Some great info here. I would disagree with the bolded part though. There are actually some things wrong with a piston AR, especially in otherwise standard carbine configuration. Bolt lug stress and BCG tilt being the two biggest problems.First, thank you for your service! Second, lube more and clean less. Seriously.
From talking to a buddy that used to be in the Corps and then went on to run the armorer and training programs for Dep. of State far more wear, tear and damage is done by institutionally ingrained cleaning than is typically even done by firing.
Piston systems really shine in three specific areas:
1. Lots of full auto. (Probably not an issue for you but if it is then I want to be your friend.
2. Reliable operation of a VSBR (Very Short Barrel Rifle, basically barrels under 11.5") in all climates and altitudes with a variety of ammunition.
3. Reliable operation of a VSBR in all climates and altitudes with a variety of ammunition that is suppressed.
Outside of these areas it's just more weight towards the front of the gun making things heavier. It's also that many more proprietary/non-standard parts that may or may not be available.
Is there anything 'wrong' with a piston gun? Absolutely not! If it's reliable and strikes your fancy then rock on with your bad self!
I run a MK18-type weapon from Daniel Defense that is occasionally suppressed. I understand the limitations of this system and it's useful lifespan as well as how to take care of it. If money were no object or they were MUCH more available (and factory supported with parts!!!) I would really like to have a 10.3" HK416... but that likely won't be happening any time soon if ever!
LWRC would be my next choice as it is a well designed system instead of a bunch of drop in parts. They're a known quantity and from what I've seen they go out of their way to support their customers.
At the end of the day though THIS is my preferred piston.
Ek
EK is not referring to retrofit systems, but rather purpose built piston variants, e.g. The HK 416. The problems you mention are major issues with the former but are by and large dealt with adequately on the latter.
I dont want to sound like a piston fanboi, but this is a distinction that should be understood before the discussion can have full relevance.
I dont want to sound like a piston fanboi, but this is a distinction that should be understood before the discussion can have full relevance.
He starts off his discussion talking about piston guns in general. Then he mentions that he runs an MK18 and only after that does he mention that he would like the have a HK416 if his budget allowed (probably because he knows that the HK is a superior system for those very reasons). The first half of his post, taken in context and in regard to what the OP posted just above him, it's more likely he actually was talking about retro kits. The OP had said he was looking at retro kits, so I think the issues are still quite relevant. Let's try to keep this on topic for the OP who is looking for info about retro kits, not HK416's.
Yeah, i think i covered that when i mentioned the undesirable features of a retrofit system and extolled the relative virtues of a purpose built piston gun. I think the comparison is valid to the conversation, but i am happy to take my experience and go home if that doesnt help the op.
I'm sure your experience is very valuable to the OP. But let EK explain his comments further himself instead of trying to clarify for him. Again, I think EK gave some great info also in regard to where piston systems shine, which, btw, is basically your gun (very short barrel +/- suppressed).
The intent of what I posted was to get the OP thinking about the why behind the piston-operated AR systems that are out there. I should've stated as such but I was rushing a bit when I typed that.
Note the emphasis on the LWRC (and of course the Haach und Kaay) being designed as a system.
Mechanical harmony is not to be taken for granted.
Regarding retro kits:
I have little experience with them personally. Paying attention to people who quite literally shoot for a living and are more than willing to call a Spade has not extended to me many flattering things about such kits.
The problem with retro kits is that the manufacturer has little if any control what the purchaser is going to slap their kit onto, little idea if they will follow directions for a proper install and they can only hope that the gun getting a retrofit piston kit is in good working order and not already wore out or as functional as a bag of hammers from starting out as poor initial quality. From my research some piston systems seem to be better than others.
The 'AR-15' and it's direct-impingement gas system was designed a certain way for certain reasons. It's entire energy impulse is linear in relation to the bore and the stock; there is no reciprocating offset mass and certainly no design considerations built into the gun for this. When we add on piston retrofits of varying quality and then begin shooting the guns more than talking about them on the net we start to see issues. Things like carrier tilt, worn op-rod interfaces within the upper receiver, piston systems that may now be isolated under rails which need periodic maintenance/cleaning/parts replacement, loose nuts behind the trigger who think "I don't have to lube it. It's a PISTON!!1!"... These are problems that have been encountered and mitigated by the manufacturers that've put together reliable and reputable systems either in their testing or as the product matures during various manufacturing cycles. A lot of this stuff is left up to the kit installer to diagnose and then attempt to correct as they come across these issues. (Perfect example: The PWS Receiver Extension. A well designed item for it's intended purpose but it is in essence a 'band-aid' solution...)
Can a piston retrofit kit work? Quite possibly, yes. I've seen more than a few that do. Most of those are owned by folks who think they're "The Bee's knees" and will enthusiastically tell you about their magical benefits... but they shoot two boxes of ammo a month. Tops.
I know folks who actually SHOOT that've had and been quite pleased with Adams Arms and the older PWS setups. More power to them.
IF a piston is deemed to be a necessary feature by a shooter then they should be somewhat informed of the how's and the why's behind it. Info on the internet, mine included, is worth exactly what you paid for it. If anything it's a starting point to seeking your own conclusions.
Ek
Note the emphasis on the LWRC (and of course the Haach und Kaay) being designed as a system.
Mechanical harmony is not to be taken for granted.
Regarding retro kits:
I have little experience with them personally. Paying attention to people who quite literally shoot for a living and are more than willing to call a Spade has not extended to me many flattering things about such kits.
The problem with retro kits is that the manufacturer has little if any control what the purchaser is going to slap their kit onto, little idea if they will follow directions for a proper install and they can only hope that the gun getting a retrofit piston kit is in good working order and not already wore out or as functional as a bag of hammers from starting out as poor initial quality. From my research some piston systems seem to be better than others.
The 'AR-15' and it's direct-impingement gas system was designed a certain way for certain reasons. It's entire energy impulse is linear in relation to the bore and the stock; there is no reciprocating offset mass and certainly no design considerations built into the gun for this. When we add on piston retrofits of varying quality and then begin shooting the guns more than talking about them on the net we start to see issues. Things like carrier tilt, worn op-rod interfaces within the upper receiver, piston systems that may now be isolated under rails which need periodic maintenance/cleaning/parts replacement, loose nuts behind the trigger who think "I don't have to lube it. It's a PISTON!!1!"... These are problems that have been encountered and mitigated by the manufacturers that've put together reliable and reputable systems either in their testing or as the product matures during various manufacturing cycles. A lot of this stuff is left up to the kit installer to diagnose and then attempt to correct as they come across these issues. (Perfect example: The PWS Receiver Extension. A well designed item for it's intended purpose but it is in essence a 'band-aid' solution...)
Can a piston retrofit kit work? Quite possibly, yes. I've seen more than a few that do. Most of those are owned by folks who think they're "The Bee's knees" and will enthusiastically tell you about their magical benefits... but they shoot two boxes of ammo a month. Tops.
I know folks who actually SHOOT that've had and been quite pleased with Adams Arms and the older PWS setups. More power to them.
IF a piston is deemed to be a necessary feature by a shooter then they should be somewhat informed of the how's and the why's behind it. Info on the internet, mine included, is worth exactly what you paid for it. If anything it's a starting point to seeking your own conclusions.
Ek
I'd leave it DI but that is just me.
It was my understanding that the two companies I mentioned had addressed and relieved the issues with BCG tilt. And truly as most DI systems push the bolt carrier back in the same area I don't think it's as much of a problem as some would have us believe.
But a DI system doesn't just push back to BCG from pressure on the key. A LOT more going on than that.
Similar threads
- Sub Category: Rifles
- Sale Price: 575$
- Caliber: 7.62x39
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Canada to Destroy Thousands of Classic Browning Hi-Power Pistols- Latest: HillsideDesolate
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
