User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 7/23/2005 12:46:18 PM EDT
[#1]
Why a mid length gas system and gas piston? Added weight and no benefit plus you cant use existing carbine barrels AND limit the minimum barrel length while adding weight. Your barrel is light and 6.8 and no QD so full auto fire is limited. This means civilians only and no govt contract. Carbon fiber barrels allow the light weight and heat retention while providing superior heat handling to your finned aluminum heat sink and superior rigidity. Being able to have a side charging upper means more room for crud to get into the gun. Press fit barrels means a huge pain in the ass to change barrels and major logistical problems. Civilians would not like having to send a barrel to a shop with teh equipment to press fit a barrel. Existing designs already surpas your ideas. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/23/2005 1:35:41 PM EDT
[#2]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/23/2005 1:40:10 PM EDT
[#3]
Dude, your idea sucks. Sorry.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/23/2005 2:14:20 PM EDT
[#4]
Which aspect sucks, specifically? The integral railed forend/receiver--like the SCAR, MRP, MRS? Free float barrel--like the SCAR, MRP, MRS? The midlength/longer than carbine gas system--like the SCAR, MRP, probably MRS? Short stroke gas piston--like SCAR, HK416, LW set-ups. The advanced barrel with cooling fins--similar to JP Enterprise heatsinks? The press fit barrel--like many combat rifles? Use of AR lowers? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/23/2005 2:45:25 PM EDT
[#5]
The mid-length gas system, then the piston don't seem to make sense. The LW system supposedly bleeds off just enough to work the rod so mid-length vs std length make no difference. To my way of thinking, the mid-length makes snese if you are going to stay with direct impingement. Not sure how other piston systems work, maybe there is an advantage to pair a piston with a mid-length, but I'm not aware of it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/23/2005 2:58:13 PM EDT
[#6]
The fact that the AR15 system is based on modular parts that are all interchangeable. Every part of your system is proprietary.
The finned barrel is a good idea, but only if the fins were machined or cast into the barrel. Contact heatsinks wouldn't transfer shit on an AR barrel because the surfaces wouldn't match up close enough. It would be too expensive for the benefit. Yes, the press fit barrel is a horrid idea. Why would there be any reason to have a mid length gas system if all it is doing is working an op-rod? Free floats and integral rails are always a good thing, but not if the barrel is damn near impossible to remove. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/23/2005 3:22:24 PM EDT
[#7]
why 14.5? the 1.5" more adds so much more velocity |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/23/2005 3:27:27 PM EDT
[#8]
this would be my design
A2/Vortex/Troy Flash Suppressor ABS 16.5" 1x7 HBAR Wylde Chamber M4 Cut LW Gas Piston MRS Rifle Length 12" LW Gas Piston BCG/CH Troy FUFS/BUIS |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/23/2005 3:42:42 PM EDT
[#9]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/23/2005 3:57:45 PM EDT
[#10]
Well in that case, why not use a 20" barrel? Everything in war is a compromise, the 14.5" barrel is in wide use and offers a good balance of manueverability and effective range. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/23/2005 4:10:47 PM EDT
[#11]
Now there is a well reasoned answer.  Finned barrels went out with the Thompson, you might want to do some research as to why that is so. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/23/2005 4:18:31 PM EDT
[#12]
crack...
it's whats for breakfast..  jokingly said... |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/23/2005 4:24:04 PM EDT
[#13]
A one piece upper with a press fit barrel would be a step back from a standard upper, not to mention the perfectly reliable quick change barrel/reciever systems currently availible today. I can think up a few ways to use a threaded barrel in a unified reciever that would be easy to implement, but the fact remains that current and upcoming solutions more than solve the problem.
You could have the gas block anywhere along the tube, just have a hole machined in the hand grips to stick an allen key in to adjust gas if you want that feature. How exactly are our current battle rifles failing in the barrel arena that we need heatsinks on them? Making a bolt on heatsink that would efficiently transfer heat would be damn near impossible. Have you ever worked with high end computer hardware? For maximum heat transfer both the heat generating device and the heat sink have to have perfectly mated surfaces, mirror polished is preferable. With computer heatsinks this is accomplished by lapping both surfaces against a hard, perfectly flat plane, like plate glass. With a barrel, you would have to make the outside edge PERFECTLY round and mirror polished. Then you would have to make the inside diameter of the heatsink match that barrel perfectly. We're not talking a few extra dollars to "save lives", we're talking hundreds of man hours of manual labor to get those surfaces perfect. M4 barrels are not proprietary, the barrel extension is. A barrel extension is $25 and can be installed by any gunsmith if you can't afford a M4 upper. MK262 ammo works fine in 14.5" barrels. Real units are supplied with it right now. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/23/2005 4:46:53 PM EDT
[#14]
Once again, the fins are machined into the barrel (not bolted on). You stated that the fins were a good idea. Now you are against them? The purpose of the added surface area is to prevent a lighter barrel from overheating. Shaving weight off an infantry weapon while providing the same level of barrel cooling is an asset. The added cost of machining for this feature would clearly be worth it. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/23/2005 5:12:50 PM EDT
[#15]
I think a better step than fins would be adoption of better alloys that provide greater life and can sustain the heat. 4150 is good, but there are other alloys out there.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/23/2005 5:27:37 PM EDT
[#16]
No kidding. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/23/2005 5:33:42 PM EDT
[#17]
The nicest thing about ARs is that there is no 1 right answer. Build your rifle the way you see fit and enjoy.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/23/2005 6:00:36 PM EDT
[#18]
Fins in theory are a good idea, difficult in execution. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/23/2005 6:31:35 PM EDT
[#19]
How about this? It's all available now.
MRP (rifle length) 16" ABS carbon wrapped match SS barrel lined with MGI's new coating (well, this last part they're still testing) LW short stroke gas piston (maybe in midlength?) I can't see getting much better than this. But YMMV. Corey EDITED to add that soon we might have the LW MRS and MGI's SCAR upper to add into this mix. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/23/2005 6:46:50 PM EDT
[#20]
stellite lined? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/23/2005 6:51:48 PM EDT
[#21]
Why would you go to such lengths to create a monolithic upper receiver only to use a piston gas system?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/23/2005 6:57:36 PM EDT
[#22]
Because the AK has a gas system. An AK will always run. So, it must be because of the gas system.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/23/2005 7:17:47 PM EDT
[#23]
I wonder if the poster knows that a gas piston negates free floating a barrel? |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 7/23/2005 7:24:34 PM EDT
[#24]
The benefits are well known. 
|
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 7/23/2005 7:49:57 PM EDT
[#25]
It's as "free floated" as a any gas impingement system. The gas rod and the gas tube may both contact the receiver, so neither are truly, technically free floated. The integral forend of the MRP and MRS eliminate pressure from the handguards in a traditional M4 upper. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/23/2005 7:50:24 PM EDT
[#26]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/23/2005 7:53:56 PM EDT
[#27]
I suppose you could ask LW and LMT when their gas piston systems are released for their MRS and MRP, respectively. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/23/2005 7:58:22 PM EDT
[#28]
LMT did not develop the MRP to work with a piston. LW has not released the MRS but it has been said by LW that it does not work with a piston either. The real point though is that free floating a piston gas system is pointless. Respectively. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 7/23/2005 8:17:30 PM EDT
[#29]
Are you implying that any means to reduce stesses on the barrel, i.e. a free float tube, are pointless? Take a look at Mellonics: 3-4 feet off target at 300yds. due to sling/bipod stresses on the barrel. Any effort to free float the barrel as much as possible, regardless of the operating system, is well worth the effort. Further, the bullet has long left the barrel before the piston starts to move--hence any stress the short stroke gas piston has on the barrel at that point is irrelevant. So how is making an effort to free float as gas piston system pointless? Does the gas piston apply pressure to the barrel differently with every shot such as with a bipod or hand forces on a non free floated forend? As far as the gas piston not running in the MRS--stay tuned. The gas piston in the MRS is one of its strong selling points. Have a little more confidence in the folks at LW, they'll get it right. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/23/2005 8:32:49 PM EDT
[#30]
it was said in a joking manner, if you know me, you know i never mean to insult someone, the poster was insulted, and for that i am sorry... |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 7/23/2005 8:59:02 PM EDT
[#31]
As of right now the MRS is vapor wear and any argument based upon second hand speculation is worthless. Concerning free floating a gas piston system, the barrel will never be free floated. The piston will always apply pressure to the barrel no matter if it is stroking or not. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 7/24/2005 12:00:02 AM EDT
[#32]
You might as well stop with that statement, because you are dead wrong................ |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/24/2005 10:07:38 AM EDT
[#33]
How is that? Is this magical bullet somehow moving faster than the gas that is forcing it down the barrel? Your physics are questionable. You should stop and evaluate your idea before your next post; you need more evidence than the expiriences of various "SF Operators". Just because someone like H&K or whoever designs a new gas system for the M16/M4 platform doesn't mean that it's a good idea. It's just a way to make unknowing beauracrats buy new guns. IT IS A MARKETING PLOY. Anyway, you should stop to read everyone's posts and reconsider your idea. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/24/2005 10:22:42 AM EDT
[#34]
one of the issues in upgrading an fal rifle for accuracy has always been the pressure exerted on the barrel by the gas piston as it moves around, the harmonics on the barrel are not as stable as they would be with a direct gas system of some sort I do like the idea of an upper and rail being one part, this has already been done... the worst idea that was mentioned, (in my opinion) would be the use of a pressed in barrel, steel barrel extension and an aluminum reciever would expand at different rates and could affect the stability of the press fit between the reciever and the barrel, possibly becoming loose, to remedy this one would expect to achieve a tighter press fit, which could lead to deforming the reciever, it all presents a whole lot of other issues, ect barel cooling via grooves, or heat sinks could help keep things out of the red as far as temp issues are concerned, as long as they were machined into the barrel blank, not cast, you cannot have a cast barrel, it would detonate upon firing, 50,000+ psi is a lot of pressure... cooling grooves machined into the barrel would make for some really bad stress risers, which could mean more work done to the finish machining to eliminate the stress risers, bead blasting, and mp testing would have to be done on each barrel, also, those stress risers would be (finned) this would allow for debris to be caught(possibly) in between the fins and would also change barrel harmonics as the fins/groove became dirtier in the field, this would have a negative impact on the accuracy, as would the gas piston.... |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 7/24/2005 10:27:40 AM EDT
[#35]
I'm with DevL on this, the current system is already better than what you are proposing. Part of the beauty of the AR is the fact taht I can seperate my upper and lower and change the comlete upper in under 30seconds for a completly different set up for various uses. WHat you propose just makes that a PITA to do. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 7/24/2005 10:46:27 AM EDT
[#36]
We need that scene in OfficeSpace where that guy told his co workers about his idea for a Jump to Conclusions mat.
That's just terrible! |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/24/2005 2:21:00 PM EDT
[#37]
How's that? It's still a separte upper that would mount on any AR lower. It may take more than 30 seconds when you stop to marvel at how light it is!  |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/24/2005 5:44:49 PM EDT
[#38]
With a monolithic upper, damage the rails and the entire upper is junk.
With the present design, just install a new handguard. 0 for 7 |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/24/2005 7:26:04 PM EDT
[#39]
How light is it? Gas piston is heavier than the current gas tube. Finned bbl is heavier than the current profile. Built in rail system, heavier than the current system. How do you add the items you propose, and drop the weight? Your proposal defies logic because it adds all of the features that the original design was intended to avoid. They didn't just invent a gas piston. It was in use long before the M16. The M16 was designed to be lightweight, inexpensive, and simple. That's what the gas impingment system does. One thin little tube instead of a larger tube, piston, and associated hardware. The lightweight profile of the bbl, again done to save weight. Why does everybody want to turn the nice little efficient assault rifle into a bloody great ponderous main battle rifle? If you want a battle rifle, buy a FAL. If you want a lightweight combat rifle stick to the M16 and quit borrowing trouble. edit:speeling. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2005 5:06:10 AM EDT
[#40]
Bullet leaves the barrel before LW gas piston moves. Confirmed by testing done by LW.
Carbn fiber barrel has superior heat transfer. Testing done by MGI. FF barrel removes handguard stress induced POI shift and negates add/removal of equipment to the rail even if you have a gas piston set up. MRS is not vapor wear go look in the LW section. MRS designed to work with gas piston. Go read in the LW Industry section. LW gas piston does not add weight, as per LW. LW gas piston does not hurt accuracy as per testing done by LW. Some of you need to get some better information before posting untruths to back up your position. I have never read a thread with so much bad information in my whole life. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2005 5:07:22 AM EDT
[#41]
LW converts the MRP to gas piston with a special gas block. MRS is designed to work with gas piston. |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2005 5:11:28 AM EDT
[#42]
And CF barrels remove weight while offer superior cooling to your idea... plus it has already been done (finned heat sink on AR)... noone was interested. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2005 5:43:26 AM EDT
[#43]
I like the current M4 configuration. It works so keep it that way.
Colt_SBR |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2005 6:33:25 AM EDT
[#44]
It is not vapor wear? Please post a link to where it is for sale or where someone is buying it(anyone). |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2005 8:50:59 AM EDT
[#45]
Well there is a pic of the functioning prototype (which can be purchased if you wna to use it for proofing barrels and swapping quickly right now) and there is a waiting list to get the weapon upper which is mere weeks away from being released and shipped. Vaporware is equipment that does not exist. This is equpiment that DOES exist. People said the gas piston conversion was vaporware too. Pretty ignorant if you ask me. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2005 10:07:32 AM EDT
[#46]
There are pics of the LW dedicated .22 uppers from 1998 too. Yet you don't see too many available for sale. I wish LW lots of luck on the MRS; but so far all I've seen is a pic of a very rough prototype and the pics of the plastic model from SHOT SHOW 2005.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2005 5:32:55 PM EDT
[#47]
Thank you! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2005 6:00:19 PM EDT
[#48]
+1 on why make an AR a FAL?
If you want a FAL, just buy one. A lot cheaper than converting a design that works with one concept into basically another rifle. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2005 7:46:32 PM EDT
[#49]
Here's our answer for the AR/FAL/AK:
(No Heat, Carbon, or Gas Leaks in the receiver) Hope you enjoy the pic's. Best regards, Frank Patriot Ordnance Factory (POF-USA) www.POF-USA.com 9.25", 5.56mm Gas Piston, O.C.C.(Offensive Compact Carbine), with Krink flash hider  
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2005 10:08:55 PM EDT
[#50]
Three Shrikes have been delivered too. |
|||
|
|
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.
