Why haven't we swapped out DIs with short-strokes in the military?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sorry if I offended any DI worshipers, and I know you exist. A short-stroke gas piston system just seems the way to go. With most combat engagements occurring within 300 yards (and even that's a stretch), do we really need all the accuracy that the DI has to offer?

Actually in our AO most are being reported from units that never fire a shot. Then we engage with HIMARS (arty). They tend to be measured in km's not m's. LOL

I all honesty as a varmint hunter who uses the 5.56 (.223), I will say even with heavier bullets it is a 300-400yd round. Oh and I have used AR type weapons in both military and civilian field conditions and have NEVER had a malfunction that was because of the weapon. My reloading is another story when I first started. LOL
 
In the technical world, they have a phrase

"operator Error"
DI works, works well, as long as it is worked within it's system, I carried one in the 'bad situations' and 'bad environment' and it works...
 
I have a rifle that works very well. I have no desire to modify it. For pistons to be a benefit, you have to commonly reach the operating temperatures where it would be an actual benefit. If you are firing your rifle that much, you should have used a SAW.
 
Precision,

I appreciate your enthusiasm for shooting and gun rights. It's a good thing. Don't lose that.

However, what I do recommend is spend more time listening and asking questions and less time telling everyone how it goes. You're still wet behind the ears and the only thing that fixes that is knowledge and experience.

The gunboards and internet is full of great amounts of knowledge and helpful tips. It's also full of total BS. You need more experience and knowledge to be able to filter through that BS.

My suggestions are, keep up the enthusiasm, get out to the range, go hunting, join the military (if you feel so bold), or whatever, but you GOTTA get out out of the house and get that personal experience, and you have to keep up on it to a degree too.

It's taken me years to gain any amount of real useful knowledge about guns. I would say that the first few years I was learning, I still knew next to nothing. Definitely not enough to be teaching others much of anything especially useful. I still learn new things EVERY DAY and don't plan on stopping. I'll never know it all...
 
Honest enthusiasm isn't a crime, and, yes, there are a lot of us who would like to see an upgrade from the M4. And buying it for the Army would cost about one fighter plane in money spent.

Here's what you aren't hearing: When most of the current Vietnam vets served, they lived in an America that had 1 in 10 other citizens who had served in the Armed Forces. Now, it's 1 in 100. Most of what the public hears these days is distorted second hand BS.

Chalk me up in the category of combat trained, Infantry and MP, but my deployment was in the wire - not even inkpens allowed. I used the M16 in the Reserves for 22 years, but I learned more about it in the last 16 months BUILDING one than the Army ever taught me.

In brief: No, the M16/M4 does not have problems with dust, it has problems with soldiers who won't clean it every day, keep it clean, and kept it lubricated WET in the upper cam pin channel per the TM. Soldiers do keep the port cover closed, add a plastic muzzle cap to protect the barrel, and even bag them in high dust areas. What's not being said is the AK has the same problems, and being DI or piston has really nothing to do with it.

Magazines have been a big source of the M16's problems since nearly the beginning. What makes the AK reliable is a nearly bullet proof machined magazine that works, and what makes the M16 fail is a cheap stamped aluminum magazine that will jam if dropped on the feed lips when loaded. The fix is the Marines are using Pmags, and the Army is buying them, too. If you can't bend it, dent it, or make it hang up inside, a mag works, and there are a lot less problems with them.

Who we train to use a gun is part of it, too. Think about it, the kids you teach soccer really haven't much clue about it, they still kick with the toe, don't pass well, can't exploit an opening, or dribble downfield against 5 opponents and attempt a goal. Well, an 18-23 year old new recruit hasn't lived with a M16 since birth (like some recent immigrants who dominate the game locally,) and there's a lot to learn.

I was watching a Marine squad leader teaching his team the finer points of simply switching from carrying the weapon pointing left to pointing right - you depress the barrel to the ground as you sweep your buddy in line in front of you. Don't shoot him in the back, the guy behind you doing the same. 22 years in the USAR, I'd never seen that.

There are literally hundreds of tips, tactics, and tricks to learn, the problem being making them lifesaving habits in less than three years before someone ETS's. A lot of them don't even get the habit of cleaning the weapon daily - especially if you don't fire it for months at a time. Haji isn't ambushing us that much, he'd rather plant an IED, read up on what really kills our troops.

Switching to a piston won't fix the REAL problems, DI works just fine.
 
I'm not for or against it but I do have a few comments and thoughts.

Do we even have a standard Piston system? From what I see each company that puts one out uses the same concept but not the same parts and they are not interchangable.

Also it seams to me that a lot of poeple pretend that the DI system is new and a sole concept of the AR15 family of rifles. It's not new by any means. It was developed by Stoner in the AR18 to improve upon the AR15 years ago.

As far as combat goes I'm pretty sure the AR18 or 180 I forget , was used by military in african countries for years. Anyone have reports of it's use cause I can't find any.


I have a DI for a competition service rifle and I have no combat experience.
 
OP, I don't know your Marine friend personally, so I'm speaking generally here.

There are a lot of people in the military who are not the most mechanically inclined, and don't know crap about guns, how they work, or how to keep them working. Not every claim that "my M16 was a jamming piece of crap!" is a valid one. The overwhelming majority of soldiers keep their M16s and M4s functioning properly just fine.
 
OP, I don't know your Marine friend personally, so I'm speaking generally here.

There are a lot of people in the military who are not the most mechanically inclined, and don't know crap about guns, how they work, or how to keep them working. Not every claim that "my M16 was a jamming piece of crap!" is a valid one. The overwhelming majority of soldiers keep their M16s and M4s functioning properly just fine.
As a former Marine armorer, I concur. Not knocking anyone, but some people are quick to blame the hammer when they hit their thumb.

I had an Lt. cursing a .50 one day. When clearing the weapon before working on it, I noticed a bone dry gun with a chamber full of sand. Sir, let's clean this thing off a little and try some lube. Purred like a tiger afterward. Many similar stories exist.
 
Precision said:
well, you gotta give me credit for trying.

Give you credit for trying WHAT?

I think everyone here appreciates a young person interested in guns coming here to get educated.

That said, it usually works better to ask questions rather than just argue with no real experience on the topic.
 
This is a long and pricey process that is currently in the works. Now what I wish is that nato would adopt the 6x45 or 6.8 as the standard nato round. That would save a lot of lives when coupled with a gas piston upper or something like the acr.
 
I don't see any point in wasting my tax payer dollars on a new rifle for the Army.
 
question asked an answered. this topic has been done to death
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top