Originally Posted by
Miale
wow, a discussion of piston and direct impingement systems that hasn't decayed into name calling and trolling!
i have both types, and the main reason for getting a piston set up was that i hate the gas from the impingement system blowing back into my face. i brought an m6a2 and while it is a good weapon, the balance feels off, the rail system is too wide, it's heavy and it recoils more than my di rifles.
i keep going back to my 6920 and increasingly my e3. both deliver better accuracy, both are lighter and to be honest, by the time you get the rail covers off the m6a2, they all take about the same amount of time to clean.
i do take on board the substantial price penalty you are expected to pay to join the piston club.
i don't however subscribe to the argument leveled at piston guns that there is no common operating system, rather i regard them as different weapons combining the excellent ergonomics of the ar platform, much like you would compare a sig 556 to an ar for example. i've seen no evidence of carrier tilt on the m6a2 and certainly no bolt wear. in point of fact, as the bolt is stabilized in the barrel extension by chamber pressure and as the fit between the bolt and carrier is sloppy, i find no evidence of bolt tilt. if hk416 bolts are getting to 12k in heavy use, that's at least double what you would expect from an impingement m4 in the same situation.
for me it's like a gas or diesel truck, both get you where you need to go, they just go about it in a different way.
now what would be really cool would be a light-weight, well balanced, piston driven rifle with no cost penalty, less recoil and narrower rail system. could that be the mrp - almost.