Is anyone else really disappointed with the Bushmaster ACR?

We got two into the shop a few days ago.... My first time to really be able to spend some time taking one apart and getting to know it.

It's just the basic model, since the deluxe one isn't out yet.

I just can't say I'm all that fond of it... Why?

-Lot's of plastic, specifically of critical parts such as the receiver and fire control group. Stocks should be plastic to save weight... Vital parts should be of something more substantial. Anyone who sees my answers knows I'm not a traditionalist by any means... Give me polymer and aluminum. But, polymer on important things... I don't feel we're ready.

The polymer leads to two additional concerns.

-How did they manage to make it so heavy? Good grief. You might as well be carrying an M1 Rifle. With such an extensive use of polymer, shouldn't it be light?

-I thought polymer was supposed to be cheap? At ~$2500... That's not cheap at all.

In addition, I have other complaints...

-Ambidextrous safeties are so uncomfortable. They rub against the index finger of my fire control hand. Very uncomfortable. Make it in available option... But it shouldn't be standard.

-Disassembly isn't quite as intuitive as an AR15. It isn't terrible, and I'm experienced enough that I can basically figure it out based on my knowledge of "the way things are". To others, though, this may not be the case.

-The stock is too short. I'm beginning to become very annoyed with the "tactical" community, in spite of my involvement in it. They make the stock short enough for use with body armor.... But what percentage of their customers are going to be using it with body armor with rifle plates? <1%? The average shooter buying one isn't using rifle plates.

-They didn't improve the extractor. Isn't that what we all complain about, extraction issues? Personally, I like the extractor of an AR15... But most people don't. I can't see why they didn't change that. (My reasoning is that it is better to have a double feed from a failure to extract, clear it, then extract manually.... as opposed to trying too hard to extract a stubborn case and tearing off the head, putting the rifle out of commission. Just my philosophy... I'd rather have two failures every 5000 rounds that are minor, rather than one disaster every 5000.)

-If you're going to have a proprietary bolt, why not bee fit up a bit? That's one of the few things I like about the HK416 style... They put a nice, chunky bolt in it that looks like it will live a long life. I mean, at least make the area around the cam pin a little bigger.

-The adjustable cheek weld is a nice idea.... But it seems gimmicky in the execution.

The barrel is where my biggest problems are...

-Proprietary? Ok, ok, it has a quick change feature.... So what? How often is that really necessary? An AR15 has a quick change barrel system, too... It's called a new upper. Two pins and it's a change over from .50BMG to .22LR in 15 seconds. It may have a little more weight involved, but not much more.

-Not chromed, and 1/9 rifling twist is the next problem. Chrome extends barrel life incredibly. 1/9 rifling doesn't allow use of the really nice defensive and match loads which 1/7 does. And, since they are proprietary barrels... you have to depends on Bushmaster for them, you can't change it yourself to whatever you want.

.... What do you guys think? Am I way off and this is going to be the next "big thing" or will it be unheard of in ten years.... I'm going with something in the middle. I think people will still be clinging to the concept 20 years from now, with some never willing to give up on it. Most people will see the price and just stick with an AR at 1/3 the cost.

.... And, the basic premise isn't impressive.... It's yet another 5.56NATO rifle with a 30 round magazine, and a piston system that is going to save the world.