Piston Powered Poodle Shooters

Glenfilthie

Glenfilthie

CGN Regular
EE Expired
Rating - 100%
4   0   0
It used to be awhile back that all the cool kids sneered and scoffed at the AR15. They called it the 'Poodle Shooter' and the 'Mouse Gun' and all kinds of other names. One blogster had an article that had us black rifle geeks foaming at the mouth called 'Why I Hate The AR15'. He proceeded to list all the failings of the gun and explain why it is the biggest piece of crap in the world. (I notice now that he seems to have changed his tune and is building 'custom AR15's and will even offer training on their use...all for a modest fee dontchya know...:D).

I dunno about you, but I think I can safely conclude that the AR15 isn't the piece of junk that the cool kids were making it out to be - your mileage may vary.

One argument that I found interesting was the perceived limitations of the gas impingement system - vs. the piston cycled guns. One scholarly expert made a comment that grabbed my attention. To paraphrase, he said that piston guns mean more moving parts - and therefore more unreliability because of that. I had never heard that before but I am just a gun club duffer and turkey shooter. The cool kids seemed to say that the gas impingement method of actuating the cycle was more unreliable.

What's your take, O foolish fellow firearm forum folk?:D

My experience is extremely limited: I have the HK SL8 (a piston gun) and a chit house stock AR15 Bushmaster (standard gas impingement system). I do not do IPSC or action shooting, most of my stuff is informal bullseye 'position shooting' at the range. The guns are both well looked after and get cleaned once a month whether they need it or not. Both the systems work just fine, with the only advantage being that the HK piston gun cleans up faster and easier. For a civvie like me this is pretty much a non-issue....but a darn interesting topic of discussion...
 
I think that retrofitting an AR upper with a piston is just asking for problems. Nothing wrong with piston guns, its just the AR was designed for gas impingement.

I've finally bought my own AR :D and I'm fine with it the way it is. If I wanted another piston gun I would of bought one.
 
When it all boils down, a piston designed system is more reliable in adverse conditions than the impingement system.
Does the AR work? Sure, but failing maintenance and cleaning will see failure rates above a comperable piston system. Generally speaking of course.
 
50calshooter said:
This has been argued to death, it's the old, "my Ford is better then your Chev" arguement... Both get the job done, and both are more then reliable... Both have their good and both have their bad... Both are equally good... IMO
Click to expand...

They both make holes in paper or otherwise. Proper service equals proper function.
 
There's no difference in operation with a maintained rifle under the restrictions of the Canadian Firearms Act.

Instances where you would potentially see the difference however is if you fired full auto, operated from under water or were not in a position to not maintain a rifle over a very long course of time.

DI in full auto causes increased the heat in the breech/bolt , the thermodynamics of which can increase failures. As we're limited to 5rds in centre fired rifles this in not an issue in Canada.

Water in the gas tube during firing can cause damage due to pressures of the DI system. This is also true of the barrel but he gas tube is a less robust item. Not an issue unless your a SEAL(lol).

More commonly however as the combustion gasses that drive the DI system are dumped into the breech during firing, this can contribute to fouling and carbonization which can contribute to failures(a common saying is that a Mr. Stoner shouldn't have made the rifle poop where it eats). It's important to state that this level of fouling would not happen for hundreds or even thousands of rounds. Even this is a very rare issue for the vast majority to responsible AR owners who wipe down there rifles with a diaper before putting it to bed after the range.

For the premium a piston system costs it may or may not be worth it. IF you're intent on something different you're best off going with an engineered upper instead of a conversion kit. With an engineered upper/bolt there is no issues with the piston setup on an AR, regardless of whether the platform was originally designed for DI or not.

I have both and prefer the piston, but just because I find it a bit easier to keep clean. I fire side by side with DI rifles and there is no difference. Reliability for mine is the same with both... zero failures. And the paper doesn't care one bit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom