I’m new to this forum, so if this topic has been done to death, please redirect me.
The piston guns seem to be gearing up to flood the AR market, at least as ads tell it. My question is::Have the piston AR’s been around long enough to say they are “better” than top of the line DI type guns?
I know with the di guns they need lube, and reasonable cleaning, but if for some reason that was not practicle/possable, is that where the piston guns would be a major advantage?
For compairision; say Noveske, or DD vs LWRC or LMT.
Personally I am a D.I. guy…the MRP piston and HK 416 piston guns look extremely well built, and enough testing have been done on both to show them to be very reliable.
Only real advantage to a piston gun is the whole maintenance issue…NOT, reliability issue. D.I. is just as reliable when properly lubed. D.I. gun is the only gun I would ever pick if my intended purpose was accuracy.
Just buy a MRP and be done with…D.I. or piston…SS tack driver or CL volume shooter…sbr or spr type…22lr or 9mm or .204 or 5.56 or 6.8…and on and on:)
Are they worth it?
Depends of your frame of reference, use, and expectations.
If you are shooting a short barreled gun with a suppressor, a piston will alleviate excessive fouling of the FCG, mag, and bolt over long strings of fire.
Testing (dust chamber) seems to indicate that piston systems in general make the weapon slightly less prone to stoppages (comparing a stock M4 to a 416, for a more direct comparison, as well as the SCAR and XM8), though the M4 wasn’t really all that bad when taking all the data into account.
The lack of commonality between competing piston designs as well as the predominance of DI parts makes replacement parts for piston guns less available than DI parts.
16" piston ARs seem have a sharper recoil impulse than comparable DI guns. My frame of reference are LWRC and HKs. The 10.5 416 didn’t seem to be so sharp to me, but I wasn’t comparing the guns side by side.
Some people just want a piston gun for whatever reason, and no amount of user input or testing will sway their opinion, so to them, they are worth the money.
Failure2Stop made some good points, the most commonly applied I have quoted below:
I like piston guns. I think they are cool (pun sort of intended). But I think/hope we will see an improvements in piston AR design in the years to come. I was hot to go to get a piston gun last fall. But after much contemplation, I decided to build a good DI rifle instead. I am going to wait a few years and see where/how far the piston system adaptation goes.
As I said I’m new to the forum, but not to AR’s. I’ve been shooting them for 20 or so years, and have encountered very few problems.
Right now I have a Daniel Def. that seems great so far.
I can’t recall the web site, but supposidly there was a legit test firing M4/HK/Scar, and others, where there was a fairly high rate of malfs, per x amount of rounds, with the standard m4, and far less with hk and other piston guns. As I understand it, with m4 you keep it lubed but in a hostile enviornment, ie:desert sand, as well as high round count causes the oil to cake/coat the inside of the bolt/carrier, causing trouble. Also in sand, lube draws sand causing trouble.
I’m not a spec ops guy or anything like that, but I keep my m4, for training/shooting, but in the back of my mind, it is really a shtf type gun. Probably will never actually use it for that, but who knows. In that scenario, cleaning might be iffy, on a regular basis.
I hear good things about NB coating for the bolt/carrier and I might go with that.
If I got the piston gun I’d be trading the DDm4, and probably getting no where what I paid for it. (1500) Normally it’s bad mojo to trade something that works and a system that is proven,(more or less) for the younger better looking girl, errr, gun on the block so I’ve decided against that. Again thanks for the info.
I don’t think they make much sense for the average user. A 16 inch, lightweight piston AR is probably the best rifle a person can own. A good AR is very reliable, safe, accurate, and certainly the most developed gun on the market. However, there are certain niche uses for the rifle that a piston AR might be better for. LAV, who helped develop the 416 for Delta says that short direct impingement guns don’t consistently run well full auto suppressed. They can be tuned, but it is a hassle that Delta didn’t have time for. So, if you are running a lot of full auto suppressed 10 inch ARs you probably need a 416. Very few people are doing this.
There is currently a backlash against the piston guns. Most of it is irrational and, in my opinion, just the normal cyclical reaction against the “top-dog.” You will hear every possible negative rumor against the piston gun magnified and repeated 1000 times. Some of this is by industry folks who would rather keep making the same junk, some of it is by folks who bought a Bushmaster and now feel the need to defend it, some of it is just the normal internet horse-pucky. Meanwhile, objective testing, and evidence that top-tier units are deploying these weapons when it counts is discounted. Usually with a “a buddy of mine is in task force wango tango and he says the hate it!” Well, no one could argue with that.
Anyway, piston guns are almost certainly more reliable, but probably only in situations you won’t need. And the costs and other hassles associated with owning a quality piston gun probably outweigh the benefit for the average user.
The only reason I shoot Piston Guns exclusively (I currently have 2 LWRCIs and have a SCAR 16 on order) is because I’m too lazy to clean my guns. This is the same reason I exclusively shoot Glocks.
As far as I’m concerned, you can do pretty much everything with a good, quality DI gun. YMMV.
Im sticking to DI. The only differnce is the piston is slightly cleaner. But if your like me and most of the guys on here we dont mind cleaning our babies
Id stick to DI for now. If the military does select a piston M16 type rifle I would think that most everybody will switch their pistons over to that system. You dont want a piston system that could be orphaned here in a few years.
I have a LMT piston 12". I love the gun and could always switch back to DI with barrel and bolt carrier change, though I won’t. I bought it because the system makes sense by keeping the hot gasses venting out the front of the gun away from critical parts. Would be very easy to clean if I left the piston area dirty, but I’m anal and I have to clean it too. Reliability should be better in theory if you were shooting thousands of rounds in short period of time or dusty environment, etc, time will tell. About 1000 rounds through mine so far, no problems. I am so impressed with the fit / finish that if I did ever buy a DI gun again, it would be an LMT. Basically their piston system made the most sense to me for a gun I plan on keeping for my lifetime, so I bought it.
PS- running suppressed, the gun is still very dirty, but no gas in the face and the heavy fouling is in the piston.
Yeah in those specific situations there is a benefit.
At the same time, though, the piston AR market has tried to sell the idea of the DI being inherently unreliable. LAV also went on national TV to light a match on a DI AR gas tube in selling the piston AR.
Im by no means an AR expert but Ive run either mil issue guns or my own personal guns in conditions from 120+ desert dunes with blowing sand to -20 in the mountains of Germany, and had VERY FEW reliability issues. Certainly not enough to make me even come close to not trusting an AR with everything I would need a gun for.
Generally I would have to totally agree…the fact that piston guns are pushed over D.I. by certain folks def. dirties the water and makes it harder to discuss the tech aspects to the diff. systems. D.I. guns in my past with a little lube and common sense…and PMAGS, go thousands of rounds without a hiccup…so at those types of numbers between ftf/fte’s, its semantics to compare in the reliability dept. imho.
There’s only a few piston guns I’d place as potentially above DI guns for certain very limited applications. If you’re running a suppressed SBR on full auto, piston makes sense, For any two of those, it has advantages.
There is very little a piston can do that can’t be done with DI - running dedicated suppressors works great, and the Noveske Switchblock allows QD suppressors to run well on, and the host to run reliably without.
The real beauty of making lightweight AR15’s is that so much of the weight is located farther back, and the Stoner system is actually quite ingenious.
With the common issues of DI AR15’s sorted, it works.
Magazines - biggest reliability problem for wear parts - Pmags are a $10 fix
Ammunition - junky, or underpowered ammunition is next
Springs - Extractor springs and inserts, ejector spring, and action spring in spec make a difference.
Bolts and carriers - mostly with civilian ‘mil spec’ AR’s, these can be a failure point.
Buffer - the right buffer for the application makes a huge difference.
With a logically set up AR, you can have a very accurate, very reliable, lightweight yet capable stick, for still less money than a piston system.
I think FN has done a great job with their piston system on the SCAR. None of the accuracy was sacrificed as with most piston guns. Great rifle, I may pick one up as soon as it drops in price. I have also hear good things about the ACR, which is another good piston gun. I just cant get over how front heavy it is, nothing a lite barrel cant fix though.
My opinion is that pistons were the past and they remain the future.
The Direct Impingement AR-15/M-16 is an (or rather THE) anomoly. It has a cottage industry surrounding it like the 1911 pistol has. THAT fact alone is reason enough to own a D.I. carbine or rifle.
The piston system is inherently a more robust design with weight (and balance) and sharper felt recoil impulse (which can affect some) being functional concerns. Other posters have stated the FACTS: heavy buffer, Sprinco action spring, proper extractor assembly and good magazines (regardless of carbine action) combined with sensible lubrication and the current system will work just fine.
I have stated my opinion on here before about piston guns, my experience being with LWRCi. Therefore I won’t bother anybody with the facts again. I will ask a question “Why do people reinvent the wheel?” The answer is to make more money off of people who don’t know any better. There is a reason why so many people are complaining about pistons in ARs. What normally happens when you reinvent the wheel? You F*ck it Up…
I’m sticking with DI AR’s because parts may be found just about anywhere. I may consider a piston AR down the road if a system becomes commercially successful enough that parts availability is no longer an issue and if there is some functional advantage for me in my application for the weapon (cleaning ease aside as I enjoy cleaning AR’s).
