-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
KAC SR25 challenge!!!
- Thread starter bigjake83
- Start date
It is reliable, for what it was designed to do. KAC is well aware of how the rifle performs and it does what it is supposed to do...
Wait, the difference between Aero and KAC is a more durable bolt? Complete Aero BCGs are running $60 at Primary Arms right now. Conceptually, one could treat BCGs as disposable, single use, items and still come out money ahead.
Surely there’s more to KAC than that. Please tell me they make your dick look bigger, or something.
Surely there’s more to KAC than that. Please tell me they make your dick look bigger, or something.
If you really care then check out this video by Chris Bartocci. This man has forgotten more about AR rifles than most people here combined.
I have a feeling there is nothing anyone could do to change your mind based on your tone, but if not check it out.
This is a moot point, KAC already increased the size of their gas ports to accommodate the low functioning average gunsumer.
Haven't read through this entire thread in a while. Trying to remember - has anyone actually met the challenge and gotten the $100? I mean it's been like 3 years and we have 500+ posts.
And maybe it's worth taking a step back and breaking down exactly what KAC owners think they are getting for the substantial premium they're paying for their rifles. Accuracy? Not so much? Reliability? Maybe, but I think there are a lot of cheaper rifles that have proven to be reliable. Durability (which I think is slightly different than reliability)? Again, maybe, but I'd be curious to see some hard data on this. Innovation? Well yes, but to me innovation is only worthwhile if said innovation leads to greater accuracy, reliability, durability, etc. Who wants a rifle that's tremendously innovative, but inaccurate and unreliable?
And I'm not dumping on KAC. I actually own an SR30 upper that I enjoy shooting. It has proven to be well made, reliable, soft shooting and generally fun to shoot. But I managed to pick it up 7-8 years ago for $1,200 (I think KAC were just coming out with an updated Mod 2 version) so a couple of sellers were looking to clear out their Mod 1's. Never really shot it for accuracy, since it has an 11.5" barrel and a red dot on it and I really use it for fun CQB drills. At $1,200 I think it was a decent purchase. Honestly not sure what they cost now. Maybe double? If that's the case, to me, just not worth the premium. YMMV.
And maybe it's worth taking a step back and breaking down exactly what KAC owners think they are getting for the substantial premium they're paying for their rifles. Accuracy? Not so much? Reliability? Maybe, but I think there are a lot of cheaper rifles that have proven to be reliable. Durability (which I think is slightly different than reliability)? Again, maybe, but I'd be curious to see some hard data on this. Innovation? Well yes, but to me innovation is only worthwhile if said innovation leads to greater accuracy, reliability, durability, etc. Who wants a rifle that's tremendously innovative, but inaccurate and unreliable?
And I'm not dumping on KAC. I actually own an SR30 upper that I enjoy shooting. It has proven to be well made, reliable, soft shooting and generally fun to shoot. But I managed to pick it up 7-8 years ago for $1,200 (I think KAC were just coming out with an updated Mod 2 version) so a couple of sellers were looking to clear out their Mod 1's. Never really shot it for accuracy, since it has an 11.5" barrel and a red dot on it and I really use it for fun CQB drills. At $1,200 I think it was a decent purchase. Honestly not sure what they cost now. Maybe double? If that's the case, to me, just not worth the premium. YMMV.
Army has issued some reliability reports on them, the Army and Air Force has spent more money on the CSASS and now has more in service than the KAC (Military.com and Wikipedia).
You should check someones resume before spewing bullshit, Drinking a few beers and rubbing elbows with someone in the know doesnt make you a SME or give you street creds.
I feel like the whole 'my gun is just as gud as a kac' comes back around roughly once a year. It's mainly brought on by 2 kinds of people:
1 - The people who literally don't know what they don't know. Their 'shooting' consists of going to a square range or some BLM land and shooting off of a rest at a fucking target stuck to the back of an old TV box at 50 yards in 75 degree weather because otherwise its 'too hot outside'. They clean their gun after every 40 round range session and base their experience on how well it grouped. Then spend years trying out different types of ammo at 50 yards trying to shoot .5 MOA groups. Whenever they do have a malfunction, they spend hours on the internet afterwards typing up posts and trying to diagnose it. This leads to them buying more dumb shit for the gun for their next 50 yard 'training session'.
2- Professional LARPers who do 'run and gun' drills.....or something. The drills consist of shit smashed together from various Magpul and 'tactical series' CDs with a sprinkle of shit they see on youtube. They won't do all of the drills from a set training class because they don't understand some of them and/or can't figure out what they are supposed to be doing. Everyone has 'kit' on and it looks as clean as 98% of the fucking plate carrier pictures of AR15. Mission priority #1 is to make sure you don't look like a boomer fobbit and have at least 3 US flag patches on you at all times. Everything else from there is downhill and icing on the cake. "Training' consists of about 100 rounds shot at gigantic steel plates while running around and screaming things in unison like its some sort of LARPer mating call. Mission success is everyone looking cool and that one time you all managed to scream the same shit. But you're out there 'training' right? So it would show if that Anderson lower build would be shit or not, right?
Does everyone NEED a KAC? No.
Is there a difference? Fuck yes there is. Without going into a massive detail as to what, one of my SR15s has 35k rounds on it. The only failure I've had is from the chamber being too dirty (not the gun's fault). They are specifically designed to work, under less than ideal conditions, with high use. Shit you wouldn't know when its 'too hot' to go shooting, or your round count is 50 rounds a week. Shit you wouldn't encounter sitting on a rest with a clean gun. Shit you wouldn't understand when it NEEDS to work even when you're really pushing it.
Over the last few years I have a long list of both cheap and pricier guns going down during actual training. Meanwhile, the only problem with any KAC gun I've run to the point that my firing hand outline is etched into the side of the grip and receiver was fixed in 7 seconds with a chamber brush.
It's amazing at how fast the 'this gun just runs' peoples' guns all of a sudden stop running when its no longer used at a bullshit range condition.
1 - The people who literally don't know what they don't know. Their 'shooting' consists of going to a square range or some BLM land and shooting off of a rest at a fucking target stuck to the back of an old TV box at 50 yards in 75 degree weather because otherwise its 'too hot outside'. They clean their gun after every 40 round range session and base their experience on how well it grouped. Then spend years trying out different types of ammo at 50 yards trying to shoot .5 MOA groups. Whenever they do have a malfunction, they spend hours on the internet afterwards typing up posts and trying to diagnose it. This leads to them buying more dumb shit for the gun for their next 50 yard 'training session'.
2- Professional LARPers who do 'run and gun' drills.....or something. The drills consist of shit smashed together from various Magpul and 'tactical series' CDs with a sprinkle of shit they see on youtube. They won't do all of the drills from a set training class because they don't understand some of them and/or can't figure out what they are supposed to be doing. Everyone has 'kit' on and it looks as clean as 98% of the fucking plate carrier pictures of AR15. Mission priority #1 is to make sure you don't look like a boomer fobbit and have at least 3 US flag patches on you at all times. Everything else from there is downhill and icing on the cake. "Training' consists of about 100 rounds shot at gigantic steel plates while running around and screaming things in unison like its some sort of LARPer mating call. Mission success is everyone looking cool and that one time you all managed to scream the same shit. But you're out there 'training' right? So it would show if that Anderson lower build would be shit or not, right?
Does everyone NEED a KAC? No.
Is there a difference? Fuck yes there is. Without going into a massive detail as to what, one of my SR15s has 35k rounds on it. The only failure I've had is from the chamber being too dirty (not the gun's fault). They are specifically designed to work, under less than ideal conditions, with high use. Shit you wouldn't know when its 'too hot' to go shooting, or your round count is 50 rounds a week. Shit you wouldn't encounter sitting on a rest with a clean gun. Shit you wouldn't understand when it NEEDS to work even when you're really pushing it.
Over the last few years I have a long list of both cheap and pricier guns going down during actual training. Meanwhile, the only problem with any KAC gun I've run to the point that my firing hand outline is etched into the side of the grip and receiver was fixed in 7 seconds with a chamber brush.
It's amazing at how fast the 'this gun just runs' peoples' guns all of a sudden stop running when its no longer used at a bullshit range condition.
Mission drives the gear. Experience guides the choices. KAC has proven on many fronts to be consistently reliable. Period. They constantly strive to make a better weapons platform. They listen to their serious users and adapt when experience and testing yield a worthwhile change. To some people that's worth it. To others it may not be. The good news is it's still America as far as I can tell, and you can make your own choices- and live with them.
I remember years ago when the M110 was fielded, people complained about the stock, original scope and bipod, only to find out that's what Army asked for, not what KAC wanted. It was also lost on people that what they built was a modular platform where you could swap out parts (which they did in later versions) to make the weapon even better. I also seem to remember that during the original testing Trey and his dad were throwing the rifle in puddles to cool it off and it was still consistently working. Point being, they were dedicated to it, and subsequently kept data on every rifle that left their factory. Was everyone's experience good? Nah, bro but please tell me when it ever is for any platform. Oh, and let's take a look at why it wasn't a good user experience, because that matters.
YMMV
I remember years ago when the M110 was fielded, people complained about the stock, original scope and bipod, only to find out that's what Army asked for, not what KAC wanted. It was also lost on people that what they built was a modular platform where you could swap out parts (which they did in later versions) to make the weapon even better. I also seem to remember that during the original testing Trey and his dad were throwing the rifle in puddles to cool it off and it was still consistently working. Point being, they were dedicated to it, and subsequently kept data on every rifle that left their factory. Was everyone's experience good? Nah, bro but please tell me when it ever is for any platform. Oh, and let's take a look at why it wasn't a good user experience, because that matters.
YMMV
I'm really loving this post.
Let's be honest. 90--95% of AR owners maybe shoot their gun less than a half dozen times a year. If they can hit a tin can at 50 yards or a balloon at 100 from a concrete bench they're happy.
Of the remaining 5-10% who actually go to the range on a regular basis, 95-99% of them fall into one of the two categories described by the German. I will freely admit I'm one of them. I'm a civilian, 65 years old and have a bad back. Although I believe that training is important, and I regularly do drills designed to improve my skill level, they are pretty similar to the drills the German makes fun of. (Although I do shoot when it's 5 below zero and when its 90+, so I'm not weather dependent).
And I also try to take care of my guns. So yes, they go from my cabinet, to a padded case, to my car, to the "square" range, then back into the padded case and back home. At least every 1-200 rounds the BCG gets wiped down and re-lubed. Maybe run a bore snake through the barrel. Every 5-600 round gun gets a more thorough cleaning. It's not that hard.
Not really sure what kind of training the German and his elite cadre of KAC owners are doing. Maybe parachuting into the middle of the Everglades, hiking 7-10 miles through waste deep swamp water and living off the land for the next month eating nothing but raw alligators. Their range is the swamp and training exercises involve popping up out of chest high water to engage the enemy (or get their next meal), and lots of ninja rolls. And being high speed, low drag operators they can't possibly bring along a bottle of CLP, a rag and a bore snake so their gun needs to be able to go 10,000 rounds between cleaning.
I guess my point is that there is certainly a level of implicit snobbery in the German's post - i.e. the KAC is designed for a tiny, super elite group of shooters that "need" its level of performance, something the rest of us pathetic "larpers" simply can't understand or appreciate. Although, as I said in my earlier post, I would love to see some actual data on how KAC hold ups against something like BCM or DD in terms of reliability and durability, rather than a somewhat vague statement about how " a long list of both cheap and pricier guns going down during actual training ..."
And certainly there are a number of mfg.'s whose guns are combat proven because they are used by soldiers on active duty, which gives me some confidence that I don't have to deliberately abuse my guns to determine whether they can hold up to "hard" use.
BTW, if you've got 35,000 hard use rounds through that KAC barrel, you should probably think about replacing it.
I've got no dog in this fight and really couldn't possibly care less. But I keep coming back for the entertainment this thread delivers. Thanks guys, you know who you are..
I see people claiming round counts like that on a single barrel and it always makes me scratch my head. Even if you wait an hour between shots for cooling I can't fathom a barrel going that long. I haven't killed a CHF or chrome lined barrel yet but I've smoked several nitrided SS and chromoly barrels and some bare SS ones and I've never seen them go more than 12k. Is it really possible that a tougher manufacturing process and reduced rate of fire could triple that?
That’s how HK originally won contracts with the HK416. Their barrels simply put up with SOCOM’s firing schedule whereas others did not.
I try to go tip first in all aspects of life.
Last time I got a barrel over 13k my bullets were arriving on target sideways by 50 yds. Didn't quite meet my accuracy requirements.
I can believe in increased longevity. But 35k is beyond my comprehension. I'm open to having my mind changed but I'd like to see the hard numbers from whatever agency is doing the documented testing.
The barrels are rated at 45K rounds and I have seen some go over 50K rounds. The muzzle end of the bores are swaged to keep the bullets going straight under high rate of fire. The barrel material source is closely guarded and made in one factory in the world. Even the hammers of the forgers are of special material from the metal hardness. The special contract .gov only KAC rifles use this material if the requirement calls for it.
The bolts are also a special proprietary material not available to the public.
Best advice in this thread so far.
Going 35k rounds between barrel changes does give you an idea of how important accuracy is to the KAC owner. I guess bullets key holing is actually another advanced design feature of KAC rifles.
Last edited:
That may have been true, but I’m fairly sure that’s no longer true. The contracts that called for that material are done and gone - my understanding is they’ve simplified their supply chain and only use one material now.
Maybe. That lifestyle gave me two kids before I hit 20, so be careful taking advice from me..Best advice in this thread so far.
“If you don’t know what you’re doing, it’s best to do it quickly”- Jase Robertson
Would love to see a cut away of one of those barrels at 35k. I’ve seen Jack Leuba post that chrome lined SR-25’s have a 25k expected barrel life. 7.62 is going to last longer than 5.56. Magic metal or not, 35k 5.56 pressure rounds, that’s a pretty bold claim. The tests I’ve read on stellite lined barrels showed increased life over chrome but unfeasable due to the costs. We aren’t talking cannon or artillery barrels.
FN is known for good barrels and tapering the bore if the customer calls for it. Maybe they have some wonder steel that they only use in Mil firearms.
I like KAC gear, but damn. Lol
FN is known for good barrels and tapering the bore if the customer calls for it. Maybe they have some wonder steel that they only use in Mil firearms.
I like KAC gear, but damn. Lol
Ok where are you getting this from? I am asking about the secret sauce barrels that last longer than any other barrel on the planet.
The Military spec for the 110 was like 5k or 10K barrel life.
To demystify this - KAC never publicly stated the material SR-16 bolts were made of, nor what the SR-15 bolt is made of. The assumption made by the community is that KAC used Aermet 100 series alloy at one point in time for certain contract SR-16 guns; notably a material used by LMT in their enhanced bolts as well. At present, it is believed KAC uses the same alloy for their contract and non-contract guns and that alloy isn't believed to be particularly exotic.
People who rebarrel their SR-15s typically do so at 25K+ from that folks that I personally know.
Pretty sure you just don’t operationally train how you fight hard enough to understand the difference broke dick 4 MOA KAC rifles make to the modern warfighter.
Bought a KAC SR-25 & SR-30 because I wanted them, and like them. Helps that I can sell either of them for thousands more than I paid. Hated the wait.
So, if I've made money on the deal, and I get to shoot a Gucci rifle while I'm at it, what's the harm? Carried plenty of shitty rifles around for a decade. Now that I'm paying for 'em, I carry what I want.
So, if I've made money on the deal, and I get to shoot a Gucci rifle while I'm at it, what's the harm? Carried plenty of shitty rifles around for a decade. Now that I'm paying for 'em, I carry what I want.
UFO crash retrieval programs. I wouldn't put it past the government to pry a rocker panel off a flying saucer and make a barrel out of it.
My understanding was they use 9310 material for their bolts.
Don’t know what material is used for the barrels but I am sure it is a close to what and how h & k make their cannon grade barrels.
Don’t know what material is used for the barrels but I am sure it is a close to what and how h & k make their cannon grade barrels.
The prized single extractor chrome bolts were allegedly Aermet, but 9310 is most likely what they’ve streamlined product lines around.
Not sure if the video is still around on Youtube or not but there was an older video of the owner and and a engineer from Knight's that were being interviewed on what design and features of their rifles that won the military contract. They discussed how their end design and engineering was different. I will try to find it and post a link.
I do not have the numbers for myself, but when we switched to CHF CL barrels at work (from Colt button barrels), the armorers are saying we went from a 10k round replacement schedule to 40k.
I dont know man.
I think we can all respect the engineering that has gone into KAC rifles and agree that they are some of the best running rifles on the planet, but I think there are a lot of really good guns out there these days.
At this point, I primary have stuff from Kac and LMT, I while i am willing to concede that my KAC is a little more refined than my LMT's, I am sort of over KAC at this point. Not because they aren't great rifles, or they are too expensive, but bc their parts availability is atrocious.
They have been talking about Short, 14.5 inch 6.5CM uppers for the last 4 years. Now they are talking about their new KS1 line up. I just can't take them serious anymore.
They have no availability, and this has been a problem for years. Ok their stuff is durable but if it takes 18 months to replace an extractor on a hard use rifle, it's really nothing more than a paperweight.
If KAC had a mechanism were KAC owners who blow $4,000 to $6.000 on one of their rifles, had the ability to log on and purchase spare parts and components for that rifle, to be filled as production allows, I would be all about KAC rifles.
But when you purchase one of their Gucci tier rifles made with Floridian space magic and ask them if you could order a new muzzle device and a silencer, no thanks, maybe give gunbroker a try, I just can't.
For every elite KAC shooter that spends 6 days a week, low crawling through the Florida everglades with a rifle that hasn't seen a drop of CLP in 20,000 rounds, there is some drunken slav, with no teeth running around in a muddy trench in Eastern Ukraine with a CZ Bren telling drunk Russians to suck his dick.
KAC, LMT, HK, CZ, FN, B&T, ect... It really doesn't matter; they all make good shit these days it really comes down to product support
Well said and you highlighted my issue with the company. The logon and filled as production is a great idea btw.
The 35k is on one of my SR15s.
I sold the M110 I used to shoot to someone during the skyrocketed KAC pricing time. I have a M110K1, but if I'm going for a large frame I shoot a MK20 due it being 6.5 and I still haven't been able to ever find the SR25/M110 6.5 upper.
This is all true.
SR15 not as much, but I've had people offer almost 3k for a shot out CQB suppressor because you just can't get them. Parts ebb and flow, but the good news is if its not the bolt, you can use milspec parts as replacements and it'll work just fine.
The SR25 side is an entirely different thing. I gave up looking for the 6.5 upper that doesn't exist except for on a few youtube videos and realized a MK20 complete rifle was cheaper than just the KAC 6.5 upper that I'd never find.
I have not tried it but I thought the gas tube was different and it has some kind of proprietary locking nut on it as well. The handguard can't be removed without a special tool. Good news though is if the bcg does break milspec work just fine in it.
Yeah like the mk12 quad rail that the entire world is after. People are scalping them for 1200$ or more on Arfcom.
On a practical level i agree that swapping out some KAC parts with some MILSPEC parts is not going to result in anybody getting killed in the streets.
With That being said. If I am paying a 50+ percent premium to get a negligible increase in performance over a different high-end rifle, I EXPECT that company to be able to provide support. Having to indefinitely monitor multiple vendors 24/7 or pay a 3X premium at gunbroker is unacceptable.
While KAC is does not treat their customers as Beta testers, they really don't operate too differently than Sig in supporting their lineup.
For Example
5 years ago, KAC comes up with their lunchbox special/one piece at a time rifle. Cool, But 5 years later, those 50 to 100 guys that got into that deal are still left standing with their dick in their hand.
Out of nowhere, Kac releases a bunch of SR16 uppers on the market. They sell out for minutes, no effort to make a second run.
As mentioned previously in regard to their 6.5's, 5 years after the announce them, there are only a couple dozen out in the wild.
Fast forward to this last week and its come out that they are now setup to be able to 3D print $700 triple taps so they should be regularly available. I mean triple taps are cool and all but who the fuck is asking for 700-dollar muzzle devices.
Lets say that I picked up an ECC or SR16 or CQB, and I actually shoot the piss out of it. What happens after I shoot the barrel out, I see their reps telling people to send in their rifle for a new barrel but what does that even mean, how long is the gun going be down for, why as a owner of a kac rifle, can't I just forecast my shooting schedule at place an order for a replacement barrel 12 to 18 months prior.
Why does it feel like anybody that you ask this question goes into a full-blown mini stroke.
Seriously, can these guys just finish up that stupid lunchbox special, I am willing to bet that people on that list have died waiting on that project to complete.
Similar threads
