Direct Gas Impingement

>So basically, you can literally shoot an AR until parts of it exceed their service life without cleaning even once. And the gun will still work.
Right, but environmental conditions should be taken into account.

youtube.com/watch?v=YAneTFiz5WU

youtube.com/watch?v=DX73uXs3xGU
Environmental factors considered, noted, and still wind up in the AR's favor.

Mud tests aren't something you should hold as the gold standard.
youtube.com/watch?v=iCMR48JQ-cc
From Vietnam, but still holds true today.

checked and laugh out loud

>gun fires at range to 15,000 rounds without cleaning, still works
>gun can be filled with mud and still fire
what environemental factors exactly then are going to hinder it? Dust?
youtube.com/watch?v=crdPv6nAQwU
No, not that apparently.

So like, what?

operator incompetence is an environmental factor.
also extreme cold, but that'll break damn near any mechanical system

Actually, yes dust can hinder it. Numerous stories of veterans in Iraq having that problem.

Obviously nature v nurture.
Raise an AR in an unloving environment and it will fail to thrive .

>operator incompetence is an environmental factor.
kek
>also extreme cold, but that'll break damn near any mechanical system
I could see that being the case.
inb4 that screencap of a NG convoy that couldn't even read a map and we're supposed to believe they actually knew how to use their guns
be sure to headpat your rifles and offer them rewards for performing well daily.

Why has nobody mentioned that the excess gas vents out the side of the carrier and not into the receiver like that shitty gif says?

>inb4 that screencap of a NG convoy that couldn't even read a map and we're supposed to believe they actually knew how to use their guns
Confirmation bias? Look at the other accounts.

>Look at other accounts
post some.

Because from what I've seen, the AR is actually an exceptionally reliable rifle when it comes to cycling in adverse conditions, especially compared to a lot of guns considered more traditionally reliable. Specifically the AK.

Who knew, having a wide open gap for shit to get into the gun's internals is actually bad.

>It just takes an awful lot to actually jam the action if the rifle is lubed.

>lubing your gun before shooting
STOP!

It does, it just takes a while

>not lubing your gun before shooting
START

>post some.
I don't have them on my computer.
>Because from what I've seen
You're only looking at a few facets.

>I don't have any examples
>Also there are other facets than ARs working in dust and AKs choking
Ok, what am I missing exactly user? Enlighten me.

how many facets of reliability are there? kind of a single-facet aspect to me dude

The high speed gas that works the cycling doesn't really leave much residue at all. It's the smoke that wafts out from an empty chamber that sticks to everything and that affects every autoloading gun.

Ok, how about how parts are divvied up over time, and how a weapon at a certain stage of its service life performs in specific battle conditions. I wouldn't consider a weapons performance to be showing the entire picture if it was utilized by delta or whatever the fuck either.

so take old, clapped out weapons, and put them in basic light infantry hands, and then keep them in continuous hard service in austere conditions for a long time?
why does that sound familiar?
most accounts I've read boil down to the fact that moon dust is hell on any weapon, especially if you oil them like big daddy army taught you to.

Corrosion is a big one.
Humid jungles of Vietnam combined with lack of maintenance and chrome lining made corrosion a real threat back then.
Shouldn't be as much of a problem now, but in wet or salty environments, oil is a must.

>why does that sound familiar?
What do you mean?

Iraq and Afghanistan ring any bells for you?

Most of the gas (and carbon) from the tube gets blown right out of the rifle. Most chamber fouling occurs during extraction, exactly as with piston-operated weapons.

>Iraq and Afghanistan ring any bells for you?
Is there a reason why you are so passive aggressive?

>>lubing your gun before shooting
Son, I'm gonna stop you there

probably, but I don't trust therapists.

Since I am more intelligent than you, I will explain why. When I said "environmental conditions" you linked a video displaying a satanist shoveling mud onto a firearm. You have been fooled by Satan.

Attached: 34827307_10107580844997752_780388732980166656_n.jpg (2048x1152, 229K)

I'm not that guy, fuck inrange and their wet concrete test

Satanist trickster.

>his gun isn't powered by satanic bloodlust
lol good luck user

Not that much gas actually goes up there, most of it flies out the front. You'll notice that attaching one of those blank-firing attachments, which traps more gas in the barrel to build enough pressure to cycle the gun with blanks, leads to absolutely ridiculous amounts of carbon fouling, because it doesn't blow out of the gun.

That graphic isn't even right. . . ARs are gas piston operated. That graphic stops right before the gas enters the BCS to operate the bolt/piston.

How would a Direct Infringement operating system work?

>operator incompetence is an environmental factor.

Are you really taking user error as a point against AR reliability?

Why the fuck wouldn't you lube your gun?

Because hes a stupid fuck dont listen

The gas enters your home and confiscates all your other guns.

Okay retard.

He fell for the lubeless Anderson meme

>The gas system isn't even the biggest component to fouling in the receiver, residual gas coming from the chamber upon extraction is. AKs will get just as filthy, same with piston ARs.

This. My roller-delayed gun gets way filthier than my AR. Because it opens a lot faster.

kek

>Does this have a shorter time between cleanings than, say, a Kalashnikov?
Total fucking fudd lore. Look up the Filthy 14 AR. You aren't going to get any properly built AR dirty enough to make it stop working just by firing milspec ammo, period.

>takes your guns
>takes a dump on your dinner table

>underrated

I have to wonder if that image was legitimately made to troll, or if it's just a case of 100% fuddlore

>same with piston ARs
Got to disagree there. I have a blem Adams Arms gun that I'm in the process of running into the dirt. My BCG stays way cleaner than my buddies DI gun when we've compared them after 15+ mags of 5.56 in a class. As in, wipe off with a paper towel and CLP and the BCG is done.

I do get a lot of carbon build up on the back of the gas block where the gas from the gas port strikes the piston and then escapes forward of the handguard though, and he doesn't. It fucking sucks to scrape off with a dinky wire brush that fits between the two, so I know where all that carbon that didn't get on my BCG is going.

because most of the gas gets sent through the bolt carrier and out of the side of the gun very little stays inside the upper