TMB

I think movies affect sales of fire arms but a lot of people want them because Grandpa,Dad or their self used one while in military.

NY Ruger

I bought a pre-ban (I'm on NY) from the era of when I shot them, back in the early 80's, decent price, never shot, so I jumped on it.

But honestly, before that I had said to myself, if I'm gonna get one, maybe I would once there are some piston driven AR's out there that are proven.

I've seen talk, and some kits come and go, and some makers with piston models come and go..... but seems nothing has stuck ????

I'm no AR pro, just reading the gun rags..... and following along...

Any thoughts? what's up with the piston scene ?

tnx

RoverSig

I've carried them in different places over the years. I don't own one.

I like the fact they are an American designed and built weapon. I have read the platform is inherently pretty accurate. As a visceral thing, I much prefer them to AKs. My emotional reaction to both is based on coming into the Army in the early 1970's. We heard bad things about our M-16's, e.g., made by Mattel, but I despised the AK as the enemy's preferred weapon (and emblematic of terrorism and revolution around the world).

I'm not a big believer in the 5.56 -- its range, its ability to shoot through things (sometimes bad guys hide behind vehicles and walls), its knockdown power -- all seem limited to me. I debriefed some of our guys after a big and long fight, and they told me how the "green tip" rounds would ice-pick right through bad guys, as long as they didn't hit a bone. The bad guys would die from the hit but could continue to stand and keep shooting for a while. Not good.

So if there were a battle rifle I have an emotional affinity for, other than the M1 Garand, it would be the M-14. Not based on experience, per se, but on reputation. This is probably not an well-informed opinion on my part, but there is range, firepower, and knockdown power in one package. I notice the M-14's found their way back into the mix in Afghanistan, where the ranges stretch out, in the designated marksman program as well as in sniper rifle format.

But for those who like the AR platform, wow -- there is so much that can be done with it to personalize it and make it work well.

Fackler Rebel

Carried an M16 while in the service, and am on my third Mini-14. For durability, and dependabilty, and accuracy out to 100 yards or so, I'll take the Mini anyday, anytime.

Reb

KKBMTGG/go army

Yep, that's a fact!!
The system's great but like any military weapon{AK included} it does need to be cleaned now and then.
Don't ya love bureaucrats running military procedure? {YUCK}

KKBMTGG/go army

Yep, that's a fact!!
The system's great but like any military weapon{AK included} it does need to be cleaned now and then.
Don't ya love bureaucrats running military procedure? {YUCK}

OOPS!!, sorry for the double tap.

KKBMTGG/go army

For accuracy beyond a 100 yards, I'll take an AR! In fact, for accuracy period, I'll take an AR.

KKBMTGG/go army

Not at all, I fully support the Mini owners, I am one. What I don't support is the folks who speak from which they do not know!!
In no way is the Mini superior to the AR other than personal desireability. That by the way is all the reason one needs to love the Mini, desireability!

Marky2002S

Mini 14 > AR... I just am a sucker for the design.

Seneca

The more I read through this thread the more I'm convinced that I really don't want an AR...guess that leaves one more AR on the shelf and available for the person who does...

303lithgow

I went into the Army in 1968 and trained on the M14. In nam we were issued M14s but after a couple of months they took them and issued us M16's which few if any of us were trained on. I was artillery and a rifle was a secondary weapon so we were issued well worn rifles. Mine was the early XM16. I didn't care for it but it never failed me.e

About ten years ago I bought an SP1 and rebuilt it to be like the one I had in nam. Since then I've bougth six more.

Lee D

looking back, would you have rather been issued something like a Mini-14 instead of the M16?
just curious, since you said you were trained on the M14

303lithgow

To me an M14 looks like a battle rifle should look like and an M16 looks like it was made by Matel. But I liked the smaller 5.56 Nato round so yes the Mini 14 would have been better............except I bought a Mini 14 and didn't care for it. Forgetting looks the M16 was the best weapon for nam in my opinion.

I don't think the rifle ever had any major problems but the early ammo did and gave the M16 a bad name.

brimic

Piston guns are kind of a niche market and they do have disadvantages:
1. carrier tilt and odd wear patterns.
2. More moving parts to break/lose.
3.No standardized system.
4. diminished accuracy potential than a DI system.

The things they are good for-
1. running an upper that is carbine or shorter in full auto.
2. suppressors.
3. keeps the action cooler and MUCH cleaner.

I swore that I would never buy a piston upper, but when local stores started selling piston uppers with the exact features I wanted, I ended up buying one (Huldra arms). Now I can't see using a DI system outside of my precision/NM rifles.

NY Ruger

I heard a lot about the carrier tilt on the retro-fit kits.

yea, big time, cooler and cleaner action !! the big reasons I like it.

There were some I saw reviewed, as you said, complete uppers or complete rifles/carbines ground up design, which if done correctly they can design to take care of the carrier tilt issue.
But just don't hear much about it lately. Didn't know of the recent designs of ground up piston rifle flopped and didn't prove themselves. ???