AR Sponsor
Posted: 1/10/2004 7:09:48 PM EDT
|
It appears that all of the ar15 complainers always single out the most obvious feature about the rifle, the fact that it is a dirty rifle and that is so because the gas's are sent back into the action to foul it up necessitating more frequint cleanings. OK that being said I've got an idea for an improvement for the ar15! You never hear these complaints with the HK 9X series rifles or their military conterparts that operate on the roller delayed action principal. Why doesn't some make an ar15 that gets rid of the direct gas impingment ar15 action and replace it with an HK roller delayed style action? It appears that all you would have to do is to redesign the bolt, bolt carrier and the barrel extension. well that my take on the matter, I'm curious to here yours |
| I would love to see a drop in kit that simply replaces the gas tube.The rod could be as thick as the tube wich could run into a cylinder that projects from the front site tower under the hand guards you could also have a cyclinder that the rod will run through at the front of the upper like a operating rod guide. |
|
I've always liked the M16a2, but after having to spend several hours to get it clean (and i mean uber not-to-piss-the-sarge-off army clean) I have to agree that the gas system is dirty to say the least. Perhaps the way to go is the ar18 gas system like in the new HK g36? The RROC upper that was talked about sometime back also seemed to mitigate the dirtyness issue... but it doesn't seem to have been very well accepted by most ar15.commers The LR300 by ZM i believe also uses the ar18 gas system abliet hasn't been popular so far Haven't used a g36, rroc or lr300 so i'm no expert - but it would be nice to have a cleaner weapon so there's more range time! |
|
I always loved the cleaning rifles for the army... (sarcasm) It makes soooo much sense to scrape carbon for hours or use brake cleaner and turn a weapon in dry... Its not a problem with the weapon, just the cleaning mentality. I've seen plenty of damage done by troops attempting to clean their weapons to standard. I took off the handguards on an M16A2 to find solid rust one time... |
|
Quoted: ... Why doesn't some make an ar15 that gets rid of the direct gas impingment ar15 action and replace it with an HK roller delayed style action? ... Seems like substituting a gas piston setup (which has been done) would be a lot easier than such an extensive redesign. |
|
Anyone think the ZM would be more popular if a)it was more readily available. I understand they have to have a minimum number of orders before they will produce one. b)the ban expires and more people can take advantage of the side folder. IIRC Oly has a similar system available. |
|
Quoted: Anyone think the ZM would be more popular if a)it was more readily available. I understand they have to have a minimum number of orders before they will produce one. b)the ban expires and more people can take advantage of the side folder. IIRC Oly has a similar system available. c) if they weren't so fucking expensive!!! Holy shit have you seen those prices? Having said that, they are nice.. [img]http://www.zmweapons.com/Lg_images/Leftside.jpg[/img] |
|
david10066, I'm sorry to inform you that roller delayed blowback guns actually get [b]dirtier[/b] than the AR-15. I own an HK-94 (civilian MP-5) and the internals get filthy not to mention all the nooks and crannies of the stamped receiver are a PITA to dig crud out of. A roller delayed blowback gun is still a blowback gun - it blows all the crap back into the receiver. It take me far less time to clean an AR than it does to clean an HK. Just because no one complains about HKs doesn't mean there isn't a problem. I doubt I'm the only one that shares this opinion. As others have mentioned, a gas operated piston seems to be the cleanest system out there right now. If the operating system can't blow anything back into the receiver, it will be pretty easy to clean. |
|
I actually thought of this a few weeks back, but I discarded the thought because there was not enough space up front to provide strong enough springs for the ball locks. I think the gas piston design would be the second best system for the AR ( as an improvement ). Otherwise, as far as I can see, the weapon has no flaws. The ONLY other thing I could possibly think of the improve the insides, is to have a two piece bolt carrier, so that if it jams in the rearward position, you can still open the rifle up. |
|
The ZM design doesn't use indirect-impingement - it still blows crud back into the receiver, but is reportedly reliable. There has been comment that it may not be as reliable in FA due to the spring surrounding the gas tube makes it susceptible to heat, causing it to lose its tension, coupled w/ inadequate handguard venting. ********** The roller locking method doesn't redirect gases back towards the receiver like the AR does, so when the bolt opens from the breech, there's minimal blowback because the bullet has already exited the bbl., thus eliminating the pressure that would otherwise push the gases + crud back there. Actually, the timing is really close, so some stuff still gets back there, but it's not like the AR, in my experience. The system is robust, & tolerant of ammo variation, unlike the AR. My own 94 shoots everything I feed it. Cleaning is required, but it isn't the sh!t-wiping affair that the AR produces. ********** Rumor's are flying that HK is developing/has developed a swap-in AR upper that uses the G36/AR18 piston, & that it will be revealed at the forthcoming Feb. 12-15 SHOT Show. Anxiously waiting... |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Anyone think the ZM would be more popular if a)it was more readily available. I understand they have to have a minimum number of orders before they will produce one. b)the ban expires and more people can take advantage of the side folder. IIRC Oly has a similar system available. c) if they weren't so fucking expensive!!! Holy shit have you seen those prices? Having said that, they are nice.. [url]http://www.zmweapons.com/Lg_images/Leftside.jpg[/url] I didn't think about cost. I don't know how much they cost. Why is the rear sight so far forward? |
|
Rumor's are flying that HK is developing/has developed a swap-in AR upper that uses the G36/AR18 piston, & that it will be revealed at the forthcoming Feb. 12-15 SHOT Show. Whoa that would be cool... But wouldn't that mean that HK would be shooting itself in the foot? After all the few advantages of the XM8 is that it is a cleaner rifle right? (uh oh did someone say xm8?! grabs kevlar and hides in hole) |
| Master_Blaster, I agree that the HK (roller delayed blowback) system is more reliable (I shot 700 rnds through my 94 one day with a single problem) but you don't think it gets dirtier than the AR? It's lot more of hassle to clean to me because of the shape of the receiver. I shoot plain ol' Winchester Whitebox through both rifles but the HK is always dirtier. I don't mean to disagree with you on this. It's just my opinion. I have actually considered getting rid of my HK-94 and replacing it with a Colt 9mm AR but I still think the HK is a better 9mm rifle. |
|
Quoted: Blackjack, Yep, its a Mini-14 [:D]. Although I really like my Mini, to me, the AR is in a different league. FWIW Doc Not a mini fan, but if someone picked up the ball that Ruger dropped, and there was a good source of reliable hi-caps, I could see myself owning a mini. Maybe after the ban, I'll find a used one and dress it up. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Anyone think the ZM would be more popular if a)it was more readily available. I understand they have to have a minimum number of orders before they will produce one. b)the ban expires and more people can take advantage of the side folder. IIRC Oly has a similar system available. c) if they weren't so fucking expensive!!! Holy shit have you seen those prices? Having said that, they are nice.. [url]http://www.zmweapons.com/Lg_images/Leftside.jpg[/url] I didn't think about cost. I don't know how much they cost. Why is the rear sight so far forward? IIRC $1500 to $2000 for the UPPER ONLY...The sight is a preference I believe, so you can mount a sight behind it. |
|
Quoted: Master_Blaster, I agree that the HK (roller delayed blowback) system is more reliable (I shot 700 rnds through my 94 one day with a single problem) but you don't think it gets dirtier than the AR? It's lot more of hassle to clean to me because of the shape of the receiver. I shoot plain ol' Winchester Whitebox through both rifles but the HK is always dirtier. I don't mean to disagree with you on this. It's just my opinion. I have actually considered getting rid of my HK-94 and replacing it with a Colt 9mm AR but I still think the HK is a better 9mm rifle. The 94 may have a more complex receiver shape that isn't the easiest to clean, but if it crapped on itself as much as the AR, it'd be much worse. The AR is (thankfully) relatively easy to clean in terms of accessibility (buffer tube notwithstanding). I use toothbrushes to get at the tighter spaces (on all the toys, for that matter), & it's not so bad, really. The channels on the HK's stamped reciever (along which the carrier reciprocates) accumulate a fair amount of crud, unlike the AR's relatively open receiver, but it seems that the AR's bolt + carrier group gets dirtier by contrast. The HK's tiny, complex bolt & firing pin setup is pretty straightforward. I wish that the cocking tube was accessible for cleaning, but that's a minor gripe. One thing for sure, the HK94 is an ammo-omnivor. I've actully done well w/ my AR's, but haven't tried the Russian ammo that seems to have a rep for inconsistency. As to disagreeing w/ me...well my boy, everyone's entitled to make a mistake once in a while. Go & sin no more. [;)] |
| Cleaning my G-3 is like cleaning a rifle that was just used with blanks. I've never seen anything get dirtier quicker. If I shoot 40 rounds I might as well shoot 400 because it gets filthy. I strip all the furniture off and clean it in the sink with warm soapy water and a big nylon brush. Come to think of it, I'm going to start cleaning my AR's the same way. Maybe I'll take the plastic off and put them in the dishwasher. |
|
Someone just needs to make the Morris gas system.. The Morris system still uses the gas tube of the rifle, but shortens it and couples it to an extended bolt carrier gas key (36 in the diagram below). The plus of this is that the gas key can't get out of alignment with the gas tube (34) -- which can happen on occasion with the standard system. With the Morris system, the gas key always surrounds the gas tube, even when the bolt carrier is in its rear-most position. The added mass of the extended gas key will make the gun a tad more apt to chamber a cartridge as well. More importantly, the system is claimed to be a bit more resistant to fouling. Other added pluses are that the Morris system can be easily retrofitted to existing AR-15s and M16s with a minimum of machining. And once in place, barrels can be exchanged with the upper receiver in the field. This would make it possible for a shooter to quickly change from a 20-inch barrel to, say, a 16-inch barrel. This would be a real boon to those of us who like to have several different options; currently to do this you have to buy an entire upper receiver to mount the barrel assembly on. The Morris system would make such an option about a hundred bucks cheaper for each barrel to be exchanged. For those wanting details, the Abstract for Morris's patent number 4,765,224, granted August 23, 1988, reads like this: An M16-type automatic rifle is provided with an improved gas operating system. The tube extending forwardly from the bolt carrier key is of such length that it permanently mates with the aftwardly extending gas transfer tube as the bolt carrier key shuttles forward and aftward in operation. This arrangement minimizes fouling by combustion products from the firing of ammunition. Modifications to the gas transfer tube and barrel nut assembly accommodate the extended bolt carrier key tube and facilitate quick change of the barrel in the field with a standard tool. Although Morris submitted his patent idea in 1986, it's only now starting to "take off" - which is pretty much the normal time lag with new patents and inventions. It will be interesting to see if this new idea catches on. Certainly for those wanting to add a few barrel options to an existing AR-15, it has a lot of promise. I wouldn't be too surprised if it catches on with the civilian market for this reason, should it fail to capture the military market. The webpage [url]http://members.cox.net/dlong41/guns-n-stuff/gun19.htm#morris[/url] |
| The Morris system addresses the fouling that comes from the gas tube, but I don't think that this is major source of the fouling. By the time the carrier key and gas tube seperate the exhaust holes in the side of carrier have relieved the pressure from the gas system. A lot of fouling is produced by the gas leaking around the gas rings and along the firing pin channel while the system is still pressurized. The Morris system does not address this problem. Some gas escapes back out the carrier key while the system is still pressurized. This deposits fouling around the gas tube entry point. The Morris system would address this, but the bolt and carrier would still be prone to fouling. |
|
Quoted: Blackjack, Yep, its a Mini-14 [:D]. Although I really like my Mini, to me, the AR is in a different league. FWIW Doc I went to my local gun show this weekend and saw a stainless steel AC Mini-14 select fire with the beautiful factory stainless folding stock for $5K. It was in mint condition. I almost whipped out my credit card -- financial consequences be damned. I should have bought it. |
| After a couple months with my AR now, I LIKE the gas system. Does it get dirty? yeah, but I know where all that dirt is, and cleaning it isn't hard at all. Haven't had a failure yet either, though I haven't shot much more than 300 rounds in a range session yet. |
AR Sponsor