PDA

View Full Version : NEW GAS PISTON!


X-NewYawker
09-30-2008, 5:27 PM
In spite of what anti-GPU guys like our beloved UCLAplinker always posts, the Gun Industry is going full bore with Gas Piston Uppers and retro fits -- Came Home and found this nice box from the latest company to jump into the fray, Lewis Machine & Tool (LMT) --

http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p54/Fasanoland/_MG_4809.jpg
Three thin suspicious boxes inside --

http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p54/Fasanoland/_MG_4813.jpg

Two M-4 Uppers and a MRP CQB Gas Piston upper --

http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p54/Fasanoland/_MG_4816.jpg
http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p54/Fasanoland/_MG_4815.jpg
http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p54/Fasanoland/_MG_4817.jpg

If the GPU feels better than my existing upper it will become my CQB upper...

Shooting Thursday...

a1fabweld
09-30-2008, 5:45 PM
Anyone know of a retro kit for a midlength system that will fit under a standard free floated railed handguard? All I see is carbines.

stphnman20
09-30-2008, 6:00 PM
Call them.. you never know..

X-New Yawker, man you always have new stuff!! Need a room mate?

X-NewYawker
09-30-2008, 6:13 PM
Who's paying the rent?

Remember -- I don't get to KEEP them -- unless the Bailout bill goes through!

aplinker
09-30-2008, 7:31 PM
I'm not against gas pistons - I'm not a fan of gas piston ARs where their potential advantages don't overcome their liabilities.

Some of the best military rifles in the world use gas pistons.

The commercial success of gas piston ARs is no surprise.

ohsmily
09-30-2008, 7:38 PM
I would only buy a gas piston upper if the bolt was redesigned to allow for a folding stock, like in the Z-M Weapons upper receiver. Otherwise, the standard AR-15 design works just fine for me and the additional cost of the piston upper is not worth the benefit of it.

joe_sun
09-30-2008, 8:15 PM
Nice! I really like those LMT piston uppers.

X-NewYawker
09-30-2008, 8:20 PM
BTW -- the XCR is like the Z-M Weapons system -- the bolt return spring is in teh foreend so stock can fold, no stock, shoot with stock submerged...

tophatjones
09-30-2008, 8:29 PM
You always get the coolest toys! Anyways, I think the GP for Ar is overrated. After all, how can a company increase their margins in the Ar industry when such a great rifle has been around for so long? Create a solution for a problem that's overrated, and convince everyone that their weapons are inadequate. Ok, if one has a full auto, 14.5" or shorter barreled Ar, a gas piston becomes much more important. For a 20" or 16" mid length, semi auto rifle, a GP is totally unnecessary and adds parts to the system. They're still very cool, however.

bwiese
09-30-2008, 8:32 PM
"the Gun Industry is going full bore with Gas Piston Uppers and retrofits..."


Yup, they gotta sell something even if what they're trying to fix ain't broke and even if it can add more flaws into the process.

X-NewYawker
09-30-2008, 8:50 PM
We get it! You HATE GPUs!

Lest I forget my other latest BRD acquisition -- the completed ADDAX GPU waiting for Leupold Mark 2 6-18x --

http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p54/Fasanoland/_MG_4827.jpg
http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p54/Fasanoland/_MG_4828.jpg

X-NewYawker
09-30-2008, 8:57 PM
"the Gun Industry is going full bore with Gas Piston Uppers and retrofits..."


Yup, they gotta sell something even if what they're trying to fix ain't broke and even if it can add more flaws into the process.

Excuse me, I have to step in here and ask for clarification -- it is your premise that the AR platform gas system is perfect, and then countries all over the world have been working on alternate systems... why? To "add flaws" to the system? That's pretty cynical.
For shats and giggles?

The AR platform was "broke" since it's inception and the reliable, workable M-4 we have now is the result of CONSTANT "fixing" and fudging with the gun since the first ones hit vietnam. With twist rates, forward assists, sights, stocks, and yes, now even gas systems.

ohsmily
09-30-2008, 9:04 PM
BTW -- the XCR is like the Z-M Weapons system -- the bolt return spring is in teh foreend so stock can fold, no stock, shoot with stock submerged...


Yeah, but I don't have a reg'ed XCR. I do have a reg'ed Armalite lower that I could put a ZM weapons upper on (or other redesigned gas pistol upper with modified bolt) and then run a detachable mag, folding stock ar.....which would be just plain cool ;)

thmpr
09-30-2008, 9:05 PM
One day, I will be able to get nice toys... I'm hoping to win the lottery soon!

X-NewYawker
09-30-2008, 9:07 PM
Does Z-M still exist?
They were the first "tacticool" uppers I saw, just before the AWB.

Cypriss32
09-30-2008, 9:08 PM
Lots of negative nancys here!

Looks good man. When am I convincing you to build a bolt gun?

ohsmily
09-30-2008, 9:14 PM
Does Z-M still exist?
They were the first "tacticool" uppers I saw, just before the AWB.


Guess who licensed the design and is going to sell them now.........
.
.
.
.
.
Para Ordnance. I believe they were due out this year. However, that seems to have been delayed....hopefully not indefinitely.... http://www.para-usa.com/new/product_rifle.php

X-NewYawker
09-30-2008, 9:17 PM
Lots of negative nancys here!

Looks good man. When am I convincing you to build a bolt gun?

Drossing R-5 Remmie tomorrow at Rettings. Putting in this stock:

http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p54/Fasanoland/JAE-rem-700.jpg

Which will use AI magazines.

tophatjones
09-30-2008, 9:40 PM
The AR platform was "broke" since it's inception and the reliable, workable M-4 we have now is the result of CONSTANT "fixing" and fudging with the gun since the first ones hit vietnam. With twist rates, forward assists, sights, stocks, and yes, now even gas systems.

I disagree. The 20" rifle is a great weapon. The reliability problems in Vietnam had more to do with the military changing powder specs, not issuing cleaning supplies/knowledge, and omitting chrome lined chambers/bores.

These days, because of the new rage for shorter rifles, the original design has been compromised. The shorter gas system doesn't allow enough dwell time for the fired casing to lessen its grip on the chamber, requiring more pressure from the gas and a stronger extractor for successful extraction.

The "craps where it eats" argument is BS. Sure, the gas goes into the bolt carrier, but it has a release at the right side of the bolt carrier. The gas blows right out the ejection port. A properly built Ar with the right lube in the right places is a damn reliable weapon (you can expect at least 1000 rounds without a failure). When are you going to be in a situation where you need to fire 1000 rounds without cleaning? In such a situation, where are you going to even get 1000 rounds (or carry it)?

For anyone except SBR full auto Ar owners, the Ar15 gas piston doesn't offer any noticeable advantages for the few hundred dollars it costs to add a piston an a bolt carrier. Marketing and hype combined with feelings of inadequacy from the consumer is a powerful force.

jandmtv
09-30-2008, 9:44 PM
Drossing R-5 Remmie tomorrow at Rettings. Putting in this stock:

http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p54/Fasanoland/JAE-rem-700.jpg

Which will use AI magazines.

I didnt even know that stock was out for the Remmy, and glad to hear you are getting the Remmy 5R, you will love it, Im sure.

X-NewYawker
09-30-2008, 9:53 PM
I disagree. The 20" rifle is a great weapon. The reliability problems in Vietnam had more to do with the military changing powder specs, not issuing cleaning supplies/knowledge, and omitting chrome lined chambers/bores.

These days, because of the new rage for shorter rifles, the original design has been compromised. The shorter gas system doesn't allow enough dwell time for the fired casing to lessen its grip on the chamber, requiring more pressure from the gas and a stronger extractor for successful extraction.

The "craps where it eats" argument is BS. Sure, the gas goes into the bolt carrier, but it has a release at the right side of the bolt carrier. The gas blows right out the ejection port. A properly built AR with the right lube in the right places is a damn reliable weapon (you can expect at least 1000 rounds without a failure). When are you going to be in a situation where you need to fire 1000 rounds without cleaning? In such a situation, where are you going to even get 1000 rounds (or carry it)?

For anyone except SBR full auto Ar owners, it is just marketing and hype.

We'll have to agree to disagree.
Shorty ARs (XM177E2s) have been around for forty years. People messing with this gun is not new. People want it to work better. The Israeli army HATEs that it has to issue M-16s in their desert environs.

Maintenance stories coming back from the sandbox have mostly been nightmares going back to the second day of the war. I went to CENTCOM and interviewed the surviving Soldiers on Jessica Lynch's ill fated convoy -- almost every one of them had FTF (remember these were support troops and like the troops on patrols for long stretches who are not "gun guys" who don't clean and lube their guns religiously like you guys do)

You do not have a universal movement to fix this gun based on marketing and hype.

What is 6.8 SPC and 6.5 Grendel and all that other stuff about? Making the AR better.
The 5.56mm NATO AR is not perfect and it seems weird that you guys get your backs up to defend it so hard, and so definitively?
Are you Eugene Stoner?
Do you have stock in Cerebrus?
I have had every legal centerfire rifle platform made at one time or the other. My first rifle was a Colt AR-15 bought from Leslie Edelman's Long Island store in 1979. I loved it. But it cried out to be "hot roded" in a way my HK 91 and FN FAL didn't -- lose the handle -- get better fore end -- better grip -- I mean, this SITE is basically a tribute to how you guys keep screwing with your ARs!

But the gas piston sets you off.
I wish you could drop the AR's sainted mantle. It's just a tool. Instead of shiiting on GPUs, help make them better. Constructive criticism.

I like these piston guns. They're not perfect either, but they are cooler and cleaner. That is enough.

ARs have their limitations. They are not as accurate as bolt guns or as wild as HK G36s or as cheap as 10-22s or as powerful as elephant guns. So they will have to do.

X-NewYawker
09-30-2008, 10:04 PM
I didnt even know that stock was out for the Remmy, and glad to hear you are getting the Remmy 5R, you will love it, Im sure.

Your recommendation was a big plus. Thanks.

Weirdly, 308 ammo costs less in an R-5 than in a M1-A --
amazing isn't it?

tophatjones
09-30-2008, 10:32 PM
You are reasonable and make good points. I guess I overreacted because it's a pet peeve of mine to see so many people rag on the Ar when in reality it isn't as bad as most say. Although I don't have as many contacts as you do, my friend in the Marines (just had his 2nd tour in Iraq) loves his M16a4, and is even proud of it. He is the type of Marine who believes in testing any equipment "Marine style". I saw him throw a test flashlight he was raving about some 30 yards into the air and not lose a beat when it shattered on impact with the concrete ground. He just said it wasn't ready yet because it hasn't met his standards. He is proud of his M16a4, however.

I do believe that any weapon/system can be improved upon and even replaced if it was for the benefit of our soldiers. So, if moving up in caliber and replacing the Ar with a piston gun, or even retrofitting their M4s with different caliber piston uppers will help them, I'm for it. The thing that really gets me is when manufacturers/publications claim that the rifle is unreliable crap without their ultra smooth designed gas piston.

We'll have to agree to disagree.
Shorty ARs (XM177E2s) have been around for forty years. People messing with this gun is not new. People want it to work better. The Israeli army HATEs that it has to issue M-16s in their desert environs.

Maintenance stories coming back from the sandbox have mostly been nightmares going back to the second day of the war. I went to CENTCOM and interviewed the surviving Soldiers on Jessica Lynch's ill fated convoy -- almost every one of them had FTF (remember these were support troops and like the troops on patrols for long stretches who are not "gun guys" who don't clean and lube their guns religiously like you guys do)

You do not have a universal movement to fix this gun based on marketing and hype.

What is 6.8 SPC and 6.5 Grendel and all that other stuff about? Making the AR better.
The 5.56mm NATO AR is not perfect and it seems weird that you guys get your backs up to defend it so hard, and so definitively?
Are you Eugene Stoner?
Do you have stock in Cerebrus?
I have had every legal centerfire rifle platform made at one time or the other. My first rifle was a Colt AR-15 bought from Leslie Edelman's Long Island store in 1979. I loved it. But it cried out to be "hot roded" in a way my HK 91 and FN FAL didn't -- lose the handle -- get better fore end -- better grip -- I mean, this SITE is basically a tribute to how you guys keep screwing with your ARs!

But the gas piston sets you off.
I wish you could drop the AR's sainted mantle. It's just a tool. Instead of shiiting on GPUs, help make them better. Constructive criticism.

I like these piston guns. They're not perfect either, but they are cooler and cleaner. That is enough.

ARs have their limitations. They are not as accurate as bolt guns or as wild as HK G36s or as cheap as 10-22s or as powerful as elephant guns. So they will have to do.

m24armorer
09-30-2008, 10:42 PM
Well I'm not Eugene Stoner or Gordon Ingram for that matter. But I have met both of them and spent some time with them. Brilliant folks!

The piston upper has only one advantage for me. I shoot left handed and supressed. The piston upper keeps all the gas and powder junk out of my face.

m24armorer
09-30-2008, 10:45 PM
Oh, tophatjones. First rifle in 79". You be just a pup :D

aplinker
10-01-2008, 1:50 AM
You knew I had to respond when you singled me out ;)

The reason I speak up against GPs is that I think, if you consider what a GP does for the AR, it's pretty damn clear it's completely unnecessary for 95% of AR shooters. The problem is 95% of noobs come on here saying "get a GP - it's the best," without qualifying the statement (or even understanding the basic principles of the argument).

Most of the guys who come on here are going to build one, maybe two ARs. I guess I'm overprotective and would like to see people spend money on what gains them the most - good barrels, BCGs, triggers and stocks.

I actually have no issue at all with gas pistons or AR gas pistons; I do when they're touted as a fix and the ultimate.

One of the big issues is, as tested as they might be, they're far from proven. The data isn't there and it takes time. One-off "torture tests" aren't much more than anecdotal in my book. It takes consistent and large data sets for a platform to show it's worth it over another. Right now there are numerous piston designs battling - some do things better than others and all of them have drawbacks. In the future it could very well be a GP will be a worthwhile addition to a wide variety of ARs.

Now, on a select fire SBR, even now... I'd roll a piston, too.

Lastly - what makes you think a GP would have prevented the failures you reference?



We'll have to agree to disagree.
Shorty ARs (XM177E2s) have been around for forty years. People messing with this gun is not new. People want it to work better. The Israeli army HATEs that it has to issue M-16s in their desert environs.

Maintenance stories coming back from the sandbox have mostly been nightmares going back to the second day of the war. I went to CENTCOM and interviewed the surviving Soldiers on Jessica Lynch's ill fated convoy -- almost every one of them had FTF (remember these were support troops and like the troops on patrols for long stretches who are not "gun guys" who don't clean and lube their guns religiously like you guys do)

You do not have a universal movement to fix this gun based on marketing and hype.

What is 6.8 SPC and 6.5 Grendel and all that other stuff about? Making the AR better.
The 5.56mm NATO AR is not perfect and it seems weird that you guys get your backs up to defend it so hard, and so definitively?
Are you Eugene Stoner?
Do you have stock in Cerebrus?
I have had every legal centerfire rifle platform made at one time or the other. My first rifle was a Colt AR-15 bought from Leslie Edelman's Long Island store in 1979. I loved it. But it cried out to be "hot roded" in a way my HK 91 and FN FAL didn't -- lose the handle -- get better fore end -- better grip -- I mean, this SITE is basically a tribute to how you guys keep screwing with your ARs!

But the gas piston sets you off.
I wish you could drop the AR's sainted mantle. It's just a tool. Instead of shiiting on GPUs, help make them better. Constructive criticism.

I like these piston guns. They're not perfect either, but they are cooler and cleaner. That is enough.

ARs have their limitations. They are not as accurate as bolt guns or as wild as HK G36s or as cheap as 10-22s or as powerful as elephant guns. So they will have to do.

BlackReef
10-01-2008, 1:57 AM
I read your posts and I can see you change your 'tone' about Gas Piston AR's as more and more people are purchasing them. I feel like I lose brain cells every time I read what you have to say in your opinionated posts. Don't buy a GPU, simple as that. Have fun with your DI, nobody cares.


You knew I had to respond when you singled me out ;)

The reason I speak up against GPs is that I think, if you consider what a GP does for the AR, it's pretty damn clear it's completely unnecessary for 95% of AR shooters. The problem is 95% of noobs come on here saying "get a GP - it's the best," without qualifying it.

Most of the guys who come on here are going to build one, maybe two ARs. I guess I'm overprotective and would like to see people spend money on what gains them the most - good barrels, BCGs, triggers and stocks.

I actually have no issue at all with gas pistons or AR gas pistons; I do when they're touted as a fix and the ultimate.

One of the big issues is, as tested as they might be, they're far from proven. The data isn't there and it takes time. One-off "torture tests" aren't much more than anecdotal in my book. It takes consistent and large data sets for a platform to show it's worth it over another. Right now there are numerous piston designs battling - some do things better than others and all of them have drawbacks. In the future it could very well be a GP will be a worthwhile addition to a wide variety of ARs.

Now, on a select fire SBR, even now... I'd roll a piston, too.

Lastly - what makes you think a GP would have prevented the failures you reference?

aplinker
10-01-2008, 3:09 AM
My tone? Since when is there anything auditory in a written post?


When counterbalancing the side of a point/argument you don't give ground. When expressing your personal opinion you state everything you believe.

If you can't tell the difference between the two that's not my fault.



Gas piston ARs aren't new. I've owned two.


You sure seem interested in what I say, since you took the time to "call me out." :confused:


I read your posts and I can see you change your 'tone' about Gas Piston AR's as more and more people are purchasing them. I feel like I lose brain cells every time I read what you have to say in your opinionated posts. Don't buy a GPU, simple as that. Have fun with your DI, nobody cares.

X-NewYawker
10-01-2008, 5:24 AM
GUys -- as a person who LIVES by words. I will say that I have also gotten hot under the collar in posts, and posts are "tone deaf." Sarcasm can sound like hate.

I'm very happy with the last few responses because they got away from being knee-jerk and we've been discussing, rather than dissing GPUs. Are they "proven?" To some owners, yes. To others, no.

Companies like LMT are making gas pistons not to drum up new clients, but because (hyped or facing real maintenance problems) they clients are asking them to.

But back to the posts. We are humans which mean we love top rag on each other, but as Kiing points out, seeing teh printed words (with the usually I'm typing as fast as I can before my wife comes in and reminds me that we were suposed to leave for dinner ten minites ago typos) sometimes makes us sound mean spirited.

A big part of this AR phenomenon is the joy we take in personalizing and sharing our "new toys." Yes, guns aren't toys, they are potentially dangerous weapons, but for men (and some women) they fulfill that desire to have new and shiny things.

If you have the money to buy a $5K sniper rifle or $350 airsoft gun and stick a 10-22 sporter in it, I don't ask "why?" I say cool.

marxdspot
10-01-2008, 5:49 AM
GUys -- as a person who LIVES by words. I will say that I have also gotten hot under the collar in posts, and posts are "tone deaf." Sarcasm can sound like hate.

I'm very happy with the last few responses because they got away from being knee-jerk and we've been discussing, rather than dissing GPUs. Are they "proven?" To some owners, yes. To others, no.

Companies like LMT are making gas pistons not to drum up new clients, but because (hyped or facing real maintenance problems) they clients are asking them to.

But back to the posts. We are humans which mean we love top rag on each other, but as Kiing points out, seeing teh printed words (with the usually I'm typing as fast as I can before my wife comes in and reminds me that we were suposed to leave for dinner ten minites ago typos) sometimes makes us sound mean spirited.

A big part of this AR phenomenon is the joy we take in personalizing and sharing our "new toys." Yes, guns aren't toys, they are potentially dangerous weapons, but for men (and some women) they fulfill that desire to have new and shiny things.

If you have the money to buy a $5K sniper rifle or $350 airsoft gun and stick a 10-22 sporter in it, I don't ask "why?" I say cool.

Nicely said. Bravo, NY'er.:)


A big part of this AR phenomenon is the joy we take in personalizing and sharing our "new toys." Yes, guns aren't toys, they are potentially dangerous weapons, but for men (and some women) they fulfill that desire to have new and shiny things.

If you have the money to buy a $5K sniper rifle or $350 airsoft gun and stick a 10-22 sporter in it, I don't ask "why?" I say cool.

http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w316/marxdspot/Items%20of%20Sale/IMG_4240.jpg
It satisfied my "desire".

Toolbox X
10-01-2008, 7:54 AM
I think it is important for people to understand that GPU's will benefit soldiers greatly because of the reduced heat, and reduced cleaning required. Our troops betting their lives on their rifles, while they are getting ultra-fine sand and dust constantly poured on them. Gas Pistons are going to be excellent upgrades for them.

For people casually shooting AR's in non-life threatening, clean environments, GPU's are simply cool. The technology is new, but GPU's are getting better and better. Over the next 10 years we are going to see the price of GPUs come way down and become much more common. (Assuming everything isn't banned of course) Once perfected, they are a better system than DI.

scubamark13
10-01-2008, 8:46 AM
I have a question for you GPU experts. When I shoot several hundred rounds through my OLL my eyes become blurry. I always attributed it to gas face.

1. Will the GPU take care of this problem?
2. Can you use a GPU with a Ciener kit?

Thanks,

Addax
10-01-2008, 1:45 PM
I don't hate GPU's ;)

We get it! You HATE GPUs!

Lest I forget my other latest BRD acquisition -- the completed ADDAX GPU waiting for Leupold Mark 2 6-18x --

http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p54/Fasanoland/_MG_4827.jpg
http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p54/Fasanoland/_MG_4828.jpg

odesskiy
10-01-2008, 2:31 PM
So, who has these LMT MRP GPU's in stock and how much are they?

DrunkSkunk
10-01-2008, 2:37 PM
Instead of shiiting on GPUs, help make them better.

well said

dwa
10-01-2008, 2:40 PM
You are reasonable and make good points. I guess I overreacted because it's a pet peeve of mine to see so many people rag on the Ar when in reality it isn't as bad as most say. Although I don't have as many contacts as you do, my friend in the Marines (just had his 2nd tour in Iraq) loves his M16a4, and is even proud of it. He is the type of Marine who believes in testing any equipment "Marine style". I saw him throw a test flashlight he was raving about some 30 yards into the air and not lose a beat when it shattered on impact with the concrete ground. He just said it wasn't ready yet because it hasn't met his standards. He is proud of his M16a4, however.

I do believe that any weapon/system can be improved upon and even replaced if it was for the benefit of our soldiers. So, if moving up in caliber and replacing the Ar with a piston gun, or even retrofitting their M4s with different caliber piston uppers will help them, I'm for it. The thing that really gets me is when manufacturers/publications claim that the rifle is unreliable crap without their ultra smooth designed gas piston.

not to condratic your friend but my experiance with the m-4 differed with your friens a4. Marines arent know for their objectivy.(i was army just a friendly rib) While the m-4 is by no means a bad weapon i dont consider it the best weapon ever. They tend to get very very dirty when fired in regular use. they do have issues with fte and double feeds being the most common. 5.56s effectiveness is another topic so i wont go there but to say of seen some less than impressive preformance involving a m249 so i would say that there is something to the 5.56 debate.

one situation that directly involved me was during a several day mission. i stritly maintianed my weapon so i know it wasnt my fault (you have only my word for it :) ) in northern iraq it gets rather nasty during the winter (wet cold miserable) when we returned to the fob i was clearning my weapon and the bolt had rusted in place. i had to take the upper of to get the bolt out the rust wiped off with a finger swipe so it wasnt a big deal there but it made me wonder what would have happend if i had to engage targets.

the pros to the ar is its very easy to use, accurate, easily accepts accessories, manuverable, and low recoil (im sure theres more im not thinking of) but i think there are better things out there. the gas pistons may be a step that way i really dont know ive never seen one.

Addax
10-01-2008, 2:46 PM
I think the DI system is a good design, but it has it flaws too.

The DI system was designed to get the most bang for the buck, to reduce costs of manufacturer and moving parts, but there was a compromise in the DI system, and that is by moving the Gas Operation from the Gas Block into the Upper Receiver, another host of issues cropped up, and over the years, design improvements and shooters training and handling of the AR have changed to compensate for the DI systems weaknesses.

The DI system blows hot gas that contains contaminants from the barrel into the upper receiver, and yes some (But Not All) gets vented out.

As you shoot more, more of these contaminants build up in the upper and inside and around the BCG.

In order to ensure functionality, AR shooters have been trained to keep your AR Constantly Lubricated / Wet, and this will help to break down the Carbon Build up in the upper receiver and bolt carrier, but this is also is another Stop Gap Fix for the DI's design flaw.

Also, since lubrication burns off quickly, you need to constantly keep your AR Lubricated.

You should not have to keep your rifle constantly lubricated/wet to help break down carbon build up and to help ensure that it is going to fuction, lubrication should be used to keep parts fresh, and to reduce wear and friction.

AR Gas Piston Systems are addressing a problem, and some AR owners have seen the benefits of the AR Gas Piston Systems, and some who love the DI system, have not.

The AR Gas Piston Systems redirects the gas operation of the AR rifle, carbine etc. from the Upper receiver to the Gas Block up in front (like many contemporary Gas Piston Rifles). So you do not have to keep your upper receiver and BCG Wet with lube, or special lubricants and greases, since now your upper receiver and BCG do not get dirty or get built up with Carbon anymore. Plus you don't get oil in your face when you shoot a Gas Piston Upper, since your upper receiver and BCG are not built up with oil.

Gas Piston Uppers are also allot easier to maintain vs. DI uppers.

All that has to be done on my Gas Piston Uppers is to pull out the piston tube and piston, clean them, clean your bore and wipre your rifle down. All it takes is no more than 10 minutes. Plus you do not have to have frequent clean ups.

I have gone 3000 rounds without doing anything more than spraying a little G96 down the bore and running a bore snake down the bore, and giving my piston one shot of G96. Again, only once in 3000 rounds of shooting over a period of 3 months.

Addax
10-01-2008, 3:08 PM
Very well said NewYawker.

GUys -- as a person who LIVES by words. I will say that I have also gotten hot under the collar in posts, and posts are "tone deaf." Sarcasm can sound like hate.

I'm very happy with the last few responses because they got away from being knee-jerk and we've been discussing, rather than dissing GPUs. Are they "proven?" To some owners, yes. To others, no.

Companies like LMT are making gas pistons not to drum up new clients, but because (hyped or facing real maintenance problems) they clients are asking them to.

But back to the posts. We are humans which mean we love top rag on each other, but as Kiing points out, seeing teh printed words (with the usually I'm typing as fast as I can before my wife comes in and reminds me that we were suposed to leave for dinner ten minites ago typos) sometimes makes us sound mean spirited.

A big part of this AR phenomenon is the joy we take in personalizing and sharing our "new toys." Yes, guns aren't toys, they are potentially dangerous weapons, but for men (and some women) they fulfill that desire to have new and shiny things.

If you have the money to buy a $5K sniper rifle or $350 airsoft gun and stick a 10-22 sporter in it, I don't ask "why?" I say cool.

tophatjones
10-01-2008, 8:57 PM
Well, I can enjoy a patient, intelligent discussion any day. This is why I spend time on Calguns as opposed to arf.com.

I think as the trend goes towards shorter rifles, we will definitely be needing more potent calibers than the 5.56 and a piston system for the carbines. The DI is designed for the 20" length rifle after all. My 20" Ar is the most reliable weapon I own, it is the only gun I have that has never failed, and the action can glide shut with gravity alone. Another advantage it and other Ars have is their closed system. With the dust cover closed, much less external grit can get in compared to more open systems such as the SKS and the M14. If external grit gets into the chamber area, any gun will jam.

The real problem I see here is that people are changing the system to fulfill the modern requirements of an assault rifle without flat out replacing the Ar. Shortening the barrel allows the operator to exit vehicles smoother and have a more effective CQB weapon. However, without primary extraction and a longer dwell time for the casing to bleed off some of its pressure (the major problem in shorter barreled Ars), the extractor will be overworked. Case separation will be much more likely, resulting in more jams that are catastrophic in nature. In addition, the 5.56 round is much less effective in shorter barrels. If I was to have a great Ar15, give me a 20" rifle or 16" mid length carbine in 5.56, DI. If I was on the front line for the military, give me a new rifle originally designed with the gas piston with primary extraction and a larger caliber.

Bottom line is this, any gun is designed as a system, and when one changes one part, all will be affected. In order for one change to work, parts must be altered accordingly to create a new system. The GP does introduce benefits, such as a cleaner action and stronger rearward impulse of the BC. However, it doesn't address the most important reliability issue. Shortening the gas system causes a shorter dwell time for the casing, which requires a much more violent impulse to separate the case from chamber. This could lead to case separation and broken extractors.


P.S. I don't think that the GP's popularity in the civilian market is primarily attributed to its utility.

Addax
10-01-2008, 9:18 PM
Well, I can enjoy a patient, intelligent discussion any day. This is why I spend time on Calguns as opposed to arf.com.

I think as the trend goes towards shorter rifles, we will definitely be needing more potent calibers than the 5.56 and a piston system for the carbines. The DI is designed for the 20" length rifle after all. My 20" Ar is the most reliable weapon I own, it is the only gun I have that has never failed, and the action can glide shut with gravity alone. Another advantage it and other Ars have is their closed system. With the dust cover closed, much less external grit can get in compared to more open systems such as the SKS and the M14. If external grit gets into the chamber area, any gun will jam.

The real problem I see here is that people are changing the system to fulfill the modern requirements of an assault rifle without flat out replacing the Ar. Shortening the barrel allows the operator to exit vehicles smoother and have a more effective CQB weapon. However, without primary extraction and a longer dwell time for the casing to bleed off some of its pressure (the major problem in shorter barreled Ars), the extractor will be overworked. Case separation will be much more likely, resulting in more jams that are catastrophic in nature. In addition, the 5.56 round is much less effective in shorter barrels. If I was to have a great Ar15, give me a 20" rifle or 16" mid length carbine in 5.56, DI. If I was on the front line for the military, give me a new rifle originally designed with the gas piston with primary extraction and a larger caliber.

Bottom line is this, any gun is designed as a system, and when one changes one part, all will be affected. In order for one change to work, parts must be altered accordingly to create a new system. The GP does introduce benefits, such as a cleaner action and stronger rearward impulse of the BC. However, it doesn't address the most important reliability issue. Shortening the gas system causes a shorter dwell time for the casing, which requires a much more violent impulse to separate the case from chamber. This could lead to case separation and broken extractors.


P.S. I don't think that the GP's popularity in the civilian market is primarily attributed to its utility.

So far in my shooting 8 different Gas Piston Upper test mules we built, we have logged in over 12,000 rounds, and we have yet to experience a parts failure, broken extrator or split cases or chewed up brass.

PWS has over 20,000 rounds in a couple of their test mules.

I have a little over 6500 rounds in a 16" Carbine, and we have yet to see case seperation, a broken extractor and any other parts failures.

I have even gone beyond the limits and over-pressured 2 of my test mule uppers, and they work without a hitch, they just recoil harder, so I know what the operating limitations are, and I have yet to break an extractor or cause any excessive bolt wear.

The PWS Gas Piston System we use on all of our uppers has unique design elements that I cannot disclose, but I am able to run 10.5" GPU's all day long, or 17" Rifle Length GPU's which I am also currently testing, without running into major dwell time issues or causing the excessive pressue impulses.

I check many of the rounds we shoot just to make sure we are now chewing up brass cases, or spliting them, and I have yet to have one bad case after shooting.

One of the things that really sets us apart from many other dealer that builds Gas Piston Uppers, is we test the crud out of our uppers, and we have gone through tens of thousands of dollars in barrels, parts, and systems.

I will agree that a whole new system would be better, but for now, we do what we can, and the PWS system is the best we have run into yet.

thedrickel
10-02-2008, 2:09 AM
How does accuracy compare b/w DI and GPU?

Addax
10-02-2008, 6:30 AM
How does accuracy compare b/w DI and GPU?

We have been able to achieve 2" to 3" groups at 100 yards.

This is closely comparable to a standard/contemporary AR DI upper, so we can say that our uppers can produce general ar accuracy.

With a target barrel installed, we have seen 1" groups, and we are going to do some more testing next week using match ammo and a new scope that finally arrived to help us with some accuracy shots.

Linh
10-25-2008, 8:54 PM
I think it is important for people to understand that GPU's will benefit soldiers greatly because of the reduced heat, and reduced cleaning required. Our troops betting their lives on their rifles, while they are getting ultra-fine sand and dust constantly poured on them. Gas Pistons are going to be excellent upgrades for them.

For people casually shooting AR's in non-life threatening, clean environments, GPU's are simply cool. The technology is new, but GPU's are getting better and better. Over the next 10 years we are going to see the price of GPUs come way down and become much more common. (Assuming everything isn't banned of course) Once perfected, they are a better system than DI.

I totally agree, before anyone say that a GPU will not benefit Soldiers/Marines let me ask you how many times have you been in a sandstorm?

Will the GPU fix the problem? I don't know but I'll take that chance knowing that the regular upper has problems with sand. And before anyone says that Soldiers/Marines should be cleaning their rifle 24/7 well you really do watch too much tv.

thmpr
10-25-2008, 9:20 PM
We have been able to achieve 2" to 3" groups at 100 yards.

This is closely comparable to a standard/contemporary AR DI upper, so we can say that our uppers can produce general ar accuracy.

With a target barrel installed, we have seen 1" groups, and we are going to do some more testing next week using match ammo and a new scope that finally arrived to help us with some accuracy shots.

Best way to validate if accuracy has been affected is to do a pre and post piston retrofit. Take a DI rifle and shoot at least three 10 rds groups at hundred yards. Take the same rifle, retrofit the PWS system, load the same ammo and repeat the three round groups and validate the difference between the two. I would say no accuracy has been affected. The best test scenario would be at 300 yards.