Primary Weapon Systems/ Is it the Best Choice

Blindmike · September 12, 2012, 12:00 AM

Over the Past year and a half I have spent time working my way through the piles of information on all the gas piston system AR platforms found in today's marketplace. A very close review of the different platforms was needed due to my requirements of a weapon system and which company makes the best system overall. I was looking for a rifle that could meet all my needs and also what most people, I believe, would also expect from a weapon that life and limb could come to depend on in some unforeseen future event.
First, it must be dependable. Second, be able to be reconfigured into pistol, CQB carbine, M4 carbine, or rifle. Third, multi caliber choices up to 7.62X51 NATO. Forth, is very important when you can't print your own money like a government and that is cost. Last of all is the configuration, with the most needed accessories already on the gun, as received from the factory. Since I believe that (2) two weapons, both have to be gas piston operation, are needed to fill the many rolls required I have put forth and they need to be the same brand so that at lest some parts would interchange if needed. Also, the smaller caliber weapon would need all its parts for any configure change to be produced from the one suppler. Extra credit is given to any company that also has a 7.62x51 in the lineup, as matter of fact not having one is reason for the companies brand to be dropped from the list. The purpose for this would be better sinergy of the weapon system.
In my review of all the companies out there who make a gas piston system only one meets all these common sence requirements and that has been Primary Weapon Systems. I have already purchased the Mk116 and have also started working on getting other uppers for the pistol and a 14" CQB configuration. After wards I plan to start on a 308 version for my collection. This is what makes Primary Weapon Systems, IMHO, the best overall small arms builders. What are your thoughts on the subject?

buckhorn_cortez · September 12, 2012, 06:14 AM

My thoughts? You've stated your self rationalizations for buying a specific manufacturer. If it works for you - that's all that counts. Me? I have a Barrett REC7 and a Les Baer .308. I only care about ultimate performance within a specific platform type. In my case - a piston AR15 and AR platform .308 - and chose those two manufacturers.

Blindmike · September 12, 2012, 12:22 PM

Thanks for your reply Buckhorn-Cortez, but the reason for my looking for one manufacture of both rifles was not brand loyalty or some preset desire to purchase the PWS MK116, it is so parts can be used between the rifles in case one is damaged beyond repair. Many of the brands I looked at had parts that could be used between the 5.56 and the 7.62 versions of the rifles. With the PWS I chose to go with the gas piston system on both rifles have many of the same parts, the fire control parts will change out with each other, along with the unique buffer tube used by PWS and that is just to name a few parts in their system that interchange. Other manufactures like LMT's gas piston rifles, FNH's SCAR and others have parts that interchange also. I was looking at this as an advantage in a push comes to shove situation. My reasoning is simply the more parts your can take from one system to keep the other up and running improves the chances you will not have to defend yourself or hunt for food by throwing rocks.

Mrgunsngear · September 12, 2012, 12:53 PM

Quote:

Is it the Best Choice

It's a good choice. They're great guns but you're the one who will ultimately have to decide if it's the best choice for you...

GI Sandv · September 12, 2012, 05:32 PM

Check out Colt's new .308/.223 lower. It comes as a full .308 rifle, but with the ability to purchase one piece to allow a .223 upper to be put on.

http://www.gunsamerica.com/blog/colt...iew-le901-16s/

However, it's not going to be cheap.

I've wondered about an AR .308 pistol. Let me know if you ever do that. I'd love to see the finished result.

10mmAuto · September 12, 2012, 06:11 PM

It's the best if you're going to use it in some kind of adverse environment. Their long stroke flex piston is great, I'm not a fan of the short stroke 416 style at all. They are very reliable.

If you're not going to pack it into a mountain valley on a five day hunt, it's probably not worth it over a quality DI.

buckhorn_cortez · September 12, 2012, 09:30 PM

Quote:

Thanks for your reply Buckhorn-Cortez, but the reason for my looking for one manufacture of both rifles was not brand loyalty or some preset desire to purchase the PWS MK116, it is so parts can be used between the rifles in case one is damaged beyond repair. Many of the brands I looked at had parts that could be used between the 5.56 and the 7.62 versions of the rifles. With the PWS I chose to go with the gas piston system on both rifles have many of the same parts, the fire control parts will change out with each other, along with the unique buffer tube used by PWS and that is just to name a few parts in their system that interchange. Other manufactures like LMT's gas piston rifles, FNH's SCAR and others have parts that interchange also. I was looking at this as an advantage in a push comes to shove situation. My reasoning is simply the more parts your can take from one system to keep the other up and running improves the chances you will not have to defend yourself or hunt for food by throwing rocks.

Your reasons are meaningful for you and meaningless to me - as long as you're satisfied with your choice, that's what matters. I have enough rifles and pistols that if any one goes down, I'm not going to be "throwing rocks" - just changing guns.

I have no idea what "push comes to shove" scenarios you've imagined that will require interchanging parts - but, if owning the rifles you've chosen lets you sleep at night, then that's good for you.

As for the need to interchange parts - I never quite understand that idea. There are very few parts that are going to break in an AR style gun. If you're that concerned about it, then I'd just buy extra parts and make up a parts kit, it's not that difficult to do, and that way you don't have one gun down to make another one run.

I have firing pins, pre-fitted extractors, spring kits etc. for my pistols that I take with me in a small parts kit if I'm going to be in an extended shooting situation. I've never done that for my rifles, but it wouldn't be all that difficult to do. If I was really concerned, I'd buy another upper get a backup modular trigger and be done with it.

Blindmike · September 12, 2012, 10:50 PM

I have looked at the Colt LE-901-16S And find it to be a very interesting and ground breaking ideal. As a matter of fact I want to see more information from people who take the leap into a new and yet unproven system. My gut tells me that Colt did its homework, as we all know they are a very conservative company, and they would not chance damage to their reputation. Although, I do not mind spending hard earned money on quality, I do look for proven weapon systems. Colt is on to something good here and I am sure they are looking at the US military need for a more versatile weapon that will also not require retaining of the troops. That is my objective as well, as I am sure many that read this thread as well, finding a weapon system or in my case at this point 2 rifles that fulfill all the requirements. The Colt is one weapon system that has peaked my interest, due to only having the one basic body and in the long run may have a lower over all cost, since I am keeping a very open mind to the subject at hand this could be the best answer. One thing I do like is the simplest answer is normally the best.

buckhorn_cortez · September 13, 2012, 05:56 AM

Quote:

One thing I do like is the simplest answer is normally the best.

Then in my estimation, two separate rifles, each purpose-built for the optimum performance, is the simplest answer. While the Colt is an interesting product, it is neither the best solution for a .223, nor the best for a .308. It is a compromise design relying on extra parts to make a .308 lower functional with .223 upper - it is NOT the "simplest" answer.

Art Eatman · September 13, 2012, 08:02 AM

I've never been a fan of the "One size fits all" idea. I'd much rather have a specific tool for a specific use. A screwdriver makes a lousy chisel. A commuter doesn't need a full-size heavy-duty pickup.

I'm always curious about the intended use of any rifle, which hasn't been mentioned here...

Too many equal-reliability tests for comparing direct impingement with pistons; six of one, half-dozen of the other. "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder."

Colt's good; others are equal, and right now the S&W has found many admirers. Pardon me while I show little interest in hollering, "Best!"

kraigwy · September 14, 2012, 08:36 AM

Quote:

What are your thoughts on the subject?

I'm with ART.

There is no such thing as a ONE RIFLE to do everything. I do to many things.

And if I want a pistol, I'll get a pistol. I personally don't have any use for a 308 Win Pistol.

Besides, one rifle for everything would get pretty lonely in my gun safe.

I like shooting, all kinds of shooting, and all kinds of shooting require different rifles.

Blindmike · September 15, 2012, 10:35 PM

The reason I started this thread was to discuss an Ideal. It is simple, in a time when our military continues to look for a replacement rifle for the M-16 and all of Its sub-groups, due to its shortcomings. The reason for their search is the same as mine and that is to come up with the most flexible weapon for the largest range of situations. Yes it is nice to have a pistol for when a pistol is the very best choice or a sniper rifle for when precision shots need to be made at 600-1000 yards. Personally, that is what anyone would want but when things just happen the way they happen many times you have to just love the one your with as the old saying goes. I would rather have a rifle I can convert to something like a pistol than to have a sniper rifle and need a pistol. Flexible weapons fits the bill and that is what I, like the military, are really looking to find. Now, finding a weapon system with the greatest ability to fill the rolls has different answer for everyone based on there point of view. You may want a true pistol and a true rifle, I like having two flexible rifles to cover the widest range. Someone else likes the Colt 901, the do it all rifle system, which is a good ideal also. Are these the very best weapon for every situations is not even the point. The point is what ideals do you have to bring to the table on a flexible weapon system and making it as simple as possible covering the widest range of situations. There are holes in any ones ideal and I am sure they can find them with no help from the back seat drivers. What this thread is about is what would you chose and why. So what is your ideal if you only get no more than 2 weapons and the attachments to protect and feed yourself?

Art Eatman · September 16, 2012, 12:04 AM

"...if you only get no more than 2 weapons and the attachments to protect and feed yourself?"

Probably a good .22 rifle and a 12-gauge shotgun. Those would cover the most probable scenarios which would be likely in the real world--as I see the real world.

kraigwy · September 16, 2012, 08:34 AM

Quote:

Probably a good .22 rifle and a 12-gauge shotgun. Those would cover the most probable scenarios which would be likely in the real world

I think ART is on to something.

The first two years I lived in Alaska, I got laid off each winter. No income what so ever.

I lived in a little cabin about 3 miles north of Healy (north of McKinley Park).

Though I had several rifles and pistols, the rifle I used to feed my family was a Savage 24-D, a 22/410 over and under. And it did feed my wife and two young children. I did supplement it by fishing through the ice.

I think if I had to do it again, I'd rather have a 22/20 ga.

If you want something that can be converted to a rifle, pistol, shotgun, etc. Thompson Contender already lined that out some time back.

As for the Military, its gonna be hard to replace the M16 system (contrary to internet myths). It comes with a short barrel for urban use, and the 20 inch barrel to be used as a battle rifle. It's SDM Rifle works great to 8-900 yards.

But at 65, I have no use for militry rifles except as used in rifle matchs

I'll bet if one was to join the military, they would probably be told what rifle/pistol they'll use.

When I joined the military in 1966 and was sent to Vietnam in '67, I trusted the military to give me a rifle to do my job, and to protect me and my comrads. They did, it was the M16a1 and it worked just fine. If it didn't I wouldn't be writing this.

Big Shrek · September 16, 2012, 09:19 AM

There is only ONE little problem with the OP's choices in AR15...

That unless he uses a Pistol lower, BATF will have his @$$ in a sling...
if he gets caught with a Rifle lower with a pistol Upper, that's an SBR, Short Barreled Rifle, which requires a Tax Stamp/etc...

Even POSSESSING an unattached AR lower with a unattached AR pistol upper can get one charged...
as it is constructive possession...

BE CAREFUL!!

Yes, I realize yer in Alabama...but get stopped by a knowledgable 'Bama trooper/LEO that's a jerk and the squishy will hit the fan...
God help ya if ya ever travel to NY/NJ/Ill/Kali/HI with 'em

With a pistol lower, he can use the Exception that was used for the Beretta NEOS pistol/carbine combo...
or the old Fiala pistol/carbine combo...google those to read up on the laws pertaining to 'em...

You also have to assemble them in a particular order so as not to run into trouble with BATF...

Quote:

To follow ATF laws, you MUST dissassemble/reassemble in a particular fashion.

1. remove the pistol barrel from the frame.
2. attach the stock to the frame to make it a carbine stock.
3. attach the carbine barrel to complete the modification.

When changing from Carbine to Pistol...

4. remove the carbine barrel from the frame.
5. remove the stock from the frame.
6. attach the pistol barrel to the frame.

By doing the steps in that order, you never create an SBR, which requires a Tax Stamp.

See also the ATF info on the Fiala pistol/carbine conversion of 1930-ish origins to hear the exact same thing

buckhorn_cortez · September 16, 2012, 10:49 AM

Quote:

I would rather have a rifle I can convert to something like a pistol than to have a sniper rifle and need a pistol. Flexible weapons fits the bill and that is what I, like the military, are really looking to find.

Why? This makes little sense. The utility of a pistol is that you can wear it in a holster and have it with you at all times. If you have to convert a rifle to a pistol - what's the point? The weapon doesn't transform at the single push of a button - so you're not going to change it in the field, in the middle of using the weapon.

The utility of the rifle and pistol is that you have a weapon that is good for medium to long range use (rifle), and a weapon that is good for short to medium range (pistol).

You can't convince me that one weapon converted to another use has the same utility or reliability as carrying two guns. Converting one gun to another use may be "flexible" but to what purpose? So you can claim you have a single weapon that's a transformer toy you can make into another type of gun?

This seems to be important to you - and I think it's a useless requirement.

I'll continue to choose the guns I need for the situation I anticipate outside of artificial performance constructs.

Quote:

The point is what ideals do you have to bring to the table on a flexible weapon system and making it as simple as possible covering the widest range of situations.

Military use and civilian use are two diffenent things. You'll have to define the "widest range of situations." Self defense is different from hunting use or target / competition use - what's best for one use is generally a compromise for another use.

Hog hunting is different from pheasant hunting - although a shotgun would be a choice for a single weapon to use for both. In this case your convertible rifle / pistol - whatever - is useless for pheasant hunting and may prove marginal for hog hunting.

Weapons choice also varies depending upon where you live. If you lived in Alaska you want the weapons combination that would give you the appropriate flexibility for that locale. If you live in rural New Mexico - that's a totally different set of requirements - especially if you're within 30 miles of the Mexican border.

I don't think I need a single weapon that converts to the widest range of situations as that is an evaluation metric setup by you to justify your purchase. I don't think this is the best way to either choose or use guns.

I think the best thing you can do is own multiple long gun weapons (both rifles and shotguns) chosen specifically for the task required and backed up with a handgun that is also chosen specifically for the task required.

September 12, 2012, 12:00 AM	#1
Blindmike Member Join Date: June 7, 2012 Location: Albertville, Alabama Posts: 30	Primary Weapon Systems/ Is it the Best Choice Over the Past year and a half I have spent time working my way through the piles of information on all the gas piston system AR platforms found in today's marketplace. A very close review of the different platforms was needed due to my requirements of a weapon system and which company makes the best system overall. I was looking for a rifle that could meet all my needs and also what most people, I believe, would also expect from a weapon that life and limb could come to depend on in some unforeseen future event. First, it must be dependable. Second, be able to be reconfigured into pistol, CQB carbine, M4 carbine, or rifle. Third, multi caliber choices up to 7.62X51 NATO. Forth, is very important when you can't print your own money like a government and that is cost. Last of all is the configuration, with the most needed accessories already on the gun, as received from the factory. Since I believe that (2) two weapons, both have to be gas piston operation, are needed to fill the many rolls required I have put forth and they need to be the same brand so that at lest some parts would interchange if needed. Also, the smaller caliber weapon would need all its parts for any configure change to be produced from the one suppler. Extra credit is given to any company that also has a 7.62x51 in the lineup, as matter of fact not having one is reason for the companies brand to be dropped from the list. The purpose for this would be better sinergy of the weapon system. In my review of all the companies out there who make a gas piston system only one meets all these common sence requirements and that has been Primary Weapon Systems. I have already purchased the Mk116 and have also started working on getting other uppers for the pistol and a 14" CQB configuration. After wards I plan to start on a 308 version for my collection. This is what makes Primary Weapon Systems, IMHO, the best overall small arms builders. What are your thoughts on the subject? Last edited by Blindmike; September 12, 2012 at 11:19 AM. Reason: Sentence correction, basic information needed

September 12, 2012, 12:22 PM	#3
Blindmike Member Join Date: June 7, 2012 Location: Albertville, Alabama Posts: 30	One advantage in owning PWS Thanks for your reply Buckhorn-Cortez, but the reason for my looking for one manufacture of both rifles was not brand loyalty or some preset desire to purchase the PWS MK116, it is so parts can be used between the rifles in case one is damaged beyond repair. Many of the brands I looked at had parts that could be used between the 5.56 and the 7.62 versions of the rifles. With the PWS I chose to go with the gas piston system on both rifles have many of the same parts, the fire control parts will change out with each other, along with the unique buffer tube used by PWS and that is just to name a few parts in their system that interchange. Other manufactures like LMT's gas piston rifles, FNH's SCAR and others have parts that interchange also. I was looking at this as an advantage in a push comes to shove situation. My reasoning is simply the more parts your can take from one system to keep the other up and running improves the chances you will not have to defend yourself or hunt for food by throwing rocks.

September 12, 2012, 05:32 PM	#5
GI Sandv Member Join Date: December 16, 2008 Location: Minnesota Posts: 65	Check out Colt's new .308/.223 lower. It comes as a full .308 rifle, but with the ability to purchase one piece to allow a .223 upper to be put on. http://www.gunsamerica.com/blog/colt...iew-le901-16s/ However, it's not going to be cheap. I've wondered about an AR .308 pistol. Let me know if you ever do that. I'd love to see the finished result. __________________ The state that too strictly distinguishes its warriors from its scholars will have its fighting done by cowards and its thinking done by fools. Kahr PM9, Springfiled XD9, Browning BPS 12Ga., Browning SA-22.

September 12, 2012, 10:50 PM	#8
Blindmike Member Join Date: June 7, 2012 Location: Albertville, Alabama Posts: 30	Colt LE-901-16S I have looked at the Colt LE-901-16S And find it to be a very interesting and ground breaking ideal. As a matter of fact I want to see more information from people who take the leap into a new and yet unproven system. My gut tells me that Colt did its homework, as we all know they are a very conservative company, and they would not chance damage to their reputation. Although, I do not mind spending hard earned money on quality, I do look for proven weapon systems. Colt is on to something good here and I am sure they are looking at the US military need for a more versatile weapon that will also not require retaining of the troops. That is my objective as well, as I am sure many that read this thread as well, finding a weapon system or in my case at this point 2 rifles that fulfill all the requirements. The Colt is one weapon system that has peaked my interest, due to only having the one basic body and in the long run may have a lower over all cost, since I am keeping a very open mind to the subject at hand this could be the best answer. One thing I do like is the simplest answer is normally the best.

September 15, 2012, 10:35 PM	#12
Blindmike Member Join Date: June 7, 2012 Location: Albertville, Alabama Posts: 30	Anyone can find fault do you have ideals? The reason I started this thread was to discuss an Ideal. It is simple, in a time when our military continues to look for a replacement rifle for the M-16 and all of Its sub-groups, due to its shortcomings. The reason for their search is the same as mine and that is to come up with the most flexible weapon for the largest range of situations. Yes it is nice to have a pistol for when a pistol is the very best choice or a sniper rifle for when precision shots need to be made at 600-1000 yards. Personally, that is what anyone would want but when things just happen the way they happen many times you have to just love the one your with as the old saying goes. I would rather have a rifle I can convert to something like a pistol than to have a sniper rifle and need a pistol. Flexible weapons fits the bill and that is what I, like the military, are really looking to find. Now, finding a weapon system with the greatest ability to fill the rolls has different answer for everyone based on there point of view. You may want a true pistol and a true rifle, I like having two flexible rifles to cover the widest range. Someone else likes the Colt 901, the do it all rifle system, which is a good ideal also. Are these the very best weapon for every situations is not even the point. The point is what ideals do you have to bring to the table on a flexible weapon system and making it as simple as possible covering the widest range of situations. There are holes in any ones ideal and I am sure they can find them with no help from the back seat drivers. What this thread is about is what would you chose and why. So what is your ideal if you only get no more than 2 weapons and the attachments to protect and feed yourself? Last edited by Blindmike; September 15, 2012 at 10:50 PM. Reason: spelling

September 12, 2012, 06:14 AM	#2
buckhorn_cortez Senior Member Join Date: July 30, 2010 Posts: 857	My thoughts? You've stated your self rationalizations for buying a specific manufacturer. If it works for you - that's all that counts. Me? I have a Barrett REC7 and a Les Baer .308. I only care about ultimate performance within a specific platform type. In my case - a piston AR15 and AR platform .308 - and chose those two manufacturers.

September 12, 2012, 06:11 PM	#6
10mmAuto Senior Member Join Date: October 13, 2010 Posts: 598	It's the best if you're going to use it in some kind of adverse environment. Their long stroke flex piston is great, I'm not a fan of the short stroke 416 style at all. They are very reliable. If you're not going to pack it into a mountain valley on a five day hunt, it's probably not worth it over a quality DI.

September 13, 2012, 08:02 AM	#10
Art Eatman Staff in Memoriam Join Date: November 13, 1998 Location: Terlingua, TX; Thomasville, GA Posts: 24,798	I've never been a fan of the "One size fits all" idea. I'd much rather have a specific tool for a specific use. A screwdriver makes a lousy chisel. A commuter doesn't need a full-size heavy-duty pickup. I'm always curious about the intended use of any rifle, which hasn't been mentioned here... Too many equal-reliability tests for comparing direct impingement with pistons; six of one, half-dozen of the other. "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder." Colt's good; others are equal, and right now the S&W has found many admirers. Pardon me while I show little interest in hollering, "Best!"

September 16, 2012, 12:04 AM	#13
Art Eatman Staff in Memoriam Join Date: November 13, 1998 Location: Terlingua, TX; Thomasville, GA Posts: 24,798	"...if you only get no more than 2 weapons and the attachments to protect and feed yourself?" Probably a good .22 rifle and a 12-gauge shotgun. Those would cover the most probable scenarios which would be likely in the real world--as I see the real world.