We have all heard that old phrase haven't we? But in my opinion, it is a motto of the underachiever...the change hater who wants things to stay as they are and never change due to the inconvenience it would create for him...or his company. Change is disruptive and disruption in an industry requires rethinking, retooling and remarketing. All inconvenient and expensive. But change is often progress, and it is a powerful concept...to make things better.
Can you imagine an airline company using, "If it ain't broke - don't fix it?" Who would fly in such a machine? Advancements are brought about by preemptively "fixing" things. That mindset is what brought us smartphones, laser surgery, and other advances. Had these innovators taken the "Don't Fix" approach, we would still be using rotary dial landlines and cutting open an entire arm just to get to the carpal tunnel.
But on to the point!
Nothing is perfect, and in seeking to make it perfect, we do in fact make it better. Those who are invested in doing this one way will resist any deviation from that path...even though subsequent paths will be faster, and well...better.
The AR/M4, like it or not, has a reputation for being unreliable. Whether one particular AR has gone 150,000 rounds (like Chuck Taylor's Glock) is not relevant to the discussion. The reputation remains as much as that of the AK not being accurate.
Just as attempts to make the AK more accurate are warranted, so are attempts to make the AR more reliable. One of those attempts has been the use of a Piston in lieu of the Direct Impingement.
Go to any forum where there are a higher number of DI makers advertising and the Piston AR is reviled as if it were the product of Lucifer himself. And of course, the only DI guns worthy of consideration are those sold by the advertising companies....who also happen to be on some arbitrary list. Yet go to a forum where Piston guns advertise more and DI is seen as some backward rifle akin to a crossbow. With the guns sold by the companies in question being the only choice.
Business is business and nobody can blame them. But I must say...after studying the matter thoroughly, the piston AR is an improvement over the Direct Impingement concept. Argue if you will but that is the conclusion I arrived at on the matter. I suspect this will create at least twelve pages of excoriation at one of those wannabe AR-15 forums. Well, I hope at least the get the URL correct.
In subsequent discussion we will discuss which guns are the best value and why (HK416 vs. LWRC vs. SIG516....for examples), as well as answer the detractions of the piston concept.
DI Gun Advantages -
1). It will cost the buyer less money. I do not use the "C" word (cheap). That can be good or bad depending on what you get. A WASR 10 will also cost less money, but it is hardly anyone's first choice. A rotary dial phone will still work, but it hardly the best choice today. DI gun can be very good...but it is still a DI gun.
2). Lighter recoil than Piston Guns (are we realy comparing the recoil of a 5.56!!??)
3). One thing you commonly hear is that it has commonly available parts. Well we need to qualify that. If you have the parts in your possession that is fine. if not, you will have to order them. Not being in a military role, that is what you will need to do anyway. So if you simply buy what you need beforehand, and have it available, it is really as much a non-issue as AK-magazine availability.
Piston Gun Advantages -
1). Avoids the fouling and carbon build up common in DI guns. Fouling is the main cause of the AR's unreliable rep. Fix that and you have a new animal altogether.
2). Did you know that an M4 in service is intended to be rebuilt every few thousand rounds? The parts wear out. That is directly from a US Army M16 Armorer. A Piston gun, OTOH, does not heat the internals of the gun as much as DI guns. That means that the various small internal pieces and springs will not get subjected to the heat in a DI platform. That translates into far longer service life and enhanced reliability.
3). In our in house testing, I have found the piston guns to cycle faster than the DI guns. Not a conclusive, split-time examining test, just a feel. On the DI guns you can feel the action working between shots. On a piston gun, it is press trigger, shot out. Perhaps we need to dwell in this area a bit more.
4). Ease of maintenance is only overshadowed by ease of replacement. Carrying a spare anything with you is as easy as it is with a DI gun, but only easier to replace.
5). Finally, the piston gun keeps the blowback out of your face and nose and lungs. We hear all manner of dram from "second hand smoke" yet we hear nothing about the lung-full of gas the DI shooter gets everytime he touches off a shot. I wonder if the Piston Guns are..."healthier".
One cannot have a discussion of the Piston M4 without the HK416 dropping in. I am not certain if it was first, but it certainly was the most marketed, and of course...it is a top choice among US Special Ops. Using an HK416 to kill Bin Ladin was a telling rebuttal to "piston dtractors". These guys...the Special Ops guys tasked with the mission could have anything they want as money is no object. Yet the gun they used, and use, is not a Direct Impingement Rifle.
Ernst Mauch, at HK, was tasked with an improvement program for the M4 as far back as 2001 and one of the primary issues faced was the DI gas system. Rather than build a "faster horse", Mauch went with the proven successful piston system as is seen in the G36. In less than two years, including time wasted fighting a lawsuit by Colt. I find it amazing how often American companies, resting on their laurels, fail to innovate, and get legally upset when a disruptive company does what they should have done all along.
The advantages of the 416 over standard DI M4 are well documented in the various tests conducted. Those advantages are of course said to be inconsequential by HK's competitors. What would anyone expect them to say....that yes, the HK is better? Unlikely.
The issue with the HK is simply that Heckler & Koch was damaged in 1994 when the AWB took place and, rightly so, they saw the US Civilian market as too unstable to mess with. This has changed of course, and many companies came back after 2004, but not HK. Their standing in the civilian market is poor. But one has to mention the 416 in any discussion like this as it is the gun that other try to emulate.
PART TWO FOLLOWS -
I was an engineer working on the C7 (Canadian M16A2 variant) in the 80s and 90s and there was a company marketing a "Rhino" conversion for the AR 15 back then. It was a great idea and worked pretty well for a garage project. (Well, aren't most novel ideas started in someone;s garage most times?) I studied it and talked to the Colt engineers and the general conclusion was "Yup that's better but Big Green won't change." and as far a Colt was concerned there endeth the argument. But a few of their more ingenious guys and some of us up north still played with the idea and even Colt had some "Clean 16" ideas in its vault. Sadly, they never saw the light of day - much like H&K not coming back to the civi market as you mention - and it is a shame as there are some really excellent ideas that corporate America has killed. Ask Jim Taylor about the MARS. He had the P90 and HK MP7 beat 10 years before they started but again it was shuttered up and not spoken of.
Your comments on the piston system are all 100% valid, it is an improvement (yes Gene you can argue with me when I get to the table, hopefully not for a while!) and if you want to really verify that... pick up an AUG. They've been selling a "piston M16 system" since the 70s and a whole lot of folks will tell you their gun works just fine.
Posted by: Phil O'Dell | 09/21/2012 at 08:39
Gabe- spot on with this topic. I have been on the piston bandwagon for some time now. Recently I wrote an article regarding gas piston AR's which was published in our state law enforcement firearms instructors association newsletter. One of the points I made is "What was once old is now new"; Borrowing and improving on gas piston operation used on some of the best combat rifles of their time (M1 Garand, M1 carbine, M14) Stoners original AR15/M16 has reached a pinnacle of acheivement in it's concept and design. Gas piston operation has made the AR15/M16/M4 "near perfect" for military,& law enforcement applications, as well as use by the sportsman and home defender.
Posted by: Michael Lupachini | 09/21/2012 at 08:53
Gabe ,
I am not an AR guy by any stretch of the imagination; however I do own several DI and three piston guns that I have ran for several years. One issue that DI guy's like to bring up is the weight and balance of a piston gun as another draw back.
I actually ran a Patriot Ordnance Factory 14.5 inch in the SI patrolling class in Anaconda MT a while back. POF makes a piston gun that is much like the German Tiger tank from WWII it is made to last a 100 years, it is heavy as all get out and it just won’t quit. Now the Germans were criticized for over engineering their tanks to last 100 years when in reality the life of a Tiger was only a few days to a week on the eastern front, POF has received some of the same over engineering criticism which I believe to be unwarranted. The POF receiver is much finer than a standard AR receiver. All you have to do is compare them side by side. In particular the ambidextrous bolt carrier release on a POF is conveniently above the mag release.
In truth the barrel nut on the POF dose add significant weight (if you are in FA it is to dissipate heat from their receiver and barrel) and the balance is different than a DI gun it dose take getting use to.
Carrying the weight of the heaviest piston gun I could have chosen in Anaconda for three days of patrolling was not a big deal however noticeable. But that gun was filthy when I brought it to class and it ran great during and after class. One could not say the same for the other AR's in the class. I have yet to strip the thing down and clean it and it is still running strong, I want to see this thing fail! The piston is well worth the weight when trading it for reliability and the minimal maintenance compared to a DI gun.
Brando
P.S I have an Piston Driven LWRC M6A2 SPR that is 16 inch barrel with a standard barrel nut and spiral fluting that shaves 20% of the weight off the barrel. So if weight ,feel and Balance of a traditional DI gun is a deal breaker for transitioning to a piston gun then the LWRC SPR is the answer.
Posted by: Brandon Walton | 09/21/2012 at 11:48
The DI crowd will never accept that a piston rifle is superior to a DI but the facts don't lie. Some will argue that DI is more accurate but when you're talking fractions (1/16th to 1/8th) of an inch, that small amount of accuracy that the impingement rifle MIGHT have over the piston is a non-issue.
That being said, piston designs are not created equal and some are arguably better than others. Take for example LWRC and POF*USA. The LWRC piston system utilizes a spring whereas POF*USA uses a simple gas trap system (no springs), thereby eliminating another point of possible failure.
I used those as an example because I have no experience with the other piston rifles from HK, PWS, etc.
Posted by: KillShot | 09/21/2012 at 11:59
Gabe:
Could not agree with you more. In the last few years I have unassed all but one (a Rock River Entry Tactical) of my DI 5.56 rifles, and replaced them with what I consider to be one of the best small arms in the arena today, Sigs 556. This year I acquired an H&K 417 (7.62X51) and without a doubt this weapon simply exudes quality, both on the range and afterwards on the cleaning bench. Irregardless of the cost I was keen on adding the 416 to my small arsenal...that is, until I did a little more research. In its current configuration the 416 will not accept the best (in my opinion) 5.56 mag on the market today, Magpuls pmag. Over the years I have acquired a sackful, a big sack, of metal mags for the 5.56 so I could easily feed the weapon, but I have found the metal mags too prone to failure, especially because of feed lip problems. The problem developed to the point that I purchased Brownells "go no go" feed lip gauge as well as the lip adjustment tool. Equipment not easily deployed (nor should something like it be needed) on the battlefield. I now stock pmags to feed my Sigs and the Rock River. H&Ks inability to accept the pmag was a deal breaker for me, but your mileage will, of course, vary.
To be a true combat weapon, a gun you are willing to bet your life on, it should be able to accept and function with just about any battlefield pickup magazine. Perhaps H&K will address this problem in the next evolution of the 416...I can hardly wait.
As usual Gabe, another great article...always interested in following your opinions.
Best Regards
Larry Petro
Posted by: Larry Petro | 09/21/2012 at 12:10
All I can say, as a former Colt trained LE armorer, is "excellent!"
Posted by: David | 09/21/2012 at 12:15
Wow, you just mentioned something I had forgot with the m16a1, we had to put tape over the stock/reciever mate point to keep escaping gas from getting into our eyes during rifle qualifications, since rifle scores were important for advancement and bragging rights.
Posted by: J.D. Fleming | 09/21/2012 at 14:12
+1 on getting rid of all the DI ARs I am an LE Armorer and I ran my LM&Tool in the PTR Rifle Inst class. Over 1K with no failures of any type. Last night of class it rained for several hours. Many M4s started to choke. Tim
Posted by: Tim | 09/21/2012 at 16:16
"I find it amazing how often American companies, resting on their laurels, fail to innovate," - spot on for many companies in many different product arenas. 70's gas crunch going on? Detroit churns out in-efficient land-yachts giving people no other option but fuel efficient toyotas.
Posted by: USMC2112 | 09/21/2012 at 17:30
BRAVO Mr. Suarez!!!! Finally someone calls the spade a spade. The DI guns are a thing of the past yet so many guys cling to them like some childhood girlfriend. You should see all the fatso fag wannabees crying about what an evil man you are on M4 and ARFCOM. Screw them...keep telling it like it is.
Smith
Somewhere in A-stan
Posted by: MSSGT Andrew Smith | 09/22/2012 at 09:26