User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 10/5/2004 5:21:53 PM EDT
[#1]
I can't afford to shoot my AR enough to get it so dirty it malfunctions! LOL
So I'm not at all interested in a gas piston AR. I like the standard design just fine. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/5/2004 5:48:55 PM EDT
[#2]
The only way I would be interested is if I owned a LL or DIAS. Then it would help to stop melting gas tubes, as I am sure I would do mag dump after mag dump. Other than that I dont see the need.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/5/2004 5:49:53 PM EDT
[#3]
I don't see why morons obsess on this piston nonsense. "Oooohh it keeps the gas out of the upper receiver." SO WHAT? ARs don't malfunction from carbon in the upper receiver.
Bad ammo or dirt are a more likely cause of malfunction. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/5/2004 5:53:33 PM EDT
[#4]
If one comes along that keeps the action clean, and doent affect accuracy, and makes it more reliable, I am game.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/5/2004 5:53:44 PM EDT
[#5]
The simple fact is that a gas piston system will reduce accuracy. Having a mechanical connection between the bolt and barrel, and having a shifting weight, will change the way the barrel vibrates. Too many people overlook the fact that the gas system in an AR allows for exceptional accuracy that isn't available in most other rifles.
-Troy |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/5/2004 7:14:20 PM EDT
[#6]
I would buy one simply from the standpoint of being able to go shoot, then spend 20 minutes cleaning. That's why I bought my AKM. The SL8 I owned was also like that, got the bolt face dirty, that was about it. (unfortunately it had cracking issues in the polymer FCG housing so I returned it). The AKM was not the most accurate, but fun and quick to clean. The SL8 was as accurate as any AR I have owned, but then it had a match grade HBAR barrel. I think a gas piston AR would be a hoot for that reason, when I didn't have time to spend hours cleaning. Run a bore snake through it a few times, clean the bolt face, and you are done. I'll alway own and love standard gas system ARs, but I think I gas-piston upper would be a nice addition to the gun cabinet if the price was reasonable (no more than $850 or so complete).
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/5/2004 7:24:30 PM EDT
[#7]
I would buy one 1 if the price is right2 it has to retrofit without having to modify hand guards or FSB,if all that had to be done was take out the original gas tube and maybe replace the carrier key then it would be worth it.The one that Kurt offers from KKF looks good but I think the front of the handguard and ring have to be modified.Drop in system with no major modifications would be appealing and probably to the military too.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2004 5:05:30 AM EDT
[#8]
Blah, blah, blah, try shooting one of the new generation systems before rushing to judgment. Both the HK system and the LW system are at least as accurate as the Colt system, with both showing more accuracy in fast semi and full-auto fire. The HK may have the edge due to its hammer forged barrel. This is not just my opinion but the opinion of everybody who has fired them and the results of the holes in the paper. HFG |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2004 6:28:22 AM EDT
[#9]
After comparing the actions of my SKS and AR15 I can understand the strong argument for the possible enhanced reliability that a piston driven upper would have to offer. I just imagine that if I dropped my SKS in a puddle, I could grab it and continue picking off zombies - but I can just imagine if I dropped my AR in a puddle deep enough to reach the gas port and tube - I'd be as good as zombie dinner! Can I get an amen? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2004 7:29:50 AM EDT
[#10]
I like the idea from the same standpoint that _DR like the gas piston design. Reducing the cleaning time seems like a real advantage. I've never fired enough rounds through one rifle between cleanings to sufficiently foul the gas system to cause malfunctions. Even shooting hundreds of rounds of Wolf, arguably the dirtiest 5.56 on the planet, doesn't give me any trouble through any of my uppers.
Winter's coming soon. I have a few machinist friends, maybe I'll see what I can come up with. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2004 7:37:58 AM EDT
[#11]
Piston uppers are probably going to be exactly what you want for a suppressed rifle, but otherwise the original design works fine.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2004 7:44:29 AM EDT
[#12]
Let me know if you need volunteer beta testers!
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2004 7:45:33 AM EDT
[#13]
Because the increased gas pressure causes more fouling? That makes sense, I had never thought about that. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2004 8:01:57 AM EDT
[#14]
My AR's run 100%.
I fail to see the need to change that. and 15 minutes to clean the current design isn't bad. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2004 8:02:34 AM EDT
[#15]
+1, seriously. I have an open free range at my disposal 24/7 |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2004 8:09:18 AM EDT
[#16]
If i happen to have the money a few years down the road, I could be tempted.
Nothing id get all excited about tho. - BG |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2004 8:29:11 AM EDT
[#17]
If I wanted a piston operated gun, I'd get an AK.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2004 8:33:22 AM EDT
[#18]
15 minutes? No way it can pass the q-tip test after 15 minutes. Putting a weapon away dirty is like putting your child to bed with a dirty diaper. It can be done, but not with a clear conscience. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2004 8:37:29 AM EDT
[#19]
the only gas piston ar i'd buy is a chromelined ar180 that has a flattop...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2004 8:42:08 AM EDT
[#20]
I agree the AR180 would be good and the current proprietary optics mount on the AR180 leaves much to be desired. A 1913 rail and a side folding stock would be nice. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2004 8:56:49 AM EDT
[#21]
15 minutes is all it takes. If you're taking longer than that then you're probably over cleaning it. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2004 9:11:20 AM EDT
[#22]
What's Wrong with the way my Ar is designed? It groups with the best of my bolt guns, and goes BANG everytime I pull the trigger, so long as I keep her clean and feed her good ammo.
I guess I'm from the old school, If it ain't broke, Don't fix it.... Kind of like all the new Improved SUPER SHORT MAGNUM cartridges.....WTF? What good are they ? How are they an advantage over my OLD .300 Win MAG? The Fella's down at the local gun store say that with the new .300 Super short magnums , I can work the bolt faster, cause the action is shorter.... I was always taught that if you have to shoot more than once, you have already fucked up....  Keep your new Gas Piston Upper, Mine works Just fine! |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2004 9:48:30 AM EDT
[#23]
Well, my standard is there must nothing that can return a dirty q-tip, anywhere (as well a shiny, spotless bore, carrier and bolt. No way I can do that in 15 minutes. Maybt in an hour if I get after it and start the bolt group soaking right away, but probably longer. You might call it overcleaning, but to me, if it's dirty at all, it's not clean. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2004 9:53:15 AM EDT
[#24]
right on bro! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2004 10:41:31 AM EDT
[#25]
I don't care how long you clean it - I'll bet I'll be able to get that tip of a q-tip dirty.. It's a rifle - not an eating utensil. If you want near spotless and 15 minutes - SLIP2000 makes a very nice dunk tank where you can drop your whole rifle in it. Of course that much SLIP2000 cleaner is pretty pricy. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2004 10:46:20 AM EDT
[#26]
I don't shoot q-tips.  My guns run 100%, which is a hell of a lot more than I can say for most of the folks that spend hours cleaning theirs, usually F'ing things up in the process. (like a friend that was removing the gas key every time) Oh - and I sold my carbon scraper after learning it's pointless to remove the carbon. Guess what? 10's of thousands of rounds later, my guns still run 100% - without EVER scraping carbon off. It's self limiting, so why bother? Your guns, your choice - but you wonder why folks bad mouth the AR-15 and love the AK, anal cleaners aren't helping the reputation. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2004 11:13:53 AM EDT
[#27]
Well, yeah that would make a big difference. I just do it the old army way. If I had a dunk tank that would make a difference. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2004 11:20:08 AM EDT
[#28]
I like the gas piston. May detract from accuracy a bit, but it prevents short stroking, no gas tube to melt ( extremely hard to do, but possible ), prevents internal crud from building up with external dust and dirt, keeps the bolt face cleaner ( keeps gunk off the extractor/ejector as far as carbon goes ), and various other reasons.
I still like the impingement, though. A self cleaning gas system that gives all available accuracy out of a given barrel, blows up excess buildups of carbon, and a few other reasons. If the gas piston somehow becomes the military standard, then I'll buy into the system. If not, then gas impingement it is. I would be satisfied with either of the systems. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2004 11:25:56 AM EDT
[#29]
Cleaning it 'the Army Way' as outlined in the -10 should only take 15 minutes. It won't be white glove inspection ready - but white glove inspection on weapons is pretty stupid in the first place. I've founs SLIP-2000 to be great for the bolt & bolt carrier group as I can dunk them while I clean the bore - 15 minutes later I can pull them out rinse them and lube them and they look like I spent an hour cleaning them. At classes I just pull the parts wipe them down with CLP - reassemble and be ready to go in the same amount of time. No the parts won't be spotless - but they will be 100% reliable - which is all that counts. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2004 11:27:57 AM EDT
[#30]
gas pistons belong to AKs and FALs, ARs are just fine the way they are now.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2004 11:28:58 AM EDT
[#31]
Years ago there was a test of the G36 done by both the NRA and Tactical Shooter. The test ran three variants or the G36 and the SL8. Both folks found the G36 was shooting between 2" and 4" MOA groups with the SL8 firing a best group of 1 1/2" MOA. I would be very surprised if the XM-8 Design would be any better since it is a take off.
I have fired almost every variant of the M16 in the Army and have even fired original M16s that were 30+ years old that could still shoot 1 to 1 1/2 MOA. As well as built ARs which will group 1 MOA at 300 yards. The shit where it eats argument is only good for a military where the private only has a 3rd grade education or you have the maintenace battalion fighting your wars. My opinion is the farther you can kill them the sooner you can kill them. So if they can make a piston system that is not a compromise; sure knock yourself out. If they compromise accuracy for the promise of "reliability" no thanks. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2004 11:41:47 AM EDT
[#32]
so how many magazines do i have to fire before carbon build up becomes an issue?
or should i ask how many DOZEN mags? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2004 1:14:44 PM EDT
[#33]
Hmm...
From an engineering standpoint: Adding more moving parts = adding more places for Murphy to work his magic. You're not changing the way the rifle actually functions just the way the gasses energy reaches the bolt carrier. You're still reintroducing 'dirty' gasses back into the gun at some point or another. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2004 1:42:30 PM EDT
[#34]
Well in the -10 maybe, but when I was XO for A Co. 2/142 Inf (mech) I ran the arms room (as well as Beans & Bullets & LOGPACS, etc), and everything had to be q-tip clean. the guys usually cleaned their weapons for 1-1.5 hours min or they wouldn't pass, my armorer was a real stickler for that. I guess old habits die hard. But with the SLIP2000 you describe maybe I could still cut the cleaning time down a lot. where can you buy this stuff? who makes it? |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2004 1:52:02 PM EDT
[#35]
I don't think the soldiers in Jessica Lynch's convoy in Nassiriya would care whether it shot 1 moa or 5 moa, as long as they could have gotten a lot of lead downrange on a man sized target very quickly. You can argue all day long that they should have kept their weapons clean, but with maintenance troops and the like it's just not going to happen in a high stress sandstorm environment where they have been up for two days digging 5-ton trucks, Hemets and tractor/trailers out of the sand and getting lost because their C.O was an asshat who couldn't use a GPS unit (and then hauled ass when the shooting started)...Better that they had a 4 moa weapon that would fire when dusty than a 0.5 moa weapon that would not. For a battle rifle, for common, non-elite troops, 1.5 moa or the like is not essential to be combat effective. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2004 1:55:03 PM EDT
[#36]
Wow this is good discussion.
However, I can't seem to understand how a practically weightless piston will effect accuracy to the degree that some of your guys are preaching. If it is weightless enough, and in a tight piston 'chamber', per se, I can't see how. I need to see some scientific evidence. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2004 2:05:20 PM EDT
[#37]
Anyone seen information about how existing AR-15 gas piston mods deal with unloading the bolt so the lugs can last longer? It seems to me that if you just run an op rod through the gas tube hole and shove the BC back, it's going to cause a lot greater wear on the bolt and chamber lugs. I'd be interested to see how it's done on the OA-93. Does the HK and the KKF kit do anything to get the force off of the bolt to release it easier?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2004 7:31:32 AM EDT
[#38]
I couldn't tell you I've fired 1000s of rounds between cleaning and never had carbon be an issue. IIRC Troy went between 6K and 9K rounds before cleaning (and he didn't have any issues). The Danish army went 15K rounds in their trials w/o issues. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2004 7:35:24 AM EDT
[#39]
The stuff you're looking for is their Carbon Cutter They also make a CLP that I'm experimenting with. I don't see any improvements in capability with their CLP other than it's non-toxic. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2004 8:27:53 AM EDT
[#40]
Your barrel will burst before your gas tube. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2004 9:05:42 AM EDT
[#41]
I'll order some and try it. thanks for the tip. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2004 2:32:31 PM EDT
[#42]
Yeah, dealing with a fussy AR with bolt carrier rash can be a headache.
That was not an AR issue, that was a maintainance issue. Not only did their ARs not run but every weapon they had from the m249 to the M2HB failed. Will a piston system work where the Ma Duece won't? |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2004 9:13:54 PM EDT
[#43]
Another point of view is we now fight in the desert, if our weapons don't work in that environment - I say it's a M16 Issue and time to move on to another weapons system that is capable of performing well without a lot of user intervention! I don't know if it is so much the piston, but if you can find the videos of the trials for the XM8 including the mud/sand test it is absolutely unbelieveable watching them submerge the weapon in mud, wait, pull it out and then empty a full magazine of ammy without any issues! Whatever HK has done, it appears they have done it right!! Can anyone with real world experience comment on how much the sand affects the headspace and timing on a M2? I remember them as pretty forgiving and never saw an M2 that wouldn't fire right off the bat using the field method of adjustment without using the go/nogo keys... ______________________________ Eagles may fly, but weasels don’t get sucked into jet engines! |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2004 1:46:42 AM EDT
[#44]
I'm amazed everytime I go to shoot one. Dosen't matter how much salt or corrosion is built up either. As long as you can cycle the first round into battery, she'll fire. I'm even more amazed when I'm done and go to check how badly the GM's have screwed up the adjustments. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2004 11:28:39 AM EDT
[#45]
The lugs are only loaded from one side as there is no gas pressure on the back of the bolt and therefor the loadings on the cams are dramatically reduced. HFG |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2004 4:21:13 PM EDT
[#46]
First, AR-pattern rifles work JUST FINE in the desert. We currently have over 100,000 (!!!) AR-pattern rifles in Iraq, and more in Afghanistan, and you certainly aren't hearing about soldiers being killed because their weapons have failed, or even cries from the soldiers about their rifles' reliability. In fact, soldier confidence in their weapons (Beretta aside) continues to be very high, and is growing. Jessica Lynch's unit's situation was one of those unfortunate exceptions. They had been operating in a huge sandstorm for over 2 straight days. It shouldn't be any surprise that operating in a sand storm will require extra measures to be taken to keep vehicles, weapons, and people going. Lynch's crew had been focusing on their vehicles and people (and recovering other units' vehicles), and more or less ignored their weapons. Again, in a 2+ day SANDSTORM. As we know, ALL of their weapons failed, including the M2s and the M240s, both of which are normally considered ultra-reliable. But 2 days of caked-on talcum powder-fine grit will kill any weapon. That their M16s and SAWs also failed is not even remarkable, given the conditions and lack of maintenance. Finally, you seem to be impressed with the XM8 demos, of the rifle being dropped in the mud and then firing. You might want to review Armalite's website, which has videos of Gene Stoner himself demoing the AR10, performing virtually identical tests. And this film was made in 1960! Similar demonstrations have been performed with M16s dozens of times, and anyone who's ever been through Marine bootcamp can attest to the M16's reliability in mud and water. There's no magic with the XM8. Mostly, it's about MARKETING and back-channel deals; it really doesn't give the soldier anything they don't already have, and in fact, in several areas, REMOVES capabilites. -Troy |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2004 6:21:35 PM EDT
[#47]
If the testers want to impress me, they will use an M-16 for a control while they are doing the dunk tests on their new wonder weapon.
I think they won't because they know they M-16 will acquit itself well. I am suspicious of anyone who runs a test claiming Y is better than X but does not put X thru the same test at the same time. Even better would be to use five examples of each to rule out the possibility of the odd lemon. Ethier these jokers conducting these tests don't have a basic working knowledge of statistical analysis or are being deliberately deceptive. The best thing to do would be to give 5 examples of wonder weapon Y to HP White labs and thet them run them thru the ringer. I would believe those results. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2004 7:03:37 PM EDT
[#48]
FYI Since I've had a couple people contact me offline about the product I thought I post a link to the review I did on it. Carbon Cutter Review |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2004 7:11:55 PM EDT
[#49]
I have no desire to own a gas piston AR15 upper. I believe the Stoner system is superior for a number of reasons that I wont go into because frankly its just not worth the time or the debate around here, and honestly, I dont know shit about ARs or shooting them.
Anyone that wants one, go buy one, bump fire into berms at the range all day, and be happy. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2004 7:22:52 PM EDT
[#50]
I personally don't want my ARs to shoot with the percision of AKs. I've drug an M16 throght the mud and sand and snow with no problems.. I'm not going to worry about getting it dirty now.
|
|
|
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.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
