Originally Posted By firefight:
I think that Bushmaster should do a torture test too. That kind of thing really convinces people (including me) of a firearm's dependability . 1.5 to 2 MOA is pretty impressive and that redhead stepchild remark has almost convinced me! Thanks.
Look at the mechanism - it's virtually identical to the AR18. This design is superior to the AR series for many reasons (that have been debated ad nauseum, ad infinitum, et ad absurdium).
The bolt carrier doesn't slide back and forth inside the URA - it's only bearing surfaces are limited to the two action rods: an design that is inherently more resistant to jams caused by debris (dirt, primer parts, and associated dreck).
When the AR-type weapon cycles, you have a gas tube blowing burning / unburnt powder, jacket shavings, and carbon into the bolt / chamber area. Granted the system works great, but it's not as inherently dirty or as reliable as the AR18 system. The guys who died in 'Nam holding jammed M16s (MAINLY due to shitty maintnance a switch in gunpowder that was incompatable with the weapons) wouldn't have died if they had rifles that worked like an AR18. The guns would've gobbled up the crappy ammo and begged for more.
Pull the trigger on an M17S, gun goes bang, gasses are siphoned off to the gas housing, piston pushes gas cylinder, drives link rod / oprod, excess gasses are vented INTO THE ATMOSPHERE, oprod smacks bolt carrier, bolt carrier is driven back, ejects brass, strips a fresh round, chambers, and repeat.
Now, (here's the kicker) until I'm done abusing - ahh... EVALUATING my "M17Sk" project and it earns my respect (read: when I can trust it to save my life), I'll grab my Bushy M4gery, and go to work.
BUT, when that time comes, the ARs are going to 2nd line status.