The XCR was designed years before the Bushmaster ACR which appears to be only a slight advancement (if any) over the AR15/M16 from which it heavily borrowed.    The XCR was designed completely from scratch to be better; and it is.  Here’s how.

The XCR has a more reliable and durable operating system.    The XCR has an operating system which has features similar to those of Kalashnikov’s AK47.   It simply has better feeding, cycling, extracting, and ejection than rifles like the M16 and SCAR which are based on the less reliable M16 operating system designed by Stoner.

The XCR’s manual controls are more ergonomic and intuitive.   The XCR has a charging handle that does not reciprocate and is located well away from the top rail so the operator’s hands don’t hit optics and other accessories attached thereto.   The way the ACR’s charging handle connects to the bolt carrier is a weak point.

The XCR’s lower receiver is the serialized part and is made from aluminum.   The XCRs lower receiver is the serialized part and made from aluminum.  The ACR’s lower receiver is plastic and is not the serialized part.

The XCR has a better upper receiver.  The XCR’s upper receiver is not the serialized part so you can change it without buying another firearm.   You cannot do this with the ACR because its upper receiver is the serialized part and is the part most likely to wear or be damaged.  XCR uppers come in 4 lengths with three different rail systems:  Keymod, M-LOK, and Picatinny.   One must only loosen one bolt to remove and replace the barrel.  One must remove the handguard to remove the barrel on the ACR which may require a recalibration of accessories mounted thereon.  Also, the method the ACR uses to attached the barrel is second rate. 

The XCR has a better buttstock.  All the XCR’s structural components are made from metal, including the buttstock.  It not only folds but is adjustable for length and height.  The height can be adjusted via the cheek rest, and also by bolting the stock to the hinge at different heights.   The ACRs stock is plastic.   Slam the but of an ACR hard on the ground and see what happens!

XCR has many caliber conversion kits.  The XCR has more caliber conversion kits than the ACR and it has had them for many years.  What the ACR promised, the  XCR delivered!

The XCR has fantastic looks.   While looks are very subjective, few would say the XCR does not have fantastic looks.  The ACR looks large and fat in comparison.  The XCR is a smaller package from top to bottom and form side to side.  It is sleeker from any angle.

The XCR is less expensive.  The XCR is less expensive though it is made from better materials.   Plastic is cheap and for toys.  The XCR is made to last a very long time.  It should be priced higher than the ACR.

2 thoughts on “XCR v ACR

  1. As someone who’s looking for the ultimate battle rifle to own one day, I can’t argue with any of these points. I would pick the XCR over Bushmaster’s ACR or FN’s SCAR, and after getting acquainted with what the XCR platform has to offer, it really isn’t even a competition.

    Both the SCAR and the ACR are made of plastic, which makes them lighter, but much less durable and robust than the aluminum XCR (which isn’t that much heavier).

Leave a Reply




Join Our Mailing List

Be the First to Know!