Short Stroke Piston Vs DI

[TheRatDragon]

Since we are a No CAN state and it’s very unlikely to be shooting any volume of rounds in sand, grit or mud.

Is it worth the premium price for a piston system here in Cali versus the other benefits of a DI system?

We currently have an LWRC DI. Love it but not a fan of how much carbon deposits in the action and firing pin.

I am trying to rationalize one of the following in the distant future:

Sig Spear MCX
POF 415 Edge
VKTR V1
CZ BREN 3
LWRC IC

HK is way out of my league.

I have both Direct Impingement (DI) firearms and a Short Stroke Piston (SSP) firearm. I have two AR-15s that are clones and one SCAR 16S. Both the SCAR and AR-15 platforms are easy to maintain, field strip, robust, capable, and extremely accurate as well as extremely customizable and plenty of aftermarket support for parts. DI systems tend to run dirtier than SSP systems and so you'll have more carbon buildup inside a DI firearm. The SSP system runs super clean and even after shooting say a thousand rounds, it will be not nearly as dirty as my DI firearms. Since you already have a DI system, I would recommend getting a SSP firearm in the near future and I would absolutely recommend the SCAR 16S/17S. Yes they are extremely expensive but it's a buy once cry once kinda firearm. You can adjust the gas settings for non suppressed and suppressed fire and it's extremely customizable. I've already shot my SCAR 16S once and I have to say, it has quickly become one of my favorite rifles.

I see you've listed a SIG Spear MCX which go for prices similar to the SCAR but you haven't listed a SCAR. May I ask why?

 

[chiroken007]

SCAR are more expensive than MCX by about a grand. My first choice would probably be BREN3 which would be even more affordable. On top of that, I’ve heard from multiple sources the SCAR has a sharp recoil. So much so it’s known for testing the limits of optic systems.

 

[TheRatDragon]

SCAR are more expensive than MCX by about a grand. My first choice would probably be BREN3 which would be even more affordable. On top of that, I’ve heard from multiple sources the SCAR has a sharp recoil. So much so it’s known for testing the limits of optic systems.

While yes they are more expensive than the MCX, all of the kinks of the SCAR platform have been neutered and it no longer tests or breaks optic systems. This was more prevalent on older SCAR 17 models but since you're mostly looking at 5.56 rifles, the SCAR 16S does not have this problem. Recoil on the SCAR is nonexistent, my SCAR 16S can shoot easily 1-1.5 MOA at 100 yds and 1.5-2 MOA at 500 yds.

I would not recommend the MCX because of SIG's recent quality control as well as known gaps on the rifle that could affect performance. The CZ BREN3 is a solid choice and way cheaper, however since it is a proprietary system, it uses proprietary parts and has limited aftermarket parts support so if something breaks, you're kinda f*cked. In addition, CZ's customer service is known to be less than satisfactory. Basically it's a nice looking rifle but you're gonna be forking large amounts of cash for parts, and like I said there's very little customization for the BREN 3. If your parts break which we all know happens with our firearms after large amounts of use, you're gonna be forking over even MORE money for proprietary parts ONLY made by CZ themselves. And with AB1263 affecting our ability to buy firearms parts online, you'll be spending way more than a SCAR on a firearm that you can't really change things on and parts are hard and expensive to come by.

Since you're already gonna be spending 2,000 dollars plus, I don't see why spending an additional 1,000 plus dollars is an issue. I highly recommend the SCAR system. You can't go wrong with it. It has the aftermarket support you need, FNH USA's customer service is pretty good, parts are readily available and if you get the SCAR 16S and not the 17S, you can use standard AR-15 magazines with the rifle. It really is a cry once, buy once rifle. But again, I'm not trying to sell you on it lol, I'm only recommending the platform as I love the damn thing. Even though it may seem like I'm trying to sell you a pitch, I've recently just become a massive SCAR fanboy so I'm bias. But I was in the same situation you're in now, I was looking at SSP platforms too and I decided ultimately on the SCAR and waited for the right one to be put up for sale here on CAGuns.

I understand though if you don't want to get the SCAR system, just try and keep these things in mind when researching a new platform to purchase. You want aftermarket support, great/exceptional customer support/service by the manufacturer, parts compatibility with your other platforms like magazines, accuracy and a firearm that won't break on you for a LONG time and that can even outlast you and be passed on to your descendants.

 

[Gawernator]

Forget everything in this thread

Buy SR-25

 

[TheRatDragon]

Forget everything in this thread

Buy SR-25

I don't even have that kinda money and I just bought a SCAR 16S and a Staccato P within a month of each other lol.

 

[chiroken007]

While yes they are more expensive than the MCX, all of the kinks of the SCAR platform have been neutered and it no longer tests or breaks optic systems. This was more prevalent on older SCAR 17 models but since you're mostly looking at 5.56 rifles, the SCAR 16S does not have this problem. Recoil on the SCAR is nonexistent, my SCAR 16S can shoot easily 1-1.5 MOA at 100 yds and 1.5-2 MOA at 500 yds.

I would not recommend the MCX because of SIG's recent quality control as well as known gaps on the rifle that could affect performance. The CZ BREN3 is a solid choice and way cheaper, however since it is a proprietary system, it uses proprietary parts and has limited aftermarket parts support so if something breaks, you're kinda f*cked. In addition, CZ's customer service is known to be less than satisfactory. Basically it's a nice looking rifle but you're gonna be forking large amounts of cash for parts, and like I said there's very little customization for the BREN 3. If your parts break which we all know happens with our firearms after large amounts of use, you're gonna be forking over even MORE money for proprietary parts ONLY made by CZ themselves. And with AB1263 affecting our ability to buy firearms parts online, you'll be spending way more than a SCAR on a firearm that you can't really change things on and parts are hard and expensive to come by.

Since you're already gonna be spending 2,000 dollars plus, I don't see why spending an additional 1,000 plus dollars is an issue. I highly recommend the SCAR system. You can't go wrong with it. It has the aftermarket support you need, FNH USA's customer service is pretty good, parts are readily available and if you get the SCAR 16S and not the 17S, you can use standard AR-15 magazines with the rifle. It really is a cry once, buy once rifle. But again, I'm not trying to sell you on it lol, I'm only recommending the platform as I love the damn thing. Even though it may seem like I'm trying to sell you a pitch, I've recently just become a massive SCAR fanboy so I'm bias. But I was in the same situation you're in now, I was looking at SSP platforms too and I decided ultimately on the SCAR and waited for the right one to be put up for sale here on CAGuns.

I understand though if you don't want to get the SCAR system, just try and keep these things in mind when researching a new platform to purchase. You want aftermarket support, great/exceptional customer support/service by the manufacturer, parts compatibility with your other platforms like magazines, accuracy and a firearm that won't break on you for a LONG time and that can even outlast you and be passed on to your descendants.

I appreciate the detailed response and will certainly consider the SCAR.

 

[mbuss101]

With exception of competitive shooters such as 3 gun etc. it would be difficult for any of us to say one “needs” a piston rifle.

That’s a pretty reductive argument.

However, there is no harm in asking the pros and cons to piston rifles. Especially when most military forces (including the US now) operate on piston systems.

There must be tangible benefits. As a civilian the benefits are not necessarily the same.

It would be nice having a rifle that runs cooler and cleaner with less fouling from carbon deposits. Would also be nice to have a rifle with a smoother action recoil and doesn’t have a “Doinnggg” sound from the buffer spring.

Some of y’all weren’t shooting in the mid 2000s and it shows. This argument/convo has been beat to death for decades at this point. The only branch going piston is the USMC and that’s because of the IAR concept and needing reliable full auto from every infantryman, your regular support side guys are still using M16s and M4s. Again if you have to ask if you need a piston gun you probably dont

 

[chiroken007]

Some of y’all weren’t shooting in the mid 2000s and it shows. This argument/convo has been beat to death for decades at this point. The only branch going piston is the USMC and that’s because of the IAR concept and needing reliable full auto from every infantryman, your regular support side guys are still using M16s and M4s. Again if you have to ask if you need a piston gun you probably dont

You must not have heard of the M7. Aka Sig Spear.

 

[TheRatDragon]

Some of y’all weren’t shooting in the mid 2000s and it shows. This argument/convo has been beat to death for decades at this point. The only branch going piston is the USMC and that’s because of the IAR concept and needing reliable full auto from every infantryman, your regular support side guys are still using M16s and M4s. Again if you have to ask if you need a piston gun you probably dont

I used all three in the Marine Corps. I was issued an M16A4 during Recruit Training at MCRDSD, I was then issued an M4 for the majority of my training at SOI, Ft. Sill, etc and when I finally got sent to the fleet. During 2021-22, I was issued an M27 IAR and that was my rifle for the rest of my contract. I'm gonna be honest in my assessment and I honestly think that the M27 IAR is nice and all but I honestly prefer the M4 and I know a lot of guys preferred the M4 and the M249 SAW over the M27.

However the M27 had a lot of benefits, you can switch out barrels on the fly to make it a DMR or a carbine length rifle, we ran KAC NT4 cans with them which made them way more pleasant to shoot and it ran mostly clean even WITH a suppressor attached. However I still preferred our issued ACOGs to the VCOGs we ran on the M27s. Most of the time, we ran our M27s suppressed for the most part and I loved every minute of it being a Californian lol. I love HK as much as the next guy but I would've been content running my issued M4 or hell even the M16A4 for the rest of my days if I had to. I felt way safer with a SAW gunner than that same guy with an M27 instead of the M249.

However even since my time in the Marine Corps, I've been of the firm belief that we should be allowed to own suppressors or silencers in California if you want to call them by their legal classification. I believe shooting suppressed is safer, easier on the ears, and prevents long term hearing damage that is prevalent in our community. I still don't understand why Californian politicians are scared of suppressors, they're still loud enough to be heard, they blunt the loud noise and make shooting more enjoyable and safer. I just don't get it.

 

[mbuss101]

You must not have heard of the M7. Aka Sig Spear.

Yeah I figured someone would mention that even though it’s been hit and miss with implementation, also the spear needs to be piston due to the high pressure round in combination with select fire so using it an an example to justify a piston 556 is kinda not valid imo

 

[mbuss101]

I used all three in the Marine Corps. I was issued an M16A4 during Recruit Training at MCRDSD, I was then issued an M4 for the majority of my training at SOI, Ft. Sill, etc and when I finally got sent to the fleet. During 2021-22, I was issued an M27 IAR and that was my rifle for the rest of my contract. I'm gonna be honest in my assessment and I honestly think that the M27 IAR is nice and all but I honestly prefer the M4 and I know a lot of guys preferred the M4 and the M249 SAW over the M27.

However the M27 had a lot of benefits, you can switch out barrels on the fly to make it a DMR or a carbine length rifle, we ran KAC NT4 cans with them which made them way more pleasant to shoot and it ran mostly clean even WITH a suppressor attached. However I still preferred our issued ACOGs to the VCOGs we ran on the M27s. Most of the time, we ran our M27s suppressed for the most part and I loved every minute of it being a Californian lol. I love HK as much as the next guy but I would've been content running my issued M4 or hell even the M16A4 for the rest of my days if I had to. I felt way safer with a SAW gunner than that same guy with an M27 instead of the M249.

However even since my time in the Marine Corps, I've been of the firm belief that we should be allowed to own suppressors or silencers in California if you want to call them by their legal classification. I believe shooting suppressed is safer, easier on the ears, and prevents long term hearing damage that is prevalent in our community. I still don't understand why Californian politicians are scared of suppressors, they're still loud enough to be heard, they blunt the loud noise and make shooting more enjoyable and safer. I just don't get it.

The M27 was just getting fielded when I got out and I only saw a handful in person but heard good things. My initial comment with this whole convo is revolving around piston guns not being necessary for most shooters

 

[Darqhelmet]

Skip the SCAR 16/17 they are meme guns that SF doesn’t even use or want, the stock is a wobbly piece of , the rails suck, the recoil is harsh compared to ar15/10’s. FN is way to high on their own farts price wise. I have owned and shot both about 1000 rounds through my 17 and 2500 through my 16. I got what I paid for out of the rifle, but not all the parts I had to add to make it kind of close to my AR15’s. The only thing a folding stock does it wobble. Yeah it’s easier to transport in a shorter case, but big deal, you’re not a dismount, you’re not running anything suppressed in CA where it matters about having to tune gas ports and spring weights.

I have finger blasted a Sig they do feel good in the hand but are front heavy and they gets old after a while especially if your planning on anything but a flat range. Don’t know how they shoot, SiG is really hit or miss for QC for what they charge. I think FN and Sig share a supple because they cost way to much.

Bren was fun to shoot but I only shot the 7.62x39 one. So I have no idea how the 5.56 does.

I just have standard AR’s at this point. but piston guns have there place. Issues an A2, got an M4, the M27 was a few years after I got out, but hey the SAW’s where great…

 

[Darqhelmet]

I used all three in the Marine Corps. I was issued an M16A4 during Recruit Training at MCRDSD, I was then issued an M4 for the majority of my training at SOI, Ft. Sill, etc and when I finally got sent to the fleet. During 2021-22, I was issued an M27 IAR and that was my rifle for the rest of my contract. I'm gonna be honest in my assessment and I honestly think that the M27 IAR is nice and all but I honestly prefer the M4 and I know a lot of guys preferred the M4 and the M249 SAW over the M27.

However the M27 had a lot of benefits, you can switch out barrels on the fly to make it a DMR or a carbine length rifle, we ran KAC NT4 cans with them which made them way more pleasant to shoot and it ran mostly clean even WITH a suppressor attached. However I still preferred our issued ACOGs to the VCOGs we ran on the M27s. Most of the time, we ran our M27s suppressed for the most part and I loved every minute of it being a Californian lol. I love HK as much as the next guy but I would've been content running my issued M4 or hell even the M16A4 for the rest of my days if I had to. I felt way safer with a SAW gunner than that same guy with an M27 instead of the M249.

However even since my time in the Marine Corps, I've been of the firm belief that we should be allowed to own suppressors or silencers in California if you want to call them by their legal classification. I believe shooting suppressed is safer, easier on the ears, and prevents long term hearing damage that is prevalent in our community. I still don't understand why Californian politicians are scared of suppressors, they're still loud enough to be heard, they blunt the loud noise and make shooting more enjoyable and safer. I just don't get it.

Because they don’t want anyone to have any firearms period. Suspressors are already banned and have been for I think close to 100 years in CA at this point. Mine are out of state secure and I do go and visit them. I just can’t add anymore for the time being. Though I got to the point where it’s rimfire, bolt guns, and subguns only. Semi auto rifles and suppressors are just a F-ing pain in the . Unless you have a Hux those things are magic, never had to tune any of the rifles, didn’t get gassed out after 5 rounds.

*now i’m going to go find out when CA banned cans*

 

[chiroken007]

Yeah I figured someone would mention that even though it’s been hit and miss with implementation, also the spear needs to be piston due to the high pressure round in combination with select fire so using it an an example to justify a piston 556 is kinda not valid imo

Not using it to justify anything.

 

[grandpapeepap]

Ideally I’d love bufferless such as Spear or CZ BREN 3.

i had a 805 and now im on my 2nd bren2, they are amazing firearms. you should still get a bren3 when they eventually make it state side for the commercial market. i know ill be getting one

 

[chiroken007]

i had a 805 and now im on my 2nd bren2, they are amazing firearms. you should still get a bren3 when they eventually make it state side for the commercial market. i know ill be getting one

Have you been using Compmags or another fix mag format? Any issues?

 

[grandpapeepap]

Have you been using Compmags or another fix mag format? Any issues?

my first one was pistol made rifle and followed 922r but my 2nd one is pistol format and idk what the original owner used but it works pretty fine no issues. its 762x39. wish i could give more help but theres a set screw so you cant drop mag

 

[Darqhelmet]

my first one was pistol made rifle and followed 922r but my 2nd one is pistol format and idk what the original owner used but it works pretty fine no issues. its 762x39. wish i could give more help but theres a set screw so you cant drop mag

Wish 7.62x39 was still dirt cheap. I like it more than 300blk supers. Bren2 runs x39 so nice.

 

[RustVendor]

piston rifles are a novelty, DI functions extremely well and is very easy to tune for recoil with lightweight bcg, buffer, adjustable gas block etc. You can build an extremely robust and reliable AR for ~1000 bucks, even compared to a bren2 at 2k, if you really hate cleaning you can buy 12 toolcraft BCGs at 80 bucks each for 1k (recently got a couple from ar15discounts at that price) and literally just throw your bcg away every few thousand rounds instead of scrubbing some carbon off of the rings. It's not to say the Bren isn't a nice rifle, they are cool but nothing beats the modularity and tune-ability of a DI AR15. But run your BCG wet and wipe off and re-lube every 500-1000 rounds and it's extremely easy to maintain.

 

[bonesurf]

people will debate DI vs piston til end of time and again, both platforms have strengths/weaknesses as noted above.

on the whole sig vs bren vs fn or whatever. brens are nice. shot 'em. havent owned them. i have a B&T APC308 and that's VERY nice. the APC556 is a shrunk down version. somewhat lighter than my Sig Spear in 308 (granted that one uses a stupid heavy profile barrel) so MAYBE the APC556 will be somewhat lighter than a spear LT. B&T as a design isnt that far off from the SCAR. but of course B&T has been going through their issues with the US distributor so.....FWIW ive owned many Sig guns and as far as I can tell the issues people have with the QC are nothing burgers but hey your mileage may vary. the Sig spear LT is lighter than a MR556 for me anyways. im guessing its mostly barrel profile. also maybe the spear LT has newer/lighter furniture. Sig also makes another piston 556. the sig 516 which is on whatever generation now. i THINK it's lighter than a spear LT i could be wrong.

if i was going to get a 556 FN i would wait for the ARKA to hit civilian markets. looks like they married the SCAR concept but built it on a dedicated 556 platform