Anyone here into firearms?

Rooster89 · 01-10-2012, 05:43 AM

No my hands on is with spikes tactical and colt. and of course the army which is really a bad indicator i know because the army's weapons have seen abuse that would turn an enthusiast's stomach.

MacCool · 01-10-2012, 08:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rooster89

No my hands on is with spikes tactical and colt. and of course the army which is really a bad indicator i know because the army's weapons have seen abuse that would turn an enthusiast's stomach.

By "Stoner platform", I was referring to the M16/M4/AR15 and variants. Your concern about "high maintenance to maintain reliability, and life of parts" in that system of rifles/carbines runs counter to 40 years of continuous experience as one of the most effective combat firearm systems in the world.

I do agree that the platform has relative weak spots, noteably the bolt and BCG, but it's extremely hard for me to imagine the **** hitting the fan hard enough for you that those would even begin to be an issue. There might be other reasons to choose the SCAR or ACR over the AR15 as a rifle you desire to own, but functionality, reliability, and maintenance concerns are unwarranted in civilian use. If those were your benchmarks, you'd opt for an AK. Those rifles are reliable and just about anthing that breaks on them can be fixed with 3 lb hammer and a big screwdriver.

As at least one example, review Pat Rogers' article in SWAT Magazine regarding "Filthy 14". My own experience over many years and tens of thousands of rounds (in civilian use) and my association with several police department armorers just doesn't support concerns about high maintenance nor reliability. As to parts, IIRC Pat Rogers finally had an extractor break at about 27,000 rounds (with no cleaning to that point). Personally, although I've replaced the gas rings on one of my older rifles (a Stag - a consumer-grade brand and not the pinnacle of the platform), I've never had an extractor break on any AR15 I've owned. In fact, I can't think of any other malfunctions in all that time that weren't attributable to faulty ammo or magazines. Granted, other than that Stag, I don't own any "consumer grade" rifles, but if you stay away from the DPMS/Bushmaster/CMMG brands of the world, I'd venture to say that there's no way you could possibly shoot your rifle enough to have maintenance problems and parts breakage.

Rooster89 · 01-10-2012, 10:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MacCool

By "Stoner platform", I was referring to the M16/M4/AR15 and variants. Your concern about "high maintenance to maintain reliability, and life of parts" in that system of rifles/carbines runs counter to 40 years of continuous experience as one of the most effective combat firearm systems in the world.

I do agree that the platform has relative weak spots, noteably the bolt and BCG, but it's extremely hard for me to imagine the **** hitting the fan hard enough for you that those would even begin to be an issue. There might be other reasons to choose the SCAR or ACR over the AR15 as a rifle you desire to own, but functionality, reliability, and maintenance concerns are unwarranted in civilian use. If those were your benchmarks, you'd opt for an AK. Those rifles are reliable and just about anthing that breaks on them can be fixed with 3 lb hammer and a big screwdriver.

As at least one example, review Pat Rogers' article in SWAT Magazine regarding "Filthy 14". My own experience over many years and tens of thousands of rounds (in civilian use) and my association with several police department armorers just doesn't support concerns about high maintenance nor reliability. As to parts, IIRC Pat Rogers finally had an extractor break at about 27,000 rounds (with no cleaning to that point). Personally, although I've replaced the gas rings on one of my older rifles (a Stag - a consumer-grade brand and not the pinnacle of the platform), I've never had an extractor break on any AR15 I've owned. In fact, I can't think of any other malfunctions in all that time that weren't attributable to faulty ammo or magazines. Granted, other than that Stag, I don't own any "consumer grade" rifles, but if you stay away from the DPMS/Bushmaster/CMMG brands of the world, I'd venture to say that there's no way you could possibly shoot your rifle enough to have maintenance problems and parts breakage.

I was under the impression the stoner was an older platform that came before the m16/m4.
Not all DI, but m16/m4, I don't like the charging handle placement. The AK I wish I would like it, but never have I. I don't know if its the ergonomics or what, but I can't seem to group well with an AK. I am by no means saying the m16/m4 is bad, I just want better. Yes the majority of my training an experience is with M4s, but I had rather mediocre experience. I have experienced malfunctions, and failure of parts ( gas rings and retaining pin). I like the idea that the new platforms have addressed a lot of issues. Maybe I'm just stubborn and want something newer and different.

You have been extremely helpful Mac, Thank you. I don't mean to come off like an anti AR15 troll, or anti DI troll.

Also I would like to try a bullpup... heard good things about the british service rifle in iraq...can't remember what its called off hand. googling.... L85/sa80.

I am still only a year out of the service and would not yet consider myself a firearms enthusiast...but I am working on it.

MacCool · 01-10-2012, 10:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rooster89

I was under the impression the stoner was an older platform that came before the m16/m4.

Sorry, I wasn't clear. I wasn't referring to the original Stoner Weapon System (Stoner 63), rather the direct gas impingement system, rotary bolt etc etc designed by Eugene Stoner as has been used from the original AR-15, through the M16 and current M4 and all their variants.

The thing about firearms...we tend to like what we like. Can't judge a man for driving a Chevy instead of a Ford. My only point in getting so uppity is that I hate to see my particular Chevy criticized unfairly.

If you were in a combat unit and had experience with broken gas rings in the field, your unit armorer should have been shot. If they were range weapons...yeah, high round counts and low maintenance are the norm and they tend to be fired and not maintained until they break. But again, I can't imagine any scenario where a civilian or a police agency would put anything close to that volume downrange.

It would be interesting to see how a SCAR would fair over time in a training cadre.

Rooster89 · 01-11-2012, 12:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MacCool

Sorry, I wasn't clear. I wasn't referring to the original Stoner Weapon System (Stoner 63), rather the direct gas impingement system, rotary bolt etc etc designed by Eugene Stoner as has been used from the original AR-15, through the M16 and current M4 and all their variants.

The thing about firearms...we tend to like what we like. Can't judge a man for driving a Chevy instead of a Ford. My only point in getting so uppity is that I hate to see my particular Chevy criticized unfairly.

If you were in a combat unit and had experience with broken gas rings in the field, your unit armorer should have been shot. If they were range weapons...yeah, high round counts and low maintenance are the norm and they tend to be fired and not maintained until they break. But again, I can't imagine any scenario where a civilian or a police agency would put anything close to that volume downrange.

It would be interesting to see how a SCAR would fair over time in a training cadre.

The Arms room in my old unit is where we put the Sh1tb@gs. Nothing was ever done right. but even so it put a bad taste in my mouth. The gas rings failed in iraq. luckily it failed during qualification on a fob, but it was down range nonetheless. I was part of DART(downed aircraft recovery team) so you can imagine how that felt.

Yea, it would be interesting. Durability is more important to the military than me personally, because I don't plan on abusing my weapon. I already have a plinker, that takes up most of my rounds fired.

What benefits do you feel DI has that piston doesn't? besides price...because thats the biggest one I see. and it is a big one.

Besides, I am willing to bet you probably know more about your chevy and my ford than I do.

ImportConvert · 01-11-2012, 01:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rooster89

The Arms room in my old unit is where we put the Sh1tb@gs. Nothing was ever done right. but even so it put a bad taste in my mouth. The gas rings failed in iraq. luckily it failed during qualification on a fob, but it was down range nonetheless. I was part of DART(downed aircraft recovery team) so you can imagine how that felt.

Yea, it would be interesting. Durability is more important to the military than me personally, because I don't plan on abusing my weapon. I already have a plinker, that takes up most of my rounds fired.

What benefits do you feel DI has that piston doesn't? besides price...because thats the biggest one I see. and it is a big one.

Besides, I am willing to bet you probably know more about your chevy and my ford than I do.

-The recoil impulse in DI is softer.
-DI suppresses better, and with a switchblock or properly sized gas-port for the application, runs cleaner.
-DI is lighter.
-DI has less parts to go wrong.
-DI is what the system was made for, and the forces on the BCG do not induce carrier tilt and wear to the buffer tube and other areas, nor necessitate the tightening of tolerances by adding rings to the BC and whatnot to prevent such.

MacCool · 01-11-2012, 07:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ImportConvert

-The recoil impulse in DI is softer.
-DI suppresses better, and with a switchblock or properly sized gas-port for the application, runs cleaner.
-DI is lighter.
-DI has less parts to go wrong.
-DI is what the system was made for, and the forces on the BCG do not induce carrier tilt and wear to the buffer tube and other areas, nor necessitate the tightening of tolerances by adding rings to the BC and whatnot to prevent such.

All good points. I'd add that the emergence of mid-length gas systems on the DI guns has made a difference in heat and parts wear on the BCG, in addition to softening the recoil impulse even more. Additionally, it's a mature system with a wide variety of parts and accessories readily available. The SCAR may get there, but DoD dropping the Mark 16 hasn't helped the penetration into the civilian market. With Iraq winding down and given the cost of the system, it's not clear to me where the SCAR project is heading. I'd be leery about buying into a less-than-widespread weapon system.