View Full Version : Piston Short Barreled uppers?
Does anyone have any input on going with a piston system for a short barreled rifle in the .223 AR platform, in an under 12" rifle?
I'm considering going this way, but not sure if piston uppers work well in SBR configurations, and if there would be any gains going with a piston system.
Does anyone have any input on going with a piston system for a short barreled rifle in the .223 AR platform, in an under 12" rifle?
I'm considering going this way, but not sure if piston uppers work well in SBR configurations, and if there would be any gains going with a piston system.
The LWRC system seems to work well with 10.5" (10.3?) chrome-lined barrels. I wouldn't hesitate to buy one if money was no object, though I would NOT buy a longer barreled LW again... They seem to shine as SBR's, though.
Then again, high quality direct impingement 10.5's supposedly run fine, too.
i have an 11.5" POF upper. it rocks + it's easier to clean. the big thing is that they are freaking expensive. i got mine used for $950 and have another on the way from POF [but who knows how long that will be?].
i've heard that LMT is releasing one in the fall + i've heard that the LWRC SBR uppers are good, too.
In my opinion, SBRs are where piston guns really shine. I have two 10.5" LWRC rifles (6.8mm and 5.56mm) and they alleviate a LOT of the problems of a short barrel and short gas system. Almost zero heat transfer to the operating group, almost zero accumulation of carbon and powder residue in the operating group, increased reliability due to the piston operation (much smaller gas volume required to initiate cycling). I've got one of the 8" 6.8mm guns on order and hope to have it in time for a couple of carbine classes this fall.
With a 16" barrel or longer I'd stick with a mid-length DI, but for <16" a piston operated gun has a lot of benefits over a similarly equipped DI carbine. I don't even own any carbine length DI guns anymore.
Stephen
The advice to go DI for 16+ guns is just to save money since both systems are reliable at that length, right? I'm assuming that if the price were the same, the piston gun would still be preferrable because of the cleaner- and cooler-running design, correct?
In fact SBRs are exactly when you want a piston. For under 14.5 inches, go with piston. DI seems ok for longer barrels. A 16 inch mid-length is nice.
I put 500 rounds through my LMT 10.5" and another 400 the next day with a KAC M4QD NT4 attached. I did not clean it between the two days. All I did was take the BCG out before the start of day two and hosed it down with CLP. I did not have one malfunction. I did learn a lesson though.... take the can off at the end of the day. It was a bitch to get off after day two when it cooled down. :eek:
It was pretty dirty when I cleaned it, but who cares. It ran like it was supposed to. The only advantage that I see with the piston system is that they'll take less time to clean. Big deal, it takes ten minutes (if that) to clean a DI rifle.
As for the heat transfer, again, who cares. I have spare parts if something breaks and can buy 3 LMT uppers with BCG's to 1 LW upper or ten to one HK416.
IMO... a piston upper is not "needed" for the 10.5"-14.5" uppers as some say.
IMO... a piston upper is not "needed" for the 10.5"-14.5" uppers as some say.
I never said it was needed, just better. Some folks prefer to have every advantage they can get when it comes to fighting for their lives.
Stephen
Derek_Connor
07-27-07, 07:39
I never said it was needed, just better. Some folks prefer to have every advantage they can get when it comes to fighting for their lives.
Stephen
The arguement could go both ways I guess - the pistons are relatively new on the scene to be deemed as more advantageous or better, am I wrong?
Also if someone happens to be in an organized unit, what happens if your piston breaks? Do the S4 channels have the ability to replace/fix your piston?
Murphy finger ****s the proprietary bolt carrier group in piston run rifles, can you get a new one?
But the whole idea behind piston setups is that they help preserve these parts mentioned above more so than DIs, so the scenario's above could be called "moot"
Just thinking out loud, these are all hypotheticals of course, trying to think outside the box
The arguement could go both ways I guess - the pistons are relatively new on the scene to be deemed as more advantageous or better, am I wrong?
Also if someone happens to be in an organized unit, what happens if your piston breaks? Do the S4 channels have the ability to replace/fix your piston?
Murphy finger ****s the proprietary bolt carrier group in piston run rifles, can you get a new one?
But the whole idea behind piston setups is that they help preserve these parts mentioned above more so than DIs, so the scenario's above could be called "moot"
Just thinking out loud, these are all hypotheticals of course, trying to think outside the box
All very valid points. If a unit/department is issueing these weapons they would have no more trouble with replacement parts than with a DI weapon. By my count there are only 7 parts that are different from my LWRC carbine to a DI carbine with none of them likely to wear out before the barrel does.
Stephen
Concur with S-1, the 10.5 LMT or Colt is a very reliable system ... and know with personal experiance that with 77gr it is effective out to 300m from that length, I don't know what anyone could expect more out of a MOUNT, SOUC or CQC weapon system. However, "those who know choose H&K 10.5" ... make your own decisions.
I never said it was needed, just better. Some folks prefer to have every advantage they can get when it comes to fighting for their lives.
Stephen
I fail to see how the LWRC upper is "better" than a LMT 10.5". The LMT has been proven in combat by some of the best trained men that our nation has to offer, and continues to be a favorite among them, while the LWRC upper hasn't even been issued, let alone tested in real world situations.
I also fail to see how someone is at an advantage with a piston upper when the LMT works just as well. My life does depend on my rifle, and I feel that with the components (LMT+KAC=Quality) that I choose to use, will not fail me when I need them. I would MUCH rather have a weapon, along with components/accessories, that have been put through the ringer, than have the latest "gucci gear" that hasn't been.
With all that being said... I would try out a HK416 if they were $1,200 for a upper, as the 416 is a proven design. I have heard some reports of reliability issues with them lately though...
Steel_Weasel
07-28-07, 04:35
I fail to see how the LWRC upper is "better" than a LMT 10.5". The LMT has been proven in combat by some of the best trained men that our nation has to offer, and continues to be a favorite among them, while the LWRC upper hasn't even been issued, let alone tested in real world situations.
Not entirely accurate. While certainly not issued via the Gov't supply channel, more than a few LWRC 10.5 guns have gone in harms way via some SFG's and performed well.
FYI - Let's try to leave manufacturer marketing claims & Internet forum fairy tales to other forums.
- LWRC has not had a single U.S. goverment/military purchase. A few (5-6 at most) private sales to U.S. military personal is not the same thing as "Used by U.S. Army SF".
This is HFG type stuff.
- LWRC has not had a single U.S. goverment/military purchase.
The Marine Corps has purchased the IAR candidate submissions from LWRC.
Stephen
I fail to see how the LWRC upper is "better" than a LMT 10.5". The LMT has been proven in combat by some of the best trained men that our nation has to offer, and continues to be a favorite among them, while the LWRC upper hasn't even been issued, let alone tested in real world situations.
I also fail to see how someone is at an advantage with a piston upper when the LMT works just as well. My life does depend on my rifle, and I feel that with the components (LMT+KAC=Quality) that I choose to use, will not fail me when I need them. I would MUCH rather have a weapon, along with components/accessories, that have been put through the ringer, than have the latest "gucci gear" that hasn't been.
With all that being said... I would try out a HK416 if they were $1,200 for a upper, as the 416 is a proven design. I have heard some reports of reliability issues with them lately though...
I'm glad your LMT runs good. I have shot a lot of 10.5" guns that run good. I also understand if a piston operated M4 style carbine isn't your cup of tea. I'm not trying to convince anybody here to sell off all their guns, run down to the gun shop, and buy an LWRC Carbine. If your guns run great maybe you'll never have any problems with them. The original poster asked for opinions on SBR piston guns and I gave it.
Stephen
The Marine Corps has purchased the IAR candidate submissions from LWRC.
Stephen
LOL, you LWRC boys are damn determined to keep spreading the BS aren’t you?
One last time before my Moderator edit function gets a workout:
A few (1-3) prototypes submitted for a program heading down the toilet or 5-6 private sales (at an huge discount I would assume) to military personal DOES NOT constitute a military contract or the much-abused “Used by U.S. Special Forces”.
I’ve noticed these claims don’t get posted on LF forum anymore since Basicload posted his reply about the validity of the claim and basically shot it to pieces. You guys also seem to avoid making them on 10-8 forum. M4C forum should be treated just the same. Enough of us know the real deal and will shoot it down every time.
Does this logo mean Vulcan Armament really has weapons in Special Operations service?
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v74/va_dinger/vulcan_logo.jpg
I know Darren and his ½ dozen minions will probably cry that I’m picking on them again but enough is enough. Stop posting these BS claims on M4C and you won't have a problem.
I'm glad your LMT runs good.
So am I.
I also understand if a piston operated M4 style carbine isn't your cup of tea.
Like I said, I would buy a HK416 if they were more reasonably priced as they are a proven design.
I was just curious of how a design (LWRC 10.5") that hasn't proved itself in combat, or through extensive testing, is "better" than a system that has (LMT 10.5") and that many HSLD types are happy with.
5-6 private sales (at an huge discount I would assume) to military personal DOES NOT constitute a military contract or the much-abused “Used by U.S. Special Forces”.
HAHAHA
I remember that thread over at ARFcom. PLW/HFG posted stating that the LWRC rifles were being "tested" by SF..blah..blah. He then posted pretty pictures of them shooting them in Iraq.
IIRC.....The truth came out. He gave a few SF guys a large discount on a couple (5-6) of rifles if they would take pictures of themselves using them overseas.
(This was a few years ago, but that's how I remember it. Someone correct me if I'm wrong).
Steel_Weasel
07-28-07, 17:58
FYI - Let's try to leave manufacturer marketing claims & Internet forum fairy tales to other forums.
- LWRC has not had a single U.S. goverment/military purchase. A few (5-6 at most) private sales to U.S. military personal is not the same thing as "Used by U.S. Army SF".
This is HFG type stuff.
Dinger, you didn't add a single thing except to confirm what I posted with your own bias.
You don't know me so I can only take the HFG allusion as an insult to my integrity which earns you the same in my eyes.
LOL, you LWRC boys are damn determined to keep spreading the BS aren’t you?
? What BS? LWRC was paid $10,488 by NSAC for three USMC IAR prototypes. It's not BS and is info that is available online at NSAC's website.
There was an SF team that bought uppers for all their men (12 upper receivers). I don't know how the transaction was processed (they may have all chipped in out of their pockets or it could have been an IMPAC card purchase), but they did deploy with them and some of the uppers are on their 3rd trip to Iraq and/or Afghanistan. I interviewed two of these soldiers for an upcoming LWRC article in "Tactical Weapons" and they were very happy with their LWRC guns and both had "countless" rounds through them both on the square range and on the 2 way range. A very small sample size to be sure, but combat use non-the-less.
I'm sorry that you don't like LWRC, the rifles, or the people that operate the company. You ought to come down to Lewisburg, WV on the 31st of August and try out some of their guns and meet some of the people that run the place. They are hosting a Pat Goodale class there and it should be a good time for all that attend. I will be a student at the class and I think if nothing else you might have fun.
As for it not being discussed on 10-8 or LF.net, I don't know what to tell you. I, personally, am not a member at 10-8 and when a search is done on "LWRC" at my website you get 11 pages of hits so they are obviously being discussed. I don't remember the specific incident that Basicload commented on, but I assure that the LWRC staff is welcome at LF.net to post about their products or their end users.
Best regards,
Stephen
It's not BS and is info that is available online at NSAC's website.
Link please. I googled NSAC and keep getting Nevada State Athletic Commission. Thanks.
It hurts me to use your own forum against you, but:
http://lightfighter.net/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/7206084761/m/1761022213?r=8851064213#8851064213
Originally posted by basicload:
Just because Steve Holland buys a couple dozen guns does not make them .mil issue.
5th SFG has had some wazoo guns for years. They take limited funds and buy a few that could be shared by ODAs that were rotating down range.
That model kind of got screwed post 9/11 when the whole group was rotating and not just a handfull of ODAs.
I have seen 7.62X39 colt ARs
I have seen USP compacts.
I have seen the MK-12 before it was even called the MK-12
That SFG has a reputaion of going out on their own.
almost NONE of what they do is supported by USSOCOM or USASOC.
SOmetimes they can get "higher" to drink the cool-aid and sometimes they cannot.
Thes initiaves are personality diven from within that Group.
Other FORCE MOD NCOs from toher groups are following the example of 5th, but since there is a SINGLE small arms combat developer for all of USELESSSOC, it can at times make his job even harder.
He is constantly having to do briefings explaining WTF the groups are doing.
Rant mode on: you see the f******g vendors like to use these "trials" as an endorsement of their product. So a f******g congressmen calls the commanding General's phone wanting to know why everyone of his guys is not running *insert product made by shady assed **** stain lobbying gun company here*.
The General has no ****ing idea that somewhere in the world 22 wigets were purchased with unit funds for testing. SO he calls this poor ****ing captain or Major and lights into his ass about why the congressman from Conn is humping his leg and offing pork money to fund the whole thing.
Now the captian has to call around to even figure out what ****ing unit bought the things, not to mention that if the wigets in question have not been live fire safety certified by ARDEC (at the unit's cost I might add) then they are illegal for use by US soldiers.
The whole gun testing thing is a ****ing racket. Labs like ARDEC survive off of other unit's budgets to pay their expenses.
Our 21E's have not been deployable for over a year pending the outcome of the testing. This is a gun that has been in service with the US military since 1979 in small numbers, but not a single testing lab had any record of it ever undergoing a safety cert. RAnt Mode OFF.
So you can see that unit's buying their own shit can run the full spectrum from "great idea" through "pain in the ass" to "down right against regulations".....
When I see contract bid and filled to meet the needs of a user group in the form of a requirements document that has been staffed and validated by that user's Major Commmand. Then I think it will be safe to say that the miltary is currently using more than one piston system.
This prompted an immediate back pedal by Martin Custer “Mil-Programs LWRC” (I need his job :D ) in the very same thread. Posted 28 April 2007 21:56
“Just to set the record straight we've not processed any DOD Contract purchases at this point.”
Link please. I googled NSAC and keep getting Nevada State Athletic Commission. Thanks.
http://www.nationalsmallarmscenter.org/awards.php
It hurts me to use your own forum against you, but:
Thanks for the link. We're in agreement on this issue though. I am aware that LWRC has not had any guns purchased on DOD Contract.
Stephen
I have had active duty SF types buy guns from me to use in bad places. Does that mean that I hold a DoD contract? Nope.
The Military buys weapons from tons of different manufacturers for T&E and some even find their way into action. This of course does not mean a damn thing.
To the orig. poster, having talked with Vickers at length about SBR's and piston systems, it is his belief that SBR's (especially ones that have a can attached to them) should be piston driven. Even though I build and shoot SBR's and they have all run fantastic, I believe that you are better off with a Piston driven system when talking SBR's.
My problem with piston driven AR's is that I have not seen any that look to be all that good for one reason or another (less the 416). They all seem to suffer from weight, reliability, manufacturing delays or a lack luster company backing them. None of this interests me in the least and is why I have stayed about 1.5miles away from any of these manufacturers.
I do believe however that hope is on the way. With the Magpul Masada and LMT's gas piston MRP, we will soon have some other choices to examine.
C4
Concur with S-1, the 10.5 LMT or Colt is a very reliable system ... and know with personal experiance that with 77gr it is effective out to 300m from that length, I don't know what anyone could expect more out of a MOUNT, SOUC or CQC weapon system. However, "those who know choose H&K 10.5" ... make your own decisions.
Knowing that M4Carbine is very selective in who it grants Industy professional status to I am sure your information is correct. Could you please explain what you mean by "effective out to 300m"? With the fragmentation range of this round in such a short barrel at 60-70 yards or so I am confused.
Knowing that M4Carbine is very selective in who it grants Industy professional status to I am sure your information is correct. Could you please explain what you mean by "effective out to 300m"? With the fragmentation range of this round in such a short barrel at 60-70 yards or so I am confused.
Having not seen fragmentation in ballistic jelly I couldn't tell you much about that, but generally when bad guys who were 300m and less didn't do to well after being shot by a round or two of the 77gr stuff. Now it could have been the extra velocity from the suppressors, the fact that the altitude was somewhere around 10,000 ft or simply shot placement, you guys can figure that out.
Having not seen fragmentation in ballistic jelly I couldn't tell you much about that, but generally when bad guys who were 300m and less didn't do to well after being shot by a round or two of the 77gr stuff. Now it could have been the extra velocity from the suppressors, the fact that the altitude was somewhere around 10,000 ft or simply shot placement, you guys can figure that out.
I think you kind of nailed it Will. If you can shoot (meaning putting your rounds where you want) fragmentation doesn't matter.
I believe that are very own KevinB has taken a bad guy with a 10.5 and a M855 round well past the fragmentation range.
C4
Knowing that M4Carbine is very selective in who it grants Industy professional status to I am sure your information is correct. Could you please explain what you mean by "effective out to 300m"? With the fragmentation range of this round in such a short barrel at 60-70 yards or so I am confused.
IP's on this forum are generally required to meet one of two reqs:
E-5/O-3 or above Special Forces
Weapon designer
After they meet one of these reqs, they are then voted on by the Mods/Staff.
So when one of them says that they did or have done XYZ, you can just about gurantee that they are not blowing smoke up your skirt.
C4
IP's on this forum are generally required to meet one of two reqs:
E-5/O-3 or above Special Forces
Weapon designer
After they meet one of these reqs, they are then voted on by the Mods/Staff.
So when one of them says that they did or have done XYZ, you can just about gurantee that they are not blowing smoke up your skirt.
C4Grant that is what I meant without knowing who I was actually addressing, was not trying to insult anyone
Grant that is what I meant without knowing who I was actually addressing, was not trying to insult anyone
No, I know you weren't trying to insult anyone. I just wanted to make sure you knew that forum members were not just randomly selected for no real reason to be IP's.
C4
I think you kind of nailed it Will. If you can shoot (meaning putting your rounds where you want) fragmentation doesn't matter.
I believe that are very own KevinB has taken a bad guy with a 10.5 and a M855 round well past the fragmentation range.
C4
That's pretty much in line with most of the GS wounds that I've seen/dealt with. Shot placement is everything, it doesn't matter what magic bullet you're using, or what caliber.
There's WAY too many people that preach "fragmentation/ballistics" on these boards (mostly on TOS). The discussion comes up the most in the "10.5-11.5" threads with a guy saying that a SBR will not kill anything past 50 yards because the bullet won't fragment. I just roll my eyes everytime someone starts ranting about it.
Thanks for your service Will.
I've had good luck with this piston SBR. It's an LWRC. Over 1K rounds thru it now, only had one malfunction. with light reloads. It runs suppressed just as well.
http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b299/nimslow/IMG_1058.jpg
http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b299/nimslow/IMG_1104.jpg
variablebinary
10-06-07, 22:00
Does anyone have any input on going with a piston system for a short barreled rifle in the .223 AR platform, in an under 12" rifle?
I'm considering going this way, but not sure if piston uppers work well in SBR configurations, and if there would be any gains going with a piston system.
My LMT DI SBR runs great. I'd sit out the piston format wars for now and just get an LMT, Noveske or Colt and call it a day
The main issues that a DI SBR with a can encounters are greater wear on bolts and barrels as well as the gas sytem blowing out the lube it needs to keep running.
I think the better fix can be found using a KAC E-3 equipped SBR and lubing it with LT Machine Gunners Lube, that is if you are really looking to find a 'better animal'.
What I do is just lube the crap out of the BCG and replace the standard parts before their service life is questionable. I know that it's not as sexy as the other options, but it does work.
The Archangel
10-09-07, 15:44
Not entirely accurate. While certainly not issued via the Gov't supply channel, more than a few LWRC 10.5 guns have gone in harms way via some SFG's and performed well.
I'm with the 20th SFG and I use Pert Plus shampoo.
Pert Plus
The Choice of America's Elite...
There's my endorsement. ;)
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.