Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 27
  1. #11
    User
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Age
    63
    Posts
    112

    Default Re: DI vs Piston AR's again

    "They are at best personal opinions, as are the books by the sweeney dude. True, impartial tests are impossible for someone who's grown up on a system. As has been said, both have merits and downsides."

    DarkH I think you are absolutely correct with this statement, Depending on your personal choice there is so much technical data that can be used to enforce a personal opinion in one direction or the other , Authors always try and keep there feedback unbiased but there will always be some subtle expressions that will come though to show the authors personal preference.

  2. #12

    Default Re: DI vs Piston AR's again

    My opinion on Piston ar's is that they are an answer to a question that was never asked. Piston AR's have only one upside compared to DI AR's. For water borne operations the user does not have to worry about clearing water from the gas tube prior to firing, which if not done can rupture the tube.

    The negatives of piston AR's are considerable. Carrier tilt, added recoil, extra weight... etc. My biggest concern in NEA building a Pistol AR is carrier tilt. The Design of the upper reciever was never intended to have a piston striking the carrier.

  3. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Age
    45
    Posts
    151

    Default Re: DI vs Piston AR's again

    As someone still learning about the pros and cons of the various systems it seems that the main reason for choosing should be what you intend to use it for and under what conditions? I understand the smaller differences in the bigger scheme of things like cost, weight, ect. It seems the main pro for the piston system is when you will be firing it alot without the means to clean it. Like in A war situation (even there you should have cleaning kits though), but lets say you cant clean it or dont have lube ect it will also function better when dunked in water, mud, sand ect which happens sometimes in war situations. So in A "controlled" invironment like here in SA that one big advantage of the piston system might be outweighed by all the smaller pros of the DI system? To me it seems like the piston system might be better in extreme conditions only, when conditions are "normal" the DI might be the better choice? For range work/hunting/comps/self defence ect I will choose A DI system, when I think I might be engaging in A war where I will be far away from the nearest cleaning kit or lube I will get the piston system.

  4. #14
    User
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Not where I want to be..
    Posts
    12,596

    Default Re: DI vs Piston AR's again

    Not quite true on the cleaning issues.

    The SCAR which is a very modern piston rifle that started life as a piston rifle has a 1000 round suggested cleaning cycle for the regulator.

    Mike Pannone has shot a good quality DI AR without any lube for around 1500 rounds. Pat Rogers has shot a good quality AR with good lube for around 40'000 rounds without any serious cleaning.

    The big bonus with piston is imo with SBR rifles and for serious suppressor use - other than that I would take a DI AR eyes closed - they can do much more with much less attention than readers would give them give them credit for on the internet.
    Last edited by DS; 14-01-2014 at 15:21.

  5. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Age
    45
    Posts
    151

    Default Re: DI vs Piston AR's again

    Khumba are you talking about SCAR's in general or specific ones? Whats your take on the different length DI's, the mid length sounds best? My experience wrt DI systems is unfortunitely limited to the Colt M4 which I used for 3 years. I have to say that I never had any kind of problem with my personal issue (in hot dusty and cold snowy wheather) but there was usually someone on the range who had an issue. ( 1 on A 100 or so) but then again my weapon was allways well looked after. I think if one is willing/able to clean your weapon properly the DI system should be qn easy choice over all. I just still have some difficulty wrapping my head around the idea that in the extreme situation that you cant clean your weapon that the DI system will last as long as the piston system will shot for shot. Then again the DI systems has been proving itself in wars since before I was born! And wrt surpression,I see they make DI systems with which you can change the gas flow with A knob and you can permanently change the gas flow by changing gas blocks for SBR. Does this sort out surpressors and SHort barrels on the DI system or is there more to it?

  6. #16

    Default Re: DI vs Piston AR's again

    Piston AR's are evolving all the time , The new ones don't have the disadvantages of there predecessors like carrier tilt, weight felt recoil etc , The only real disadvantage is the proprietary parts on the Piston AR's, But if you buy from a reputable manufacturer example Sig Sauer, you wont have any issues getting spares in the future!

  7. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Age
    45
    Posts
    151

    Default Re: DI vs Piston AR's again

    From reading all the different forums (I realise forums are not to be taken as gospel) it Seems that the main issue/worry for most was the possibility of carrier tilt, but it does sound A thing of the past now with the newer models, even with the 7.62x51.

  8. #18
    User
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    The moral high-ground
    Age
    52
    Posts
    3,001

    Default Re: DI vs Piston AR's again

    I would like to add my 2 cents to the debate. I believe it is a case of comparing apples to pears when the AK's reliability is brought into the piston vs DI AR debate. The AK system is the AK system. The AR system is something different. Adding a piston to an AR does not give it any of the perceived advantages of the AK (Please note I'm not bashing piston AR's)

    The AK's piston is not what makes it reliable. The AK would be just as reliable with a DI system. BS you say . . . read the rest.

    This is what makes an AK reliable under adverse conditions:
    1) Extreme taper of the round compared to almost anything else, there is not much preventing a 7.62 x 39 case from chambering or extracting.
    2) Loose tolerances (having said that . . . there are a lot of very reliable "tight" weapons out there.
    3) Mags built like Russian tanks.
    4) But the most significant factor that make AK's reliable is the inertia, weight and momentum of the AK BCG. Specifically the distance an AK's bolt carrier moves. An AK bolt carrier travels further backward past the round in the mag than it needs to to work. This means on the forward stroke it also travels further than other types of rifles (Notably the AR) before scooping a round from the mag. Thus the bolt has already accelerated for roughly 3 centimetres before picking up the next round to be chambered and not much will be able to slow the inertia and momentum of the AK bolt on its travels toward the chamber.

    The AR does not have the luxury of distance to give the BCG a chance to pick up speed and momentum before it picks up the next round it needs to chamber. This is how it was designed, and the design requirement was to be light.

    And the myth of DI AR's running dirty and hot is just that, a myth. I have compared my DI AR to an R5, both starting from clean and firing the same amount and type of ammo. The chamber areas get equally dirty (Granted it wasn't a shooting marathon, but still.) Piston rifles collect hard carbon on the piston, DI AR's collect soft carbon on the bolt tail. Lucky for us the bolt tail has nothing to do with how an AR chambers a round.

    As for DI guns running hot in the BCG and chamber area = BS. In the newest Book of the AR by Sweeney he describes how the US Army tested M4's by putting them in a fixture and then remote firing them full auto until the barrels drooped and the bullets started coming out the side of the drooping barrel. The bolt carriers and bolts were still functioning by the time the barrels started melting.

    What piston ARs solved were short barrel issues and suppressor compatibility / capability.

  9. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Age
    45
    Posts
    151

    Default Re: DI vs Piston AR's again

    "I believe it is a case of comparing apples to pears when the AK's reliability is brought into the piston vs DI AR debate. The AK system is the AK system. The AR system is something different. Adding a piston to an AR does not give it any of the perceived advantages of the AK "

    Makes good and perfect sense! I would how ever like to believe that in theory at least some of the principles would be the same or in line at least, I guess I will only sleep better if I can take both AR systems and shoot them without any maintenance until one stops functioning! (Ok have to take 5 of each as A problem might be weapon specific and not operating system related!) as I think maintenance or lack there off might be THE difference. But yea the points you made about the AK is very much AK specific, cant copy that unless building another AK! Guess Ill just have to own both! And just yesterday I was looking for A reason to justify buying/owning two AR's! Thanks!

  10. #20
    User
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Not where I want to be..
    Posts
    12,596

    Default Re: DI vs Piston AR's again

    Quote Originally Posted by WERNER7771 View Post
    "I believe it is a case of comparing apples to pears when the AK's reliability is brought into the piston vs DI AR debate. The AK system is the AK system. The AR system is something different. Adding a piston to an AR does not give it any of the perceived advantages of the AK "

    Makes good and perfect sense! I would how ever like to believe that in theory at least some of the principles would be the same or in line at least, I guess I will only sleep better if I can take both AR systems and shoot them without any maintenance until one stops functioning! (Ok have to take 5 of each as A problem might be weapon specific and not operating system related!) as I think maintenance or lack there off might be THE difference. But yea the points you made about the AK is very much AK specific, cant copy that unless building another AK! Guess Ill just have to own both! And just yesterday I was looking for A reason to justify buying/owning two AR's! Thanks!
    There is no need to redo all the testing - others have saved you the expenses and time and logistics and have done it already.

    We shot our demo NEA 14.5" with several kinds of ammo to roughly 3500 rounds without any major cleaning - boresnake through the bore and a a bcg wipe down once in a while. We used Slip EWL and lubed when we deemed it necessary. That cost around R12K at the time just for ammo.

    Others have done much more than that - read Filthy 14 (which ended up with a round count of around 50'000) http://www.slip2000.com/blog/s-w-a-t...ine-filthy-14/

    And this is informative http://vuurwapenblog.com/2010/08/27/...waste-of-time/

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. [WANTED] Franchi 500 shotgun 2 port piston
    By Prodigal in forum Accessories Wanted (Parts, Magazines, Stocks, Scopes, Reloading etc.)
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 27-11-2015, 09:34
  2. R6/LM 6 gas tube and piston
    By Ugh! in forum Accessories Wanted (Parts, Magazines, Stocks, Scopes, Reloading etc.)
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 18-01-2011, 09:13
  3. Nitro Piston Air Rifles
    By 30.06 in forum Air Guns / Airsoft / Paintball
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-01-2011, 16:04
  4. Which Modern Gas Piston Rifle?
    By Speed_Freak in forum Tactical Rifles and Carbines
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 01-01-2010, 21:47
  5. Another on jumps on the AR piston bandwagon
    By SSP in forum Tactical Rifles and Carbines
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 19-05-2009, 17:15

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •