Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/19/2017 7:27:10 PM
Posted: 1/18/2006 9:47:06 PM EDT
anybody have any experence with one of these? are they the sheeeznit they claim?
Link Posted: 1/19/2006 2:22:20 AM EDT
are they the schizznit?

can't say, but those who use it and those who use other makes using the same technology, swear by them.

Some of our more spirited and passionate discussions have been over the POF, Leitner-Wise, and HK, products

In short, they all rely on piston operation and all make the same claims: Cleaner, more reliable, and cleaner.

Check out the Leitner wise forum here for some good discussion, or search HK416, or Leitner Wise and you will see what I mean
Link Posted: 1/19/2006 5:19:57 AM EDT
I own both an L-W conversion and a POF upper. I like them enough that I traded my Colt M4 (MT6400C unbanned) for an A1 retro gun plus 2 Duracoat jobs on the side. Other than having the A1 for nostalgia's sake, I have no use for direct impingement guns any more. Gas piston guns (at least with my own experience) show no degradation of accuracy, reliability is equal or better, and CLEANING is not even comparable. Yeah, they sport a little more heft to them (especially the POF) but it certainly isn't prohibitive. More availability on the general market would be nice as spare parts would be more common, but I'm not going to be shooting either one to failure anytime soon. Give it time and I'm sure piston systems will be more available.

Before I get crucified by the DI guys, I'm not bashing DI guns. Hell, that's pretty much all that's been available to us on AR's for years, so I've had many. Does the AR NEED a piston system to run effectively? Of course not. I just see the piston systems as an evolution of the AR platform that has it's advantages, the chief one for ME being ease of maintenance. To each his own.
Link Posted: 1/19/2006 1:04:07 PM EDT
I believe they are the shizznit. I agree 100% with the above post. Just as accurate and much much cleaner. Even if they aren't more reliable,which I believe they are, just the fact that they are cleaner makes up for changing systems. Why are AR/M4 guys talking about going to SIG 55X when they come out in the US. They are less parts for those than there are for AR gas piston systems...

JMO,

TS
Link Posted: 1/19/2006 1:33:16 PM EDT

Originally Posted By ABNAK:

I just see the piston systems as an evolution of the AR platform



Ironic that the platform is evolving back to what guns were prior to DI.
Link Posted: 1/19/2006 1:50:01 PM EDT
holy crap 6-8 week back up! biznezz is good!
Link Posted: 1/20/2006 4:00:41 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Bradd_D:

Originally Posted By ABNAK:

I just see the piston systems as an evolution of the AR platform



Ironic that the platform is evolving back to what guns were prior to DI.



What do you mean "what guns were prior to DI"?

The AR15 is the ONLY commercially successful DI rifle out there. Everything else, from the G36, to SIG 550, to Benelli R1, to Browning BAR is piston operated.

DI is the exception to the rule.
Link Posted: 1/20/2006 4:51:06 AM EDT
He means that the AR15, with its DI system developed during the 1950s and 60s, is going back to technology found on 1940s era rifles - the gas piston.
Link Posted: 1/20/2006 5:05:55 AM EDT
I own the POF gas system and I have over 3000 rounds fired through it without 1 single hiccup. This is even using a number of different ammos including wolf. I have also used different strength buffer springs and different weight buffers. None of these changes affected the weapons reliability. Very welll worth switching over from DI.

As time goes on others will realize what gas system is better. No Brag. Just Fact.
Link Posted: 1/20/2006 6:08:33 AM EDT
Own a POF, cleaning time is 1/4 of what I use to do with my Bushmaster. This alone was worth the money.
Link Posted: 1/20/2006 6:55:10 AM EDT
I also own a POF 16" upper with a P9X mid-length rail. Cleaning time is like 5-10 minutes, and with the chrome BCG, it's like as simple as wiping off any carbon. Haven't had one issue yet, but I've only been out shooting a couple times with it.

Photos of mine can be found here:

ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=118&t=264272

- rem
Link Posted: 1/20/2006 11:16:22 AM EDT

Originally Posted By SWO_daddy:

Originally Posted By Bradd_D:

Originally Posted By ABNAK:

I just see the piston systems as an evolution of the AR platform



Ironic that the platform is evolving back to what guns were prior to DI.



What do you mean "what guns were prior to DI"?

The AR15 is the ONLY commercially successful DI rifle out there. Everything else, from the G36, to SIG 550, to Benelli R1, to Browning BAR is piston operated.

DI is the exception to the rule.



Lighten up, Francis. I meant that the DI platform is "evolving" back into a piston system which is what was around prior to DI.
Link Posted: 1/20/2006 2:11:55 PM EDT
[Private Francis] And if any of you homos touches me, I'll kill you [/Private Francis]
Link Posted: 1/20/2006 3:50:38 PM EDT

Originally Posted By SWO_daddy:
[Private Francis] And if any of you homos touches me, I'll kill you [/Private Francis]



Link Posted: 1/20/2006 4:34:09 PM EDT

Originally Posted By SWO_daddy:
[Private Francis] And if any of you homos touches me, I'll kill you [/Private Francis]





Damn, thats funny!
Link Posted: 1/20/2006 4:38:49 PM EDT
DI guns were around post WWII. Look up the Hakim. This was a copy of a preceedingDI semi auto gun of which the name escapes me.

I don't exactly think any op system in a firearm has been revolutionary. Take DI....did it revolutionize anything? I don't think it did. If it did, every currently fielded modern weapon would have it. Yet stoner designed the ar180 with a short stroke piston. The Koreans liked the M16, but fitted the K2 (M16 clone of sorts with a long stroke piston). Direct impingement never went beyond the M16, and no, it is not a patent issue as there is clearly prior art.

The M16 WAS revolutionary in that for the first time, modern materials, manufacturing, and attention to things like ergonomics were incorporated. The chinsy gas tube comes straight off previous weapons like the hakim. Hardly the so called INNOVATION that folks proclaim. They should be bragging on Aircraft grade aluminum receivers, the in line rotary bolt that locks into a barrel extension, the use of plastics and carbon fiber. The ergonomics and accurracy offered in a mass produced weapon.

What these really do on the AR series is offer the inherent advantages of the piston without the usual piston disadvantages of a long stroke piston. The remaining disadvantages remain like making manufacture slightly more complicated and expensive. For instance, now the FSB has to be absolutely top dead center.

Yes, you add parts, but you rarely have to maintain or remove and loose them, and you could go the entire time you owned a piston operated weapon without ever needing to take the BCG apart.
Link Posted: 1/20/2006 7:36:17 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Va_Dinger:

Originally Posted By SWO_daddy:
[Private Francis] And if any of you homos touches me, I'll kill you [/Private Francis]





Damn, thats funny!



Lookee here!
Link Posted: 1/21/2006 4:43:17 AM EDT

Originally Posted By 48thHighlander:
DI guns were around post WWII. Look up the Hakim. This was a copy of a preceedingDI semi auto gun of which the name escapes me.



That would be the Swedish Ljungman.
Link Posted: 1/21/2006 8:59:03 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/21/2006 9:00:46 AM EDT by 48thHighlander]
Thats the one I was thinking of! Thanks. I could remember the Hakim, because I used to have one. It looked stupid, but it had the tilting breech block of the FAL and the direct gas of the AR. It sure was a wierd gun as you used the top cover to cock the weapon.
Link Posted: 1/21/2006 10:40:38 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Jagdpanzer:
He means that the AR15, with its DI system developed during the 1950s and 60s, is going back to technology found on 1940s era rifles - the gas piston.


Don't be fooled DI is 40s tech as well.
Top Top