First, lets talk ergonomics and usability. We love the idea of a completely ambidextrous rifle platform that can swap calibers easily, is lightweight, easy to use, and compatible with current equipment. Especially if it feels like a glove to shoot. But if we had to choose between some of these things, what would you categorize as most important? Ambidexterity? How about simplicity? Adaptability? Its hard to say, but one thing is for certain. It needs to be comfortable for anyone to shoot.
Enter the Beretta ARX100, It does most of these things well, but not perfectly. My first reaction was positive. The barrel swap is quick and easy. Bolt functioned smooth, the safety was easy and sturdy, and the stock adjustment was Simple. But then the gremlins started to emerge. While loading I found the bolt release to be the equivalent of a manual staple gun, long and heavy with a sharp snap at the bottom, that I could not operate unless I used my thumb, which made me leave fire control. When sighting the weapon I found the length of pull was off, and for my size I need the stock in the shortest position. This caused my cheek to land directly on the top picatinny rather than the cheek rest/stock which is actually nonexistent. If I lengthened the stock my arms were too far away and the optic to high. Felt recoil is a bit more violent than an AR15. The mag release is ambidextrous but very small and high up on the receiver, in my opinion the only practical mag release is the third that is located on the trigger guard.
The other features are not obvious and will require instruction and practice to become familiar with. Especially disassemble, with no pins or tools its definitely specific and with a few field strips and re assemblies I’m guessing it would become easy. All in all it had a lot of potential. Many technological innovations were attempted. But most fell short.
Pingback: GUN.fm | SHOT Show 2014