AR Sponsor
[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Piston ARs - Why? (Page 1 of 3)
Posted: 10/10/2009 4:15:53 PM EDT
|
I don't mean that to be a silly question, but a serious one. What problem with the carbine is the piston supposed to fix? Obviously, piston-driven systems are cleaner, but beyond that what is the issue that the piston system addresses? And why does that problem only exist with carbines, as opposed to full-length rifles?
Sorry to be asking such a question, as I'm sure this has been gone over and over...but I couldn't find the answer. Thanks, John |
|
They're cleaner. That is the issue. Piston rifles don't put gasses into the receiver like a direct impingement rifle does. That really does cause fewer failures related to carbon build up in the receiver. There is absolutely no arguement of this.
A properly maintained Di gun is every bit as reliable as a Piston gun. No gun is reliable if you don't take proper care of it. Piston guns have issues of their own. More parts means more things to break. Some piston rifles have the dreaded carrier tilt issues. I like them both. Get what you like. |
| Its mostly for people who A) want to shoot using a silencer (less smoke in your face, so they say) or B) Want to shoot from just exiting the water with out allowing it to drain from your weapon. |
| I'd only be interested in a piston AR upper if it was a completely reengineered upper and bolt carrier group designed as a piston operated upper with rails to guide the bolt/carrier and prevent tilting like pretty much all other firearms disigned as piston operated. The piston upper conversions on the market now are a compromise. I'm not saying they don't work, I'm just saying they aren't ideal and are a compromise. |
|
Quoted:
I'd only be interested in a piston AR upper if it was a completely reengineered upper and bolt carrier group designed as a piston operated upper with rails to guide the bolt/carrier and prevent tilting like pretty much all other firearms disigned as piston operated. The piston upper conversions on the market now are a compromise. I'm not saying they don't work, I'm just saying they aren't ideal and are a compromise. I was looking at a Daewoo K2 and I noticed they have no rails for the bolt carrier. They are Korea's issued rifle, so somehow they must have overcome the problem. |
|
Some piston systems can get sub MOA out of the box, can that be said for out of the box DI guns?
US Military is seriously considering a piston system for this next upgrade, not to mention using a 6.8 or .308 round if they can get away with it, or atleast having a lower that can take a variety of uppers (DMR, Auto Assault rifle, standard battle rifle, along with other uppers designed for more tasks). I think pistons are a step in the right direction, even the A1 had SERIOUS issues that took a while to work out and now everyone uses its basic design and platform. |
|
Quoted:
Some piston systems can get sub MOA out of the box, can that be said for out of the box DI guns? US Military is seriously considering a piston system for this next upgrade, not to mention using a 6.8 or .308 round if they can get away with it, or atleast having a lower that can take a variety of uppers (DMR, Auto Assault rifle, standard battle rifle, along with other uppers designed for more tasks). I think pistons are a step in the right direction, even the A1 had SERIOUS issues that took a while to work out and now everyone uses its basic design and platform. Ummm, yeah, there are plenty of DI ARs that shoot sub-MOA. Adding a piston does NOT increase the accuracy potential of the weapon. 
|
|
Quoted: They're cleaner. That is the issue. Piston rifles don't put gasses into the receiver like a direct impingement rifle does. That really does cause fewer failures related to carbon build up in the receiver. There is absolutely no arguement of this. A properly maintained Di gun is every bit as reliable as a Piston gun. No gun is reliable if you don't take proper care of it. Piston guns have issues of their own. More parts means more things to break. Some piston rifles have the dreaded carrier tilt issues. I like them both. Get what you like. They get dirty just the same as DI guns, and solve no problems. But they sure are fun!    |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
They're cleaner. That is the issue ... They get dirty just the same as DI guns, and solve no problems ... From that same thread: Originally Posted By DocGKR:
Neil, Your results are exactly what we have found––quality piston and DI uppers both work equally well, although the better piston designs may run with less lube. Some of the poorly executed piston designs have more reliability and durability problems than DI uppers. The bottom line seems to be that ... you may be able to save a few pennies on lube, in an extended shooting session - with a piston. That appears to be the main "advantage". |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
They're cleaner. That is the issue. Piston rifles don't put gasses into the receiver like a direct impingement rifle does. That really does cause fewer failures related to carbon build up in the receiver. There is absolutely no arguement of this. A properly maintained Di gun is every bit as reliable as a Piston gun. No gun is reliable if you don't take proper care of it. Piston guns have issues of their own. More parts means more things to break. Some piston rifles have the dreaded carrier tilt issues. I like them both. Get what you like. They get dirty just the same as DI guns, and solve no problems. But they sure are fun! Sacrilege! Surely you purposely baked carbon on those parts! Oh the agony! 
That's funny right there. I don't care who you are. Kinda negates the supposed purpose of a gas piston setup, doesn't it? |
|
they get just as dirty it's just dirty in different places.I really don't think the barrel will stay any cleaner than a DI gun.
I won't be getting a piston gun because there is a lack of standardization.Everybody and their brother is making a piston gun now and all of them have a different set of parts. I like my DI guns better cause you can get parts to fit it almost anywhere in the world. If something breaks on your piston gun you'll be lucky to find replacement parts for it. If the manufacturers would get together with the same system throughout the industry I may considerpurchasing it then and only then. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
If you pick up an AK47 you know it will go bang %99.99999 of the time, that;s the kind of reliability a piston AR is supposed to reproduce. Having handled AK copies here in the states, and real AK's in Iraq, I can tell you that is not the case. Glad you said that. I was about to point out that anyone who thinks AKs never malfunction has not shot very many AKs. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
They're cleaner. That is the issue ... They get dirty just the same as DI guns, and solve no problems ... From that same thread: Originally Posted By DocGKR:
Neil, Your results are exactly what we have found––quality piston and DI uppers both work equally well, although the better piston designs may run with less lube. Some of the poorly executed piston designs have more reliability and durability problems than DI uppers. The bottom line seems to be that ... you may be able to save a few pennies on lube, in an extended shooting session - with a piston. That appears to be the main "advantage". I know Neil personally and just so there isn't any confusion, the HK416 upper he shot at the course was shot suppressed the whole time except for 150 rounds..IIRC it was a total of 2000 or so rounds with just lubing right before the course. |
|
Quoted:
I don't mean that to be a silly question, but a serious one. What problem with the carbine is the piston supposed to fix? Obviously, piston-driven systems are cleaner, but beyond that what is the issue that the piston system addresses? And why does that problem only exist with carbines, as opposed to full-length rifles? Sorry to be asking such a question, as I'm sure this has been gone over and over...but I couldn't find the answer. Thanks, John Thats the same as asking why 5.56 when we have 7.62, or to take it further M1911 over Glock 21. ... .............. its a silly question that will result in guys arguing for the next 10 pages trying to answer the question and bashing each other. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
They're cleaner. That is the issue ... They get dirty just the same as DI guns, and solve no problems ... From that same thread: Originally Posted By DocGKR:
Neil, Your results are exactly what we have found––quality piston and DI uppers both work equally well, although the better piston designs may run with less lube. Some of the poorly executed piston designs have more reliability and durability problems than DI uppers. The bottom line seems to be that ... you may be able to save a few pennies on lube, in an extended shooting session - with a piston. That appears to be the main "advantage". I know Neil personally and just so there isn't any confusion, the HK416 upper he shot at the course was shot suppressed the whole time except for 150 rounds..IIRC it was a total of 2000 or so rounds with just lubing right before the course. Thanks for pointing that out! If that would have been a DI AR, it would have been much dirtier. Somebody needs to compare pics of a piston AR with 2000 rounds and a DI with the same count. That will certainly answer some questions here. Yes , piston guns get dirty but not nearly as quick as a DI gun. Your lube wont burn off nearly as quick either. Some piston AR's may not be up to speed but the well know manufactures with piston AR's are as good as anything out there. |
|
Quoted:
I like my 10.5" LWRC more than my AR15's No gas in the face with a Gemtech Halo, runs clean all day with all kinds of rotten ammo, not ammo picky Yes, I found the same to be true with my LWRC's. They will shoot any type of ammo out there. Good piston AR manufacturs are a step up in relaibility. Most of us do not need that but its good to have. |
|
I will say this I was at the LWRC factory (before they moved) they had an LWRC test gun come out of a shipping crate (dirty, had sand and what i am hoping was mud smeared over it - uncleaned from a weapons test) go to the firing line (no cleaning, no lube) go 8 mags on full auto, rapid mag changes (no stoppages) and at the end the guy broke open the weapon and handed me the bolt carrier group (no gloves). i bought one that day |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
They're cleaner. That is the issue ... They get dirty just the same as DI guns, and solve no problems ... From that same thread: Originally Posted By DocGKR:
Neil, Your results are exactly what we have found––quality piston and DI uppers both work equally well, although the better piston designs may run with less lube. Some of the poorly executed piston designs have more reliability and durability problems than DI uppers. The bottom line seems to be that ... you may be able to save a few pennies on lube, in an extended shooting session - with a piston. That appears to be the main "advantage". I know Neil personally and just so there isn't any confusion, the HK416 upper he shot at the course was shot suppressed the whole time except for 150 rounds..IIRC it was a total of 2000 or so rounds with just lubing right before the course. That's a lot of rounds over the course of a weekend with very little lube, to be sure. But the question that remains is: suppressed or not, how does that translate to any sort of real-world advantage for the vast majority of average users ? |
|
Quoted:
Basically....If you don't own one, you bash it, it you do own one, you love it......That's about it...... i gotta agree with this as i own one. but i've shot both and i prefer the piston IMHO its a lot more reliable. i shoot a lot out in the desert and the sand can be a problem, but with the piston i have had no misfires after several trips out shooting, were as i have had countless misfires with gas, granted could be that they were army issued and not as well maintain as personally owned |
|
Don't have to clean it as much - With DI the whole breech gets fouled up with carbon and other stuff not so with piston - I have 3 cases of 77gr prvi through my LMT and won't clean it till it starts malfunctioning. Sort of my own test I'm doing and all I do is put a little grease on bolt.
Thermal cycling on bolts , extractors, and extractor springs is what breaks them and pistons don't have this problem since they run much cooler. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
They're cleaner. That is the issue. Piston rifles don't put gasses into the receiver like a direct impingement rifle does. That really does cause fewer failures related to carbon build up in the receiver. There is absolutely no arguement of this. A properly maintained Di gun is every bit as reliable as a Piston gun. No gun is reliable if you don't take proper care of it. Piston guns have issues of their own. More parts means more things to break. Some piston rifles have the dreaded carrier tilt issues. I like them both. Get what you like. They get dirty just the same as DI guns, and solve no problems. But they sure are fun! He ran a can whole time. The back pressure caused by a can is ten fold anything going down a DI tube. So yeah running a can not much difference but run off and it's night and day.
|
|
Quoted:
One the theory is that since they're cleaner, they're more reliable. I don't buy it. It seems to me that introducing a piston is just introducing more parts that could potentially fail. What parts? A spring and oprod? take out the oprod for gas tube and leaves you with one extra part, a spring. a Big beefy spring protected by rail system - big deal. I've never heard of them breaking. |
|
But the question that remains is: suppressed or not, how does that translate to any sort of real-world advantage for the vast majority of average users ?
For average users its probably not necessary. DI AR's are good. I just beleive in a combat enviornment, a good piston driven AR is more reliable than a DI AR. The majority of average users do not need an AR 15. A Ruger 10/22 will usually suffice. Its wanting to have the best piece of equipment one can afford and/or get his hands on. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
But the question that remains is: suppressed or not, how does that translate to any sort of real-world advantage for the vast majority of average users ? For average users its probably not necessary. DI AR's are good. I just beleive in a combat enviornment, a good piston driven AR is more reliable than a DI AR. The majority of average users do not need an AR 15. A Ruger 10/22 will usually suffice. Its wanting to have the best piece of equipment one can afford and/or get his hands on. 
So you're saying that for hunting, home defense, etc. that the average user doesn't really need an AR, but rather that a .22 LR will really suffice for the majority of folks' needs ? Uhhh, no thanks. That doesn't even make any sense. |
|
Quoted:
You can knock the piston design all you want it is battle proven in other designs . IT may be a slow death but none the less will be the death of the DI system in the AR . Resistance is futile. It's been "battle proven" in other designs, because those other designs were designed to use a piston from the start ... The AR was originally designed to use DI. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Basically....If you don't own one, you bash it, it you do own one, you love it......That's about it...... This So then how about all of the piston supporters simply produce some solid, thorough evidence that actually validates their claims instead of posting nonsense along the lines of "... if you don't own one, then you just don't 'get it' ..." Additionally, lots of people making claims (for instance) about how they run cleaner especially when suppressed, which sounds great; except for when you come across other comments from real-deal, real-world end users who post here and have stated that in their experience the actual difference in their use has been negligible, to non-existent. And the list goes on ... cleaner, cooler, smoother, more reliable, etc. etc ... claiming "whatever" makes it a "superior" system. It would be nice if for once, in threads like these, the piston guys would actually be able to back their claims with something more than a personal bias based on anecdotal information or speculation; which is all too frequently the only thing they seem to be able to come up with. Again, Originally Posted By DocGKR:
... quality piston and DI uppers both work equally well, although the better piston designs may run with less lube. Some of the poorly executed piston designs have more reliability and durability problems than DI uppers. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Basically....If you don't own one, you bash it, it you do own one, you love it......That's about it...... This So then how about all of the piston supporters simply produce some solid, thorough evidence that actually validates their claims instead of posting nonsense along the lines of "... if you don't own one, then you just don't 'get it' ..." Additionally, lots of people making claims (for instance) about how they run cleaner especially when suppressed, which sounds great; except for when you come across other comments from real-deal, real-world end users who post here and have stated that in their experience the actual difference in their use has been negligible, to non-existent. And the list goes on ... cleaner, cooler, smoother, more reliable, etc. etc ... claiming "whatever" makes it a "superior" system. It would be nice if for once, in threads like these, the piston guys would actually be able to back their claims with something more than a personal bias based on anecdotal information or speculation; which is all too frequently the only thing they seem to be able to come up with. Do you own a piston gun? Do you have any experience with a piston gun? If so, I'd like to hear your thoughts on them as opposed to just trying to discredit other people because you don't believe them or restating comments you've heard 3rd hand from other people. I have experience with both DI and piston. I shoot suppressed about 90% of the time. It's a fact that my piston gun stays cleaner, cooler, and for me, has been more reliable than my DI gun. |
|
No, I don't own a piston - mainly because I *don't want* to own a piston. Beyond that, you seem to have missed the point. My comments were not directed at "discrediting" piston systems or owners, but rather to point out that I've yet to see any solid body of evidence that indicates that they are truly "vastly superior" to DI systems, as many piston supporters try to claim. Glad that you like yours and have confidence in it. But then again, there are others who have also indicated just the opposite of much of what you stated ... that they don't really stay that much cleaner, and that they're not really any more reliable, etc. And that's coming from those who have used them hard in training courses and in combat environments. But you seem to think that that input is irrelevant, while your comments are somehow more valuable or "proving" something. OTOH, if someone were to give me a LWRC setup I certainly wouldn't turn it down. But that's not because I thought it would be significantly superior in any way as there is plenty of info that indicates quality DI systems perform just as well, and I know that my DI system is more than adequate for my needs. |
|
Quoted:
No, I don't own a piston - mainly because I *don't want* to own a piston. Beyond that, you seem to have missed the point. My comments were not directed at "discrediting" piston systems or owners, but rather to point out that I've yet to see any solid body of evidence that indicates that they are truly "vastly superior" to DI systems, as many piston supporters try to claim. Glad that you like yours and have confidence in it. But then again, there are others who have also indicated just the opposite of much of what you stated ... that they don't really stay that much cleaner, and that they're not really any more reliable, etc. And that's coming from those who have used them hard in training courses and in combat environments. But you seem to think that that input is irrelevant, while your comments are somehow more valuable or "proving" something. OTOH, if someone were to give me a LWRC setup I certainly wouldn't turn it down. But that's not because I thought it would be significantly superior in any way as there is plenty of info that indicates quality DI systems perform just as well, and I know that my DI system is more than adequate for my needs. I'd be interested to read any information you have from people that have used piston systems in harsh environments if you could point me to it. I personally don't claim that the piston system is "vastly superior" to DI, but for me it has its advantages. If the majority of people agreed with you companies like LWRC and POF wouldn't still be in business, and companies like LMT, HK, FN, and SIG wouldn't be spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to do R&D and produce and sell piston systems. |
|
Quoted:
I'd be interested to read any information you have from people that have used piston systems in harsh environments if you could point me to it. I personally don't claim that the piston system is "vastly superior" to DI, but for me it has its advantages. If the majority of people agreed with you companies like LWRC and POF wouldn't still be in business, and companies like LMT, HK, FN, and SIG wouldn't be spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to do R&D and produce and sell piston systems. I suspect it's a safe bet that a majority of AR purchasers are buying DI systems, not pistons ... And as far as references to piston systems that have seen hard use, I've already referenced one source of information twice in this very thread. I'd have to search for other accounts of hard use and use in combat. Quoted:
OK, I admit, they dont get as dirty. But run a silencer on anything and you'll get filth everywhere. This is my HK 416 upper, I ran it with an AAC 416 silencer at the last Magpul Dynamics class here in St Augustine. 2 days, 2000 rounds. I only took the silencer off the start of day 2 for a few drills, I would guess about 150 rounds. All the rest were with the can. I dropped some lube in the gun at the start of the class, aside from that, no cleaning, no oil, nothing at all. No problems either, well, not really. I will admit, I have run regular DI guns like this without problems, but I needed to keep dumping oil on the bolt group. In fact, one of the guys who works with me ran his Noveske N4 with a AAC M4 2000 right next to me the whole class. His gun ran fine as well, but he did keep dumping lube into the bolt carrier. Anyway, the gun was fiilthy. I have never cleaned a gun that was so dirty. Grime and crud was seeping out between the upper and lower trying to escape. It is worth mention that a large piece of carbon built up and fell under my trigger group toward the end of the second night. I thought it was a primer, but when I opened the gun up and shoot the lower, it was plainly a piece of carbon. So technically, the gun did comletely fail. I have seen this same thing happen one other time, in another Magpul class (actually the one from the last DVD). My friend Derek was running a gun with a can on it for about as many rounds. Same thing, crud kept building up until some of it found its way under the trigger group. Anyway, here's some pics of the filth. <pics> Quoted:
Quoted:
No more pictures... sorry. The gun is clean now. I took pictures of the worst of it. The buffer spring was dirty and dry. To run the charging handle was very rough on the gun by the end of the class. The 416 bolt design is completely different at the opposite end. Have you ever seen it? It was dirty but not as crazy as the rest of the gun. The whole piston is cleaner argument goes out the window when you screw a can on one. That teensy-weensy gas tube blowback is pretty insignificant compared to the backpressure caused by can, which is now blowing back down the bore. You BCG doesn't get nearly as hot, but that's all, its still plenty enough to blow the lube off of everything, as you commented. Brett Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
TAG But, but, but HK says that is unpossible..!!!! Piston = Gods right hand!!! If it was a DI gun, it would have looked like a piece of charcol... I'm the guy he was talking about in the OP running beside him with a DI gun. Noveske N4 switchblock Recce My DI gun ran without fail and was probably not as dirty as his gun though pretty close. I sprayed lube on from time to time only difference. BTW shot as many rounds as he did with a can on. Sorry but the piston is still gonna run just as dirty with a can on it. Quoted:
Quoted:
Sorry but the piston is still gonna run just as dirty with a can on it. So at the end of the class, the $13 gas tubes performed as well as the pistons? Thats been my experience as well running suppressed SBRs in high round count classes. http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=118&t=446047 |
| That's one account and if you'll notice he says he didn't have any problems and that he didn't lube or clean the gun at all during the class. Try that with a DI gun. I don't think anyone will argue that a piston gun still gets dirty. I didn't say that the majority of AR purchasers are buying piston guns, just that the majority of them aren't so against the idea like you are. A majority of people at least have enough interest in the piston system for most of the big companies to dump money into piston AR development. I think only time will tell how much "better," if at all, the piston system is than DI. |
|
If you're a civilian you shouldin't need a piston gun for the range.
Quoted:
Quoted:
If you pick up an AK47 you know it will go bang %99.99999 of the time, that;s the kind of reliability a piston AR is supposed to reproduce. Having handled AK copies here in the states, and real AK's in Iraq, I can tell you that is not the case. Yes AK's are unrealiable POS now just because fired poorly made or tampered with ones <_< |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: They're cleaner. That is the issue. Piston rifles don't put gasses into the receiver like a direct impingement rifle does. That really does cause fewer failures related to carbon build up in the receiver. There is absolutely no arguement of this. A properly maintained Di gun is every bit as reliable as a Piston gun. No gun is reliable if you don't take proper care of it. Piston guns have issues of their own. More parts means more things to break. Some piston rifles have the dreaded carrier tilt issues. I like them both. Get what you like. They get dirty just the same as DI guns, and solve no problems. But they sure are fun! He ran a can whole time. The back pressure caused by a can is ten fold anything going down a DI tube. So yeah running a can not much difference but run off and it's night and day.Uh huh, please elaborate how you came to those very scientific observations ... Point is, it does the same thing and not any better (or worse). DI gets dirty faster? Boo hoo, tell me who is wearing 1000 rds on a rig to the fight. Tell me which rifle doesn't need to be cleaned and lubed? Same shit, different package.
|
[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Piston ARs - Why? (Page 1 of 3)
AR Sponsor
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.