The Hog Whisperer (Administrator)
Some don’t know there are differences. For those that do, they may want the inherent accuracy of direct impingement compared to a gas piston. Could be a number of reasons. When I bought my AR15 twenty five years ago I didn’t know the difference . All I know is I wanted one and that it was a Colt with a carry handle. Were I to buy one today, a lot more consideration would go into the decision.It seems like I could find a discussion on this, but I haven't. I understand why a piston driven rifle is more reliable, but not in ways most of us who clean our guns will appreciate. And there's also the benefit of not having gas dumped near your face, especially if you're running a suppressor.
I'd call piston drive a slight advantage. But isn't it strange how unavailable piston rifles are? Everything i find is direct impingement. This includes parts for snapping one together.
I want to build a KM18 style rifle with a suppressor, but I thought it would be cool to do it with piston drive. I've found two outfits making piston system, but it seems like they're a seriously small minority. The only piston AR's I find are .308 chambered.
Why? Piston system seem so much cooler. What's up with this?
That is not accurate.The AR was designed to be cheaply built, mostly stamped parts. But today the AR rifles are not cheap. The AR crowd really doesn't understand firearms, so direct impingement is fine with them.
The Ruger Mini is a piston operated, clean design, much better made. It has a fixed-piston gas system and self-cleaning moving gas cylinder . But it isn't cool with the under 40 group.
The AR is sold on 'tactical looks' not quality. Hence the nic-name 'Made by Mattel'.
My first AR clone was a KelTec SU16 series rifle, which was, and still is, a piston action rifle. I probably put well over twenty thousand rounds through it before being talked into a trade. I went to DI Ar's for a short time afterwards, before building my own.
I never found either system better than the other, or, lacking to one another!
On a side note,... I am glad to read above about some not having the genetic need to shoot hundreds of rounds every time, at the bench. As posted above, I shoot a semi like a bolt gun, like a shotgun, like a single shot, and a bow and arrow. First shot concentration on hitting the target with the expectations of not needing a follow up shot!
Since changing over to my own hand loads a couple decades ago, I find that I shoot MANY more rounds developing a specific load for an individual rifle/handgun, than I would normally shoot in a YEAR! My typical routine is to bring a weapon out of the safe twice a year to check function, and scope zero (if it has one) which normally only takes around 6 rounds,... 3 for verification, and 3 for the fun of it and then stripping/cleaning.
Any more shots than that, and I find, pounding the center area of my 8" gong at 100 yds,... simply,... repetitive,... and, BORING!
There have been MANY times, when I would shoot one round, dead center at 100 yds, and just pack up, walk back to my reloading room and clean it up before going back to the safe. That is the way I want my weapons! First shot,... dead on,... whenever I pull the trigger,... or, I don't keep them! I don't have the need to do it, over, and, over, and, over again!
Lastly, I find TODAY'S Ar's to be more than adequate in every respect,... the reliability, accuracy, and ergonomics of my builds, verify such, for me.
Exactly. It was even said that they used "mostly stamped parts" on ARs, that is so far off base its...The term "cheaply built" carries with it the possible meaning that a reduction of quality is at stake here. I would agree that it's certainly "cheaper to build" an AR but in my opinion they are not "cheaply built"