Notice the gas piston system the US Government bureaucrats won't adopt (except the Marines did an end run around them with the M27 IAR) that eliminates the problem completely.
Posted on 04/27/2015 1:14:39 PM PDT by DJ Taylor
Lol, “the barrel was prone to overheating.”
Notice the gas piston system the US Government bureaucrats won't adopt (except the Marines did an end run around them with the M27 IAR) that eliminates the problem completely.
Active Duty ping.
The thing is, the Army’s been denying the M4 has any problems for decades despite it losing in every Army organized objective field test in at least the last decade. The Army has been claiming it *is* perfect while most grunts are finding otherwise.
From Gannett’s Army Times:
USMC officials said the M4 malfunctioned three times more often than the M16A4 during an assessment conducted in late summer 2002 for Marine Corps Systems Command at Quantico, VA. Malfunctions were broken down into several categories, including “magazine,” “failure to chamber,” “failure to fire,” “failure to extract” and “worn or broken part,” according to the briefing documents. During the comparison, the M4 failed 186 times across those categories over the course of 69,000 rounds fired. The M16A4 failed 61 times during the testing.
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/the-usas-m4-carbine-controversy-03289/
That whole direct impingement system is terrible. The Army’s own tests show just how bad it is, but they refuse to acknowledge the results of their own testing.
Then there’s the famous 2007 dust test:
The M4 carbine, the weapon soldiers depend on in combat, finished last in a recent “extreme dust test” to demonstrate the M4’s reliability compared with three newer carbines.
Weapons officials at the Army Test and Evaluation Center at Aberdeen Proving Ground, Md., exposed Colt Defense LLC’s M4, along with the Heckler & Koch XM8, FNH USA’s Special Operations Forces Combat Assault Rifle and the H&K 416 to sandstorm conditions from late September to late November, firing 6,000 rounds through each test weapon.
When the test was completed, ATEC officials found that the M4 performed “significantly worse” than the other three weapons, sources told Army Times.
Officials tested 10 each of the four carbine models, firing a total of 60,000 rounds per model. Here’s how they ranked, according to the total number of times each model stopped firing:
• XM8: 127 stoppages.
• MK16 SCAR Light: 226 stoppages.
• 416: 233 stoppages.
• M4: 882 stoppages.
Personally I would rather deal with the Carbon at the barrel where it can be blown out
by just discharging the wep. Cleaning up front would just add more of a pain in the
process of cleaning and recovery. The Bolt carrier together eliminates the problem
of keeping the carrier wet to an extent. They say it doesn't require oil because
of the coating. Still not sure about that one though and I've since began using Cerflon
on all moving parts.
Then the extra movement up front might get interesting.
Just cannot win with that carbon! lol..
Just my thoughts on it.
The Russian 5.45 x 39 appears to be a superior weapon and the rounds are better than the 5.56.
A few years ago I installed and tested the Osprey Defense piston kit on a carbine AR15, the Adams Arms on the same length system, and the CMMG system. After a thousand rounds through each I found the OSprey to be far superior to the other two, and the Adams Arms to be better than the CMMG. The Osprey system has the fewest parts to deal with and darn near cleans itself with the piston cup being kidney shaped. It does build up heat fast out front, but the reliability is amazing. The Adams Arms unit had the ability to dial gas charging, so when shooting at distance the gas could be turned down or off and single the cycle. of the three, the Adams Arms with adjusted gas output functioned best in full auto. The barrel was H barrel not a pencil type.
Is that the Sharps Reliabolt?
I was meaning to get that and try it out.
Gotta wait until I start having issues with my homemade AR, first. Went to the range this afternoon to zero my scope, and I had no issues with it at all.
Well, with the exception of the scope being mounted too low and the buffer tube yanking out my mustache whiskers.
*BOOM*
“OUCH!!”
*BOOM*
“FU*K!!”
Without, I went through about 200 before having to oil the carrier.
Still waiting for a sale on the Balanced carrier group, so I can
buy the whole setup.
Watch those whiskers. Hah
Aren’t those around $80?
Sounds reasonable. I’ll have to do more research. Heard a LOT of great reviews about them.
I’m running a Ruger SR556. It’s night and day reliable vs most of the other ARs out there at the outdoor range. The Ruger system is something between the Adams Arms setup and the dial-a-gas system on the old reliable FAL.
Being able to clean it in less than 10 minutes is also a huge advantage, not to mention the fact that anyone shooting one with a suppressor will be much happier about all the crud that doesn’t blow out of the receiver with each shot.
Last Christmas it was on sale for $170 for the full setup.
Not sure I can wait until then though.
You do know they recalled a bunch of those Relia-Bolts, right?
http://srcarms.com/wordpress/2015/01/update-recall-small-lot-sharps-relia-bolts/
And even with the ‘Relia-Bolt’, should it work properly, you still have to chip carbon off the damn thing... and scrub it out of all the other workings it got blown into and doesn’t want to get out of. And the entire mechanism with moving parts included starts heating up fast.
I’d rather almost all the crud and most of the heat be kept ahead of the piston in front of the gun.
Well, damn!
That’s the exact price I paid for the Spikes Tactical bolt carrier group for my AR.
Sounds really reasonable.
I won't be going to war at my age. /Grin
There are some piston setups that don't heat up. I'll look into that another time
since that upgrade is way over my budget atm. Losing the rails for another grip
also concerns me for the AR.
The original problems with the M-16 began with powder. The AR-15 was tested using DuPont CR8136 (tube) powder, but Olin Mathieson WC846 powder (cap and ball powder) became the standard for the M-16, even though it increased the cyclic rate and caused excessive fouling. The service also increased the rifling from 1:14 to 1:12 which increased accuracy, but decreased short-range lethality.
The M-16 and M4 both suffer from the same malaise: government contracting. it’s not reasonable to expect the government loggies to keep up with the civilian market, but then again, there wouldn’t be a civilian market without the original military variants...
LA Riots. Ferguson. Baltimore. Sometimes the war comes to visit instead.
Speaking as someone who had an ‘unfortunate experience’ in LA in 92 and has since seen too many DI guns jam and fail at the range, a lifetime warranty isn’t worth much if your DI gun carbons up and fails you when you need it. No thanks.
Look at the Ruger SR556 - designed to have rails and a piston from the get go. It’s not a conversion.
Unless you’re right next to the gas block on mine, it doesn’t get any warmer than a DI gun’s rail.
Of course, I still regard the AR as a secondary weapon. My go-tos are a Saiga 12 and a DMR-configured FAL in .308.
Yeah, the cleanup with the Admas Arms is amazingly simple. All out front where the piston slides in and out. The bolt and bolt carrier don’t need any cleaning for 1k rounds or so. Bolt remains cool tot he touch ... I use hi-temp red bearing grease for lube. I moved the CMMG system to an eleven inch ‘pistol’ that has a heavy barrel ... virtual SBR. Works fine with just one-half a coil of the buffer spring /recoil spring removed to tune it just right.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.