Hey, my current AR weighs in at around 10 to 11lbs loaded. I am looking to build something that is very light and minimal. Probably just a red dot and free float. Gas pistons are more expensive but seem to come in lighter. My current AR is a tack driver and i have not had a malfunction in the four years and thousands of rounds i have had it. My questions are, is gas piston more accurate or less accurate? does a gas piston system in general mean a lighter weapon? Thanks in advance for any answers!
is a gas piston AR less accurate than DI?
- Thread starter hobgob
- Start date
- Status
DI is lighter. If you want a light weight AR, stick with DI, thin barrels, and plain old ordinary handguards. Heavy barrels, quad rails, piston systems, all that crap adds weight. Everything else being equal, DI should be more accurate as well.
Last edited:
HorseSoldier
Member
Piston guns are heavier than direct gas, and will tend to be less accurate. Unless you have a need for an AR set up to take advantage of what pistons do bring to the table (SBR or heavy suppressor use), they're really pointless.
HorseSoldier said:
How much heavier and how much less accurate? I just weighed my POF P415 shown in the photo below without a magazine but including everything on the list. It weighs 8lb 14.25oz and if you want to get really picky, it has KNS anti-walk pins, ambi mag release, safety AND bolt release all adding weight. And another thing, the P415 and my POF P308 will shoot 1/2 MOA at 100 yards with reloads, and easily under 1 MOA at 100 yards with quality factory ammunition such as FGGM or BH ... and that's prone off a bipod with all rounds fed from the magazine.
POF P415 with 16" barrel and POF muzzle brake
Aimpoint M4s with battery
LaRue LT659-NV QD mount
TROY BUIS front and rear
Daniel Defense Piston Omega 7.0 rail
VLTOR Emod stock
H buffer
TUBB CS flat wire spring
Geissele SSA trigger
LaRue FUG
hobgob, since you asked about accuracy ... here are a couple of targets shot prone off a bipod with my P308 at 100 yards using a Leupold Mark 4 3.5-10x with the scope set on 10x. POFs aren't built as target, match or sniper rifles, but they're more than accurate enough for hunting, 3-gun, law enforcement or military use.
FGGM 168gr BTHP
Reloads using a friend's recipe i.e. no OCW yet
FGGM 168gr BTHP
Reloads using a friend's recipe i.e. no OCW yet
madcratebuilder
Member
The piston certainly adds weight, though not that much. A free-float forend may or may not add weight depending on which forend you're talking about. A railed version will add some weight however some of the polymer and carbon fiber tubes will weigh the same or less than a normal set of handguards and the delta-ring assembly. Barrel profile and accessories are going to be the major determining factors on weight and balance of the rifle.
As for accuracy, I've never seen a definitive A-B comparison between the two using the same barrel and loads tuned for each setup. The piston system will change the barrel harmonics and might result in a load that was accurate with the same barrel in a DI configuration being all over the place, but adjusting the load to suit the piston system should bring it back. Based on how well many piston guns shoot, I would not cite a decrease in accuracy as a detractor from piston systems.
As for accuracy, I've never seen a definitive A-B comparison between the two using the same barrel and loads tuned for each setup. The piston system will change the barrel harmonics and might result in a load that was accurate with the same barrel in a DI configuration being all over the place, but adjusting the load to suit the piston system should bring it back. Based on how well many piston guns shoot, I would not cite a decrease in accuracy as a detractor from piston systems.
One important detail has been left out - how much accuracy do you need?
If this is a NM, precision, or long range rifle, all the best accuracy parts are DI. No choice but stick with it.
If it's inherent bragging rights, or a concern one's better than another, good luck. The barrel and ammo are more likely to affect accuracy. While a piston can affect barrel dynamics by introducing barrel whip, whether it actually affects accuracy is something that would have to be tested back to back on the same gun. There's just too many other variables that also influence it.
Anecdotally, which is to say, reading posts on forums - it can go both ways. The mistake is to declare a one gun range target definitive of ALL DI or Piston guns out there. Again, too many variables.
Heavy is another challenge altogether. There's no guarantee that a HBAR would shoot better than a pencil - you'd have to test barrels buttoned with the same tooling (likely alternately,) and shoot about 500 of each to get any significantly observable result. By the time one person was done with it, they likely would have improved their skill, to boot. Nobody has done that - again, it's anecdotal, too many other variables to really observe.
Then there's the functional thing - all a piston kit does is deactivate the existing one in the carrier, and mount another - more parts and weight - out on the barrel, where studies show it runs hundreds of degrees hotter. That forces the use of an aluminum freefloat, which may not be lighter, but will be additional expense. It also moves the center of gravity forward, putting more weight out front.
Buying a barrel with a better guarantee of accuracy is cheaper, doesn't add more complication, and gets the job done more simply. In this case, if a light KISS gun is the goal, moving the piston doesn't net any guaranteed gains except more parts to wear out, and more dead weight. And those parts are unique to that vendor only. The AR market is going to expand for a while, then consolidation will take place. Some brands are already under the same roof (Remington, Bushmaster, and DPMS come to mind.) And some kits are already out of production - no spare parts available right now.
Don't look for DI OR piston to guarantee accuracy, look to the barrel maker and what ammo you shoot. The type of motivation for bolt cycling is far enough down the list of influences that it takes a NM level shooter to discover for themself. In effective field accuracy in combat or hunting, it won't contribute much at all.
If this is a NM, precision, or long range rifle, all the best accuracy parts are DI. No choice but stick with it.
If it's inherent bragging rights, or a concern one's better than another, good luck. The barrel and ammo are more likely to affect accuracy. While a piston can affect barrel dynamics by introducing barrel whip, whether it actually affects accuracy is something that would have to be tested back to back on the same gun. There's just too many other variables that also influence it.
Anecdotally, which is to say, reading posts on forums - it can go both ways. The mistake is to declare a one gun range target definitive of ALL DI or Piston guns out there. Again, too many variables.
Heavy is another challenge altogether. There's no guarantee that a HBAR would shoot better than a pencil - you'd have to test barrels buttoned with the same tooling (likely alternately,) and shoot about 500 of each to get any significantly observable result. By the time one person was done with it, they likely would have improved their skill, to boot. Nobody has done that - again, it's anecdotal, too many other variables to really observe.
Then there's the functional thing - all a piston kit does is deactivate the existing one in the carrier, and mount another - more parts and weight - out on the barrel, where studies show it runs hundreds of degrees hotter. That forces the use of an aluminum freefloat, which may not be lighter, but will be additional expense. It also moves the center of gravity forward, putting more weight out front.
Buying a barrel with a better guarantee of accuracy is cheaper, doesn't add more complication, and gets the job done more simply. In this case, if a light KISS gun is the goal, moving the piston doesn't net any guaranteed gains except more parts to wear out, and more dead weight. And those parts are unique to that vendor only. The AR market is going to expand for a while, then consolidation will take place. Some brands are already under the same roof (Remington, Bushmaster, and DPMS come to mind.) And some kits are already out of production - no spare parts available right now.
Don't look for DI OR piston to guarantee accuracy, look to the barrel maker and what ammo you shoot. The type of motivation for bolt cycling is far enough down the list of influences that it takes a NM level shooter to discover for themself. In effective field accuracy in combat or hunting, it won't contribute much at all.
hobgob, since your intention is to build a light rifle, I believe that your intention makes the piston vs. DI debate moot. As a general matter, all other things being equal, a piston rifle is going to be at least a bit heavier than a DI rifle.
Besides, I really don't think that there has been any definitive determination of which system is better. Each has its pros and cons. I've seen at last two Adams Arms based systems where the piston locked up tight. My only point is that neither is infallible.
If you want a light rifle and will be using some sort of red dot, this is what I'd do. I'd go with either a 14.5 or 16" barrel in a light weight (pencil) profile with a midlength gas system and MOE handguards. For the stock, I'd use a plain Jane M4 stock. That should get you in around the 7lb neighborhood.
1858, that's an impressive list of specs on that POF rifle, but you might want to give Geissele a call and see what they have to say about running their trigger with the KNS pins.
Besides, I really don't think that there has been any definitive determination of which system is better. Each has its pros and cons. I've seen at last two Adams Arms based systems where the piston locked up tight. My only point is that neither is infallible.
If you want a light rifle and will be using some sort of red dot, this is what I'd do. I'd go with either a 14.5 or 16" barrel in a light weight (pencil) profile with a midlength gas system and MOE handguards. For the stock, I'd use a plain Jane M4 stock. That should get you in around the 7lb neighborhood.
1858, that's an impressive list of specs on that POF rifle, but you might want to give Geissele a call and see what they have to say about running their trigger with the KNS pins.
Here is my AR setup, a KAC SR-15 upper on a LMT lower.
I weighed it, and it comes out to 7.8 lbs. without a magazine. That's a full lb. lighter than your setup which is pretty significant for a carbine. YMMV of course, but if I'm going to run something ~ 9 lbs. I would give serious thought to going with a full battle rifle like a Springfield M1A.
Shooting Sports had an article where gunsmith David Sams built up a DI and a gas piston and ran accuracy tests.
In his tests the DI was slightly more accurate.
However, the gas piston was not horribly inaccurate.
As said before, how much accuracy to you need? Do you have a 1/4 MOA hold without a bench rest? I don't, but I know people who do. They might be able to see a difference on target between a DI and gas piston.
Until you are shooting at a High Master level, I really doubt you will ever notice any difference on paper.
In his tests the DI was slightly more accurate.
However, the gas piston was not horribly inaccurate.
As said before, how much accuracy to you need? Do you have a 1/4 MOA hold without a bench rest? I don't, but I know people who do. They might be able to see a difference on target between a DI and gas piston.
Until you are shooting at a High Master level, I really doubt you will ever notice any difference on paper.
Cal-gun Fan
Member
Your POF is also a 2500 dollar or so rifle, so I would expect more out of it than a run of the mill piston.hobgob, since you asked about accuracy ... here are a couple of targets shot prone off a bipod with my P308 at 100 yards using a Leupold Mark 4 3.5-10x with the scope set on 10x. POFs aren't built as target, match or sniper rifles, but they're more than accurate enough for hunting, 3-gun, law enforcement or military use.
FGGM 168gr BTHP
Reloads using a friend's recipe i.e. no OCW yet
kamagong said:
kamagong said:
VLTOR EMod stock > 0.89lb
LaRue FUG > 0.28lb
AIMPOINT M4s and LaRue QD mount > 0.79lb
TROY BUIS > 0.21lb (front alone > 0.08lb)
POF muzzle brake > ?
The MAGPUL CTR you're using weighs 0.55lb, you have no FUG and no front sight. That's a 0.70lb difference right there. How much does the AIMPOINT mount you're using weigh? How about the rear sight? How much does your flash hider weigh compared to the POF muzzle brake that I'm using? The POF uses a fluted barrel that is 0.85" O.D. from the gas block back and 0.75" from the gas block forward. What are your barrel specs? It's hard to compare apples to apples.
TonyAngel said:
Yes, I'm well aware of what Mr. Geissele has to say about KNS anti-walk pins and have been for more than two years. I have three Geissele triggers with thousands of rounds on them without any issues. I'll take my chances.
Cal-gun Fan said:
Price wasn't part of the discussion ... or was it? This is more about weight and accuracy, however, my POF will shoot as well as my friend's SR-25 which costs quite a bit more. He isn't happy about that.
Last edited:
Strykervet
member
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2010
- Messages
- 1,610
Well, one of the reasons the DI rifles are more accurate is because they are DI. Not necessarily because of the weight either, it is because there isn't a bunch of junk rattling around over the barrel. Now the gas piston could make the rifle more reliable IF you are in the sandbox AND deprived of cleaning supplies, but otherwise it doesn't add anything and could take away.
If I were to use a gas piston rifle, I'd stick with the more expensive ones in hopes that they work. The rifle wasn't really designed to use this method of operation and it has caused problems. One problem is when regular bolt carriers are used. The forces exerted on the carrier are different --with DI, it is more or less directly straight back as you would imagine. With the piston, the force is exerted more at an angle. This has both broken carriers and warped uppers. Of course this affects the accuracy.
Supposedly Smith and Wesson fixed this. At least they say they did. The problem with these uppers is that they haven't been fielded (outside of a few SF guys maybe) and they haven't been around long. As a rule of thumb, I don't depend on anything that hasn't been around awhile. I'll leave the field testing to someone else (because that is what the piston is right now, a test, and that is why we are still finding out about the force problem and the materials issues associated with it).
The other thing you should ask yourself is how many competitive shooters use these? How many target rifles or actual fielded sniper rifles use them? I can say for a fact that, despite what folks think, and despite the fact that SF does have access to various weaponry, that the SOPMOD M4 based on a plain Colt M4 with a heavy barrel is what SF uses on a regular basis. It is the primary issue weapon. They take a lot of abuse and are accurate on a point target out to 600m.
I think if one tracks back the idea of the gas piston, one will find that it is born from the idea that the AK is more reliable than the M4. The AK will stand up to more abuse, sure, but a well trained soldier doesn't abuse their weapon. They use it, sometimes harshly, but they don't abuse it. Industry saw this and they capitalized on it. The army was looking for a new weapon, like they always have but more apt to the idea, and one candidate was the HK416. An AR with a gas piston --and a $4000 price tag. The Gucci rifle. Others copied the idea and now you have what you have.
The DI is plenty reliable, lends to accuracy, and most certainly is lighter. Weighing the whole weapon doesn't do that justice, no, you weigh that tube and the roll pin against the piston assembly. But weight isn't so much the issue here. Accuracy isn't either. It is the very issue the gas piston was developed to assist: reliability.
But don't get me wrong. I like the gas piston. In rifles that were designed from the ground up with one. It is one of the reasons the AK shines. My FAL has one, a very reliable weapon albeit not so accurate (compared to the M4).
Bottom line though is that more hinges on accuracy than the operating system. Chances are a well made piston design will shoot better than most of us, but theoretically the DI is more accurate because it is simpler. The most important part on the M4 that lends accuracy is the barrel (secondary to the shooter of course).
Now what I am waiting on is the new DI AK with the FF barrel and target trigger.
If I were to use a gas piston rifle, I'd stick with the more expensive ones in hopes that they work. The rifle wasn't really designed to use this method of operation and it has caused problems. One problem is when regular bolt carriers are used. The forces exerted on the carrier are different --with DI, it is more or less directly straight back as you would imagine. With the piston, the force is exerted more at an angle. This has both broken carriers and warped uppers. Of course this affects the accuracy.
Supposedly Smith and Wesson fixed this. At least they say they did. The problem with these uppers is that they haven't been fielded (outside of a few SF guys maybe) and they haven't been around long. As a rule of thumb, I don't depend on anything that hasn't been around awhile. I'll leave the field testing to someone else (because that is what the piston is right now, a test, and that is why we are still finding out about the force problem and the materials issues associated with it).
The other thing you should ask yourself is how many competitive shooters use these? How many target rifles or actual fielded sniper rifles use them? I can say for a fact that, despite what folks think, and despite the fact that SF does have access to various weaponry, that the SOPMOD M4 based on a plain Colt M4 with a heavy barrel is what SF uses on a regular basis. It is the primary issue weapon. They take a lot of abuse and are accurate on a point target out to 600m.
I think if one tracks back the idea of the gas piston, one will find that it is born from the idea that the AK is more reliable than the M4. The AK will stand up to more abuse, sure, but a well trained soldier doesn't abuse their weapon. They use it, sometimes harshly, but they don't abuse it. Industry saw this and they capitalized on it. The army was looking for a new weapon, like they always have but more apt to the idea, and one candidate was the HK416. An AR with a gas piston --and a $4000 price tag. The Gucci rifle. Others copied the idea and now you have what you have.
The DI is plenty reliable, lends to accuracy, and most certainly is lighter. Weighing the whole weapon doesn't do that justice, no, you weigh that tube and the roll pin against the piston assembly. But weight isn't so much the issue here. Accuracy isn't either. It is the very issue the gas piston was developed to assist: reliability.
But don't get me wrong. I like the gas piston. In rifles that were designed from the ground up with one. It is one of the reasons the AK shines. My FAL has one, a very reliable weapon albeit not so accurate (compared to the M4).
Bottom line though is that more hinges on accuracy than the operating system. Chances are a well made piston design will shoot better than most of us, but theoretically the DI is more accurate because it is simpler. The most important part on the M4 that lends accuracy is the barrel (secondary to the shooter of course).
Now what I am waiting on is the new DI AK with the FF barrel and target trigger.
Strykervet
member
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2010
- Messages
- 1,610
"... my POF will shoot as well as my friend's SR-25 which costs quite a bit more. He isn't happy about that."
Then you are a better shooter than he is or he needs to take it back. Seriously. That rifle should shoot better than most bolt actions.
Then you are a better shooter than he is or he needs to take it back. Seriously. That rifle should shoot better than most bolt actions.
Strykervet said:
That friend is a distinguished service rifle shooter ... earned last year at Camp Perry. His SR-25 is a 1/2 MOA rifle with his reloads shooting prone off a bipod, but so is my POF. His SR-25 is better with FGGM than my POF, but regardless, what more could either of us ask from a semi-auto .308 Win. Just as many here wouldn't buy a POF, I wouldn't buy an SR-25 after handling and shooting one. A LaRue OBR ... I'm trying hard NOT to buy one!
Strykervet said:
I haven't found this to be the case with either POF ... nothing is rattling around over the barrel during the firing cycle. If you lock the bolt back, then and only then are the piston and op rod free to "rattle around".
As much as like my POFs and as reliable as they are, I don't generally recommend them, but not because of the supposed weight, weight distribution or accuracy. I don't recommend them for the simple reason of ROI for the "typical" user.
I just wanted to add ... EXCELLENT posts from helotaxi and Tirod.
I would add that my P415 has a six-position buffer tube and I generally have the stock set at #4 as shown in my first picture (#1 being fully collapsed). In that position, the rifle's balance point is directly below the magazine well.
Carry on!
Tirod said:
I would add that my P415 has a six-position buffer tube and I generally have the stock set at #4 as shown in my first picture (#1 being fully collapsed). In that position, the rifle's balance point is directly below the magazine well.
Carry on!
taliv said:
I would like to think that the two targets I've shown aren't merely anecdotal ... 0.95 and 0.56 MOA with FGGM and reloads respectively. I even posted a video of the FGGM target as it was being shot. But you make a good point (I think) about standard deviation. I would expect a smaller standard deviation with SR-25s than with P308s. I can't speak for anyone else, their shooting ability, their attention to detail when reloading, their ability to work up a load etc. All I can do is discuss what I've done, what I know, what I don't know and leave it to others to take what they want from it.
taliv said:
What front sight is that ... a nano BUIS?!!
i'm sure the targets are representative of your rifle. but i consider targets for one rifle anecdotal and not necessarily representative of all POF rifles. (particularly since the ones I've seen are not all that accurate)
on the KAC rifles with the URX2 rail (best rail ever) the front sight is built into the rail itself. it folds up and is flush when down. (you can actually mount stuff on the sight and it will pivot up)
seems relevant given the discussion about weight. the KAC is full of similar innovative features.
edit: btw, i believe KAC sold a special run of upper receivers with their 600m rear BUIS built into the receiver itself too, instead of screwed onto the pic rail, so it's a bit lower profile, which is good for people like me that shoot low-power variable optics with large ocular lenses. I think they plan to make that a standard offering)
to the OP:
i'm not really sure. the conventional wisdom certainly seems to be that DI is theoretically capable of better accuracy than the piston guns. given the wide range in quality of piston and DI offerings (particularly early pistons) and the relatively tiny population of individuals with substantial experience with both platforms for legit comparison... my guess is it's impossible to say
on the KAC rifles with the URX2 rail (best rail ever) the front sight is built into the rail itself. it folds up and is flush when down. (you can actually mount stuff on the sight and it will pivot up)
seems relevant given the discussion about weight. the KAC is full of similar innovative features.
edit: btw, i believe KAC sold a special run of upper receivers with their 600m rear BUIS built into the receiver itself too, instead of screwed onto the pic rail, so it's a bit lower profile, which is good for people like me that shoot low-power variable optics with large ocular lenses. I think they plan to make that a standard offering)
to the OP:
i'm not really sure. the conventional wisdom certainly seems to be that DI is theoretically capable of better accuracy than the piston guns. given the wide range in quality of piston and DI offerings (particularly early pistons) and the relatively tiny population of individuals with substantial experience with both platforms for legit comparison... my guess is it's impossible to say
I understand the M203 cuts were eliminated on the latest issue guns - and that's what the SOCOM community seems to get issued. I say that because those barrels are not "heavy" profile, they just lack the reduced slots. I can't say that SOCOM guns are specifically rebarreled with new heavy profile ones - a link to show specifically that would be nice.
The AK does have a reputation that it keeps running, but is that related to being piston, or having magazines that are incredibly heavy duty, with machined feed lips, and built with the concept they would be issued three to a soldier for the duration of his service? When it comes to the piston design it uses, there's nothing special there - and ALL pistons CAN clog and jam without maintenance, as most Garand owners can point out in there copy of the TM.
High speed video of the AK does show the barrel is bent due to the forces acting on it by the exceptionally high mounted gas piston set up. The issue with typical AK accuracy is nonetheless that the barrel rifling and ammo are still the significant source of most of it's large group size. When seriously upgraded with match barrel, ammo, and optics, they can tighten up to less than 1MOA. They also cost over $1,500 at that point.
The point is that spending another $400 for a piston conversion won't add any measurable advantage in accuracy whatsoever, but it will make it heavier. The setup will be less efficient overall, as the piston in the carrier is now dead weight and has no function. It's simply adding another piston to do what the first one did already.
The idea of piston kits was to eliminate the dirty, gas residue eating filthy jammomatic Stoner direct impingement design. It just isolates SOME of the gas residue in another location. Gas residue still enters the action around the case due to timing the action to open early enough to function. Self loading guns all still get dirty regardless, if the bolt opened only after the gas pressure in the barrel went to zero, the cyclic rate would be so low it wouldn't function. Tests at that are actually old news presented at NDIA in 2003, it's been shown gas residue pressure in the case is actually mandatory to ensure extraction - it pushes the case out against the bolt face more reliably than the extractor.
The interesting part is that some won't accept findings at these meetings, because you can't even get the industry professionals to agree on what each other has discovered. Don't expect a consensus opinion on DI vs piston accuracy because of that contentiousness, and do expect marketer BS to distort the facts in favor of their product.
The AK does have a reputation that it keeps running, but is that related to being piston, or having magazines that are incredibly heavy duty, with machined feed lips, and built with the concept they would be issued three to a soldier for the duration of his service? When it comes to the piston design it uses, there's nothing special there - and ALL pistons CAN clog and jam without maintenance, as most Garand owners can point out in there copy of the TM.
High speed video of the AK does show the barrel is bent due to the forces acting on it by the exceptionally high mounted gas piston set up. The issue with typical AK accuracy is nonetheless that the barrel rifling and ammo are still the significant source of most of it's large group size. When seriously upgraded with match barrel, ammo, and optics, they can tighten up to less than 1MOA. They also cost over $1,500 at that point.
The point is that spending another $400 for a piston conversion won't add any measurable advantage in accuracy whatsoever, but it will make it heavier. The setup will be less efficient overall, as the piston in the carrier is now dead weight and has no function. It's simply adding another piston to do what the first one did already.
The idea of piston kits was to eliminate the dirty, gas residue eating filthy jammomatic Stoner direct impingement design. It just isolates SOME of the gas residue in another location. Gas residue still enters the action around the case due to timing the action to open early enough to function. Self loading guns all still get dirty regardless, if the bolt opened only after the gas pressure in the barrel went to zero, the cyclic rate would be so low it wouldn't function. Tests at that are actually old news presented at NDIA in 2003, it's been shown gas residue pressure in the case is actually mandatory to ensure extraction - it pushes the case out against the bolt face more reliably than the extractor.
The interesting part is that some won't accept findings at these meetings, because you can't even get the industry professionals to agree on what each other has discovered. Don't expect a consensus opinion on DI vs piston accuracy because of that contentiousness, and do expect marketer BS to distort the facts in favor of their product.
JustinJ
Member
I'm a fan of the AR and have several but it is telling that almost no other gun has been fielded with similar DI operation and probably never will again.
I've read many accounts by those whove installed Adams Arms kits that resulted in some loss of accuracy. I'm just theorizing but a long stroke piston, such as that from PWS, may have less affect on accuracy.
I've read many accounts by those whove installed Adams Arms kits that resulted in some loss of accuracy. I'm just theorizing but a long stroke piston, such as that from PWS, may have less affect on accuracy.
HavelockLEO
Member
I've read many accounts by those whove installed Adams Arms kits that resulted in some loss of accuracy. I'm just theorizing but a long stroke piston, such as that from PWS, may have less affect on accuracy.
I switched out the DI gas system my RRA middy upper came with and installed an Adams conversion, with no ill affects on accuracy or function, the most noticeable change was the recoil impulse..........
I switched out the DI gas system my RRA middy upper came with and installed an Adams conversion, with no ill affects on accuracy or function, the most noticeable change was the recoil impulse..........
Boanerges57
Member
The accuracy thing isnt really to do with weight. A heavy rifle is often more accurate.
The issue is reciprocating mass. with a DI system you have less reciprocating mass.
A light rifle usually recoils harder.
A free floated barrel is typically going to be more accurate since it is more difficult for the firer to mess with the barrel harmonics.
The whole reason bolt actions are typically more accurate is because they have no reciprocating mass at all.
The market for low mass bolt carrier assemblies and low mass buffers stems from bench rest AR shooters.
The issue is reciprocating mass. with a DI system you have less reciprocating mass.
A light rifle usually recoils harder.
A free floated barrel is typically going to be more accurate since it is more difficult for the firer to mess with the barrel harmonics.
The whole reason bolt actions are typically more accurate is because they have no reciprocating mass at all.
The market for low mass bolt carrier assemblies and low mass buffers stems from bench rest AR shooters.
- Status
