Forgive me if this has been beaten to death,I tried a search and came up empty. I'm looking for opinions or experiences from those who have built or used rifles with both gas impingement and piston driven systems and your thoughts on the pros and cons of both(operation,parts availability etc). I'm building my rifle with 3-gun in mind thanks.
Gas systems for a build?
- Thread starter fridge450
- Start date
Phat Eagle
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Fraser Valley, BC
This has been beat 
, but here's my humble opinion anyway:
Pistons
PROS: run cooler and cleaner, and are especially good for sustained full auto fire and suppressor use (think HK416). Last I checked, none of us do too much of that...
CONS: they're heavier, and each manufacturer makes them differently. Parts aren't universal, and they're more expensive and even less available
DI
PROS: Mil-spec is mil-spec... Parts are easy to find (most of the time!) and drop right in.
CONS: they run dirtier, but I let mine go 1000 rounds or more between full cleanings (usually pull the bore through after range sessions, that's it), and have no issues with it running smoothly.
Bottom line: 99% of military M4/M16/AR type rifles are DI. That's good enough for me!
I suggest you consider mid-length or rifle gas systems rather than carbine. IME they get a little smoother the longer they are.
, but here's my humble opinion anyway:Pistons
PROS: run cooler and cleaner, and are especially good for sustained full auto fire and suppressor use (think HK416). Last I checked, none of us do too much of that...
CONS: they're heavier, and each manufacturer makes them differently. Parts aren't universal, and they're more expensive and even less available
DI
PROS: Mil-spec is mil-spec... Parts are easy to find (most of the time!) and drop right in.
CONS: they run dirtier, but I let mine go 1000 rounds or more between full cleanings (usually pull the bore through after range sessions, that's it), and have no issues with it running smoothly.
Bottom line: 99% of military M4/M16/AR type rifles are DI. That's good enough for me!
I suggest you consider mid-length or rifle gas systems rather than carbine. IME they get a little smoother the longer they are.
Last edited:
I agree with Phat Eagle on this. The only thing that I will add is that I have shot both types and honestly you don't feel much difference in the recoil impulse, but depending on what barrel/gas length you go with on a piston gun, you will feel the weight. My advice, If you want a light, fast 3 Gun rifle, go DI. It will be easier to source all the parts that you want, ie 18" barrel with a rifle length gas, and the parts to match. Im a bit biased, however, I don't see much of a point to piston guns aside from specific, hardcore applications, ie SOF moving through 3 environments (land,sea,air) and firing tons of rounds in a very adverse climate.
This has been beat
Pistons
PROS: run cooler and cleaner, and are especially good for sustained full auto fire and suppressor use (think HK416). Last I checked, none of us do too much of that...
CONS: they're heavier, and each manufacturer makes them differently. Parts aren't universal, and they're more expensive and even less available
DI
PROS: Mil-spec is mil-spec... Parts are easy to find (most of the time!) and drop right in.
CONS: they run dirtier, but I let mine go 1000 rounds or more between full cleanings (usually pull the bore through after range sessions, that's it), and have no issues with it running smoothly.
Bottom line: 99% of military guns are DI. That's good enough for me!
I suggest you consider mid-length or rifle gas systems rather than carbine. IME they get a little smoother the longer they are.
99% of Western military guns are DI.
Gunnerlove
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Vancouver Island
Except for the AUGs, SA80s, G36s, FNC and the like. But each has its own NATOish ammo to control gas port pressures.
mebiuspower
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Morontario
mid-length gas is what everyone goes for for 3-gun.
Patt08
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
The numbers are not even close.
Approximately 75 million piston AKs versus 8 million DI ARs.
"PRODUCTION NUMBERS
Since its introduction was churned-out in millions. Soviet Union was shipping giant caches of these weapons to its allies and friendly states. Also a number of factories were established around the world to produce the AK-47, its copies or clones. So the gun has spread all over the world. It also made a significant cultural impact. Mozambique even displays this gun on its flag.
The AK-47 and its derivatives are now used by the armed forces of around 100 countries. No one knows how many of these assault rifles are in circulation, but this number might approach 75 million units.
On the other hand the M16 was more popular among countries, where the Soviet Union had less influence. United States also supplied the M16 to its allies in large numbers. Around 8 million of these assault rifles were built. This weapon was also widely cloned and copied. The M16 and its derivatives are used by more than 70 countries. Also the M16 is the most produced firearm in 5.56 mm caliber.
+ The AK-47 was produced in much larger numbers."
http://www.military-today.com/firearms/m16_vs_ak47.htm
Phat Eagle
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Fraser Valley, BC
^^^ He was asking about ARs, so I responded about ARs. I've fixed my original reply for those who wish to be pedantic...
Gunnerlove
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Vancouver Island
I was talking Western Countries where the share of piston guns is indeed far greater than 1%.
I can't think of any country I would consider Western that is currently using the AK.
I can't think of any country I would consider Western that is currently using the AK.
