Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 55

Thread: LWRC 10.5, or LMT 10.5 upper?

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    7,868
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by scottryan View Post
    Not mine.

    I have a used Colt MK18 barrel that works fine.
    Scottryan I don't mean to seem rude, but when asked about LMT's superiority over LWRCi you answered that you don't like 10.5'' DI rifles.

    Please elaborate on the failures you see on the LWRCi platform.

    Having never owned a 10.5'' gun I am actually curious, but I've owned a 12.7'' LWRCi gun, and I never had a stoppage that I could attribute to the gun, or lack of maintenance on the gun.
    We miss you, AC.
    We miss you, ToddG.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    101
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    I own a 10.5" LWRC with the newer 1 piece carrier. I've shot about 500 rounds thru it so far using brass reloads & wolf. I have yet to clean it (other than before first trip to range), and have zero issues. I put the H3 buffer & spring in my stock that came w/ the upper.
    I have not shot any other 10.5, so I can't helpya there. I just know I have to clean my DI carbine (Daniel Defense) every 200-300 rounds using the same ammo mix above before I start getting feeding or cycling issues.
    YMMV.
    Last edited by jdub75; 08-11-10 at 19:21.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    The South
    Posts
    4,420
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    I have an early 10.5 inch LMT that I've run almost exclusively on fullauto with a conservative guestimate of about 5k rounds. Much of this has been suppressed. The only failures I've experienced are several failures to feed, which occurred after about 300 rounds of suppressed fullauto fire. The action was absolutely filthy, had not been re-lubed and the bolt carrier was just dragging through all this filth. Applying some lube immediately solved the problem. In my estimation, these FTFs were due to loss of bolt velocity on the return stroke due to bolt carrier drag in the setting of excessive fouling/debris within the upper receiver and on the bolt group. When shooting unsuppressed, I have never had a failure in this upper.

    I have a Noveske N4 hammer forged 10.5 inch upper that I have yet to shoot. It is waiting for me to install a Daniel Defense Mk18 RIS-2 rail.

    Just out of curiosity, have you considered buying a BCM upper with hammer forged barrel? This would be my preference at this point, however I have no experience with their short barrels. Knowing BCM, I would venture to say that they work as advertised. They also offer uppers with 11.5 and 12.5 inch, as well as in lightweight configuration.
    Last edited by JoshNC; 08-11-10 at 21:43.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Southern Command
    Posts
    1,909
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    I have an LMT 10.5" that has been 100% reliable, the most rounds through it were a couple of thousand with out cleaning and about 1,500 at a Magpul Dynamics class without adding more than 3 drops of oil to the BCG.

    It is very accurate and has turned out true sub MOA groups at 100 yards.

    If I was buying another shorty I would buy another LMT or a Bravo Company.

    Cameron

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    7
    Feedback Score
    0
    Thank you to all who chimed in on this. I was able to get a brand new M6A2 upper for under $1200. I couldn't be happier with it. With the H3 buffer and Wolff Extra Power buffer spring, it lobs brass out to about 3' away at 3 o'clock. The recoil is minimal with this setup, including the BattleComp. Thanks again to everybody's advice.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Barre, VT
    Posts
    7,217
    Feedback Score
    94 (100%)
    Great looking rifle.
    "Real men have always needed to know what time it is so they are at the airfield on time, pumping rounds into savages at the right time, etc. Being able to see such in the dark while light weights were comfy in bed without using a light required luminous material." -Originally Posted by ramairthree

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    The Free State of Nebraska
    Posts
    5,441
    Feedback Score
    7 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Magic_Salad0892 View Post

    Please elaborate on the failures you see on the LWRCi platform.

    Well I don't like LWRC's stupid three piece top rail that is trying to mimic a monolith but is actually 3 pieces.

    LMT is true monolith and you can have both DI and piston. I don't see why you would buy a LWRC.

    It is a wash between which piston system is more "proven" as none of them are.

    I don't see why this is even up for debate.

    Between the two LMT is far superior.
    Last edited by scottryan; 08-12-10 at 17:54.
    "Not every thing on Earth requires an aftermarket upgrade." demigod/markm

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    56
    Feedback Score
    0
    Wow, your right, what a failure.... I like how you have to throw in how the rail is "stupid".

    You still haven't been able to come up with your personal experience for an LWRC (or LMT piston) failing. And LWRC has been tested, rigorously, DEA for example. Pat Rogers likes them and rates them among Colt, Noveske, and BCM for his company's uses. I rely on mine every day at work as an LEO. As for the 3 piece rail I like being able to access the piston for maintenance, though I only do so every 1000 rounds or so. LWRC recomends every 5000 if the user is inclined but says it isn't necessary. Unless you are hanging a metric ton of shit on your gun the monolithic rail is nice but not necessary....well at least I haven't found it so for my uses. I guess if your hanging an optic that far forward its nice to not have a rail that can be moved. But in the end it doesn't matter, some people like the monolithic rail, some don't, neither opinion is wrong.

    I find it ironic that this kind of limited thinking and non-acceptance of new ideas and technology is of the same variety as those that hated the M16 when it replaced the M14.
    Last edited by Boomer; 08-13-10 at 05:40.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    The Free State of Nebraska
    Posts
    5,441
    Feedback Score
    7 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Boomer View Post
    Wow, your right, what a failure.... I like how you have to throw in how the rail is "stupid".

    You still haven't been able to come up with your personal experience for an LWRC (or LMT piston) failing. And LWRC has been tested, rigorously, DEA for example. Pat Rogers likes them and rates them among Colt, Noveske, and BCM for his company's uses. I rely on mine every day at work as an LEO. As for the 3 piece rail I like being able to access the piston for maintenance, though I only do so every 1000 rounds or so. LWRC recomends every 5000 if the user is inclined but says it isn't necessary. Unless you are hanging a metric ton of shit on your gun the monolithic rail is nice but not necessary....well at least I haven't found it so for my uses. I guess if your hanging an optic that far forward its nice to not have a rail that can be moved. But in the end it doesn't matter, some people like the monolithic rail, some don't, neither opinion is wrong.

    I find it ironic that this kind of limited thinking and non-acceptance of new ideas and technology is of the same variety as those that hated the M16 when it replaced the M14.

    Did you not read what I said?

    I said it is a wash on either piston system. I'm not doubting the reliability of either.

    So then it boils down to the rail.

    If I am going to drop the money on this stuff, I willl get a monolith, not a fake monolith.
    Last edited by scottryan; 08-13-10 at 16:49.
    "Not every thing on Earth requires an aftermarket upgrade." demigod/markm

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    7,868
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by scottryan View Post
    Well I don't like LWRC's stupid three piece top rail that is trying to mimic a monolith but is actually 3 pieces.

    LMT is true monolith and you can have both DI and piston. I don't see why you would buy a LWRC.

    It is a wash between which piston system is more "proven" as none of them are.

    I don't see why this is even up for debate.

    Between the two LMT is far superior.
    At least your complaint is a valid one.

    Thanks for the reply.

    Personally I like the LWRCi system better, I don't care for monolithic platforms, and like that if some part of the rail system is damaged I can buy that one piece, and maintain the piston without taking off the whole system.

    I also love gas block mounted front sights, and adjustable gas blocks, and the LWRCi system has both.
    We miss you, AC.
    We miss you, ToddG.

Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •