by, a lot of them will buy expensive guns to flex and never shoot it. Anything is alright when you have stupid amounts of money and don't have to worry about problems arising from guns. Same type of people will drop $7k on "high spec" PVS-14 with half a spec sheet and not understand that they ended up wasting money.
Maybe it's me having grown up poor and getting into a profession that makes decent money but the way people spend money without care bothers me, especially when they don't use their shit. I think at least 2 coworkers own about $20k in expensive Sig and B&T rifles and maybe shoot them once a month then rave about how good they are.
Also if someone does spend a lot of money on equipment even if they overpay but actually uses their stuff, it doesn't bother me anywhere as much as people who buy things for "flexing" or are disingenuous regarding how good or bad their expensive toys are.
>Maybe it's me having grown up poor and getting into a profession that makes decent money but the way people spend money without care bothers me, especially when they don't use their shit. I think at least 2 coworkers own about $20k in expensive Sig and B&T rifles and maybe shoot them once a month then rave about how good they are.
Shooting once a month is decent
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
Once a month is being generous in my case, I know many people who've bought dozens of guns and haven't shot any of them or maybe shot them once immediately after buying them. Once a month for a single box of ammo still isn't that great for buying (using a coworker, again, as an example) a Spear LT with a NGAL he got off Tacswap and has shot two mags through it the day he bought it.
I don't care about them liking them so much as I dislike how they propagate that it should replace the AR platform in military service, when it obviously has quite a few glaring issues.
>all that money for a 308 rifle with two charging handles
If you got the 277 Furry version, good on you, poors be mad. Otherwise like others have said you can get similar performance or better for less money. BUT that's just me and my preferences. I don't begrudge a man spending his own money on what he wants.
>Why does this gun trigger /k so bad?
Because PrepHole is either noguns, or doesn't have SBRs with cans. Short ARs with cans are hard to tune right, don't like switching ammo, and are dirty. It's a logical step to go the piston route which leaves you with:
-Hk416/MR556, expensive and HK hates you
-SCAR, but if you throw a can on your rifle, FN voids your warranty
-LMT: good option, decent price
-PWS: Way overpriced for what it is
-POF: get the fuck out of here
-MCX and all the drama that goes with it
-JAKL: doesn't seem to run that great with cans, also, PSA
In the end who gives a shit, hating on how people spend their money on a hobby is peak cringe. I'll respect a poor with a PSA and a entry level optic that shoots regularly and well more than some guy who can't shoot for shit with an expensive gun. Once you built your 4th AR, it's understandable to want cool toys like a 416, an MCX, an AUG, or something like that.
Jakl owner here. The thing runs great, zero malfunctions through about 500 rds so far. Haven't had it that long. No can on it yet, but has easily adjustable gas knob for them. 10/10 so far
genuine question. how often in modern warfare does it boil down to mid to long range rifle engagements where artillery/air support/drones are not doing the heavy lifting?
how often would the extra range and penetration be advantageous over having less weight and being able to carry more ammunition while being significantly cheaper
Its an AR-15 with an AR-18 gas system but they gave it a proprietary lower receiver so you have to use their shitty stocks. Its fine but not should half of what they are charging for it. Which is true for most piston ARs. Fact is, the cost on DI ARs is so optimized and the advantages of pistons is so small that there is little to no practical argument for buying these or any of the alternatives over a normal AR. You'd be much better served in spending the savings on accessories and ammo.
The gun's fine.
The company sucks.
why does PSA/S&W piss PrepHole off so much?
>throwing S&W in there to be disingenuous
>PSA
It’s fine as a starter or upgrade gun, but they definitely have some more issues and don’t have the features that other rifles do. I also like a few of their other products besides the AR’s but you have to give them a year to work kinks out. The problem is “justasgood.” Like there’s a reason they sell both a basic line of ARs and the Sabres. One is simply better. The question is do you really need all of the advantages other rifles offer? Do you go shooting enough or have a use case rigorous enough to justify something verifiably nicer?
I’m sorry anon but it’s so ugly.
what features are they lacking?
they'll just say "muh ambi". im left handed and use a standard ar15 just fine
it's like $50 for an ambi selector though? that's less than sling mounting hardware with sling
9" MCX is more front heavy than a medium weight 20" AR. With an optic and suppressor it was awful and I got rid of it.
My brother in christ go to the gym.
more like sig should go on a diet
Going to the gym won’t make a unbalanced gun less unbalanced. An unbalanced gun is slower to get on target than a balanced one if your a 5’ twink or a 7’ Chad compared to a balanced gun
Overpriced for what it is
Little benefit over existing designs. No real reason to exist
As for the newly adopted Army version, the round is arguably a step backwards for a standard issue infantry rifle
>arguably
only a fag takes that position. Anything is arguable. arguably you may not be a fag. but as we all know you are. QED.
Well now, that's just downright unreasonable
>Little benefit over existing designs.
Folding stock and you can shoot suppressed without getting gas bukkake in your face.
none of which can be found in existing designs, of course
certainly not in much better guns
the guns it was in competition with in ngsw were doing some cool new things but this was the least innovative and won.
Which version is that? The MCX 1.0? 2.0? Virtus? Spear LT?
Virtus 16"
Sorry, it’s hard to keep track when a rifle has already gone through 2-3 “iterations” ups in just 8 years.
No idea, it's a fantastic platform
In that angle and lighting, it looks good. But the rail is just fat as fuck when that shadow is not there.
Honestly, it’s not that I hate the gun, it’s just that I know nuSig already has a version 2.0 in the works.
>50 Shades of Shit
Tanodized guns are the future. Much better than the cerakoted/PVD shitshow companies do on their ARs
Why do people get mad at owners of these guns when they say they're alright?
There's a thread up right now about how slightly expensive guns like the SCAR trigger normies and poorfags even more than super expensive ones because they're only just out of their reach. I think the MCX falls into that category.
Not sure but I enjoy every Sig product that I own including this gun.
If knowing a bunch of techbro normies is anything to go by, a lot of them will buy expensive guns to flex and never shoot it. Anything is alright when you have stupid amounts of money and don't have to worry about problems arising from guns. Same type of people will drop $7k on "high spec" PVS-14 with half a spec sheet and not understand that they ended up wasting money.
Maybe it's me having grown up poor and getting into a profession that makes decent money but the way people spend money without care bothers me, especially when they don't use their shit. I think at least 2 coworkers own about $20k in expensive Sig and B&T rifles and maybe shoot them once a month then rave about how good they are.
Also if someone does spend a lot of money on equipment even if they overpay but actually uses their stuff, it doesn't bother me anywhere as much as people who buy things for "flexing" or are disingenuous regarding how good or bad their expensive toys are.
>Maybe it's me having grown up poor and getting into a profession that makes decent money but the way people spend money without care bothers me, especially when they don't use their shit. I think at least 2 coworkers own about $20k in expensive Sig and B&T rifles and maybe shoot them once a month then rave about how good they are.
Shooting once a month is decent
Once a month is being generous in my case, I know many people who've bought dozens of guns and haven't shot any of them or maybe shot them once immediately after buying them. Once a month for a single box of ammo still isn't that great for buying (using a coworker, again, as an example) a Spear LT with a NGAL he got off Tacswap and has shot two mags through it the day he bought it.
I don't care about them liking them so much as I dislike how they propagate that it should replace the AR platform in military service, when it obviously has quite a few glaring issues.
Which are?
Weight, theory of use, cost+weight of ammunition, etc
Cheapest ammunition in the program and it weighs as much as an M14.
Siggers are only 3/5 of a gun owner
I'm annoyed I didn't buy one for under $1500 before covid, I even spent that on an AR at that exact time.
Poorfag scar, simple as
>all that money for a 308 rifle with two charging handles
If you got the 277 Furry version, good on you, poors be mad. Otherwise like others have said you can get similar performance or better for less money. BUT that's just me and my preferences. I don't begrudge a man spending his own money on what he wants.
I'm waiting for somebody to do a custom bolt head and barrel extension for an LR-308 in .277 Furry
LMT did some 277 Fury uppers for the brits to test out. Don’t know if anything came out of that.
yeah but I need one that I can buy
>Why does this gun trigger /k so bad?
Because PrepHole is either noguns, or doesn't have SBRs with cans. Short ARs with cans are hard to tune right, don't like switching ammo, and are dirty. It's a logical step to go the piston route which leaves you with:
-Hk416/MR556, expensive and HK hates you
-SCAR, but if you throw a can on your rifle, FN voids your warranty
-LMT: good option, decent price
-PWS: Way overpriced for what it is
-POF: get the fuck out of here
-MCX and all the drama that goes with it
-JAKL: doesn't seem to run that great with cans, also, PSA
In the end who gives a shit, hating on how people spend their money on a hobby is peak cringe. I'll respect a poor with a PSA and a entry level optic that shoots regularly and well more than some guy who can't shoot for shit with an expensive gun. Once you built your 4th AR, it's understandable to want cool toys like a 416, an MCX, an AUG, or something like that.
Jakl owner here. The thing runs great, zero malfunctions through about 500 rds so far. Haven't had it that long. No can on it yet, but has easily adjustable gas knob for them. 10/10 so far
I don't know about being triggered but it just looks like an autistic AR15 to me.
Folding stocks are a meme
it's a shittier, heavier scar
genuine question. how often in modern warfare does it boil down to mid to long range rifle engagements where artillery/air support/drones are not doing the heavy lifting?
how often would the extra range and penetration be advantageous over having less weight and being able to carry more ammunition while being significantly cheaper
Its an AR-15 with an AR-18 gas system but they gave it a proprietary lower receiver so you have to use their shitty stocks. Its fine but not should half of what they are charging for it. Which is true for most piston ARs. Fact is, the cost on DI ARs is so optimized and the advantages of pistons is so small that there is little to no practical argument for buying these or any of the alternatives over a normal AR. You'd be much better served in spending the savings on accessories and ammo.
Shoot both suppressed before leaving such a foolish comment please.
Thanks.
Yeah that's a niche that hardly anybody is doing and there are plenty of ways to optimize an AR for use suppressed.
>but but but the marines are getting supressors!
Yeah, and they bought HK416's. Which are the same thing but less retarded than the SIG.
Try shooting a suppressed 416 and let me know if you think that platform is optimized for suppressed shooting.