What do you think of the SR-25?

#54
Re: What do you think of the SR-25?

Then your as lost as he is....

That list includes 2 piston systems, which I am decidedly not a fan, a switch barrel system which is quite heavy(but that feature may outweigh the weight factor for some), and a rifle designed for gun games. So to say one has no value over the others entirely ignores what you want the rifle for and what value it holds for you!

What if you place a high degree of value on the weight of the system?

Lets look at some published weights.
LWRC 9 lbs 8oz
POF 9 Lbs
MWS 10 lbs
EMC 8 lbs 5 oz


If either of you two have owned ANY of these systems Id like to hear actual experience. Otherwise its just internet regurgitation. Somethingelse Im not a fan of.
 
#56
Re: What do you think of the SR-25?

My opinion is correct for me. But sprecifically he is making a blanket statement. If you see the value in a piston driven 308 pattern AR, which I assume you do since you popped for one, would it make sense for me to say that your rifle doesnt bring anything to the table over a plain old AR10A4 for $995?

By listing so many systems that are different enough to likely include a deal maker or breaker, it doesnt make sense. For example if you want a quick switch barrel system, then only the MWS meets that criteria and holds a value to the buyer over the others.
 
#57
Re: What do you think of the SR-25?

There's no need to get worked up over there. The guy only said you could pay less for a rifle that functions just as efficiently and is built with as much quality as a KAC is.

He's not wrong. He didn't say anything about weight, or gas system, or whether or not the barrels are quick change. Relax.
 
#58
Re: What do you think of the SR-25?

Your missing the point.....

If your going from trunk to bench it probably matters little. If your after a specific feature it matters a lot. Functions how? If the rifle is not capable of doing what the KAC can do, how is it just as good/functional for less money? Weight matters, system matters, features matter if you require those features for the rifle to perform the function you want it to.
 
#60
Re: What do you think of the SR-25?

Factors I would consider in approximate order:

1. reliability
2. accuracy
3. longevity and durability (sort of interchangeable, but not exactly)
4. parts availability and interchangeability (including magazines)
5. weight
6. cost
7. type of system (piston VS direct impingement)

My reasons for choosing these factors, and their relative order:
Note that cost is a factor, but it is toward the bottom of my list. Other factors are more important.

Accuracy is useless to me if the system doesn't work.

I don't hump rifles in the bush much any more, hence weight isn't too big of a factor.

If something does go wrong, I would like the option of repairing it myself if I can get the parts locally.

All rifles wear out eventually, even if it is only the barrel. But if things wear out unusually fast, I would like to know ahead of time. However, if there was a system that did everything else perfectly, was half the weight of other systems, and gave considerably greater accuracy, I would consider that rifle even if it only lasted half as long as other models.

If all other things were equal, the type of system wouldn't matter to me. If one system could be shown to either last longer, be more accurate, more reliable, less troublesome, more durable, then I would consider it. But from what I have learned, both systems have their advantages and disadvantages. As a result, I would consider other factors long before I got to the method of operation.

I ended up with a DPMS LR308 rifle. I am more likely to bring out one of my bolt guns when I want accuracy. When I want real accuracy in a semi-auto, I bring one of my Grendels. If I need the long distance hitting power on a plate, then I'll bring out the DPMS rifle. It isn't as accurate as either the bolt guns, or the Grendels, but it does hit harder...at least until it goes transonic...
 
#61
Re: What do you think of the SR-25?

Snake, I can only answer that in relation to the details that matter to me. Im sure there are other features like suppression etc etc but since I dont live in free america they werent high on the list of considerations. What matters to me is wieght and balance for starters. At this level and since just about all the rifles mentioned have a proven track record for reliability (with the exception of early LWRC's IIRC) its probably a moot point. I do not believe in the piston AR so that eliminates the POF and LWRC right off the top. I have never shot or even held a JP so I have nothing to offer on that rifle. That leaves the LMT and the EMC. What I can tell you is that the nose heavy weight distribution and the overall weight of the system made it unsat for what Im doing with the rifle. Engaging targets on the move was exceptionally difficult for me as the weight and nose heavy nature induced a LOT of bobbing and weaving when aI ran the MWS. I do not have this issue with the EMC. In fact the only other 308 I am able to do it as effectively with was my SCAR17. But I like my EMC better and when I want to toss the Bipod and Hendsholt on it, it rewards me with about .5 moa accuracy. Should I escape to free America, the fact it is designed to run suppressed interests me. These are some of the things that make the rifle worth it to me over the others.
 
#62
Re: What do you think of the SR-25?

Let me rephrase the question.

When you load the rifle (let's say with 175gr SMK) and pull the trigger and the gun goes bang; what does the KAC do that the others cannot?
 
#64
Re: What do you think of the SR-25?

My point is I understand all of those ancillary features matter to the individual depending on what they need out of the weapon, but those factors are all subjective dependent upon the shooter, at no fault of the rifles themselves.

You told us we were delusional for saying you could spend less on something that does the same job just as well and of the same quality.

I'm asking you to back that up by asking, if all the rifles mentioned are lined up and shooting the same ammo, what does your preferred choice do that the rest cannot?

Or you can just say "At the end of the day my personal preference is the KAC, sorry for getting hostile."
 
#65
Re: What do you think of the SR-25?

Snake, dont put words in my mouth. I never said anyone was delusional.

Your painting an example that makes no point. Wy not get a piece of pipe, a hammer and a nail if all your after is "bang".

I backed up my position with a clear cut example of a tangeable benefit. The claim I am refutting is his statement that all your getting for your money is a name.

Features of these rifles is indeed what sets them apart from each other. And that is also what makes the value an individual choice when it comes to the cost. Which is why his statement is flawed. And again when I hear that statement made with nothing to support it, its just regurgitation, something I have grown quite weary of. I do not claim to be an expert by any means but I have owned most of these rifles and shoot them enough in varying disciplines to at least have an informed opinion. If you have side by side experience with your LWRC and an EMC I would be quite interested to hear about your impressions.
 
#66
Re: What do you think of the SR-25?

I believe he said you pay MORE money for the name, not that all you get is the name.

And my mistake, you didn't say delusional, you said lost and defiant of logic. Just as well.

You still haven't said what the EMC can do that my 16" barreled REPR cannot. Note that I've said nothing ill of the EMC; I'd use one.

I'm just wondering if we're still lost and defiant of logic for having our own opinions of the available selections when compared to the KAC offerings.
 
#67
Re: What do you think of the SR-25?

Im pretty sure im interpreting him correctly "You are paying for the Knight name. There is nothing inherently better about the SR25 then any other quality AR10-type rifle " I interpret that as your only paying for the name there is no other benefit....

My commenton on flawed logic was to compare systems that have such significant differences and like I said already, feature sets that are likely to be deal makers or breakers to an individual for each of these systems.

On the specific comparison of the LWRC what can you do to shave 3/4 of a pound off it? What I found, again this is for me, is that when a rifle goes over 10 lbs with optics, I cant run it like i intend to anymore. Especially if it is nose heavy. Is the LWRC nose heavy as it seems piston AR's tend to be?
 
#68
Re: What do you think of the SR-25?

I have personally shot an sr-25 and has the accuracy to back up its name. However I do know you can get another AR-10 for half the price. If you want to buy an SR-25 and be happy with the price no one else's opinions matter.

You will not be disappointed.
 
#69
Re: What do you think of the SR-25?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Unknown</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Factors I would consider in approximate order:

<span style="font-weight: bold">1. reliability</span>
<span style="font-weight: bold">2. accuracy
3. longevity and durability (sort of interchangeable, but not exactly)</span>
<span style="font-weight: bold">4. parts availability and interchangeability (including magazines)</span>
<span style="font-weight: bold">5. weight</span>
<span style="font-weight: bold">6. cost</span>
<span style="font-weight: bold">7. type of system (piston VS direct impingement)</span>

My reasons for choosing these factors, and their relative order:
Note that cost is a factor, but it is toward the bottom of my list. Other factors are more important.

Accuracy is useless to me if the system doesn't work.

I don't hump rifles in the bush much any more, hence weight isn't too big of a factor.

If something does go wrong, I would like the option of repairing it myself if I can get the parts locally.

All rifles wear out eventually, even if it is only the barrel. But if things wear out unusually fast, I would like to know ahead of time. However, if there was a system that did everything else perfectly, was half the weight of other systems, and gave considerably greater accuracy, I would consider that rifle even if it only lasted half as long as other models.

If all other things were equal, the type of system wouldn't matter to me. If one system could be shown to either last longer, be more accurate, more reliable, less troublesome, more durable, then I would consider it. But from what I have learned, both systems have their advantages and disadvantages. As a result, I would consider other factors long before I got to the method of operation.

I ended up with a DPMS LR308 rifle. I am more likely to bring out one of my bolt guns when I want accuracy. When I want real accuracy in a semi-auto, I bring one of my Grendels. If I need the long distance hitting power on a plate, then I'll bring out the DPMS rifle. It isn't as accurate as either the bolt guns, or the Grendels, but it does hit harder...at least until it goes transonic...


</div></div>

Allow me to give me feedback as a former EMC owner -

1. My EMC only cycled with black hills red box 308, it would not cycle with FGMM or SWA 308, I never even tried surplus, whereas my GAP-10 and my Scar-17 would eat FGMM and SWA all day, my SWA chronos better and more consistently than my black hills so...I'm not really sure why this was an issue with mine, but it definitely turned me off to the point I decided to part with the gun.

2. My EMC was very accurate, in all honesty I never understood the guys saying the larue platform was so much better, I was able to get .6 and .7 groups out of it.

3. To be fair I never really had the opportunity to test this, I wasn't going to test the durability of a gun I paid $5000 for that I wasn't sure about keeping. I don't see how it would be any less durable than its competition, or any more. They are all basically the same platform with very similar build quality, all just with minor tweaks in the system. SCAR would be an obvious difference here though, but my scar is a 1 MOA gun, not a .6 MOA gun. YMMV

4. Hard to find parts that are super expensive, very much like the scar. Magazines are an interesting topic to me, I hated the 762 pmags and thought they felt like shit, I bought 20, only 6 of which would feed reliably. The KAC mag was very reliable, however it costs even more than a SCAR-17 mag at the inflated prices they are going for. A lot of people seem to be happy with their PMAG-LR's though so perhaps you would be as well.

5. Weight was better than my LMT, however I couldn't really feel a difference compared to my GAP-10. Scar blows all of these away in this category, by a HUGE margin, which I did not expect. I thought the EMC would be more akin to the scar in weight from what I had read online.

6. Super expensive, imho not worth the coin unless you are a collector. If you are looking for value there are better options out there, but as a collector piece it is pretty cool, I just can't afford to do it.

7. This is a wash, I definitely prefer the piston system in the SCAR, however in an AR-10/SR-25 pattern gun I don't think I would be interested. I have shot piston ar-15's which I hated, don't know how similar these would be.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
What is the state of LMT MWS-H complete uppers these days?
Replies
11
Views
638
Sid Post
S
bigjake83
New Purchase?
Replies
103
Views
3K
bigjake83
bigjake83
Brushout
SOLD WTS: KAC SR-25 mags metal Larue***SOLD***
Replies
1
Views
99
KimberGuy
KimberGuy
Bakwa
Casual KAC SR-15 Comparison [a study in performance]
Replies
74
Views
5K
SigSauerM7
SigSauerM7
carbonbased
Rifle Scopes S&B 5-25 vs 3-20 US at 20x
Replies
25
Views
560
carbonbased
carbonbased
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Merch
Alerts