Printable View
I am considering trying out a piston system AR type rifle for the first time and would like some input as to which company produces a better piston system. I would guess they are similar designs, but I'm sure there are some differences.
I already own an LMT SBR and it is an incredible weapon. I have held one of the LWRC piston rifles, but not fired it or taken it apart to look at how the system is put together.
Thanks in advance.
Regards,
OH58D
while i cant speak for an lmt gas piston system, i have never shot one.
but i can speak about my lwrc 6.8 m6a2 srt. i have the 14.7 w/ a p/a flash hider. this gun is top notch. took it out 2 weeks ago to the range. i had some sub moa groups with tactical ssa loads in the barnes tsx 11Og. i love this gun. here are some of the things i love:
1) cold hammer forged barrel
2) full auto bcg
3) m4 feedramps machined in to the receiver and ext.
4) spc II chamber
5) eats tactical loads like a champ, superior accuracy
6) reliability, no hiccups
7) lightweight
8) not effected by my drool raining down on it as i shoot it.
I have almost 5k rounds through my LWRC, M6A2 556 upper, so far. (mostly Wolf)
Only cleaned it a couple times. Runs like a champ, freakishly accurate-never shoots over 1minute.
I am not easily impressed, but I have to say, my LWRC upper/LMT Defender lower combo is my best rifle.
There is an interesting "warts and all" Pat Rogers review of the LWRC rifles in this months' SWAT. The folks over on the factory forum seem happy with it.
Love the review on swat. That gun was run hard! A gun that is run that hard will eventually have a hiccup of some sort. Pat Rogers also addressed the SWAT article in the factory forum.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg Bell
One thing he did stress on the forum was "At the end of the day, i have not only complete confidence in LWRCI, but strongly recommend their guns. "
If you already own the MRP CQB version of your LMT SBR, then all you need to do is order/get the piston conversion. It is the barrel and BCG. No other changes necessary. I have had my LMT Piston since this past summer and it is great!!! You won't go wrong with their version. I'm sure that LWRC is nice also....it was the other choice if I hadn't gone with the LMT.Quote:
Originally Posted by OH58D
At this point, I haven't shot either one of them. But I do like that LMT has a one-piece carrier. I've heard that LWRC is working on a one-piece carrier also so it may be a moot point in the future.
Both are great weapons. For the LWRC remember in addition to the coming one peice carrier, don't forget the:
-cold hammer forged barrel
-Upper assembly features a ferritic salt bath nitro carburized interior
and exterior finish
-Carriers featuring TeflonNickel plating
These features have made a difference to me.
I have over 7,000-rounds through my LWRC 10.5-inch upper. Some of that is suppressed and over 2,000-rounds of that was in two different Carbine Courses.
The only mechanical failures I've had are:
- The buffer spring that came with the upper was faulty (Wolff Plus).
- The extractor started failing to extract.
- One of the Carrier key screws broke.
LWRC sent me a new buffer spring (which I have since relegated as a backup along with the H2 buffer - I am using an H3 buffer with a flatwire CS spring). The extractor resulted in FTEs and was replaced with no further issues.
I did not even know that the screw was busted until I decided to check the screws and the broken one kept spinning and would not tighten. LWRC shipped me a replacement Carrier overnight at no charge and I have not had any issues since.
I am awaiting the arrival of my Select-fire Transferable AR-15 and I am considering buying another LWRC upper to use on it. YMMV.
I know he hasn't responded yet, but I've asked this very question to rob_s.
I found that his advice in this regard was worth serious consideration.
I'll let him speak for himself but he's put a lot of thought into the myriad considerations.
This parrallels my experience with the 16"--except the extractor hasn't failed yet . I have replaced the buffer spring that came with the rifle and staked the carrier key screws, which were not staked.Quote:
Originally Posted by CarlosDJackal
I'd get the LWRC personally.
LWRCi is not Leitner Weiss ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by markm
Has LWRCi ever gotten into production their (non-black) anodized receivers? I've been waiting.
Does anyone have any significant time with one of the LMT piston guns yet? I really liked the piston SBR they had at SHOT but haven't been able to dig up much first-hand info...
Actually, since the bolt carrier does not experience heat like a DI ar, the LW socket head cap screws were red loctited and not meant to be staked.Quote:
Originally Posted by losbronces
Quote:
Originally Posted by LOKNLOD
This is the elephant in the room. I have not seen any real usage reports on the LMT piston yet. The LWRCI has been run hard and reported, warts and all, through many revisions. Can anyone point to data on the LMT?
Quote:
Originally Posted by epf
I believe that LMT will be reported in time...remember, it's only been out for 6 months or so and LWRC has been out over a year longer. It will take time. With the economy and other factors, this might take more time than the LWRC to have an accurate and unbiased report. That said, I too am looking forward to seeing how LMT works under hard use. I know that the factory has used and abused this piston. That is another reason I decided to buy my LMT. They took their time releasing this version trying to make sure all the bugs were worked out prior to selling to the public. I am one of the first to get mine and I did have an issue with the failure to feed. It was traced back to the gas port size. I was using some old red and white box PMC ammo. When I called and talked with Gene Swanson at LMT, he said that all the ammo used by LMT was much better quality 5.56 and this was the first time he had heard of short stroking. He had me send in the upper and returned it back to me in a week. I haven't had any issues with it since and Gene assured me that all versions since mine have had slightly larger gas ports to accommodate any and all ammo. I have since shot Silver Bear, Prvi (55gr), and the older PMC and no issues at all.
I too would like to see and hear someone taking LMTs Piston upper and putting it on an full auto lower and really running it hard. Maybe using it suppressed also at the same time. I know that LMT has already shot over 10,000 rounds (mostly full auto) through their own Piston, but that is not the same as others here doing their own testing.
Has anyone been to a class or two with their LMT??? If I could afford it, I would not hesitate to take mine and run it through the paces.
I went to one of Pat's classes and shot next to a guy using the loaner LWRCi gun. That gun seemed to choke on Wolf 55gr - it was the 10.5" gun too. The guy shooting it wanted to use it since he had an early LWRCi gun that was not very reliable in the configuration he was using. I think Pat said he was going to call LWRCi and talk about why the gun was having trouble. FTEs if I remember right.
Spooky
my interest is strictly in the differences between an LMT and LWRC piston weapon. Are they identical systems, or does one have mechanics that stand out over the other?
Regards,
OH58D
LWRC has 3 pieces to their 'piston' system and you have to take off the top rail to access it. That said, their piston system sits lower to the bore and under their top rail.Quote:
Originally Posted by OH58D
LMT only has two pieces to their 'piston' system and can be accessed by only removing the gas cup. BTW, that same gas cup can be turned upside down to block the gas port from the barrel to make it a true single shot rifle. LMTs can also be changed quickly to different calibers without changing the entire upper. As a matter of fact, their entire upper is a true one piece billet and extremely stiff and well built. You can even change back to their DI system with just a barrel/BCG change.
I have nothing bad to say about either system. I just bought the LMT because I liked the idea of changing calibers/systems without keeping complete separate uppers. I really like my LMT as you can tell, but I'm sure if they weren't available, I would have gone with LWRCI.
Does either system suffer from the issue of a QD-suppressor mount FS with a larger diameter, blocking access to the gas piston assembly for cleaning?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cohibra45
meh..
I suggest going back and cleaning up some post here. If you want to argue, do it offline. I'll check on it a bit later-----I cleaned up anything in here that had nothing to do with his questions---keep it on track for his and others benefit, thanks--
sorry for my part mark, but I do think that someone needs to post the poop on the whole paul thing somewhere and sticky it. Theres too much crap floating around that muddies the waters on the actual correct, and current info.
Best review yet.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cohibra45
LMT has a track record of excellence too, lets not forget that.
LMT absolutely deserves the nod as far as I'm concerned. The versatility of their design, the simplicity, the conversion abilities and the fact that LMT has done nothing but deliver quality. LWRC has a lot to prove IMO.
With time and use, maybe they'll be able to be talked about in the same sentence as LMT...but that day is not today.
I agree that in the industry, LMT has an excellent track record for Doing Things Right, but I still haven't seen any long-term, hard-use evaluations of their piston system as a system. The modularity, the simplicity are all excellent, I agree, and it works seamlessly within the MRP platform if you have an MRP. But I just don't know anyone who's got more than a few hundred rounds through theirs, and I want to know what happens to one of those long rods at 5k, 10k, 20k, and so on. Right now, that data doesn't seem to be there like it does for the LWRC guns, unless you have read something I haven't. Hopefully someone will take a crack at high-round-count torture testing an LMT piston, because the monolithic platform isn't offered through LWRC, and I like monolithic...Quote:
Originally Posted by 5POINT56
Agreed. You would think that with LMT's track record with DI guns that their piston design would be as robust. This is only an assumption at the moment, there is no real world high round count testing that proves this as far as I know. On the other hand, the LWRCi setup has been ran hard by a lot of individuals and has proven itself. Many have an issue with the old Leitner Weiss company, that is fine but don't let that roll over to automatic hatred of LWRCi.Quote:
Originally Posted by KingsideRook
ETA: I just picked up a LWRCi M6A2 based on the reviews from those who have abused this system. I didn't need the mono rail and don't plan on changing calibers so the LMT wasn't as appealing to me as it is to others. Doesn't make it an inferior system by any means. I would have to assume the LMT would run right along side the LWRCi for many, many rounds.
As an owner of pre-ban AKs in the US, and have played with select fire versions overseas, you still have a basic standardized system which is robust and simple. I would hope that if the piston system AR has a future, there would be a standardized system as well. A system that is easy to maintain.
I have noticed that both LMT and LWRC have their own rail system installed. Can most rail systems (i.e. KAC RAS) work as well or are there clearance problems with the height of the piston not found with the gas tube?
OH58D
Min was one of the fist ones, and its gone past 30K nearly all F/A, mostly suppresed, mostly wolf . I posted on TOS sight about it last year
Ive broken
solid piston cup pin, into FSB broke (Upgraded on newer models)
piston spring broken-still runs fine (LWRC found it/replaced when it was sent in for FSB pin/BCG screws)
original BCG dovetail screws for the BCG sheared (over torqued according to LWRC)
mult FPs collars worn down/FP tip worn to a point
extractor springs replaced
Does not run with a 9mm buffer- reg H buffer works fine
Upgraded teflon-nickle BCG screws unscrewed, restaked by me. I sent a email to darren about this since they origianlly said they didn't need to be staked since it was dovetailed. It still worked with the dovetailed key but if they would have come completly out it would have stopped the rifle
Non-upper parts
Lower reciever bolt catch worn out no the spring but the catch (colt)
hammer springs replaced (colt)
Burned out 1 noveske pig blast cone. he-he
Buffer spring replaced colt
Most of my failures have been fixed with the newer model, it has broken many parts but it also has been abused. I don't clean it and do beta mag dumps. Bolt looks nearly new though.
I wouldn't hesitate to own any of their products.
Quite possibly with any adoption of a 'Piston' system by the 'Government', the piston system would be standardized. Since no such adoption seems eminent by our government, no standardization of 'Piston systems' is in the near future.Quote:
Originally Posted by OH58D
About the rail systems on LMT and LWRCI, I can only speak about my LMT. LMTs 'Piston' rifle uses it's propriety MRP CQB upper which is a true 'monolith' one piece upper. These rails are milled from a single piece of billet aluminum and are extremely sturdy. That is the one quality of the LMT that drew me to it instead of getting the LWRCI. A person is stuck using LMT barrels but that is something I liked. Going with the LMT, a person can change calibers by changing barrel/BCG and the versatility is great. LMT offers .204 Ruger, 5.56 NATO, 6.8 SPC and in the future, I have heard that they are looking into 6.5G. I would really like to see them bring out one in 458 SOCOM. All are in a DI version now, but I'm sure in the future, they will be available in their own 'Piston' version. That is another beauty in going with LMTs MRP CQB system. You can change from Piston to DI and back again very easily.
I guess it's all in what you want or think you want in which rifle. I'm sure LWRCI makes a very fine rifle and I know LMT does, so I believe with whichever you go with, you won't be disappointed.
It's not billet. It's a forging.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cohibra45
Quote:
Originally Posted by couch_potato
Yes, they are forgings and are very good ones!!!;) Thanks!!!:D:D:D
I went with LMT
why ? I like them and sure both are great setups but when I was at a shop a guy had a LWRC that had a canted front sight ? and it was his second one !!!!!!
every company has QC issues though so once I am perfect I can bitch but until then I give them a pass as LMT has had issues !
but it also gave me a chance to have one in hand and I just liked the looks and feel of the LMT in hand with its MRP setup over the other
I say choose the one you like and be happy :)
I went with the LMT also. Ive gotten to fire a few diff piston systems on active duty, I didnt see alot of difference in performance between the (limited) samples we had. I like the MRP CQB platform the LMT is built on. You can swap calibers, even go from piston to DI fairly quickly. Also Ive always had good experience with LMT and I appreciate the company and their bending over backwards to accomodate military customers.
I just shot the LMT MRP piston against the HK 416 for a day long test session which I will put up in a few days...
The LMT MRP is clearly the better gun of the two... we also have a LWRC first gen gun available, but I can not make the assumption against the M6A1 we have.
I recently ran one of my LWRC 10.5's through Larry Vickers 3 Day pistol/carbine class and the only problem I had was a couple of bad pmags otherwise it ran smooth. I went with the LWRC because I could get it in varying lengths such as the 10.5. However, I am sure that LMT is making a quality rifle & the MRP is very attractive. When they start getting the 12.5 out I might take a look at it.
Interestingly when asked LAV did say if you needed to go with a pistol set up that you could actually buy, go with the LWRC. I did not think to ask him about LMT's pistol setup, I should have since those are probably the most competing piston manufacturers.