Which AR...?

[Classic1911]

Hi there guys

I just joined up the other day, been doing IPSC (handgun), mainly classic. I want to get myself an AR but am not sure which is the better make or what the two gas systems have over one another in advantages/disadvantages...

I live in South Africa, so we do not have the variety you guys have. I have looked at the following rifles (all .223/5.56mm);

• Norinco CQ-A
• Smith & Wesson M7P 15 Sport
• Anderson Arms M4
• Proarms PAR Mk3

The first thre have gas-impingment systems and the last one has the short-stoke gas piston (please excuse mis-naming the systems). What would you guys suggest? Advantages/disadvantages of the various makes and operating systems.

Thanks!!

[KY1911]

A Direct Gas gun will be fine and likely less expensive. I'd go with either the S&W or the Anderson and then shoot the heck out of it.

[EkuJustice]

I would go DI. The Anderson makes a good rifle and actually makes parts for other big name companies. The advantage I DI over piston is the parts all interchange in a DI where on piston gun it's more proprietary.

[Classic1911]

Thanks for the answers KY1911 and EkuJustice. Appreciated!

If the DI gas system works so well, as it has since the early '60's, why on earth did they start using the piston on the AR's? It seems to be a European thing though. The Anderson I looked at impresses me more than the Smith. But before any one want to tar and feather me, the M&P 15 is one of the most popular AR here in SA, followed very closely by the Norinco CQA. The Norincos are cheaper and easier to get. The Anderson seems to be a more solid firearm than the Smith.

Ar's are still fairly mistrusted here, being made out of aluminium. Most shooters here go for the LM 4 rifle, which is a semi-auto version of our military rifle, the R4. It is a copy of the Isreali Galil, which as everyone knows is a copy of the AK. I used the R4 in service rifle shooting sometime back, and it is heavy and not as accurate as the AR I tried for the first time a month ago (an old early 1980's AR-15 with the Veitnam era triangular hand guard). That rifle was way more accurate than the LM4/ R4 platform and the recoil was less (due to reduced mass of the moving parts I guess...)

I like the AR and I am leaning towards the Anderson as I like the round, free-floating aluminium for-end. I would just like to get more info on it. I have tried looking at their website.

TIA

Edited November 1, 2014 by Classic1911

[dauntedfuture]

I don't know much of anything about your situation there in SA. I should think that parts are harder to come by. I would think that the S&W and the Anderson rifles have standard AR dimensions, i'm not as sure about the Norinco gun. It would be a shame to find yourself in a situation where you can get aftermarket parts and they don't fit. Is you are considering the Norinco, I would make sure it will take triggers and compensators etc.

[wgj3]

What everybody else said mostly. We from the other side of the pond are most familiar with the S&W and the Anderson brands, so that may be the basis for a bit of our bias. That said, we know Smith will stand behind their product if you happen to experience any problems. Anderson likely would as well.

Many would argue that the piston AR is a solution looking for a problem. Others would tell you that the piston guns are more reliable and run cooler than DI guns. Most competitive shooters in the US still run DI guns and with modern coatings and tolerances and a bit of cleaning and lube from time to time, they run great.

Edited November 1, 2014 by wgj3

[Classic1911]

The spare/aftermarket parts issue are a big deal. The Anderson interests me a lot, I really like the build of the rifle! I have seen two shooters here with expensive European AR's and both of them used the gas piston. Guess what. They both gave problems as well!

I know you cannot judge a make by one bad rifle. I hear that the USN SEALS use or used the H&K 416 and that has a gas piston...??

Anyway, I am kinda leaning towards the Anderson...I have a few ideas about the add-ons and this will be influenced by the uses this rifle will be put to.

One things for sure, US companies have stood by their product when I have had the odd little glitch, so that does keep me coming back for more!

[shakman]

I'm a recent convert to gas pistons on my competition rifles, and I can honestly say there is a difference. Mine have the Adams Arms XLP retrofit kit installed. I have noticed a significant decrease in the amount of felt recoil impulse which leads to faster follow-up shots during stages. Another obvious side-effect is the upper receiver doesn't get all fouled up with deposits like a DI system does which makes cleaning my rifle fun again.

That being said, unless you are dead-set on a piston system, stick with a DI system for your first foray into the AR platform. It's a tried-and-true system that just runs with pretty much any ammo you throw at it. Parts are easily found at any major distributor. I can say my AA kits have been problem-free since I installed them and I would highly recommend them to anyone wanting to make the transition to gas piston, but for someone just getting started with the AR, I would recommend DI systems to begin with.

Just my 2 cents....take it as such.

[gliney00]

I have a couple of the M&P 15 sports, and they have been great rifles for the money.

[zimm33]

I started with a S&W MP 15 and it was a great rifle. Never had a problem even when I ran it with a slidefire stock a couple times. It handled 30rd mag dumps in 3 seconds like a champ!

[Jadeslade]

Man,if you're not sure go for the Norinco. Not available in US, but an M4 clone. I suspect that will be the least expensive of the lot.

[Salsantini]

I have both DI and piston AR's. The DI tend to be lighter. The main advantage to a piston rifle is ease of maintenance.