I am hoping this does not turn out to be a DI vs piston thread, that is not my goal, I also searched and couldn’t find any info on this matter.
So I am wondering, why is there so much controversy behind the Stoner system, I understand what happened in Vietnam had alot to do with it, but why is it that 40 years later there is so much misinformation about the system out there?
why does every politician who wants to make a name for himself say the system is getting soldiers killed and is horrible?
I mean for being a society that has a wealth of knowledge on the internet that you can look up information about anything, why are so many still so stupid when it comes to this system?
I don’t see the negative comments about the Stoner DI system because I don’t read that kinda nonsense.As to the early on issue with the M16,that was a desk driven policy issue the ended up in the field IMHO.
Otherwise I’d say its leanings toward attempts at pet projects which is closely related to money.
Whats the old saying,believe nothing you hear and trust only half of what you see.
Uhhh when a system is 4x more likely to jam, what happens when a soldier busts in a door, shoots once misses, gun jams?
Is there some sort of gentleman’s agreement between the Taliban and the US that they must wait for them to clear the jam before they shoot?
When the facts are that a lubed up gun in sand tests as much as a non lubed gun in the same circumstances, why would you choose the first one?
Money is not an object, they are going to spend $120million each on a jet every other country that was involved in its development no longer wants, its because the procurement system is a miserable mess of people in charge wanting to make up for that other 30% when they retire.
Again, not excessive direct experience with DI rifles, but I have read a lot of the negative press.
I am guessing you are talking about the platforms reliability, correct?
My 2 cents is that it all stems from user error. Instead of realizing lack of competence as a user, people started blaming the platform. And if the right journalist caught wind of this criticism, it is easy for that kind of negativity to get legs of it’s own.
Also, people buy into it, if it supposedly comes “directly from the soldiers in the field”. Even people who have no first hand knowledge, and they start spouting it off as fact.
Most people generally do not know very much.
I see it with the HK416 in my battalion as well. Both officers and NCO’s having issues that they attribute to the weapon, when it is actually their own fault.
Because people are idiots. Working fast food taught me that everyone is an idiot until they prove otherwise, and guns attract a lot of idiots.
Of course, when you have a bunch of idiots around a lot of guns, either at a gun store or a gun show, all the Super Special Ops Top Secret Delta Sniper Kill Team 6 stories come out about how the AR15 is unreliable and blah, blah, blah. Of course, people who are new to guns and don’t know any better, believe the stories and keep spreading them for years to come.
The simple truth is that most people don’t care to research beyond what they hear from others. They accept it as truth. People like us who come to forums to learn are a small part of the gun community, and even smaller is number of us who avoid all the bullshit forums.
Because it is a complete fallacy there is a wealth of knowledge on the internet. There is not. There is an overdose of information on the internet. Very little knowledge. For everything you know, there are at least ten webpages with information to prove you wrong. In this very thread, there is reference to the sand test which was proven to performed unfairly, yet it’s findings are presented as fact.
We know the AR system has a piston. Yet folks talk about how it “needs a pistion”. Eugene Stoner, the inventor of the AR gas system wrote in the original patent that it’s not a conventional direct impingement system. Yet people still insist that it is.
People want to believe their leaders are doing something. In order to look like they are doing something, politicians fling feces at the wall until they find something that sticks. In this case, they have a target and that’s the AR. People keeping flinging new rifle designs at it hoping they’ll find something that sticks so they can be the new hero.
Take a look at what happened at Wanat. Our soldiers were out-numbered, out-gunned and surrounded. They fired M4s at our enemies until those carbines finally failed. 49 Americans and 24 Afghanis fought off as many as 200 enemy. Fingers were pointed at the M4s that were fired till they turned white hot and failed while ignoring the fact they were used in an attempt to return and surpass the volume of fire from four times as many enemy weapons.
Everybody wants to be a hero and save the world. If they can get their flung-pu to stick, they’ll run with it
The only thing I’ve actually seen as a big problem is the part where water in your gas tube = explosion. Aside from that I’ve not seen much unreliability.
Companies do say “Well, an op-rod driven piston gun runs cleaner” because it does. What happened is they marketed it to be a bigger factor than it really was, and folks clinged to it.
Another issue clinged upon was the fact the bolt group doesn’t get hot in an op-rod piston driven system. The fact that was pointed out so boldly before is that the AR-15 is and always has been a piston system… it’s just simply that the piston is rolled into one with the bolt and the gasses to operate it are sent back into it via tube. If you think about this, all it means is the AR-15 platform is super efficient and that Stoner’s design was genius.
Yes. When ever anyone’s gun jams everything stops. The US soldiers bring out the smokes, the Taliban brews some tea. They enjoy the smokes and the tea, catch up on the latest news… A lot like NASCAR under the yellow flag.
Because the rifle is the longest serving US military rifle ever. Because it has been in the hands of Granddad, Dad and Son. Because there are two kinds of people (at least among the crowd I run with) those who have one (or more) and those who want one (or more). With this much interest and exposure there is going to be a lot of discussion and controversy. If Stoner had designed the AR as a piston and DI never happened we would be arguing about something else.
I wanted to learn first hand the advantages and disadvantages of both piston and DI and bought both. Over the last two years and twenty thousand rounds or so I have come to the conclusion that, for most applications, there is not enough difference to make a difference.
Edit - You know, I went back and read that 4x post and actually have no clue what he’s even talking about. At first I thought it was that one single test where the Colt didn’t do well, but I don’t know.
If he’s saying DI is 4x more likely due to that one failed test, well there you have the basis for stupid arguments.
Oh there is a difference; I’ve seen a SF Soldier with a LMT piston upper that broke while in a fire fight, he was disgusted and put his M4 upper back on when he got back to my COP. This was summer of ’09 and though I was aware of some politicians criticizing the M4 I didn’t know there were companies making piston uppers and convincing Soldiers that it was better. That incident is the reason I’m on this board and learning about my weapons, how they are made, and who makes them. I’ve had a few conversations with Colt’s VP for QC over an issue I had with my Colt to insure that the same problem didn’t make it to issued M4s. Milspec and military testing mean something.
I think it’s quite simple and I have been amused at how many people get upset on this forum about it, if all you want is a range gun get a $599 kit, if you need to trust your life with it there are only a few to choose from and you should stay with what’s proven.
I think a Piston gun is better…eventually…just not one retrofitted to fit under the handguards of an AR.
My nephew is in MARSOC and in 2010, he was given 6 SCAR’s and 36K rounds for him and his guys to evaluate. Four days later, they returned the SCAR’s and said they’d keep their M4’s. He told me the SCAR came up short compared to the M4 for what “they use their guns for” (mission). That is a clue…
I don’t think people on M4C “hate” piston guns, I just think they are knowledgeable enough that when all of the real features of both guns are weighed up, piston guns come up short against AR’s. Plus I don’t think M4C members give guns “cool points” like most people do when evaluating them.
If the most “perfect” piston gun came out tomorrow for the same money as a quality AR, I would maybe eventually someday possibly get one BUT it would not be my “go to” gun, mainly because of parts.
Hes refferin to the fall '07 extreme dust test 3 that had the M4 with nearly 900/60000 stoppages, guess he missed the summer '07 test where the M4 had 330/60000 stoppages where 50% was magazine related.
All that said it was a test in a vacuum that in no way represented real world circumstances, the rifles were only cleaned once every 600 rounds