LMT MRP CQB (that's a lot of letters!) piston rifle pics:

[Obey]

I've had this for a while, but I have yet to shoot it. It's driving me nuts - studying for the bar 6 nights a week and working during the day.

Anyways, looks good!

In case anyone wanted to know about the rest of the gear...

YHM 7.62QD Phantom silencer
LBT 6034B vest
Some Spyderco S30V knife that I like a lot...
A Maglite that takes 3 or 4 C batts...
Pelican M3 LED light with remote and TDI adapter
KAC VFG
EOTech 5-something
Centurion diopter BUIS
LMT SOPMOD stock
Tactical Recon Manx tabby cat, 1y/o, adopted from the LASPCA.

Now I just have to take this thing out and shoot it!

 

[Nolacopusmc]

At first look, I thought you had that maglight mounted on there some kind of way. LOL. tactical foot lighting or something.


Sweet ride.

 

[penguin]

love the tacti-cat...lol Hey, while you're studying for the Bar, I'd be happy to run a few rounds through it. You know, keep her running well...

 

[Obey]

love the tacti-cat...lol Hey, while you're studying for the Bar, I'd be happy to run a few rounds through it. You know, keep her running well...

 

[Jon]

Excellent rifle.

 

[dwr461]

That's a very nice rifle. Where's the tactical rail mounted coffee maker?

Dave

 

[Obey]

That's a very nice rifle. Where's the tactical rail mounted coffee maker?

Dave

I try to keep it to the essentials...RDS, BUIS, light. The VFG is handy in this instance because the silencer is quite heavy, and I have found that the VFG helps me stabilize the weight a bit more when aiming a rifle with a stainless steel can on the end of it. Plus, it makes for a nice place to put the pressure pad...

Same with this rifle of mine: BUIS, RDS, light. I think any fightin' rifle needs all three, or at least something in its place that serves the same purpose...

 

[LAPatriot]

Nice rifle!! I'm in the market for one of these LMT piston rifles, but I can't find anything on their durability after several thousand rounds have fired. Do you have any sources for more info?

 

[Obey]

Nice rifle!! I'm in the market for one of these LMT piston rifles, but I can't find anything on their durability after several thousand rounds have fired. Do you have any sources for more info?

No, but you should know that these rifles are based on the already-proven LMT MRP CQB DI rifle, so I wouldn't worry. LMT is a government contractor, and makes arms for our military, so they do not lack in quality. They make one of the best ARs around.

Here is a 2k round test without cleaning (vs. an HK416):

http://www.defensereview.com/lmt-mrp-pistonop-rod-system-vs-hk416-2000-round-head-to-head-test/

-J

 

[mct601]

rediculously nice rifle

 

[jimdana1942]

I bet that thing will do every thing except mow the grass.

 

[BRLAShooter]

Those Guns are the HAWTNESS... Very Nice.

 

[LAPatriot]

No, but you should know that these rifles are based on the already-proven LMT MRP CQB DI rifle, so I wouldn't worry. LMT is a government contractor, and makes arms for our military, so they do not lack in quality. They make one of the best ARs around.

Here is a 2k round test without cleaning (vs. an HK416):

http://www.defensereview.com/lmt-mrp-pistonop-rod-system-vs-hk416-2000-round-head-to-head-test/

-J

Thanks for the link. This article makes me feel better. I have ordered one from Kiesler's. It should be in my hands the middle of next week. If it does well I'll be able to get rid of some of my AKs. While all of them are completely reliable, most have just barely acceptable accuracy. They are fun to shoot and practice with, but that isn't the only reason for having them, is it? The LMT should solve the problems that were drawbacks of the previous direct gas impengment system.

Thanks Again,

 

[Obey]

Thanks for the link. This article makes me feel better. I have ordered one from Kiesler's. It should be in my hands the middle of next week. If it does well I'll be able to get rid of some of my AKs. While all of them are completely reliable, most have just barely acceptable accuracy. They are fun to shoot and practice with, but that isn't the only reason for having them, is it? The LMT should solve the problems that were drawbacks of the previous direct gas impengment system.

Thanks Again,

No problem!

That is also the way I felt. I/I've own/owned Romanian, Polish, Yugoslavian, and Bulgarian AKs. I like the reliability, BUT, the lack of modularity, mediocre accuracy, reciprocating CH, lack of mag release/BHO really kind of disappoint. While this hasn't caused me to write off the AK completely, I do think the piston ARs, if they work as advertised, may challenge the AK in reliability while being more accurate, modular, and faster to operate. I put my faith in LMT, though it is one of the newer designs, because I think that LWRC and POF don't match LMT in design (though they rival in build quality). Further, the LMT only varies from the standard AR in 2 parts - bolt carrier and barrel assembly. Everything else is the same. Further, if you so please, the LMT can be swapped from DI to piston in a minute or so. I don't anticipate the HK rifle being superior to the LMT.

I also want to thank all of you for the compliments!

 

[LAPatriot]

First, please understand that this is NOT a personal shot at you directly. More so, its aimed toward all the people who really don't know any better and have drank the AR-15.com/keyboard commando Kool-Aid regarding "piston guns".

I have been using the original AR "platform", with that dastardly direct gas impingement system, since 1970... in various environments both military and LE. If you keep it reasonably clean, and use proper ammunition, it works; period.

Now... a lot of sand WILL choke one if you're not meticulous. And this is where the piston gun has it over the direct gas system. If I was going to fight in the desert, I'd want a piston gun.

But last time I checked, we're fresh out of sand and/or sand storms around here.

So, buy a piston gun if it makes you feel good. But if you think, in THIS environment, that you'll have a better carbine than my old Colt 6520, or even the BushMaster I drag around with me... "better" being defined as goes bang reliably and is accurate... think again.

.

I understand what you are saying and I agree with you to a certain extent. I realize many of the problems with the M-16/AR-15 were due to 1) fielding the weapon before it had been fully tested 2) changing to ball powder instead of stick type originally specified by the factory 3) the idiotic idea that a weapon did not require cleaning in a combat invironment and therefore no cleaning kits or instructions were provided. These solved many of the original problems and there were other mods that fixed other problems or just improved the rifle, like the A2 model.

I have several other AR-15s, many other Aks, and various other assault type rifles. I like them all for different reasons. It is just that I believe the longivety of the rifle has been greatly increased by the addition of the gas piston system. It will make cleaning frequently less of a necessity, and by eliminating the gas rings and such increase reliabilty and lessen the need for the parts to be replaced. The gas key is no longer an issue since the gas key is now milled with the carrier as one unit. These are all improvements that appeal to me and do make the AR a better weapon no matter where you use it. There are trade-offs such as the weight increase and being slightly less accurate. It will never be as reliable as an AK, but neither will the AK ever be as accurate.

I don't believe it will be much better in the sand since it still maintains the close tolerances of the original. To my knowledge only a lose tolerance weapon such a a AK can handle such an invironment.

No I don't have any illustions when it comes to what is the better weapon. To me it really depends on where you use it, what you feed it, how often you clean it, and what your expectations of accuracy are.

Thanks,
Paul

 

[LAPatriot]

No problem!

That is also the way I felt. I/I've own/owned Romanian, Polish, Yugoslavian, and Bulgarian AKs. I like the reliability, BUT, the lack of modularity, mediocre accuracy, reciprocating CH, lack of mag release/BHO really kind of disappoint. While this hasn't caused me to write off the AK completely, I do think the piston ARs, if they work as advertised, may challenge the AK in reliability while being more accurate, modular, and faster to operate. I put my faith in LMT, though it is one of the newer designs, because I think that LWRC and POF don't match LMT in design (though they rival in build quality). Further, the LMT only varies from the standard AR in 2 parts - bolt carrier and barrel assembly. Everything else is the same. Further, if you so please, the LMT can be swapped from DI to piston in a minute or so. I don't anticipate the HK rifle being superior to the LMT.

I also want to thank all of you for the compliments!

You make some very valid points and I could never get rid of all my AKs. Their simpilicity is what I really like about them. You are correct in that they do not offer much in the way of options or optical applications. Again that adds to their simplicity and to their reliability. I also agree that with the LMT I hope to have the best of both worlds. The only rifle I have that combines a bit of both the accuracy of the AR with the reliability of the AK is my Galil. Infortunately it is also very heavy.

Thanks,
Paul

 

[Obey]

First, please understand that this is NOT a personal shot at you directly. More so, its aimed toward all the people who really don't know any better and have drank the AR-15.com/keyboard commando Kool-Aid regarding "piston guns".

I have been using the original AR "platform", with that dastardly direct gas impingement system, since 1970... in various environments both military and LE. If you keep it reasonably clean, and use proper ammunition, it works; period.

Now... a lot of sand WILL choke one if you're not meticulous. And this is where the piston gun has it over the direct gas system. If I was going to fight in the desert, I'd want a piston gun.

But last time I checked, we're fresh out of sand and/or sand storms around here.

So, buy a piston gun if it makes you feel good. But if you think, in THIS environment, that you'll have a better carbine than my old Colt 6520, or even the BushMaster I drag around with me... "better" being defined as goes bang reliably and is accurate... think again.

.

There's a lot that can be said in response here. At this point in the technological evolution of firearms, what gun won't work if properly maintained? You echo a common argument of the DI faithful, here, and that is 'my DI will be just as reliable as a (theoretically) reliable piston gun so long as I keep it cleaned, lubed, etc. A better argument is what you tangentially alluded to when relating your prior experience - DI guns have been 'proven' to work (again, so long as you keep them cleaned and lubed), while the piston AR has not seen enough 'action' to draw any conclusions. We will see what happens in that regard. However, you ARE correct about the sand issue, it would seem:

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/12/army_carbine_dusttest_071217/

A you may or may not know, I have several ARs in DI, piston, and even blowback (pistol caliber carbines). Sadly, I cannot say which is 'better' at this point. They are all reliable platforms. However, I believe that if the LMT piston rifle delivers as promised, it will simply be a more reliable rifle. I won't have to worry about it always being meticulously cleaned and heavily lubed. Now, we can create alternative scenarios where the DI gun will be equally reliable (in the 'this environment' you are referring to, which I assume means an urban setting?), but I can't think of a scenario in which the DI guns will be more reliable than the (again, theoretically) reliable piston gun. That is why I would prefer the piston rifle, and why I would contend it is 'better.' Again, if you set your own terms and limits for what 'better' is, the term 'better' becomes meaningless, generally. To take your example to an extreme, 'If you think your carbine can fire one whole magazine on a sunny day better than mine, you are mistaken.' In fact, with your qualification, you are essentially robbing the piston rifle of one of its main advantages over DI - the ability to run dirtier and 'dryer,' so to speak.

 

[LAPatriot]

There's a lot that can be said in response here. At this point in the technological evolution of firearms, what gun won't work if properly maintained? You echo a common argument of the DI faithful, here, and that is 'my DI will be just as reliable as a (theoretically) reliable piston gun so long as I keep it cleaned, lubed, etc. A better argument is what you tangentially alluded to when relating your prior experience - DI guns have been 'proven' to work (again, so long as you keep them cleaned and lubed), while the piston AR has not seen enough 'action' to draw any conclusions. We will see what happens in that regard. However, you ARE correct about the sand issue, it would seem:

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/12/army_carbine_dusttest_071217/

A you may or may not know, I have several ARs in DI, piston, and even blowback (pistol caliber carbines). Sadly, I cannot say which is 'better' at this point. They are all reliable platforms. However, I believe that if the LMT piston rifle delivers as promised, it will simply be a more reliable rifle. Now, we can create alternative scenarios where the DI gun will be equally reliable (in the 'this environment' you are referring to, which I assume means an urban setting?), but I can't think of a scenario in which the DI guns will be more reliable than the (again, theoretically) reliable piston gun. That is why I would prefer the piston rifle, and why I would contend it is 'better.' Again, if you set your own terms and limits for what 'better' is, the term 'better' becomes meaningless, generally. To take your example to an extreme, 'If you think your carbine can fire one whole magazine on a sunny day better than mine, you are mistaken.'

Well, you are "preaching to the choir", but I did check out the link. This is good news since the HK416 and the LMT are so very similar. It is too bad they did not use an AK as a base line for reliability. Of course that would not have been fair to the manufacturers of the other weapons.

 

[Obey]

It is too bad they did not use an AK as a base line for reliability.

I agree, here. I think it would have been taken with a grain of salt (or sand? ) though, since we would all expect the AK to perform better with half a sand dune in the action anyways, but on the other hand, no one would expect that same AK to post anything better than 3 or 4 MOA, anyways. It's all about priorities, though. If I was a 12 year old Afghani, I'd probably take minute-of-man accuracy for a rifle that I'll never have to fix or clean, and that cost me only 1 goat.

 

[Obey]

Not really sure what point you're tying to make there... your "lawyer schooling" is obviously working...

MY point is this... yes, the piston gun (properly executed) does have a higher degree of reliability overall in certain environments... BUT, it doesn't matter to the average dude/user, who won't see sandy extreme climates nor days of protracted combat with no time for weapon maintenance.

.

To clarify, what I am saying is that I would call the - I like the way you put it - "properly executed" piston gun 'better' because it has this 'higher degree of reliability' overall. But as usual, Steve, I find it hard to disagree with you - "the average dude/user...won't see sandy extreme climates nor days of protracted combat with no time for weapon maintenance."

STILL, the appeal of zero maintenance appeals to SHTF-types like me who are sure their house is going to get robbed every time a hurricane comes 'round, and I am POSITIVE the Chinese are going to set foot in New Orleans by 2012. So don't come crying to me after you lose your CLP and boresnake and can't keep your (very nice) DI ARs running when the communist zombies have taken Jax brewery.

I'm kidding, of course. I doubt my piston gun will see over 300 consecutive rounds without a thorough cleaning, but just like the doctor with the Porsche he uses for grocery shopping, I am the (hopefully soon to be after the July Bar) lawyer with the high-end-LMT-Honey-Island-plinking-rifle. The alleged absolute reliability appeals to me. I again note I've not shot a damn round through this thing yet, whereas I have cases upon cases of rounds through DI ARs, and any quality DI AR I have owned (DPMS, Bushmaster, BCM, Rock River, CMMG, etc.) has, surprisingly, never, ever had an FTF, FTE, breakage, etc. They, of course, were always cleaned and lubed.

One other thing, I should realign my perspective with yours in order to understand your approach. When you see a piston rifle thread, you see the arfcom fanboys who say it's the next best thing to quilted toilet paper. I know how annoying that can be! On the other hand, when I see a piston rifle thread, I wait for the arfcom diehard 'old guys' who say 'unnecessary!! Nothing wrong with DI!' With that in mind, I should have tailored my post to look more like an addendum to yours, rather than a contrary opinion. Because, after all, you are not incorrect, and I understand your frustration with the kool-aid drinkers...