Piston Rifles; LWRC or LMT? - Page 2

Cohibra45 · #21 02-09-09, 14:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by OH58D

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.

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.

LOKNLOD · #22 02-09-09, 14:38

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

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.

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.

QuietShootr · #23 02-09-09, 21:23

meh..

mark5pt56 · #24 02-09-09, 21:29

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--

Bolt_Overide · #25 02-10-09, 01:52

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.

5POINT56 · #26 02-10-09, 11:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cohibra45

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.

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.

Best review yet.

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.

KingsideRook · #27 02-10-09, 11:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by 5POINT56

Best review yet.

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...

bullitt5172 · #28 02-10-09, 12:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by KingsideRook

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...

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.

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.

OH58D · #29 02-11-09, 01:34

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

Taylorwso · #30 02-11-09, 02:11

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.

Cohibra45 · #31 02-11-09, 22:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by OH58D

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.

couch_potato · #32 02-11-09, 23:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cohibra45

single piece of billet aluminum

It's not billet. It's a forging.

Cohibra45 · #33 02-12-09, 08:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by couch_potato

It's not billet. It's a forging.

Yes, they are forgings and are very good ones!!!

Thanks!!!

Honu · #34 02-12-09, 13:07

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

KBAR-04 · #35 02-13-09, 08:28

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.

SMGLee · #36 02-13-09, 13:06

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.

Sigmax · #37 02-13-09, 13:18

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.