My new toy.

[Raygun]

Can i run .223 Remington through my WASR-3

That's my understanding, but I'd definitely wait for Ray.

Yes.

I wrote a big long story about it, but it just boiled down to "yes". So here's another one!

Bone: One thing I should mention is that I failed to consider that you live in a much more humid environment than I do, so you probably do want to think about cleaning your AK more often than I would clean mine.

You're honestly never going to kill that rifle in your lifetime, unless you run over it with a tank or tractor or throw it off the top of a moderately high building or store it in a tank of salt water. But if you decide to shoot the really cheap ammo, it is sometimes primed with corrosive agents that will build up and start to rust carbon steel if they also get into any contact with water (like what's in the air when it rains, which carbon buildup tends to attract). Your bolt, chamber and rifling are likely chrome plated, so they are more resistant to that kind of wear, but the gas tube and gas block are not. So if you use cheap, Eastern-European manufactured, steel-cased ammunition, you'll want to up your cleaning regimen more than you would if you bought Lake City M855 or commercial .223 Remington ammo. Also, you might want to get some silica packets and throw them into your case with the rifle as it is stored.

[Bonefish]

at my est friends for burgers last night, and we decided to compare our rifles. He's got an AK-74 with folding stock, while I have my WASR-3. apparently one of the mags was interchangeable, the bolt carrier is interchangeable, as war the spring and receiver. Trigger group also looks interchangeable. So I guess i'm hanging out with him when thez ombies come.

He also had about 20 rounds of .223 that he gave me. It's not m855, but it's still something.

[Bonefish]

Have you sighted this thing in yet? How accurate does it appear to be thus far?

I haven't messed with the sights, actually. I have no idea how to even begin to do that...

[Raygun]

at my est friends for burgers last night, and we decided to compare our rifles. He's got an AK-74 with folding stock, while I have my WASR-3. apparently one of the mags was interchangeable, the bolt carrier is interchangeable, as war the spring and receiver. Trigger group also looks interchangeable.

Yeah. I think between rifles that come from the same plant, particularly the ones based on the PM md.63 AKM (as ours are), the only differences when chambering another cartridge are in the barrel, the bolt, the magazine, and maybe the weight of the recoil spring (which should even be dimensionally identical). There may be other small changes, but generally speaking, the plan is to make them as parts-compatible as possible.

ARs are similar in that respect, except that it is much, much easier to change the rifle out for different chamberings, either by replacing the barrel, or just swapping out upper receiver groups.

He also had about 20 rounds of .223 that he gave me. It's not m855, but it's still something.

Now you've got a mag's worth and some!

SDQ's mom (who lives very close to the Missouri River, which is above flood stage at the moment) brought over about 20 rifles and shotguns today, along with two milk crates and seven 7.62 cans full of ammo. If zombies want to start some shit, now's the time.

Have you sighted this thing in yet? How accurate does it appear to be thus far?

I haven't messed with the sights, actually. I have no idea how to even begin to do that...

The only thing you need to worry about is elevation, and that's adjusted on the rear sight. That cross bar with the button on the right that slides up and down the rear sight is what I'm talking about. The rear sight is marked in hundreds of meters, 1 = 100, 2 = 200, 3 = 300, etc. So if your target is about 300 meters out, you set the bar on 3. (Yes, it goes up to 10. Russians are apparently more optimistic than one might otherwise assume!) That's all the adjusting you do. The rest is all Kentucky with an AK. The front sight is set at the factory and you shouldn't mess with it. You'd need tools for that anyway.

[Bonefish]

at my est friends for burgers last night, and we decided to compare our rifles. He's got an AK-74 with folding stock, while I have my WASR-3. apparently one of the mags was interchangeable, the bolt carrier is interchangeable, as war the spring and receiver. Trigger group also looks interchangeable.

Yeah. I think between rifles that come from the same plant, particularly the ones based on the PM md.63 AKM (as ours are), the only differences when chambering another cartridge are in the barrel, the bolt, the magazine, and maybe the weight of the recoil spring (which should even be dimensionally identical). There may be other small changes, but generally speaking, the plan is to make them as parts-compatible as possible.

Reaility check: AK-74 mags ARE NOT interchangeable. They seem like it, but the bolt fails to carry round inter chamber. Results in LAUGHS!

Now you've got a mag's worth and some!

indeed. But, sadly, the exta mag doesn't work.

The only thing you need to worry about is elevation, and that's adjusted on the rear sight. That cross bar with the button on the right that slides up and down the rear sight is what I'm talking about. The rear sight is marked in hundreds of meters, 1 = 100, 2 = 200, 3 = 300, etc. So if your target is about 300 meters out, you set the bar on 3. (Yes, it goes up to 10. Russians are apparently more optimistic than one might otherwise assume!) That's all the adjusting you do. The rest is all Kentucky with an AK. The front sight is set at the factory and you shouldn't mess with it. You'd need tools for that anyway.

I got a "p". What does dat mean?

[Bonefish]

more specifically, while the ak-74 mag may SEEM to accept 5.56 rounds, when you rack the chamber? Nothing goes. She fails to feed a single round. I had to pop all those .223 out by hand. Very shitty experience.

Also, the .223 are orange when they shoot, while the 5.56 are green. Important to remember.

[Raygun]

Reaility check: AK-74 mags ARE NOT interchangeable. They seem like it, but the bolt fails to carry round inter chamber. Results in LAUGHS!

Yeah, the 5.45x39mm case is significantly larger in diameter and more tapered than the 5.56x45mm. 74 mags will definitely not work even a little bit.

I got a "p". What does dat mean?

"Oh shit."

It's the "don't touch, conscript" battle setting. Rather than dicking around with the elevation adjustment, the idea is to leave the sight on the 'P' setting for man-sized targets inside of 300 meters because the difference in trajectory is less than the length of an average human torso. So on the 'P' setting, if you're aiming center mass at a man-sized target anywhere inside of 300 meters, you're likely to score a hit.

If you look closely, you'll notice that the 'P' and '3' settings are the same. Reminds me, one more difference between AKs in different chamberings will be the rear sight and base, as each cartridge has a different trajectory.

This is something you might want to try out at the range, when you get the chance. Shoot at a 100 yard target with the sight set to 'P' and see how high the shot lands so that you know how much you'd need to adjust for to be dead on, Kentucky style.

Also, the .223 are orange when they shoot, while the 5.56 are green. Important to remember.

What?

[paladin2019]

1. I hate Kalashnikovs almost as much as I hate AR-15s, for much different reasons. But awesome deal and I'm glad it's operable.

2. If you get a 3 pack of locks, that's all you should need to secure the case. Like Ray sez, anyone can walk off with it. If it's a standard cheapo hardcase (not a Pelican or something that retails for 3x what you paid for the rifle), it'll be easier to cut the case off the locks than go through the locks. But same keyed locks are a great idea.

3. I wanna play, too. I dumped 180 through my SIG556* this weekend. And broke in my P225

*I love this platform. Everything I love about the AR-15 (and there's a lot to love) and fixes what I hate. Damn Swiss and their precision engineering.

[Raygun]

1. I hate Kalashnikovs almost as much as I hate AR-15s, for much different reasons.

So much hate in the world!

I could really get into a conversation like this, but I think everyone else would be bored out of their skulls.

3. I wanna play, too. I dumped 180 through my SIG556* this weekend. And broke in my P225

*I love this platform. Everything I love about the AR-15 (and there's a lot to love) and fixes what I hate. Damn Swiss and their precision engineering.

It is a pretty good mash of ideas from the AK and AR in one rifle, and I think it's pretty safe to say it's based on arguably the best 5.56 platform so far. They're not even hellaciously priced anymore. If it weren't so easy to keep building ARs bits at a time, I might get one too.

[Bonefish]

[
Do you seriously believe that it's impossible for the government to collapse sometime within the useful lifespan of the rifle [or its owner, whichever is shorter]?

Very accurate. This Rifle will probably out last me.

[Bonefish]

Also, the .223 are orange when they shoot, while the 5.56 are green. Important to remember.

What?

The .223 ammo I go fires orange. When the 5.56 m844 goes? It's green. The muzzle flash is green, is what i'm sayin'.

[Bonefish]

1. I hate Kalashnikovs almost as much as I hate AR-15s, for much different reasons. But awesome deal and I'm glad it's operable.

Can you expand on this? I'd like to know what i can do to make my rifle less offensive.

2. If you get a 3 pack of locks, that's all you should need to secure the case. Like Ray sez, anyone can walk off with it. If it's a standard cheapo hardcase (not a Pelican or something that retails for 3x what you paid for the rifle), it'll be easier to cut the case off the locks than go through the locks. But same keyed locks are a great idea.

The basic idea is to lock up my rifle when i aint usin' it. I aint worried about someone picking it up and walkin' off, but I don't want my lil' coursin to show it off to her friends, ya dig?

3. I wanna play, too. I dumped 180 through my SIG556* this weekend. And broke in my P225

Hate and discontent.

*I love this platform. Everything I love about the AR-15 (and there's a lot to love) and fixes what I hate. Damn Swiss and their precision engineering.[/quote]

[paladin2019]

1. I hate Kalashnikovs almost as much as I hate AR-15s, for much different reasons. But awesome deal and I'm glad it's operable.

Can you expand on this? I'd like to know what i can do to make my rifle less offensive.

Uhhh, get a new rifle? Seriously, alashnikovs aren't built for accuracy and that's what I don't like. A true Avtomat Kalashnikova selector switch goes from safe to auto to semi. That should tell you everything you need to know.

[3278]

If what you want is a high-capacity rifle with moderate range and stopping power, and an emphasis on reliability, what would you recommend? And I'm not just asking Ray and Paladin, although this is a topic one would expect them to dominate.

If I ever bought a rifle, I'd expect to buy one [because I'm poor], which would then need to wear as many hats as possible, so what I'd like is a simple, basic, durable rifle that can be used for hunting, "survivalism," and light warfare, and that doesn't require constant reloading or large numbers of clips, or ridiculous amounts of effort to maintain. By that standard, it seems like I'm looking at an MAK-90 or some AR-15 variant, depending on which side of the line you fall on priorities.

What I really want is a P90, even though it's not any of the things I need. That novel submachine gun makes a terrible simple survival rifle.

[DV8]

I like the sound an FN P90 makes.

[Bonefish]

1. I hate Kalashnikovs almost as much as I hate AR-15s, for much different reasons. But awesome deal and I'm glad it's operable.

Can you expand on this? I'd like to know what i can do to make my rifle less offensive.

Uhhh, get a new rifle? Seriously, alashnikovs aren't built for accuracy and that's what I don't like. A true Avtomat Kalashnikova selector switch goes from safe to auto to semi. That should tell you everything you need to know.

Ah. Well, See, I like the durability. And besides, most of my "crew"(friends) have AK clones, so the parts are available if they get eaten by zombies.

[Bonefish]

If what you want is a high-capacity rifle with moderate range and stopping power, and an emphasis on reliability, what would you recommend? And I'm not just asking Ray and Paladin, although this is a topic one would expect them to dominate.

If I ever bought a rifle, I'd expect to buy one [because I'm poor], which would then need to wear as many hats as possible, so what I'd like is a simple, basic, durable rifle that can be used for hunting, "survivalism," and light warfare, and that doesn't require constant reloading or large numbers of clips, or ridiculous amounts of effort to maintain. By that standard, it seems like I'm looking at an MAK-90 or some AR-15 variant, depending on which side of the line you fall on priorities.

What I really want is a P90, even though it's not any of the things I need. That novel submachine gun makes a terrible simple survival rifle.

I'd think an AK clone is the best bet. It's not terribly accurate, but it's rugged and durable. And I'm not just sayin' that cuz I have one.

But a Scout Rifle is what da experts recommend.

[Bonefish]

If what you want is a high-capacity rifle with moderate range and stopping power, and an emphasis on reliability, what would you recommend? And I'm not just asking Ray and Paladin, although this is a topic one would expect them to dominate.

If I ever bought a rifle, I'd expect to buy one [because I'm poor], which would then need to wear as many hats as possible, so what I'd like is a simple, basic, durable rifle that can be used for hunting, "survivalism," and light warfare, and that doesn't require constant reloading or large numbers of clips, or ridiculous amounts of effort to maintain. By that standard, it seems like I'm looking at an MAK-90 or some AR-15 variant, depending on which side of the line you fall on priorities.

What I really want is a P90, even though it's not any of the things I need. That novel submachine gun makes a terrible simple survival rifle.

I'd think an AK clone is the best bet. It's not terribly accurate, but it's rugged and durable. And I'm not just sayin' that cuz I have one.

But a Scout Rifle is what da experts recommend.

[paladin2019]

If what you want is a high-capacity rifle with moderate range and stopping power, and an emphasis on reliability, what would you recommend? And I'm not just asking Ray and Paladin, although this is a topic one would expect them to dominate.

Kalashnikov or Simonov or Stoner "A" (AR-10 and -15) or Stoner "B" (AR-18, modernized in the SAR80 and G36/SL8) actions. All available with quality production under $1000. Accuracy in this category can be a false trade-off with reliability; accuracy deficiencies are mitigated in the eastern actions through superior machining while Stoner A mitigates reliability with more aggressive maintenance. I've heard great things about Stoner B but have no first hand experience.

[3278]

But a Scout Rifle is what da experts recommend.

Yeah, Joseph has an excellent little "survival rifle," in low-corrosion steel with composite stocks, that amounts to the same thing, with more of a zombiepocalypse emphasis. The only thing that draws me away from scout/survival rifles is the need to frequently reload [and I should just become a better shot if that's my problem], and the fact that they're usually small caliber. [edit: Okay, a scout rifle definitely isn't the latter!]

[3278]

All available with quality production under $1000.

See, and that may well put me out of having a rifle altogether: cost. $1000, for me, is like half the purchase price of a really nice car. Which is just one of the many things I need badly. So a rifle may have to wait. A long while.

[Bonefish]

All available with quality production under $1000.

See, and that may well put me out of having a rifle altogether: cost. $1000, for me, is like half the purchase price of a really nice car. Which is just one of the many things I need badly. So a rifle may have to wait. A long while.

This is one of the reasons I like the cheaper AK varients: $400 for it.

But keep in mind, you're going to end up spending a whole lot more than the weapon price. I mean, getting mags, slings, optics(if you want them), etc will end up costing a few hundred as well.

[Raygun]

If I ever bought a rifle, I'd expect to buy one [because I'm poor], which would then need to wear as many hats as possible, so what I'd like is a simple, basic, durable rifle that can be used for hunting, "survivalism," and light warfare, and that doesn't require constant reloading or large numbers of clips, or ridiculous amounts of effort to maintain. By that standard, it seems like I'm looking at an MAK-90 or some AR-15 variant, depending on which side of the line you fall on priorities.

I'm in the process of both building a rifle with these ideas in mind and writing an article for Uncle Joseph's website regarding it, but I'll sum it up here.

If you're planning on staying in North America, you want an AR. Hands down. It's probably the single best-supported firearm on earth at the moment. Parts are EVERYWHERE, it's easy to use and maintain, accurate, and can be easily modified for different tasks. Ideally, in a situation where you'd only have one rifle, you'd want an AR chambered for a cartridge that's suitable for taking big game at reasonable ranges and engaging threats at longer ones, like the 6.5 Grendel. (For which you would also definitely want to have reloading equipment.) It's easily possible to build a rifle for this cartridge yourself for well under $1k. I haven't done the math on an 'economy' build in 6.5 Grendel, but I'm guessing it could be done for around $700 minus optics, and you'd have the last multi-purpose rifle you'd need.

But in the meantime, if you want something fast and cheap, an SKS or Romanian AK will do in a pinch, as would a Ruger Mini-30 (which are pretty easy to find in the second-hand market). None of them are very accurate, but they get the job done.

What I really want is a P90, even though it's not any of the things I need. That novel submachine gun makes a terrible simple survival rifle.

Sure, if you intend to survive on nothing but small woodland creatures for the rest of your life!

Compact, looks neat, works good against body armor with the original load when you can dump a few rounds into a person (which if you're close enough shouldn't be an issue as it fires at like 900 rpm). Not great for much else. It's ballistically similar to the .22 WMR, which classically has been a squirrel/rabbit anti-pest type package, and for that, a shotgun is more versatile.

Last I heard though, Magpul was in the process of developing a similarly compact platform for use with the 5.56x45mm, called PDR.

[Raygun]

Accuracy in this category can be a false trade-off with reliability; accuracy deficiencies are mitigated in the eastern actions through superior machining while Stoner A mitigates reliability with more aggressive maintenance.

If you choose to stick with Direct Impingement operation in the AR, anyway. Beauty of the AR-15 these days is that you have the choice of operation, either DI or piston (like the AR-18 ). There are several companies now than manufacture piston-operated AR-15s and a few that offer aftermarket piston conversion kits that substantially reduce the maintenance requirements for the AR platform, putting them in reach of AK reliability, while continuing to be much more accurate than AKs tend to be.

[Bonefish]

Accuracy in this category can be a false trade-off with reliability; accuracy deficiencies are mitigated in the eastern actions through superior machining while Stoner A mitigates reliability with more aggressive maintenance.

If you choose to stick with Direct Impingement operation in the AR, anyway. Beauty of the AR-15 these days is that you have the choice of operation, either DI or piston (like the AR-18 ). There are several companies now than manufacture piston-operated AR-15s and a few that offer aftermarket piston conversion kits that substantially reduce the maintenance requirements for the AR platform, putting them in reach of AK reliability, while continuing to be much more accurate than AKs tend to be.

Reee-heeely?

[Raygun]

Really! No joke. I swearz.

[paladin2019]

Accuracy in this category can be a false trade-off with reliability; accuracy deficiencies are mitigated in the eastern actions through superior machining while Stoner A mitigates reliability with more aggressive maintenance.

If you choose to stick with Direct Impingement operation in the AR, anyway. Beauty of the AR-15 these days is that you have the choice of operation, either DI or piston (like the AR-18 ). There are several companies now than manufacture piston-operated AR-15s and a few that offer aftermarket piston conversion kits that substantially reduce the maintenance requirements for the AR platform, putting them in reach of AK reliability, while continuing to be much more accurate than AKs tend to be.

Gas operated* versus gas piston operated isn't the issue, it's the bolt/chamber interface. The basic design coupled leads to excessive fouling and the geometry of the barrel to receiver assembly of the AR-15 platform overly complicates clearing said fouling. If the SIG556 didn't have a piston, it would still be a great system because the chamber is so accessible for cleaning.

The beauty of removing the piston, and remember the standard at the time of design was the T-44 (adopted as the M-14) and T-48 (the FN FAL, adopted by the rest of western world) rifles, was lightening the rifle by at least 9 oz. That's another mag (again, at the then 20-rd standard of the T-44/48.)


*let's stop using the incorrect "direct gas impingement" label, please

[Raygun]

Gas operated* versus gas piston operated isn't the issue, it's the bolt/chamber interface. The basic design coupled leads to excessive fouling and the geometry of the barrel to receiver assembly of the AR-15 platform overly complicates clearing said fouling.

It's the difference in the aggressiveness of the maintenance that I'm referring to. Using a piston system greatly reduces the amount of cleaning necessary as fouling is no longer being blown directly back into the receiver anymore, as with the DI system. Compared to a two-lug bolt and trunnion barrel attachment, yes, cleaning inside the AR's barrel extension is more difficult. A trade-off for not having to deal with headspacing and drilling gas ports when you change a barrel. Bolt in spec? Good to go.

If the SIG556 didn't have a piston, it would still be a great system because the chamber is so accessible for cleaning.

I agree. Having two big lugs locking the bolt is better than seven tiny ones. It allows easier access to the breech and means that the bolt is much less likely to break. But then, how easy is it to rebarrel a SIG556 for a chambering other than, say, 5.56mm?

The beauty of removing the piston, and remember the standard at the time of design was the T-44 (adopted as the M-14) and T-48 (the FN FAL, adopted by the rest of western world) rifles, was lightening the rifle by at least 9 oz. That's another mag (again, at the then 20-rd standard of the T-44/48.)

That's true, you do lose the weight savings. But the AR is still a pretty lightweight platform even with a piston system. Or at least, it can be. The Osprey piston especially won't add that much weight.

*let's stop using the incorrect "direct gas impingement" label, please

Oooookay. If you could enlighten me as to the incorrectness of it, I would appreciate it.

[paladin2019]

*let's stop using the incorrect "direct gas impingement" label, please

Oooookay. If you could enlighten me as to the incorrectness of it, I would appreciate it.

It doesn't exist in any armorer's manual until after 2000? (Coincidentally, I don't recall AR-15 pistons systems widely marketed as the next big thing prior to this, either.) The combat developer (ie, the DOD) describes this system as gas operated while contemporary systems as gas piston operated in 1960? The specification for the M16 and M4 rifles is a "lightweight, gas-operated, air-cooled, magazine-fed, shoulder-fired weapon that can be fired either in automatic three-round bursts or semiautomatic single shots"?

[Raygun]

*let's stop using the incorrect "direct gas impingement" label, please

Oooookay. If you could enlighten me as to the incorrectness of it, I would appreciate it.

It doesn't exist in any armorer's manual until after 2000?

Sooooo... They've called it 'direct impingement' since 2000, but that doesn't count for some reason?

(Coincidentally, I don't recall AR-15 pistons systems widely marketed as the next big thing prior to this, either.)

The earliest references to the language I can personally find are in the book Military Small Arms of the 20th Century, 6th Edition, by Ian Hogg and John Weeks (1991). With regard to the M16 family of rifles, page 179 states "It operates on direct gas impingement on the bolt carrier," and regarding the AG42 Ljungman rifle on page 169, it states "...the usual gas piston assembly was dispensed with in favor of a simple direct gas system in which gas tapped from the barrel is allowed to strike the bolt," and regarding the French MAS-49 rifle on page 145: "The gas system uses no piston or cylinder, the gas being piped back to impinge directly on the face of the bolt and blow it backwards."

I'll look at Stoner's (2951424) and Eklund's (2388396) patents and see if there's any precident for the wording. I'm not sure that it's there, but it's a possibility that the creators may have had something to do with it.

What one should notice about all of the patents and rifles in question, regardless of the language, is that none of the weapons include a component of the operating system which all other gas-operated systems possess, and that is a 'connecting rod' or 'operating rod'. There is no indirect, intermediate device for propellant gasses to act upon and transfer motion to the bolt group. In the case of the system in question, gasses come into contact with, expand against, impinge upon the bolt group directly, inside a chamber between the piston (in this case, the bolt, with the piston rings on it), and the cylinder (bolt carrier, which surrounds the piston), causing the cylinder to be forced rearward.

The combat developer (ie, the DOD) describes this system as gas operated while contemporary systems as gas piston operated in 1960?

If only now we could call them something that might more quickly and easily differentiate the two... Hmm. *finger to lip, brow arched*

It certainly makes sense that the term would come into more use when competing methods of gas operation were being tested on the same platform. Both of them are forms of gas operation, can we agree on that? And can we agree that it's handy to be able to easily differentiate between the two?

The specification for the M16 and M4 rifles is a "lightweight, gas-operated, air-cooled, magazine-fed, shoulder-fired weapon that can be fired either in automatic three-round bursts or semiautomatic single shots"?

And if only the Combat Developer's words were as those of God Himself! *thunderclap*

"Book of Armaments, Chapter 11, Verse 27: Lo, and it was the AR-10, and it was a pretty good idea, but needed some work. And the Lord said unto Eugene, "Nay! Its method of operation shall not be referred to as 'direct impingement'! At least not until the Combat Developer approves of such language in armorer's manual form around the year of 2000. And even then, thou shalt be suspicious of such language!"

Amen.

Okay, FINE. I won't call it 'direct impingement' anymore, so as not to upset your delicate military sensibilities.

[Bonefish]

You're so cute.

[Raygun]

I hope I still am after that brick directly impinges on my face.

(It was late, I was a bit punchy. Sorry for being such a smart ass.)

[paladin2019]

...the M16A2, M16A3, M16A4 Rifles, M4 and M4A1 Carbines. These weapons are lightweight, gas-operated, air-cooled, magazine-fed. shoulder-fired weapons that can be fired in either automatic, three-round bursts, or semiautomatic.

My issue with the term is its marketing use undermining basic soldier competence, confidence and discipline. Direct gas impingement isn't a term recognized by military maintenance or technical documentation. They do recognize gas operated as different than gas piston operated and blowback operated. So when Joe uses direct impingement, it shows a lack of attention to detail. And then I have to correct that.

And my personal feeling that the gas system isn't the issue so much as the chamber design that promotes fouling.

RE converting a SIG556 to something else, first I gotta find replacements for proprietary parts. It doesn't use standard AR-15 bolts and barrels

RE the actual question about what gun, Raygun hits the best reason to use an AR15. Ubiquity.

[Raygun]

My issue with the term is its marketing use undermining basic soldier competence, confidence and discipline. Direct gas impingement isn't a term recognized by military maintenance or technical documentation. They do recognize gas operated as different than gas piston operated and blowback operated. So when Joe uses direct impingement, it shows a lack of attention to detail. And then I have to correct that.

And my issue with this is that A) what the Army teaches doesn't really concern me much, but B) the lack of attention to detail would seem to fall upon the Army and how it has chosen to classify and use descriptive terms in this case. 'Direct impingement' isn't a marketing term. It's an engineering term that denotes the lack of a connecting rod. The term "gas operated" covers a lot of ground and refers to a number of different specific forms of operation. So, in the order of taxonomy, Piston and Direct would fall a level below Gas Operated.

Gas Operated, Piston
Gas Operated, Direct

Joe uses 'direct impingement' because it is a correct sub-categorization of gas operation in common parlance. The Army, unfortunately, has put you in a difficult spot (it's what the Army's good at!) and for that, I sympathize.

And my personal feeling that the gas system isn't the issue so much as the chamber design that promotes fouling.

Noted. In my experience, both are issues. However, the method of attaching the barrel to the receiver of an AR (via the use of a barrel extension fixed to the barrel itself during manufacture) and the ease of attachment it allows offsets the increased difficulty of cleaning the breech and inside of the barrel extension compared to other designs. The inclusion of a piston system significantly helps in keeping the receiver clean, and helps keep the breech and barrel extension cleaner.

That said, the minute someone starts making two-lug bolts for the AR, I'm in. Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if someone does, but I haven't found it yet.

RE converting a SIG556 to something else, first I gotta find replacements for proprietary parts. It doesn't use standard AR-15 bolts and barrels

And then when you do, you'd have to have the barrel headspaced, fitted, and then gas tapped to your specific upper.

With the AR, the barrel is a manufactured assembly that can be attached to any mil-spec upper with the turn of a wrench. If the SIG556 had something similar (and I see no reason why it could not), it would, in my opinion, be as close to perfect in an automatic rifle design as we have yet come.

RE the actual question about what gun, Raygun hits the best reason to use an AR15. Ubiquity.

It may not be the very best automatic rifle design in the world, but it has proven to be good enough and for lots of good reasons: It is everywhere, it is accurate, it is reliable, it is acceptably ergonomic, it is relatively inexpensive, and it is incredibly modular.

[Raygun]

Oops.

[Jeff Hauze]

Oops.

You know, they have a product to help with that. They're called Depends.

[Raygun]

If only I'd crapped myself... I manipulated a computer right into that fuck-up.

[Serious Paul]

Wait someone is arguing weapons with him? Seriously?


Sorry to be a pot stirring bitch. I will admit to having learned a few things in this thread I did not previously know.

[Raygun]

Wait someone is arguing weapons with him? Seriously?

Who, me? I think he's right to argue. He seems to have learned about these things in an entirely different fashion than I did, so it's nice to see opinions coming from a different perspective (particularly from someone who has the perspective of training groups of people how to use and maintain these types of rifles). Even though I may disagree with him on some minor details, I value Paladin's knowledge and opinions and I'm glad he's here to share them.

[Bonefish]

You're a big fucking pussy.

[Raygun]

I'LL BURN YOUR HOUSE DOWN!!!!!

[Raygun]

[SumDumQuim]

I know two things about this development.

1. That weapon was used in a crime, which is why you now own it.
2. At some point, and I am guessing sooner than later, you are going to shoot your eye out.

That is all I have to say about that, but mark my words.

[Bonefish]

1. That weapon was used in a crime, which is why you now own it.
2. At some point, and I am guessing sooner than later, you are going to shoot your eye out.

It's legit.

[Bonefish]

I picked up a mag today, one of those "polymer"(gee, looks like plastic!) waffle mags, translucent. Not sure I like it, the fit is tight and I'm still not sold on the weight savings vs. durability.

Also, I made a rifle sling out of paracord. And not jsut a simple, "tie it off and let the paracord cut into your skin like butter" one either. I basically looped three strands of paracord, then wrapped them tightly with paracord. it's a pretty solid sling, but I think I can do better with more practice. Sure, it's no tactical 3 point sling that lets me do crazy cool stuff, but it's also cheaper than that sling, and it does the job of allowing me to sling my rifle and use my hands for stuff. Awesome.

[paladin2019]

RE: grewvy kewl slings

If you have a sling swivel on the back of the receiver, build your next sling as a loop that only attaches there. If you don't, consider bolting one to your stock (not the reveiver) in the same general area. Single point > 3 point.

[Bonefish]

RE: grewvy kewl slings

If you have a sling swivel on the back of the receiver, build your next sling as a loop that only attaches there. If you don't, consider bolting one to your stock (not the reveiver) in the same general area. Single point > 3 point.

My sling swivel is mounted on the butt of my rifle. Will that still work?

[3278]

What's the benefit of a single- or 3-point sling, versus a basic 2-point strap?

[Bonefish]

You can drop your rifle and it falls into a position that is readily accessible, while allowing you rapidly bring your rifle back into position if needed. A two-point sling, doesn't allow this so much. There's a few ways I can carry my rifle with the 2 point sling where I can un-sling it and have it in ready position in a hurry.

A 2 point sling is good enough for letting you carry your weapon out of the way so you have both hands to use for other tasks, but it doesn't really lend itself to rapid shouldering of a slung weapon.

But any sling is better than no sling.

[Bonefish]

Also, I was checking out Kvar for 5.56 followers, so I can swap out the follower in my AK74 mag and have THREE(3!) Mags. But, this seems to be more complex than I thought, and KVar doesn't offer any followers for 5.56. Mudda sucka.