View Full Version : do you consider the AR reliable?
in dirty battlefeild conditions, with little lube, and little time to clean?
I hear a lot of opposing opinions
Failure2Stop
12-09-08, 12:59
Is the AR reliable?
Is the sky blue? Is the ocean MORE blue? Is the ocean a better blue? Is green better than blue?
The AR is reliable under the conditions you set out. However the word "reliable" is inadvertantly linked to the indiviudual that is involved in the "relying upon" part of the question. You never know that your next trigger pull is going to result in a satisfying "bang", or that the "bang" will result in a dropped BG. All you have is the culmination of your experiences, and frankly there are a lot less people with experience in the areas you ask about than there are that will volunteer their opinion on same.
If I don't think that my gun will work it automatically loses reliability. If I think that it will work, but never pull the trigger, it is still perfectly reliable- but only in my mind (the majority of Bushmaster owners seem to fall into this category for some reason :p).
The better question would be- "Who here with experience in whatever circumstance are still happy staking their lives to whatever particular weapon?"
Anyway-
There are other guns that are somewhat MORE reliable or robust in the same conditions though. And that is the crux of the "versus" arguments that have befouled the intellect of participants in these "discussions" since nerd first disagreed with geek over whatever obscure interest they decided to argue about.
cavscout82nd
12-09-08, 13:01
I think the AR-15/M-16 Weapons platform is very reliable; from dust, to cold, to hot and humid..if it's properly maintained. the weapon got a bad rap during the Vietnam War; partly due to the fact it was a new weapon system that didn't get the bugs worked out before it was fielded in combat and partly because many Soldiers were not properly trained on maintaining the weapon. The weapon itself has improved quit a bit since it was introduced 40 years ago.
I hear a lot of opposing opinions
I see dead people.... :eek:
I think the internet grossly exaggerates everything bad you hear about the ar15 platform.
The only thing I hate about the ar15 platform is the tighness in which the bolt carrier fits into the upper receiver.
I thought about how you can solve this problem by shrinking the exterior diameter of the carrier while making the gas key taller, the cam pin head thicker to reach the cam track, and having 4 little wheels as friction points on the bottom of the carrier to reduce friction and keep the carrier in line with the chamber for correct function.
Guys,
On this very forum, we all saw that link that outlined the results of the Army's weapons evaluation.
I was the only one who wrote how shocked I was to learn that the Colt M4 suffered ten times the malfunctions of the other contenders. Others chimed in and said that they were not shocked because the conditions of the test did not allow for maintenance or lube or something.
I'm sure I'll get slammed for even typing this....but which is it? Who's right?
Just know that I love my Colts & my LMT.
yeah I remember the tests. Although I don't think the the colt suffered ten times the malfuntions. I think it was three times the malfuntions suffered by the contenders on average. Then again the mags had alot to do with thouse malfs.
The m4 fired 98.6% of the time, the other fired more than 99%. All the rifles were deemed unsuitable for duty after the tests.
OH MY GOD THE M4 IS SO UNRELIABLE!!!:D
I really wonder how would have the AK done in the tests. Or XCR....
I think any weapon is only reliable as the person behind it.with the right training it is one of the best IMO
stronghold
12-09-08, 16:23
are you guys referring to the "dust tests"?
this is the info i find interesting
This was the third in a series of tests.
Summer 2006: M4 and M16
Summer 2007: M4 with added lubrication
Fall 2007: M4, SCAR, HK416 and XM8. All with added lubrication
Summer 2007 M4 + lube = 307 jams.
Army credits it to the additional lubrication.
Fall 2007 M4 + lube = 882 jams.
Army has no clue, claims test is ostensibly the same.
sorry if this has been covered before, i'm new here.
threebanger
12-09-08, 18:54
Don't confuse reliable with 'idiot proof'.
reliable - hell yes. In the hands of someone properly trained in it's use.
idiot proof - nothing in this world is 100% idiot proof.
All my rifles have been reliable under every circumstance that I have used them so far. What else can I say? If I jump into a pool of molten lava, will the rifle still fire? I have no idea. Sure, an AK would, but would I care? ;)
Beat Trash
12-09-08, 19:15
I think any weapon is only reliable as the person behind it.with the right training it is one of the best IMO
Well put.
I am willing to bet my life on the reliability of my AR's. Actually, I do every day I drive my marked car out of my District parking lot...
CarlosDJackal
12-09-08, 19:40
In order of importance:
1) Clean and well lubed.
2) Dirty and well lubed.
3) Clean an not well lubed.
4) Dirty and not well lubed.
Does it look like these can be applied to any mechanical device?
A close friend of mine served a combat tour in Viet Nam in 1969, during the A1's reign. This is of course after the well documented problems I'm guessing 65-67. He never had any problems with it at all, and was actually impressed with it's reliability. I can remember him talking about wading through a river, pull it out of the water still dripping and firing with out problem. The only thing he did was down load the mags to 18 rounds. And he used to carry something like 1100 rounds on patrol, he was afraid of running out of ammo.
It is VERY reliable. People are lately trying to fix what is not broke. The weapon is actually very forgiving and reliable if someone with half a brain is fielding it. The weapon system outperforms the AK if you ask me....but the catch is you must maintain it. Not hard to do if you are slightly smarter than a primate. I swear it's the easiest system out there to field strip and keep running.
variablebinary
12-10-08, 00:55
I think it will get the job done. That does not mean that better mouse traps should be researched
No one can honestly say spraying the action with heat and carbon and cooking off lube is good or benign
Therefore, if one can maintain all the traits that make an AR15 great, yet reduce fouling, heat and cooked off lube this would be a good thing
I think the internet grossly exaggerates everything bad you hear about the ar15 platform.
The only thing I hate about the ar15 platform is the tighness in which the bolt carrier fits into the upper receiver.
I thought about how you can solve this problem by shrinking the exterior diameter of the carrier while making the gas key taller, the cam pin head thicker to reach the cam track, and having 4 little wheels as friction points on the bottom of the carrier to reduce friction and keep the carrier in line with the chamber for correct function.
Was it LMT Enhanced carrier or a Dave Lauck thing that had "sand cuts" in the lower bearing/contact areas of the carrier for that reason? I haven't heard much about it or its theory being proven/disproven. Would be interesting to see...
Was it LMT Enhanced carrier or a Dave Lauck thing that had "sand cuts" in the lower bearing/contact areas of the carrier for that reason? I haven't heard much about it or its theory being proven/disproven. Would be interesting to see...
I believe the LMT Advanced Carrier is for suppressed fire and for use in in 14.5" barrels and over only. Keep the AR platform well lubed with serviceable magazines and it will run just fine.
PhotomanM4
12-10-08, 08:48
in dirty battlefeild conditions, with little lube, and little time to clean?
I hear a lot of opposing opinions
I'm too old and out of shape for "dirty battlefield conditions" and I keep my AR lubed and clean. So...I guess what I'm saying is I can't answer your question. :rolleyes:
decodeddiesel
12-10-08, 09:30
I think any weapon is only reliable as the person behind it.with the right training it is one of the best IMO
This.
With proper user training in the use, care, and lubrication nearly any weapon is "reliable".
Case in point, I saw way way way more AKs go down in the hands of the Iraqi Army soldiers than M4s go down in the hands of US Army soldiers.
Are bicycle wheels reliable? I mean, look at those flimsy spokes!
Yes, if they're made of good components and assembled correctly.
Wheels raced on for many seasons can last and last, unless you abuse them. The only way around that is to use heavier parts, which slows you down.
However, if they're laced up by idiots with cheap parts, the first pebble you hit may knock them out of true. Again, this can be circumvented by using heavier parts (again, cheap), but this makes racing a bear.
I think this analogy may help some AR-noobs. Look at what the AR is designed for, and what the alternatives are, and it makes plenty of sense.
I believe the LMT Advanced Carrier is for suppressed fire and for use in in 14.5" barrels and over only. Keep the AR platform well lubed with serviceable magazines and it will run just fine.
Uh yea I know that but I guess what I was asking was a hypothetical as to thoughts on the dust/sand test results on a M4 with a sand cut carrier...I have not had issues with reliability and have been using AR/M16s for years. The one thing I do like is having RObar NP3 my bolt carrier groups.
stronghold
12-10-08, 12:06
Are bicycle wheels reliable? I mean, look at those flimsy spokes!
Yes, if they're made of good components and assembled correctly.
Wheels raced on for many seasons can last and last, unless you abuse them. The only way around that is to use heavier parts, which slows you down.
However, if they're laced up by idiots with cheap parts, the first pebble you hit may knock them out of true. Again, this can be circumvented by using heavier parts (again, cheap), but this makes racing a bear.
I think this analogy may help some AR-noobs. Look at what the AR is designed for, and what the alternatives are, and it makes plenty of sense.
great analogy. kind-of boils down to "buy from a reputable MFR who uses quality parts".
QuickStrike
12-10-08, 13:51
My 6920 is the most reliable gun I own.
Almost 3K rounds, including about 1200 in class, *looks around for Rob_s* It ran FLAWLESSLY! :p
in dirty battlefeild conditions, with little lube, and little time to clean?
I hear a lot of opposing opinions
Yes, IF you understand its weak points and address them (extraction, lubrication, springs, magazines).
C4
If.....
* you get an AR that was properly made with milspec (or "close to milspec") components and processes, and
* you take proper care of it
...then it'll get the job done.
BTW, I think the Army's round of "dust tests", especially the 2nd round which had the AR with roughly 3x the number of stoppages as its competitors, were flawed. Given the first round of results they got, the second round clearly had something going on. Or vice versa. There's no way those results should be so far apart between round 1 and 2. For a valid statistical test, they either need to throw out all the results and start over, or they need to run a bunch more cycles of the test, to establish what is the average range of stoppages for each rifle type. Based on the test results we have today, they are too divergent, and there is not enough of a sampling, to be of any use.
Yes, IF you understand its weak points and address them (extraction, lubrication, springs, magazines).
That's the problem. No rifle out of the box should need improvement when there were already designs before it that solved the issues.
Since we're on the subject, let's talk about the extractor. It is known to be "weak", and has performanction issues at times. Most other assault rifles in the world copy the ar18 system, which also uses a 7 lug bolt with that same extractor. Do those rifles have the same problems the ar15 does with extraction?
I am probably off on the extreme end of the bell curve, but to me an acceptable number of malfunctions is zero. Under duress I will accept malfunctions that have an identifiable cause and respond to a distinct fix--and do not recur. In other words, I badly want perfection; but can live with very, very, very reliable. I have a very low tolerance for any weapon that acts up and continues to do so.
Thus far my carbine has lived up to that standard.
Which, frankly, is better than my issued M16 did back in 66-67...
Alaskapopo
12-10-08, 23:06
in dirty battlefeild conditions, with little lube, and little time to clean?
I hear a lot of opposing opinions
Yes I do and if I did not I would not carry one as a patrol rifle.
Pat
Robb Jensen
12-11-08, 05:58
in dirty battlefeild conditions, with little lube, and little time to clean?
I hear a lot of opposing opinions
Yes, no, yes.
The AR system will run about somewhere around 100 round completely dry if using NATO spec ammo and good mags. After the heat and the dryness will start making it run too slow to cycle.
A filthy gun as long as it's wet with a lot of lube will continue to run for a long time as long as it's wet with lube.
99% of the people who want piston guns don't really need them.
This is a free country and you can spend you money in any fashion you want. Needs and wants are very different things. You don't have to justify to us why you want a piston gun if you want one get one, but it's very likely you don't really need it.
I am probably off on the extreme end of the bell curve, but to me an acceptable number of malfunctions is zero. Under duress I will accept malfunctions that have an identifiable cause and respond to a distinct fix--and do not recur. In other words, I badly want perfection; but can live with very, very, very reliable. I have a very low tolerance for any weapon that acts up and continues to do so.
Thus far my carbine has lived up to that standard.
Which, frankly, is better than my issued M16 did back in 66-67...
I think that your standards are too high. ALL weapon's malfunction (even bolt guns and pump shotguns).
C4
Yes, IF you understand its weak points and address them (extraction, lubrication, springs, magazines).
C4
Grant,
I'm a very literal person.....
"Springs" means which springs?
Grant,
I'm a very literal person.....
"Springs" means which springs?
Extractor and buffer springs.
C4
uscbigdawg
12-11-08, 11:04
It's absolutely reliable, and after 3 deployments I'll say you ALWAYS have time to maintain it. The weak link in the AR platform (to me) are the magazines. After thousands of rounds for Uncle Sam and 15-20 times that as a 3-Gun competitor, the rifles will run and run and run when well built and maintained (and mil-spec does not = the gold standard of well built).
On another thread I explained that even some of the best parts fail. 2 PMAG's puked on me at the Ft. Benning 3 Gun Challenge. My "emergency" Brownell's mag (even though I had 4 more PMAG's) ran without a hiccup. Anything can cause anything to fail.
Rich
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.