I want to add one of these two guns to my collection. I was pretty set on the X95, but I held a Virtus today - and was definitely intrigued.
I'm familiar with the SAR vs X95, and I know there's some differences between the Virtus and the original MCX, but I'm not finding all that much comprehensive comparisons beyond the obvious color, rail, trigger... and? I'm also just curious if there are other compatibility concerns or if the general consensus of the MCX is positive now that it's been out a while for SIG's customers-are-beta-testers to find the issues - or is the Virtus a different-enough beast that it'll have it's own hiccups.
There's a used X95 with "extras" (mags and a case) for $1600 and the local gun shop has a brand new MCX Virtus for $1625 before tax, if that makes a difference.
I went and looked at the X95 today, with the Virtus and some other options in mind. It was a private sale, and the guy had about $250 in extras. I like the feel and i have always loved the Tavor SAR, so i bought it.
I swapped the A2 flash hider for my suppressor mount flash hider, and will work on getting some optics next.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: PorterN,
The Sig is going to be lighter. It also uses more standard AR parts than the X95. However the X95 is pretty cool.
Have you considered a CZ Bren 805? Piston operated 5.56 with many similarities to a SCAR. Also cheaper than either the Virtus or X95.
I handled a X95 recently at a local show...IMHO, felt like a M-1 Garand in a shorter package.
I don't shoot my X95 that much anymore but only because I have sbrs. I looked the the Virtus but fell in love with the MCX Rattler in 300blk. Can't wait to see one in person.
Not minority enough!
As much as i laughed at the Rattler when i first saw it announced, the idea has grown on me. Theres a local guy who has one for $2300. I just dont have that much cash, nor as much set up for 300blk. But i considered it very hard.
I initially considered both of these guns and went on to own, at one point, 6 MCX's in various configurations. The X95 really lost out on 2 points, cost and accuracy.
It was expensive when considering the upgrades I would need to make in order to really like the gun. Accuracy from mine was about 3moa which isnt terrible but I expected a little more for a 1700.00 rifle. The shared AR components of the MCX eventually pushed me over the edge and I went that route.
Fast forward 3 years or so and I have 0 MCX's. I dont trust Sig enough not to drop the line after a few years and 5 generations later all using different parts and components. I picked up a pair of DD rifles to replace them. I'll still eavlaute new piston guns as they come out but nothing has really hit all the criteria Im looking for in a rifle and the company who makes it.
I dont think you can go wrong either way. The Sig is probably the better fo the from a value perspective but if it came down to it for a rifle I needed to take to war...Id probably go X95.
|Go ahead punk, make my day|
10 years from now the X95 will be around and people won't know what the MCX was.
Then again I'd take an AR or SCAR over either.
That’s a bingo!
|addicted to trailing-throttle oversteer|
Considering how this iteration of SIG NH until now likes to use the 'flavor of the month' principle for their product planning, I definitely would agree.
Congrats to the OP on his acquisition!
Folks speculate that SIG will not support the MCX platform in much the same manner as the 556xi. The 556xi never got the military and police contracts that SIG was after, hence no continuing support.
The MCX platform is being purchased by the US DoD SOCOM as part of its LVAW program. The Rattler was developed to meet SOCOM needs.
The MCX has been adopted by the London Metropolitan Police, German state police and the Dutch counterterrorism forces. Hence, the MCX is not going away soon and will continue to be developed to meet new military and police needs.
|The guy behind the guy|
What I like about the X95 is that it's the IDF's rifle. It will be around and have support for a while.
The reasons I bought one instead of another AR:
- It's as short as an SBR without needing a 5320.20 every time I want to take it out of state. When I travel, I always take a rifle with me. This fits nice and easy on trips.
- It's just plain fun. It's kind of nice to have something completely different than an AR, but still have some familiarities at the same time.
Like yours, mine is FDE, but mine is chambered in 300 blk.
I think this rifle is kind of perfect for 300 blk actually. Given the fact that it leaves a little to be desired on the MOA issue, I'm not going to be shooting it beyond 300 yards. So I've got a red dot up top and a 30 caliber bullet...I'm digging it.
I'm confused...wait, maybe I'm not.
Yessir. it's about the same length as my DDM4V7s pistol. The MPX is about the same length as them all with suppressor on and brace extended. I have the law-tactical folding stock adapter on the AR, and the MPX has the collapsible brace, but shooting them like that is either impossible or not feasible.
|Go ahead punk, make my day|
You might wanna take the vfg off of that there pistol... or at least not post such pictures on the interwebz.
the "firearm" is over 26" in OAL so it's legal .
I like it! Btw, what is that buffer tube cover? I have a pistol build in the works, and am looking for something other than a blade or a brace.
Thats a Thordsen cheek weld. Its okay. I think id rather have the shockwave.
|Powered by Social Strata|