New Ruger Rifle

[The Last Standing Knight]

I'll stay with my Mini-14; not Camp Perry standards but good enough for SHTF scenario.
I do not understand the reason for all of the stuff that gets hung on weapons today; more stuff to maintain, cumbersome, et. al. "the more you complicate the plumbing, the easier it is to stop up the drain..."
When I used Stoner designed weapons (M-16A1 and A2)in the USMC, I found them to be accurate, but high maintenance weapons with a highly fragile nature that I would not risk my life with in a combat situation. Given my choice, I'd take an AK-47 before anything in combat. But, I have been told by people "in the know" who are not on this forum that the new series are just as reliable as an AK and that the problems we had 20 yrs ago are the past.
Like the 1911, everyone seems to be copying everyone else with them these days.
I do not own ANY AR-15 style weapon and while I have thought about getting one, I will wait until I win the lottery.
If Ruger wanted to make some inroads, my suggestion would be to improve their current Mini-14 with heavier barrels, better iron sights,modify them to use M-16 magazines, and make it affordable. They would, I believe, in a politically correct world, do a lot better than just another AR copy.
Mini-14's can do the same job an AR can and not look like an EBR.
Jst my rant and IMHO.

 

[Curt Dawson]

Stupid question,but what are the pro's and con's of the piston versus gas systems?

 

[zercool]

Originally posted by Curt Dawson:
Stupid question,but what are the pro's and con's of the piston versus gas systems?

Not a stupid question.

Direct-impingement (DI) is what "normal" ARs use. Gas is vented from the barrel through a small tube back to the receiver and forces the bolt to cycle. The gas only impinges on the bolt carrier for a fraction of a second - as soon as the bolt is moving, the gas is no longer pushing on it. However, it means that hot gas is being dumped directly into the action/receiver. With dirty-burning ammo, that's going to foul the carrier, bolt, firing pin, etc - eventually. It also raises the temperature of the bolt and chamber. It's somewhat sensitive to cleanliness, and if the gas tube gets kinked, you're pretty much done - the fancy autoloader just became a straight-pull bolt-action.

With a piston gun (AK, M1, M1A, Mini14), the gas is still vented from the barrel to a gas tube, but instead of acting directly on the bolt carrier, it pushes a piston back, which moves an operating rod, which moves the bolt assembly. It's more reliable (witness the AKs and Mini14s of the world), but the op-rod is subject to damage much like the gas tube of a DI gun. It keeps the action and receiver cooler because gases aren't being dumped into the chamber area. It also is cleaner for the same reason. Down side: it has a higher reciprocating mass, which means it will tend to be louder and have higher wear on the frame and shooter (recoil). It can also be a heavier system.

They both have their place. I love my AR for what it is - an accurate rifle that's kinda picky about ammo but can reach out. I also love my Mini14 for the opposite reason - it's not hyper-accurate but it's light and maneuverable and will eat ANYTHING.

 

[tennexplorer]

I would be more happy if they had proofread their webpage. The bottom line says copyright Strum, Ruger.

 

[m1gunner]

Not to nitpic, but the standard AR system is a little more involved.

The gas is vented from the barrel and pressurizes a cylinder that is sealed by the bolt. The cylinder is contained in the bolt carrier and is under the key. The tail of the bolt has gas rings that seal the cylinder.

As the bolt carrier moves rearward due to the pressure in the cylinder, it partially unloads the locking lugs by the action of the high pressure gas trying to drive the bolt forward as the carrier moves rearward and starts to cam the bolt out of lock up.

When the bolt unlocks, the ports on the side of the carrier are exposed by the movement of the bolt, and the residual pressure in the chamber is vented to atmosphere.

Is this better than just forcing the bolt open while still under some chamber pressure as is done with the piston/rod setup of the new system?

Who knows.

 

[zercool]

Originally posted by m1gunner:
Not to nitpic, but the standard AR system is a little more involved.

Not nitpicking at all; you've increased my knowledge significantly. I'm still fairly new to the AR world and this is more than I understood before. Thank you.

 

[4864]

Humm. May have to add that to the wish list.

 

[Horace Smith]

I like it but for top end cash one can pick the very nicest components one wants. IE: I'd put built in quick disconnect sling mounts in the stock and rail. Having said that; I put Troy front & rear battle sights (S&W's AR uses em too) and Troy's quad rail on the Franken-AR I put together last year. I think P-Mags are top end mags also.

 

[Joe Kent]

A close friend who is a trained M16/AR15 armourer had the opportunity to handle and fire one at a recent writers meeting and could not get it to run for any length of time . It was one of the first and apparently the bugs are not yet worked out.

 

[m1gunner]

Here is a link to a power point page done by the Army looking into extraction on the M4.

It is 4MB in size, but is interesting reading, and shows that odd stuff happens in these gas guns.

http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2003smallarms/din.ppt

 

[n4zov]

I do not understand the reason for all of the stuff that gets hung on weapons today; more stuff to maintain, cumbersome, et. al. "the more you complicate the plumbing, the easier it is to stop up the drain..."

Well said Standing Knight! Somewhere down in the middle of all that junk there is supposedly a rifle that can actually shoot at the enemy.

 

[Farmer17]

A decent AR-15 should not cost over 800 bucks. They were design to be inexpensively mass produced, and before Obama, there were several decent ones for around that price. To make one more expensive is like "tricking out" a Chevy Cavalier to be more expensive than a Mercedes.

 

[2Loud4You]

Originally posted by Farmer17:
A decent AR-15 should not cost over 800 bucks. They were design to be inexpensively mass produced, and before Obama, there were several decent ones for around that price. To make one more expensive is like "tricking out" a Chevy Cavalier to be more expensive than a Mercedes.

Before the election I think you were right but times have changed and the prices reflect that. It also depends on how someone defines decent and how they want it outfitted. Someone may just want handguards while someone else wants rails so to mount a light or laser, etc... That obviously affects price just as it does with other popular firearms. Just look at the price range of 1911's for example.

 

[Joni_Lynn]

I've seen the current trend swing towards the AR that has the 4 rail handguard all one piece with the upper receiver. This is probably going to cost a bit more as will a piston drive.