Bushmaster .308 ORC 1 Minute Review

Normally, when I do a review, I talk, or type…you know, describe the weapon or component that I’m reviewing.

In this case, though, I think this video (and very little text) does a pretty good job of describing how the weapon has performed so far. I’m not giving up on it, mind you.

The third video clip is what I’d like people who say “if it works, it works” to pay special attention to…

Advertisements

15 Comments

Filed under Firearms

15 responses to “Bushmaster .308 ORC 1 Minute Review

  1. Yep, and when it doesn’t work you may die. I am not an armorer, but it would seem to me that re-engineering the original AR platform to shoot 7.62 would be a very demanding task. Not to be undertaken lightly. I am just an old guy that has used the M16 platform since the XM16E1 days, but it appears too many people are in a rush to go to 7.62 just because it is fashionable. I cannot speak to the M4, but the old M16s with the proper ammunition killed quite well.

    • Andy

      The AR was originally designed for 7.62x51mm (.308) in 1950. It was almost 10 years later that the 5.56 cartridge was developed. The only reverse engineering that happened here was taking a rifle designed for 7.62mm and making it work for 5.56mm- not the other way around.

      • If so it was Stoner’s design. I wonder if all these companies jumping on the 7.62 bandwagon bother with that kind of research. I am not referring to quality rifles like the LaRues and Daniel Defense,BCM or other quality manufacturers. Back in the day I was only concerned that the weapon would work and never gave a thought to it’s design. At the time, the major selling point to us was it’s weight, the amount of ammunition you could carry in the basic load and the fact that the barrel was not susceptible to bending when we jumped. Also we did not have to break it down to jump, so it was immediately useful on landing in the DZ.

  2. John Jackson

    A good case of actions (pictures) speak louder than words

  3. MrMaigo

    I don’t think that’s supposed to happen

  4. Arcane

    Looks like a seriously weak extractor.

  5. Arcane

    I watched the video again. What a piece of crap.

    How does Bushmaster manage to continue to produce this junk without ever getting sued?

    God, I hope Remington doesn’t get any more military contracts.

  6. Redchrome

    Weak extractor, or is it overgassed? Is the bolt unlocking too soon?

    Not saying that the AR platform’s extractor couldn’t be engineered better; but crushing a brass gasket (effectively what the case is) under 25 tons of pressure against the inside of an almost-straight-cylindrical steel wall, then expecting it to spring back and slide free a few milliseconds later, does seem kind of dubious. The more milliseconds you wait, the more time there is for the case to come free of the chamber wall before extraction happens.

  7. MarkM

    It’s not a Stoner concept problem, it’s a engineering and production execution problem. The gas action is doing the job. Whether it’s a weak extractor, overgassed, or poor timing needs to be discovered.

    200 rounds: burrs have been scuffed off, the bolt friction from that should be less. The extractor is still pulling the case from the chamber, it’s when it’s halfway out it releases it and doesn’t flip it against the lump. The ejector should be doing that.

    Instead we see it falling free, not being tilted and forcibly thrown clear. The ejector plunger is supposed to be pressing against the case head at all times.

    Is there brass jamming it from soft commercial cases? Self loading actions are hard to tune to a wide variety of loads, as shotgun designers well know, and few car owners expect great performance from a tankful of white gas.

    If the ammo is straight up surplus in good condition, Bushmaster hasn’t done so well on this one. It remains to be discovered why.

  8. Phil

    Looks like the extractor is weak. I’d check that first. This is why we have the black o-rings…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s