PNW Guns Forum
Go Back   PNW Guns > PNW Guns > Gunsmithing

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-21-2012, 03:49 PM   #1
Marksman
 
KillermondoDude's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2009
From: Washington on the wet side
Posts: 363
Big probs SR 556

Put 2 rounds down the pipe of a 556E first round fired no probs but gas selector was on 0 so i had to manually reload put the selector on 2 and fired guns locked up tighter than a virgin on promnight
the bolt moves 1/4 inch but stopps when gets to the lug cycle
calling ruger tomorrow unless one of you insanely brillient gun nuts can stear me to a solution

fuckin sucks got a slide fire stock as well yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeehawwwwwwwwww
 
Join PNW Guns


Welcome to PNW Guns, a gun and firearm community for gun owners in the Pacific Northwest. We welcome everyone and the community is free to join so register today and become part of the PNW Guns family!


Old 08-21-2012, 11:06 PM   #2
Moderator
 
sunofnun's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2009
From: s. greenlake bitch
Posts: 1,469
new gun, or what??

is the round locked in the chamber? Does the bolt slide at all?
 
Old 08-22-2012, 09:19 AM   #3
Marksman
 
KillermondoDude's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2009
From: Washington on the wet side
Posts: 363
2 rounds down range new gun 2 rounds total
bolt does not move at all carrier assembly moves until it engages the bolt
My bad: bolt is locked; carrier assembly still moves 1/4 inch

Last edited by KillermondoDude; 08-22-2012 at 09:22 AM.
 
Old 08-22-2012, 12:04 PM   #4
Marksman
 
KillermondoDude's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2009
From: Washington on the wet side
Posts: 363
Fixored did the put the stock all the way in and hammer it on the ground while holding the charging handle trick and what ya know it worked

The round that was ejected was unfired but had a good firing pin strike dead center of the primer
 
Old 08-22-2012, 12:31 PM   #5
Sharpshooter
 
GixxerPete's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2009
From: Renton, WA
Posts: 824
That's still really odd. Even if it was a dud primer or something, it should have just gone 'click' instead of 'BANG!' and that's it, not locked up like that. Were these reloads or factory ammo?

You said the first round fired ok, but the gas selector was set to 0. So you hand cycled the 2nd round in, correct? So then that round fired, and it was actually the 3rd round that jammed up and was unfired but with a primer strike? I'm a little confused on the sequence of events.

At any rate, I'd still call Ruger, if you haven't already. That just shouldn't be happening on brand new rifle. Unless it was reloads, then that could be the culprit.
 
Old 08-22-2012, 01:59 PM   #6
Marksman
 
KillermondoDude's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2009
From: Washington on the wet side
Posts: 363
Reloads from HSM Stevenville MT gonna shoot fiotchi's canned heat now

Last edited by KillermondoDude; 08-22-2012 at 02:12 PM.
 
Old 08-23-2012, 01:08 PM   #7
Moderator
 
sunofnun's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2009
From: s. greenlake bitch
Posts: 1,469
Hmmm glad you got it cleared.. I'd try to cycle a couple kinds of ammo.. and maybe look online to see what guys are setting that gas block at?
 
Old 08-23-2012, 03:04 PM   #8
Marksman
 
Joined: Nov 2009
From: WA
Posts: 463
Lube the hell out of it. AR's prefer to run wet.....but it's a piston so it's super reliable right?
 
Old 08-23-2012, 03:37 PM   #9
Sharpshooter
 
GixxerPete's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2009
From: Renton, WA
Posts: 824
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brianaintright View Post
Lube the hell out of it. AR's prefer to run wet.....but it's a piston so it's super reliable right?
I see what you did there...
 
Old 08-23-2012, 04:22 PM   #10
Marksman
 
Joined: Nov 2009
From: WA
Posts: 463
yea, couldn't help it.
 
Old 08-23-2012, 06:19 PM   #11
Sharpshooter
 
GixxerPete's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2009
From: Renton, WA
Posts: 824
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brianaintright View Post
yea, couldn't help it.
Live in the now, man. Piston guns are here to stay, and have proven reliable. Let Patrick Sweeney enlighten you...

Gun Photos: Brutal AR-15 Torture Test | Gun Digest - We Know Guns So You Know Guns
 
Old 08-23-2012, 07:38 PM   #12
Marksman
 
Joined: Nov 2009
From: WA
Posts: 463
Pete -

If you're such a badass and make enough money you can feed a mil spec full auto DI gun to failure....then I guess you need a piston gun.

The fact is, you shoot like we do, you don't need the reciprocating mass, the weight or the "added reliability" of a piston AR unless you are completely fucking lazy and refuse to clean your weapon.
 
Old 08-24-2012, 08:02 AM   #13
Sharpshooter
 
GixxerPete's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2009
From: Renton, WA
Posts: 824
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brianaintright View Post
Pete -

If you're such a badass and make enough money you can feed a mil spec full auto DI gun to failure....then I guess you need a piston gun.

The fact is, you shoot like we do, you don't need the reciprocating mass, the weight or the "added reliability" of a piston AR unless you are completely fucking lazy and refuse to clean your weapon.
Well if by 'badass' you mean a criminal, cuz that's what I'd have to be to have a full auto anything in WA, then no. Nor do I have the money to buy enough ammo, plus a rifle to sacrifice in the testing process. But guys like Sweeney do, so he did. His test is what it is.

Weight I can understand, though there are some pretty light piston guns. The reciprocating mass argument is new to me, care to explain that one?

As far as lazy and cleaning... I resemble that remark. Funny though, both my ARs are DI, and as long as I keep em wet, they run just fine.

Piston guns definitely have some advantages, like in SBRs and suppressed weapons. Don't be such a Luddite. Do you really think it's IMPOSSIBLE to improve on the original AR design and piston guns have no merit and are just a fad or something?
 
Old 08-24-2012, 10:07 AM   #14
Marksman
 
KillermondoDude's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2009
From: Washington on the wet side
Posts: 363
its an age old argument
old time cowboy
The single action works just fine why do we need the more mass and complexity of a dual action?
Dual actionist dont go around half cocked HA why would i want to cock the gun before firing?

personal preference
 
Old 08-24-2012, 11:04 AM   #15
Sharpshooter
 
GixxerPete's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2009
From: Renton, WA
Posts: 824
LOL I wouldn't exactly call Boz and old time cowboy, but yeah, it is kinda the same argument.

But if I were heading into harm's way tomorrow and got to choose, I'd have to go with a DI rifle for the simple reason of readily available parts that definitely interchange. There is no standard for piston guns, with many different designs out there. At least with a mil-spec DI gun, you can find parts/armorer that can fix your shit IF something were to go wrong.
 
Old 08-24-2012, 11:51 AM   #16
Marksman
 
Joined: Nov 2009
From: WA
Posts: 463
I don't have a problem with piston guns. FN, SIG, AK's....lots of great piston guns out there. The AR was designed to be a DI gun and stoner knew what he was doing for the most part.

I have seen a lot of piston AR's shit the bed. LWRC, PWS, POF....lots of issues. I don't have too much time on a 416 and it may be the exception but I'd like to run one some more to see.

My issue with piston design is they do not perform any better than a mil spec DI gun under normal combat conditions. The only time they have any advantage is at the extreme end of the envelope..sustained full auto fire. Since we don't get to do that and none of us have enough money to feed the system, it doesn't make sense to me to take on the extra weight, additional parts and moving mass.

It's shiny and new and lots of people have to have it so it's gotta be better but really? Is it?
 
Old 08-24-2012, 01:28 PM   #17
Sharpshooter
 
GixxerPete's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2009
From: Renton, WA
Posts: 824
Well my humble opinion is it *could* be better, but it's not quite there yet. It wasn't that long ago when there were no piston ARs. Then a few, then a few more, now most major brands offer them. But the non-standard part is a problem. I think eventually there will be a standard, and everyone will follow suit.

Even the venerable 1911, while still the same basic design, has been 'improved' in small areas over the years, as manufacturing technology has increased. Granted the change to a piston system AR is more radical than anything that's been done to the 1911, but I still see it as evolution, not revolution.

Like I said before, there are some applications where a piston does have some advantages over a DI gun, like an SBR, where the short dwell time can be problematic for a DI gun, and/or suppressed guns. But for longer barrels and non-suppressed, that's not really relevant. And you can't fully free-float a piston AR, so for a more accurate rifle, DI is still the way to go. And the piston guns are still a little heavier, and if you're someone that is carrying your rifle all day, that can be a big deal.

FWIW, I know some LE agencies have adopted the Ruger 556. And the fact that the Army is seriously considering Colt's piston AR definitely says something as well. The piston may well be the way of the future.

Defense Review - The U.S. Army’s Next Carbine: Hello Gas Piston/Op-Rod “Enhanced M4/M4A1 Carbine”-Type AR (AR-15), Goodbye Direct Gas Impingement (DGI) Operation?
 
Old 08-24-2012, 04:57 PM   #18
Marksman
 
Joined: Nov 2009
From: WA
Posts: 463
You keep mentioing SBR and supressor applications but if you run a factory SBR from a mil spec manufacturer (Colt, BCM, DD) you won't have any problem. I run my commando (11.5") with a can as my patrol gun and it just runs. It does get a bit dirtier than some piston guns I've run with a can, (SIG, AUG) but there are no issues.

Now when you talk about dwell, Colt solved that problem years ago with proper sized gas ports mated to proper buffers. This doesn't mean every AR manufacturer is up to speed and some of the shit out there is truly appalling but if you buy quality you won't have any issue running a DI SBR even supressed. You'll get gas in the face but a gas buster eliminates just about everything that's not coming down the barrel and you'll get that with a piston gun as well.

As far as Defense Review? No clue man. Maybe the 416 or the Colt is on the horizon but is it necessary? Do our guys need that volume of fire that would justify the expense of the changeover? I doubt it. Talking to the Colt engineers at the armorers school, they made it clear. They're making a piston gun because the civilian market is clamoring for them, not because of any true performance gain. Are some agencies going to piston guns? Sure, but police departments often issue shit they think is cool. Where will a cop ever get into a shootout where sustained full auto fire for more than 6-7 mags is necessary? And these are semi auto non mil-spec guns....poor choice in my opinion.

These days you can get an LE6920 for just about $1K. No better AR out there for any price if your goal is to have bullets come out the end repeatedly....except maybe the 6720.

Check out the BCM torture tests by Pat Rogers. 30K rounds out of a DI BCM rifle with no real cleaning.
 
Old 08-24-2012, 11:46 PM   #19
Marksman
 
Joined: Nov 2009
From: WA
Posts: 463
I can't find the actual SWAT article but here is the synopsis of "Filthy 14" (and sorry for the hijack but...) I'd actually like to see a piston gun do this.

FILTHY 14

As of this writing, EAG students have 31,165 rounds downrange through Filthy 14. During this evaluation period, it was cleaned once (as in one time), at 26,245 rounds. The end result is that Rack #14 was—and remains—filthy. It is filthy because it has been shot at class. Only at class. Every round that has gone down that barrel has been fired at class, with an average of approximately 1,300 rounds every three days. It has been lubed generously with Slip 2000 Enhanced Weapons Lube (EWL).

The combination of carbon and lube create (wait for it)…filth. It is so dirty that, while sitting in the rifle rack, it is almost a biohazard. The filth oozes out and contaminates other carbines adjacent to it.

But it is still shooting—and shooting well.

Rack #14 is a 16-inch Bravo Company Mid Length Carbine—mid length meaning that the gas system is two inches longer than the standard carbine gas system. This permits the use of a nine-inch rail with the standard front sight base. Use of a clamp on the front sight will permit a longer rail to be used.

The longer rail is necessary to accommodate some shooting styles, as well as to provide additional rail estate for the various white lights and IR lasers required to kill bad guys at night.

Subjectively, the mid length system has a softer recoil impulse.

The lower receiver is a Bravo Company USA M4A1, one of very few in circulation. It has a TangoDown BG-16 Pistol Grip. An LMT Sloping Cheekweld Stock (aka the Crane Stock) rides on the milspec receiver extension, as does a TangoDown PR-4 Sling Mount.

The upper is a BCM item, with a milspec 16.1”, 1:7 twist barrel. The barrel steel is chrome moly vanadium (CMV) and certified under milspec Mil-B-11595E.

The BCM bolt is machined from milspec Carpenter 158® gun quality steel, heat-treated per milspec, and then shot peened per Mil-S-13165. Once completed, each bolt is fired with a high-pressure test (HPT) cartridge and then magnetic particle inspected (MPI) in accordance with ASTM E1444.

The handguard is a LaRue 15-9, the nine-inch model to allow full use of the available rail estate.

We have a TangoDown BGV-MK46K Stubby Vertical Foregrip. We use TangoDown BP-4 Rail Panels.

The primary sight is an Aimpoint T1 in a LaRue 660 Mount. The T1 is still on the same set of batteries, and it has never been shut off. The back-up sight is the Magpul MBUS and the sling is the Viking Tactics VTAC.

This is a normal configuration for our guns, although stocks (Magpul CTR, Vltor I-Mod), BUIS (Troy), and day optic (Aimpoint M4s) may be substituted.

IN SERVICE

We received the carbine in late 2008 and put #14 into service shortly thereafter.

At Brady, Texas, in March 2009, it suffered a malfunction, which was reduced with Immediate Action. The bolt was wiped down at 6,450 rounds.

At Prairie du Chien, Wisconsin, in May 2009, it had several failures to extract, and the extractor spring was replaced at 13,010 rounds. This is far beyond the normal extractor spring life under these conditions.

At Wamego, Kansas, in June 2009, two bolt lugs broke at 16,400 rounds. We replaced the BCG. Considering the firing schedule, this is within normal parameters.

At Columbus, Ohio, in November 2009, we had several failures to extract at 24,450 rounds. The shooter gave it a field cleaning and replaced the extractor and extractor spring.

At 28,905 rounds, we finally cleaned Filthy 14. As part of our year-end maintenance schedule, we inspect and replace parts as necessary. Filthy 14 looked like the inside of the crankcase of Uncle Ed’s ’49 Packard. It was disgusting to look at and contaminated everything near it, somewhat like the toner cartridges for old printers.

I plopped it into a parts washer filled with Slip 725 parts cleaner, and 20 minutes later it was clean. Mostly clean, anyway.

We have never used a bore brush in the barrel of this gun. We did run a patch down the barrel twice, but that was all. At 50 yards it still shoots two-inch groups, and we understand that it might not at 100 yards and beyond, but we are happy with the fact that, even at 50 yards, the gun is capable of tighter groups than most of the people running it.

We have never used a chamber brush in this gun either. We were often told that this was an absolute must.

Sure…

At the last class in Casa Grande, Arizona, at approximately 30,000 rounds, we had several failures to extract. We replaced the extractor spring and wiped down the BCG.

By the time you read this, we’ll likely have another 3,000 to 4,000 rounds through Filthy 14. At that point we’ll probably retire it. We’ll reuse the LaRue rail, the sights and, after rebuilding the lower, replace that old and well-worn mid length upper with something else.

Fourteen will continue, but just not as Filthy 14.
 
Old 08-28-2012, 09:30 AM   #20
Sharpshooter
 
GixxerPete's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2009
From: Renton, WA
Posts: 824
Hey I'm familiar with 'Filthy 14'! That article was in some gun rag I read awhile back. Pretty impressive. It pretty much convinced me that I do not need to clean my DI ARs, ever.

I do not know if anyone has run a similar test on a piston gun. A piston gun wouldn't get as filthy, but the real question is, would it hold up as well and keep running?

I can't say I'm surprised some LE departments might buy something cuz they think it's cool. But I'd like to the think the Army wouldn't be looking at it unless there was a good reason to? But I dunno... you have better insight on that than I do.

Look I'm not trying to be a cheerleader for piston guns and say that we should all ditch our DI guns in favor of them. I don't even own one personally, but I think it's an interesting development for the AR platform, though I'm far from qualified to say if it's 'better' or 'necessary'. AKs are piston guns and are probably the most reliable weapons on the planet. That's gotta say something.

It just seems like we've seen this pattern before, many times over. Just look at the AR itself. It wasn't exactly warmly received when it first came out, from it's plastic stock and handguards, to the round it fired. And it definitely had some initial teething problems. Yet now it's still in service, the longest running service rifle in the US military. So is it so crazy to think that piston guns might be the next evolution?
 
Old 08-28-2012, 06:38 PM   #21
Marksman
 
Joined: Nov 2009
From: WA
Posts: 463
I think a piston gun will be the next rifle adopted....but I think it'll be a completely different design. Most likely the scar. Something designed from the ground up as a piston system, not some horrible abortion.
 
Old 08-29-2012, 07:57 AM   #22
Sharpshooter
 
GixxerPete's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2009
From: Renton, WA
Posts: 824
Well wasn't the ACR supposed to be that? But it ended up being heavier than it was supposed to be, and a lot more expensive (at least the civvy version). I like the SCAR, though my only experience with it is limited to Call of Duty.

I'm definitely not a fan of AR piston 'kits' or conversions. I think the best examples are ones designed to be piston, though admittedly that's still not quite a 'ground up' design.

I think what's needed to make a piston AR truly viable is one solid design that becomes the standard, call it a 'mil-spec piston AR' if you will. Until that time, its likely relegated to civilian (and some LE) use.

FWIW, I think my next AR is going to be a .308, and I'm leaning towards the LMT MWS. But it's kinda spendy.
 
Old 08-30-2012, 09:26 AM   #23
Sharpshooter
 
koorbloh's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2009
From: Lynnwood, WA
Posts: 822
Quote:
Originally Posted by GixxerPete View Post
I like the SCAR, though my only experience with it is limited to Call of Duty.
 
Old 08-30-2012, 01:28 PM   #24
Marksman
 
Joined: Nov 2009
From: WA
Posts: 463
So I just took a course taught by some SF guys out of Ft. Lewis with recent deployments. I asked about piston guns and they weren't too impressed with the SCAR16. In their mind, the M4 does just fine and they can get parts. The 416 didn't do anything better than their standard M4, "Rounds came out of my M4 regularly, didn't see any reason to fuck with it" was one of the better quotes. They did like the SCAR Heavy though "The 5.56 SCAR's just sit in the box" but that was because it was 7.62 and they liked the punch.
 
Old 09-11-2012, 03:11 PM   #25
Sharpshooter
 
GixxerPete's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2009
From: Renton, WA
Posts: 824
Ok just to stir up the pot a little... I recently watched an episode of "American Rifleman" where they did a segment on the history of the M16. As I'm sure you know, the M16 was not well received when first introduced, and I bet you could find more than one soldier who said, "rounds came out of my M1 regularly, didn't see any reason to fuck with it".

In fact, soldiers died because that of that rifle, in it's initial deployment, because of no chrome bbls/chambers, wrong powder, no cleaning, etc. But by the end of the Vietnam war, all that was sorted out it was the very reliable M16/M4 platform in use today.

Was the M16 a solution to a problem that didn't exist? A lot of Luddites back then sure thought so... yet here we are, and it's now the longest serving rifle in military history.

So the M16 had teething problems, but was eventually dialed in and is now very reliable. Why can't the same be true for piston guns?

After all, dogs won't shit where they sleep, why should your rifle?
 
Old 09-11-2012, 07:01 PM   #26
Marksman
 
Joined: Nov 2009
From: WA
Posts: 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by GixxerPete View Post
Ok just to stir up the pot a little... I recently watched an episode of "American Rifleman" where they did a segment on the history of the M16. As I'm sure you know, the M16 was not well received when first introduced, and I bet you could find more than one soldier who said, "rounds came out of my M1 regularly, didn't see any reason to fuck with it".

In fact, soldiers died because that of that rifle, in it's initial deployment, because of no chrome bbls/chambers, wrong powder, no cleaning, etc. But by the end of the Vietnam war, all that was sorted out it was the very reliable M16/M4 platform in use today.

Was the M16 a solution to a problem that didn't exist? A lot of Luddites back then sure thought so... yet here we are, and it's now the longest serving rifle in military history.

So the M16 had teething problems, but was eventually dialed in and is now very reliable. Why can't the same be true for piston guns?



After all, dogs won't shit where they sleep, why should your rifle?
Good points but what advantage did the m16 have over the m14? Lighter weight, ability to carry more ammo, controllable full auto. It brought something to the table. Piston ar based weapons are heavier, more complicated and don't do anything better than a di gun under normal conditions. So again I ask, why?
 
Old 09-14-2012, 10:11 AM   #27
Sharpshooter
 
GixxerPete's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2009
From: Renton, WA
Posts: 824
Umm.... new shiny thing?
 
Old 09-18-2012, 01:35 PM   #28
Moderator
 
sunofnun's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2009
From: s. greenlake bitch
Posts: 1,469
Quote:
Originally Posted by GixxerPete View Post
In fact, soldiers died because that of that rifle...

So the M16 had teething problems, but was eventually dialed in and is now very reliable.


I think your answering your own question here..
If you were at war in 1966, would you want to be trying to clear your "experimental new rifle" while the AK's are blasting away all around you?
My dad HATED the m16 (he trained on the M14's) and opted for a wwii era 12 gauge winchester 97.
He didn't shoot another AR/M-16 unil he shot mine a couple years ago.. he likes them now, but he's not getting shot at either..


BOTTOM LINE.. DO YOU WANT TO BE THE "TEETHING EXPERIMENT"??

If your in a situation where it actually matters (not your couch or the range) why would you not go with the tried and true performer??????
 
Old 09-18-2012, 04:01 PM   #29
Sharpshooter
 
koorbloh's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2009
From: Lynnwood, WA
Posts: 822
pete's getting shot at in COD and still seems to prefer the new hotness.
 
Old 09-19-2012, 02:42 AM   #30
Marksman
 
Joined: Nov 2009
From: WA
Posts: 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by koorbloh View Post
pete's getting shot at in COD and still seems to prefer the new hotness.
Hard to argue with a "combat vet" of Pete's caliber......


He is, by far, my favorite hippy.
 
Old 09-19-2012, 02:22 PM   #31
Sharpshooter
 
GixxerPete's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2009
From: Renton, WA
Posts: 824
Quote:
Originally Posted by sunofnun View Post
I think your answering your own question here..
If you were at war in 1966, would you want to be trying to clear your "experimental new rifle" while the AK's are blasting away all around you?
My dad HATED the m16 (he trained on the M14's) and opted for a wwii era 12 gauge winchester 97.
He didn't shoot another AR/M-16 unil he shot mine a couple years ago.. he likes them now, but he's not getting shot at either..


BOTTOM LINE.. DO YOU WANT TO BE THE "TEETHING EXPERIMENT"??

If your in a situation where it actually matters (not your couch or the range) why would you not go with the tried and true performer??????
Well it obviously sucked big time that troops in combat had to work out the bugs of the M16, it should have been thoroughly vetted before going into harm's way. So no, obviously NOBODY wants to be the 'teething experiment' when lead is flying.

But that said, if everyone said 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it' we'd all be driving Model Ts and shooting lever action rifles and single action revolvers. If you wanna make an omelet, you gotta break some eggs. The M16 had some serious issues when it first came out, yet now it the longest service rifle in US history, and utterly reliable with minimal maintenance. Should they have just given up on it in the 60s and stuck with the M14? Methinks not.

So perhaps the same is true of the piston AR. Except in this case, it's getting vetted by the civilian market, nobody is forcing our troops to use an 'experimental' rifle in the field.

Or let me put it to you this way: if a piston gun weighed the same as a DI gun, and was just as reliable, (remember, AKs are piston guns) why wouldn't you want it? It runs cooler and cleaner, hard to see those as bad things. Seems to be those are the beefs, weight and reliability. If those were non-factors, which in time I bet they will be, what's not to love?
 
Old 09-19-2012, 02:24 PM   #32
Sharpshooter
 
GixxerPete's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2009
From: Renton, WA
Posts: 824
Quote:
Originally Posted by koorbloh View Post
pete's getting shot at in COD and still seems to prefer the new hotness.
Well for starters when you die in COD, you respawn. Not so much in real life.

But guess what? My favorite rifles in COD are the M4 and Mk14... so there!
 
Old 09-19-2012, 02:31 PM   #33
Sharpshooter
 
GixxerPete's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2009
From: Renton, WA
Posts: 824
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brianaintright View Post
Hard to argue with a "combat vet" of Pete's caliber......


He is, by far, my favorite hippy.
Well I am in the top 8000 or so in all of XBOX-land for shotgun kills, that has to say something, right? I love me some BOOMSTICK!

Now what self-respecting hippy would own a gun, let alone a whole bunch of them?

LOL when did this smilie get added? Or this one? WTF??
 
Old 09-19-2012, 02:54 PM   #34
Moderator
 
sunofnun's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2009
From: s. greenlake bitch
Posts: 1,469
Quote:
Originally Posted by GixxerPete View Post
Well it obviously sucked big time that troops in combat had to work out the bugs of the M16, it should have been thoroughly vetted before going into harm's way. So no, obviously NOBODY wants to be the 'teething experiment' when lead is flying.
By "sucked big time" you mean guys got shot and killed trying out a new platform.

So it's safe to say they can't come back and say FUCK THAT PEICE OF SHIT.. GIVE ME A M-14

They were chalked up as R&D by the fed gov.

Bottom line, IF IT MATTERS, No-one wants to be an experiment.



Quote:
Originally Posted by GixxerPete View Post
Or let me put it to you this way: if a piston gun was just as reliable
Your question again answers itself..

"IF piston guns were known to be as reliable great.. "

Seems like we need another 40 yrs for the answer to this one.
Are you volunteering lives over in the desert to test this shiny new idea?
 
Old 09-19-2012, 03:56 PM   #35
Sharpshooter
 
GixxerPete's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2009
From: Renton, WA
Posts: 824
Quote:
Originally Posted by sunofnun View Post
By "sucked big time" you mean guys got shot and killed trying out a new platform.

So it's safe to say they can't come back and say FUCK THAT PEICE OF SHIT.. GIVE ME A M-14

They were chalked up as R&D by the fed gov.

Bottom line, IF IT MATTERS, No-one wants to be an experiment.
So you're saying they should have shelved the M16, returned to the M14 and left it at that? Name ONE single major invention of ANYTHING that was 100% dialed in on the very first attempt. It just doesn't happen. Not cars, planes, trains, nor guns.

I think we can all agree how the M16 was introduced was an epic fail. It was not thoroughly tested/vetted before going into combat. And IIRC, one of the bigger problems, the original gunpowder, was not even a design flaw, but the fault of some bean counter bureaucrat that said 'hey why use that fancy new expensive gunpowder when we have all this perfectly good old stuff laying around?' It was perfectly good for older rifles, but the new gunpowder was specified for a reason, a reason lost on that bean counter.


Quote:
Your question again answers itself..

"IF piston guns were known to be as reliable great.. "

Seems like we need another 40 yrs for the answer to this one.
Are you volunteering lives over in the desert to test this shiny new idea?
Ok I'll play...

"IF M16s were known to be as reliable great.. "

They weren't then, but they are sure are now. Why is so hard for you to believe we can't make a piston gun just as reliable as a DI gun, so we shouldn't even try?

Would you prefer an original 1911 over a 'new & improved' one that is every bit as reliable, yet more accurate, feeds better, has a better trigger, WAY better sights, doesn't give you hammer bite, etc? I sure as shit wouldn't. But by your standards, we should NEVER have modified the original 1911 as Browning designed it, because 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it', right?
 
Reply

  PNW Guns > PNW Guns > Gunsmithing

Tags
556, big, probs


Thread Tools
Display Modes



Facebook @pnwguns PNW Guns RSS Feed

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright © 2009 - 2010 PNW Guns. All rights reserved.