View Full Version : Piston or Gas?
Im not new to firearms but new to the AR, which brings me to my question. What are the pros of a straight gas tube system versus the gas piston system? I know the straight gas is dirtier while the piston is cleaner, but thats about it, i have no experience with the pistons. Is their really a difference in accuracy, or realiability? or is it just a matter of preference? Im building my first AR and havnt bought an upper so help me out here:D
Pistons are way too problematic. They're a solution to a problem that's really been exagerated big time.
If you have to ask....then standard gas. I wouldn't look into the piston until I was familiar enough with the system to understand why, how, and "if" i might benefit from it. Plus as markm said there are still a lot of different versions and bugs to be worked out. If you're building your first AR, then go gas, and a piston version might make a great 4th or 5th AR for your collection.
Pistons are way too problematic. They're a solution to a problem that's really been exagerated big time.
So there's no real reason to buy a piston upper? For my first anyway? If you would please state the common problems they cause. I honestly don't know.
LWRC, LMT pistons are not so problematic as people may believe. They are GTG.
The only problem is the $ in most people's minds.
Gas and Piston both work. I prefer piston for the ease of maintenance and because you won't cook off all your lube running a whole lot of rounds through.
I have both, would grab either one for SHTF
decodeddiesel
04-21-09, 08:52
Pistons are a fad, and a solution looking for a problem IMHO. Most of them are under developed, poorly implemented, and offer little or no benefits over a DI gun. Nothing wrong at all with a well made, correctly setup, properly maintained DI AR.
*This is coming from a 2 tour Iraqi War veteran who placed his in the hands of a DI Colt M4 day in and day out.*
I don't follow the pistons very closely because I find them to be total nonsense.... but....
Almost every one of them has been problematic in one way or another. Pistons breaking/seizing is one of the problems I've seen. Another common problem is "carrier tilt". See, pistons have been forced into a platform that was meant for direct gas. Thus most pistons drive the top of the carrier and push the bottom of the carrier in to the receiver extension. This beats the crap out of the gun.
HKs piston appears to be the best of a silly idea. But i've read at least two account of problems with that design too.
Being an owner of both, gas.
If it is your first AR style platform build, go with a quality gas build. Don't skimp, do it once, do it right and forget about it. When it comes to resale, someone who knows what quality is will always pony up.
I've been interested in the midlength style for awhile and it will be added to the stable.
EzGoingKev
04-21-09, 11:52
It would depend on a couple of things - intended use and budget.
If you are going to shoot it at the range once in a while and let it sit around as a SHTF rifle then a DI rifle would be fine. If you are shooting a silenced SBR in the desert then a piston rifle might be what you need.
I don't buy all the "solution looking for a problem" comments. Obviously issues arose with the DI setup when it was used in a certain environment/configuration. Just because it works great for you doesn't mean it works great for everybody/everywhere.
If funds are not a determining factor and a piston set up makes you happy then by all means buy a piston rifle. After all, this is America and if you want it and can afford it then get it.
If you are going to go the piston route, I would suggest buying a piston rifle from LWRC, POF, or LMT. They have had their piston setups out a while and have worked out the bugs.
The "carrier tilt" problem has kept me from going the piston route for now. I've seen some people post pics of the damage done to the BCG because of it.
Thomas M-4
04-21-09, 12:31
I am not going to put a Honda engine in my Porsche just because I want more m.p.g
just my $.02
ok here's my .02 I see benefits with both designs. I just put an LWRC M6A2 on layaway as someone mentiones earlier LWRC and LMT seem to be the best examples of the piston breed. I am aware of the carrier tilt issue but I also researched the customer service of LWRC incase this becomes an issue and am told they really stand behind their products. That being said I plan on making the LWRC into an SBR later, which in my opinion will bring the piston benefits to bear. But DI guns have proven themselves reliable if treated correctly, I've carried M4 / M16 platform in every conceivable environment over my 15 years in the Army and have never had an issue but I am a OCD cleaner of all my guns.
I think both have merit but it depends on what your needs are Money can be a factor my Colt 6721 was $1500 the LWRC M6A2 is $2500, thats a lot of money to sink into goodies, optics etc.
Thomas M-4
04-21-09, 13:11
I am just curious what has LWRC done for the bolt carrier tilt issue?
I am just curious what has LWRC done for the bolt carrier tilt issue?
I really don't know, in my reading on the subject it seems to be a problem that is not present in all carbines. Some LWRC ownes say they have fired thousands of rounds with no visible signes of tilt. Some say they have had tilt signs show after a few hundred rounds. I am a bit puzzled on it my self, I just hope mine is gtg. We'll see I guess.
No Bananas
04-21-09, 13:30
Isn't threre a guy on this forum whose made a buffer to address the tilt issue? I think he's trying to tool up to sell them if I recall correctly. Anybody?
The_War_Wagon
04-21-09, 13:31
Having owned AR's for 18 years now (PWA, Colt, Olympic, DoubleStar & S&W), I took the plunge LAST year, and bought my first piston gun - a POF-415. Because I was already QUITE familiar with the platform through several different makes, I knew what I was looking for in a piston gun, quality wise.
It may just be, that it's the highest QUALITY firearm I've ever owned, but I LOVE my POF. It's accuracy is due to the quality of parts in it, though - NOT because it's piston-driven.
A marksman can make a GOOD rifle in either configuration DO what he needs it to do. And a GOOD QUALITY gas rifle, will perform better than a poor quality piston rifle.
As others have suggested, I'd get a GOOD gas gun first - learn the eccentricities of the breed, as it were - and then see if you still need or even WANT a piston gun thereafter. Even if money is no object, and you're worried about the OBAMANATION'S forthcoming bans :mad:, and you want to get one of each, I'd still set the piston rifle aside, until the gas rifle was mastered.
My $.02, as an owner of both.
Why not have both?
Get a LMT MRP piston. Then get a MRP DI gas barrel for $300. Add a BCG if you don't have one already. Change the piston to a gas system in 2 minutes.
Sttrongbow
04-21-09, 20:34
The "carrier tilt" problem has kept me from going the piston route for now. I've seen some people post pics of the damage done to the BCG because of it.
I'm curious about this issue. I hear a lot about carrier tilt, but I've never heard of a failure or stoppage supposedly caused by it.
Pat Rogers beat the heck out a few LWRC M6's... maybe he can chime in and comment on if "carrier tilt" was problem?
Gutshot John
04-21-09, 20:37
Gas.
I wanted to like the piston systems, but after shooting one for two days at a Rogers class, I was completely underwhelmed.
The AR DI system functions just fine if you keep it lubed.
Sttrongbow
04-21-09, 20:39
I am just curious what has LWRC done for the bolt carrier tilt issue?
Two things:
1) the "key" is slightly angled down to provide a force vector more towards the middle of the carrier (not terribly effective IMO) and
2) the rear of the teflon-chromed carrier has "pads" which keep the carrier more centered in the receiver.
I have about 500 rounds through mine so far, and it shows some superficial wear on the leading edge of the receiver extension, but it hasn't visually changed in about 250 rounds.
Cagemonkey
04-21-09, 20:47
Had a LWRC M6A2 upper. The quality of the product was great. Never had a problem with function. Carrier tilt doesn't seem to be a problem. Unfortunately, the recoil for a 5.56 is too much, especially if you use an optic like an ACOG TA31F. If you want a piston gun, try a Robinson XCR. If you want an AR, stay with DI and use adequate lubrication.
It appears it has all much been said. Especially for someone just now getting into the rifle system, buy a quality DI and spend the extra grand on ammo and get good with it.
Seth Harness
04-21-09, 21:58
I'm curious about this issue. I hear a lot about carrier tilt, but I've never heard of a failure or stoppage supposedly caused by it.
I never wanted to experience a failure or stoppage down the road, thats why I made the buffers. Tilt is not okay, by any stretch of the imagination or for any length of time IMHO...
There are systems that can put certain parts through added strain, over that of the DI system. Preserving those parts is the best anyone can do, given the fact that they would continue using a piston gun.
Thomas M-4
04-21-09, 22:06
Two things:
1) the "key" is slightly angled down to provide a force vector more towards the middle of the carrier (not terribly effective IMO) and
2) the rear of the teflon-chromed carrier has "pads" which keep the carrier more centered in the receiver.
I have about 500 rounds through mine so far, and it shows some superficial wear on the leading edge of the receiver extension, but it hasn't visually changed in about 250 rounds.
Out of curiosity does LWRC use a different bolt or does it a standard style bolt?
I never wanted to experience a failure or stoppage down the road, thats why I made the buffers. Tilt is not okay, by any stretch of the imagination or for any length of time IMHO...
There are systems that can put certain parts through added strain, over that of the DI system. Preserving those parts is the best anyone can do, given the fact that they would continue using a piston gun.
The thing I don't get is that some piston examples exhibit tilt while others in the same brand don't. is it an anamolie or what I mean I don't get it. I am beginning to re thing my getting an LWRC. I wanted the reliability of the piston system for sbr / suppressor purposes but even then is it worth it?
Go with gas
Why fix what isn't broken?
You will have to clean it either way just not as much with the piston but if you clean it more often and it breaks you may what is broken and how to fix it easier. With a piston chances are you will not know the gun as well due to the lack of field striping/cleaning.
Thomas M-4
04-21-09, 22:49
The thing I don't get is that some piston examples exhibit tilt while others in the same brand don't. is it an anamolie or what I mean I don't get it. I am beginning to re thing my getting an LWRC. I wanted the reliability of the piston system for sbr / suppressor purposes but even then is it worth it?
I could be wrong but I think grant at G&R tactical is building suppressed sbr,s uppers with lmt enhanced carriers. Might be worth checking out.
I could be wrong but I think grant at G&R tactical is building suppressed sbr,s uppers with lmt enhanced carriers. Might be worth checking out.
Maybe I'll check that out I will not be in the market for an SBR upper for at least 15 months as I'll be in afghanistan for a year. Maybe I'll go see if there is another colt in at my store and switch layaways again on the LWRC. We'll see
Thomas M-4
04-21-09, 23:17
Maybe I'll check that out I will not be in the market for an SBR upper for at least 15 months as I'll be in afghanistan for a year. Maybe I'll go see if there is another colt in at my store and switch layaways again on the LWRC. We'll see
15 months if AWB2 hasn't by then I would be looking for a FN scar or an ACR
you would have enough coin for that :D
ive heard from the more reliable guys on these forums that if your gunning for accuracy as your objective, than D.I. is much better than piston. That was enough said for me til i get my fill on all the different models of DI guns i want.
Buy a quality DI gun; Noveske, Larue, Daniel Defense, Colt, LMT to name a few. For a complete gun, the new DD M4 is hard to beat for what you're getting. Larue uppers are priced very reasonably as well for what you're getting.
sounds good guys, i think i got my answer. Ill go with a DI system for a while, though the cost of a piston gun will keep me away from it for a while. If i ever get the bank or interest in a piston gun ill just buy an upper later. Thanks for the info guys, but i got one more question, im probably gonna build my upper like im doing my lower, my local gun shop just got some stripped uppers from YHM, they pretty decent? 125$ last i checked, they got the forward assist and dust cover installed
YHM is fine. Just make sure you get a good BCG. Since you have the option, I would go with a match grade.
yeah a match grade was kinda my thinkin too, though i might just get a decent one and upgrade later, bank is low for the time being:p
30 cal slut
04-22-09, 07:31
this is what i overheard from a (retired) HSLD gent this weekend.
1) piston guns, when combined with a suppressor, are murder on the internal parts as the bolt comes back with greater force than with a gas gun.
this is what i experienced this weekend.
1) piston parts can and do break.
15 months if AWB2 hasn't by then I would be looking for a FN scar or an ACR
you would have enough coin for that :D
good call
this is what i overheard from a (retired) HSLD gent this weekend.
1) piston guns, when combined with a suppressor, are murder on the internal parts as the bolt comes back with greater force than with a gas gun.
this is what i experienced this weekend.
1) piston parts can and do break.
Wait a minute....does this appy to SBR's?? I thought cans, SBR's and pistons were the only way to go??
Thomas M-4
04-22-09, 10:08
Wait a minute....does this appy to SBR's?? I thought cans, SBR's and pistons were the only way to go??
With the sig 556, FN scar, and ACR are designed from the outset to run a short stroke gas piston and should work great as SBR's though a can .
DI gas can be made to work with SBR's and cans with switch blocks or enhanced carriers.
I would rather tune my Porsche engine to work as best as it could with a exhaust system than sticking a honda engine in the front because it works good in the civic.
OldNavyGuy
04-22-09, 10:13
sounds good guys, i think i got my answer. Ill go with a DI system for a while, though the cost of a piston gun will keep me away from it for a while. If i ever get the bank or interest in a piston gun ill just buy an upper later. Thanks for the info guys, but i got one more question, im probably gonna build my upper like im doing my lower, my local gun shop just got some stripped uppers from YHM, they pretty decent? 125$ last i checked, they got the forward assist and dust cover installed
very sorry to read that you are going with the gas D.I., i believe you need to reconsider your choice, i have been shooting a piston ever since Paul Leitner-Wise converted a Colt 6721 upper for me, and has 5,720 rounds thru it, (i keep track of every round i fire and every misfire, jam, FTF, etc. ) the carrier has a "boss" on the rear of the carrier that reduces carrier tilt to a minimum, DOES NOT ELIMINATE TILT, just reduces it, i also have three other LWRC & LWRCI piston carbines and they run flawlessly, as someone mentioned they do NOT burn off the lube, they eliminate the heat that is directed into the action and rounds in the mag.
my target/sniper rifle is a Colt D.I. with 20" barrel and if i could convert it to piston i would do so, she is pretty accurate as is but i still like the BCG and lower parts to be void of the crud build up and heat
the above is my OPINION and NOT to be construed as an endorsement of any brand or company i just love pistons.., no mater who makes them as long as they are HIGH QUALITY
With the sig 556, FN scar, and ACR are designed from the outset to run a short stroke gas piston and should work great as SBR's though a can .
DI gas can be made to work with SBR's and cans with switch blocks or enhanced carriers.
I would rather tune my Porsche engine to work as best as it could with a exhaust system than sticking a honda engine in the front because it works good in the civic.
Sorry...confused with your statement. Are you saying you do not like pistons on all AR's including SBR's?? Only reason I ask is I see LOTS of M4's with this set up but never a Porshe w/ jap pistons.
Your option for an SBR AR would be to stick with DI & add some bells and whistles over the piston system??
Thanks!!
Thomas M-4
04-22-09, 11:28
Sorry...confused with your statement. Are you saying you do not like pistons on all AR's including SBR's?? Only reason I ask is I see LOTS of M4's with this set up but never a Porshe w/ jap pistons.
Your option for an SBR AR would be to stick with DI & add some bells and whistles over the piston system??
Thanks!!
Yes I do not believe in AR piston conversions SBR or other wise [When I want a piston operated assault rifle I will buy one that was designed from the ground up to be one ] not a conversion that has fixes to cover up a design that was meant to run a another way.
This debate with DI and Pistons has been going on for 40+ years and has far I can tell so has these conversions. [I don't know the whole history but I know its been going on far awhile]
The reason I try to explain the Porshe with Jap motor is because most guys know something about cars. Show why would I want to put 2 engines in a car and only ever use one of them.[Doesn't make any since nor does gas piston conversions from DI do to me].
And as far as adding one or two things to make DI work other than putting in a completely different system that the original rifle wasn't designed for YES...
I will take the lesser of 2 evils.
LMT's and LWRC's have their bugs too.
I know both have accuracy concerns, the LWRC apparently shoots quite differently as it heats up or cools off.
I've heard of more than a few LMT's choking, too.
Lube a well built DI gun properly, and it'll outshoot a piston gun, and do so more reliably.
The problems people talk about with DI guns are caused by improper maintenance and lubrication....the problems with piston guns are caused by the actual mechanism. Which would you rather have?
Seth Harness
04-22-09, 12:53
very sorry to read that you are going with the gas D.I., i believe you need to reconsider your choice, i have been shooting a piston ever since Paul Leitner-Wise converted a Colt 6721 upper for me, and has 5,720 rounds thru it, (i keep track of every round i fire and every misfire, jam, FTF, etc. ) the carrier has a "boss" on the rear of the carrier that reduces carrier tilt to a minimum, DOES NOT ELIMINATE TILT, just reduces it, i also have three other LWRC & LWRCI piston carbines and they run flawlessly, as someone mentioned they do NOT burn off the lube, they eliminate the heat that is directed into the action and rounds in the mag.
my target/sniper rifle is a Colt D.I. with 20" barrel and if i could convert it to piston i would do so, she is pretty accurate as is but i still like the BCG and lower parts to be void of the crud build up and heat
the above is my OPINION and NOT to be construed as an endorsement of any brand or company i just love pistons.., no mater who makes them as long as they are HIGH QUALITY
Spoken by an actual user. Good info ONG, thank you.
well for better or worse I swapped layaways again I switched the LWRCM6A2 for a S&W VTAC after reading this thread for a bit and since I dont have any first hand with the piston stuff, hopefully I made the right decision. :confused: Oh and I swapped a Colt 6721 for a 6920, that seemed a no brainer. :) Either way whats done is done I deploy in less than a month and that was my last trip to the store...I hope
I believe the 'Piston or DI' is an individuals personal decision. I made mine on my on accordance and am very happy with my purchase. I bought the LMT MRP CQB Piston.
It seems to me that to ask someone to make your decisions for you is a little ridiculous.
I have freely admitted that I had a problem with my rifle when I first received it. That has been taken by some here and on TOS to mean that the rifle and it's operating system is flawed. This is simply not true. LMT took over two years to design and test their system BEFORE releasing it to the general public. They have shot thousands of rounds through their system and have addressed any and all issues that were related to the actual performance of their rifle. On mine, the issue wasn't necessarily with the operation of the rifle, but the ammo I was using. This has been addressed and corrected by LMT. Their customer service and company backing has been nothing but stellar!!!
For those that don't own one (LMT, LWRCI, POF, Barrett) or are just talking about their own experiences with using the DI versions of the rifle without having owned one, please say that you have no direct knowledge. Even if you have seen one have stoppages in a class you took, that doesn't mean much. Stoppages occur in classes all the time and mostly in DI versions..........they're the most in use and that's the only reason.
Please, if you have direct information by owning a piston AR, then by all means, give your input. These rants about DI only is just that........rants/hot air!!! A well designed piston AR will function just as well as a DI and in certain circumstances, better. Everyone says that the DI works well as long as it's lubed, what if you run out of lube??? Shock!!!!!!!! The DI works because it is well lubed. Without the lube, it stops!!! That is the design. It cooks off the lube by design. Dumping hot gasses on the part that needs the lube in the first place is it's design. That is the reason the Piston AR's were developed!!!
Yes, the early designs of Piston AR's had some teething problems, but for the most part, they have been addressed. 'Carrier Tilt', at least in my LMT (and LMT's in general) has been addressed and corrected. It is not a concern!!! I am only speaking from experience since I OWN ONE!!!
Thomas M-4
04-23-09, 10:12
I believe the 'Piston or DI' is an individuals personal decision. I made mine on my on accordance and am very happy with my purchase. I bought the LMT MRP CQB Piston.
It seems to me that to ask someone to make your decisions for you is a little ridiculous.
I have freely admitted that I had a problem with my rifle when I first received it. That has been taken by some here and on TOS to mean that the rifle and it's operating system is flawed. This is simply not true. LMT took over two years to design and test their system BEFORE releasing it to the general public. They have shot thousands of rounds through their system and have addressed any and all issues that were related to the actual performance of their rifle. On mine, the issue wasn't necessarily with the operation of the rifle, but the ammo I was using. This has been addressed and corrected by LMT. Their customer service and company backing has been nothing but stellar!!!
For those that don't own one (LMT, LWRCI, POF, Barrett) or are just talking about their own experiences with using the DI versions of the rifle without having owned one, please say that you have no direct knowledge. Even if you have seen one have stoppages in a class you took, that doesn't mean much. Stoppages occur in classes all the time and mostly in DI versions..........they're the most in use and that's the only reason.
Please, if you have direct information by owning a piston AR, then by all means, give your input. These rants about DI only is just that........rants/hot air!!! A well designed piston AR will function just as well as a DI and in certain circumstances, better. Everyone says that the DI works well as long as it's lubed, what if you run out of lube??? Shock!!!!!!!! The DI works because it is well lubed. Without the lube, it stops!!! That is the design. It cooks off the lube by design. Dumping hot gasses on the part that needs the lube in the first place is it's design. That is the reason the Piston AR's were developed!!!
Yes, the early designs of Piston AR's had some teething problems, but for the most part, they have been addressed. 'Carrier Tilt', at least in my LMT (and LMT's in general) has been addressed and corrected. It is not a concern!!! I am only speaking from experience since I OWN ONE!!!
You have a shelby cobra on your avatar I am assuming you know some history
about cobras for instance the 289 CI was a better road racer than the 427 CI
because the 427 CI was to front heavy and to over powered for the FRAME
and the top speed of 150 mph was only 10mph faster than 289CI version because the original roadster had horrible aerodynamics. MR Shelby being the smart man that he is Designed FROM THE GROUND UP the daytona coupe and with the same 427 CI engine from the cobra the daytona coupe's top speed was 180MPH.
I still say that when I want a short stroke gas piston assault rifle I will buy one that was designed FROM THE GROUND UP to be a short stroke gas piston assault rifle not a adaptation that was put on a rifle original designed to be a Long stroke gas piston via direct gas impingement.
The theme for this thread was gas piston VS DI gas I have not posted any failures of gas piston systems I have merely pointed out design flaws that happen when you do adaptations and stated my opinion I will not tell somebody what they should buy they are free to make there own choice in such matters.
Has everyone here read this thread???
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=26421
It is a comparison between HK 416 and LMT Piston. Great writeup with great pictures.
BTW, Para USA is coming out with their version which is a completely new twist by using what I believe is both systems together!!! No buffer tube!!! True folding stock!!! Works well with SBRs!!! Supposedly cleaner than traditional DI by using Delayed DI???
http://www.para-usa.com/new/product_rifle.php
Video link with Todd Jarrett:
http://www.para-usa.com/new/video_ttr.php?PHPSESSID=59b1395bde474d36b2c78d4c9a438e49
Articles:
http://www.tactical-life.com/online/guns-and-weapons/para-usa-ttr-556mm/
and Guns and Ammo special edition: Combat Arms.
The_War_Wagon
04-24-09, 11:11
BTW, Para USA is coming out with their version which is a completely new twist by using what I believe is both systems together!!! No buffer tube!!! True folding stock!!! Works well with SBRs!!! Supposedly cleaner than traditional DI by using Delayed DI???
http://www.para-usa.com/new/product_rifle.php
Video link with Todd Jarrett:
http://www.para-usa.com/new/video_ttr.php?PHPSESSID=59b1395bde474d36b2c78d4c9a438e49
Articles:
http://www.tactical-life.com/online/guns-and-weapons/para-usa-ttr-556mm/
and Guns and Ammo special edition: Combat Arms.
Saw that on Guns 'n' Ammo TV two night ago! Looks pretty impressive!
Thanks for 'representing' there for us HAPPY piston owners. I am glad I waited to get a Gen.III POF, but for those of us who are HAPPY with pistons, you'll need good shot placement and a crowbar to get 'em away from us! :D
vicious_cb
04-24-09, 11:42
Saw that on Guns 'n' Ammo TV two night ago! Looks pretty impressive!
Thanks for 'representing' there for us HAPPY piston owners. I am glad I waited to get a Gen.III POF, but for those of us who are HAPPY with pistons, you'll need good shot placement and a crowbar to get 'em away from us! :D
The LR300/Para TTR doesnt count as piston operation. More like it has two gas tubes. One is attached to as the gas block and one recoils back with the carrier.
Thomas M-4
04-24-09, 11:56
Has everyone here read this thread???
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=26421
It is a comparison between HK 416 and LMT Piston. Great writeup with great pictures.
BTW, Para USA is coming out with their version which is a completely new twist by using what I believe is both systems together!!! No buffer tube!!! True folding stock!!! Works well with SBRs!!! Supposedly cleaner than traditional DI by using Delayed DI???
http://www.para-usa.com/new/product_rifle.php
Video link with Todd Jarrett:
http://www.para-usa.com/new/video_ttr.php?PHPSESSID=59b1395bde474d36b2c78d4c9a438e49
Articles:
http://www.tactical-life.com/online/guns-and-weapons/para-usa-ttr-556mm/
and Guns and Ammo special edition: Combat Arms.
I am so glad that you posted those links with the pictures if you read the article and look at the pictures You will see my point.
1st HK HAS A PROPRIETARY BARREL,BOLT,BOLT CARRIER,FIRING PIN,& BUFFER
proprietary meaning that all of those parts a DESIGNED to work together for that system In case you didn't know the bolt on a DI system is the piston. Other than the HK SYSTEM I don't know of any other piston conversion system that has its own proprietary bolt. Why do I want 2 engines in a car and only ever use 1??
The HK 416 was designed for the MILITARY the MILITARY IS NOT GOING TO ACCEPT A INCOMPLETE REDESIGN THEY WANT A SYSTEM. All these other piston conversions are designed for the civilian market.
2nd The para ordnance rifle is the ZM WEAPONS DESIGN and guess what??
Its DI gas:eek: the gas key is extended all the way to the gas block on the barrel there is no gas tube the extended gas key is the gas tube. The recoil spring surrounds the gas key so they can do away with the buffer assemble.
Thank You:D
Saw that on Guns 'n' Ammo TV two night ago! Looks pretty impressive!
Thanks for 'representing' there for us HAPPY piston owners. I am glad I waited to get a Gen.III POF, but for those of us who are HAPPY with pistons, you'll need good shot placement and a crowbar to get 'em away from us! :D
You're welcome War Wagon..........Like you said, the others (DI owners) will have to pry our Piston rifles out of our hands. I'm extremely pleased with my LMT. Glad you like your POF. There are others out there that have LWRCI and Barrett and are just as happy.
I don't understand why the DI owners feel so angry at us Piston owners. They are all ARs for the most part. Thomas M-4 is pointing out that HK uses proprietary parts in their piston version....well, I think that all the manufacturers of piston rifles use their own proprietary versions. The locking lugs, bolt face, and cam on the HK version bolt is the very same design on every AR/M-15/16/4 out there. We should ask Kevin B if he could swap out the bolt on the LMT with the HK? Maybe, maybe not, but the function is the same. My LMT bolt has no gas rings, therefore doesn't operate like the DI, but is still the same bolt that LMT produces for all their rifles. It still operates in my Piston AR just like it is suppose to. If I wanted to put gas rings on it and slap it in a DI version, it will work just fine. Sounds like a good idea to me!!!;) LMT designed their Piston AR proprietary, but also being smart about the parts used. I guess they didn't see any reason to change things like the bolt, firing pin and buffer. Saves on manufacturing and stocking. You could also use another bolt/firing pin/buffer from another AR. You know, that does sound like smart business. I understand that the HK 416 is/was designed for the military, however, I do believe that there are others using LWRCI rifles in two way firing ranges.
I don't understand why some smart people can re-engineer something like the AR for use with a piston system and others get all upset. It's not their rifle that got re-engineered. Their AR is still DI. Just because someone likes to be different, people get all their feathers ruffled. No one is telling (or should be telling) others their rifle is bad. It's just different that's all. If it works for them, great....if not, then they can complain.
Thomas M-4
04-24-09, 14:36
You're welcome War Wagon..........Like you said, the others (DI owners) will have to pry our Piston rifles out of our hands. I'm extremely pleased with my LMT. Glad you like your POF. There are others out there that have LWRCI and Barrett and are just as happy.
I don't understand why the DI owners feel so angry at us Piston owners. They are all ARs for the most part. Thomas M-4 is pointing out that HK uses proprietary parts in their piston version....well, I think that all the manufacturers of piston rifles use their own proprietary versions. The locking lugs, bolt face, and cam on the HK version bolt is the very same design on every AR/M-15/16/4 out there. We should ask Kevin B if he could swap out the bolt on the LMT with the HK? Maybe, maybe not, but the function is the same. My LMT bolt has no gas rings, therefore doesn't operate like the DI, but is still the same bolt that LMT produces for all their rifles. It still operates in my Piston AR just like it is suppose to. If I wanted to put gas rings on it and slap it in a DI version, it will work just fine. Sounds like a good idea to me!!!;) LMT designed their Piston AR proprietary, but also being smart about the parts used. I guess they didn't see any reason to change things like the bolt, firing pin and buffer. Saves on manufacturing and stocking. You could also use another bolt/firing pin/buffer from another AR. You know, that does sound like smart business. I understand that the HK 416 is/was designed for the military, however, I do believe that there are others using LWRCI rifles in two way firing ranges.
I don't understand why some smart people can re-engineer something like the AR for use with a piston system and others get all upset. It's not their rifle that got re-engineered. Their AR is still DI. Just because someone likes to be different, people get all their feathers ruffled. No one is telling (or should be telling) others their rifle is bad. It's just different that's all. If it works for them, great....if not, then they can complain.
1ST I am not angry with any piston AR owner in fact I feel sorry for most that have been duped and or conned it to believing that the piston converted AR solves any & all problems imaginary or real with the DI system. While the design problems in a piston conversions or either totally ignored or down played .
Sorry if I am playing consumers advocate.
1ST I am not angry with any piston AR owner in fact I feel sorry for most that have been duped and or conned it to believing that the piston converted AR solves any & all problems imaginary or real with the DI system. While the design problems in a piston conversions or either totally ignored or down played .
Sorry if I am playing consumers advocate.
Do you own or have significant trigger time on a piston AR? If so, was that a retrofit or a weapon that was reconfigured by design to work with a piston operated system such as LWRC, HK, POF, or LMT? I have heard of far more problems with the retrofit piston kits designed to be added to gas operated AR's than I have weapons that were engineered to work with a piston. The FAL which operates on a similar piston system and to my understanding is what many good AR manufactures have looked to when designing their piston systems, has long been thought of as one of the worlds great weapons platforms.
I'm not trying to jump on you so I hope it doesn't come across that way. I appreciate your opinions on the topic, I am just trying to get a feel for where you are coming from and your perspective on the subject at hand.
I have a LMT piston carbine and am very, very happy with it. I have had various other AR's over the years and carried one for several years in the Army on deployments in multiple environments. In my personal opinion (which may be worth exactly what you paid for it :D), the LMT piston carbine that I own now is the finest I have shot bar none. Plus, I spent plenty of time scraping carbon off of a bolt when I worked for uncle Sam. I don't feel much need to do that now that I am a dirty nasty civie. ;)
I think the jury is out as far as the reliability of piston AR platforms and whether or not this is a fad. I don't think you would see major manufacturers spending the resources they have to develop these systems if they thought this was just going to blow over in a couple of years. Furthermore, even if there are reliability issues with current piston AR's, it is likely that those will be fixed when the next rendition of the platform comes out. Things are rarely gotten right the first time and I can't think of a weapons system that has not benefited from adaptation and feedback when the first model came out.
I will be curious to see where this goes in the future. For now, I love my LMT CQB Piston Carbine and don't plan on giving it up anytime soon.
Love the forum...
regards.
Jason
QuickStrike
04-24-09, 15:25
For me it's now either HK 416 or gas in a midlength system.
I've tried another piston design and was not that impressed.
Thomas M-4
04-24-09, 16:57
Do you own or have significant trigger time on a piston AR? If so, was that a retrofit or a weapon that was reconfigured by design to work with a piston operated system such as LWRC, HK, POF, or LMT? I have heard of far more problems with the retrofit piston kits designed to be added to gas operated AR's than I have weapons that were engineered to work with a piston. The FAL which operates on a similar piston system and to my understanding is what many good AR manufactures have looked to when designing their piston systems, has long been thought of as one of the worlds great weapons platforms.
I'm not trying to jump on you so I hope it doesn't come across that way. I appreciate your opinions on the topic, I am just trying to get a feel for where you are coming from and your perspective on the subject at hand.
I have a LMT piston carbine and am very, very happy with it. I have had various other AR's over the years and carried one for several years in the Army on deployments in multiple environments. In my personal opinion (which may be worth exactly what you paid for it :D), the LMT piston carbine that I own now is the finest I have shot bar none. Plus, I spent plenty of time scraping carbon off of a bolt when I worked for uncle Sam. I don't feel much need to do that now that I am a dirty nasty civie. ;)
I think the jury is out as far as the reliability of piston AR platforms and whether or not this is a fad. I don't think you would see major manufacturers spending the resources they have to develop these systems if they thought this was just going to blow over in a couple of years. Furthermore, even if there are reliability issues with current piston AR's, it is likely that those will be fixed when the next rendition of the platform comes out. Things are rarely gotten right the first time and I can't think of a weapons system that has not benefited from adaptation and feedback when the first model came out.
I will be curious to see where this goes in the future. For now, I love my LMT CQB Piston Carbine and don't plan on giving it up anytime soon.
Love the forum...
regards.
Jason
Jason does the gas piston or the gas plug never gets carbon build up? If not
thats the first I have ever heard of that. By the way I was in the Army to and they made me scrape that bolt also. You will have carbon build up On piston and DI systems. The carbon has to go some where right??
HK is a SYSTEM not a adaptation or a conversion and Is not to be filed in with the rest that was the point of my last post.. Did you not read it completely?
I am less than than a year away from receiving my engineering degree Its not in mechanical engineering but you do learn difference between a designed system and a adaptation. Those skids that are own your bolt carrier to keep it from gouging your buffer tube are there BECAUSE THE UPPER RECEIVER AND BOLT CARRIER ASSEMBLE WHERE NEVER DESIGNED TO HANDLE BOLT CARRIER TILT.
Thats why the HK has so many proprietary parts.
If you have no problems with skids on you carrier or a bolt that was originally designed to function as a piston just reciprocating around serving no function. In a adaptation that is marginally less P.M. intensive and cost twice as much more then Gas piston is for you there are you happy I said it.:D
Jason does the gas piston or the gas plug never gets carbon build up? If not
thats the first I have ever heard of that. By the way I was in the Army to and they made me scrape that bolt also. You will have carbon build up On piston and DI systems. The carbon has to go some where right??
HK is a SYSTEM not a adaptation or a conversion and Is not to be filed in with the rest that was the point of my last post.. Did you not read it completely?
I am less than than a year away from receiving my engineering degree Its not in mechanical engineering but you do learn difference between a designed system and a adaptation. Those skids that are own your bolt carrier to keep it from gouging your buffer tube are there BECAUSE THE UPPER RECEIVER AND BOLT CARRIER ASSEMBLE WHERE NEVER DESIGNED TO HANDLE BOLT CARRIER TILT.
Thats why the HK has so many proprietary parts.
If you have no problems with skids on you carrier or a bolt that was originally designed to function as a piston just reciprocating around serving no function. In a adaptation that is marginally less P.M. intensive and cost twice as much more then Gas piston is for you there are you happy I said it.:D
No, you are correct, the piston does build up carbon to some extent. However, it is not nearly as difficult to get off as what used to end up on the bolt after shooting a few hundred rounds when I was in the Army. As for the rest, though I a solid academic background in mechanics up to the doctoral level I am not an engineer so I will defer to you on design. However, I also realize that LMT, LWRC, and others went back and redesigned many things, rather than slapping a piston on a system and then moving on. The only problems I have seen with piston AR's are those who tried to retrofit a piston to a gas AR with a kit. The LMT's. LWRC's, and even the POF's that I have seen and shot myself have been nothing but reliable.
As I stated earlier, it remains to be seen whether they will remain that way over the long haul.
Furthermore, I am a bit confused at something you stated that I have seen echo'd by others on here which is that piston systems cost twice as much as gas AR's. I know that LWRC rifles are pretty expensive and the HK system is out of this world but the LMT was only $100 more at my dealer than the non-piston model of the MRP CQB. On the LMT website it lists for approx. $220 more. As LWRC, POF, and HK do not make a gas AR that I am aware of, I think LMT provides one of the only direct comparison of costs between piston and gas AR systems. Certainly $100 - 220 is nothing to sneeze at, especially in this economy, but it is hardly twice the price either.
Thomas M-4
04-24-09, 17:56
No, you are correct, the piston does build up carbon to some extent. However, it is not nearly as difficult to get off as what used to end up on the bolt after shooting a few hundred rounds when I was in the Army. As for the rest, though I a solid academic background in mechanics up to the doctoral level I am not an engineer so I will defer to you on design. However, I also realize that LMT, LWRC, and others went back and redesigned many things, rather than slapping a piston on a system and then moving on. The only problems I have seen with piston AR's are those who tried to retrofit a piston to a gas AR with a kit. The LMT's. LWRC's, and even the POF's that I have seen and shot myself have been nothing but reliable.
As I stated earlier, it remains to be seen whether they will remain that way over the long haul.
Furthermore, I am a bit confused at something you stated that I have seen echo'd by others on here which is that piston systems cost twice as much as gas AR's. I know that LWRC rifles are pretty expensive and the HK system is out of this world but the LMT was only $100 more at my dealer than the non-piston model of the MRP CQB. On the LMT website it lists for approx. $220 more. As LWRC, POF, and HK do not make a gas AR that I am aware of, I think LMT provides one of the only direct comparison of costs between piston and gas AR systems. Certainly $100 - 220 is nothing to sneeze at, especially in this economy, but it is hardly twice the price either.
Thank you for enlightening me I did not know the price of the DI mrp was only $100-$200 less than the piston mrp. LMT does make a fine rifle in my opinion I have one my self. And one day I might get the MRP upper if I can get my finances straight of coarse it will be DI ;)
Jason does the gas piston or the gas plug never gets carbon build up? If not
thats the first I have ever heard of that. By the way I was in the Army to and they made me scrape that bolt also. You will have carbon build up On piston and DI systems. The carbon has to go some where right??
HK is a SYSTEM not a adaptation or a conversion and Is not to be filed in with the rest that was the point of my last post.. Did you not read it completely?
I am less than than a year away from receiving my engineering degree Its not in mechanical engineering but you do learn difference between a designed system and a adaptation. Those skids that are own your bolt carrier to keep it from gouging your buffer tube are there BECAUSE THE UPPER RECEIVER AND BOLT CARRIER ASSEMBLE WHERE NEVER DESIGNED TO HANDLE BOLT CARRIER TILT.
Thats why the HK has so many proprietary parts.
If you have no problems with skids on you carrier or a bolt that was originally designed to function as a piston just reciprocating around serving no function. In a adaptation that is marginally less P.M. intensive and cost twice as much more then Gas piston is for you there are you happy I said it.:D
I cannot speak for all the pistol systems however I am familiar with and own 2 LWRCI rifles, and had some trigger time with both the LMT piston and the HK416. I definitley will get a LMT and may even get a shot at buying a 416 here real soon.
But from what I know about the LWRCI system they use a "proprietary part" which is their bolt carrier. The key has a slight downward slope so that the forces are re-vectored ensuring the carrier is pushed straight back in the receiver.
While no current piston system, including the LWRCI, is as vetted or recommended as the HK 416, certain experts like Pat Rogers and Larry Vickers have had good things to say about them. And I have had good luck with my LWRCI rifles running one to 6458 rounds with no sign of carrier tilt or abnormal carbon build up on the nozzel cup. I am embarrassed to say that I recently realized that I had not cleaned it in the recommended time frame of 2500 rounds. I have had it for a couple of years and it had made it through 2 classes including a, Vickers 3 day carbine/pistol class, many 3 gun competitions, and lots of just plain shooting.
Does this mean I don't use DI guns? Absolutley not, I run my 2 Colts as often as I can and should be ordering a MK 12 Mod 1 from Centurion arms here shortly. But I realized they each of strengths and weaknesses the other doesn't. And I defer to the advise of LAV when he said pistons shine in:
-Barrel lengths less then 14"
-Suppressed fire
-Wide range of ammunition used
-full auto fire (yeah I wish)
In the end it is probably up to personal opinion. Generally my 16" guns are DI, a colt 6940 & a DDm4, I am picking up soon, that I keep well lubed while my sbr's tend to be pistons. I think that Larry has gone to great lengths to point out the definicencies in a a hard run DI system, although many civilian shooters will never run into those problems some of which are outlined in this report on pages 44-46 from Crane http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2006smallarms/taylor.pdf.
As for the cost I. Right now a stock 6920 is running about $1600 around here, though they can be had for less I hope somewhere. To add a quality rail and stock you are probably looking at another $500. A Daniel Defense m4 is running at $1599 pretty much fully loaded at that price and is probably the best value around.
A SOPMOD equivalent of a LWRC rifle, M6A1, is retailing at Northwest tactical for $1891 with their free float rail system, Magpul MOE stock, rear BUIS, & a cold hammer forged barrel. As such it can be considered a good value.
Sttrongbow
04-25-09, 20:51
I never wanted to experience a failure or stoppage down the road, thats why I made the buffers.
I'm interested in your buffers... are you gonna offer them for sale?
Tilt is not okay, by any stretch of the imagination or for any length of time IMHO...
Do you have a basis for that opinion, or is it just a "gut feel" kind of thing?
There are systems that can put certain parts through added strain, over that of the DI system. Preserving those parts is the best anyone can do, given the fact that they would continue using a piston gun.
I hear ya, but I assess such matters as a matter of function... do they compromise the function of the rifle over its useful life?
Sttrongbow
04-25-09, 20:55
LMT's and LWRC's have their bugs too.
I know both have accuracy concerns, the LWRC apparently shoots quite differently as it heats up or cools off.
Mine certainly doesn't. Just this last week, I dumped 4 mags through it as fast as I could pull the trigger. It got DAMN hot, but POI didn't change at all.
Sttrongbow
04-25-09, 21:01
Out of curiosity does LWRC use a different bolt or does it a standard style bolt?
It works just fine with a standard bolt, but new ones are shipping with an "enhanced" bolt (With a whale tail style extractor).
Thomas M-4
04-25-09, 22:59
That link you gave I read over 2 years ago It has nothing to do with LWRC ,HK , LMT, or any other gas piston AR. It does mention the FN SCAR [ A SHORT STROKE PISTON ASSAULT RIFLE DESIGNED FROM THE GROUND UP AS A REPLACEMENT FOR THE M-4 IN SOCOM ] . Have you read this entire thread?? Because I am only talking about adaptations..
Are you trying to point out the bolt failure at 6,000 - 10,000 rounds ???
Did you know barrels only last to 6,000-10,000 rounds ???
Did you know that when you replace the barrel that you also replace the bolt???
What is your point with that link???
The proprietary bolt carrier that LWRC has that uses the slight downward slope [THAT RE-VECTORED FORCES INSURING INSURING THE CARRIER IS PUSHED STRAIGHT BACK] your own words. WHERE DOES THE FORCES GO???????????????? THEY GOT TO GO SOME WHERE RIGHT.. Do you want a hint?? They go to the gas piston/ pushrod that is pushing your carrier to the rear. Can you show me a SHORT STROKE GAS PISTON DESIGNED FROM THE GROUND UP THAT PUTS TORQUE INTO THE GAS PISTON/ PUSHROD THAT WAS A SUCCESSFUL DESIGN ???
The great thing is SETH HARNESS [HAS DESIGNED THE BEST ANTI TILT BOLT CARRIER DEVICE THAT I HAVE SEEN TO DATE BETTER THAN THE SKID PADS:eek: AND BETTER THAN THE ANGLED KEY THAT VECTORS FORCES:rolleyes: HIS DEVICE SPREADS THE FORCE ACROSS THE CARRIER BUFFER & BUFFER TUBE.
Why does every body that has piston systems keeps throwing up round count numbers to me??? I dont care if YOU HAVE 1,000,000 ROUNDS THROUGH IT.
I NEVER EVER SAID ANY THING ABOUT FAILURES I HAVE STATED THAT MORE THAN ONCE THAT I AM MERELY POINTING OUT DESIGN FLAWS.
By the way for those people that do not know the difference between FORCES AND TORQUE THEY ARE THE EXACT SAME THING.
This engineering class 101 has been going on for days If you most know every detail about this I suggest you get in SCHOOL.. ITS $330 A CREDIT HOUR.
By the way the enhanced bolt that you say is in your LWRC I HAVE THAT EXACT SAME BOLT IN MY M-4 CARBINE ITS MADE BY LMT I AM ALSO RUNNING THE ENHANCED CARRIER DO YOU KNOW WHAT ITS SUPPOSE TO DO???
Its suppose to reduce the stress on the bolt that runs in a carbine gas system.
Seth Harness
04-25-09, 23:01
I'm interested in your buffers... are you gonna offer them for sale?
Yes,
working on that and starting a company at the same time.
There is a thread on these buffers here as well. Link (https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=15453)
Do you have a basis for that opinion, or is it just a "gut feel" kind of thing?
The way I see it is, bolt carriers were designed to travel down bearing surfaces in a linear path with little to no tilt. Now, take that same carrier, force a bind on it and send it down the same path with nothing to hold it straight through its cyclic motions. The rear of the bolt carrier has to be held in place somehow, especially when the bearing surfaces on that carrier only measure something like 2 3/4" to control a 7"+ bolt carrier (when bolt is fully extended).
I hear ya, but I assess such matters as a matter of function... do they compromise the function of the rifle over its useful life?
"Usefull life" is a relative term. Two guys with the same gun are going to have different usefull lives. My answer to this question would be along the same lines as the last answer... How much binding can the current AR system take with this piston technology applied to it. I dont know, but Im not going to wait for parts to wear out or possibly break prematurely to find out. I believe this is the best fix for the tilt issue. Its positive, constant and drop in. Bearing surfaces are not made to bind, tilt is proof that bearing surfaces (among other things) are being stressed more than a DI system. Within the current parameters, Im not comfortable with that. Unless Im coming from left field, it seems like common sense to me.
Thanks for your interest,
Seth H.
By the way for those people that do not know the difference between FORCES AND TORQUE THEY ARE THE EXACT SAME THING.
This engineering class 101 has been going on for days If you most know every detail about this I suggest you get in SCHOOL.. ITS $330 A CREDIT HOUR.
Maybe you should go back and take it yourself, or at least ask for your money back. That way you would understand that force and torque are not the same thing. The term 'Force' is used to describe linear kinetics whereas 'Torque' implies angular kinetics. The formula for force is Force = mass x acceleration whereas Torque actually uses force as one of its derivatives, Torque = Force x the length of the moment arm (d). Someone who truly understands mechanics would never use torque and force interchangeably.
If you are going to talk down to people, at least define your damn variables correctly.
OldNavyGuy
04-26-09, 08:05
Maybe you should go back and take it yourself, or at least ask for your money back. That way you would understand that force and torque are not the same thing. The term 'Force' is used to describe linear kinetics whereas 'Torque' implies angular kinetics.
thank you for posting this TRUTH, this is one of the first things i learned in the U.S.Navy as an 18 y.o. jet engine mechanic.., and i do not hold a college/university degree !
Thomas M-4
04-26-09, 10:24
Maybe you should go back and take it yourself, or at least ask for your money back. That way you would understand that force and torque are not the same thing. The term 'Force' is used to describe linear kinetics whereas 'Torque' implies angular kinetics. The formula for force is Force = mass x acceleration whereas Torque actually uses force as one of its derivatives, Torque = Force x the length of the moment arm (d). Someone who truly understands mechanics would never use torque and force interchangeably.
If you are going to talk down to people, at least define your damn variables correctly.
First my engineering degree IS NOT IN MECHANICAL ENGINEERING.
Forces used to describe liner kinetics. Torque implies angular kinetics.
ANGLED CARRIER KEY THAT VECTORS [FORCES] ANGLED KEY.... AND TORQUE IMPLIES ANGULAR KINETICS your own words you still have torque being transmitted into the pushrod. Look I am sorry if you got up set at my response last night I APOLOGIZE I did not intend this to get into a flaming match. I just was pointing out design differences that I do not agree with along with some marketing hype thats been thrown around. Really this horse has been beaten to death time after time. I say again I APOLOGIZE TO YOU IF MY RESPONSE SEEMED MEAN. I really believe I have had too much of this thread.
So I am done with this thread.
Thank You
Maybe you should go back and take it yourself, or at least ask for your money back. That way you would understand that force and torque are not the same thing. The term 'Force' is used to describe linear kinetics whereas 'Torque' implies angular kinetics. The formula for force is Force = mass x acceleration whereas Torque actually uses force as one of its derivatives, Torque = Force x the length of the moment arm (d). Someone who truly understands mechanics would never use torque and force interchangeably.
If you are going to talk down to people, at least define your damn variables correctly.
well i have to agree
F=mA were F is force in vector form and A is acceleration in vector from
torque is a moment arm F times length so yes for is a torque is a function
now in the case of the piston ar we must also include vibration and piston deflection it become a anctual FEA analysis problem
in order to determine the amount of force on the piston we need to know the pressure build at the front of the gas piston. this force translate to the bcg via the piston rod which will undergo deflection under load. this deflection is what causes the bcg to undergo tilt.
this does not happen with the DI system because there is no deflection rods. the gases are directed and allowed to escape. the almost immediate escape of the gases prevent any residual pressure to tild the bolt.
now one major fix to this is either to make the bcg and piston one complete unit
but ultimately the best way wold be to increase the diameter of the piston rod in order to minimize deflection. this becomes an issue with the ar design because of the lack of space .
if u guys want a FEA analysis give me a bit of time so i cam finish finals and i will gladly post it up
now this is my eng. 2c :) and my major is mechanical eng. deseign
First my engineering degree IS NOT IN MECHANICAL ENGINEERING.
Forces used to describe liner kinetics. Torque implies angular kinetics.
ANGLED CARRIER KEY THAT VECTORS [FORCES] ANGLED KEY.... AND TORQUE IMPLIES ANGULAR KINETICS your own words you still have torque being transmitted into the pushrod. Look I am sorry if you got up set at my response last night I APOLOGIZE I did not intend this to get into a flaming match. I just was pointing out design differences that I do not agree with along with some marketing hype thats been thrown around. Really this horse has been beaten to death time after time. I say again I APOLOGIZE TO YOU IF MY RESPONSE SEEMED MEAN. I really believe I have had too much of this thread.
So I am done with this thread.
Thank You
So, not being a mechanical engineering student relieves you of your knowledge of introductory physics? I'm sure your professors are quite proud to have you as a student. If my undergraduate or graduate biomechanics students didn't know the difference between force and torque they would fail my class. Furthermore, the engineering students who take my class as an elective typically understand basic physics quite well regardless of what kind of engineer they intend to be. Perhaps it is just you...
If you did not intend to start a flaming match perhaps you should avoid calling people out and telling them to go back to school on internet forums in the future. Snide comments like that have no place in mature discussions. Plus, it helps when you know what the hell you are talking about. Less talkie-talkie and more study-study for you, especially since finals are so close.
This thread reads like some have lost track of a few things.
Just adding a gas piston system to an AR does not automatically make it inherently more reliable. The advantages of a gas piston system is just a piece of the puzzle, and even then might only make a difference if certain very specific parameters are introduced (Barrel length less then 14.5", lots of suppressor use, use of varying quality ammo, ETC). More important is the rifle itself. The HK416 gets such respect by those who truly know becuase it is such an extremely high quality AR. Not just becuase it uses a gas piston system. Look one over sometime. You will find proof marks indicating the level of testing, highest quality materials, and QC all over it. Not to mention the high level of testing the rifle went through before it was adopted. These are indicators of a quality weapon system that has stood the test of time and real world use.
Why do you guys think we see such varying opinions on other gas piston AR rifles? Hint: This is an indicator of varying quality from rifle to rifle. These are tiny companies and without question are at the mercy of there parts suppliers. Thus they have to take what they can get and without the engineering & QC support of larger companies this effects there quality/durability. They also know very few of there rifles will really be shot all that much so it is a calculated risk. Engineering staff, experienced QC departments, and hundreds of thousands of rounds of ammo for durability testing is very expensive. That's why for the most part they let customers do there testing for them.
If you have purchased a gas piston AR from a certain manufacturer and it has proven itself reliable over high round counts, good for you. But always keep in mind that there are guys on this forum who have had the exact opposite experience. You got lucky and got a good one. The guy right behind you in line might have gotten a dud, even if he has not shot it enough to know yet.
As already stated buy a high quality AR from Colt, Daniel Dense, Charles Daly, Noveske, or LMT and 99% of us will be perfectly happy.
Excellent post Dinger, makes a whole lot of sense to me.
Thanks VA Dinger for your insight. That is why I posted the link for this thread to SMGLee testing and evaluating an HK and LMT rifles. I have one of the LMT Piston rifles and am extremely pleased so far. I look forward to more people testing and shooting the LMT Piston. I would like to hear in detail from SMGLee about how the rifle did in the weekend course.
Are there any others here that have the LMT Piston that are shooting it alot? VA Dinger, have you had the opportunity to run the LMT Piston rifle much? Have you attended classes where others in your class used this platform?
I guess one major selling point in using the LMT MRP CQB platform is that it is extremely quick and easy to change back and forth from Piston to DI whenever one wants. All anyone needs is a barrel and BCG and you are back and forth, whichever you want or like.
I think LMT really did their homework (engineering and testing) before bringing out this rifle. I guess only time will tell, but from what I see and have read from people that actually have one of these, it is a great platform!!!:cool:
BTW, here is the link again to SMGLee shooting and running both rifles. I think it is really interesting that he noted the recoil impulse of the LMT and compared it to a DI rifle. From what I gather, most of the piston ARs out there have a rather sharp recoil. I have shot mine side by side with my neighbors S&W M&P 15 and I have to say, that I actually think that my LMT is softer recoiling, but that might be due to the solid upper.......don't know for sure, but I really like it!!!:D:D:D
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=26421
Thanks again VA Dinger. Again, I'm really interested in range reports, extended shooting sessions, or classes taken by people that have the LMT Piston!!!
Thomas M-4
04-26-09, 13:53
Thank you Dinger for clear and to the point statement.
Has I stated before jwinch2 I tried to APOLOGIZE to you. I did not use profanity In my statement to you. I guess you use profanity in your professional discussions.
I am sorry that you have gotten so upset in this discussion. Can I ask you to please re-vector your anger from me.
CYMAX has stated he has the proper knowledge for this discussion I will take his analysis on this subject from now on.
well looks like i have some modeling to do :P
it will keep me busy on those cloudy days and let evening :)lolool
I stated before jwinch2 I tried to APOLOGIZE to you. Why don't you try apologizing to all the people who you insulted and talked down to rather than apologizing to me?
As already stated buy a high quality AR from Colt, Daniel Dense, Charles Daly, Noveske, or LMT and 99% of us will be perfectly happy.
Very true. While there are certainly deals to be found and I would encourage anyone looking for a weapon to due their research first, I firmly believe that 95% of the time you get exactly what you paid for.
Parabellum9x19mm
04-26-09, 15:04
if you even have to ask this question, then the answer is: Direct Impingement.
out of my 7 ARs, all of them are direct gas. i could buy a piston upper if i wanted, however, for the vast majority of users (myself included) piston ARs offer no significant advantages to outweigh the draw-backs that come with piston ARs: like carrier tilt, weight, cost, difficult to obtain non-spec parts, change in recoil impulse, sheared or bent op-rods, etc. adding extra springs and other parts is rarely a good thing.
Thanks VA Dinger for your insight. That is why I posted the link for this thread to SMGLee testing and evaluating an HK and LMT rifles. I have one of the LMT Piston rifles and am extremely pleased so far. I look forward to more people testing and shooting the LMT Piston. I would like to hear in detail from SMGLee about how the rifle did in the weekend course.
Are there any others here that have the LMT Piston that are shooting it alot? VA Dinger, have you had the opportunity to run the LMT Piston rifle much? Have you attended classes where others in your class used this platform?
I guess one major selling point in using the LMT MRP CQB platform is that it is extremely quick and easy to change back and forth from Piston to DI whenever one wants. All anyone needs is a barrel and BCG and you are back and forth, whichever you want or like.
I think LMT really did their homework (engineering and testing) before bringing out this rifle. I guess only time will tell, but from what I see and have read from people that actually have one of these, it is a great platform!!!:cool:
BTW, here is the link again to SMGLee shooting and running both rifles. I think it is really interesting that he noted the recoil impulse of the LMT and compared it to a DI rifle. From what I gather, most of the piston ARs out there have a rather sharp recoil. I have shot mine side by side with my neighbors S&W M&P 15 and I have to say, that I actually think that my LMT is softer recoiling, but that might be due to the solid upper.......don't know for sure, but I really like it!!!:D:D:D
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=26421
Thanks again VA Dinger. Again, I'm really interested in range reports, extended shooting sessions, or classes taken by people that have the LMT Piston!!!
Although I am big LMT fan I have zero experience with there piston gun. I just got to see my 1st example (SMGLee's) at a recent class and it seemed to run well. I do think it's way to early to declare it ready to go for the long haul though. Let's see how relatively large numbers of them perform over time and escalating round counts.
IMO: I pay no attention to "Recoil" comments. To me, it's all what you are used to shooting. I shoot a 416 most of them time, so when I shoot a standard direct gas AR it feels very different. I can actually feel the buffer spring and buffer cycling. It's not that it's "Bad" or "good", it's just different.
TheRifleman
04-27-09, 01:20
Direct Gas Impingement is battle tested, tried and true, although I do like some of the innovative piston designs. That said, the military has not officially adopted any variation of the latter system as spec.
I shoot suppressed a LOT. My PWS piston upper is by far and above my favorite for suppressed fire.
If I run 100rnds through a DI upper with suppressor on... that thing is FILTHY afterward. Takes significant effort to clean it good.
100rnds through my piston upper with suppressor on is a breeze to clean. Sure, its dirty, but I'd say 1/10th as dirty as the DI. For that reason alone, the piston systems get the nod from me.
If I was not shooting suppressed, then there would be almost no motivation for me to have one.
Eh, I have no dog in the fight either way. I have DI uppers aplenty in 5.56 and 6.5 and exactly one PWS .223 piston upper I'm writing an article on. I'm at 1930+/-rds since the week before SHOT and not a single failure that wasn't attributable to ammo or me (excepting a buffer detent failed). I gave the bcg 2 small squirts of MPT lube when I got it and nothing since except to use compressed air to blow off the exterior dust from a really bad day at the range in February.
http://www.ttellc.net/fun/dirtypws1.jpg
There are two tiny marks on the receiver extension, about 2mm wide by 1mm long (no depth that I can feel) caused by sidewall loading (the actual term for 'carrier tilt').
I'm enjoying mine so far.
Anyone else ever notice that these threads generally become (or start out as?) nothing more than guys that bought pistons defending their purchases, and guys that haven't bought pistons defending theirs?
My take (copied from an email I sent, some of the below has been argued to death above)...
I am somewhat biased, as I don't see any problems with my DI guns. I'm not "anti-piston", I'm just "anti-piston for me". I have DI guns with 1k+ rounds on them, without cleaning, that haven't had a single malfunction outside of ammo issues. I personally don't think that any of the piston companies have worked out all the bugs, and I don't think that any AR-conversion piston system is going to be as reliable as a DI gun over the long haul. Then there's the whole issue of purchasers as beta-testers, something that I'm not at all interested in. here's the issues as I see it with pistons, and what keeps me from buying one:
1) Carrier tilt. In a DI gun the gas is routed through the carrier and expands inside pushing back against the bolt to unlock the action. This means that it's pushing right along the centerline of the bolt and carrier as the carrier is pushed back into the receiver extension against the buffer and spring. In a piston gun the pressure is on the key, which is off-axis and which causes the tail end of the carrier to tilt down. This means that it rubs, or can rub, on the receiver extension where it meets up with the lower receiver. There have been some reports of pretty extensive wear in this area after only a couple of thousand rounds. AKs and other guns that are designed to run with a piston don't have this problem because the bolt/carrier rides on rails and can't tilt.
2) Proprietary parts. There is no standard for a piston system in an AR. If I need a gas tube for my DI guns I can buy one from any number of manufacturers. If a piston-specific part breaks, it's sole-source and only the OEM maker can supply replacements. This is a problem both in the obvious short term if I need a spare part, and in a future with any potential ban. Is a company who's only product is a potential target for legislation going to survive a ban? and if they go out of business, where do I get that part?
3) Incremental improvement. For the most part, the only thing that the piston makers are addressing is the operating system. I think this is a cop out, although I understand why they are doing it (the quest to get a government contract wherein the purchaser doesn't have to buy a whole new gun but only a new complete upper). If I was going to go with a piston system, I'd like to see other improvements to the overall design of the system (lighter weight, integral rail systems, ambidextrous controls, folding adjustable stock, etc.). Frankly, I'd prefer to see it in a bigger/better caliber like the 6.8 as well, but then you get into ammo cost issues for training.
I consider buying a piston rifle/upper from time to time; 416, LWRCI, XCR, etc. I even shop around looking at what's available. I just can't help getting stuck on the three items above, and none of them would appear to have any resolution in the long term, and certainly are all issues in the short term.
IF the ACR were ever to come out, and IF it was marketed by Remington and IF they can show that they meet or exceed the current milspec for the M4 (or can show why it doesn't apply), then I MIGHT consider a piston operated gun. Maybe.
Yeah i never intended to have this thread turned into somthing from TOS:rolleyes: I just wanted advice, which i got so its over. Thanks for giving me your opinions ill take them for what there worth and buy a DI for my first upper and will see what the future brings beyond that. I think ill stick with my first piston gun, my AK:D
flynn, you bring up a good point. Frankly, if I were bound and determined to have a piston-operated 5.56, I'd try to track down an AK in that caliber.
flynn, you bring up a good point. Frankly, if I were bound and determined to have a piston-operated 5.56, I'd try to track down an AK in that caliber.
I was more just looking at other AR options really, im quite content with the punch of the 7.62 as opposed to the 5.56. I think the AK was made for the 7.62 and the AR for the 5.56. Although it would be interesting to have the ruggedness of the AK action in a 5.56, but those are probably few and far between id guess. I was just entertained by the fact that theres a piston AR i wasnt really dead set on a piston or DI im just happy to be able to build one:D
Seth Harness
04-27-09, 08:39
Anyone else ever notice that these threads generally become (or start out as?) nothing more than guys that bought pistons defending their purchases, and guys that haven't bought pistons defending theirs?
My take (copied from an email I sent, some of the below has been argued to death above)...
I am somewhat biased, as I don't see any problems with my DI guns. I'm not "anti-piston", I'm just "anti-piston for me". I have DI guns with 1k+ rounds on them, without cleaning, that haven't had a single malfunction outside of ammo issues. I personally don't think that any of the piston companies have worked out all the bugs, and I don't think that any AR-conversion piston system is going to be as reliable as a DI gun over the long haul. Then there's the whole issue of purchasers as beta-testers, something that I'm not at all interested in. here's the issues as I see it with pistons, and what keeps me from buying one:
1) Carrier tilt. In a DI gun the gas is routed through the carrier and expands inside pushing back against the bolt to unlock the action. This means that it's pushing right along the centerline of the bolt and carrier as the carrier is pushed back into the receiver extension against the buffer and spring. In a piston gun the pressure is on the key, which is off-axis and which causes the tail end of the carrier to tilt down. This means that it rubs, or can rub, on the receiver extension where it meets up with the lower receiver. There have been some reports of pretty extensive wear in this area after only a couple of thousand rounds. AKs and other guns that are designed to run with a piston don't have this problem because the bolt/carrier rides on rails and can't tilt.
2) Proprietary parts. There is no standard for a piston system in an AR. If I need a gas tube for my DI guns I can buy one from any number of manufacturers. If a piston-specific part breaks, it's sole-source and only the OEM maker can supply replacements. This is a problem both in the obvious short term if I need a spare part, and in a future with any potential ban. Is a company who's only product is a potential target for legislation going to survive a ban? and if they go out of business, where do I get that part?
3) Incremental improvement. For the most part, the only thing that the piston makers are addressing is the operating system. I think this is a cop out, although I understand why they are doing it (the quest to get a government contract wherein the purchaser doesn't have to buy a whole new gun but only a new complete upper). If I was going to go with a piston system, I'd like to see other improvements to the overall design of the system (lighter weight, integral rail systems, ambidextrous controls, folding adjustable stock, etc.). Frankly, I'd prefer to see it in a bigger/better caliber like the 6.8 as well, but then you get into ammo cost issues for training.
I consider buying a piston rifle/upper from time to time; 416, LWRCI, XCR, etc. I even shop around looking at what's available. I just can't help getting stuck on the three items above, and none of them would appear to have any resolution in the long term, and certainly are all issues in the short term.
IF the ACR were ever to come out, and IF it was marketed by Remington and IF they can show that they meet or exceed the current milspec for the M4 (or can show why it doesn't apply), then I MIGHT consider a piston operated gun. Maybe.
Rob,
Dont get me wrong, I respect you and you have a good reputation. I am definitely not challenging you...
But, Cant it just be that people are sharing their experiences and proud/happy that they're not experiencing some of the other issues that many people talk about???
I dont even share my experiences anymore, the reason being, is I'll get dubbed and thrown into a gaggle of people who are just trying to fool themselves into believing they have made a good purchase.
Alot of people around here dont carry your level of merit, your well respected, I see it a little unfair to point out people who might just be wanting to share some info and happy to do so, as they see others with high merit doing the same...
Again, I respect you and Im not trying to challenge you. Just sharing my concern. :)
Please accept it for what it is and do not take offense. I have seen what your talking about, in more than just piston gun threads. Rail systems, stocks, triggers, etc... etc... Not everyone is humble in their postings and if thats where your coming from, then I understand.
Thanks Rob,
Seth H.
No offense taken, and you're absolutely right. People who are reading threads like these, whether about pistons, stocks, or ball-gags, need to take into account the people that are doing the talking. Regardless of the product being discussed, people tend to defend their purchases to the death (look at any thread discussing the Chart as an example) because they think it reflects on their ability to rationally make a decision.
The other issue is that quite a lot of people that share their experiences and opinions fail to properly qualify those opinions. Having a "flawless piston gun" is kind of a useless statement if it only sees 200 rounds per year and the shooter has zero experience with a quality DI gun.
The other side of the piston argument that I see a lot is shooters that argue in the exact same post that they "need" the extra reliability of their piston gun but that they didn't "need" a Colt when they bought their DI gun because their Bushmaster ran "flawlessly" for 10k rounds. I'm still at a loss as to what these shooters were then improving on.
Ultimately people have to make informed decisions for themselves. That's why I posted the three bullet points that I did. They are the things that hold me back from buying a piston gun and they are things that I don't see really getting addressed in the market/industry. As long as a potential buyer doesn't care about being an early adopter of a gun that they may or may not be able to get parts for next year (or even tomorrow) with an incremental (at best) improvement to the operating system; that's my only goal with even bothering to post in this thread.
I see it a little unfair to point out people who might just be wanting to share some info and happy to do so, as they see others with high merit doing the same...
I would never tell someone not to share their experiences or opinions, as long as they qualify those experiences and opinions at the same time.
Seth Harness
04-27-09, 09:05
Okay, fair enough.
Thanks,
Seth H.
I was more just looking at other AR options really, im quite content with the punch of the 7.62 as opposed to the 5.56. I think the AK was made for the 7.62 and the AR for the 5.56. Although it would be interesting to have the ruggedness of the AK action in a 5.56, but those are probably few and far between id guess. I was just entertained by the fact that theres a piston AR i wasnt really dead set on a piston or DI im just happy to be able to build one:D
Flynn,
I bought my first AR last year. I did a whole lot of research before purchasing it (at least as much as I could on my own). I ended up getting the LMT MRP CQB Piston version. It was a new platform brought out by LMT.
Now LMT had been testing it's prototype for almost two years before releasing it. They shot thousands of rounds of ammo through it.......full auto, suppressed, and of course for accuracy. More importantly, at least for me, was the fact that LMT designed their piston rifle on their MRP CQB platform so that anyone that wished to could revert back to DI without any problems what so ever!!!
Again, this purchase was my FIRST AR rifle and so far my only AR. I'm completely satisfied with it even though I did have to send the upper back to LMT the first time I took it out shooting. It had intermittent short stroking. After contacting LMT, Gene Swanson (their testing/CS guy) told me about their gas port size being minimum and wouldn't function with all 223/5.56 ammo. He took care of my problem withing a week and I've not looked back since.
It's your choice and if it's your first AR (build or purchase); look, listen, and most importantly do your own research before getting one. The 'Piston' craze really started a few years ago and comparing it to the DI version of the AR is a little unfair. Yes, piston AR testing prior to a few years ago was done, but not to the level of engineering and research that has been done in the last few years! Remember, when the AR first came out, they had problems that had to be worked through. Never mind what they were; it was new and it did have problems. They were worked through and we now have a platform that we 'know' real well. We have been using this DI platform for over 40 years and if the quirks hadn't been worked through, I'm sure that the military would have dumped it a long time ago.
As I see it, the use of the DI AR rifle is a PROVEN platform PERIOD!!! I CHOSE to get the LMT Piston rifle. My uses are purely recreational. I don't RELY on it for anything other than fun. I hope to hunt with it in the future, which again, is recreational in nature. If I were REQUIRED to use one for me or my families protection, ie. THE ONE and ONLY gun in my house or patrol car, I would CHOOSE the DI version. That said, since I am not REQUIRED TO or HAVE to RELY on it for personal/family protection, AND it was MY choice, I chose the LMT platform. Like I said earlier, if in the future LMT goes belly up, I can always return it back to DI or just change uppers. Remember, it is after all the COMMON 'AR' platform that can support everything from SBRs, suppressed, LR shooting, hunting, plinking, caliber changes, and yes PISTON uppers!!!
Heavy Metal
05-02-09, 16:38
I've had a piston AR since 1987 and it works great!!! And I paid less than $325 for the whole rifle!!!! NEW!!!
http://topgun.rin.ru/images/2139_1.jpg
A Flattop K2 with a railed fore end, an adjustable stock, accepts AR P-grips and a 90 degree selector would be near-perfect.
If i were rich, I would make an improved version of this rifle and call it a day.
Sttrongbow
05-02-09, 20:37
That link you gave I read over 2 years ago It has nothing to do with LWRC ,HK , LMT, or any other gas piston AR. It does mention the FN SCAR [ A SHORT STROKE PISTON ASSAULT RIFLE DESIGNED FROM THE GROUND UP AS A REPLACEMENT FOR THE M-4 IN SOCOM ] . Have you read this entire thread?? Because I am only talking about adaptations..
Are you trying to point out the bolt failure at 6,000 - 10,000 rounds ???
Did you know barrels only last to 6,000-10,000 rounds ???
Did you know that when you replace the barrel that you also replace the bolt???
What is your point with that link???
The proprietary bolt carrier that LWRC has that uses the slight downward slope [THAT RE-VECTORED FORCES INSURING INSURING THE CARRIER IS PUSHED STRAIGHT BACK] your own words. WHERE DOES THE FORCES GO???????????????? THEY GOT TO GO SOME WHERE RIGHT.. Do you want a hint?? They go to the gas piston/ pushrod that is pushing your carrier to the rear. Can you show me a SHORT STROKE GAS PISTON DESIGNED FROM THE GROUND UP THAT PUTS TORQUE INTO THE GAS PISTON/ PUSHROD THAT WAS A SUCCESSFUL DESIGN ???
Geez, you're a cranky little......
I see we are not an engineer. The design DOES NOT apply a torque to the op rod. The Op rod strikes the anvil (the key) and the force is vectored down intot he carrier. This will not eliminate side-loading, but helps redirect the force vector.
The great thing is SETH HARNESS [HAS DESIGNED THE BEST ANTI TILT BOLT CARRIER DEVICE THAT I HAVE SEEN TO DATE BETTER THAN THE SKID PADS:eek: AND BETTER THAN THE ANGLED KEY THAT VECTORS FORCES:rolleyes: HIS DEVICE SPREADS THE FORCE ACROSS THE CARRIER BUFFER & BUFFER TUBE.
Yeah, it's a cool idea. But I add again... provide evidence of failures due to "carrier tilt." I bet you can't. And I mean FAILURES, not wear you find "unacceptable."
Why does every body that has piston systems keeps throwing up round count numbers to me??? I dont care if YOU HAVE 1,000,000 ROUNDS THROUGH IT.
I NEVER EVER SAID ANY THING ABOUT FAILURES I HAVE STATED THAT MORE THAN ONCE THAT I AM MERELY POINTING OUT DESIGN FLAWS.
If a "design flaw" doesn't cause failures, it's not a design flaw. Ever done risk management? If there is no consequence to the risk, it's not a risk.
By the way for those people that do not know the difference between FORCES AND TORQUE THEY ARE THE EXACT SAME THING.
Not QUITE. A force CAN cause torque, but it doesn't HAVE to. So no, not exactly the same.
This engineering class 101 has been going on for days If you most know every detail about this I suggest you get in SCHOOL.. ITS $330 A CREDIT HOUR.
B.S.M.E. UMCP 1990. R&D Engineer for the U.S. Navy 1990-present (as both a civil servant and contractor).
]By the way the enhanced bolt that you say is in your LWRC I HAVE THAT EXACT SAME BOLT IN MY M-4 CARBINE ITS MADE BY LMT I AM ALSO RUNNING THE ENHANCED CARRIER DO YOU KNOW WHAT ITS SUPPOSE TO DO???
Its suppose to reduce the stress on the bolt that runs in a carbine gas system.
The enhanced bolt in the LWRC is not an LMT bolt. The whale tail extractor is intended to improve extraction.
The bolt carrier is intended to slow unlock and reduce stress on the lugs... what does that have to do with this thread?
Thomas M-4
05-02-09, 22:37
Geez, you're a cranky little......
I see we are not an engineer. The design DOES NOT apply a torque to the op rod. The Op rod strikes the anvil (the key) and the force is vectored down intot he carrier. This will not eliminate side-loading, but helps redirect the force vector.
Redirect the force where ?
Yeah, it's a cool idea. But I add again... provide evidence of failures due to "carrier tilt." I bet you can't. And I mean FAILURES, not wear you find "unacceptable."
Do you have a short attention span I never posted failures why do you keep bringing this up? The rifle wasn't designed to wear there so yes its unacceptable.
If a "design flaw" doesn't cause failures, it's not a design flaw. Ever done risk management? If there is no consequence to the risk, it's not a risk.
If you are happy with that risk then go for it buddy .
Not QUITE. A force CAN cause torque, but it doesn't HAVE to. So no, not exactly the same.
Can you point out that it doesn't cause torque
B.S.M.E. UMCP 1990. R&D Engineer for the U.S. Navy 1990-present (as both a civil servant and contractor).
The enhanced bolt in the LWRC is not an LMT bolt. The whale tail extractor is intended to improve extraction.
The lmt enhanced bolt has a whale tail extractor to also to improve extraction
does it look like the one thats the 8th& 9th pic from the top?
http://www.weaponevolution.com/forum/showthread.php?t=341
The bolt carrier is intended to slow unlock and reduce stress on the lugs... what does that have to do with this thread?
My bad I was just trying to figure out why you posted that link that didnt have anything to do with gas pistons thread ?
militarymoron
05-02-09, 23:21
i have piston uppers because i like to try new/different stuff. like food. variety is the spice of life, and it keeps my hobby interesting.
i'm an engineer, and i enjoy all things mechanical, so i like seeing the different solutions that people come up with.
kaiservontexas
05-02-09, 23:22
I stay away because I rushed to snag a BM GP upper receiver when I first noticed them over a year ago. The most expensive straight pull bolt-action rifle I have ever owned. I went over it several times. It would cycle and then not cycle in the same magazine. I tried Prvi Partizan, Remington, and 5.56 XM855 Lake City though PMAG, Bushmaster Magazines, and C-Product Magazines. I traded it for a kitted out WASR-10, sling, mags, ammo, a ton of spare AK parts, etc.
I will say it kept the bolt clean and all like the gas piston rifles are supposed to compared to the DI system. I will also admit Bushmaster is not the best thing in the world, though my A2M4 works well. (My first AR and why I thought the BM would be fine. Little did I know back then about anything.)
So I am leery of the GP AR-15 rifle variants. Kinda wish I kept it though to run it by you guys, but water under the bridge. If I ever get the bug again who makes the best GP AR-15?
My bad I was just trying to figure out why you posted that link that didnt have anything to do with gas pistons thread ?
He didn't I did, almost as an after thought to a minor point in my post,which I guess you were offended by because you then appeared to be upset and became rather insulting.
Most of what I was saying was that in my small sample size & in the round count that I indicated I had not seen any indications of carrier tilt or carbon buildup on the piston to date. I did not dismiss it out of hand but my experience did not substantiate your theory.
Before I came back here the engineers jumped in and the matter appeared to have run it's course. In the end each to their own.
variablebinary
05-03-09, 02:38
In the next couple of years I only plan on adding more piston guns to the collection (SCAR, XCR-M, LWRC M6A3, ACR/Masada, HK416).
They will join my current, ever growing piston collection (XCR-L, LWRC, Robinson M96)
I've whittled my direct gas collection down to 3 Colts. I will not be buying anymore direct gas guns in the future.
Thomas M-4
05-03-09, 10:40
He didn't I did, almost as an after thought to a minor point in my post,which I guess you were offended by because you then appeared to be upset and became rather insulting.
Most of what I was saying was that in my small sample size & in the round count that I indicated I had not seen any indications of carrier tilt or carbon buildup on the piston to date. I did not dismiss it out of hand but my experience did not substantiate your theory.
Before I came back here the engineers jumped in and the matter appeared to have run it's course. In the end each to their own.
Sorry man your right you did post that Its hard keeping track of things with 3 kids running around. I am all with trying new things I cant begin to count engine swaps supercharger installs nitrous systems, tranny swaps. Hell I even swapped out entire suspension sn-95 mustang to a fox body mustang just to get a wider track and to get 4 wheel disk brakes. I looked at piston conversion my self found the pros and cons looked at the DI system I really liked how MR Stoner set all of the moving parts inline with the barrel I think thats really a smart design and its proven to work. When I recommend something to some one especially somebody new for me I will recommend the most proven system simply because I dont want them to have problems and get frustrated and dump the entire Idea.
Obviously piston adaptations work I just will not recommend them for newbies because I want them to have the smallest learning curve and if they do have a problem I want them to be able to get it fixed in the shortest and easiest way. I have found that makes the experience the most enjoyable for the most people in my opinion. If you have 3 or 4 AR'S and want to try something different that's fine If you are one of those people has to try some thing different and likes the challenge IF something goes wrong more power to you brother I am 100% with you.
Robb Jensen
05-03-09, 10:50
Im not new to firearms but new to the AR, which brings me to my question. What are the pros of a straight gas tube system versus the gas piston system? I know the straight gas is dirtier while the piston is cleaner, but thats about it, i have no experience with the pistons. Is their really a difference in accuracy, or realiability? or is it just a matter of preference? Im building my first AR and havnt bought an upper so help me out here:D
Since you're asking the question then there is 99.99% probability that you don't need a piston gun.
I was more just looking at other AR options really, im quite content with the punch of the 7.62 as opposed to the 5.56. I think the AK was made for the 7.62 and the AR for the 5.56. Although it would be interesting to have the ruggedness of the AK action in a 5.56, but those are probably few and far between id guess. I was just entertained by the fact that theres a piston AR i wasnt really dead set on a piston or DI im just happy to be able to build one:D
Consider an AK-101 style Saiga conversion.
What about the Piston Conversion kit offered by Adams Arms? It has several videos on it's website along with a few independant videos on you tube. The system looks well thought out ans claims several advantages over competitors. It also offers an upgrade BCG with "skis to allay fears of Tilt and also has a built up ker that spreads the linear force more evenly lower down the BCG. It is the system Smith and Wesson M&P Ar's run with.
I only have DI expeirnce but have thoughts of installing one on a poly lower Sabre Defence M$ flatop I have yet to fire..
Thoughts?
Several advantages go with the gas piston design. Whether or not they are appreciated by ALL of the buying public is moot.
[1] The chamber temperatures will be lower which will improve or enhance the life of the springs in the bolt head.
[2] A cleaner chamber also makes for a statistically improved reliability. How much? I have no idea as each shooting event will vary and cannot be controlled.
Are there any disadvantages? In theory, yes, same with the advantages listed above. Will they occur with a frequency to make them significant? Time will tell.
[1] More parts equal a greater chance for failure. But when we see a bolt carrier sans carrier key, two screws, loctite and staking and no gas rings ( 8 parts including staking exercise ) I don't think we have an increase in parts at all. BUT THE PARTS ARE DIFFERENT AS WILL BE THE FAILURE MODES.
[2] There is a slight increase in felt recoil - okay, not a reliability/durability issue but is something that is unique to the design and even though it's slight, it's noticeable and not for the better, ultimately.
[3] Proprietary parts. That, to me, is the potential killer as is the next disadvantage
[4] Carrier Tilt (ouch!)
[5] Price.
I, too, am a degreed engineer with a BSME in Thermal Science and 14 yrs experience in Vibrations and Acoustics and 7 yrs experience in high temp and wear resistant coatings. The Gas Piston CONCEPT is *THE* way to go, period. Whether or not any of the current AR-15 adaptations represent decent execution of same remains to be seen.
P.S.
If anyone wishes to "unload" their ill-performing (even in their mind's eye, only) DGI or GP AR-15s just drop me a line. Since they are "flawed" I'll require a hefty discount. :p
Several advantages go with the gas piston design. Whether or not they are appreciated by ALL of the buying public is moot.
[1] The chamber temperatures will be lower which will improve or enhance the life of the springs in the bolt head.
Have you seen data from a DI gun versus a piston -- chamber temp is 99% from the fired casing. You will see a warmer bolt from the Di gun, as the piston in the DI gun is the Bolt head - and hot gas does affect it directly.
However I think you will find the unlocking of the Piston gun much more violent.
Depending upon the quality of the spring being used the spring (ejector or extractor) can take a great deal of heat, and lose very little strength and cooling/heating while being cycled does in fact take a very little from ther spring life.
[2] A cleaner chamber also makes for a statistically improved reliability. How much? I have no idea as each shooting event will vary and cannot be controlled.
Chamber fouling is not specific to DI - its related to the unlocking time, and pressure in the barrel.
Two of you basic premises are flawed in relationship to Direct Inpingment.
I'm not an engineer, but I've got 24+ years of working with the M16FOW, have shot over 1,000,000 rds and seen several countless million through them, plus have a bunch of Engineers at work, and a lot of differnet test on springs and the actions of weapons.
It's been awhile since I've been on here, and I honestly haven't been keeping up with the whole 'piston debate'.
That being said I'm inclined to accept what Dinger's says, namely that the 416 is the only way to go...IF you want a piston.
How does the HK system deal with carrier lift?
vicious_cb
09-14-09, 05:33
Several advantages go with the gas piston design. Whether or not they are appreciated by ALL of the buying public is moot.
[1] The chamber temperatures will be lower which will improve or enhance the life of the springs in the bolt head.
[2] A cleaner chamber also makes for a statistically improved reliability. How much? I have no idea as each shooting event will vary and cannot be controlled.
WHAT!? How does a having a piston affect how clean the chamber is? The gas from the gas tube acts on the back of the bolt and inside the carrier and doesnt make its way into the chamber hence why we replace the gas rings to ensure a gas seal. Having an engineering degree doesnt make you an automatic expert in firearms operating systems. I think you should read up more on the AR-15s operation.
I would suggest this:
http://www.ar15barrels.com/prod/operation.shtml
It's been awhile since I've been on here, and I honestly haven't been keeping up with the whole 'piston debate'.
That being said I'm inclined to accept what Dinger's says, namely that the 416 is the only way to go...IF you want a piston.
How does the HK system deal with carrier lift?
Even HK's have problems with carrier tilt. However their bolt is designed to minize the effects of this.
Even HK's have problems with carrier tilt. However their bolt is designed to minize the effects of this.
can you be more specific?
I have a uncle that worked for the FBI as a weapons examiner and later a armorer and a good friend who both (uncle and friend) have worked with and around the dea. And as I can remember when the p90 was getting hyped up they bought a pretty pennys worth before they figured out how ballistically sucky they were. Just sayin, doesn't seem that the dea has a good track record for doing there homework. I'm not saying the lwrc or any piston ar is bad or good. Just that basing a judgement on the dea's is not a real good idea.
Obviously they learn from their mistakes. They went straight to the top with LWRC.;)
I have a uncle that worked for the FBI as a weapons examiner and later a armorer and a good friend who both (uncle and friend) have worked with and around the dea. And as I can remember when the p90 was getting hyped up they bought a pretty pennys worth before they figured out how ballistically sucky they were. Just sayin, doesn't seem that the dea has a good track record for doing there homework. I'm not saying the lwrc or any piston ar is bad or good. Just that basing a judgement on the dea's is not a real good idea.
This is true for ANY agency. When I was selling guns we sold a ton of USPs simply because the local PD changed over to them. :rolleyes:
tracker722
01-22-10, 17:12
As the armorer for my department, I have been the guinea pig, having been issued the only piston AR. I have been to several instructor schools with it and have used it non-stop in training and teaching. Well over 7K rounds through it.
Do I think it is the end-all system? No. I still have reservations about it though it has never failed me. I can say I like it so far.
Due to the nature of the beast, I would NOT recommend it to a neophyte. As previous posters have noted, learn the DI system first before getting involved in GP, unless of course you are familiar with a system like the FN FAL, which most piston systems seem to copy.
VooDoo6Actual
01-22-10, 17:29
imo,
a re-designed solution from existing engineering (FAL, M1a etc.) posing as a solution in an effort to embellish & ratioanlize a non existant problem IMO. Most of them offer little or no benefits over a DI gun.
In fact more moving parts to fatique or fail.
Time will tell.
As a frame of reference I have been hosting 2 to 5 tactical training classes a year, every year since 2001. A side from the classes I host I also take other training classes. I've been a full time Police Officer for 14 years, I've been a SWAT cop for 11 years, and I'm a Firearms Instructor for my agency, our Police Academy, SWAT Team, and SWAT Academy. Prior to that I was in the Marine Corps (Infantry / Security Forces).
In the early 60's when the M16 first came on line there were several important people that wanted to see the M16 fail. So troops were told that they didn't have to clean their guns, they used the wrong powder in the ammo (ie. they were suppose to use stick powder and they used ball powder), etc. By doing this the M16 got a reputation as being an unreliable platform.
In my opinion the reason that the direct impingement gas system (DI) has gotten such a bad reputation in recent years is because people go out an buy low end AR's or they try to build a AR from parts from various manufacturers. They end up with a gun that is unreliable and this feeds into the myth that the DI gas system is unreliable.
When I was in the USMC the main malfunctions were caused from shooting blanks and magazine related. I had seen a hand full of other problems, but they were far and few between.
In the training classes that I host and take on my own and from the AR15's that I see in training and qualification courses at work. Colt, LMT, BCM, Noveske, etc. run well. While CMMG, DPMS, Olympic Arms, Bushmaster, Stag Arms, RRA and others have a high number of reliablity problems.
Piston guns. I have seen a lot of piston guns that have had problems. I have never seen a POF make it through an entire class without problems. About half the Sigs that I have seen have had problems. About 1/3 of the LWRC guns I have seen have had problems.
From my experience piston guns
-have a sharper recoil impulse
-they are heavier
-piston system guns are more expensive
-the different piston systems are new and haven't had the time to be as thouroughly tested as the DI gas system
-many of the piston system operate on a slightly different system
Piston systems on the AR15 is a fairly new concept (most within the last decade). The DI gas system in use on the AR15 has been in service for close to 60 years, this has given engineers time to work the bugs out of the DI system. Not the same can be said for the piston systems used on the AR platform.
In my opinion the piston system is not needed on the AR15 and it exists because guys buy lower end AR15's, many of these lower end AR15's are not reliable, and when a shoorter buys or builds an unreliable AR15 it feeds into the myth that the DI gas system is unreliable. DI gas system AR15's are not created equal. There are different levels of quality.
A well known trainer has a DI gas system BCM upper that had 26,000 rounds through it before it was ever cleaned. Currently the gun has just shy of 29,000 rounds on it. Read this article for more info:
http://www.03designgroup.com/photo/bcm-complete-ar15-upper-and-lower-receivers/icon-bcm-upper-lower.jpg
03designgroup | BCM Complete AR15 Upper and Lower Receivers http://demigodllc.com/icon/extwh3.png (http://www.03designgroup.com/reviews/bcm-complete-ar15-upper-and-lower-receivers)
In short I see no need to buy a piston upper. Buy a QUALITY AR15 with quality ammo, quality magazine, lube it, and it will run without any issues.
Just my experience.
Excellent write up '03,
I was ready to jump on the GP bandwagon a couple of years ago myself but have since learned that THIS guy doesn't need one. I understand that a few individuals running a SBR with a can may see a benefit from a GP but I am not in that class, and I don't think most "civies" are either. Like you said, go with a good quality carbine and most people will be covered. Again good write up, thanks a lot.
MaD HuNGaRIaN
01-24-10, 18:34
Pistons are way too problematic. They're a solution to a problem that's really been exagerated big time.
I agree. I have a mechanical engineering background, and when researching my first 5.56, I decided that if I was going to go piston, that the Sig 55x was the way to go. It was designed for piston from the ground up. The AR pistons have too many basic physics issues to overcome.
If you're really concerned about the "issues" of the AR platform, grab a KAC SR-15. Its bolt really addresses the issues without fighting the basic premise of the weapon: direct impingement.
RogerinTPA
01-24-10, 20:13
As a frame of reference I have been hosting 2 to 5 tactical training classes a year, every year since 2001. A side from the classes I host I also take other training classes. I've been a full time Police Officer for 14 years, I've been a SWAT cop for 11 years, and I'm a Firearms Instructor for my agency, our Police Academy, SWAT Team, and SWAT Academy. Prior to that I was in the Marine Corps (Infantry / Security Forces).
In the early 60's when the M16 first came on line there were several important people that wanted to see the M16 fail. So troops were told that they didn't have to clean their guns, they used the wrong powder in the ammo (ie. they were suppose to use stick powder and they used ball powder), etc. By doing this the M16 got a reputation as being an unreliable platform.
In my opinion the reason that the direct impingement gas system (DI) has gotten such a bad reputation in recent years is because people go out an buy low end AR's or they try to build a AR from parts from various manufacturers. They end up with a gun that is unreliable and this feeds into the myth that the DI gas system is unreliable.
When I was in the USMC the main malfunctions were caused from shooting blanks and magazine related. I had seen a hand full of other problems, but they were far and few between.
In the training classes that I host and take on my own and from the AR15's that I see in training and qualification courses at work. Colt, LMT, BCM, Noveske, etc. run well. While CMMG, DPMS, Olympic Arms, Bushmaster, Stag Arms, RRA and others have a high number of reliablity problems.
Piston guns. I have seen a lot of piston guns that have had problems. I have never seen a POF make it through an entire class without problems. About half the Sigs that I have seen have had problems. About 1/3 of the LWRC guns I have seen have had problems.
From my experience piston guns
-have a sharper recoil impulse
-they are heavier
-piston system guns are more expensive
-the different piston systems are new and haven't had the time to be as thouroughly tested as the DI gas system
-many of the piston system operate on a slightly different system
Piston systems on the AR15 is a fairly new concept (most within the last decade). The DI gas system in use on the AR15 has been in service for close to 60 years, this has given engineers time to work the bugs out of the DI system. Not the same can be said for the piston systems used on the AR platform.
In my opinion the piston system is not needed on the AR15 and it exists because guys buy lower end AR15's, many of these lower end AR15's are not reliable, and when a shoorter buys or builds an unreliable AR15 it feeds into the myth that the DI gas system is unreliable. DI gas system AR15's are not created equal. There are different levels of quality.
A well known trainer has a DI gas system BCM upper that had 26,000 rounds through it before it was ever cleaned. Currently the gun has just shy of 29,000 rounds on it. Read this article for more info:
http://www.03designgroup.com/photo/bcm-complete-ar15-upper-and-lower-receivers/icon-bcm-upper-lower.jpg
03designgroup | BCM Complete AR15 Upper and Lower Receivers http://demigodllc.com/icon/extwh3.png (http://www.03designgroup.com/reviews/bcm-complete-ar15-upper-and-lower-receivers)
In short I see no need to buy a piston upper. Buy a QUALITY AR15 with quality ammo, quality magazine, lube it, and it will run without any issues.
Just my experience.
Good wright up USMC03. I've noticed the POF thing as well. The one in my last class was a jammamatic throughout the course. I came very close to buying one several years ago and hope it would live up to expectations. It seems unless you are running suppressed in a SBR a lot, a piston is a solution in search of a problem, that doesn't exist in a quality AR.
clickclack
01-24-10, 20:56
seriously im gratefull for USMC03 reviews and info but jesus you plug that BCM sht whenever you can dont you..
got a kickback deal with them or what? oh wait they sell your chest harness dont they! bet you get deals on parts too...
seriously i own a BCM upper and i own some piston guns.. to say the DI runs better is blasphemy....
you want to do some real testing without operator/mags/ammo.... variables and then the BCM comes out on top then so be it.. but i would be willing to bet a hefty penny on the gas system lasting a hell of lot longer then a DI gun given the same treatment equally.
wait didnt the military already do this test... what was the outcome again
seriously im gratefull for USMC03 reviews and info but jesus you plug that BCM sht whenever you can dont you..
got a kickback deal with them or what? oh wait they sell your chest harness dont they! bet you get deals on parts too...
seriously i own a BCM upper and i own some piston guns.. to say the DI runs better is blasphemy....
you want to do some real testing without operator/mags/ammo.... variables and then the BCM comes out on top then so be it.. but i would be willing to bet a hefty penny on the gas system lasting a hell of lot longer then a DI gun given the same treatment equally.
wait didnt the military already do this test... what was the outcome again
http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-taunt001.gif
What's your background again, clickclack?
clickclack
01-24-10, 21:19
http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-taunt001.gif
What's your background again, clickclack?
a non biased shooter..... who rides no-ones jock strap just looking for the best equipment..
whats yours?
biased shooter or jock strap rider?
a non biased shooter..... who rides no-ones jock strap just looking for the best equipment..
whats yours?
biased shooter or jock strap rider?
Good job not answering the question. I can guess why you haven't, though.
USMC03 gave his training bio, and linked credible sources who've been shooting the hell out of the product in question. You haven't.
His affiliation with the company does not mean that he can not recommend them as a product. If you notice, his recommendation was to buy a quality product, not a BCM product.
I would recommend quantifying how your DI BCM doesn't run better than your piston one, in detail, if I were you....that is if you feel like sticking around, and contributing more than unsubstantiated claims with nothing to back them up.
clickclack
01-24-10, 21:39
Good job not answering the question. I can guess why you haven't, though.
USMC03 gave his training bio, and linked credible sources who've been shooting the hell out of the product in question. You haven't.
His affiliation with the company does not mean that he can not recommend them as a product. If you notice, his recommendation was to buy a quality product, not a BCM product.
I would recommend quantifying how your DI BCM doesn't run better than your piston one, in detail, if I were you....that is if you feel like sticking around, and contributing more than unsubstantiated claims with nothing to back them up.
Look buddy.. I respect USMC03 and i actually have spent time on his site reading and taking in stuff. He will for sure be more of a valuable asset to this forum then I.
BUT I think its unfair to other members who might not know the affiliations certain posters have with certain companies. that said i think DI guns are great if you maintain them right.. There are pro's and cons for both systems..
without going to much into my credentials (which i shouldnt have to justify to post on a forum anyways) I know for a fact that special operations run Gas sytems and sigs........ NOT DI AR's and Glocks butt reading the internet one would think a colt ar and glock 19 are the end all in firearms.. well NOT SO MUCH!
ive spoken to reall Trigger pullers about this subject and They Prefer gas systems. over the DI gun....
some of you guys might just be too Long toothed to accept the future in firearms..
some of you might have invested interest in DI.. some of you might just be ignorant to the facts.. IDK
Failure2Stop
01-24-10, 21:50
seriously im gratefull for USMC03 reviews and info but jesus you plug that BCM sht whenever you can dont you..
got a kickback deal with them or what? oh wait they sell your chest harness dont they! bet you get deals on parts too...
seriously i own a BCM upper and i own some piston guns.. to say the DI runs better is blasphemy....
you want to do some real testing without operator/mags/ammo.... variables and then the BCM comes out on top then so be it.. but i would be willing to bet a hefty penny on the gas system lasting a hell of lot longer then a DI gun given the same treatment equally.
wait didnt the military already do this test... what was the outcome again
Publicy accusing a well respected moderator that constantly provides information and experience with being dishonest or receiving kick-backs will not stand.
As it is, BCM makes an excellent product. I frequently recommend them, as do many others, are we also being accused of dishonesty or financial gain through morally questionable practices?
I suggest that you seriously consider the consequences of your accusations and comments before posting.
P.S.- I am a "real" trigger puller, and I can tell you that I prefer mature, proven designs, as do others with higher technical knowledge.
Look buddy.. I respect USMC03 and i actually have spent time on his site reading and taking in stuff. He will for sure be more of a valuable asset to this forum then I.
BUT I think its unfair to other members who might not know the affiliations certain posters have with certain companies. that said i think DI guns are great if you maintain them right.. There are pro's and cons for both systems..
without going to much into my credentials (which i shouldnt have to justify to post on a forum anyways) I know for a fact that special operations run Gas sytems and sigs........ NOT DI AR's and Glocks butt reading the internet one would think a colt ar and glock 19 are the end all in firearms.. well NOT SO MUCH!
ive spoken to reall Trigger pullers about this subject and They Prefer gas systems. over the DI gun....
some of you guys might just be too Long toothed to accept the future in firearms..
some of you might have invested interest in DI.. some of you might just be ignorant to the facts.. IDK
That's funny, because one click over to the article that Jeff linked, or the link in his Sig line would disclose that. Or when someone went to BCM's site and saw the 03 rig.
As for speaking to real trigger pullers, you are not the only one who has. I dunno who you spoke to about what is and is not in use...but you might want to check your sources, if you even think it matters.
lawusmc0844
01-24-10, 21:57
Dude I'm sure all of us that love and recommend BCM "rides their jock-strap" :rolleyes: I can agree with you to a point; I have no particular brand loyalty BUT when a brand makes an excellent product at a good price (BCM, Magpul, etc.) then I will always recommend them to others. You said it yourself; you want the best equipment. The way I see it, the BCM can be considered "the best" in DI AR-15s because its built to the same standards as a Colt but without the heavier price tag. When well known professionals like USMC03 or Pat Rogers tout the BCM, I'll call that a clue.
As for pistons, I too wish the military uses service rifles/carbines with piston systems. Our rifles are select fire, issued to many different servicemen, and the more high speed guys may use suppressors on SBRs. I hate having to clean my M4 after shooting it, especially to the USMC "white glove" standard which I no longer do thankfully. I still don't like a system that blows the gas directly back into the working heart of the weapon, however, the DI AR has been around for nearly 50 years and has been improved during that time. Cleaning the BCG can suck but its not that bad at the same time.
I own a LWRC M6A2 upper, LMT MRP CQB piston upper, and a DDM4 and BCM BFH middy upper. I like all of them and have confidence in them to survive a deployment but I do feel most users, including myself, DON'T need the advantages of a piston system. That doesn't mean I hate pistons, in fact I love them, but the AR has proven to run well on a system that theoretically shouldn't. I recommend anyone getting into an AR first should go with a QUALITY DI rifle, (BCM, Colt...) then after some experience try a piston driven system. (LWRC, LMT...)
clickclack
01-24-10, 22:01
Piblicy accusing a well respected moderator that constantly provides information and experience with being dishonest or receiving kick-backs will not stand.
As it is, BCM makes an excellent product. I frequently recommend them, as do many others, are we also being accused of dishonesty or financial gain through morally questionable practices?
I suggest that you seriously consider the consequences of your accusations and comments before posting.
Noted. I may have worded my post incorrectly to get my point across.
I too believe BCM makes a great product and my current build is actually a BCM. I also planned to get the harness that Jeff had designed.
I just felt the " Ive seen gas systems go down and the all mighty BCM has never failed post with a link about how great bcm thing to be a little bit "hidden agenda" for lack of better words and i wanted to get the word out there that the gas system is a great system in the right design.
my bad
Noted. I may have worded my post incorrectly to get my point across.
I too believe BCM makes a great product and my current build is actually a BCM. I also planned to get the harness that Jeff had designed.
I just felt the " Ive seen gas systems go down and the all mighty BCM has never failed post with a link about how great bcm thing to be a little bit "hidden agenda" for lack of better words and i wanted to get the word out there that the gas system is a great system in the right design.
my bad
You are trying to argue "gas systems" when you're actually talking about gas PISTON systems. The fact that you aren't even clearly identifying/know the proper name for what you're trying to plug, is clue #1 for us.
More importantly, though...the guys here who've already weighed in have been around the block, and have seen what actually runs, and what doesn't.
Jeff's affiliation with BCM is easy to see for those who care, you're not exposing anything that people don't already know.
As for trying to educate folks about the potential of the gas piston AR systems... this is where you'll need to be highly detailed and specific if you want anyone to take you even remotely seriously.
When there are gents here who helped develop the various systems on the market, have used and broken pretty much every piston system out there, been shooting DI carbines for 20+ years, etc....you should probably explain how you "know better" than they do.
If you can't do this I'd recommend going back to lurking, and not shooting off at the mouth and embarrassing yourself quiet so badly.
clickclack
01-24-10, 22:17
You are trying to argue "gas systems" when you're actually talking about gas PISTON systems. The fact that you aren't even clearly identifying/know the proper name for what you're trying to plug, is clue #1 for us.
More importantly, though...the guys here who've already weighed in have been around the block, and have seen what actually runs, and what doesn't.
Jeff's affiliation with BCM is easy to see for those who care, you're not exposing anything that people don't already know.
As for trying to educate folks about the potential of the gas piston AR systems... this is where you'll need to be highly detailed and specific if you want anyone to take you even remotely seriously.
When there are gents here who helped develop the various systems on the market, have used and broken pretty much every piston system out there, been shooting DI carbines for 20+ years, etc....you should probably explain how you "know better" than they do.
If you can't do this I'd recommend going back to lurking, and not shooting off at the mouth and embarrassing yourself quiet so badly.
oh so then by your wording.. every gas piston must be designed the same huh? :rolleyes:
seriously if anyone wants to run a real wold test of a DI vs GAS to find out which one lasts longer please let me know the outcome.
Failure2Stop
01-24-10, 22:24
Both sides have been heard and weighed.
This thread has detoured significantly enough to become a distraction.
I am closing it down.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.