...when compared to a proven short stroke piston system in an AR15 profile?

As more info is made available on new military weapons, now that events like Shot Show and the European Enforce Tac have come and gone, I am curious about the perceive benefits of weapons designed around having the entire operating system contained in the receiver. In a world where no one cares about "another AR", it seems weapons designed this way get all the attention. A big one this year is the Beretta NARP.

When rifles like this are compared to weapons like the LWRC, Colt 6940P, Sig 516, Caracal 816, and others that use a reliable short stroke tappet in an AR footprint, it seems to me that the only benefit is a folding stock. A folding stock, IMO, is not worth the extra weight and bulk that the larger receiver required to house the recoil assembly comes with. These receivers are also typically longer, therefore cancelling out some of the length saved by the folder they are able to employ.

We have talked about folding stocks before, in the Rifle Room, and their applications are always deemed present, but limited. That, combined with the overall weight and bulk gain of a rifle so-equipped, makes it seem not worthwhile.

Originally, the AR18 system was designed to be cheaper and simpler to produce, using stampings. It was intended to be marketed as a budget alternative, with the ability to be produced on site in less industrialized nations.

But the current trend of shoehorning AR18 actions into AR15 platforms doesn't have that original benefit. So with those, it's mainly about the novelty, and potentially the folding stock.

In my opinion a true AR18 variant will have a bolt carrier that rides on rails in the upper receiver. In theory this should give better clearance for carbon, grime, dirt, debris, etc to be pushed out of the way. The carrier riding on rails also allows for an external piston without inducing off axis motion translated to the carrier.

quote:

Originally posted by JoshNC:
In my opinion a true AR18 variant will have a bolt carrier that rides on rails in the upper receiver. In theory this should give better clearance for carbon, grime, dirt, debris, etc to be pushed out of the way. The carrier riding on rails also allows for an external piston without inducing off axis motion translated to the carrier.

Yep. And over the last decade, the AR18 designs have really proven themselves. Different manufacturers and different designs have been crafted and tested with a lot of success. I almost believe they are more “proven” than the platforms mentioned in the OP that really were flash in the pan comparatively.

I would like to spend some time on the Spear LT. but, from an upkeep standpoint, I’ll stick with bread and butter DI guns.

So better overall reliability due to a greater ability to power through filth, and overall longevity due to the alignment ensured by the rails. I hear ya.

I didn't mention the 416 or POF rifles in the OP, though they are arguably pistons stuffed in an AR, due to their larger receiver dimensions. I didn't mention PWS because I was focusing on short stroke. So, all the brands/models in the OP, combined with these additions, are all going to ultimately have problems and parts wear/breakage, due to carrier tilt, at a higher rate than the AR18 guns?

The 416 is on the 12th or 13th generation. Several of the parts won’t interchange from the older versions to the newer. Is it a “good” rifle? Yeah. It has a recoil impulse that I don’t like. Even with a RC2 attached.

I like the PWS a lot better. The only thing I don’t like is converting them to SIMS. You have to take the piston off of the charging handle. Not really a big deal but annoying.

The MCX and SCAR designs are fairly robust. The fear of wear or parts breakage is mine and mine alone, as an example, if I have a buffer spring go bad, I go to my parts bin and grab another. I don’t think I want to collect parts for another system.

That’s just me though.

I would also add that AR-18 based systems suppress much better than AR-15 based ones. The DI is obviously bringing the gas much farther back, but also the charging handle on a -15 is just in a piss-poor location. I have a ten inch BRN-180 as a fun gun, that is amazing suppressed. Zero, I mean zero gas to the face, even with older suppressors and cheap ammo.

Having said that, a standard AR is what is under my bed.

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:
The fear of wear or parts breakage is mine and mine alone, as an example, if I have a buffer spring go bad, I go to my parts bin and grab another. I don’t think I want to collect parts for another system.

Hardly, I used to be an AK guy until the Russian sanctions and conflict cut the AK supply to a trickle. At that point I saw the light. I bought several lowers, uppers, rifles, and pistols. I got the tools and parts whenever they went on sale. At this point many companies won’t ship parts to my state. I’m not even sure I could legally ship a semi auto rifle out for repair and receive it back. I know parts kit builds are a no-go. Being your own armorer is only going to be more important as time moves on. Or maybe I listened to Red Barchetta during the Federal AWB one too many times.