Gun Review: Beretta ARX-100

IMG_7203

I consider myself very familiar with most modern military rifles. In fact, I am an avid collector of two distinct subsets of firearms; machine guns, and semi-automatic military style 5.56×45/.223 rifles. Collecting the latter has become an obsession to the point that I have a poster in my gun room where I have crossed out what I have and circled what I need (when Steve saw this, he laughed pretty heartily). I am missing 7 or 8 at this time, and most are super obscure guns like the French FAMAS rifle (of which 100 or so were imported).

A few years ago I lucked out and grabbed up an unfired, new in the box Beretta AR70. While I have not fired it, everything on the gun looks very well made and it just screams Cold War stamped goodness:

IMG_2351

As a result, I knew that Beretta (the world’s oldest gun manufacturer) definitely had the means to produce an awesome next generation military rifle, and when I heard about the ARX-160, I was ecstatic. The 160’s semi-automatic only brother is now called the ARX-100, and I lucked out into being the writer who got to test her.

Testing of the ARX-100 rifle took two range trips, notably because on the first I had left my camera’s SD card in my computer. Regardless, I still shot the gun about 180 times. This session was discouraging, as I experienced numerous failure to feeds with brand new Lake City M193 ball:

IMG_3719

Thank you, iPhone.

Also, I was not at all impressed with how the rifle shot, so I took it over to my friend CJ’s house to get a second opinion. He and my friend Patrick were busy loading ammo, but both of them wanted to check out Italy’s latest contribution to the US gun community. We measured the trigger pull. It was so heavy that it actually maxed out CJ’s trigger pull gauge. We did get it to read once at 11.5 pounds.

IMG_3710IMG_3711

Also, the short and stubby charging handle (handle is a generous term) caused Patrick to pull the bolt to the rear and scrape his knuckle on the shell deflector badly, which resulted in blood being drawn:

IMG_3712

The charging handle is about an inch long and maybe an eighth of an inch thick because it has to be swappable from left to right, so this is a compromise. It has been designed for glove wearing soldiers.

Despite these blatant flaws, I did convince Patrick to come along to the range to help me test this gun a little more. I cleaned it up as best I could and took several loaded magazines with the same Lake City M193 ball ammo.

At first I wanted to try and replicate the jams I was experiencing on day one. I shot quickly and even messed with the gas setting. Still, the rifle ran fine:

IMG_7163

I even folded the stock in and tried to make it jam by shooting it with no support at the rear. Still, the ARX-100 ran fine:

IMG_7176

IMG_7187

When I got done with a few mags trying to get the gun to fail I started doing double taps and trying to keep the gun on target with some rapid fire. The trigger really made this hard, as pulling 12 lbs. over and over again tires out your pointer pretty quick.

That said, it was now time to accuracy test the rifle. Here I was not optimistic at all. The sights included with the rifle are poorly constructed in my opinion. I have been told Beretta is redesigning them.

IMG_7300

IMG_7306

When you pull the sights down, you have to manually lock them in place.

It was time to see what this rifle, M193 ball, and my trigger finger could produce.

IMG_7208

IMG_7285

Notice the rifle’s massive ejection port.

Here I was actually surprised. I am an iron sight guy first of all, as I believe that rifles issued with iron sights should be shot primarily with iron sights (at least while I am young and my eyes are still good). At 100 yards with m193 ball ammo, I was able to eak out this group:

IMG_7445

Despite the trigger, I believe that with a telescopic sight, quality ammo, and a more solid rest the rifle is capable of good accuracy. That said, my worst group was atrocious out of the 5 groups of 5 I shot:

IMG_7444

Still, with an average of 3.4″. I would have preferred better accuracy, which could be achieved with a better trigger and sights.

After the accuracy test was performed, Patrick decided to give the rifle that stole some of his blood a go:

IMG_7315

IMG_7341

We both agreed that the recoil impulse is similar to an FN SCAR’s, and that with some finesse and fine tuning, Beretta could really turn this system into something great. Also, we appreciate the gimmicks such as the ejection selector and swappable charging handle:

IMG_7356

As for my bullet points:

The Good:

  • $1,500 price tag is much lower than other rifles like the SCAR and ACR
  • Lefty friendly
  • Excellent placement of the bolt catch (in the trigger guard)
  • Awesome barrel quick detach

The Bad:

  • Charging handle too short
  • Experienced jams
  • Not as accurate as pretty much any sub-$1,000 AR15
  • Everything feels cheap
  • Terrible sights

The Ugly:

  • Trigger. Seriously Beretta… come on
  • Factory sights very high, with no cheek comb like on the SCAR or ACR

In my opinion, the ARX-100 is probably the least pleasant to shoot of the latest generation 5.56 military style semi-automatic rifles on the market. Its $700-$800 price difference between a SCAR makes it seem appealing, but I would recommend you save your money see what Beretta does with this platform first.



Alex C.

Alex is a Senior Writer for The Firearm Blog and Director of TFBTV.


Advertisement

  • Patrick R

    No mention of the nucular heated picitiny rails …. Worst gun ever.

    • GS

      I can rest my thumb on the left side rail, put 2 mags through in a hurry and not feel a thing. Are your thumbs made of butter?

  • asdf

    That is rather sad, being a left I was really hoping the ARX-100 would be a good rifle.

    • ColaBox

      There are other options out there for lefties. AR…SCAR…ACR…most WWII rifles…etc.

      • M

        AR-15s are surprisingly lefty-friendly, even without the aftermarket ambi parts. Locking the bolt open is actually easier as a lefty than a righty, as your index finger can work the bolt release up AND down without shifting your hand (at least mine can).
        The only really awkward part is the safety… and I guess the charging handle if you are used to pulling only one side of it.

        Also, adding AKs to the list of lefty friendly guns…

        • ColaBox

          The safety is still fairly easy, you can just twist your hand a bit and switch it with your thumb, at least I can with mine. As for the charging handle, I got use to using my right hand, just stick your arm out, turn the gun sideways and pull.

          • M

            Not talking about easy or not. I was talking from a sheer design point of view, it has a mostly ambi design. ARs have a more ambidextrous control than people give it credit for. The only thing that is not is the safety and [arguably] the charging handle

          • Phil Hsueh

            The charging handle is very lefty friendly if you use it the way I was taught in the Corps which was to operate with two fingers, one on either side of the handle. Doing it that way it doesn’t matter which hand you use since you’ll hit the latch/lever regardless. Of course, I realize that things have changed and that the preferred method is to now work it with your hand on one side and operate it like it’s an AK or any other side mounted charging handle rifle.

          • TFB Reader

            +1 on the safety

      • Blake

        The SKS would be a good lefty option if the bolt carrier handle wouldn’t smash you in the face. Check out this lovely conversion:
        http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f19/sks-bullpup-convert-not-convert-78072/#post1055405

  • Josh

    Another Con is the incompatibility of magazines….

    • BattleshipGrey

      Are PMAGs not accepted?

      • Steve Truffer

        not gen 3’s.

        • BattleshipGrey

          Hmm, I didn’t realize the M3’s were overhauled that much. Interesting. You’d think a mag latch hole is a mag latch hole, how complicated can it be :)?

          • Vhyrus

            It’s not the hole thats the problem. The gen 3’s have a tab on the back to prevent people from slamming them too far into the mag well. This was designed around the AR platform. The back of the ARX mag well is lower than an AR, so the tab keeps it from seating.

          • Cornelius Carroll

            You would think, at this point, manufacturers chasing the 5.56 caliber would just design their mag wells around the AR platform.

          • Anonymous

            When it’s designed overseas, in a country that doesn’t *have* a robust small arms market, where there are only a literal handful of designers, and it can take them ages to get access to current products on the market…the quality of their attempt to be cutting edge is going to suffer dramatically.

          • Zachary marrs

            Im pretty sure they have access to p mags

          • I would think—-

          • Zachary marrs

            I would hope

            But apparently hope isn’t enough

    • I just say no to plastic magazines whenever possible.

      • Zachary marrs

        Any particular reason why? Id much rather have p mags than a usgi mag

        • I know some people who are/were deployed who didn’t like plastic mags because they aren’t “fixable”. A metal magazine may bend easier than a plastic mag may break, but you can bend a metal magazine back.

          For me? I like PMags for pleasure and Lancers for business.

          • Zachary marrs

            Oh, so you just want steel feed lips, ok

          • Eh, I found my PMag gen 2s to be kinda breaky, that’s all.

            Really, any mag from a major manufacturer will be alright.

          • Y-man

            Sounds kinky!

            LOL!

          • Zachary marrs

            Hey, thats not my scene man, but if it floats your boat

          • Guest

            LOL!

          • Zachary marrs

            Wtf just happened, I… I think I just got molested.

          • Y-man

            LOL!!

        • They dont work in most of my guns well. PMAGS and the like are fine for ARs, but I have too many guns that were designed around steel/aluminum mags (FS2000, SCAR, HK416, M17s, etc).
          If you are strictly an AR guy they they are fine, but I am not.

          • Yeah, I second that. I’ll also say USGIs are really underrated.

          • Indeed. I have some mags that are much, much older than me that work flawlessly. While I am sure PMAGs will hold up, it isn’t like GI mags are junk.

  • thedonn007

    I was considering getting one of these back when they first came out. I ended up getting a Tavor instead. I would like you see your review of a sig 556XI.

    • We can do that—-In the meantime there’s some information on my Sig reviews on the 556XI.

    • Vhyrus

      I got the tavor as well. I think I made the right choice.

  • USMC03Vet

    Visually the eroganomics of that rifle look horrid. Skinny buttstock, fat ass obtuse center, and then back to skinny hand guard/barrel.

    It’s like the equivalent in the gun world of an opposite muffin top fatty wearing spanx. I’m sure if you listen carefully you can hear it asking to be put out of it’s misery when the trigger resets.

  • At SHOT 2013, I angered a Beretta rep by gumming up the rifle trying to change the charging handle from right to left. It’s not really “grunt proof”…

    • John

      Hmmm, so how is its reception by the Italian Army?

      • I haven’t read anything official from them.

      • realist

        Easy to toss when it’s time to run?

      • dp

        Potentially risky topic…. stay out.

      • Toms

        As if their opinion matters.Its like the Russian army complaining about Izmash products, or a Brit complaining about the enfield. Yeah sure we will go to another country and buy you a better rifle, not.

      • No idea.

    • ducky

      Can confirm this (eyewitness). Won’t forget two reps slamming it into the ground trying to release the bolt and how they were frowning at us…
      Cheers Axel

    • dp

      So far I have seen just couple of videos so my base is limited. Yet, what I observed is less than intuitive take-down; awkward actually. This will be augmented in dramatic circumstances of battle to point when operator just gives up, throws that junk away and pulls out his white hankie.
      Too many gadgets are recipe for disaster.
      Btw, heard that French military is less than enthusiastic about it so far.

      • DP do you have a link to the comments from the French military?

        • dp

          This was a private mention from a French national who is interested in firearms and is current (but not professionally involved with) on subject of standing procurement. According to him, they wanted “some modifications”.

  • SM

    So, the hype train has derailed?

    • Heh, the hype train stopped at Colt 6920 station, for me.

  • William C.

    Looks like it has the potential to be a good weapon somewhere in there but it will need fixing. Any reviews from Italian military users operating the ARX-160?

  • ColaBox

    “I am an iron sights guy first of all, as I believe rifles issued with iron sights, should be shot primarily with iron sights.” Amen to that my friend, marksmanship in its purest and most reliable form. The fancy doo-dads of today are nice but fairly unnecessary. Quite frankly, I see electronics as a handy cap that many shooters cant get past.

    • Quach

      lol

    • n0truscotsman

      Try actually shooting in a manner that is outside the delicate paradigm of what american shooters hold dearest to their hearts: the shaded range with IPSC targets out in the open.

      No seriously.

      Try some fire and maneuver sometime through the woods or desert, where you take cover and are constantly forced to adapt to shooting positions and make compromises on your comfort.

      Optics are a godsend.

      • I am a recreational marksman, not a soldier. I have been shooting iron sights all my life and I will continue to do so until my eyes forbid it.

      • Zachary marrs

        You act as if thats impossible, even though irons have been used in much worse conditions then what you’ve mentioned, since about the 1500’s. Dont get me wrong, I love red dots and acogs as much as the next guy, but c’mon

        • n0truscotsman

          My point was that optics are not a luxury, they’re the new KISS or the new standard as to what should be included on a fighting rifle. This has been the case since the late 1990s. As a former instructor of warfighters and current trainer of civilian shooters and law enforcement, the idea that optics are a handicap is fundamentally flawed and technophobic to be honest.
          Optics have evolved significantly since the days of thin aluminum tubes and spider’s silk.
          I have no issue with irons, having a personal affinity for simplistic, redundant systems to remedy a hypothetical problem that would degrade my ability to shoot accurately. Those sights Beretta put on that rifle look like utter abortions though, I cannot wait to see them for myself 😀
          Note: I understand that not everybody view shooting in the same perspective as I do. I respect that. My point again was that many misconceptions and biases are effectively dismantled if one trains hard and realistically.

          • Zachary marrs

            So? That doesn’t give them an excuse to cheap out on the irons, especially on a $1000+ gun

          • n0truscotsman

            I agree and to add more to that, there was no reason to try and reinvent the wheel.

          • You can have your optics. I will continue shooting and hunting with irons. If that makes me a technophobe, then so be it. I do not view optics as a luxury or a handicap; I simply don’t want or need them. More power to the people that use them though if they enhance your abilities and enjoyment!

          • Y-man

            In all my experience, as a recreational shooter, I have found it hard/ almost impossible to focus with optics [Scopes though, I have not tried reflex sights.] possibly due to my severe astigmatism. Even at ranges as close as 75 feet: It took me twice as long to aim as iron sights, and once while firing a Barrett M107 .50 at about 120 yards [LOL!] I just could NOTuse the optics…
            Shooting the G36 [With the two tube optics] was a nightmare… But on the AK-74, iron sights: I had the gong ringing time after time…
            I tend to think about it more as per SHTF situations, you will have more iron sights guns around than guns with optics.
            Hell, we should all even practice shooting WITHOUT sights: aiming down a bare barrel: we might have to shoot like that to save our lives! [The FPS Russia challenge style…LOL.]

          • Lol @ FPS Russia challenge! That would be awesome!

          • iksnilol

            I have a bit of a problem with reticles that cover the target. A reticle like the one on the PSO-1 works just fine (though Acogs I have a bit of a problem with). Ironically, I tolerate mil-dot reticles.

          • n0truscotsman

            optics DO have an advantage in that they keep the weight and bulk down. That is valuable to many people. Especially with AKs or anything different where mounting an optic is a pain.

      • I don’t think Alex was saying that optics are unwanted for serious applications, but that he prefers shooting at the range with irons.

  • ValleyForge77

    Damn that was an informative review. Thank you.

  • KestrelBike

    A few years ago I saw a FAMAS on gunbroker, at the time it was at about $8,200? I was floored to see one out in the wild!

    • BattleshipGrey

      I’m surprised it was so low in price considering how few there are in the US.

      • iksnilol

        I’m surprised people want the Famas.

        • Why so? Any rifle that can serve a deployed military for forty years with little support must be a pretty decent gun!

          • iksnilol

            I know the F1 models are horrible. The F2 models I don’t know.

            Also they can’t use brass cased ammo due to the blowback system or something.

            I like bullpups and the Famas looks cool but other than that it isn’t that good.

            If you want an ambi-friendly bullpup of foreign make, try to find an A-91. Though I doubt they make a civilian version of it.

        • n0truscotsman

          I am too.

          I can guarantee that if anybody actually used the damn things, they would be rushing back to their ARs. I thought the French were going to walk off with our M4s and Mk18s in afghanistan…

    • n0truscotsman
  • RFS

    3+ MOA (not free-floated), lame cheek weld with (lousy) irons (high off the bore), a pick for a charging handle, cheap and plastic-y with FTF issues right out of the box and an 11+ lb trigger? What’s not to love? I like the side folder and barrel swapping thing, but man oh man.

  • 1leggeddog

    MAC did a nice test for it.

    and

    He also explains it will take PMAGs but not Gen 3. Gen 2 and earlier are ok.

  • Cornelius Carroll

    It seems like the flaws in this rifle would be fairly cheap to correct at the factory. Granted “really good” triggers are more expensive to produce, a 7-8lb “decent” trigger wouldn’t cost them a dime extra. Nor would a longer charging handle. They would need a new mold to fix the ergonomics of the stock but, in the scope of things, that’s a trivial cost.

    I hope Beretta reads your review and makes the necessary improvements to this rifle.

    • Adam aka eddie d.

      Allow me to adress the “mold” matter you mentioned: ordering or even in-house production of a mold is very far from a trivial cost.
      A mold this size would be around 5-10 thousand dollars minimum,
      and that’s only for one part, molds/dies have a limited “lifetime”,
      and under this time they have to produce enough pieces to cover the machinig cost of the mold, you have to reprogram the injection machines, retool them, slow or even shut down the production (the most costly thing for a big company, definitely for one that has active military contracts and already present delays),
      and it also means changes at the assembly department.
      Quite a few reasons why this doesn’s go so easily from a mfr’s standpoint.

      Of course, if they want it to be successful on the civil market (soldiers don’t have the luxury to choose), they’ll have to step their game up whatever it costs.
      I wrote the abovementioned to be clear about costs.

      • Cornelius Carroll

        Even if you’re looking at $100,000 to change tooling, it’s a trivial cost compared to millions in R&D, tooling for the rest of the weapon, and marketing/lobbying.

  • SD3

    At the risk of being too technical, that is one goofy-ass- looking rifle.

  • C.J. Shull

    This rifle had one of the worst triggers I have ever seen or felt. I was shaking and bending my trigger gauge to get those readings. The charging pick requires concentration and great diligence to operate. It feels like a field sobriety test trying to charge the rifle. I think it would be much less stressful if they made an larger charging knob which could be slipped over the pick. I will also mention that I was quite excited to get a chance to try the ARX-100 as the first appearance at SHOT made it look great. Lots of great ideas, but none of it matters if the trigger is that bad.

  • Timothy G. Yan

    The one you have could be a lemon. The two ARX100 that I shot at a media event last year didn’t had any issue other than the 300 Blackout version is a little picky about subsonic ammo.

    • dp

      Chances are that show-guns are doctored; perhaps a remote possibility. Now, quality per se means consistency. This applies for any industrial product. Two out of hundred bad products means quality as whole is in question.

  • MFirepower

    I have about 600 rounds through mine (every kind of ammo I could find). It has never jammed once. It behaves nicely with a suppressor, but this gun wont really shine till it has the factory short barrel installed and a better trigger. With the 12″ barrel, it reminds me of holding a scorpion evo with regards to size and weight. I can’t wait for the tax stamp to come in!

    • MFirepower

      Oh, and gloves are a good choice for this rifle, The tiny charging handle does start to hurt if you play with it too much.

      • I’m curious as to what your trigger pull comes in at?

        • MFirepower

          I don’t have a tool to measure the trigger pull. Its not great, but I think it is less than my stock SCAR-17s trigger. That’s not saying much though. The trigger pull on my ARX100 is nowhere near as “gritty” feeling either. The SCAR-17s trigger is a joke and it costs $1000 more! No worries though, the Geissele SCAR trigger is on its way!

          You send me the tool to measure it and I will send it back with the results.

          • Guest

            Here you go. Much, much better than the ARX. This is the same gauge used on the ARX.

          • Here you go. Same gauge used on the ARX was used on this SCAR.

    • Patrick R

      How do you know how your gun handles and shoots both with a 12″ barrel and a suppressor if your tax stamp isn’t here?

      • Oops I’m not sure I want to know.

        • MFirepower

          The 12″ bbl would be even with the front of the forend plus the length of the gas block. This rifle makes it extremely easy to get the feel of what a short barrel setup would be like, just pull down the two tabs and slide out the barrel…
          I never said how it shoots with a short bbl. Those aren’t supposed to come out till next month.

          • Rick559

            No offense meant, but that is one of the ugliest rifles I have ever seen.

  • Dracon1201

    Remember when I called this on the announcement on here? And the hype train got so pissed off at me? I was fraking right. Just so, you know, I feel vindicated now.

  • Burst

    A small thing, but the word is “eke”, not “eak”.

    The charging ‘handle’ thing is seriously mystifying.

  • northafrican

    so its not a plastic fantastic

  • kbroughton77

    Super disappointing, I had high hopes for the arx-100. Thought it was nice to see an honest review on a gun blog, feel that doesn’t always happen anymore

  • Matrix3692

    Hey there, Alex, is it ok if i translate this article and share it on another forum?

  • TangledThorns

    That’s a pretty bad review. I was holding out for the ARX till I ran out of patience in Summer of 2012 and bought a LWRC M6A2. In hindsight I’m glad I bought the LWRC, its the Samuel Adams of ARs. Still, Beretta needs to get their shit together before they end up looking like Taurus.

  • dp

    Certo, “plasti-cento”, cento-percento! Bravo (wanted to say “porco madona” instead)!
    Yeah, I expected that. Not only looks like sxxt but it shoots like sxxt. MAC found the same – 2.25in at 100yrds at best.
    Overall, I believe (and HK has feet soaked in it too) the plastic bodied rifle is not good idea. If you do not believe that, wait for ‘plastic’ AK

  • Anyone remember that time Beretta did a video promo for the ARX and mounted their optic backwards?

  • jeff

    it sucks because this rifle has a lot of very innovative features that are not found on any other military weapon system. just wish they would have got the simple stuff like feeding rounds and trigger pull correct. i think this is thier version one in the game . i hope they learn from this and come out with a better one.

  • Houston H.

    This is what I love about TFB. Honesty is reviews. Its not always rainbows and unicorns with everything. Thanks guys!

  • mechamaster

    They need to redesign and correct the flaw of ARX-100/160 into Gen 2 production model. ( I bet it’s take too long or never happens )

  • GS

    I own an ARX and have shot a few hundred rounds through it from cheap wolf to 75g match –all without a problem. I was also able to change sides for the charging handle without causing it to seize up. I like the piston/bolt carrier set-up and my rifle action definitely stays very clean compared to many other rifles. The trigger on mine wasn’t bad at all.

    You are correct that it doesn’t have the accuracy of AR15s in the same price range. I get from 1-4 moa depending on what I’m using and that definitely widens as the barrel gets hot. This is from a featherweight barrel with a piston attached to it that can be pulled from its receiver in a couple of seconds.

    I actually like the way the rifle handles and it feels very light, though being new the controls on mine are still stiff and the bolt release is very hard. I hope this will wear in rather wear out over time.
    However, it does amaze me how other plastic rifle people (the Stoner cult in particular) really HATE this rifle: It’s not reliable, it’s not accurate, it feels cheap, it breaks, etc. Funny thing is the Garand/M14 guys said the same things about the M16. And, let’s be honest it took decades of development to get the AR15s you guys have today. How long has the ARX been around?

    • Decades? My vintage M16A1 (genuine Colt select-fire gun) is the sweetest and best shooting AR variant I own, and I have them all. Many people, myself included, consider the A1 to be the best variant.

      • GS

        Yes, decades. This includes the picatinny rails, after market triggers, forward assists, stainless barrels, etc which many shooters take for granted today.
        Glad your Colt works well. One of my experiences w/ Colt was a Commando which required the use of the the forward assist for every subsequent round after only 3 or 4 mags through it on FA. Apparently it couldn’t handle whatever dirty ammo was put through it that day (no NOT wolf). It would’ve been interesting to use the same ammo through the Beretta ARX, AK 556, or a Sig 55x that day and seen which kept chugging along.
        Should I base my opinion on the entire M16/M4/AR15 line from my one bad day w/ the Colt or also remember my issue FN M16A2 that never had a problem? Many would argue we need to look at a larger sample size. I agree. Let’s do with the ARX, too.
        I’m not the only person posting here who hasn’t had any problems with the ARX.

      • Seconded.

  • Yellow Devil

    I think I’m more interested in the AR70 than the ARX actually. You should shoot that and do a review.

    • That gun is unfired and new in the box so that first bullet would cost me $500 or so. I think I will keep her boxed up 🙂

  • mrt

    wow, what a bummer. I was looking forward to getting another Beretta.

    how does it compare to the .22 version? (not that I would buy that instead, just wondering if the issues translate between them)

  • Hank Seiter

    I’ve had nothing but reliability with my ARX-100, including handloaded ammunition in 55 and 62 grain SS109. Shot four different factory loads including Belgian SS109/M855 and didn’t have a single failure to feed, failure to extract or failure to eject. 100% reliable from the first round on.

    But I do agree they need to upgrade to a bigger and better charging handle. I keep hitting the brass deflector when charging my ARX. It won’t accept Gen 3 Magpul PMAGS unless you dremel off the rear mag-overtravel stop tang, but it worked flawlessly with the included Beretta steel mag, all Gen1 and Gen2 PMAGS, mil-spec aluminum mags (including a “tired” Vietnam era mag) and the H&K steel 5.56 mag.

    For a relatively light 5.56 platform, the ARX has very low recoil impulse, easy to maintain, my trigger is around 6.5 pounds with good reset which actually lends itself to manageable and more controlled double and triple taps and is cleverly designed to be truly ambidextrous. Mine came out of the box set up for a left-hander so I had an interesting time at the range figuring out how to change back to right-handed though I ended up keeping the charging handle on the left-side since it posed no threat to the hand I use to hold the forearm as a right-hander.

  • It has potential. If major change are made in the design and manufacturing of it, it can be great. Sad to see it’s not.