On a swat team, I carried a 14.5 inch M4, fixed carry handles until I finally converted them to flat top A1s. We were originally issued Beretta PM12S, then M16A1s and several MP5A4s. I preferred to carry my 14inch Benelli M1 Super 90 on entries until I became a sniper. Man, those were fun times but it was mid 90s to mid 2000s.
@@Mag_Aoidh Had to go feast my eyes on that Benelli, had never crossed my mind that Swat would use a 14" variant. What a kickass little hammer of a shotgun. Would love to own one! Was it a 4 + 1 ?
In Norway, Finland, and Sweden, we all use piston guns for our line infantry, for precisely the reason Henry touches on: Reliability in wet arctic and subarctic conditions. As soon as snow and ice comes into the picture, a lot of "common" knowledge on guns don't quite apply in the same way. All tolerances and parameters for gas systems, lubrication, how clean your gun is etc change, sometimes in unintuitive ways. Like how ample lubrication becomes more important as it gets colder, until a certain point where you instead must run the gun completely dry. Things that people have never had issues with on their home range in the US or continental Europe suddenly leads to frequent failures. It is a fairly common experience whenever we get visitors from foreign forces that their gear starts malfunctioning in ways they're unused to. In a way it mirrors the experience of us Nordics deploying to hot and sandy places, where our ingrained habits of gun maintenance has led to sand sticking to the oil and gunking up the action, resulting in failures. One of our early hard-won lessons from Afghanistan.
Yeah, moving from the arid Australian bush to Switzerland, I can never get used to running rifles with oil/grease in them. We just avoided it and ran dry or with graphite/teflon powder.
This is more or less correct, though the Northern Upper Great Lakes region is very similar to to the Nordic countries, which is why so many Swedes, Norwegians, and Fins (like my ancestors) moved here.
The fact that militaries are buying both systems to this day tells you that there is no definitive answer to which is better. Both have their pros and cons.
@@T-SwiftsMaritalAid They are so good that there are like 2 or 3 countries (besides Russia of course) who are adopting new AKs as their military firearms. It's an outdated platform.
Good work at pointing out the external and environmental factors that affect reliability. This was the first time I really saw the performance difference between cheap steel and standard M193. My 'cheap/budget/rack grade' 5.56s run both reliably, until the chamber gets badly fouled. My X95 refuses to eject cheap steel, but I thought that was simply that rifle's quirk. Bottom line: The more precise one wants their rifle to be, the more carefully parts and systems must be matched.
I enjoy the discussion on gassing for different environmental conditions. Living just outside of North Pole Alaska I run my ARs in temps ranging from 85/90 degrees down to a potential -50 (my personal coldest is -34). I also semi regularly travel to CONUS and shoot there. The rifle I ran at -34 is the same rifle I took back to the states and ran at 95 degrees. The conditions for use in both cases are 5.56 m193 or m855 ammo, Silencerco Omega 36M with KeyMo, A5H2 and green spring buffer system, 14.5 mid gas barrel with a 0.076 gas port. This rifle runs consistently in all environments I have subjected it to and it is slightly on the gassy side with the suppressor added to the system, but it is certainly well within the tolerable range and is perhaps better than my Colt M4 upper unsuppressed.
I get it, in my opinion the solution is to set it up, maintain it and forget it. I use moly lube, loads that are standard and I expect results in extreme conditions, hot, cold, sand and wet. You never know, you work the day in a short sleeve shirt, go to bed, wake up with 2" of ice on the window and a steady 50MPH wind. Dealing with a 6ARC now too, testing is a bit difficult, I can't get far North or South and deep freeze units managed by gun enthusiasts aren't on every corner, but it keeps me off the strees and stops me from picking on the old people.
I thoroughly believe in the a5 system. With the tube, green springco and a5h2 every rifle I have with varying length barrels and gas lengths, supressed or not, any range of ammo just works in south Texas conditions. I just don't ever have cycling problems. A good armorer's course makes a world of difference
@@waltonchan3931 The Finns used WD40, CLP, and I used Slip2000 just because I could fly with it (non petrol based). Ran lots of high volume in 2-3 day courses in the dead of Winter there. TDP AR-15s/M4s ran just fine. Saw more issues with Arsenal AKs than anything. I did fragment my Gen 1 Magpul MIAD Grip. The little tabs broke off since the polymer became extremely brittle in -30°C.
It's so funny that the Delta Bros were ahead of the curve in the '90s and it's taken all up until roughly the last 4 years for people to realize and upright position is best for shooting under nods.
They were having carry handles machined off and Weaver rail sections drilled and tapped onto the uppers right around the time of the XM4 testing, then just went to M4A1s. Guys who still liked the carry handles kept the detachable handles on and used the Delta Cheek pieces on Fiberlite Stocks. When shooting with NODs, they’ve been using LAMs even since Desert One days. PAQ-4C was really common in the early 1990s before they asked for AIM-1 IR Laser power, but in a smaller box with an illuminator, which became the PEQ-2A. There are some really cool set-ups with no internet photos of the early 1990s carbines that rival a lot of what’s out there right now, other than the PAQ-4C. Drop an NGAL onto one of those free-floated 723 Carbines with AEM suppressor and you’d be doing better than 99.99999% of AR-15s.
They werent shooting with their optics under NV. None of the red dots available at the time were compatible with NV devices. It was active aiming only with PAQ-4s and later PEQ-2s.
@@nickcurrier8074 Kyle Lamb said it was just what they had back with the carry handle uppers, not intentional. Once they saw the Colt ACR submission, they might have been instrumental in steering the XM4 program into going with the detachable carrying handle and proper height optics mounts relative to solid cheek position with a helmet. Early XM4s were basically 727s anyway. I remember what a big deal the dual heat shield fat handguards were in 1994-1997. CAG mostly skipped past them to Unit-built modded FF tubes off SR-25s, KAC RIS, MRE, FF RAS, and all types of mounts for Aimpoints, S&B Short Dots, LAMs, and clip-ons.
So glad you guys touched on the potential benefits of overgassing and configuring your rifle to run a little harder, so many dudes are so focused on making their rifle as comfortable as possible they don't consider a simple change of climate can turn a reliable rifle into an unreliable nightmare. A big part of the AK's legendary reliability is being overgassed, which is why it's always been notoriously difficult to suppress too! (I often tell people about the AK Operator videos in which a $400 PSA was the only AR to get through his torture test because it was overgassed) A super flat, soft rifle is great for competition but for a rifle I'm staking my life on I'd gladly trade some comfort for certainty that it'll work every time.
Its more of matching the tool to the job. If you're CAG then you probably need an adverse gas position or just overgassed. If you're a competitive shooter then you want 0 recoil. If you're an average joe, if you have it reliable at your environment then you dont need adverse gas position so you're reducing your shootability in return for reliability that isn't needed. Just clean your guns and have a gun that shoots better. Recoil is always a negative and you should never accept more if you aren't getting something in return
You do realize as long as you use the proper gas system length in the AR the gassing isn't a problem? especially considering most ARs are 16 inch barrel. It's not an issue so there's no reason to have to extra weight and if you're really worried about it you can use the rifle length gas system and decent quality ammo it's really a no brainer.
@@fearsomefoursome4 I happen to live in a place where the climate can go from sand storms to snow storms and shockingly some of my lazier gassed rifles have a tendency to struggle with it. Moreover I'm just giving my two cents and personal preference, if you wanna use a dissipator go for it but I personally don't mind a rougher experience if it means more reliability. Again: AK Operator PSA AR torture test
I have a 5.56 Beryl AK that came from the factory a bit overgassed so I put a KNS adjustable gas piston in it. For range use, I run it gassed a bit higher than I'd like recoil-wise so that it runs flawlessly in normal conditions. But if I were in really cold or really hot weather? I'll damn near close the port so that mofo runs like a Swiss watch, recoil be damned. I feel like there is some weird reverse fuddlore going on in the gun community since the InRange mud test videos, as if a couple of videos shown in the same desert mud mean that every AR is flawlessly reliable in all conditions and the AK is just trash that jams when a light whiff of sand enters the action. I suspect the average off-the-shelf or built AR from the US commercial market would not actually run that well in adverse combat conditions because most are gassed very lightly; on the flip side, I've owned many European AKs and not a single one has EVER been "undergassed" and none have jammed (not counting the trial and error setting up my adjustable gas systems for my Beryl and M77). True military M4s and M16s would likely be properly gassed, as would piston ARs that almost all have adjustable gas settings.
@@flopus7 Recoil is always a negative, but reliability is not. I'll take a gun that hurts a little bit to shoot or has some muzzle rise but runs like Swiss watch over a competition-gassed AR made for split times. But yeah, I set my AK with a KNS to be slightly more heavily gassed than I need to run 100% in normal conditions for casual range use. If SHTF I'd close the piston almost entirely to ensure that bolt keeps slamming back and forth.
Trapped in 1960. My g3 has this annoying thing where if you don't modify it to ha e the proper roller gap and bolt handle gap, it literally cannot be unlocked no matter how much force you use.
For line infantry, Marines made the right decision, IMO, in switching to short stroke piston. It especially made sense for the original automatic rifleman to replace the SAW gunner. “External piston” runs cleaner and cooler, so is appropriate for a rifle used more often on full auto.
Born and raised in North Pole Alaska, def a place, and yes there's a Santa clause house; and yes the light poles are candy canes. When I was in middle school we'd write back to kids as Santa who sent letters to "Santa" lol kinda messed up lol
I just have to say, you two are an awesome team. Gun nerds in the best possible meaning of the words. Thank you for sharing your knowledge and opinions. It’s a pleasure to watch and learn
I served 3 combat tours in the Marines. All I can say is that our M27 IARs were noticeably more reliable than our M4s. It was almost a guarantee that if you were a M27 gunner, you weren’t going to be dealing with malfunctions whenever we ran into sandstorms or really harsh training conditions. Not only that, they stayed cleaner and cooler during heavy sustained fire. The two main draw backs I hear from those that don’t like the 416 platform is that they are heavier and snappier with the recoil. Both those arguments are silly because the recoil is literally the same as a regular AR running a carbine length gas system. These guns aren’t competition guns. It’s 556. The heavier argument is also dumb because most modern day rifle set ups are heavy in general. I run a 416 clone right now with an ACOG/RMR, peq 15, and light. That thing clocks in fully loaded at 10.5 pounds. If you’re bitching about that, go ask a WW2 vet how much his M1 weighed while storming beaches. In my opinion, the only reason we don’t see 416s being more prevalent is because HK has a choke hold on the platform and it’s not practical to spend $4,000 on a rifle that’s going to be coming with a shit ton of proprietary parts when you can just buy an AR15 and it will be almost just as good. If we are just talking what’s better without money being an issue, it’s clearly the 416.
I carried an M4/Mk18 as 11 and 18 series for over 30 total months in combat (Iraq/Afghan). Never once had a malfunction with thousands of rounds fired 🤷♂️ Edit: every malfunction was either user or magazine induced.
@@DraegerV1 That’s cool, but I can also say that I’ve been a proud owner of many budget rifles and pistols over the years including hi-points and I’ve too shot tens of thousands of rounds through them without ever experiencing a malfunction. Anecdotal experiences don’t necessarily make something true.
I love the looks of the older rifles but I definitely love me some modern goodness too haha. I just recently got my first suppressor and put it on my rosco k9 12.5 upper build with a noveske h2 buffer. Will probably go to a sprinco spring soon but it shoots great. Rosco advertised that barrel as shooting great suppressed or un suppressed. So far I'd say they hit their mark. I ended up getting an AB A10 5.56 can with a dead air xeno hub and flash hider keeping the whole rifle reasonably lightweight and still fairly short. I've debated doing a pistol build but have yet to try it. Great video Sirs
Side note, my modern ARs have adjustable gas blocks, but to tune my retro gun I installed an adjustable gas tube from Barnes Precision. It's extremely helpful, fits right into the gun (the adjustment block sits where the holes in the plastic handguards are) and is very hard to spot so it blends in nicely, and is click adjustable with an allen wrench. Helped my gun run smooth and also run smooth suppressed.
Great video thanks. As a side note I really enjoyed watching Henry struggle wit DI. For 50 years it was DI, now that the 416 has gained traction folks are struggling with what to call DI systems.
I agree the older guns have a certain something. I watched the movie Heat one too many times, and had to build a 11.5" A1. I just ordered PSA's retro brace to complete the look. I couldn't go all the way back in time though. I put a QD end plate, MagPul SL grip, and a BAD lever on it. Just to keep my manual of arms the same, and use my sling. Maybe someday, if the Lord tarries, it will be a full retro build. Right now it goes to church with me, in a non descript bag. Part of an active shooter response kit. Crazy that, that's something we even have to consider.
What a real pleasure it was to watch this video. Once again. You two are truly fantastic. I'm a huge Ar15 fan, even more so after this video. Despite only having American Ar's, I'm sorry you don't test the numerous other German Ar´s brands. I would like to know your opinion about them.
Josh: "I need a new Geissele upper for this video." Henry: "What's wrong with the 12 you already own?" If you're going to teach us about dwell time, you need to do a dissipator video.
4 o’clock is behind the ejection port, not ahead of it. Also, if all other variables are equal (they never are) in a suppressed auto-loader, a shorter dwell time will allow the gas pressure in the bore to decrease quicker before the system cycles and unseals the chamber, compared to a longer dwell time that will be at a higher residual pressure as the chamber is unsealed. The vast majority of gas we catch in the face comes from the chamber, not the gas tube. Longer barrels, shorter dwell times, and any factor that causes the chamber to remain sealed longer, all contributes to less gas intruding into the receiver from the chamber. Also generally speaking, the quieter the can, the more residual gas pressure there will be hanging out in the bore as the empty case is unsealed from the chamber. The RC2 is a quiet (and gassy) can. The Ops Inc/AEM reflex cans are very quiet (and extremely gassy).
Both do the job. Period. One weighs less and blows gas into your face if suppressed with a traditional baffle silencer unless you start messing with buffers, springs and AGBs or just run a flow through. The other you trade weight for not having gas in the face and reliability in all weather conditions with a bit more parts wear. That’s why you have to have one of each.
Those retro builds are a vibe, sure the modern ones may outperform in some ways but in terms of cool factor the retro ones just have it perfected, carry handle AR all the way.
Armageddon charging handle. Get one and don't look back Edit: also an adjustable gas block will help any gun. To any one saying adjustable gas blocks are unreliable, i point to the scar, hk416, sigs new spear, and the fal. Done correctly it's a non issue. My favorite currently is the riflespeed system.
Finally someone had spoken about the optimization to the mission of the weapon. Firearms are designed as a system (round-and-weapon) and are a matched set designed to be used in certain conditions. The broader the set of conditions the larger the amount of compromises the weapon will have. The more specialized the weapon, the more dedicated it will be to the circumstances outside of which it will function noticeably less effectively or reliably. These things are often not realized by civilians that use these rifles in what amounts to almost-sterile conditions
Me that built a block 2 clone with a aimpoint comp m4 and matech buis. Then built a classic carry handle with a usgi carry handle with a piggy backed comp m2... Both. Both is good.
Nice recovery. I've been pointing out for a long time that the AR-15 is not a direct impingement system as it's called forever, is incorrect. A piston is a piston wherever it's located.
When Windham Weaponry came back online after the Remington fiasco, I bought one of the first rifles they put out and wanted to test DI vs piston, just from a reliability standpoint. Using cheap Tula ammo the rifle would get fouled enough to start malfunctions at about two hundred rounds. I installed an Adam's Arms piston system and it never malfunctioned again. I don't even clean the damned thing until it's so dirty I feel guilty. Would a DI system run much longer with clean ammo? Yup, certainly. Still, piston systems are superior even with a fairly cheap after-market affair like Adams. Even with clean ammo you're venting tremendous amounts of heat into your chamber and it will cause fails when it gets hot enough and dirty enough.
pistons always seemed like a gimmick for both fudd lore about DI reliability issues or military cope for their abused, overshot guns malfunctioning being blamed on "DI is bad." US Ordnance just holds on to things too long and doesn't replace enough. Anyone from GWOT on who used a military issued M9 and then got their hands on a Beretta in the civilian world knows this. Night and day difference.
sorta like how the m60 has a terrible reputation. they were so used and abused by that time , of course only those who used the clapped out ones had that opinion.
@@Ravensbreak ok. i did say there may be situations in which one may be favored over the other depending on preference or situations in which one would be the better choice
@@sabregunner1 The biggest reason to use a piston system in an AR is for sustained automatic fire. Dumping mag after mag in the AR15 will result in a blown gas tube. But for most uses, especially in the civilian world, DI is more than adequate.
@@DriveCarToBar maybe this applies to my other comment not the one about used and abused military guns being the source of the "x is bad" because thats the version the person used
@@Ravensbreakthat's not true. The AR10 going back to 1955 was internal piston DI. Early models had it's gas tube along the side of the barrel. What AR prototype are you thinking of?
Nice content as always :) DI guns all day for me, don’t like the 416 very thick hanguard and heavy weight. Active French Soldier here, we have the 416F now (14,5' barrel for me) and it’s fucking front heavy for what it is, just for a piston gun...and i don’t talk about all the issues we have with it, like the ambidextrous magazine release which ejects the magazine if you put the rifle against you for right handed people ; it’s really annoying. The stock is too fat, too heavy (HK 416 E1 type stock) the HK stupid steel magazines are (again) heavier than the classic USGI type magazines, the gun is way overgassed(yes, i know, reliability blablabla) the flash hider/muzzle device is ringing (PPIIIINNGGG!!!) every time you shoot, the HK plastic dust cover often cracks or breaks itself, the flip up sights are not very well fixed (lot of losses on the field) the gun feels bigger, thicker, higher in every ways, i really don’t like it, the HK416 is pretty lame to my mind... And for civilians, the 416 is so expensive for what it is, as always with HK guns. So yes, it’s reliable, but sorry guys, i prefer my BCM MCMR or my retro Colt M723 type AR i have at home, or every DI gun ; they’re lighter, cooler, very thin handguard, and they never let me down, they’re reliable, what else serioulsy? I prefer my old, dusty but reliable FAMAS, it misses me lot. I regret my governement bought this HK416F (like a lot of my comrades) rather a classic DI AR, or the VHS2 Bullpup rifle.
How much of your issues are DI vs piston, or rather that the H&K 416 sucks? It is the most prevalent one out there, but militaries are also using LMT piston guns, Finland and Sweden are adopting piston guns from SAKO etc.
@@foleymaj The 416is clearly not a bad rifle, it’s just not my prefered rifle, i really don’t like this rifle, on lot of aspect : design, weight....but for sure yes, it’s reliable no doubts on it. Even i can see sometimes some malfunctions in the field, like failures too feed, even with this HK416F. If i could, i will change it for a DI gun, and i’m not the only one in my regiment ; this rifle has too much ergonomic issues and this is way too overgassed. Sometimes, we put some supressor on it just for fun, at the end of the day, and...it’s not fun, even with the "S" setting on, it’s gas, gas, gas in your face... It’s like the FN SCAR, yes lot of units, Armies, adopted it, but it’s not THE assault rifle, i believe it was tried by the Rangers in US Army, a long time ago, and they were not satisfied with it, for lot of reasons. We are, as soldiers, on the field, we eat, sleep, run, shoot....etc the rifle all day long, HK are good in marketing, but at the final, this we, soldiers, Who have to deal with all potentials issues of the gun. I kow there here lot of others piston guns in other Armies, but not because some others Armies adopted it that it’s a good rifle, or that Piston guns are, in every cases, they’re good piston guns, and they’re bad piston guns. Mort of the time it’s not because it’s not reliable, but because of others issues. For shooting with the 416F every day for 2 years now, except the good reliability, i don’t see the point with this gun, and i am also disappointed by the main feeling of the gun, and the poor ergonomics of this rifle, such as the left side magazine release, which can cause potentials big issues on the field (it’s already the case) and HK or not, it’s unacceptable to my mind. I know Armies have to deal with lot of considerations when they want to switch their service rifle, and they want reliability and it’s normal. But lot of Armies in the world still have their DI guns (especially USA, even if they’re switching now) and they’re not unreliable, or low tech guns. And there is always a difference between the marketing bullshit and the reality, always. In civilian shooting, to my mind, a 416 is useless, except if you are an HK fanboy or if you want this rifle because it’s look cool for you. The prices are way too high, and it’s just an AR15 with a piston.... But of course, it’s all personnal tastes, and it’s subjective, the principal is to have a rifle which fire everytime ;)
@@reefread1234 The Caracal 816 A2 seems to be nice, the handguard looks good, and it's not as thick that the 416F quad rail handguard, i never fired a Caracal rifle, but i will try if i can, nothing could be worse than a HK416 to my mind, in terme of short stroke piston guns.
Great video, i just dont see my self playing delta in my house. I can see myself using a PPC for in doors, and continue using 20" barrels for ourdoor use.
I built a CMMG gas piston retrofit and purchased a Sig 516. The adjustable gas port on the 516 was nice for use with a suppressor but I decided the added cost, weight and complexity of GP upper really didn't bring much to the picnic.
Internal Piston...lol, it's direct impingement. It just routes the gas inside the bolt carrier first. There is no piston. Gas goes into the carrier and the pressure forces the carrier backwards until it moves enough to vent gas pressure to atmosphere. Larry Vickers explained the reason to use a piston gun over DI in regards to the 416. It's for sustained automatic fire. If you're full auto mag dumping with a standard DI gas system, you stand a good chance of blowing the gas tube. Piston guns don't have that problem. There are other trade-offs, but if you're operating in a small unit with serious weight restrictions (because you airdropped or swam in) and have to watch what you carry, then having your carbine also be able to reliably function as an automatic rifle has an advantage.
Internal piston and direct impingement describe the same thing. The term internal piston is used by very knowledgeable people in the industry who do far more technical work with rifles than just selling products and shoot them, and describes the fact the BCG operates as the piston. The BCG inside the reciever in a DI rifle is an internal piston. The long/short stroke systems that sit under the handguard are external pistons.
@@mghegotagun The BCG in an AR15 operates as a gas cylinder. There is no piston that mechanically acts on any portion of the rifle. Gas alone provides the motive force. Gas goes in through the gas key and expands in the chamber created by the gas rings on the bolt, and the cylindrical shape of the carrier. The bolt is locked and immobile at time of firing. The only thing moving, is the carrier. It's a more complicated version of the gas system on the MAS-49.
Unit guys never used 723s or M4A1s on Full Auto. Larry said it was for handling different ammunition types when fired from short barrels and suppressed. They had tried 11.5” barrels since they always had a need for more compact carbines for low-vis work, but had issues with reliability as the round count stacked on the guns suppressed. I helped source some of the parts for him for early prototypes back in 2003.
Stoner himself made it pretty clear it isnt direct impingement. If it was DI there would be no gas rings on the bolt. The gas would just blow into the gas tube and push the carrier backwards like a MAS-49. The AR doesnt do that, it isnt direct impingement.
@@LRRPFco52 There's a video of him on RUclips (maybe the interview with Ian McCollum on Forgotten Weapons??) explaining the full auto reasoning. Perhaps I'm not remembering correctly, and he mentioned other reasons. It's been a couple years since I watched it.
Kinda fuq'd I know. I graduated in 2005 so long time ago, not sure if they still do that shit but they'd have boxes and boxes of letters sent to "Santa" that we'd respond too in English class 😂
@@LostSourdough That's hilarious, never thought much of it when I was a kid doing it but thinking back it and saying it out loud it kind of seems messed up 🤣
I get why certain groups use external pistons, in certain conditions such as in the desert around helicopters, it kinda helps and same with more limited dwell time. As for gas to the face, I’ve found external pistons don’t matter much since most of its coming from the chamber, the lower back pressure can has a bigger effect. For most people, spending the money on external piston guns that don’t suck makes zero sense. But, it’s your money not mine.
Shorter barrels have higher gas pressure at the gas port, so dwell time distances are not comparable with longer barrel dwell times. To make things more complicated, bullet velocities are different for long and short barrels too, if dwell time is the metric that matters. I suggest that it is force times time applied to the bolt carrier that matters. As in momentum, which can be expressed as energy for a given bolt and carrier mass. If full 5.56 performance is reached with a 20" barrel, then using half that length seems wasteful. Better to use a .30 BA or 7.62 x 39 because those still have a useful expansion volume with 10" long barrel.
There is a diffrence between owning a gun as a civilian , going to shooting range, cleaning your gun, gasing it to perfection and being in a military setting. When the war starts, you just want your gun to run. Through dirt, ice, sand, water, bad ammo, whatever, you just want your gun to chug out rounds through it. Having a bit higher recoil is nothing compared to your firearm working. That is why AK platform is still one of the most used platform to this day. You can tune your AK to shoot smooth as fuck and without any recoil when you are civilian, but when you are in a trench in Ukraine, do you really care for slightly better recoil? No you dont. You dont have time to clean your gun cause every minute someone could be attacking your trench. The ammo you get is questionable, it might be winter or dirt and mud, but you know your AK will chug out those rounds when it is needed. Also most of these rifles are stockpiled somewhere in times of peace. But when shit hits the fan do you really think someone goes lets clean all these guns properly and deliver them to troops? No they don't. USA is based on war economy. They are at war since the independence and they are always active. Other countries in the world haven't seen war for a long time. Reliability is key in times of war. Personally if i had the money for HK I would take it over the DI rifle. In actual war I would take AK over anything to be honest. Slightly better accuracy and a bit lower recoil means nothing in modern war setting as Ukraine have shown.
Cool as these are, herein lies the overall issue with the ar di system. The piston system adds some weight, but solves the gas issues, ammo issues etc. Ar's in general, as others have noted as well, require too many caveats to be truly reliable, lethal systems. Between bullet weight choices to try and add lethality to 5.56, dwell time, barrel length, buffer springs, twist rates, gas port size...its a lot of work to make these things as effective as possible while something like an akm just does its job everytime no matter what and to great effect no matter who's wielding it. Stoner knew what he was doing and for some reason, everyones tried improving on a system that was done right the first time and no matter what, the original design still wins everytime for overall functionality.
Delta went to piston while SAS went to DI. Delta will be back to DI, I’m sure, I due time. They always try to delude themselves into thinking the piston is better before giving up and apologizing to Stoner for ever doubting him.
This is ironic because Stoner dabbled in all three main types of gas systems: DI/internal piston with the AR, the Tokarev-based short stroke with the AR-18, and even a long stroke for the Stoner M63. Even Stoner himself situationally thought pistons could be better. Really makes you think.
Henry and Josh, have you guys considered an adjustable gas block like the Riflespeed to tune ARs for suppressed/unsuppressed usage and for different ammos? It solves the issues of needing to compromise and mitigates spring and buffer tuning needs. Also an LMT eBCG to increase dwell time. Leads to an insanely well tuned AR for any environment and ammo
I would like to see you try out the Caracal 816, its from one one of the same engineers fron the 416 project. Later he joined Sig with Chris Sirois They made the Sig 516 and then the Caracal 816 so its supposedly the most advanced of the 3.
[wheels in on mobility scooter] Actually the bolt face directly impinges against the receiver extension therefore acting as an internal gas piston brother, stay safe
Perhaps the only thing external piston has over internal is it being able to fire immediately after being submerged in water, paired with over the beach features in the 416
It's amazing how technology advances. now with the urgi you could put in a light buffer to run low power ammo reliably and then run a B&T flow through suppressor with m193 with hardly any gas in the face
The internal gas piston system remains the best operating system. The fact that the internal piston within the bolt carrier is perfectly in-line with the bore and bolt eliminates the bolt tilt problem that plagues piston ARs. And also allows the use of a lighter bolt carrier since the carrier of Piston ARs has to be overbuilt to mitigate the bolt tilt problem. Which represents another weight advantage on top of the absence of a gas piston and gas piston spring.
I served in the USMC fron 2001 to 2005. My unit never got the M16a4 ir M4 while I was in. Everyone I served with disliked the M16 because they were old, unreliable, and dirty. This was even true of a friend that was a Navy Seal, and the rifle issued to him wasn't older than the youngest members of his unit. I can't help but think that the 90s neglect directly impacted GWoT procurement choices.
The 90s definitely had a lot of stuff sitting on the shelf that should have been replaced but didn't. That was the issue with the 1911 by the time the m9 came around and was the issue with m9s after 30 years of use. There's also some unit and command politics at play in the budget process. When I was in the airborne we had fairly new stuff most of the time compared to other units.
I used all kinds of M16A1s, M16A2s, M4s, and M4A1s pre and post-GWOT. Lubed and fed from new or good conditions mags, they all ran just fine. Biggest problems were mags with split spines that double-fed, but you really had to take care of your magazines and then no real problems. We shot them all in pretty high volume. I took my M4 through a high volume course run by 3rd Group’s new CIF guys where I put 1100 rounds through it in about 4 hours. That was pre-SOPMOD heavy barrel, pre-H2 buffer, bone stock M4 with KAC RAS, PEQ-2A, Surefire, Aimpoint Comp M. Each one of us could shoot through a full can of 5.56 if we kept running drills. I had no malfunctions that I can recall. That was 2002. In Recon Platoons, we were burning a lot of ammo through M16A1s in the early-mid 1990s before we turned them in and drew out M16A2s. The M16A1 was better for weight, trigger, and balance for sure.
@@LRRPFco52 You had better luck than me. The first A2 I was issued would occasionally fire two rounds in Simi (happened right in front of a range office, he just shrugged and walked away). The second wouldn't go into battery unless you hit the forward assist. That was when it was clean and lubed (buffer spring needed replaced, good like getting the armorer to believe you that there was an issue). Good mags only helped, but only if the rifle was in good working order. Things are probably better on the ground side, but I was air wing and we were low priority on new gear. We still had people pulled for security detachments, and I've had several friends take and return fire, so wasn't entirely without consequences.
@@randomdude4505 Normal armorer inspections check the action spring length. If it’s too short, it needs to be replaced. I could see Air Wing getting shafted with weapons that were exposed to salt water and then components passed-down maybe. Number of cycles and any corrosion will wear out an action spring, but it takes thousands of rounds fired in short time or just neglect after saltwater immersion. Our A2s in Infantry OSUT were shot to crap, beaten up every cycle. Magazines were the main factor with them whether they ran or not.
Have not caved in yet, and gotten an H-3 buffer, still run H-2 with can....and 'works for me', but use only one lot of ammo, if ever switch, I expect to re-consider
Each new generation of engineers and soldiers wants to better their equipment. So does the industrial complex. A few tweaks to a 723 and it is just as capable suppressed and even more handy and lighter than the new stuff.
I have both DI and short stroke piston rifles with baffled and flow through suppressors… unless you need a folding stock just stick with DI, the advantages of flow through cans negates any benefit you get from using a piston rifle.
The weather point is huge, and I don't think it gets enough mention when it comes to tuning ARs. I live in Maine and we have a large range and drastic quick swings in weather, so I can't do things like tune my go to ARs to be super soft shooting or use certain greases that people can in other areas, because they won't work in both extremes of the weather here. I just have to settle for the best tune that will work in the negative 20 degree fahrenheit cold weather, which will run fine and just kick a little more than it has to in the 90+ degree humid summer days...
Hate to be that guy, but the gas in the face issue wasn’t the main driving force behind the piston gun push. The main reason they wanted to swap was suppressing short barreled AR15s (especially at the time with our current knowledge at the time on the system) was they had higher parts breakages and lower reliability. People do not understand that ammo 30 some years ago(yes 30 years cause remember there is manufacturing catch up to time of use) wasn’t as good as today. Guns were more prone to bolts breaking, combined with the extremely high round counts that delta was doing at the time guns were being used up extremely fast in armory timelines. Delta needed a gun that could handle the higher wear and tear. Piston guns handled like the 416 met those requirements and helped that transition.
Is that a 2 quart canteen strap 550'd on to make a sling? I'm a fan, with some 100mph tape around the 550. When I first got in, everything was 550/taped to our LCE/LBV/ruck, etc.
![Are Tall Mounts a Fad? [ THE AR FILES | Optic Height ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/yzhPX6O_Fk4/mqdefault.jpg)
![Are Tall Mounts a Fad? [ THE AR FILES | Optic Height ]](/img/tr.png)
![PSA JAKL [First Shots] the ACR at home? or space age K2?](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Irrxlyx9Mvs/mqdefault.jpg)
"Where rollers?" 🤣🤣
The M4 from the 90s is still classic.
On a swat team, I carried a 14.5 inch M4, fixed carry handles until I finally converted them to flat top A1s. We were originally issued Beretta PM12S, then M16A1s and several MP5A4s. I preferred to carry my 14inch Benelli M1 Super 90 on entries until I became a sniper. Man, those were fun times but it was mid 90s to mid 2000s.
@@Mag_Aoidh Had to go feast my eyes on that Benelli, had never crossed my mind that Swat would use a 14" variant. What a kickass little hammer of a shotgun. Would love to own one! Was it a 4 + 1 ?
In Norway, Finland, and Sweden, we all use piston guns for our line infantry, for precisely the reason Henry touches on: Reliability in wet arctic and subarctic conditions. As soon as snow and ice comes into the picture, a lot of "common" knowledge on guns don't quite apply in the same way. All tolerances and parameters for gas systems, lubrication, how clean your gun is etc change, sometimes in unintuitive ways. Like how ample lubrication becomes more important as it gets colder, until a certain point where you instead must run the gun completely dry.
Things that people have never had issues with on their home range in the US or continental Europe suddenly leads to frequent failures. It is a fairly common experience whenever we get visitors from foreign forces that their gear starts malfunctioning in ways they're unused to.
In a way it mirrors the experience of us Nordics deploying to hot and sandy places, where our ingrained habits of gun maintenance has led to sand sticking to the oil and gunking up the action, resulting in failures. One of our early hard-won lessons from Afghanistan.
There is a reason Soviets had their insane reliability testing for AK and why vast majority of their gear is tested to operate between -50C and +50C.
Teflon teflon teflon.
Yeah, moving from the arid Australian bush to Switzerland, I can never get used to running rifles with oil/grease in them. We just avoided it and ran dry or with graphite/teflon powder.
This is more or less correct, though the Northern Upper Great Lakes region is very similar to to the Nordic countries, which is why so many Swedes, Norwegians, and Fins (like my ancestors) moved here.
Henry needs to wear a Pro-tec skateboard helmet when shooting that.
The fact that militaries are buying both systems to this day tells you that there is no definitive answer to which is better. Both have their pros and cons.
yeah each has thier application
Ak’s are better
@@T-SwiftsMaritalAid They are so good that there are like 2 or 3 countries (besides Russia of course) who are adopting new AKs as their military firearms. It's an outdated platform.
@@foleymajanywhere really really cold lol. Do Alaska state troopers still use AKs?
@@foleymaj outdated? Yes. Still outperforming AR’s in every way? Also yes
Good work at pointing out the external and environmental factors that affect reliability. This was the first time I really saw the performance difference between cheap steel and standard M193. My 'cheap/budget/rack grade' 5.56s run both reliably, until the chamber gets badly fouled. My X95 refuses to eject cheap steel, but I thought that was simply that rifle's quirk.
Bottom line: The more precise one wants their rifle to be, the more carefully parts and systems must be matched.
I enjoy the discussion on gassing for different environmental conditions.
Living just outside of North Pole Alaska I run my ARs in temps ranging from 85/90 degrees down to a potential -50 (my personal coldest is -34). I also semi regularly travel to CONUS and shoot there. The rifle I ran at -34 is the same rifle I took back to the states and ran at 95 degrees. The conditions for use in both cases are 5.56 m193 or m855 ammo, Silencerco Omega 36M with KeyMo, A5H2 and green spring buffer system, 14.5 mid gas barrel with a 0.076 gas port.
This rifle runs consistently in all environments I have subjected it to and it is slightly on the gassy side with the suppressor added to the system, but it is certainly well within the tolerable range and is perhaps better than my Colt M4 upper unsuppressed.
Same here with a lot of carbines run in extreme cold in Finland from 2005-2016. 11.5”, 14.5”, 16”, and 18” all ran great from -30˚C up to hot summers.
@@LRRPFco52How did you clean and lubricate your rifle? No lube, just CLP, or graphite?
I get it, in my opinion the solution is to set it up, maintain it and forget it. I use moly lube, loads that are standard and I expect results in extreme conditions, hot, cold, sand and wet. You never know, you work the day in a short sleeve shirt, go to bed, wake up with 2" of ice on the window and a steady 50MPH wind.
Dealing with a 6ARC now too, testing is a bit difficult, I can't get far North or South and deep freeze units managed by gun enthusiasts aren't on every corner, but it keeps me off the strees and stops me from picking on the old people.
I thoroughly believe in the a5 system. With the tube, green springco and a5h2 every rifle I have with varying length barrels and gas lengths, supressed or not, any range of ammo just works in south Texas conditions. I just don't ever have cycling problems.
A good armorer's course makes a world of difference
@@waltonchan3931 The Finns used WD40, CLP, and I used Slip2000 just because I could fly with it (non petrol based). Ran lots of high volume in 2-3 day courses in the dead of Winter there. TDP AR-15s/M4s ran just fine. Saw more issues with Arsenal AKs than anything. I did fragment my Gen 1 Magpul MIAD Grip. The little tabs broke off since the polymer became extremely brittle in -30°C.
It's so funny that the Delta Bros were ahead of the curve in the '90s and it's taken all up until roughly the last 4 years for people to realize and upright position is best for shooting under nods.
They were having carry handles machined off and Weaver rail sections drilled and tapped onto the uppers right around the time of the XM4 testing, then just went to M4A1s. Guys who still liked the carry handles kept the detachable handles on and used the Delta Cheek pieces on Fiberlite Stocks. When shooting with NODs, they’ve been using LAMs even since Desert One days. PAQ-4C was really common in the early 1990s before they asked for AIM-1 IR Laser power, but in a smaller box with an illuminator, which became the PEQ-2A. There are some really cool set-ups with no internet photos of the early 1990s carbines that rival a lot of what’s out there right now, other than the PAQ-4C. Drop an NGAL onto one of those free-floated 723 Carbines with AEM suppressor and you’d be doing better than 99.99999% of AR-15s.
LAM is better than any optic under nods
They werent shooting with their optics under NV. None of the red dots available at the time were compatible with NV devices. It was active aiming only with PAQ-4s and later PEQ-2s.
Matt pranka of xrayalphallc has stated recently that nobody there buys into the riser concept, it goes as far to call it gay
@@nickcurrier8074 Kyle Lamb said it was just what they had back with the carry handle uppers, not intentional.
Once they saw the Colt ACR submission, they might have been instrumental in steering the XM4 program into going with the detachable carrying handle and proper height optics mounts relative to solid cheek position with a helmet.
Early XM4s were basically 727s anyway. I remember what a big deal the dual heat shield fat handguards were in 1994-1997. CAG mostly skipped past them to Unit-built modded FF tubes off SR-25s, KAC RIS, MRE, FF RAS, and all types of mounts for Aimpoints, S&B Short Dots, LAMs, and clip-ons.
So glad you guys touched on the potential benefits of overgassing and configuring your rifle to run a little harder, so many dudes are so focused on making their rifle as comfortable as possible they don't consider a simple change of climate can turn a reliable rifle into an unreliable nightmare. A big part of the AK's legendary reliability is being overgassed, which is why it's always been notoriously difficult to suppress too! (I often tell people about the AK Operator videos in which a $400 PSA was the only AR to get through his torture test because it was overgassed)
A super flat, soft rifle is great for competition but for a rifle I'm staking my life on I'd gladly trade some comfort for certainty that it'll work every time.
Its more of matching the tool to the job. If you're CAG then you probably need an adverse gas position or just overgassed. If you're a competitive shooter then you want 0 recoil. If you're an average joe, if you have it reliable at your environment then you dont need adverse gas position so you're reducing your shootability in return for reliability that isn't needed. Just clean your guns and have a gun that shoots better. Recoil is always a negative and you should never accept more if you aren't getting something in return
You do realize as long as you use the proper gas system length in the AR the gassing isn't a problem? especially considering most ARs are 16 inch barrel. It's not an issue so there's no reason to have to extra weight and if you're really worried about it you can use the rifle length gas system and decent quality ammo it's really a no brainer.
@@fearsomefoursome4 I happen to live in a place where the climate can go from sand storms to snow storms and shockingly some of my lazier gassed rifles have a tendency to struggle with it. Moreover I'm just giving my two cents and personal preference, if you wanna use a dissipator go for it but I personally don't mind a rougher experience if it means more reliability. Again: AK Operator PSA AR torture test
I have a 5.56 Beryl AK that came from the factory a bit overgassed so I put a KNS adjustable gas piston in it. For range use, I run it gassed a bit higher than I'd like recoil-wise so that it runs flawlessly in normal conditions.
But if I were in really cold or really hot weather? I'll damn near close the port so that mofo runs like a Swiss watch, recoil be damned.
I feel like there is some weird reverse fuddlore going on in the gun community since the InRange mud test videos, as if a couple of videos shown in the same desert mud mean that every AR is flawlessly reliable in all conditions and the AK is just trash that jams when a light whiff of sand enters the action.
I suspect the average off-the-shelf or built AR from the US commercial market would not actually run that well in adverse combat conditions because most are gassed very lightly; on the flip side, I've owned many European AKs and not a single one has EVER been "undergassed" and none have jammed (not counting the trial and error setting up my adjustable gas systems for my Beryl and M77). True military M4s and M16s would likely be properly gassed, as would piston ARs that almost all have adjustable gas settings.
@@flopus7 Recoil is always a negative, but reliability is not. I'll take a gun that hurts a little bit to shoot or has some muzzle rise but runs like Swiss watch over a competition-gassed AR made for split times.
But yeah, I set my AK with a KNS to be slightly more heavily gassed than I need to run 100% in normal conditions for casual range use. If SHTF I'd close the piston almost entirely to ensure that bolt keeps slamming back and forth.
This is probably my favorite channel. Always learning so much!
"where rollers?"
Trapped in 1960. My g3 has this annoying thing where if you don't modify it to ha e the proper roller gap and bolt handle gap, it literally cannot be unlocked no matter how much force you use.
Not an expert, but sounds like something is out of spec.
For line infantry, Marines made the right decision, IMO, in switching to short stroke piston. It especially made sense for the original automatic rifleman to replace the SAW gunner. “External piston” runs cleaner and cooler, so is appropriate for a rifle used more often on full auto.
Born and raised in North Pole Alaska, def a place, and yes there's a Santa clause house; and yes the light poles are candy canes. When I was in middle school we'd write back to kids as Santa who sent letters to "Santa" lol kinda messed up lol
Hang on a moment, everybody knows that Santa lives in Lapland!,
Can confirm. I lived in North Pole, Alaska for 2 years... I loved it and would go back..
I just have to say, you two are an awesome team. Gun nerds in the best possible meaning of the words. Thank you for sharing your knowledge and opinions. It’s a pleasure to watch and learn
I served 3 combat tours in the Marines. All I can say is that our M27 IARs were noticeably more reliable than our M4s. It was almost a guarantee that if you were a M27 gunner, you weren’t going to be dealing with malfunctions whenever we ran into sandstorms or really harsh training conditions. Not only that, they stayed cleaner and cooler during heavy sustained fire.
The two main draw backs I hear from those that don’t like the 416 platform is that they are heavier and snappier with the recoil.
Both those arguments are silly because the recoil is literally the same as a regular AR running a carbine length gas system. These guns aren’t competition guns. It’s 556.
The heavier argument is also dumb because most modern day rifle set ups are heavy in general. I run a 416 clone right now with an ACOG/RMR, peq 15, and light. That thing clocks in fully loaded at 10.5 pounds.
If you’re bitching about that, go ask a WW2 vet how much his M1 weighed while storming beaches.
In my opinion, the only reason we don’t see 416s being more prevalent is because HK has a choke hold on the platform and it’s not practical to spend $4,000 on a rifle that’s going to be coming with a shit ton of proprietary parts when you can just buy an AR15 and it will be almost just as good.
If we are just talking what’s better without money being an issue, it’s clearly the 416.
I carried an M4/Mk18 as 11 and 18 series for over 30 total months in combat (Iraq/Afghan). Never once had a malfunction with thousands of rounds fired 🤷♂️
Edit: every malfunction was either user or magazine induced.
@@DraegerV1 That’s cool, but I can also say that I’ve been a proud owner of many budget rifles and pistols over the years including hi-points and I’ve too shot tens of thousands of rounds through them without ever experiencing a malfunction. Anecdotal experiences don’t necessarily make something true.
@@kilo0151 Nope. But it does contribute to the law of averages.
I love the looks of the older rifles but I definitely love me some modern goodness too haha. I just recently got my first suppressor and put it on my rosco k9 12.5 upper build with a noveske h2 buffer. Will probably go to a sprinco spring soon but it shoots great. Rosco advertised that barrel as shooting great suppressed or un suppressed. So far I'd say they hit their mark. I ended up getting an AB A10 5.56 can with a dead air xeno hub and flash hider keeping the whole rifle reasonably lightweight and still fairly short. I've debated doing a pistol build but have yet to try it. Great video Sirs
Well, a noob learning about guns, I learned something and understood a little of what you said. Love the banter and discussion. Thank you and be safe!
I really enjoy this style of video and love learning for you both.
Side note, my modern ARs have adjustable gas blocks, but to tune my retro gun I installed an adjustable gas tube from Barnes Precision. It's extremely helpful, fits right into the gun (the adjustment block sits where the holes in the plastic handguards are) and is very hard to spot so it blends in nicely, and is click adjustable with an allen wrench. Helped my gun run smooth and also run smooth suppressed.
Or go with BRT custom spec gas tubes. They last a long time, especially for the vast majority of people.
I learned a lot from this conversation- thanks for sharing guys!
Great video thanks. As a side note I really enjoyed watching Henry struggle wit DI. For 50 years it was DI, now that the 416 has gained traction folks are struggling with what to call DI systems.
That title intro is so slick
I agree the older guns have a certain something. I watched the movie Heat one too many times, and had to build a 11.5" A1. I just ordered PSA's retro brace to complete the look. I couldn't go all the way back in time though. I put a QD end plate, MagPul SL grip, and a BAD lever on it. Just to keep my manual of arms the same, and use my sling. Maybe someday, if the Lord tarries, it will be a full retro build. Right now it goes to church with me, in a non descript bag. Part of an active shooter response kit. Crazy that, that's something we even have to consider.
Massive bored out gas-holes are my favorite kind.
What a real pleasure it was to watch this video. Once again. You two are truly fantastic. I'm a huge Ar15 fan, even more so after this video. Despite only having American Ar's, I'm sorry you don't test the numerous other German Ar´s brands. I would like to know your opinion about them.
Josh: "I need a new Geissele upper for this video."
Henry: "What's wrong with the 12 you already own?"
If you're going to teach us about dwell time, you need to do a dissipator video.
4 o’clock is behind the ejection port, not ahead of it.
Also, if all other variables are equal (they never are) in a suppressed auto-loader, a shorter dwell time will allow the gas pressure in the bore to decrease quicker before the system cycles and unseals the chamber, compared to a longer dwell time that will be at a higher residual pressure as the chamber is unsealed. The vast majority of gas we catch in the face comes from the chamber, not the gas tube.
Longer barrels, shorter dwell times, and any factor that causes the chamber to remain sealed longer, all contributes to less gas intruding into the receiver from the chamber.
Also generally speaking, the quieter the can, the more residual gas pressure there will be hanging out in the bore as the empty case is unsealed from the chamber. The RC2 is a quiet (and gassy) can. The Ops Inc/AEM reflex cans are very quiet (and extremely gassy).
shut up
Both do the job. Period. One weighs less and blows gas into your face if suppressed with a traditional baffle silencer unless you start messing with buffers, springs and AGBs or just run a flow through. The other you trade weight for not having gas in the face and reliability in all weather conditions with a bit more parts wear. That’s why you have to have one of each.
Those retro builds are a vibe, sure the modern ones may outperform in some ways but in terms of cool factor the retro ones just have it perfected, carry handle AR all the way.
Armageddon charging handle. Get one and don't look back
Edit: also an adjustable gas block will help any gun. To any one saying adjustable gas blocks are unreliable, i point to the scar, hk416, sigs new spear, and the fal. Done correctly it's a non issue. My favorite currently is the riflespeed system.
Fantastic, really enjoyed, thanks
Very cool. Love these.
Love the rifles, great show!
Finally someone had spoken about the optimization to the mission of the weapon. Firearms are designed as a system (round-and-weapon) and are a matched set designed to be used in certain conditions. The broader the set of conditions the larger the amount of compromises the weapon will have. The more specialized the weapon, the more dedicated it will be to the circumstances outside of which it will function noticeably less effectively or reliably.
These things are often not realized by civilians that use these rifles in what amounts to almost-sterile conditions
Premium 20" DI A5 build verses premium piston carbine in the tundra would be a great video.
Me that built a block 2 clone with a aimpoint comp m4 and matech buis. Then built a classic carry handle with a usgi carry handle with a piggy backed comp m2...
Both. Both is good.
Nice recovery. I've been pointing out for a long time that the AR-15 is not a direct impingement system as it's called forever, is incorrect. A piston is a piston wherever it's located.
When Windham Weaponry came back online after the Remington fiasco, I bought one of the first rifles they put out and wanted to test DI vs piston, just from a reliability standpoint. Using cheap Tula ammo the rifle would get fouled enough to start malfunctions at about two hundred rounds. I installed an Adam's Arms piston system and it never malfunctioned again. I don't even clean the damned thing until it's so dirty I feel guilty. Would a DI system run much longer with clean ammo? Yup, certainly. Still, piston systems are superior even with a fairly cheap after-market affair like Adams. Even with clean ammo you're venting tremendous amounts of heat into your chamber and it will cause fails when it gets hot enough and dirty enough.
Good stuff!
Love your videos!!!!!
pistons always seemed like a gimmick for both fudd lore about DI reliability issues or military cope for their abused, overshot guns malfunctioning being blamed on "DI is bad."
US Ordnance just holds on to things too long and doesn't replace enough.
Anyone from GWOT on who used a military issued M9 and then got their hands on a Beretta in the civilian world knows this. Night and day difference.
sorta like how the m60 has a terrible reputation. they were so used and abused by that time , of course only those who used the clapped out ones had that opinion.
@@Ravensbreak ok. i did say there may be situations in which one may be favored over the other depending on preference or situations in which one would be the better choice
@@sabregunner1 The biggest reason to use a piston system in an AR is for sustained automatic fire. Dumping mag after mag in the AR15 will result in a blown gas tube.
But for most uses, especially in the civilian world, DI is more than adequate.
@@DriveCarToBar maybe this applies to my other comment not the one about used and abused military guns being the source of the "x is bad" because thats the version the person used
@@Ravensbreakthat's not true. The AR10 going back to 1955 was internal piston DI. Early models had it's gas tube along the side of the barrel. What AR prototype are you thinking of?
🇺🇸
All about the dwell time 💯
Now we are talking lock to unlock to chamber return to ambient condition times you speak my geek 😊
Ty brother. Praise God
Nice content as always :)
DI guns all day for me, don’t like the 416 very thick hanguard and heavy weight.
Active French Soldier here, we have the 416F now (14,5' barrel for me) and it’s fucking front heavy for what it is, just for a piston gun...and i don’t talk about all the issues we have with it, like the ambidextrous magazine release which ejects the magazine if you put the rifle against you for right handed people ; it’s really annoying.
The stock is too fat, too heavy (HK 416 E1 type stock) the HK stupid steel magazines are (again) heavier than the classic USGI type magazines, the gun is way overgassed(yes, i know, reliability blablabla) the flash hider/muzzle device is ringing (PPIIIINNGGG!!!) every time you shoot, the HK plastic dust cover often cracks or breaks itself, the flip up sights are not very well fixed (lot of losses on the field) the gun feels bigger, thicker, higher in every ways, i really don’t like it, the HK416 is pretty lame to my mind...
And for civilians, the 416 is so expensive for what it is, as always with HK guns.
So yes, it’s reliable, but sorry guys, i prefer my BCM MCMR or my retro Colt M723 type AR i have at home, or every DI gun ; they’re lighter, cooler, very thin handguard, and they never let me down, they’re reliable, what else serioulsy?
I prefer my old, dusty but reliable FAMAS, it misses me lot. I regret my governement bought this HK416F (like a lot of my comrades) rather a classic DI AR, or the VHS2 Bullpup rifle.
Look up the caracal 816 a2 small arms solutions you may be impressed by the improvements on the 416
How much of your issues are DI vs piston, or rather that the H&K 416 sucks? It is the most prevalent one out there, but militaries are also using LMT piston guns, Finland and Sweden are adopting piston guns from SAKO etc.
@@foleymaj The 416is clearly not a bad rifle, it’s just not my prefered rifle, i really don’t like this rifle, on lot of aspect : design, weight....but for sure yes, it’s reliable no doubts on it.
Even i can see sometimes some malfunctions in the field, like failures too feed, even with this HK416F.
If i could, i will change it for a DI gun, and i’m not the only one in my regiment ; this rifle has too much ergonomic issues and this is way too overgassed.
Sometimes, we put some supressor on it just for fun, at the end of the day, and...it’s not fun, even with the "S" setting on, it’s gas, gas, gas in your face...
It’s like the FN SCAR, yes lot of units, Armies, adopted it, but it’s not THE assault rifle, i believe it was tried by the Rangers in US Army, a long time ago, and they were not satisfied with it, for lot of reasons.
We are, as soldiers, on the field, we eat, sleep, run, shoot....etc the rifle all day long, HK are good in marketing, but at the final, this we, soldiers, Who have to deal with all potentials issues of the gun.
I kow there here lot of others piston guns in other Armies, but not because some others Armies adopted it that it’s a good rifle, or that Piston guns are, in every cases, they’re good piston guns, and they’re bad piston guns. Mort of the time it’s not because it’s not reliable, but because of others issues.
For shooting with the 416F every day for 2 years now, except the good reliability, i don’t see the point with this gun, and i am also disappointed by the main feeling of the gun, and the poor ergonomics of this rifle, such as the left side magazine release, which can cause potentials big issues on the field (it’s already the case) and HK or not, it’s unacceptable to my mind.
I know Armies have to deal with lot of considerations when they want to switch their service rifle, and they want reliability and it’s normal. But lot of Armies in the world still have their DI guns (especially USA, even if they’re switching now) and they’re not unreliable, or low tech guns.
And there is always a difference between the marketing bullshit and the reality, always.
In civilian shooting, to my mind, a 416 is useless, except if you are an HK fanboy or if you want this rifle because it’s look cool for you.
The prices are way too high, and it’s just an AR15 with a piston....
But of course, it’s all personnal tastes, and it’s subjective, the principal is to have a rifle which fire everytime ;)
@@reefread1234 The Caracal 816 A2 seems to be nice, the handguard looks good, and it's not as thick that the 416F quad rail handguard, i never fired a Caracal rifle, but i will try if i can, nothing could be worse than a HK416 to my mind, in terme of short stroke piston guns.
Henry, spotter, bad ass rifles❤
Like a naturally aspirated engine, the integrated carryhandles are still my preferred option
9 hole is shooting AR’s therefore, Josh is happy. The logic is infallible.
Henry made a calculus joke. Respect
Great video, i just dont see my self playing delta in my house. I can see myself using a PPC for in doors, and continue using 20" barrels for ourdoor use.
Dope video, now do Devgru Noveske !
nah it’s all good man!
@@cardboard_shaft fairy
@@shanecoolen3986 noveske is a g00ner brand, nothing more
Thanks for labeling the sarcasm. I wasn't able to spot it. Really.
I built a CMMG gas piston retrofit and purchased a Sig 516. The adjustable gas port on the 516 was nice for use with a suppressor but I decided the added cost, weight and complexity of GP upper really didn't bring much to the picnic.
Internal Piston...lol, it's direct impingement. It just routes the gas inside the bolt carrier first. There is no piston. Gas goes into the carrier and the pressure forces the carrier backwards until it moves enough to vent gas pressure to atmosphere.
Larry Vickers explained the reason to use a piston gun over DI in regards to the 416. It's for sustained automatic fire. If you're full auto mag dumping with a standard DI gas system, you stand a good chance of blowing the gas tube. Piston guns don't have that problem. There are other trade-offs, but if you're operating in a small unit with serious weight restrictions (because you airdropped or swam in) and have to watch what you carry, then having your carbine also be able to reliably function as an automatic rifle has an advantage.
Internal piston and direct impingement describe the same thing. The term internal piston is used by very knowledgeable people in the industry who do far more technical work with rifles than just selling products and shoot them, and describes the fact the BCG operates as the piston.
The BCG inside the reciever in a DI rifle is an internal piston. The long/short stroke systems that sit under the handguard are external pistons.
@@mghegotagun The BCG in an AR15 operates as a gas cylinder. There is no piston that mechanically acts on any portion of the rifle. Gas alone provides the motive force. Gas goes in through the gas key and expands in the chamber created by the gas rings on the bolt, and the cylindrical shape of the carrier. The bolt is locked and immobile at time of firing. The only thing moving, is the carrier.
It's a more complicated version of the gas system on the MAS-49.
Unit guys never used 723s or M4A1s on Full Auto. Larry said it was for handling different ammunition types when fired from short barrels and suppressed. They had tried 11.5” barrels since they always had a need for more compact carbines for low-vis work, but had issues with reliability as the round count stacked on the guns suppressed. I helped source some of the parts for him for early prototypes back in 2003.
Stoner himself made it pretty clear it isnt direct impingement. If it was DI there would be no gas rings on the bolt. The gas would just blow into the gas tube and push the carrier backwards like a MAS-49. The AR doesnt do that, it isnt direct impingement.
@@LRRPFco52 There's a video of him on RUclips (maybe the interview with Ian McCollum on Forgotten Weapons??) explaining the full auto reasoning. Perhaps I'm not remembering correctly, and he mentioned other reasons. It's been a couple years since I watched it.
@2:32 Henry with the math joke, nice
I want Henry’s rifle. Beautiful rifle.
I'm a piston-enjoyer, since I aim to suppress all the things
North Pole, AK is a great place. There's a Santa who lives there and will respond to your child's letter, if you address it properly
I was born and raised in NP AK and WE as kids in middle school would write back to those letters as Santa lolol
Kinda fuq'd I know. I graduated in 2005 so long time ago, not sure if they still do that shit but they'd have boxes and boxes of letters sent to "Santa" that we'd respond too in English class 😂
@@torranceparsons5216another NP local here, I was doing it in the 08-09 timeframe. I wouldn’t be surprised if it still happens lol
@@LostSourdough That's hilarious, never thought much of it when I was a kid doing it but thinking back it and saying it out loud it kind of seems messed up 🤣
I get why certain groups use external pistons, in certain conditions such as in the desert around helicopters, it kinda helps and same with more limited dwell time. As for gas to the face, I’ve found external pistons don’t matter much since most of its coming from the chamber, the lower back pressure can has a bigger effect. For most people, spending the money on external piston guns that don’t suck makes zero sense. But, it’s your money not mine.
That 2 quart canteem strap is peak sling performance and I dont care what you say.
I see Chris from Small Arms has been spreading the "internal piston" gospel.
:)
Shorter barrels have higher gas pressure at the gas port, so dwell time distances are not comparable with longer barrel dwell times. To make things more complicated, bullet velocities are different for long and short barrels too, if dwell time is the metric that matters. I suggest that it is force times time applied to the bolt carrier that matters. As in momentum, which can be expressed as energy for a given bolt and carrier mass.
If full 5.56 performance is reached with a 20" barrel, then using half that length seems wasteful. Better to use a .30 BA or 7.62 x 39 because those still have a useful expansion volume with 10" long barrel.
Are you implying the higher pressure in shorter di gas systems makes longer dwell times less necessary?
I ❤ both!
Another "sleeper" is the Bren 2, and now I'm waiting to some Bren 3 reviews. Great video by the way, can you guys produce some videos about tactics?
The AR18/G36 gas system comes from the SVT40
There is a diffrence between owning a gun as a civilian , going to shooting range, cleaning your gun, gasing it to perfection and being in a military setting. When the war starts, you just want your gun to run. Through dirt, ice, sand, water, bad ammo, whatever, you just want your gun to chug out rounds through it. Having a bit higher recoil is nothing compared to your firearm working. That is why AK platform is still one of the most used platform to this day. You can tune your AK to shoot smooth as fuck and without any recoil when you are civilian, but when you are in a trench in Ukraine, do you really care for slightly better recoil? No you dont. You dont have time to clean your gun cause every minute someone could be attacking your trench. The ammo you get is questionable, it might be winter or dirt and mud, but you know your AK will chug out those rounds when it is needed. Also most of these rifles are stockpiled somewhere in times of peace. But when shit hits the fan do you really think someone goes lets clean all these guns properly and deliver them to troops? No they don't. USA is based on war economy. They are at war since the independence and they are always active. Other countries in the world haven't seen war for a long time. Reliability is key in times of war. Personally if i had the money for HK I would take it over the DI rifle. In actual war I would take AK over anything to be honest. Slightly better accuracy and a bit lower recoil means nothing in modern war setting as Ukraine have shown.
12:24 All one would have to do is step down to a carbine buffer. The M4A1 is a H2 buffer.
Cool as these are, herein lies the overall issue with the ar di system. The piston system adds some weight, but solves the gas issues, ammo issues etc. Ar's in general, as others have noted as well, require too many caveats to be truly reliable, lethal systems. Between bullet weight choices to try and add lethality to 5.56, dwell time, barrel length, buffer springs, twist rates, gas port size...its a lot of work to make these things as effective as possible while something like an akm just does its job everytime no matter what and to great effect no matter who's wielding it. Stoner knew what he was doing and for some reason, everyones tried improving on a system that was done right the first time and no matter what, the original design still wins everytime for overall functionality.
Delta went to piston while SAS went to DI. Delta will be back to DI, I’m sure, I due time. They always try to delude themselves into thinking the piston is better before giving up and apologizing to Stoner for ever doubting him.
This is ironic because Stoner dabbled in all three main types of gas systems: DI/internal piston with the AR, the Tokarev-based short stroke with the AR-18, and even a long stroke for the Stoner M63.
Even Stoner himself situationally thought pistons could be better. Really makes you think.
Henry and Josh, have you guys considered an adjustable gas block like the Riflespeed to tune ARs for suppressed/unsuppressed usage and for different ammos? It solves the issues of needing to compromise and mitigates spring and buffer tuning needs. Also an LMT eBCG to increase dwell time. Leads to an insanely well tuned AR for any environment and ammo
I would like to see you try out the Caracal 816, its from one one of the same engineers fron the 416 project. Later he joined Sig with Chris Sirois
They made the Sig 516 and then the Caracal 816 so its supposedly the most advanced of the 3.
[wheels in on mobility scooter]
Actually the bolt face directly impinges against the receiver extension therefore acting as an internal gas piston brother, stay safe
Just say direct impingement bro, we know what you mean 😂
But that's wrong.
I prefer how smallarmssolutions says it, internal piston vs external piston
Yeah, it’s wrong, it’s good to me that he said internal piston, BECAUSE the non gun nerds probably don’t understand.
@@meanman6992 For real, most people don't know what is meant
Gas operated or internal piston. Gas gun is also acceptable.
aesthetically, i will take the classic AR build any day.
Perhaps the only thing external piston has over internal is it being able to fire immediately after being submerged in water, paired with over the beach features in the 416
I thought that was a major driver for Delta. Water/mud/sand immersion testing was a huge part of the development of the HK416
It’s simply more reliable across the board. Only downside is weight.
@@ZzBiohazzardzZExcept Socom dropped the Fat German for another fucking M4.
@@ravenwing199 Sorry, but they didn’t. DI is trash.
@@ZzBiohazzardzZ URGI is what they're using right this second. Almost like DI is able to be perfectly tuned for the load out needed.
Buy both ❤
Quad rails for life
Please do the 1:7 twist daewoo video.
It's amazing how technology advances. now with the urgi you could put in a light buffer to run low power ammo reliably and then run a B&T flow through suppressor with m193 with hardly any gas in the face
The internal gas piston system remains the best operating system. The fact that the internal piston within the bolt carrier is perfectly in-line with the bore and bolt eliminates the bolt tilt problem that plagues piston ARs. And also allows the use of a lighter bolt carrier since the carrier of Piston ARs has to be overbuilt to mitigate the bolt tilt problem. Which represents another weight advantage on top of the absence of a gas piston and gas piston spring.
carrier tilt has been a solved issues for decades now
well clean both in the field and then its pretty clear what's superior for military use, for just plinking stuff on the range it makes no difference
Carrier tilt isn’t a thing on piston ARs most of these issues came from DI guns converted to piston. Or just plane cheap piston rifles.
@@ChappySinclairThat is an extremely rare circumstance. It is also mitigated by dust covers
Seriously a internal piston poops where it eats and it especially shows with use of a suppressor. Definitely more likely to cause problems.
I think the T91 is the best piston AR design. Closed up at the piston, adjustable, can run on a standard AR lower. I'd love to see a comparison.
@alexanderm8880, from a gas system perspective, the T91 is good, but in a modern sense, it’s limited due to not being NVG friendly
@@donrichter3523 How so? Is it something to do with the handguard?
I served in the USMC fron 2001 to 2005. My unit never got the M16a4 ir M4 while I was in. Everyone I served with disliked the M16 because they were old, unreliable, and dirty. This was even true of a friend that was a Navy Seal, and the rifle issued to him wasn't older than the youngest members of his unit. I can't help but think that the 90s neglect directly impacted GWoT procurement choices.
The 90s definitely had a lot of stuff sitting on the shelf that should have been replaced but didn't. That was the issue with the 1911 by the time the m9 came around and was the issue with m9s after 30 years of use.
There's also some unit and command politics at play in the budget process. When I was in the airborne we had fairly new stuff most of the time compared to other units.
I used all kinds of M16A1s, M16A2s, M4s, and M4A1s pre and post-GWOT. Lubed and fed from new or good conditions mags, they all ran just fine. Biggest problems were mags with split spines that double-fed, but you really had to take care of your magazines and then no real problems. We shot them all in pretty high volume. I took my M4 through a high volume course run by 3rd Group’s new CIF guys where I put 1100 rounds through it in about 4 hours. That was pre-SOPMOD heavy barrel, pre-H2 buffer, bone stock M4 with KAC RAS, PEQ-2A, Surefire, Aimpoint Comp M. Each one of us could shoot through a full can of 5.56 if we kept running drills. I had no malfunctions that I can recall. That was 2002. In Recon Platoons, we were burning a lot of ammo through M16A1s in the early-mid 1990s before we turned them in and drew out M16A2s. The M16A1 was better for weight, trigger, and balance for sure.
@@LRRPFco52 You had better luck than me. The first A2 I was issued would occasionally fire two rounds in Simi (happened right in front of a range office, he just shrugged and walked away). The second wouldn't go into battery unless you hit the forward assist. That was when it was clean and lubed (buffer spring needed replaced, good like getting the armorer to believe you that there was an issue). Good mags only helped, but only if the rifle was in good working order. Things are probably better on the ground side, but I was air wing and we were low priority on new gear. We still had people pulled for security detachments, and I've had several friends take and return fire, so wasn't entirely without consequences.
@@randomdude4505 Normal armorer inspections check the action spring length. If it’s too short, it needs to be replaced. I could see Air Wing getting shafted with weapons that were exposed to salt water and then components passed-down maybe. Number of cycles and any corrosion will wear out an action spring, but it takes thousands of rounds fired in short time or just neglect after saltwater immersion.
Our A2s in Infantry OSUT were shot to crap, beaten up every cycle. Magazines were the main factor with them whether they ran or not.
Have not caved in yet, and gotten an H-3 buffer, still run H-2 with can....and 'works for me', but use only one lot of ammo, if ever switch, I expect to re-consider
mmm more vid time to help with my clone build thingy project
Henry: "I want a really quiet suppressor."
Suppressor Company: "How about a suppressor that's the same length as your barrel?"
Henry: "Perfect!"
Each new generation of engineers and soldiers wants to better their equipment. So does the industrial complex. A few tweaks to a 723 and it is just as capable suppressed and even more handy and lighter than the new stuff.
14:21 Senpai noticed me!
I thought the 416 was being phased out for Sig Spear LT?
Correct, it's the CSAW program
Still waiting on a full video on the new Gordon
Special Poverty Rifle, please!
Josh choosing Hersey against the internet.
What Aimpoint is that on the Gordon carbine and buffer spring? Also cant wait for more videos with the proper Gordon carbine in them.
Nice to hear you reference Mr. Vickers. I dont think he is a bad guy. I think our g'uv is bad though. All the bad.
The HK416 is Xzibit Approved.
I have both DI and short stroke piston rifles with baffled and flow through suppressors… unless you need a folding stock just stick with DI, the advantages of flow through cans negates any benefit you get from using a piston rifle.
Piston rifles are more reliable
416 goes hard
The weather point is huge, and I don't think it gets enough mention when it comes to tuning ARs. I live in Maine and we have a large range and drastic quick swings in weather, so I can't do things like tune my go to ARs to be super soft shooting or use certain greases that people can in other areas, because they won't work in both extremes of the weather here. I just have to settle for the best tune that will work in the negative 20 degree fahrenheit cold weather, which will run fine and just kick a little more than it has to in the 90+ degree humid summer days...
Hate to be that guy, but the gas in the face issue wasn’t the main driving force behind the piston gun push.
The main reason they wanted to swap was suppressing short barreled AR15s (especially at the time with our current knowledge at the time on the system) was they had higher parts breakages and lower reliability. People do not understand that ammo 30 some years ago(yes 30 years cause remember there is manufacturing catch up to time of use) wasn’t as good as today. Guns were more prone to bolts breaking, combined with the extremely high round counts that delta was doing at the time guns were being used up extremely fast in armory timelines. Delta needed a gun that could handle the higher wear and tear. Piston guns handled like the 416 met those requirements and helped that transition.
No
Is that a 2 quart canteen strap 550'd on to make a sling?
I'm a fan, with some 100mph tape around the 550. When I first got in, everything was 550/taped to our LCE/LBV/ruck, etc.
I think companies should offer both gas piston and DI and allow you to go back and forth
You guys should do a vid on the Remington 700 sps tactical aac sd 308 win