Piston dilemma; LWRCi Vs. LMT Vs. Barrett? HELP

[brando]

The M82 isn't accurate for a semi-auto precision rifle - it's like a .50BMG battle rifle and that's fine if employed properly. I'm just trying to dispel the myth that Barrett is anything special. They are cheaply made and the REC7, in question, is on the same level as the Bushmaster piston gun, in my opinion. And the post I was responding to claimed that the Barrett was the way to go because of its resale value, which is just wrong. If we use that logic an official HK 416 is the best choice.

[wash]

So I guess everyone makes a ~man portable semi-auto .50 BMG?

I must have missed that.

[bombadillo]

Thanks for the clarification brando. Never heard them described like that before, but from someone who has been in the field and apparently used the m82, sounds fair. Out of the bunch, I'd get the HK as well, but I didn't think that was in the mix for some reason. Also hard to come by as you said before.

[brando]

Wash, what's your point? I've explained mine twice now.

[Hungarian_Legionnaire]

Well they were trying a big bore AR for a while.

I've got some PRI .499 Leitner-Wise magazines they they were discontinuing because LWRC couldn't figure out how to make essentially a .50 Beowulf run.

The mags work great for a Beowulf by the way.

Nobody's perfect and that is shown by LWRC failing badly at that one.

It's funny that you point out the failures of AA gas pistons because a retrofit is much harder to do than building from the ground up. The fact that they don't do the retrofit leaves a huge variable.

If you know enough to make sure the gas piston doesn't bind and isn't too long to lock up the bolt, bending should not occur. If you use their one piece bolt carrier, carrier key problems go away and the anti-tilt skis help with carrier tilt. If you add a PWS enhanced buffer tube, carrier tilt is solved permanently because the carrier has no place to tilt to.

I had to modify the gas block on my AA system but that was because my barrel was not quite right, the AA gas block is fine.

An LWRC will have better QC than an AA kit slapped on by someone who doesn't care or doesn't understand that some measuring and fitting might be required and if the AA kit installer doesn't address carrier tilt at all, it could be a problem. I think LWRC does address carrier tilt, I hope they do.

As far as I know, every gas piston system has had problems. A gas piston isn't some talisman that makes ARs unbreakable. No company has a monopoly on quality or reliability either.

When you buy a fancy name brand rifle you get a name, hopefully quality parts, attention to detail and R&D put in to the design.

Reliable short stroke gas piston designs have been around for 60+ years so the R&D doesn't impress me much.

...Are you just here to argue with people? & try to turn this thread in to a "Piston Vs. DI" thread. if so, then you should go post with other with other like minded people as your self. You bring no knowledge or real world experience to this thread & have not said anything in regards to the actual topic, just narrow minded/ argumentative comments that have nothing to do with this thread. If you have nothing to to comment on in regards to the topic of the thread, I suggest you post your comments in one of the many "Piston Vs. DI" threads.

[wash]

I just don't understand what the accuracy of a M82 has to do with the quality of a REC7.

All I know is that the price of a REC7 is high.

I don't trash things I don't know about.

I've heard the REC7 is very nice and for the price I hope it is.

If I was about to buy a REC7 and it looked or felt less than top notch, I would pass but I don't have that kind of money.

As for the M82, I give it a pass because it's pretty much the only game in town for a semi-automatic .50 BMG rifle.

Getting closer to the original topic, even if a REC7 is as nice as the price suggests, it's not going to be twice as reliable as a good AR that costs half as much. I see greater value elsewhere but I still think the REC7 should be very nice and from what I've heard it is.

[sleepr66]

Have a LMT and am not too pleased. It has not had a FTF or FTE however I am gettin "cam path gouging". Sent my rifle back to LMT and they said its normal. Kinna bugs me that my expensive rifle made by supposedly the best is eating itself with every shot. I got the bolt spring to curb it. Kinna on the fence about my rifle, I like it, but I wouldnt buy it again and am probably gonna stick to DI from now on. Also whats the point of changing barrels to DI when my upper is already damaged?!?

[wash]

...Are you just here to argue with people? & try to turn this thread in to a "Piston Vs. DI" thread. if so, then you should go post with other with other like minded people as your self. You bring no knowledge or real world experience to this thread & have not said anything in regards to the actual topic, just narrow minded/ argumentative comments that have nothing to do with this thread. If you have nothing to to comment on in regards to the topic of the thread, I suggest you post your comments in one of the many "Piston Vs. DI" threads.

If you read my post it isn't DI vs. Gas Piston, it's about the differences between gas piston systems and there isn't a whole lot.

I got a gas piston AR just for the hell of it. The fact that the kit was cheap was a deciding factor.

So far it's less reliable than DI because my gas port is too small. I will fix that.

I've got several gas piston FALs and they push the bolt carrier back just fine. Beside the gas regulator, they are quite simple, no fancy coatings, no ball bearings, they just work as designed.

When you ask "which super expensive gas piston AR is best?", I just wonder why they are so expensive. They all have about the same number of parts in the gas piston system and using the FAL as an example, I know they don't have to make the parts out of unobtanium or something.

Maybe I focus too much on nuts and bolts and budget?

The nuts and bolts just seem so similar and the budget keeps slapping me in the face.

I know I wouldn't be a good gun salesman because I would point people toward what they need rather than what would get me the biggest commission.

[brando]

Going back and looking at my initial response to the Barrett statement, I was countering the impression that a REC7 was a good choice because the Barrett brand meant a better resale value in the end. The only reason I brought up the Barrett .50BMG rifles was to point out that it's a popular misconception that they are top tier quality rifles (I should point out that I think the MRAD is their only standout). It's a popular misconception brought about by movies, TV, and video games - pop culture. It's why most people at the range asked me how I like my "Barrett" when it was actually a Windrunner. It's a misconception because my experience in the Army showed me that the M82 isn't the "sniper rifle" people talk about but is good at stopping cars at 400m. I saw how the M95 came and went with the NSW folks. The REC7 is right up there with the Bushmaster piston gun - over priced and average quality. All of Barrett's rifles are overpriced, in my opinion specifically because they aren't built particularly well. And that crazy pricing comes from A.) having been the only game in town for quite some time B.) many military contracts with US and allied nations. It's like KAC, to a degree: more mystique than reality.

[Hungarian_Legionnaire]

Have a LMT and am not too pleased. It has not had a FTF or FTE however I am gettin "cam path gouging". Sent my rifle back to LMT and they said its normal. Kinna bugs me that my expensive rifle made by supposedly the best is eating itself with every shot. I got the bolt spring to curb it. Kinna on the fence about my rifle, I like it, but I wouldnt buy it again and am probably gonna stick to DI from now on. Also whats the point of changing barrels to DI when my upper is already damaged?!?

Of course all AR's get some cam pin scraping in the upper, but how bad is the is the cam pin "gouging" in your LTM upper? If you sent it to LMT & they seem to think it's normal wear & tear (it may be?). Personally, I wouldn't even cycle the bolt on an AR (Piston or DI) without replacing the factory cam pin with a POF Roller Cam Pin.

Rather or not your LMT CQB MRP is still having this issue you should defiantly replace your cam pin with the POF Roller Cam Pin for 5.56/.223 for Gas Piston AR15's, they also have one for DI AR's the Roller Cam Pin is NP3 coated (like LWRCi's NiB), & the body is
Mil-spec hard chrome plated, It's a $25 part that will save your $2,000 rifle from having a deep gouge in the upper.

IMO you should call LMT, ask to speak to Gene Swanson enplane your situation to him & he will take care of you. (depending on if this is really just normal cam pin wear, or excessive cam pin gouging), BTW could you upload a pic of the amount of cam pin wear you have in your upper?

...Other than the issue with your cam pin, how is the LMT CQB MRP? These should be very squared away Piston AR's the UK has a number of them in service with Special Forces in Afghanistan, I have herd noting but good reports from the field.

[wash]

I would say ball bearing cam pins are not required for DI ARs.

I have several without it and the uppers show very little wear.

I think the drag from the gas rings keeps the bolt where it is supposed to be when cycling, together with the gas pushing it forward if you see wear there is a problem.

And that is the reality, every design change is just a shuffling of the tradeoffs.

The AR system is pretty well thought out and almost any system built well will have excellent reliability, even DI.

The thing that no one seems to explain is how does a hot bolt and carrier and gas in the action hurt reliability if you want it to run full of sand and dirt?

If they are all done right, the reliability in those conditions should be similar and the trials results show that they are all pretty close together. And that's with cherry picked samples.

They are all going to be nice, the question of best is very fuzzy.

I think they are all more than good enough and fall back to value because I'm cheap.

[Hungarian_Legionnaire]

I would say ball bearing cam pins are not required for DI ARs.

I have several without it and the uppers show very little wear.

I think the drag from the gas rings keeps the bolt where it is supposed to be when cycling, together with the gas pushing it forward if you see wear there is a problem.

And that is the reality, every design change is just a shuffling of the tradeoffs.

The AR system is pretty well thought out and almost any system built well will have excellent reliability, even DI.

The thing that no one seems to explain is how does a hot bolt and carrier and gas in the action hurt reliability if you want it to run full of sand and dirt?

If they are all done right, the reliability in those conditions should be similar and the trials results show that they are all pretty close together. And that's with cherry picked samples.

They are all going to be nice, the question of best is very fuzzy.

I think they are all more than good enough and fall back to value because I'm cheap.

A POF Roller Cam Pin, is a VERY cheap preventive mesure to protect your upper from cam pin gouging, Piston or DI operated I would rather spend $25.00 to protect my $2K+ investment, than risk deep cam pin scratches. AR15 uppers are either made of 6061 T6 or 7075 T6 Mil-Spec Aluminium, where as a Mil-Spec cam pin is made of Carpenter 158 steel.

7057 T6 Aluminium < Mil-Spec Carpenter 158 steel

If it can happen to a $2,000 LMT it could happen to ANY AR, & the steel will win Vs. aluminium every time, so why even risk it when there is a $25.00 Roller Cam Pin that can prevent it happening in the first place?

[wash]

Well I haven't looked in to it in detail but I don't think those ball bearing cam pins can eliminate all the wear, they just reduce it if the cam pin does strike the cut inside the upper.

It's still steel bearing race vs. aluminum upper. Rolling against each other is better than gouging.

Lots of top notch AR parts makers sell premium bolt carrier sets, I've never seen one with the ball bearing cam pin.

I think that would be different if cam pins hit the upper in DI ARs. Along with that, I've never heard of cam pin problems except in gas piston ARs.

DI ARs occasionally break cam pins or break the bolt at the cam pin hole and those failures can chew up an upper but a ball bearing won't fix that.

[Hungarian_Legionnaire]

Well I haven't looked in to it in detail but I don't think those ball bearing cam pins can eliminate all the wear, they just reduce it if the cam pin does strike the cut inside the upper.

It's still steel bearing race vs. aluminum upper. Rolling against each other is better than gouging.

Lots of top notch AR parts makers sell premium bolt carrier sets, I've never seen one with the ball bearing cam pin.

I think that would be different if cam pins hit the upper in DI ARs. Along with that, I've never heard of cam pin problems except in gas piston ARs.

DI ARs occasionally break cam pins or break the bolt at the cam pin hole and those failures can chew up an upper but a ball bearing won't fix that.

The POF Roller Cam Pin does not use ball bearings, "Rolling against each other IS better than gouging" a circular rolling cam pin rotating against the inside of an aluminum receiver as the bolt carrier travels rearwards in to the buffer tube at a high rate of speed, then with the force or the buffer spring traveling forwards back in to battery at a high rate of speed, is a far more effective method than having a square cam pin doing the exact same operation.

Also it doesn't matter if it's a Piston or DI cam pin in a bolt carrier, they both or threw the same action cycle, the only difference is the method of propulsion; hot, dirty gas or an op rod, either way the carrier does the same thing, you think DI AR's are immune to cam pin gouging?

...But once again, Piston Vs. DI is NOT what this thread is about, nowhere in the tittle or message description is "DI" mentioned, I'd appreciate it if you can refrain from comparing every comment to something DI related.

[Hungarian_Legionnaire]

Well I haven't looked in to it in detail but I don't think those ball bearing cam pins can eliminate all the wear, they just reduce it if the cam pin does strike the cut inside the upper.

It's still steel bearing race vs. aluminum upper. Rolling against each other is better than gouging.

Lots of top notch AR parts makers sell premium bolt carrier sets, I've never seen one with the ball bearing cam pin.

I think that would be different if cam pins hit the upper in DI ARs. Along with that, I've never heard of cam pin problems except in gas piston ARs.

DI ARs occasionally break cam pins or break the bolt at the cam pin hole and those failures can chew up an upper but a ball bearing won't fix that.

The POF Roller Cam Pin does not use ball bearings, "Rolling against each other IS better than gouging" a circular rolling cam pin rotating against the inside of an aluminum receiver as the bolt carrier travels rearwards in to the buffer tube at a high rate of speed, then with the force or the buffer spring traveling forwards back in to battery at a high rate of speed, is a far more effective method than having a square cam pin doing the exact same operation.

Also it doesn't matter if it's a Piston or DI cam pin in a bolt carrier, they both or threw the same action cycle, the only difference is the method of propulsion; hot, dirty gas or an op rod, either way the carrier does the same thing, you think DI AR's are immune to cam pin gouging?

...But once again, Piston Vs. DI is NOT what this thread is about, nowhere in the tittle or message description is "DI" mentioned, I'd appreciate it if you can refrain from comparing every comment to something DI related, in a Piston thread, when a comparison is not asked for or wanted.