View Full Version : piston guns worth the money?
Waffenfabric
05-19-10, 07:27
I'm new to this forum, so if this topic has been done to death, please redirect me.
The piston guns seem to be gearing up to flood the AR market, at least as ads tell it. My question is::Have the piston AR's been around long enough to say they are "better" than top of the line DI type guns?
I know with the di guns they need lube, and reasonable cleaning, but if for some reason that was not practicle/possable, is that where the piston guns would be a major advantage?
For compairision; say Noveske, or DD vs LWRC or LMT.
Personally I am a D.I. guy.....the MRP piston and HK 416 piston guns look extremely well built, and enough testing have been done on both to show them to be very reliable.
Only real advantage to a piston gun is the whole maintenance issue...NOT, reliability issue. D.I. is just as reliable when properly lubed. D.I. gun is the only gun I would ever pick if my intended purpose was accuracy.
Just buy a MRP and be done with.....D.I. or piston....SS tack driver or CL volume shooter.......sbr or spr type.......22lr or 9mm or .204 or 5.56 or 6.8......and on and on:)
DocHolliday01
05-19-10, 08:21
Not trying to be a jerk but 5 seconds using the search function would have probably gotten at least 15 threads on this topic.
Failure2Stop
05-19-10, 08:33
Are they worth it?
Depends of your frame of reference, use, and expectations.
If you are shooting a short barreled gun with a suppressor, a piston will alleviate excessive fouling of the FCG, mag, and bolt over long strings of fire.
Testing (dust chamber) seems to indicate that piston systems in general make the weapon slightly less prone to stoppages (comparing a stock M4 to a 416, for a more direct comparison, as well as the SCAR and XM8), though the M4 wasn't really all that bad when taking all the data into account.
The lack of commonality between competing piston designs as well as the predominance of DI parts makes replacement parts for piston guns less available than DI parts.
16" piston ARs seem have a sharper recoil impulse than comparable DI guns. My frame of reference are LWRC and HKs. The 10.5 416 didn't seem to be so sharp to me, but I wasn't comparing the guns side by side.
Some people just want a piston gun for whatever reason, and no amount of user input or testing will sway their opinion, so to them, they are worth the money.
Failure2Stop made some good points, the most commonly applied I have quoted below:
Are they worth it?
Depends of your frame of reference, use, and expectations.
Some people just want a piston gun for whatever reason, and no amount of user input or testing will sway their opinion, so to them, they are worth the money.
I like piston guns. I think they are cool (pun sort of intended). But I think/hope we will see an improvements in piston AR design in the years to come. I was hot to go to get a piston gun last fall. But after much contemplation, I decided to build a good DI rifle instead. I am going to wait a few years and see where/how far the piston system adaptation goes.
Waffenfabric
05-19-10, 10:38
As I said I'm new to the forum, but not to AR's. I've been shooting them for 20 or so years, and have encountered very few problems.
Right now I have a Daniel Def. that seems great so far.
I can't recall the web site, but supposidly there was a legit test firing M4/HK/Scar, and others, where there was a fairly high rate of malfs, per x amount of rounds, with the standard m4, and far less with hk and other piston guns. As I understand it, with m4 you keep it lubed but in a hostile enviornment, ie:desert sand, as well as high round count causes the oil to cake/coat the inside of the bolt/carrier, causing trouble. Also in sand, lube draws sand causing trouble.
I'm not a spec ops guy or anything like that, but I keep my m4, for training/shooting, but in the back of my mind, it is really a shtf type gun. Probably will never actually use it for that, but who knows. In that scenario, cleaning might be iffy, on a regular basis.
I hear good things about NB coating for the bolt/carrier and I might go with that.
If I got the piston gun I'd be trading the DDm4, and probably getting no where what I paid for it. (1500) Normally it's bad mojo to trade something that works and a system that is proven,(more or less) for the younger better looking girl, errr, gun on the block so I've decided against that. Again thanks for the info.
The Dumb Gun Collector
05-19-10, 10:40
I don't think they make much sense for the average user. A 16 inch, lightweight piston AR is probably the best rifle a person can own. A good AR is very reliable, safe, accurate, and certainly the most developed gun on the market. However, there are certain niche uses for the rifle that a piston AR might be better for. LAV, who helped develop the 416 for Delta says that short direct impingement guns don't consistently run well full auto suppressed. They can be tuned, but it is a hassle that Delta didn't have time for. So, if you are running a lot of full auto suppressed 10 inch ARs you probably need a 416. Very few people are doing this.
There is currently a backlash against the piston guns. Most of it is irrational and, in my opinion, just the normal cyclical reaction against the "top-dog." You will hear every possible negative rumor against the piston gun magnified and repeated 1000 times. Some of this is by industry folks who would rather keep making the same junk, some of it is by folks who bought a Bushmaster and now feel the need to defend it, some of it is just the normal internet horse-pucky. Meanwhile, objective testing, and evidence that top-tier units are deploying these weapons when it counts is discounted. Usually with a "a buddy of mine is in task force wango tango and he says the hate it!" Well, no one could argue with that.:D
Anyway, piston guns are almost certainly more reliable, but probably only in situations you won't need. And the costs and other hassles associated with owning a quality piston gun probably outweigh the benefit for the average user.
CarlosDJackal
05-19-10, 11:24
The only reason I shoot Piston Guns exclusively (I currently have 2 LWRCIs and have a SCAR 16 on order) is because I'm too lazy to clean my guns. This is the same reason I exclusively shoot Glocks.
As far as I'm concerned, you can do pretty much everything with a good, quality DI gun. YMMV.
devildogljb
05-19-10, 14:16
Im sticking to DI. The only differnce is the piston is slightly cleaner. But if your like me and most of the guys on here we dont mind cleaning our babies
Id stick to DI for now. If the military does select a piston M16 type rifle I would think that most everybody will switch their pistons over to that system. You dont want a piston system that could be orphaned here in a few years.
Kill By Number
05-19-10, 14:53
I have a LMT piston 12". I love the gun and could always switch back to DI with barrel and bolt carrier change, though I won't. I bought it because the system makes sense by keeping the hot gasses venting out the front of the gun away from critical parts. Would be very easy to clean if I left the piston area dirty, but I'm anal and I have to clean it too. Reliability should be better in theory if you were shooting thousands of rounds in short period of time or dusty environment, etc, time will tell. About 1000 rounds through mine so far, no problems. I am so impressed with the fit / finish that if I did ever buy a DI gun again, it would be an LMT. Basically their piston system made the most sense to me for a gun I plan on keeping for my lifetime, so I bought it.
PS- running suppressed, the gun is still very dirty, but no gas in the face and the heavy fouling is in the piston.
Belmont31R
05-19-10, 15:10
I don't think they make much sense for the average user. A 16 inch, lightweight piston AR is probably the best rifle a person can own. A good AR is very reliable, safe, accurate, and certainly the most developed gun on the market. However, there are certain niche uses for the rifle that a piston AR might be better for. LAV, who helped develop the 416 for Delta says that short direct impingement guns don't consistently run well full auto suppressed. They can be tuned, but it is a hassle that Delta didn't have time for. So, if you are running a lot of full auto suppressed 10 inch ARs you probably need a 416. Very few people are doing this.
There is currently a backlash against the piston guns. Most of it is irrational and, in my opinion, just the normal cyclical reaction against the "top-dog." You will hear every possible negative rumor against the piston gun magnified and repeated 1000 times. Some of this is by industry folks who would rather keep making the same junk, some of it is by folks who bought a Bushmaster and now feel the need to defend it, some of it is just the normal internet horse-pucky. Meanwhile, objective testing, and evidence that top-tier units are deploying these weapons when it counts is discounted. Usually with a "a buddy of mine is in task force wango tango and he says the hate it!" Well, no one could argue with that.:D
Anyway, piston guns are almost certainly more reliable, but probably only in situations you won't need. And the costs and other hassles associated with owning a quality piston gun probably outweigh the benefit for the average user.
Yeah in those specific situations there is a benefit.
At the same time, though, the piston AR market has tried to sell the idea of the DI being inherently unreliable. LAV also went on national TV to light a match on a DI AR gas tube in selling the piston AR.
Im by no means an AR expert but Ive run either mil issue guns or my own personal guns in conditions from 120+ desert dunes with blowing sand to -20 in the mountains of Germany, and had VERY FEW reliability issues. Certainly not enough to make me even come close to not trusting an AR with everything I would need a gun for.
Yeah in those specific situations there is a benefit.
At the same time, though, the piston AR market has tried to sell the idea of the DI being inherently unreliable. LAV also went on national TV to light a match on a DI AR gas tube in selling the piston AR.
Im by no means an AR expert but Ive run either mil issue guns or my own personal guns in conditions from 120+ desert dunes with blowing sand to -20 in the mountains of Germany, and had VERY FEW reliability issues. Certainly not enough to make me even come close to not trusting an AR with everything I would need a gun for.
Generally I would have to totally agree....the fact that piston guns are pushed over D.I. by certain folks def. dirties the water and makes it harder to discuss the tech aspects to the diff. systems. D.I. guns in my past with a little lube and common sense....and PMAGS, go thousands of rounds without a hiccup...so at those types of numbers between ftf/fte's, its semantics to compare in the reliability dept. imho.
There's only a few piston guns I'd place as potentially above DI guns for certain very limited applications. If you're running a suppressed SBR on full auto, piston makes sense, For any two of those, it has advantages.
There is very little a piston can do that can't be done with DI - running dedicated suppressors works great, and the Noveske Switchblock allows QD suppressors to run well on, and the host to run reliably without.
The real beauty of making lightweight AR15's is that so much of the weight is located farther back, and the Stoner system is actually quite ingenious.
With the common issues of DI AR15's sorted, it works.
Magazines - biggest reliability problem for wear parts - Pmags are a $10 fix
Ammunition - junky, or underpowered ammunition is next
Springs - Extractor springs and inserts, ejector spring, and action spring in spec make a difference.
Bolts and carriers - mostly with civilian 'mil spec' AR's, these can be a failure point.
Buffer - the right buffer for the application makes a huge difference.
With a logically set up AR, you can have a very accurate, very reliable, lightweight yet capable stick, for still less money than a piston system.
crazymoose
05-19-10, 22:06
SBR with a can- maybe worth it, although a switchblock-equipped DI is probably almost as good.
I think FN has done a great job with their piston system on the SCAR. None of the accuracy was sacrificed as with most piston guns. Great rifle, I may pick one up as soon as it drops in price. I have also hear good things about the ACR, which is another good piston gun. I just cant get over how front heavy it is, nothing a lite barrel cant fix though.
My opinion is that pistons were the past and they remain the future.
The Direct Impingement AR-15/M-16 is an (or rather THE) anomoly. It has a cottage industry surrounding it like the 1911 pistol has. THAT fact alone is reason enough to own a D.I. carbine or rifle.
The piston system is inherently a more robust design with weight (and balance) and sharper felt recoil impulse (which can affect some) being functional concerns. Other posters have stated the FACTS: heavy buffer, Sprinco action spring, proper extractor assembly and good magazines (regardless of carbine action) combined with sensible lubrication and the current system will work just fine.
piston guns worth the money?
No
Cameron
I have stated my opinion on here before about piston guns, my experience being with LWRCi. Therefore I won't bother anybody with the facts again. I will ask a question "Why do people reinvent the wheel?" The answer is to make more money off of people who don't know any better. There is a reason why so many people are complaining about pistons in ARs. What normally happens when you reinvent the wheel? You F*ck it Up........
I'm sticking with DI AR's because parts may be found just about anywhere. I may consider a piston AR down the road if a system becomes commercially successful enough that parts availability is no longer an issue and if there is some functional advantage for me in my application for the weapon (cleaning ease aside as I enjoy cleaning AR's).
i havent shot one or done enough research to justify the purchase.
my DI ar15s have given me no problems as of yet.
:cool:
variablebinary
05-20-10, 04:10
As 16" guns, I dont see the benefit of a piston.
SBR's and suppressed weapons is where piston guns really work their magic.
this comes up often enough that I've been chipping away at an article for my website. Here it is in it's current form.
Why Not a Piston AR?
From time to time people ask me my opinion of which piston-operated AR-pattern rifle they should by. Many are surprised when I reply with "none". Inevitably the followup question is "why not?" This page is an attempt to answer that question. Be aware, these are my opinions based on my use and my experience with ARs both direct impingement and piston-operated.
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 center-line 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 or an unstable economy. Is a company who's only product is a potential target for legislation going to survive a ban? Is a niche boutique maker going to survive a down economy? 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.
4) Turd polishing. Many of the piston systems are simply add-on, drop-in, or bolt-on to a standard or existing AR. What this means is that whatever parts were used to manufacture the host gun are still present in the piston gun, and may be us suspect quality. Even if a piston-operated AR-pattern rifle is the best thing ever, if the rest of the parts in the gun are suspect then it really doesn't matter much. To be sure, it is possible to exceed the standards that the US Government uses in procuring their rifles and carbines, and many of those standards don't apply to piston-operated guns, but if a given manufacturer can't clearly state what standards they meet and what standards they exceed (and WHY and HOW their gun exceeds those standards) then they should be considered suspect at best.
5) Weight. A piston-operated AR is going to weigh more than a direct impingement gun. A piston and operating rod are heavier than a hollow gas tube. No matter what a maker of a piston gun does to lighten their overall package the same things could be done to a direct impingement gun and it would then be lighter still. The location of the extra weight matters as well, and the fact that it is concentrated over the barrel, and therefore only the support hand, which negatively affects the balance of the rifle or carbine. Even when comparing apples:apples and looking at a piston-operated carbine that shares the same outward appearance of the military M4 (plastic handguards, M4 stock, A2 grip, flattop upper, standard front sight base, etc.) the piston gun will weigh more.
6) Cost. Piston-operated AR-pattern rifles cost more than direct impingement rifles, often giving you a reduced quality of other parts, or parts you don't want, in the process. Even when comparing apples:apples and looking at a piston-operated carbine that shares the same outward appearance of the military M4 (plastic handguards, M4 stock, A2 grip, flattop upper, standard front sight base, etc.) the piston gun will cost more.
??) Why? Much hay is made by the proponents of piston-operated AR-pattern firearms over a test, or series of tests, that the US military conducted pitting piston-operated systems against the standard M4 in which the piston-operated guns ran longer, dirtier, and without (or with less) lube. When I say "longer", I am talking about thousands of rounds. Mike Pannone, a well-known Subject Matter Expert on the AR system, conducted a test where he ran a BCM M4-pattern carbine for 2,400 rounds without lube and without cleaning. Just think of how long it could run with a regular application of lube. Pat Rogers has direct impingement guns from Colt and BCM that he has run for tens of thousands of rounds without cleaning and with only a regular application of lube. If a direct impingement gun can be run this way then what, exactly, is the benefit of the gas piston system? What is it accomplishing given all that it gives up?
Now, I'll admit to a bias. I've been successfully, and reliably, running direct impingement AR-pattern carbines for a decade. I routinely run these guns for over a thousand rounds of cheap, low-quality, dirty, steel cased Wolf ammunition. I most often wind up cleaning them out of boredom or curiosity more than any need to due to malfunctions or stoppages. Given that, and all of the above, I am reluctant to mess with success. I don't begrudge anyone their use of a piston-operated AR-pattern rifle or carbine, I just don't see any reason to pay more money for a heavier gun with a new set of reliability and wear problems and which may have a part fail that is difficult (if not impossible) to replace. But I am not a safe-stuffer, I am not a collector, and I lost that "gee wow" feeling when looking at a new gun a long time ago. Whatever is left lingering of that feeling is pretty easily managed by gun shows and other shooters I encounter on the range.
All my ars are di, but I will admit I think piston is better. I honestly just refuse to pay 2 grand for an ar though. When pistons come down, I am going all in!
Which companies are currently maufacturing piston guns ? I believe Ruger's AR is piston driven, any others ?
Opinions on the Ruger ?
D.W.
I currently have an Adams Arms Piston system w/ Adams Arms one piece carrier and a DI "truck gun". I had the Adams Arms guns built for me, carrier tilt was starting until I got the one piece carrier, no signs of it now. Both systems are good, but when it comes to cleaning, the piston is cleaner in the upper area, not in the rail area and runs almost cold, compared to the DI. The DI gun gets hot in the upper area. The DI gun needs more lube at the range than the Adams Arms one. I find cleaning the bolt on the DI is alot tougher. Weight is very close depending on what else you add to your guns (optics,lights, and other add ons). Both have very few problems with each having 5k to 10k rds fired. I would trust my life to either rifle at this point. Both are good, but do you need a piston? No. If you want it, go for it. I did and I'm happy with both rifles.
The biggest advantage to a piston gun is that it requires less cleaning.
How much trouble is it to wipe down a bolt and carrier?
A BCM 14.5" DI gun was torture tested with no lube and ran for over 2,000 rounds.
Which companies are currently maufacturing piston guns ? I believe Ruger's AR is piston driven, any others ?
Opinions on the Ruger ?
D.W.
Google Ruger SR-556 carrier tilt
Which companies are currently maufacturing piston guns ? I believe Ruger's AR is piston driven, any others ?
Opinions on the Ruger ?
D.W.
The following companies are established in piston AR market and do not offer DI guns: HK416/MR223 (not yet available to US civilian market), LWRCI, and POF. All of these are acceptable quality for a class. The HK platform has done well in military circles. Pat Rogers did a good chronicle of the LWRCI M6 platform about a year ago. I'm not familiar with any high round-count testing of the POF.
The following companies offer piston variations: LMT (MRP), Adam Arms, Bushmaster, Spikes Tactical. I'd only be comfortable with one or two of these in a class...
The Rugar offering is a relatively new player. I'd stick to one of the big 3 based on initial reports on this system.
FYI, I did not invest in piston platforms (all suppressed SBR) until I had a solid stable of DI guns with plenty of spare parts.
If you are shooting a short barreled gun with a suppressor, a piston will alleviate excessive fouling of the FCG, mag, and bolt over long strings of fire.
Here.
I'd say they're worth it if you're doing any 2 of the folowing 3 things: SBR, full-auto, running a can.
If you're not doing any 2 of the 3, you're spending 30- 60% more for a gun that doesn't do anything a DI gun can't do just as well.
Im sorry but unless you're running a suppressed SBR you have no right to even reference how "dirty" your AR gets.
Unless you're dropping the thing in mud or LIVING in the freaking desert and firing thousands upon thousands of rounds lubing the gun will keep it running for an amazing amount of rounds.
IF you're properly lubing cleanup is an absolute breeze. Simply strip the carrier, wipe it down, relube. Run a boresnake down the barrel, clean your chamber with a chamber brush if you want, reassemble and shoot some more.
Excessive cleaning came about for two reasons.
1. Indoctrination in the military saying that your weapon must be tip top, spit polished at all times (this is not necessarily a bad thing).
2. Anal retentive couch commandos that have never pushed their weapon system to see what it can do. They buy into whatever is pushed in front of them and stick to it like its their last bastion of hope.
Im an anal retentive couch commando but i have the luxury of NOT having my life on the line when i go to the range, therefor i can push my equipment and myself to failure.
Y'know, not for nothing but we civis are a lazy ass bunch. Like i said before we have the luxury of NOT being in harms way. If our shit breaks, it breaks, we step off of the firing line and fix it. For all of the information out there on the vast interweb, 99% of it is worthless. Such a shame, i wish more people were contributing FACTUAL information based upon their findings such as 87GN and Rob_S.
These kind of debates are all but worthless. If you want a piston, buy one, just dont come on here and tout how it fires LAV guided laserbeams and Costas flechette beard hairs.
*Note, no offense intended to the original poster as he was merely seeking to educate himself on a potential purchase but these threads come up far too often. Thankfully they're relatively cordial on M4C as we seem to have far fewer fanatical cultists on these forums than some others...
this comes up often enough that I've been chipping away at an article for my website. Here it is in it's current form.
Great points....and I agree with them all. Why no mention of accuracy in it though?
Im sorry but unless you're running a suppressed SBR you have no right to even reference how "dirty" your AR gets.
Unless you're dropping the thing in mud or LIVING in the freaking desert and firing thousands upon thousands of rounds lubing the gun will keep it running for an amazing amount of rounds.
IF you're properly lubing cleanup is an absolute breeze. Simply strip the carrier, wipe it down, relube. Run a boresnake down the barrel, clean your chamber with a chamber brush if you want, reassemble and shoot some more.
Excessive cleaning came about for two reasons.
1. Indoctrination in the military saying that your weapon must be tip top, spit polished at all times (this is not necessarily a bad thing).
I agre with everything here except the excessive cleaning not being bad.
I dont find keeping an AR functionaly clean to be a hard task at all. it only takes a few minutes to wipe everything down and lube. Thats how we cleaned our rifles in the field and in the sandbox when I was in.
But when we got back to the barracks the 1st Sgt wanted the rifles to be SPOTLESS. You couldnt keep oil on them when you turned it in, because the oil would pull out microscopic amounts of carbon and turn blackish and the 1st Sgt would say its dirty.
So most soldiers would scrape the shit out of the internals of their rifles and then make sure it was dry as a bone before turning them in. We would literally spend days cleaning weapons before turn in.
RogerinTPA
05-20-10, 18:34
IMHO no they are not.
Most would be better off getting some info on knowing how to keep their DI AR running reliably. I rarely clean mine, just lube and shoot.... and only after 3-4K rounds fired shooting 10s of thousands of rounds of Wolf and Barnaul over the years, and through Carbean courses, reliably. In a Pat Roger's course, Pat had T&E DI AR's (Bravocompanyusa ARs) well over 10K rounds fired, just lube. My T&E Middy had over 14K rounds and I only lubed it once (very well) during the 3 days with Slip EWL AND shooting Wolf, without any malfunctions. #14 (Filthy 14) had I believe, over 25K+ rounds fired with just lube.
IIRC, the majority of the malfunctions with the M-4 on the dust chamber test, were Mag related. So buy some quality Mags and Lube your AR generously.
Great points....and I agree with them all. Why no mention of accuracy in it though?
Several reasons.
The biggest is that I'm not a benchrest shooter, and so I not only don't CARE about the minute difference that may exist in accuracy between the two I am also unqualified to talk about it.
I also frankly think that many people that talk accuracy issues generally can't hit the broad side of a barn. I've sat at the range and listened to two guys discuss the various merits of this and that only to bring their target back looking like it's been peppered with buckshot not shot with 5.56.
RogerinTPA
05-20-10, 18:45
I agre with everything here except the excessive cleaning not being bad.
I dont find keeping an AR functionaly clean to be a hard task at all. it only takes a few minutes to wipe everything down and lube. Thats how we cleaned our rifles in the field and in the sandbox when I was in.
But when we got back to the barracks the 1st Sgt wanted the rifles to be SPOTLESS. You couldnt keep oil on them when you turned it in, because the oil would pull out microscopic amounts of carbon and turn blackish and the 1st Sgt would say its dirty.
So most soldiers would scrape the shit out of the internals of their rifles and then make sure it was dry as a bone before turning them in. We would literally spend days cleaning weapons before turn in.
I hear you...been there done that .....but, Excessive Boot camp/parade inspection cleaning has worn out more weapons and caused more damage, than the actual usage of the firearm.
RogerinTPA
05-20-10, 18:53
Great points....and I agree with them all. Why no mention of accuracy in it though?
Most weapons are more accurate that the owner. If this was a competition forum, MOA would be all the rage and not cleaning would be sacrilegious. You'd be very surprised at how many military shooting teams, that don't clean their match grade weapons, until after the shooting season and well after thousands of rounds fired. A fouled barrel allows you to track your shots and provides consistency in shot placement. If you clean it, you just screwed your zero and range book.
The only logical reason to go with a piston AR is if your running a SBR suppressed. Even then it isn't a big deal. There is absolutely no benefit otherwise, and a plethora of negatives. People just love the snake oil though :rolleyes:
This may sound ridiculous to some, but I just can't get past the fact that Gene Stoner didn't design it that way. The piston system has been around forever, and yet here we are all shooting various brands of the same rifle. The inherent design has survived this long and proven itself. It's hard to beat this track record.:)
I'm with everyone that says that DI is the way to go still. Unless piston prices drop to almost DI levels, I don't see the need. Ofcourse, most people spend money according to their feelings and emotions so the level of need is less of a factor. For me, a no nonsense DI is just fine. Especially since I'm not using it for battle. Like Clint Smith once said, the most he's ever heard of someone shooting through their rifle during battle was less than 20 mags during a period of over an hour. I don't think my 10/22 will have a problem shooting 600 rounds over the course of an hour.
Some DI torture tests.
Myth of “Fouling caused by the direct impingement gas system makes the M4 Carbine unreliable.”
http://www.defensereview.com/the-big-m4-myth-fouling-caused-by-the-direct-impingement-gas-system-makes-the-m4-unreliable/
Bolt lug cracks at 16,400 rounds. Replaced and continued until 3 FTE at 26,450. That's when they decided to clean it.
http://www.03designgroup.com/reviews/bcm-complete-ar15-upper-and-lower-receivers
Especially for a civilian firing semi auto, no suppressor, I say no.
I've been shooting DI AR's since 1988 and IMHO if the gun is put together well, with high quality parts, (see "THE LIST"), it will run very well. Back in the late 80's I even ran a Colt A2 HBAR slab slide with not much lube at all (since I didn't know any better) and shot thousands of Malaysian surplus M193's (actually that ammo was alright) through that gun, and I don't ever remember a malfunction. I would clean it every 500 rounds or so, but like I said, I used almost no lube, and cleaned it only cause I thought I should, it didn't start running sluggish or anything even during extended fire in the hot CA desert.
It seems to me that without the proper bolt carrier and internal rail design, an operating rod/piston design was not meant to be used in the AR system, hence the carrier tilt issues. So to me a piston AR seems more of a novelty. If you want a piston/operating rod system I thing you'd be better served by going with a design that is based around that system to begin with, the SCAR, ACR, Sig556, etc., and stick to DI in the AR as that's how it was designed to work. And like the other more knowledgeable guys have already said, keep the gun well lubed, and it should go at least 1000-2000 rounds, and probably a whole lot more, between failures. That's plenty!
Also here are some interesting dust tests:
AR closed dust cover http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dipghcp929I&feature=related
AR open dust cover http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8SSQ_wIG4o
And a shocking AK dust test
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lo5WhVvtYak&feature=player_profilepage#
The Dumb Gun Collector
05-20-10, 21:50
Rob S,
"I also frankly think that many people that talk accuracy issues generally can't hit the broad side of a barn. I've sat at the range and listened to two guys discuss the various merits of this and that only to bring their target back looking like it's been peppered with buckshot not shot with 5.56."
Here here. I have been lectured to death by douchebags who have all kinds of crazy rifles and the latest doo-dads--only to hear them make excuses after the shooting starts.
Would you pay someone $300 to partially clean your AR for its service life, and accept that their cleaning method increased recoil?
I just honestly don't see the value in Gas piston guns.
I'm not saying that to say "mine is better".
But a lot of people look at the tests runs by the Government and miss a large part of it, the "infamous" test, was run in Sand Storm Conditions.
Between rob citing of an DI gun running what 2,000+ rounds completely dry, and pat roger's running a gun only lubed 25,000+ Rounds (and parts breakage, wore out a BCG or two if I'm not mistaken) without cleaning.
I just don't see the value or purpose.
I'm finishing a DI BCM Midlength AR, and I'll tell you, I have no regrets.
I've only put a hundred or so rounds through it, I really want to get a 600-800, probably a thousand through it before I get too opinionated on it.
I think I'll steal a term, I think gas piston systems work great.
I just think it's frankengun in AR-15's though.
Just my opinion.
I was a proponent for them before I learned much about AR's.
Guys - have done the piston thing for 3 years and the DI thing 25 years with mean green. Honestly like many others, this DI vs Piston thing is crap. I fire lots of Class3 and clearly, full auto with silencer on a short barrel is where a piston rules IMHO. You take this to an extreme, and yes, pistons would win out on the curvel of life and reliabilty. F'ck the crap about the cost of a gas tube vs never need that extreme condition, etc.
At current age, I really like the DI for rifle courses, but pistons for carbine courses. It says something like Carlos says about not having to clean from a perfomance perspective. Yea, yea lube a lot and no problems, but yes, problems will arise even in an AK.
Let the doubters refuse to accept the future and the SCAR will surely be our future - think about it.
latching on to this a bit.
Do you guys all agree it's false economy to buy a piston conversion kit just to shoot cheap steel cased ammo as much as possible for training?
Magic_Salad0892
05-21-10, 02:38
I think piston guns are worth it. But they are a different set of problems, and virtues.
They don't remedy anything, they just replace problems.
You'll be fine with a DI gun. I'll stick to my pistons. They worked in the past, they'll work now. All the anti-piston talk is mostly ill-founded. As is the piston pushing.
Shoot both, do your research, pick which one you like more.
For me: The answer is obvious. I'll chose my op-rod over the gas tube.
Recommended options:
Piston - LWRCi, or LMT.
DI - KAC, or Noveske.
ETA: The ''next-gen'' carbines, are obsolete by design. IMHO. Don't even consider them.
If anybody disagrees, PM me. I don't want to curve the thread.
latching on to this a bit.
Do you guys all agree it's false economy to buy a piston conversion kit just to shoot cheap steel cased ammo as much as possible for training?
Why would you buy a piston to shoot steel-cased ammo? The piston guns I've seen have had more trouble with steel-cased ammo than my DI guns.
Let the doubters refuse to accept the future and the SCAR will surely be our future - think about it.
The SCAR is not a piston-operated AR (neither is an AK, which is another fallacious argument brought up by many piston supporters).
I don't personally like the SCAR from the 200 rounds or so I put through it, and I'm not a fan of the ACR for a variety of reasons, but at least those platforms bring more to the table than shoving an ill-advised after-thought of an operating system into a firearm that works quite well as-designed without any regard to the ramifications and with no discernible benefits.
Wait... Operating rods are "new" and "the future?"
Huh. I thought Op rods were "old tech".
Waffenfabric
05-21-10, 08:14
It is true that some of the most reliable systems use/used this system. I'm not sure there is anything new and revolutionary, about the piston system. I think it was "reborn" in part because of problems in desert sand with DI system.
What I can say from real experiance is this: I've been to a couple of carbine training classes and out of 10-12 guys with AR's at least 3 start having trouble after they get dirty and have a high round count. Most AR owners, (including myself) don't normally run their guns hard and get mud and other crud in them. It is a pretty big $$ investment for most working people so we baby them.
In the last class there were several guys, including 1 with a colt who started having issues. We were instructed to NOT clean our weapons after the 1st Saturday. I guess I cheated a little; I did not clean the gun, but I had a spare bolt/carrier that I slapped in my gun that night. Mine ran good.
My main point is this: Yes the di guns will run with "normal" civilian/police type use. In other words under good conditions.
The military and some govt agencies have been looking into piston guns for a while. The Dea for example use an lwrc piston gun, and are very happy with it.
Most of us fight change, including myself. Iremember 10-12 years ago I never thought I'd be using a polymer frame handgun. I never thought lasergrips would be anything but a gimmic, same thing with red dot optics. Technology usually evolves out of looking for a better mouse trap. Most anything can be improved on, and if the piston is better I hope our troops get them soon./For me, I want the best carbine I can get, just in case---.
I do know that when new things come out they usually have bugs to be worked out. I'm going for a piston gun this weekend but keeping my di gun just in case, the piston turns out bad.
Thanks guys for the input...
It is true that some of the most reliable systems use/used this system. I'm not sure there is anything new and revolutionary, about the piston system. I think it was "reborn" in part because of problems in desert sand with DI system.
What I can say from real experiance is this: I've been to a couple of carbine training classes and out of 10-12 guys with AR's at least 3 start having trouble after they get dirty and have a high round count. Most AR owners, (including myself) don't normally run their guns hard and get mud and other crud in them. It is a pretty big $$ investment for most working people so we baby them.
In the last class there were several guys, including 1 with a colt who started having issues. We were instructed to NOT clean our weapons after the 1st Saturday. I guess I cheated a little; I did not clean the gun, but I had a spare bolt/carrier that I slapped in my gun that night. Mine ran good.
My main point is this: Yes the di guns will run with "normal" civilian/police type use. In other words under good conditions.
The military and some govt agencies have been looking into piston guns for a while. The Dea for example use an lwrc piston gun, and are very happy with it.
Most of us fight change, including myself. Iremember 10-12 years ago I never thought I'd be using a polymer frame handgun. I never thought lasergrips would be anything but a gimmic, same thing with red dot optics. Technology usually evolves out of looking for a better mouse trap. Most anything can be improved on, and if the piston is better I hope our troops get them soon./For me, I want the best carbine I can get, just in case---.
I do know that when new things come out they usually have bugs to be worked out. I'm going for a piston gun this weekend but keeping my di gun just in case, the piston turns out bad.
Thanks guys for the input...
Were the guns properly maintained otherwise, mainly lubrication? There are people out there running DI guns through cases of ammo without cleaning, just keeping them wet, without issue.
It is true that some of the most reliable systems use/used this system. I'm not sure there is anything new and revolutionary, about the piston system. I think it was "reborn" in part because of problems in desert sand with DI system.
What I can say from real experiance is this: I've been to a couple of carbine training classes and out of 10-12 guys with AR's at least 3 start having trouble after they get dirty and have a high round count. Most AR owners, (including myself) don't normally run their guns hard and get mud and other crud in them. It is a pretty big $$ investment for most working people so we baby them.
In the last class there were several guys, including 1 with a colt who started having issues. We were instructed to NOT clean our weapons after the 1st Saturday. I guess I cheated a little; I did not clean the gun, but I had a spare bolt/carrier that I slapped in my gun that night. Mine ran good.
My main point is this: Yes the di guns will run with "normal" civilian/police type use. In other words under good conditions.
The military and some govt agencies have been looking into piston guns for a while. The Dea for example use an lwrc piston gun, and are very happy with it.
Most of us fight change, including myself. Iremember 10-12 years ago I never thought I'd be using a polymer frame handgun. I never thought lasergrips would be anything but a gimmic, same thing with red dot optics. Technology usually evolves out of looking for a better mouse trap. Most anything can be improved on, and if the piston is better I hope our troops get them soon. For me, I want the best carbine I can get, just in case---.
I do know that when new things come out they usually have bugs to be worked out. I'm going for a piston gun this weekend but keeping my di gun just in case, the piston turns out bad.
Thanks guys for the input...
^ This. I recall first seeing an ad for the Glock Model 17 in Road & Track (!!) magazine and thinking to myself, "Who in the Hell would buy that?" No less a SME than Jeff Cooper went to his grave disparaging the Glock pistol (and just about every other firearm development since, say, 1958).
And let's not forget the woodstock versus polymer controversy; the .45 ACP versus 9 mm low intensity warfare as well as the Effectiveness of the 5.56 Debate. Props versus Turbines. Mechanical versus Electrical. It's the way of the world. Move forward. If you wish to keep your DIs you're not at all alone - it has a cottage industry supporting it and, guess what? It still works! So you'll be fine.
What confounds me is the "it's not a great leap forward" comments. NOTHING rarely is! Most development is incremental. We will accept what the Industry develops and we will use it - or we won't. There will always be additions to the fold and those who don't move with the flow (even at a greatly reduced pace) will find themselves left behind.
I'm having a hard time reconciling the first post here
I'm new to this forum, so if this topic has been done to death, please redirect me.
The piston guns seem to be gearing up to flood the AR market, at least as ads tell it. My question is::Have the piston AR's been around long enough to say they are "better" than top of the line DI type guns?
I know with the di guns they need lube, and reasonable cleaning, but if for some reason that was not practicle/possable, is that where the piston guns would be a major advantage?
For compairision; say Noveske, or DD vs LWRC or LMT.
with the post above here
It is true that some of the most reliable systems use/used this system. I'm not sure there is anything new and revolutionary, about the piston system. I think it was "reborn" in part because of problems in desert sand with DI system.
What I can say from real experiance is this: I've been to a couple of carbine training classes and out of 10-12 guys with AR's at least 3 start having trouble after they get dirty and have a high round count. Most AR owners, (including myself) don't normally run their guns hard and get mud and other crud in them. It is a pretty big $$ investment for most working people so we baby them.
In the last class there were several guys, including 1 with a colt who started having issues. We were instructed to NOT clean our weapons after the 1st Saturday. I guess I cheated a little; I did not clean the gun, but I had a spare bolt/carrier that I slapped in my gun that night. Mine ran good.
My main point is this: Yes the di guns will run with "normal" civilian/police type use. In other words under good conditions.
The military and some govt agencies have been looking into piston guns for a while. The Dea for example use an lwrc piston gun, and are very happy with it.
Most of us fight change, including myself. Iremember 10-12 years ago I never thought I'd be using a polymer frame handgun. I never thought lasergrips would be anything but a gimmic, same thing with red dot optics. Technology usually evolves out of looking for a better mouse trap. Most anything can be improved on, and if the piston is better I hope our troops get them soon./For me, I want the best carbine I can get, just in case---.
I do know that when new things come out they usually have bugs to be worked out. I'm going for a piston gun this weekend but keeping my di gun just in case, the piston turns out bad.
Thanks guys for the input...
It sounds to me like you already had your mind made up?
It is true that some of the most reliable systems use/used this system. I'm not sure there is anything new and revolutionary, about the piston system. I think it was "reborn" in part because of problems in desert sand with DI system.
What I can say from real experiance is this: I've been to a couple of carbine training classes and out of 10-12 guys with AR's at least 3 start having trouble after they get dirty and have a high round count. Most AR owners, (including myself) don't normally run their guns hard and get mud and other crud in them. It is a pretty big $$ investment for most working people so we baby them.
In the last class there were several guys, including 1 with a colt who started having issues. We were instructed to NOT clean our weapons after the 1st Saturday. I guess I cheated a little; I did not clean the gun, but I had a spare bolt/carrier that I slapped in my gun that night. Mine ran good.
My main point is this: Yes the di guns will run with "normal" civilian/police type use. In other words under good conditions.
The military and some govt agencies have been looking into piston guns for a while. The Dea for example use an lwrc piston gun, and are very happy with it.
Most of us fight change, including myself. Iremember 10-12 years ago I never thought I'd be using a polymer frame handgun. I never thought lasergrips would be anything but a gimmic, same thing with red dot optics. Technology usually evolves out of looking for a better mouse trap. Most anything can be improved on, and if the piston is better I hope our troops get them soon./For me, I want the best carbine I can get, just in case---.
I do know that when new things come out they usually have bugs to be worked out. I'm going for a piston gun this weekend but keeping my di gun just in case, the piston turns out bad.
Thanks guys for the input...
I offered a sample of 1 to be sure, but have you seen the videos I linked? I think that a quality DI AR can be "surprisingly" reliable even in an extreme environment. Like the others have said, if you are a Special Ops guy running a SBR with a suppressor and laying down beaucoup heavy automatic fire, then yeah an op rod/piston design is the way to go, but even then, IMHO, an AR with that system is an inferior stop gap to a design that has been inherently created around such a system to begin with, for very obvious reasons.
The military may be going to a non DI system, for some very good reasons, but also for very good reasons, it will most probably not be an "op rod stuck into an AR" design, unless they change the configuration of the receiver and bolt carrier, etc., and then one might as well go with a fundamentally completely new rifle/upper.
p.s. just read rob's article on page 2, and it pretty much says everything that needs to be said IMHO
p.s.II - and just to be clear I think that non DI/piston-op rod/piston-non op rod-lengthened bolt carrier designs ala the SCAR, etc. are great, I just think that you need a rifle/upper built around that system to begin with.
Failure2Stop
05-21-10, 10:02
OP-
The piston op AR had nothing to do with sand, and everything to do with long strings of suppressed fire with a short barrel on an AR lower.
RE- buying piston this weekend:
So you are the guy that just wants a piston AR, but had to bring it up here, and despite all the evidence and experience, learned nothing.
Thank you for wasting our collective time.
Since the OP has made a decision, and there being plenty of threads on the topic, I am shutting this one down.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.