Surefire ICAR

[LRRPF52]

I wonder who will be next or is already in the process of adopting the new receivers and Magpul ICAR PMAG compatibility?

LWRCi is already poised to produce firearms with a simple barrel/bolt install with their existing Six8 receivers, but I would really like to see them use their new semi-monolithic upper.

ADM would be nice with their ambi lower and funnel mag well.

Noveske would be a great place to see a 338 ARC in the form of their Ghetto Blaster.

 

[Shoreglide]

I’d probably be all over a semi monolithic receiver that takes the new ICAR Pmags. Currently waiting to see what actually comes to market over the next few months.

 

[Spd37]

I want thicker bolt lugs that’ll handle bolt gun pressures

 

[rlsmith1]

I want thicker bolt lugs that’ll handle bolt gun pressures

Agreed, otherwise this is pointless to me. I’m not taking my 6 ARC to war so a potential broken bolt isn’t the end of the world and a non standard AR isn’t very exciting if it can’t increase performance but I’m not holding my breath.

Only solution I see is something like 223 and 556 distinction for basically the same thing

 

[Spd37]

Agreed, otherwise this is pointless to me. I’m not taking my 6 ARC to war so a potential broken bolt isn’t the end of the world and a non standard AR isn’t very exciting if it can’t increase performance but I’m not holding my breath.

Only solution I see is something like 223 and 556 distinction for basically the same thing

It’s weird PSA made this larger 6arc and different bolt when all they had to do was make that set what 40-60 thousand larger? I don’t get it

 

[LRRPF52]

I want thicker bolt lugs that’ll handle bolt gun pressures

Just for reference, when Remington did the 30 RAR, which had an AR-10 diameter bolt head with AR-10 cross section lugs, with a corresponding AR-10 diameter barrel extension, they limited the SAAMI MAP to 55,000psi.

The bolt lug lengths were still AR-15 length, as were the tooth lengths in the barrel extension.

 

[Spd37]

Just for reference, when Remington did the 30 RAR, which had an AR-10 diameter bolt head with AR-10 cross section lugs, with a corresponding AR-10 diameter barrel extension, they limited the SAAMI MAP to 55,000psi.

The bolt lug lengths were still AR-15 length, as were the tooth lengths in the barrel extension.

I guess what I really mean is the aera between the case head and od needs to be thicker

 

[J.Milanos]

Hey guy's, I think we need FN to finish bringing out the 6.5X43 cartridge, mags and weapons system... We all know the restraints of the M16/M4 platform is the magazine length.. This new cartridge takes care of this... Mag Pul does make the mags for this weapons system... Just my thoughts... Jerry.

 

[LRRPF52]

Hey guy's, I think we need FN to finish bringing out the 6.5X43 cartridge, mags and weapons system... We all know the restraints of the M16/M4 platform is the magazine length.. This new cartridge takes care of this... Mag Pul does make the mags for this weapons system... Just my thoughts... Jerry.

That receiver set is bigger than an AR-10, which is the opposite direction we should be going in bulk/weight. It also uses .473” case head diameter cartridges, which require fat magazines that don’t stow well on the fighting load. Cartridge mass pulls away from your core with AR-10 width mags, which I have never liked.

If you used those magazines with a traditional AR-15 design, with small receivers and an appropriate bolt and barrel extension, it might make sense for a DMR. The performance they are getting from that cartridge is impressive though.

This is more of the direction NGSW should have gone, but the contenders are trying to get away from the AR-15 Stoner design, and establish traction with whatever system they can come up with. I really think that’s a losing strategy.

The imagined requirements for a folding stock are not sound, nor are the regressive trends to external piston operation. It’s just that these companies can’t find a better way to make the action.

 

[Chrsclnngr]

I am pretty sure the 6.5x43 LICC is a .445 bolt face (.441 case head diameter), i.e. a stretched 6.5 Grendel. The receivers/ magazines should fall somewhere between the AR-10 and the AR-15. I for one would be interested in seeing this cartridge in the wild to confirm its dimensions. (COAL 2.64)

 

[LRRPF52]

I am pretty sure the 6.5x43 LICC is a .445 bolt face (.441 case head diameter), i.e. a stretched 6.5 Grendel. The receivers/ magazines should fall somewhere between the AR-10 and the AR-15. I for one would be interested in seeing this cartridge in the wild to confirm its dimensions. (COAL 2.64)

That was .264 USA, which was a Carcano/Grendel case head diameter and longer case at 2.600” COL.

6.5x43 LICC is something different, with a .473” case head and slightly-shorter COL, high-strength steel cases, extreme chamber pressure:

 

[Chrsclnngr]

That was .264 USA, which was a Carcano/Grendel case head diameter and longer case at 2.600” COL.

6.5x43 LICC is something different, with a .473” case head and slightly-shorter COL, high-strength steel cases, extreme chamber pressure:

I stand corrected. Thank you!! I would be interested in seeing both of these in the wild. I believe I would be more interested in the .264 USA.

 

[LRRPF52]

Shoulder angle on .264 USA is too shallow for an efficient propellant conversion and tight SDs.

I think it was designed that way based on the theory that 20˚ shoulders feed better.

 

[Chrsclnngr]

Shoulder angle on .264 USA is too shallow for an efficient propellant conversion and tight SDs.

I think it was designed that way based on the theory that 20˚ shoulders feed better.

Maybe some day someone will create a .243 USA AI ( a .264 USA necked down to 6mm with a 40 degree shoulder ) who knows? Maybe an AR-12 (Midsize) Platform!! Just random thoughts!!

 

[LRRPF52]

Maybe some day someone will create a .243 USA AI ( a .264 USA necked down to 6mm with a 40 degree shoulder ) who knows? Maybe an AR-12 (Midsize) Platform!! Just random thoughts!!

If you have 2.600” COL, then you would want to look at .257” and crush all the 6mms quite easily, and most of the 140gr 6.5mm for BC using 131-138gr 25 cals.

But it’s only .2” shorter than 7.62x51/6.5CM etc.

 

[J.Milanos]

The receiver on the 6.5X43 is smaller that an AR-10, the mag well is larger than a AR-15 mag well... The case is based off the 308/6.5Creedmoor case and is 1mm shorter than my 6GT.. This cartridge's effective range is over 800meters. Weapon weight in short configuration is approx. 6 1/2 pounds, longer barrel more weight..

 

[J.Milanos]

A 25GT with heavy bullets would be very welcome.. The weapon runs off long stroke gas system also....

 

[rlsmith1]

Seems like if you combined this with this high pressure case heads of the NGSW program you might have a pretty potent goldilocks system in 25 cal. Short barreled 6.5 or 7mm variants would be really cool too. A 338 version might be a nice bigger brother to the 338 ARC for supers and still work well with subs

 

[putput30]

Seems like if you combined this with this high pressure case heads of the NGSW program you might have a pretty potent goldilocks system in 25 cal. Short barreled 6.5 or 7mm variants would be really cool too. A 338 version might be a nice bigger brother to the 338 ARC for supers and still work well with subs

25 cal really is the goldilocks caliber for weight, recoil, and ballistic performance. Someone just needs to take advantage of it now.

 

[LRRPF52]

I was loading some test rounds in the modified 20rd Six8 PMAG from LWRCi and it just exploded from spring tension breaking their glued-together base plate flange.

They take a 30rd Six8 PMAG and cut it off to fit 20 rounds of 6.8 SPC, cut off the flange from the base, then glue it to the new bottom of the cut-down mag, then slide the base plate on.

It came apart so violently, that the base plate and spring guide blasted out of the body and one of the things hit me in the chin hard. I still can’t find the base plate. LoL

They need to weld that flange to the mag body in order for something like this to not happen. The springs are way more powerful than standard AR-15 5.56 mag springs, due to the significant difference in cartridge stack mass.

I’ll have to get a hold of LWRCi and see if I can get a replacement.

 

[Bantam1]

I cut down a 5.45 polymer AK74 mag to make it a 20 round mag and just tried glue. It held for a little while, then came apart while I did a loaded storage test. Thankfully it was in a big storage container by itself when it happened.

I then tried polymer "epoxy" from Permatex or one of those companies. Same thing.

I had to plastic weld it with the mesh screen reinforcement to get it to hold up. I know there are better adhesives out there but it's tough to get them to hold up with the constant spring force of a loaded mag. This was just a cheap commercial Bulgarian mag with a much weaker spring than the good Russian or Bulgarian military mags. I can only imagine how much pressure those or the 68 PMAG has compared to what I tried.

 

[jabonra]

I reached out to new frontier after reading through this thread, the 6.8 receivers are not discontinued and they do plan on making more in the future. No ETA or anything but it could be a faster and more affordable way to get a mid frame built depending on how PSA and surefire sell them

 

[Bakwa]

25 cal really is the goldilocks caliber for weight, recoil, and ballistic performance. Someone just needs to take advantage of it now.

So you’re saying 257 Roberts was really the winner all along…?
Now we just need a short one for AR’s…

 

[Eric_F]

I reached out to new frontier after reading through this thread, the 6.8 receivers are not discontinued and they do plan on making more in the future. No ETA or anything but it could be a faster and more affordable way to get a mid frame built depending on how PSA and surefire sell them

Hmmm. Just got an alert that the blem C-6.8 lowers are available, and only $43. But the uppers don't exist anywhere, even the product page is 404 on NFA's website.

Edit: nvm I didn't read the page correctly, their G4 G2 uppers work for both 6.8 pattern and 5.56, and are the replacement for the dedicated C-6.8 uppers.

 

[Gtscotty]

Hmmm. Just got an alert that the blem C-6.8 lowers are available, and only $43. But the uppers don't exist anywhere, even the product page is 404 on NFA's website.

Edit: nvm I didn't read the page correctly, their G4 G2 uppers work for both 6.8 pattern and 5.56, and are the replacement for the dedicated C-6.8 uppers.

This cross compatibility with standard lowers is how PSA should do their ARC uppers if at all possible, but the last time I asked either on YT or in the industry section that wasn't the plan.

 

[jabonra]

The point of these receivers is to get the bigger mag length, you can always use a regular upper if you want to use a standard lower

 

[Gtscotty]

The point of these receivers is to get the bigger mag length, you can always use a regular upper if you want to use a standard lower

I'm not sure the driver for putting the 6 ARC in the ICAR format is extra mag length, most of the bullets I've tried in my ARCs hit the lands before 2.27" and that's part of the appeal of the cartridge design. If you're shooting heavier than 108gr ELD there might be a benefit in more mag length, but I don't think that's very big chunk of the market.

My point was in order to maximize the potential market, New Frontiers approach of having their uppers for both standard and ICAR lowers makes all kinds of sense. The response I got from PSA seemed to indicate that they would only be making 6 ARC and 338 ARC uppers that fit the ICAR lowers, and that those uppers wouldn't be compatible with regular lowers. It's not really an impact to me as tend to put together my own uppers and already have the ARCs I need, but I still think it's a missed opportunity for PSA to appeal to a wider market with their new offering.

 

[jabonra]

I agree, logically having an upper that is ultimately enhanced and can do either like new frontier would be rad but consider their niche compared to PSA - they're small, apparently more of a behind the scenes oem and a franken billet upper like theirs is only going to tickle the niche enthusiast iykyk corner of the market. If PSA really means to go in on mid frame, and especially if they start marketing their own mid frame length ammo their lowest common denominator customer base is bound to start fucking shit up. from that angle it might make more sense for them to keep it distinct.

Edit - I was wrong. At least from the qa on the Magpul mag coal is the same as a regular pmag, so the lower is just fat magwell and all the magic would be in a fancy upper. don't drink and post kids

 

[Jsp556]

At this point I’m waiting to see where the ICAR goes before buying or building anything else. Hoping this offers the ability to raise the Grendel sized case head to 5.56 pressures. I’d love to see a 16 or 18” mid sized gun equal 16” 6.5 Creedmoor 130gr velocities with lighter reciprocating mass than a large frame.


CMMG mutant bolt, ICAR P-mag compatable lower, Semi-monolithic upper, 2600-2700 fps 130 class 6.5mm capable.

Gotta have a dream right?