AR M4 style rifle, which one?

If you cant understand why MPI testing barrels and shot peening bolts makes a better product than you're not intelligent enough to be having a conversation about AR's. Its really that simple. In fact I even wonder whether or not you actually know what MPI testing and shot peening does because if you did you would realize the stupidity of your statement.

Whats more, your comparisons about what "the professionals use" is bogus. There isn't any comparison at all because if you're in the sandbox and in the .mil then you're using a colt. No one has any idea whether an RRA or bushmaster would perform because they aren't there. And they aren't there because they don't have the QC or use the same parts as colt.
 
Last edited:
If you cant understand why MPI testing barrels and shot peening bolts makes a better product than you're not intelligent enough to be having a conversation about AR's. Its really that simple. In fact I even wonder whether or not you actually know what MPI testing and shot peening does because if you did you would realize the stupidity of your statement.

So in other words you have no real proof. Thought so.

Whats more, your comparisons about what "the professionals use" is bogus. There isn't any comparison at all because if you're in the sandbox and in the .mil then you're using a colt. No one has any idea whether an RRA or bushmaster would perform because they aren't there. And they aren't there because they don't have the QC or use the same parts as colt.

Thought FN and even Bushmaster made some stuff for the Military as well. But then again maybe you're right. However we do know that many professionals think Colts are junk. Regardless of what they have to compare it to. It's a good thing for you that you can't own a Colt where you live. Your laws are actually protecting you from wasting your money.
 
I even wonder whether or not you actually know what MPI testing and shot peening does because if you did you would realize the stupidity of your statement.

I will say this, though required by the military I've read that MPI testing is kinda useless these days as materials are better and it only will indicate imperfections on the surface and not deep in the material. Which is where most problems occur.
 
So in other words you have no real proof. Thought so.

Answer the question. Do you know what MPI testing and shot peening are.



Thought FN and even Bushmaster made some stuff for the Military as well. But then again maybe you're right. However we do know that many professionals think Colts are junk. Regardless of what they have to compare it to. It's a good thing for you that you can't own a Colt where you live. Your laws are actually protecting you from wasting your money.

FN is taking over the contract for 20" M16s from Colt, and they are making them to colt specs. Bushmaster doesnt make jack for the military and they cut massive corners...

http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=13532

And again I don't care what the "professionals" think. They have no frame of reference whatsoever. They shoot what they are issued and thats a colt with god know how many rounds through it and how many rebuilds. I do care what armorers think and they see far less colts with problems than other brands. I do care what instructors at thunder ranch, front sight, etc think because they see which carbines melt down and which last through classes. Colt wins there as well.
 
Answer the question. Do you know what MPI testing and shot peening are.

FN is taking over the contract for 20" M16s from Colt, and they are making them to colt specs.

No, they're making them to Military Specs. Colt didn't even design the rifle right?


Why don't you just tell me what's on that link. I don't trust you enough to follow it.

And again I don't care what the "professionals" think.

It's best that you don't. They use these weapons in real combat. The kind of stuff thunder ranch and front sight guys pretend to do with weekend warriors. You know... the kinda guys that are lawyers and dentists but wear desert tan molle vests at the range and take tactical shooting courses on the weekend. LOL.

They have no frame of reference whatsoever.

You mean other than how their rifles crap the bed in real life combat.

They shoot what they are issued and thats a colt with god know how many rounds through it and how many rebuilds.

Heard bad things about old busted ones and shiny new ones from "professionals" as you put it.


I do care what armorers think and they see far less colts with problems than other brands. I do care what instructors at thunder ranch, front sight, etc think because they see which carbines melt down and which last through classes. Colt wins there as well.

Yeah cause they spend so much time in combat. Your entire point is that Colts are made to a higher standard and that they are more combat ready. I'm telling you I've spoken with many a combat vet that said they'd have rather had an AK. That's a BOLD statement.

Look, buy what you like. I'm just not a fanboy. Nothing you say is gonna make me believe that a colt is WORTH what they charge. Is it nice, sure. Are they more expensive to make? Maybe. Are they best? Not by a long shot.
 
Once again you didn't answer my question. Do you know what MPI testing and shot peening is done for.
 
Due to the high level of cleaning/maintenance required by the DI gas system, people have jams more often. They can overheat and jam, and every company in the world(slight exaggeration) makes an AR, so lots of them probably are going to be lemons. . . unless the argument is that the AR design is inherently reliable, in which case, you are saying that the Ruger will be better than 90% of AR's on the market, since a Gas Piston is far more reliable than direct impingement. :D

A man who knows nothing of what he is talking about. Gotta love the errornet.

Mike D
 
FN and Bushmaster both make weapons for the military. They make weapons far more complex than the M-4.
FN makes the M-249, SAW, Squad automatic weapon and the M-240b Machinegun.
Bushmaster makes the 1" gun that is used as the main gun on the Bradley.
They are all superior to the Colt M-4, while at the same time being much more complex.

I guess what I'm saying is that Colt isn't the only manufacturer capable of producing a very high quality weapon.
 
Mike d, there was no problem I ever saw with the M-4 that was due to DI system. The failures I saw were due to sand getting into the upper, fix was simple, clean it out and learn to close your cover.
And, BTW, I never saw a troop throw away his weapon and start using an AK, If I did I would've reprimanded him severely. All my men kept their weapons very clean and I inspected them regularly.
I think that myth started back in 'Nam, where it may have happened. When a troop was unhappy with his weapon, he was more than likely to grab an M-14 or a shotgun, depending on where his Unit was going. If he was unhappy with the then new M-16.
 
Last edited:
Direct impingement runs hot and dirty. . . It is inferior to gas piston systems.

Or maybe I am wrong- just look at all the new Direct impingement rifles being developed. Oh, wait- there is only the AR, and new versions like the HK do away with direct impingement in favor of the piston.

Of course the Direct impingement is also a piston system, it just foolishly uses the bolt as the piston.
 
I guess what I'm saying is that Colt isn't the only manufacturer capable of producing a very high quality weapon.

No one said they were. However out of all of the factory AR's out there, Colt's are the best.

As far as bushmaster making weapons for the military, if you are referring to the M242, its actually made by McDonnell Douglas as well as AKT.
 
You're right Stage 2, The project was nicknamed "Bushmaster". Sorry for the error, I've always heard of the gun being referred to as the 1" Bushmaster, I just assumed they manufactured it.
 
Direct impingement runs hot and dirty. . . It is inferior to gas piston systems.

Gas pistons run just as dirty and are not less maintenance, especially in an AR. Too many folks think that they are getting an AK with AR ergos because they are running a gas piston. Thats not the case at all. The difference is in where the dirt accumulates. They just change the carbon buildup location from the bolt's tail to the gas port/piston face. You still need to clean a piston gun, or the carbon buildup will choke off the gas flow and cause cycling problems.


Or maybe I am wrong- just look at all the new Direct impingement rifles being developed. Oh, wait- there is only the AR, and new versions like the HK do away with direct impingement in favor of the piston.

Of course the Direct impingement is also a piston system, it just foolishly uses the bolt as the piston.

Well, if reduced recoil and greater accuracy is foolish, then call Gene Stoner a fool. You seem to be a fan of sweeping statements and seem to believe that this is a black and white issue. Its not. Most things in the firearms world are a tradeoff. You have to give up one thing to get another because as much as we like, the laws of physics cant be changed.

It is true a gas piston will usually be more tolerant of fouling than a DI system. However it will be heavier, less accurate and have more recoil. To call the gas system totally superior it would have to be the case that DI rifles failed frequently and after only a few rounds, or that the gas systems would run so much longer without a failure. From the reports from the sandbox, this isn't the case.
 
Gun powder has improved dramatically over the past 40 years. If you fire the rifle so much that it gets hot enough to scorch the bolt, rings so forth, then you have a bigger problem than a dirty gun. If this area of the gun is that hot then the barrel is going to be hot enough to be susceptible to cook offs, which will happen with a piston driven rifle as well.
 
I would rather clean a tube and piston than a crusty bolt and action. Obviously the DI functions, just a lot dirtier, etc. Nothing is black and white.

Accuracy is not decided by the gas system. Recoil is negligible with either system.
 
In case you don't want to read the whole article copied from "Defense Review".



It’s up against the growing skepticism and doubt about the supposed superiority and/or advantages of gas piston/op-rod ARs over traditional direct-gas impingement (DGI) a.k.a. direct-impingement gas (DI Gas) system AR-15 carbines/rifles. with regard to weapon reliability. There are a couple of important points to be made about this. First, as we’ve already pointed out in a previous article, there are a number of very knowledgable people out there, including, but not limited to, tactical AR-15 builders out there like John Noveske of Noveske Rifleworks, LLC and Nathan Roads of Next Generation Arms (NGA) and professional military Spec-Operators (including U.S. military Special Forces and Special Operations personnel) that actually prefer the traditional DGI setup over the gas piston/op-rod setup. Not do traditional direct gas guns tend to be more accurate, lighter-weight, softer and smoother shooting, and mechanically simpler than gas piston/op-rod guns, but there is now growing evidence that they may be as or more combat-reliable than gas piston/op-rod guns, provided the DGI guns (like the Colt M4A1 Carbine, for example) are “sprung right“, are properly maintained, and have a barrel of at least 12.5 inches (12.5″) in length. A direct-gas AR-15 SBR with a 12.5″ barrel can retain and utilize the standard M4/M4A1 Carbine-length gas system, thus optimizing weapon reliability. Piston guns are easier to clean/maintain in the field since they don’t get as dirty inside. However, the “crud” that builds up inside a DI gas AR at high round count is not what causes reliability problems.

Remember, the reason that a certain U.S. Army Special Forces (SF) unit chose the HK416 piston-driven platform was because they wanted a short weapon with a 10.5-inch (10.5″) barrel that would run reliably with a muzzle can (silencer/sound suppressor). A gas piston/op-rod setup doesn’t rely on barrel length to create the necessary gas pressure curve and timing like a direct-gas-impingement system does, so you can cut the barrel down to 10.5 inches with no loss in weapon reliablity. However, if you’re willing to go with a barrel length of 12.5 inches and up, it’s questionable that a gas piston/op-rod gun offers ANY reliability or durability advantage whatsoever over a direct-gas gun, even with a suppressor attached.

In fact, there’s now some evidence to the contrary, since the much vaunted and supposedly superior HK416 has been running into some rather serious reliability and durability problems in the field as of late, including the piston system locking up in cold weather and the upper receiver cracking. And, the HK 416 is supposed to be the most combat-proven gas piston/op-rod AR out there! According to some unconfirmed/unverified reports Defense Review has received from some of our industry contacts, the HK-416 receiver-cracking issue has led to U.S. Special Operations personnel operating under SOCOM (USSOCOM) to switch out their HK416s with combat-proven Colt M4A1 Carbines, so they’re now back to using combat-proven direct-gas-impingement guns. The fact is, the Colt M4A1 Carbine is truly combat proven, and significantly more so than ANY gas piston/op-rod AR out there, including the HK416.
 
I would rather clean a tube and piston than a crusty bolt and action. Obviously the DI functions, just a lot dirtier, etc. Nothing is black and white.

Accuracy is not decided by the gas system. Recoil is negligible with either system.

What you would rather do isn't the issue. The fact remains that both rifles need maintenance and both accumulate gunk.

Everyone heaps loads of praise on the AK because its reliable, and deservedly so. What they usually fail to mention is that its effective range is almost half that of the AR. You might have the more reliable rifle, but thats not going to matter much if you have to close an extra 250 meters to bring the fight... especially when the guy who brought the AR is shooting at you.
 
Back
Top