Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Posted: 8/6/2007 4:26:12 PM EDT
I just built my own AR-15. Understanding a lot of the issues with the weapon, I'd like to iron them out:

First, I'd like to know if there is a way to upgrade the AR-15 (without buying a different upper) to being a gas piston rifle. I don't care about modifying my upper because I am a machinist, but if it is out there I want it.

Second, I have a A3 (flattop) upper and would like to know if anyone can point me in the direction of a good and affordable sighting system, specifically red dot for a carbine rifle.

Thanks,

Boo-diggy Boo.
Link Posted: 8/6/2007 5:12:53 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/6/2007 5:13:36 PM EDT by avatarhammer]
Try the ARES GSR 35. Got mine from Denny:

www.globaltactical.com/


But you need to wait 'til there back in stock. I think it's PKfirearms that also sells them in the Equipment Exchange, too.

Link Posted: 8/6/2007 10:11:35 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Kampfzentrum:
I just built my own AR-15. Understanding a lot of the issues with the weapon, I'd like to iron them out:

First, I'd like to know if there is a way to upgrade the AR-15 (without buying a different upper) to being a gas piston rifle. I don't care about modifying my upper because I am a machinist, but if it is out there I want it.

Second, I have a A3 (flattop) upper and would like to know if anyone can point me in the direction of a good and affordable sighting system, specifically red dot for a carbine rifle.

Thanks,

Boo-diggy Boo.


I doubt you "understand a lot of the issues with the weapon" if you think you need a gas piston upper.

It's your money, just don't try to perpetuate stereotypes on this forum and expect someone not to comment critically on it.
Link Posted: 8/7/2007 3:14:08 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/7/2007 6:28:44 AM EDT by Paul]
[Personal attack removed - IM sent - Paul]
Link Posted: 8/7/2007 3:44:03 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/7/2007 6:29:20 AM EDT by Paul]

Originally Posted By Kampfzentrum:
[personal attack removed - Paul]


Wow.....

I had a few tips for you. But i just forgot them all.

You'll catch more flies with honey....
Link Posted: 8/7/2007 6:03:41 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/7/2007 6:04:37 AM EDT by FrenchKat]
Give the man a break.

He posts a couple of questions and "experts" jump on him with smart ass remarks.

Just because he just completed his 1st build doesn't make him an idiot.

4-2 Cav
Link Posted: 8/7/2007 6:16:29 AM EDT
Actually, his "know it all" attitude in his first post sunk him.

The amount of arrogance and ignorance in the phrase "Understanding a lot of the issues with the weapon, I'd like to iron them out" is uncomfortably close to a brand new 2LT telling his platoon that "I know you are all a bunch of fuck-ups, so I'm going to straighten your asses out".

I doubt he spent a lot of time reading posts before he made his own.

In case he (and anyone else) is so dense as to not "get" what is so offensive about his question, here it is spelled out:

"There are NOT a lot of issues with the AR15 platform. The gas piston is NOT necessarily an improvement."

There was a time I really wondered why people could get so "short" on this board. Now I understand.
Link Posted: 8/7/2007 6:28:55 AM EDT
"upgrade" is a misnomer.

Ares manufactures conversions.
Link Posted: 8/7/2007 8:37:20 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/7/2007 8:39:07 AM EDT by CBR900]

Originally Posted By 3-4CAV:
Actually, his "know it all" attitude in his first post sunk him.

The amount of arrogance and ignorance in the phrase "Understanding a lot of the issues with the weapon, I'd like to iron them out" is uncomfortably close to a brand new 2LT telling his platoon that "I know you are all a bunch of fuck-ups, so I'm going to straighten your asses out".


Hahahaha - reminds me of: "I am the only one in this room prefessional enough to carry the Glock forty"

On another note - why did the OP add German letters & a word to his post? What am I missing? Nothing against Germans - I am married to one - just wondering.

And there is a post by another machinist who made his own gas piston upper - he was even good enough to post pics and I think it was really inovative of him to design & build one at home (thanks for the post).
Link Posted: 8/8/2007 2:51:02 AM EDT
I think he was trying to show us how "cool" he was. Another strike against him.

Poo-Twiggy-Poo!
Link Posted: 8/8/2007 3:06:19 AM EDT

Originally Posted By CBR900:

On another note - why did the OP add German letters & a word to his post? What am I missing? Nothing against Germans - I am married to one - just wondering.


Swearing in titles is verbotten. (see? I used a german word too. I'm cool!)

So, being the sly devil that he thinks he is, he used "Scheiße". Still technically a violation of rules.

a swing....and.... a miss!
Link Posted: 8/8/2007 8:21:28 AM EDT

Originally Posted By NAM:

Originally Posted By CBR900:

On another note - why did the OP add German letters & a word to his post? What am I missing? Nothing against Germans - I am married to one - just wondering.


Swearing in titles is verbotten. (see? I used a german word too. I'm cool!)

So, being the sly devil that he thinks he is, he used "Scheiße". Still technically a violation of rules.

a swing....and.... a miss!


Oh - ok. thnks for the explanation.

Too bad about the way this all went down. Because I think the topic of piston driven uppers is cool & I'd like to see more about them in the bild-it-yerself section (but I'll probably get flamed to heck for bringing up piston uppers again).
Link Posted: 8/8/2007 2:41:50 PM EDT

OK, I'll be the first to admit that I don't know a lot about the AR-15, and maybe that initial comment came out wrong (maybe it was also picked apart too critically also); but couldn't the gas return system on the AR be considered a short-coming? I would think so considering the amount to weapons that are starting to phase out the M-16/M-4 (that are piston loaded) that if somebody wanted a truly reliable rifle, this upgrade would be something to look into.

I mean, if I'm wrong I'll admit it. But isn't a piston-loaded AR a bit of a plus in the field of reliability? I don't have a cache of weapons, this thing is all I got. And although it doesn't give me problems now, I hate to wait for a day when it might give me Scheiße (swing and hit). So wouldn't a step in the piston direction be a positive thing? I know this might touch a hair on the heads of those that like their ARs the way they are - like how fellas like their Ford, Chevy, and Dodge trucks - but is this seriously a bad upgrade?

Bo Jangles.
Link Posted: 8/8/2007 2:49:20 PM EDT

Originally Posted By FrenchKat:
Give the man a break.

He posts a couple of questions and "experts" jump on him with smart ass remarks.

Just because he just completed his 1st build doesn't make him an idiot.

4-2 Cav


+1 A lot of people are just spoiling to pick a fight. Go figure.
Link Posted: 8/8/2007 3:04:10 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Kampfzentrum:
OK, I'll be the first to admit that I don't know a lot about the AR-15, and maybe that initial comment came out wrong (maybe it was also picked apart too critically also); but couldn't the gas return system on the AR be considered a short-coming? I would think so considering the amount to weapons that are starting to phase out the M-16/M-4 (that are piston loaded) that if somebody wanted a truly reliable rifle, this upgrade would be something to look into.

I mean, if I'm wrong I'll admit it. But isn't a piston-loaded AR a bit of a plus in the field of reliability? I don't have a cache of weapons, this thing is all I got. And although it doesn't give me problems now, I hate to wait for a day when it might give me Scheiße (swing and hit). So wouldn't a step in the piston direction be a positive thing? I know this might touch a hair on the heads of those that like their ARs the way they are - like how fellas like their Ford, Chevy, and Dodge trucks - but is this seriously a bad upgrade?

Bo Jangles.


you are wrong.

the piston system is a solution looking for a problem. a properly maintained AR will run damn near 100%. It's hard to get "better" reliability when the DI system is virtually 100% reliable.

The piston has more moving parts, so there's more to go wrong.

Yes, it will run cooler, and your rifle will get a little less carbon fouling..but I've found that a little carbon fouling improves the cycling on my M16. YMMV.
Link Posted: 8/8/2007 4:12:01 PM EDT
Can we put this topic to rest. I mean, every rifle has its advantages and disadvantages, for what is worth, I like all rifles becuase it has its own unique characteristic....please don't slam me?
Link Posted: 8/8/2007 7:01:02 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/9/2007 4:51:42 AM EDT by bollox]
I have almost no experience with the AR platform. But I do have questions about the direct gas action used by Stoner in his design. Let me start out by saying that it took a long time for me to reconcile myself to this type of rifle. My first rifle was a Norinco SKS. Reliable, relatively acurate but with a small magazine. I then tried a Maadi AK but was disappointed by accuracy. I was then convinced of the efficacy of the 5.56 mm SS109 by Martin Fackler so decided on the Mini-14. It was actually my intent to gain in accuracy by switching to the Ruger. Those of you familiar with this rifle are likely chuckling now. The results were dismal. What's more, the Mini suffers from very expensive magazine synorome. So finally I have concludede that the only rifle that satisfies my expectations for inexpensive magazines, accuracy, and reliablity is the AR. I have always had reservations about the direct gas action of the AR. Since some of these issues have been broached here, it seems like a good place to ask these questions.

If a little carbon helps things work better, what does alot of carbon do. How many rounds of Wolf (because it is among the dirtiest of ammos as I understand) would it take to foul the receiver enough to induce malfunction?

If the direct gas actions' problems were completely remedied by cleaner ammo, why was the AR 18 designed with an indirect gas action?

Have any weapons designers used a direct gas action in a service rifle since the introduction of the M-16?

I know most of you are partisans to this rifle. I guess I am now by default (recently bought a lower). I would be especially interested in accounts of service members about their experices with the rifle in the field.

Thank you.


Link Posted: 8/8/2007 8:49:15 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/8/2007 8:50:06 PM EDT by 3-4CAV]
Those are good questions, based on bad assumptions. I wouldn't use the word "partisan" to describe many folks on this forum. It's just that so many people, operating from a position of relative ignorance (meant literally, not as a slam) like to come on ARFCOM and "tell it like it is" in the guise of a question. This tends to piss people off.

I'm not an AR15/M16 historian, but I am led to believe from reading numerous other posts that the AR18 was developed as a piston gun because a) there were patent issues and b) it had a completely different mission-/manufacturing-set.

As far as gas systems go, there are lots of folk who criticize DI, but do you know that, especially among the M1/M14 operating system, broken operating rods are a relatively common malfunction? Also, did you know that the relative open operating system of M1/M14 and the vaunted AK series of rifles are LESS reliable under sand/dust conditions? (the action fills up with gunk and that's it.)

I've put a bunch of Wolf down the barrel of ARs, and and enormous amount of USGI ball down M16s (I was an ammo handler back in the day, and we'd shoot up excess ammo at the end of the range). A lot of this trigger time was with beat to shit, filthy pieces, and I never experienced a serious malfunction.

On the other hand, I've seen AKs blow up, I've seen M1s that wouldn't run, and a surprising number of bolt action malfunctions that were not correctable outside of a full-service armorer's shop.

While I haven't answered all your questions, I would suggest that you could FIND the answers on this forum, or in books, and most answers in life, you have to earn. Do some research.
Link Posted: 8/9/2007 7:29:44 AM EDT
I think is all come doen to personal preference. If you want to compare rifles to see which one you would buy, just make yourself a data sheet consists all the rifles that you might consider. Somthing like this.... give it a number from 1-10 last 3 column and total it up

Rifle Reliability Accuracy Ergonomic Total
----- ----------- --------- ----------- -------
AR-15 8 10 10 28
AK-47 10 7 7 24

Total 18 17 17

This not scientific, but at lest give you some ideas which rifle you would prefer to buy.
Link Posted: 8/9/2007 8:43:33 AM EDT
3-4 CAV:
height=8
As far as gas systems go, there are lots of folk who criticize DI, but do you know that, especially among the M1/M14 operating system, broken operating rods are a relatively common malfunction? Also, did you know that the relative open operating system of M1/M14 and the vaunted AK series of rifles are LESS reliable under sand/dust conditions? (the action fills up with gunk and that's it.)


The M1 operating rod failures I am somewhat aware of. The 7.62 NATO and 30-06 calibers are not the 5.56 NATO. Assualt rifles (short cartridge) with indirect gas actions are not prone to such failures. I am intrigued by your claims about the AK series in desert/ dust conditions. Is this due to the more open receivers. Does the dust accumulate in the gas action or in the reciever. I have heard that soldiers using AK's in the desert generally keep them dry (no lube) to prevent the accumulation of dust in the weapons. Also, AK gas actions are designed with reliefs in the cylinders to allow a place for gunk to go. I thought this helped prevent malfunctions. Can you link to any artricles? I would be interested to read about such limitations. It will make me feel better about my current committment to the AR platform.
Link Posted: 8/9/2007 9:14:20 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/9/2007 9:16:37 AM EDT by CBR900]

Originally Posted By bollox:
3-4 CAV:

As far as gas systems go, there are lots of folk who criticize DI, but do you know that, especially among the M1/M14 operating system, broken operating rods are a relatively common malfunction? Also, did you know that the relative open operating system of M1/M14 and the vaunted AK series of rifles are LESS reliable under sand/dust conditions? (the action fills up with gunk and that's it.)


The M1 operating rod failures I am somewhat aware of. The 7.62 NATO and 30-06 calibers are not the 5.56 NATO. Assualt rifles (short cartridge) with indirect gas actions are not prone to such failures. I am intrigued by your claims about the AK series in desert/ dust conditions. Is this due to the more open receivers. Does the dust accumulate in the gas action or in the reciever. I have heard that soldiers using AK's in the desert generally keep them dry (no lube) to prevent the accumulation of dust in the weapons. Also, AK gas actions are designed with reliefs in the cylinders to allow a place for gunk to go. I thought this helped prevent malfunctions. Can you link to any artricles? I would be interested to read about such limitations. It will make me feel better about my current committment to the AR platform.


Good Q.s. BTW - IMI can build whatever system it wants and they have tons of experience actually fighting w/ 5.56x45mm chambered rifles and carbines - in desert conditions. The selected, tested, and the IDF adopted a weapon with a gas piston system like the AK-47 and their Galil (Tavor). BTW, I put a Galil carrier w/ US piston in my AK-47 (SLR-95) - its a direct replacement; the Galil IS an AK variant.

Why did they choose piston over DI?

Do they think a piston system is better than the AR gas impingement system they have taken into combat for decades?

I am only asking about the Israelis & why they would do this.

Link Posted: 8/9/2007 9:21:24 AM EDT
The Israelis rarely fielded the Galils. Look through pics and you will see mostly m16 derivatives.

They sold Galils to Africa and Latin America as exports and under license for manufacture.
Link Posted: 8/9/2007 10:34:38 AM EDT

Originally Posted By uxb:
The Israelis rarely fielded the Galils. Look through pics and you will see mostly m16 derivatives.

They sold Galils to Africa and Latin America as exports and under license for manufacture.


RE Galil: I am aware of that; I've been there & only saw them at roadblocks & carried to training by reserve troops.

Reason they told me they preferred the AR? - lighter weight to carry around.

But my Q is about the NEW Tavor 5.56mm rifle. Its light weight. It uses a piston.

Why?
Link Posted: 8/9/2007 10:44:12 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Kampfzentrum:
I would think so considering the amount to weapons that are starting to phase out the M-16/M-4 (that are piston loaded) that if somebody wanted a truly reliable rifle, this upgrade would be something to look into.

Bo Jangles.


The M16/M4 is not being phased out.
Link Posted: 8/9/2007 11:45:23 AM EDT
I like all rifles for recreational shooting, but If I were to pick one rifle to go to war with, it would be an AK-47 base rifle.

Generally, piston driven rifles are way more reliable in any condition than DI rifles.
Link Posted: 8/9/2007 2:19:28 PM EDT

Originally Posted By devildog1122:
I like all rifles for recreational shooting, but If I were to pick one rifle to go to war with, it would be an AK-47 base rifle.

Generally, piston driven rifles are way more reliable in any condition than DI rifles.


Link Posted: 8/9/2007 4:31:31 PM EDT

Originally Posted By devildog1122:
I like all rifles for recreational shooting, but If I were to pick one rifle to go to war with, it would be an AK-47 base rifle.

Generally, piston driven rifles are way more reliable in any condition than DI rifles.



This oughta be interesting
Link Posted: 8/9/2007 10:28:18 PM EDT
My "search-fu" on this site is weak. Has someone else saved a link to Coldblue's thread on M16 reliability trials and especially the dust/sand torture test? Coldblue, who occasionally posts on this forum, is a retired marine officer who conducted the M16E1 tests back in the '80s.

Bottom line: The AK, M1 etc, don't do as well in dust/sand, because their actions are too open, and therefore they fill with gunk. Caveat: In order for the AR/M16 to be reliable, it needs to have a magazine in the well, a round in the chamber (or a "shoot-thru" dust cap on the muzzle) and the dust cover closed. AND the bolt assembly well lubricated.

Realize that we are not talking about "Omega-Man" reliability, here. We are talking about practical field reliability. The AR/M16 series doesn't have problems that are relevant to realistic conditions. Provided that you aren't an idiot, the AR/M16 "issues" just aren't.

Link Posted: 8/10/2007 4:05:31 AM EDT
I respect your opinion, but I think you're mistake about The AK don't do as well in dust/sand, because their actions are too open. The AKs have dust cover. Just the oposite, the loose tolerance of the AK action is the heart of reliability in any field condition. On the other hand, AR tight tolerance action will most likely to jam up with sand and dust, provide that one running with ejection port cover open and don't cover the muzzle. I owned several AK variants, and never have any problem or jam with it. Don't give me wrong, I love my AR-15 becuase is great rifle.
Link Posted: 8/10/2007 5:00:46 AM EDT

Originally Posted By devildog1122:
I respect your opinion, but I think you're mistake about The AK don't do as well in dust/sand, because their actions are too open. The AKs have dust cover. Just the oposite, the loose tolerance of the AK action is the heart of reliability in any field condition. On the other hand, AR tight tolerance action will most likely to jam up with sand and dust, provide that one running with ejection port cover open and don't cover the muzzle. I owned several AK variants, and never have any problem or jam with it. Don't give me wrong, I love my AR-15 becuase is great rifle.


Might I ask what experience have you had with both in a desert environment?
Link Posted: 8/10/2007 5:58:17 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/10/2007 6:11:52 AM EDT by devildog1122]
I was in the Marines (devidog) for 8 years. I don't have have any desert experience like Iraq or in the middle east. But, I have trained in sandy environment, like Camp LeJeune, Camp Pendleton. I have countless jam with the M16A2 in rainy, dusty, sandy conditons. If you want to test yourself, just take your AR, with dust cover open and drop it in the sand with the dust cover facing down or leave it in the rain for long period of time and try to shoot it. Now, take the AK, put it on fire, the reason I say put it on fire, becuase the safety on the AK act as a dust cover like the AR. I can almost gaurantee you the AR will jam, but not the AK. I have done this test myself already. Please don't slam me until you have done the test yourself.

Again, I love my AR. Just point out the facts between the two base on my experience.
Link Posted: 8/10/2007 6:15:20 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/10/2007 6:16:06 AM EDT by DM1975]

Originally Posted By devildog1122:
I was in the Marines (devidog) for 8 years. I don't have have any desert experience like Iraq or in the middle east. But, I have trained in sandy environment, like Camp LeJeune, Camp Pendleton. I have countless jam with the M16A2 in rainy, dusty, sandy conditons. If you want to test yourself, just take your AR, with dust cover open and drop it in the sand with the dust cover facing down or leave it in the rain for long period of time and try to shoot it. Now, take the AK, put it on fire, the reason I say put it on fire, becuase the safety on the AK act as a dust cover like the AR. I can almost gaurantee you the AR will jam, but not the AK. I have done this test myself already. Please don't slam me until you have done the test yourself.

Again, I love my AR. Just point out the facts between the two base on my experience.


12 years in the service myself, I have trained in Camp Pendleton, PTA, Korea, Japan, NTC, Fort Polk, Fort Riley, Fort Hood to name a few. Also spent two years in Iraq in the desert and have used both in combat. I have had two jams in 12 years with my M16/M4 weapon system. One was in Camp Pendleton during weapons phase and one was in Fort Riley. All service has been with the Infantry. I think I have done enough testing of my own
Link Posted: 8/10/2007 6:20:49 AM EDT
Hey DM1975 (Devilog). This is why I think people will have different good/bad experiences with different rifle and we don't have concrete facts to put it in stone. Maybe if someone have the officical document somewhere that a group of people have done the test between the two rifles and post it for enquiring mind wants to know....
Link Posted: 8/10/2007 6:22:38 AM EDT

Originally Posted By devildog1122:
Hey DM1975 (Devilog). This is why I think people will have different good/bad experiences with different rifle and we don't have concrete facts to put it in stone. Maybe if someone have the officical document somewhere that a group of people have done the test between the two rifles and post it for enquiring mind wants to know....


Did you not read the post a few back stating Coldblues tests? He was a big to do in the design of the A2 and I believe the M4 as well.
Link Posted: 8/10/2007 6:25:09 AM EDT
Not to mention the IDF dropping the Galil in favor of the M16/M4
Link Posted: 8/10/2007 6:30:10 AM EDT
I'll just sticking to my experience and happy with my AR and many other rifles in my collection.

I wonder why the Israelis drop the Galil in favor of the M16/M4? Could it be becuase they have close relation with the US? and other interest with the US?
Link Posted: 8/10/2007 6:32:35 AM EDT

Originally Posted By devildog1122:
I'll just sticking to my experience and happy with my AR and many other rifles in my collection.

I wonder why the Israelis drop the Galil in favor of the M16/M4? Could it be becuase they have close relation with the US? and other interest with the US?


As much as they are at war, I think if the Galil would have been truly better then they would have stuck to it. Nothing wrong with having different opinions but I think where most get upset is when people start talking that dribble about the AK being better than the AR and that it is not suited for the desert when the AR is proven to be a very reliable weapon, even in the desert.
Link Posted: 8/10/2007 6:40:22 AM EDT
DM1975, I agreed with you 100%. I'm only speaking from my personal experiece and never want to put any rifle down just becuase of rumors going around. I enjoy shooting all rifles because of the different characterics each one has.

Link Posted: 8/10/2007 6:53:57 AM EDT
I also enjoy shooting my AK as well but my go to is my M4
Link Posted: 8/10/2007 6:59:42 AM EDT
Just curious, where did you go for boot camp? I served from 1992-2000 and went to boot camp at Paris Island.
Link Posted: 8/10/2007 7:09:26 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/10/2007 7:10:09 AM EDT by DM1975]
I was in MCRD San Diego, Plt 2066, series 2065, 2 Battalion, Fox Co., roll number 56. I even remember my DI's names...
Link Posted: 8/10/2007 7:12:57 AM EDT
Man! you have good memory. I remembered only my Plt 1122 and my senior drill instructor Staff Sergeant Reese.
Link Posted: 8/10/2007 7:16:43 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/10/2007 7:17:21 AM EDT by DM1975]
Mine was Senior Drill Instructor Staff Sergeant Rogers, Drill Instructor Staff Sergeant Thurston, Drill Instructor Staff Sergeant Aguillar, and Drill Instructor SGT Brown. Added in 3rd phase was Gunnery Sergeant Gonzales.

ETA I am in the Army now days.
Link Posted: 8/10/2007 10:28:31 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/10/2007 11:28:28 AM EDT by devildog1122]
I wonder what would happen to the AR if one decide to do a reliability test like test..

www.youtube.com/watch?v=jn9WcjsSr_I
Link Posted: 8/10/2007 11:11:05 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/10/2007 11:11:37 AM EDT by PUBBOY]

Originally Posted By devildog1122:
I wonder what would happen to the AR if one decide to do a reliability test like test..

www.youtube.com/watch?v=jn9WcjsSr_I

Link works now.
Link Posted: 8/10/2007 8:04:35 PM EDT

Originally Posted By devildog1122:
I'll just sticking to my experience and happy with my AR and many other rifles in my collection.

I wonder why the Israelis drop the Galil in favor of the M16/M4? Could it be becuase they have close relation with the US? and other interest with the US?


It was due to excessive WEIGHT of the Galil.

And the fact that we gave them many M16s - free. Price for a Galil vs. "free M16" - what would you choose?
Link Posted: 8/12/2007 1:40:15 AM EDT

Originally Posted By devildog1122:
I was in the Marines (devidog) for 8 years. I don't have have any desert experience like Iraq or in the middle east. But, I have trained in sandy environment, like Camp LeJeune, Camp Pendleton. I have countless jam with the M16A2 in rainy, dusty, sandy conditons. If you want to test yourself, just take your AR, with dust cover open and drop it in the sand with the dust cover facing down or leave it in the rain for long period of time and try to shoot it. Now, take the AK, put it on fire, the reason I say put it on fire, becuase the safety on the AK act as a dust cover like the AR. I can almost gaurantee you the AR will jam, but not the AK. I have done this test myself already. Please don't slam me until you have done the test yourself.

Again, I love my AR. Just point out the facts between the two base on my experience.


That's why you always close your dust cover. Make it a reflexive part of your training. I do. It's called "being professional".

You mention an interesting point. Carry an AR and an AK type weapon with the safety in the "fire" position during a dust storm. After a few minutes, the AK-type will be completely full of dust/sand. The AR-type will be slightly dusty on the inside, but if properly lubed, it WILL WORK, whereas you are lucky if the AK-type will.

Both rifles are roughly equivalent in reliability with the safety on, but even then, it's easier to take the safety off the M16 than the AK.

You just brought up a good point, though; the gas piston in the AK is relatively open to the environment. Is there a way for dust/sand to infiltrate through it when the dust cover is "on"?
Link Posted: 8/12/2007 5:00:26 AM EDT
I think one has to look at what kind of reliability we are talking about

here is number one
2 soldiers ,one with a ak one with a ar (m16)
Both do carry them for a looong time without cleaning or any anything
but under non harsh condition (standing gard )
Then one day they have to use them
Witch one was better

Number to the same, but with regular cleaning

Number 3
Battle condition
This time 10of each
A little dirt and dessert and and some shooting
but cleaning when needed or possible

Number 4
the same as 3 but lazy stupid soldiers that does no cleaning and expect the firearms to work

Number 5
Under attack no time for cleaning ( but started clean ),you have to go on shooting for hours
Remember you can shoot a M16 one shoot every 4 seconds without overheating
but since its at you base no ammo problems ,,theres enough
Shoot until its stops


In each case what was best

I do personally only care about case number 2 and 3 and 5

if you care about 1and 4 YOU are the reliability problem
Link Posted: 8/13/2007 10:03:24 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/13/2007 10:10:58 PM EDT by bb2007]
My personal feedback on both systems:

I have multiple uppers. 2 of them are POF gas-piston systems.

I have built and tested direct-impingement uppers of various barrel lengths.

Here are my observations after attending a full-auto CQB class. (Over 1000 rounds fired throughout the day without a cleaning break.)

The only major failures with both systems were weak extractor springs that were causing sporadic failures to extract leading to double-feeds. This was rectified by inserting plastic o-rings under the extractor springs. No stoppages of any kind the 2nd day across the various uppers used.

Towards the end of the day, some of the direct-impingement uppers were running a little dry. That was easily rectified with a few drops of CLP.

The direct-impingement uppers were noticably lighter to handle which was beneficial in one-hand shooting drills.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with the direct impingement system!
(btw - I used a gas piston system for the class)

You have to make sure that the gas port on your barrel is big enough to run your system (my friend had to have his barrel's gas port widened), but once you have enough gas in your system, the rest of it is about fit and finish.

We polish our bolts to make sure that they lock and unlock smoothly. We check to make sure that the bolt moves smoothly within the carrier and that the carrier does not have wear points within the receiver.

Spend some time fine tuning your components and the reliability will follow.

Just fyi - When I received my gas piston upper, it would not function worth a damn. Turns out the feed ramp had a burr in it, and the bolt needed to be polished.

flame suit on...

oh...btw, we were running drills firing prone with our AR's inches off the ground (sideways) and kicking up TONS of dust...they all continued to function fine.
Top Top