The Stoner design and why it's bad.

Status
Not open for further replies.
I am amazed that no one has ever heard of a gas tube pitting and coroding to the level gas escapes at such pressures the bolt doesn't even move. I have no proof and the proof that does exist in way of documents can be easily forged. The army in basic form first utilizes a form 2404 I could forge one to make you all understand or you can just trust me that I have in fact seen pitted gas tubes. I don't know what to tell all of you I feel like I'm explaining the earth is round while everyone says it's flat, and even then in this forum someone would indeed say the earth is in fact flat do to so many opinions.

Here is the simple fact I have seen pitted gas tubes render M4's useless. Including my own.
 
Here we go I'm trying to figure out what's going on here, so military depending on who you are can shoot dozens of rounds because well I'm ornlating for them, what if the tubes are coroding due to overheating if there is an end it would still work but at the bend would allow carbon to build up and in fact eventually cause corrosion. I have shot many many rounds in one day maybe the way in which the rifles are used can account for this. Here is a pic of a gas tube than malformed due to 1000 rounds being shot out without cooling breaks. Also in this it shows another issue with the rifle "that gas tubes can bend because there so small"
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2359.JPG
    IMG_2359.JPG
    122.6 KB · Views: 60
The gas tubes will not overheat and bend when the rifle is used as it is designed. Firing 1000rds without lettting the rifle cool is not how it was designed to be operated, therefore a failure in those circumstances is not a failure in design of the rifle. All a melted and bent gas tube in a training environment shows is poor distribution of fires and Or a lack of self control on the trigger finger. You have SAWs and 240s that were designed for the purpose of providing high volumes of rapid fire.

I was a Scout and was at the range pretty much weekly, never once saw a rifle fail from a corroded or otherwise abused gas tube. I saw a handful of bolt failures (broken lugs), worn bolt gas rings, worn springs and bad magazines, all of which are items with a designed life limit.
 
crazysccrmd said:
The gas tubes will not overheat and bend when the rifle is used as it is designed. Firing 1000rds without lettting the rifle cool is not how it was designed to be operated, therefore a failure in those circumstances is not a failure in design of the rifle. All a melted and bent gas tube in a training environment shows is poor distribution of fires and Or a lack of self control on the trigger finger. You have SAWs and 240s that were designed for the purpose of providing high volumes of rapid fire.

I was a Scout and was at the range pretty much weekly, never once saw a rifle fail from a corroded or otherwise abused gas tube. I saw a handful of bolt failures (broken lugs), worn bolt gas rings, worn springs and bad magazines, all of which are items with a designed life limit.
Click to expand...


I agree the M4 was not designed for that it is indeed the job of or support weapons. However not me but others I know including immediate family members have been in engaments where they were very close to that 1000 rounds I have not been in the situation to such a degree others have. The average soldier only carrier less that 300 rounds on him or as so taught 240 rounds do we listen? no I carried more mags when I wasn't carrying my XM2010. The particular individual who did fire if not. Ore than 1000 rounds had so because he had acces to more magazines that being he was in a Stryker that had more loaded mags. And who is to say 1000 rounds isn't the only crossing point of functionality, when can we presume the gas tube actually began to bend and malform? Was it 500? I don't know all I know is he was able to shoot 1000 rounds out of the malformed tube before it was really bad.

My guess so far, humidity, type of powder, extended rapid fire, and time play a role in this in some way.

And I agree all firearms if used harsh do wear, moving parts always wear; my debate is on which ones wear that you don't even know are in fact wearing down
 
Interesting, albeit heavily biased, read.

Like thousands of other folks, I too have Armorers certification in the AR platform, under which I have personally built over 200 AR's, rebuilt more than twice that number in the last ~15yrs, and have fired over 2million rounds out of AR rifles in that time. Some of these particular rifles went through 10's of thousands of rounds. There's plenty wrong with ALL firearm designs which could be improved upon, but based on my personal experience, the issues of focus in this "article" strike me as highly exaggerated. When I got to the part favoring the Mini-14 to the AR, I almost laughed myself out of my chair.

There ARE standard replacement durations for many action parts, as there are for all firearms, including the M-1a or Mini-14. Poor heat treat on FCG parts can happen, but it's a long ways from common - but ALL FCG's wear with use. I've cooked out gas tubes in destructive tests, but almost exclusively with select fire weapons - I've attempted twice to do so in semi-auto AR's. Burning out the seal in the piston of an M-1a, or bending the op rod is something I've accomplished on multiple occasions.
 
First my credentials; I was a unit Armorer with an SMOS of 45B. Because of my previous experiences before enlisting with the AR, I helped our LRSD set up "shortys" for their mission. (I was in during the time the XM177E2's had all been DX'd, but before the M4 was issued.) We used 10" commercial barrels and modded the gas tubes to function correctly. My unit was issued A1's, the line units had A2's.

OK. We all know the AR/M16/M4 needs to be maintained. You are not in combat 24/7, there is always time to maintain it. Frequent basic 'wipe it down' maintenance is better than nothing between depot-level takedowns once a year, or whenever you get around to it. And a professional soldier maintains his rifle before getting chow, hitting the latrine, etc., when getting back inside the wire. The problem I had was I had a bunch of REMF's who considered the rifle an extra 8 pounds they had to carry for no good reason. :rolleyes: Maintenance? Isn't that just wiping it down before turning it in to the Armorer? (Not in MY arms room it wasn't!) I can't speak to M4's as they were issued after I got out, but the M16A1's and A2's I handled and worked on, had aluminum gas tubes. (We kept the full length of the gas tube for those 10" by bending them to fit under the short handguards of the CAR's we built.) The gas tubes tended to get carbon fouled to beat all, but I usually replaced them before any corrosion would have happened.

I don't have combat experience with the 16, I wasn't a 'high-speed/low drag' type, but I worked on a lot of M16A1's and A2's. I saw all the common failures, and a few uncommon ones. (Those were usually the result of 'operator headspace and timing') .Parts need to be replaced on a regular basis, as you mentioned, Baja Oro, and that's why I agree with you it's not the best rifle for an individual for long term unsupported (no gunshop for parts and a gunsmith in the Apocalypse....;) ) use. That's why I have an AK. (AMD-65, which by the way, isn't that what the ANA troops usually carry? ) I agree with you, the Scout Squad is a top notch rifle. I'd have one if I were better off financially. I built my AMD for under $300, can't build an M1A for anywhere near that...

And yes, blanks are the worst for fouling up an AR! I shot up the excess from an FTX once, so many the barrel on my A1 was glowing. I had planned on replacing it anyway. I replaced the gas tube also, as well as the sight block.
 
Last edited:
crazysccrmd said:
I was a Scout and was at the range pretty much weekly, never once saw a rifle fail from a corroded or otherwise abused gas tube. I saw a handful of bolt failures (broken lugs), worn bolt gas rings, worn springs and bad magazines, all of which are items with a designed life limit.
Click to expand...

Add extractors to the list of likely villains, and you've got what I saw as a civilian.

However, most other autos are worse in my experience - AKs and SKSs tend to be unreliable out of the box due to how they're assembled and disasters accuracy-wise. Garands are very picky eaters and have problems with their gas system too. They also seem to be prone to premature clip ejection and slam fires. REmington autos eat their own actions. BARs are lucky to get through 5 mags. Mini-14s have horrible accuracy although supposedly they've been upgraded to merely bad. M1As have stocks that break and gas problems and while they can be accessorized it's hard. Of course those problems can be hammered out, but as sold I think the AR is the best of a bad lot.

I don't really understand what happened to the gas tube in that picture, unless it melted. If it melted due to heat from rapid fire a) that's not the intended use of the AR and b) it may not be a milspec part
 
entropy said:
First my credentials; I was a unit Armorer with an SMOS of 45B. Because of my previous experiences before enlisting with the AR, I helped our LRSD set up "shortys" for their mission. (I was in during the time the XM177E2's had all been DX'd, but before the M4 was issued.) We used 10" commercial barrels and modded the gas tubes to function correctly. My unit was issued A1's, the line units had A2's.

OK. We all know the AR/M16/M4 needs to be maintained. You are not in combat 24/7, there is always time to maintain it. Frequent basic 'wipe it down' maintenance is better than nothing between depot-level takedowns once a year, or whenever you get around to it. And a professional soldier maintains his rifle before getting chow, hitting the latrine, etc., when getting back inside the wire. The problem I had was I had a bunch of REMF's who considered the rifle an extra 8 pounds they had to carry for no good reason. :rolleyes: Maintenance? Isn't that just wiping it down before turning it in to the Armorer? (Not in MY arms room it wasn't!) I can't speak to M4's as they were issued after I got out, but the M16A1's and A2's I handled and worked on, had aluminum gas tubes. (We kept the full length of the gas tube for those 10" by bending them to fit under the short handguards of the CAR's we built.) The gas tubes tended to get carbon fouled to beat all, but I usually replaced them before any corrosion would have happened.

I don't have combat experience with the 16, I wasn't a 'high-speed/low drag' type, but I worked on a lot of M16A1's and A2's. I saw all the common failures, and a few uncommon ones. (Those were usually the result of 'operator headspace and timing') .Parts need to be replaced on a regular basis, as you mentioned, Baja Oro, and that's why I agree with you it's not the best rifle for an individual for long term unsupported (no gunshop for parts and a gunsmith in the Apocalypse....;) ) use. That's why I have an AK. (AMD-65, which by the way, isn't that what the ANA troops usually carry? ) I agree with you, the Scout Squad is a top notch rifle. I'd have one if I were better off financially. I built my AMD for under $300, can't build an M1A for anywhere near that...

And yes, blanks are the worst for fouling up an AR! I shot up the excess from an FTX once, so many the barrel on my A1 was glowing. I had planned on replacing ti anyway. I replaced the gas tube also, as well as the sight block.
Click to expand...

Agreed I think you were the only own that caught that. My point was in the beginning this rifle with lack of proper tools and cleaning in a very hospitable environment would be ill suited. Good question on the ANA I cannot speak for other provinces but in our large operating zone all ANA and I mean all had M16's and I saw a squad once with M4's all AKM styles were with the Afghan local police I guess your could say there government had our weapons the local government had AKM's of wife varying type
 
Last edited:
A bit of punctuation and running a spell checker would certainly make the original post easier to read. It is hard for me to be convinced of an argument from some one that cant spell aren't (arnt)
 
Google "Glock Torture Test", and turn on YouTube. If a system's design credentials are determined by what they do when you throw something at it that it was never designed for, then I guess the locked-breech design is bad as well. From the looks of that barrel, the gas tube is not the only issue that poor soul is facing. No firearm can handle everything that sadists can come up with. Some firearms are better suited for some tasks than others, but, if it has survived for half a century, it must have some merits (even if the biggest one is that Uncle Sam is slow to change. There, beat someone to it). If someone has a distaste for a particular firearm, there are other choices, but it doesn't mean the firearm is without merit for any and all situations... :rolleyes:
 
Baja Oro said:
Here we go I'm trying to figure out what's going on here, so military depending on who you are can shoot dozens of rounds because well I'm ornlating for them, what if the tubes are coroding due to overheating if there is an end it would still work but at the bend would allow carbon to build up and in fact eventually cause corrosion. I have shot many many rounds in one day maybe the way in which the rifles are used can account for this. Here is a pic of a gas tube than malformed due to 1000 rounds being shot out without cooling breaks. Also in this it shows another issue with the rifle "that gas tubes can bend because there so small"
Click to expand...
The tube in the picture was obviously too long and was bent to fit. Trolling? Something amiss here.

Picture in post #28.
 
Buy what you want. Learn to shoot it and take care of it.

Tens of millions of ARs out there working fine.
 
Aside from my experience starting with the M16 Hydramatic in Basic, or building my own which don't have issues, I refer to the long term use of AR's at the Henderson rental range in Vegas, where they are assured of firing over 100,000 rounds a year.

At that point the AR's have had bolt and action spring changes. It's a known and demonstrated issue. However, the AK's have structural failures of the lower receiver which causes cracking and that requires welding them up to continue their operation. Considering the OP's premise that a long term end of life as we know it weapon needs to be durable, where do you find an experienced welder in an environment with no power?

I will just replace parts obtained from weapons found in battle - should I be lucky enough to live that long. AR's are remarkably interchangeable and I have proven it to myself building them from sources located across the continent, and for all I know, sourced from overseas. There are plants not located on US soil manufacturing parts and they are imported. However, the AK series is notoriously fraught with source country manufacture that does not follow a single TDP and parts are NOT interchangeable, as many of the AK fans continue to report. It takes gunsmith level work to get them operational. You cannot just swap AK parts into a single lower and expect it to fire.

The premise is that the AR isn't suitable for long term use in continuous battle. That is where things go wrong. First, that ANY battle rifle ever existed that could do that. Second, that there is a "continuous battle." It completely ignores the issue of where all that ammo is coming from. As noted above, the Henderson range can fire up to 100,000 rounds a year thru a weapon. Just do the math - that is 300 rounds, a basic load, fired 365 days a year.

Nobody can sustain that level of combat. Aside from the risks, unit histories show that most teams in continuous combat for 30 days can reach manning levels of less than 10%. In other words, most are wounded and killed. Expecting that to last another 11 months is ridiculous.

Of course, that's my experience as a Infantry Officer who then went Logistics and worked at a Area Group HQ's who's task was unit reconstitution - and our job was to reequip and reman units that had slipped under 50% effectiveness. So the OP's premise that a single individual fighting continuously for months at a time and then wearing out his weapon is more than questionable, it's something based on unrealistic expectations with no relevant examples in human history at all.

If so, then I guess any one of us could get a new M4 issued any time we need it, along with that 100,000 rounds of ammo that is being parceled out just for me. I'm glad somebody else is doing it because I can't afford it and I don't know anyone with that much hoarded back. We're talking over $20,000 in ammo in your basement waiting for the end of world.

It's always fun to do the math. Sorry OP, my military and personal experience leave me to do my own thinking and choosing.
 
ClickClickD'oh said:
Don't pay the OP any mind. That picture was stolen from a thread on another forum from 2012. He's likely never seen a gun fail in the manner he described, much less it happen with any frequency.
Click to expand...

Well, good thing there were pictures, because frankly I had a hard time understanding his posts
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

P
  • Locked
What was wrong with Stoner's design?
2 3
Replies
51
Views
3K
Art Eatman
A
J
  • Locked
wolf 223=dirty powder?
Replies
11
Views
937
Samuel_Hoggson
S
N
  • Locked
Cleaning/Lubing Saiga Rifle Gas Tube
Replies
22
Views
3K
ToadPS
T
N
  • Locked
Cleaning AR15 gas port and tube
2
Replies
38
Views
23K
R.W.Dale
R
Mikee Loxxer
  • Locked
Solvents Entering the AR’s Gas Tube
Replies
6
Views
1K
wrs840
W
Back
Top