Quote Originally Posted by OH58D View Post
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
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.

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.