Piston AR's...
- Thread starter Hardballing
- Start date
The Best online firearms community in Louisiana.
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
VG,
Was yakking with Maury over @ 10-8 in Metairie and IIRC, his statement was that the Stag M8 used the CMMG piston system as is. Any truth to that? If you know?
That DD4 seems like a VERY well made WEAPON, not just fun/gun. Pretty much dollar for dollar on what I could find the Ruger for but then I'm back to DI vs PD.
And...do the warts have a hair in them? Ewwwwwww.(meaning, describe the wartage).
I have always found Maury to be credible so if he says the M8 is a CMMG Piston I'll buy that. To be hones I don't know. The DDM4 is a far superior weapon to the SR556. It has A Cold Hammer Forged Barrel and is a true Mil-Spec Gun.
The SR556 has the wrong barrel twist 1/9 vs. 1/7. A Lower Grade steel in the Barrel, and is made to SR spec. They also exhibit the bane of Piston Guns; Carrier Tilt. I also find them heavy. but as warts go the shifting specs and the Carrier Tilt issue are the biggest two. I'd go DDM4 any day.
If you want a piston gun on the low end I think CMMG and Osprey offer the best options. On the high end are LMT and Barret. I wouldn't touch any of the other ones unless the HK 416 became widely available. Even then its unlikely I will drop any coin on a Piston Gun. I just see no added capability for the way I shoot.
Definitely not the norm for a POF. I suggest you contact them, or inspect it really well to look for some kind of problem. If it's keyholing at 25 yards, the rounds may be contacting the flash hider on the way out. Or, you may have some other burr that's hanging up the rounds. Mine was 2 MOA out of the box with decent ammo. It is now 1 MOA with a barrel change and the right ammo.
The DI systems has weaknesses. That's a fact. It's weaknesses are well known. Also what's well known is exactly what you have to do to keep it running in any environment. I'd choose a well known system. Yes the piston design is well known. But which version? Who made it? What are the standard sizes etc?
Dave
Dave
If I were to get a piston gun, its a short list (SCAR would be at the top for non AR piston. LWRC, LMT... thats about it).
I own an LWRC, POF, and several DI ARs. They all run the same. I prefer the LWRC for several reasons, but it is heavier, and using a suppressor, they all the same at the end of the day. I have sent my POF 308 back to the factory once, since then its been great. LWRC has had 0 problems.
I would love to have a 12" SCAR 16s, and I will once they get the spare parts issue sorted out. Until then LWRC is king in my book.
Dont believe Internet Hype either way.
And the arguement about Stoner designing that way is ridiculous, do you really think he would have designed it that way today? "Henry Ford designed it that way, we shouldnt change a thing." Its a ridiculous arguement.
I own an LWRC, POF, and several DI ARs. They all run the same. I prefer the LWRC for several reasons, but it is heavier, and using a suppressor, they all the same at the end of the day. I have sent my POF 308 back to the factory once, since then its been great. LWRC has had 0 problems.
I would love to have a 12" SCAR 16s, and I will once they get the spare parts issue sorted out. Until then LWRC is king in my book.
Dont believe Internet Hype either way.
And the arguement about Stoner designing that way is ridiculous, do you really think he would have designed it that way today? "Henry Ford designed it that way, we shouldnt change a thing." Its a ridiculous arguement.
The Sig 556 is based on the Swiss Arms SG550, and mechanically is a great rifle. Sig basically took the operating system and adapted it to a lower that accepts AR magazines.
Sig certainly had some early production/quality control issues, perhaps most notably some had canted rails. The original handguards were generally despised as fugly. The sights originally were pretty crappy.
Generally the problems have been remedied. The trigger is very good. Functionality is very good. You should look at a Sig if you have any interest in a piston rifle.
http://www.sigsauer.com/Products/ShowCatalogProduct.aspx?categoryid=35
And not even a very good AK.
I disagree. The Swiss Arms SG55X series is known as a very good weapon system.
Then current gen of SIG rifles have warts.
Perhaps, depending on how you define "warts".
The SiG 551 is a very good rifle. All of the ones currently for sale in the states....meh not so much. Here is why I think not and what I define as warts.
-A poor, out of spec, proprietary rail system that is heavy and uses a weak attachment system.
-A barrel made from suspect materials by methods less then industry standards.
-The use of parts not standard to SiG's Military Rifle construction and made in places like Taiwan. If standard A is what the .mil guys get why does the american Consumer get standard B?
-Garbage Accessories like the silly red dot and the really dumb trigger actuated flash light. Sympathetic reflex much?!?
-Price. Its a 5.56mm rifle, what makes it cost so much?
-Mag-Well dimensions that vary gun to gun.
-Weight
-A trigger that for the price should be better.
-Lots of proprietary parts.
-Incompatability
At the end of the day there are 4 rifles for serious social work: ARs, AKs, and FALs. The market, both military and civilian, has spoken. The support is there for those platforms. Tons of spare parts, tons of people making similar variations on accessories etc. Why would you want something you can't say add an after market rail to? Try and find a part for a 55X in Fayetteville NC the night before your class. Try and find sling mounts, hell name an accessory its hard to find. I'm sure you own one and your offended by me saying its no bueno. I get the sentiment. I'm just a realist. The world didn't need another 5.56 rifle. See also the SCAR, ACR, Daewoo et al.
The gold standard for me is always gonna be who's using it for serious social work. For example the AK is in use by Goat Herders and contrarians the world over. It clearly must work. I don't own one, don't care for them but I get they work. The AR may be the most throughly tested platform in the world. I can look at the M4 and cite 20 years of testing and hard use. It works. People in the know continue to use it and buy it. Who tested the SiG? Nobody evaluated the commercial version formally that I am aware of. I'm sure some PD's got sweet deals from SiG and field them but did they evaluate or just make a cost based decision? Is anybody fielding them on the Battlefield? Not that I have ever seen once. Before you say the Swiss they don't fight anybody and the rifle they buy is made in Europe to a higher standard. If SiG made that rifle available in the States then maybe they would have something. But the New SiG didn't do that. What they did was take a product that had cachet and watered it down, geekeed it up, and cheapened the construction in order to maximize profit. Sooner or later the market will speak and what it will say is no thanks SiG we don't need another shitty maker of once iconic guns. We already survived Colt, and the Old S&W.
OK somebody else can have the soapbox now. Im done. The dust is really bad outside and I was a wee cabin crazy....
-A poor, out of spec, proprietary rail system that is heavy and uses a weak attachment system.
-A barrel made from suspect materials by methods less then industry standards.
-The use of parts not standard to SiG's Military Rifle construction and made in places like Taiwan. If standard A is what the .mil guys get why does the american Consumer get standard B?
-Garbage Accessories like the silly red dot and the really dumb trigger actuated flash light. Sympathetic reflex much?!?
-Price. Its a 5.56mm rifle, what makes it cost so much?
-Mag-Well dimensions that vary gun to gun.
-Weight
-A trigger that for the price should be better.
-Lots of proprietary parts.
-Incompatability
At the end of the day there are 4 rifles for serious social work: ARs, AKs, and FALs. The market, both military and civilian, has spoken. The support is there for those platforms. Tons of spare parts, tons of people making similar variations on accessories etc. Why would you want something you can't say add an after market rail to? Try and find a part for a 55X in Fayetteville NC the night before your class. Try and find sling mounts, hell name an accessory its hard to find. I'm sure you own one and your offended by me saying its no bueno. I get the sentiment. I'm just a realist. The world didn't need another 5.56 rifle. See also the SCAR, ACR, Daewoo et al.
The gold standard for me is always gonna be who's using it for serious social work. For example the AK is in use by Goat Herders and contrarians the world over. It clearly must work. I don't own one, don't care for them but I get they work. The AR may be the most throughly tested platform in the world. I can look at the M4 and cite 20 years of testing and hard use. It works. People in the know continue to use it and buy it. Who tested the SiG? Nobody evaluated the commercial version formally that I am aware of. I'm sure some PD's got sweet deals from SiG and field them but did they evaluate or just make a cost based decision? Is anybody fielding them on the Battlefield? Not that I have ever seen once. Before you say the Swiss they don't fight anybody and the rifle they buy is made in Europe to a higher standard. If SiG made that rifle available in the States then maybe they would have something. But the New SiG didn't do that. What they did was take a product that had cachet and watered it down, geekeed it up, and cheapened the construction in order to maximize profit. Sooner or later the market will speak and what it will say is no thanks SiG we don't need another shitty maker of once iconic guns. We already survived Colt, and the Old S&W.
OK somebody else can have the soapbox now. Im done. The dust is really bad outside and I was a wee cabin crazy....
Hardballing
Well-Known Member
Mine is an Armory USA Bulgy 47, handpicked by me from their warehouse/showroom in Houston. And that was when they were direct partners of Arsenal. Suffice it to say that it will run with "mil spec" accuracy of the standard M4 or AR out to the 100-200 meter mark. Beyond that? Rainbow City as far as trajectory goes.
And to be realistic, inside the 200 meter envelope is more than good enough for about, imho, 95% of what I can ever see me using it for (cause you can run and hide if you're able to and smart
). But...I live and move around in SE LA and E to Central Texas. That means there are open fields that are MUCH larger, cover to cover, than 200 meters. Hence the AR thoughts. (no, not going .308/7.62x51mm).Still mulling this over (and yeah Sin-ister, I did look up your previous thread) and it had been a couple months since the topic was hashed out. Not sure I've decided it all yet, not by a long shot, but that Daniel Defense rig just keeps sticking in my head....pretty much pick an optic, or not, and load er up.
Ahhhhhh. Choices. The spice of life.
Anyone else have a thought or three?
I didn't respond because I was offended. I think your characterization of a Sig 556 as a "not very good" AK is just wrong.
I agree with most of what you stated, and stated some of it myself. But of all the complaints about the 556, I have rarely heard any complaints about it's functioning. The Swiss Arms SG 55X series is the basis for the operating system, and I believe it is a proven platform.
I do have a 556, and I honestly bought it initially because there were not infinite accessories/configurations available. I didn't feel that I had the time to devote to the hobby of figuring out my ideal AR.
Although I now own an LMT Defender, which is a piston gun, I still haven't decided if it is worth the extra weight for the piston. And I also own a Colt, which is also not above criticism by someone.
Although I know people are pissed at Sig for trying to make money, and I really do have my eyes open to the "warts", I think the later 556s have addressed most of the stupidity, and are very good weapons.
pntbllr228
Well-Known Member
If you want a quality AR already set up, I recommend Daniel Defense or Spikes Tactical
Sin-ster
GM of 4 Letter Outbursts
Erm, correct me if I'm wrong, but piston rifles are not "new technology", as opposed to fuel injection, computer controlled timing and ignition, and resonance technologies that affect engine design. For that matter, there's not much new technology at all when it comes to the design and function of firearms. Stoner could have gone with a piston (short or long stroke), but went with DI instead. And it's worked for quite a while now.
From a purely logical standpoint, I'd say the quoted text above is ridiculous. "Stoner designed the gun as a DI system"-- that's fact. "Referencing that fact for a DI-to-piston comparison is ridiculous"-- that's an opinion, with no factual support.
The DI system routes gas through the carrier key, forcing the BCG into the buffer tube on a straight plane. The piston system pushes against the face of (what would be) the carrier key, causing the tilt that has damaged tubes and BCG alike. One piece BCG with skis have addressed the issue. That's the result of a "new" system interfering with the rifle's intended design. There are more variables (metal-on-metal, moving parts, valves that can stick) that are absent from the original design. Heat and fouling are dispersed in different areas; the recoil impulse is changed. For better or worse, those are the facts.
Before the finger pointing, I'm not blindly defending the DI system. There are plenty of advantages the piston AR has over its direct gas counterpart. I really believe it comes down to your intended use for the rifle, and I plan on owning a piston AR at some point in time. I do, however, think there's a lot to be said for the original design of the rifle, as archaic and "problematic" as many find it. And I certainly think it's worth mentioning in this discussion.
The problem is while it is based on a proven system it is not built to the same standard as that system. I.E. in the commercial guns sold here the piston and op-rod are cast not forged and machined. Cast parts can be good or they cane be bad this variance in quality is why the SiG Mil rifles don't have them. I am absolutely mad at SiG for trying to make money whoring their brand and cheapening their product. Her is why; THEY MADE MONEY THE OLD WAY! Thats right they made a profit when they were making great guns. But here is the part that really chaps my ass; when they decided to start cutting corners did anyone see a press release saying " Hey if you buy a new productions SiG it will not be as well made as the old guns because we have decided to forsake quality for profit. Thank you."? No they neglected to do that so thousands of people bought guns based on SiGs track record and paid a lot of money for those guns only to find out the hard way that they weren't the same. And that my friend is BUll ****. It still goes on today. The P series of guns from 10 years ago were so good that even now, despite the number of lemons SiG has turned out, people buy them and think they are doing right. So yeah I am mad at them for making a dime if it means they went a nickle to far.
Sin-ster. If Stoner was tasked today with creating a rifle, would it be the DI AR-15? There are many other advances in materials an manufacturing processes that I believe would have influenced him. Would it have been a SCAR? Old tech is old tech, it may work, but there are better options these days. A piston done right does not invoke carrier tilt. And to me, the Piston / DI argument is not the largest argument about the AR, maybe fewer / larger lugs on the bolt, different carrier geometry to facilitate a folding stock, etc. But most things we use have evolved because of new tech and new minds. Stoner is / was not the end all be all of firearm engineers.
I don't think Stoner would have designed a Piston Gun. HE had examples to look at and went in a different direction with the AR. But he also had no idea the AR would be used the way it is or as widely as it is so who knows. Personally I believe we have reached the Apex of firearms design at the current level of technology that exists today. We push cartridges down tubes as well as we are going to. Until there is a leap in technology i.e. new ammo, electric ignition and fire control, Directed Energy etc. we are just creating different flavors of the same ice cream.
Thats is a long winded way of saying Piston Guns are neato but they aren't any better then DI Guns. The one caveat to that is if you are a member of certain elite military units and you shoot 50-60K rounds a year through your Go To War guns then you may need the added durability of a piston, maybe. Even in those units there are people who remain unconvinced and tote DI.
Thats is a long winded way of saying Piston Guns are neato but they aren't any better then DI Guns. The one caveat to that is if you are a member of certain elite military units and you shoot 50-60K rounds a year through your Go To War guns then you may need the added durability of a piston, maybe. Even in those units there are people who remain unconvinced and tote DI.
SpeedRacer
Well-Known Member
I'd take a quality DI rifle over an AR with a piston shoehorned into it any day.
Buy a Daniel Defense, BCM, Spikes, Colt, Noveske and don't look back.
Buy a Daniel Defense, BCM, Spikes, Colt, Noveske and don't look back.
