I love this guy's channel and want a bcg like this.
Stoner was a genius.
https://youtu.be/Uv6a1hs9U5o
Printable View
I love this guy's channel and want a bcg like this.
Stoner was a genius.
https://youtu.be/Uv6a1hs9U5o
Not really, the gas system was terribly designed. Piston AR's run much cooler and cleaner.
It's really an inferior design to the AK or M1A.
It improved with the addition of the forward assist and dust cover but wasn't perfected until the gas system was replaced with a piston drive .
Opinions are like assholes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wildrose
It's apparent some aren't familiar with the fact that the Stoner system (both ar10 and 15) are indeed piston systems. Instead of a heavy and harmonic inducing op rod, the bolt itself inside of the bcg IS the piston.
Note Stoner patented the system as piston driven, not DI.
https://youtu.be/4xlKgkwt6Ro
I'm stating facts you cannot dispute.Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Dummy
Direct Impingement vs. Gas Piston: Settling the Debate Silencer Central
The AR's/M16's as originally tested and eventually given to the US military were direct impingement, not gas piston driven.Quote:
Originally Posted by US Conservative
The example in the OP is DI, not GP driven.
The example in your video is not either.
The gases are recirculated back into the upper via a gas tube that empties them into the BCG and upper.
This causes rapid heat buildup and excessive fouling.
This is an actual piston driven AR.
SIGSAUER 516 - Part3 - YouTube
Review: Sig Sauer Model 516 Gen 2 Piston-Driven AR - AllOutdoor.com
The heat and fouling don't make it into the BCG or upper like they do with the original system allowing them to run far cooler and cleaner.
Actual piston driven AR's are the future, not the original Stoner system who's only advantages were weight and cost of manufacturing.
Top 20 Next-Gen Piston-Driven ARs Tactical Life Gun Magazine: Gun News and Gun Reviews
Love the video! I knew nothing about the internals of an AR. I had heard generalities about the DI/Piston versions, but never got into the particulars.
In my youth I worked in a machine shop, and I love to know machines down to the tiny details.
It is a principal object of this invention to utilize the basic parts of an automatic rifle mechanism such as the bolt and bolt carrier to perform a double function. This double function consists of the bolts primary function to lock the breach against the pressure of firing, and secondarily, to act as a stationary piston to actuate the automatic rifle mechanism. The primary function of the bolt carrier is to lock and unlock the bolt by rotating it and to carry it back and forth in the receiver. The secondary function of the bolt carrier is to act as a movable cylinder to actuate the automatic rifle mechanism. By having the bolt carrier act as a movable cylinder and the bolt act as a stationary piston, the need for a conventional gas cylinder, piston and actuating rod assembly is eliminated.
It is an object of this invention to provide a gas system which is lighter and less expensive to produce because of its simplicity than the present gas systems now used in automatic rifle mechanisms.
It is another object of this invention to utilize the energy of the expanding gas developed by the firing of the weapon, for actuating the automatic rifle mechanism directly by use of a metered amount of the gas coming from the barrel. This invention is a true expanding gas system instead of the conventional impinging gas system. By utilization of a metered amount of gas from the barrel, the automatic rifle mechanism is less sensitive to different firing pressures caused by variations in the propelling charge. It is therefore still another object of this invention, to provide a rifle mechanism which is not affected by variations in the propelling charge.
https://patents.google.com/patent/US2951424A/en
Stoners patent circa 1956.
During the war he designed aircraft and after designed aircraft weapons systems.
Look you two, you are talking at crossed purposes.
The design is absolutely brilliant in the abstract.
However, that does not make it practical or reliable in a service rifle in a jungle mudfest or various sandbox environments where cleaning intervals vary wildly.
The one thing about a piston design is that is helps keep the action clean. Cleaner action more chance rifle goes bang!
I do see the beauty of what Stoner tried to do, get the gas to do two mechanical tasks AND reduce weight and price dramatically. Look at the Ruger AR-556 vs the SR-556.
Thetruthaboutguns had a review of the AR556 and said this:
"What’s the difference between Ruger’s AR-556 and their SR-556? About 1.5 pounds and $1246.00."
I am not suggesting that you agree to disagree, I am saying that you are not talking about the same topic.
The Stoner system has less recoil and less barrel whip. Making it more accurate and easier to manage FA.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wildrose
That certainly can't be demonstrated with data. "Felt Recoil" depends on many factors but the calculations are pretty easy. The PD systems put more weight forward over the barrel and weigh a few more ounces overall which gives them the advantage in any recoil calculation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Dummy
The Piston system actually stiffens the barrel's resistance to "whip".
For precision shooting the Piston System is far superior which is why it's so easy to make one that will shoot sub MOA with a much lighter barrel than is required on the DI systems.
Expert may disagree and do but many agree that the PD's are more accurate for that reason.
I currently own quite a few of both types and have for many years and my accumulated data strongly supports this.
Pick up an off the shelf Sig 516 or 716 (Or similar quality PD AR) and compare it to any off the shelf DI gun and test them both with the same types of ammo under varying conditions and see what you come up with.
Another good article.
Direct Impingement vs Gas Piston Systems: 2021 Guide - Gun Mann
I'll add this.
During the recent competition to replace the M4, or at least see if it could be replaced, the winner of that competition was the FN SCAR a short stroke gas piston operating system similar to the Sig GP system.
When it comes to expert opinions there is no more concentrated source of expertise on the subject than in the SOCOM community.
Reciprocating mass. What is it?
Was the AR platform designed as a semi auto only?
Or was it a platform that included contro)able recoil in combat?
Quote:
Originally Posted by US Conservative
Oh Good Gravy... :geez:
The bolt, carrier, spent cartridge, and whatever, move back and forth to cycle rounds.
"reciprocating..."
Still hard to be the simplistic, rattling, sloppy AK47
https://youtu.be/_eQLFVpOYm4
They are the single most sough out combat rifle in the world because of their simplicity and durability.Quote:
Originally Posted by East of the Beast
You can teach the average 9yo in a terrorist or warlord's camp to field strip and reassemble them and to kill with them consistently even at 100 yards in a day.
Indeed and that was one of its major breakthroughs- controllable full auto fire.Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Dummy
I've never fired an automatic M14 but apparently it wasn't so good.
That must be why they are still in use or were until very recently by SOF's.Quote:
Originally Posted by US Conservative
The Rangers refused to ever give up their M14's for decades because they were so effective.
The only modification needed for controllable full auto fire was a proper muzzle device.
The M14 was America's shortest lived service rifle. Its large and heavy as is its ammo. It's very difficult to control full auto.
The reason modified M14s were used through the war on terror was because they
We're available in the early 2000s while accurized AR10s and AR15s weren't yet widely available.
Since that time we have optimized ammo, ar rifles, and optics the M14 is obsolescent.
Piston based are like the HK 416 with loaded mag, lpvo, and mounts are 12 plus lbs.
It's heavier than the m14.
The 416s role is like a LAR, example the BAR.
Nice...
https://youtu.be/gOUKXIrDE0I