[rrg927]

Hi, new to the 6.8 as well as Ar's in general however I am currently building 2, 5.56 & 6.8 I am thinking about doing a 6.8 LWRC UPPER but I don"t know much about LWRC and was hoping some of the experts could tell me what they think. I've heard from some that LWRC is top tier such as LMT, NOVESKE, ETC. .... but I don't hear them mentioned no where near as much as the other more popular names. For instance they are not mentioned in the industry forums. Any feedback would be appreciated. Thanks.

 

[constructor]

If you want an LWRC talk to Crandall not Marine :lol:

 

[marinesg1012]

I have a whole thread devoted to mine.

 

[RUTGERS95]

I just got mine, 14.7 in 6.8 and it's outstanding. Check out www.lwrci.com and go to the forums for any questions you may have. If your into the whole torture test thing, there's plenty on youtube for the lwrc.

 

[T.Rexford]

I love mine, it has been a great rifle. Marine had a issue with his but in the end the company did take care of it, unfortunately he did not finish what I was hoping he would have. A re-testing of the new upper. So its sucks, but the jury is still out, and will be forever on that one.

Anyways onto mine. I've got I don't know maybe 3k through it and no problems that I can remember whatsoever. Its accuracy is more than acceptable for a combat weapon, you can see some of my targets in other threads. The bolt is always clean. Its a comfortable rail system, not a raised one like some other manufacturers. They are a new company and continuing to develop new products. They are running spcII 1 and 10 twist. Everybody that I've read or talked to said SSA combat loads are no problem ( in general... remember this issue can be a case by case basis so lets not dogpile me on this one )

Fit and finish on the gun is excellent. In my experience I have not had an issue with being able to talk to them. I've called a few times and emailed and I always receive a response within a day.

All in All I'm extremely happy with the tool and will be using one of their uppers for another build... as soon as my heaters and whatnot stop breaking in the shop.

 

[rcrandall]

I've been using LWRC since 2005 and have several of their guns/uppers in 5.56 and 6.8. They are my favorite AR rifle and have been 100% reliable for me. I have one of their new 14.7" rifles in 6.8 which I use for LE work to include swat, it has more than acceptable accuracy for a combat rifle. I also have one their new 8.5" PSD 6.8's and that is a blast, I know, I know, bad pun, to shoot. It has also be 100% reliable for me and accurate to 50 yards, as far as I have tested with that gun. I have never found their customer service to be bad, though during their move to another state and a merger things were a little chaotic. Their guns handle the combat/tactical loads. If you are willing to spend the money then go for it. I'm not sure what their wait time is right now, especially with the panic buying, so you will have to give them a call.

 

[mavericks]

Future weapons show:
PSD

IAR

I like mine. Althougth, it's causing me to spend alot on ammo and get into the reloading hobby

But I'm spending more time making my shots count. I like the extra punch downrange....you can hear it and see it. I like being able to get to the BCG without gloves and having one solid rail top. 14.5" upper here.

Got mine barely used...rather than waiting on lwrc for a new one.

 

[ArtFWTx]

If you want an LWRC talk to Crandall not Marine :lol:

:lol: :lol:

 

[rrg927]

Thanks for the info. The upper I am planning on getting is the m6a1. It's used but like new, less than 100 rds. I would prefer the m6a2 w/ flip-up sights. Is it poss. to swap the front sight on the m6a1 for a gas block?

 

[rcrandall]

It is possible, but it would need to go back to LWRC. I would recommend you either buy a new M6A2 or buy the A1 and be happy. I use a T-1 on myine and don't even notice the front sight base and I like that I don't need to spend more on a flip up front sight. Is the used A1 one of the newer one's with the SpecII chamber and hammer forged barrels?

 

[THellURider]

I'm gonna throw my thoughts on Pistons and the AR platform in general in...

In essence, my feelings are this:

On the night that E. Stoner sat in a corner of some bar nursing a beer and doodling on the back of a bar napkin, rifles with pistons were nothing new. The G3 existed, as well as the FAL among others. Now we all widely acknowledge, E. Stoner as a genius. Thus, it's not for me to second guess the man. If he chose to go with a direct impingement system, he probably had a reason far beyond my feeble mind for choosing it. Thus, if I want a piston gun, I'll buy one in which the weapon system was originally designed with a piston driven action.

Again, JMHO.

I've handled LWRC rifles and they seem nice. I've read good and bad but, as you may have guessed, I've never bought one. :wink:

 

[rcrandall]

He also designed a piston AR. Anyway, after many thousands of rounds through my LWRC's I am happy. Research the guns, figure out what will fit your uses, and decide if it's worth the money. Aside from an upper Constructor built me, I have gotten rid of all my DI guns and I don't miss them. It's whatever floats your boat, I suppose.

 

[caporider]

I'm gonna throw my thoughts on Pistons and the AR platform in general in...

In essence, my feelings are this:

On the night that E. Stoner sat in a corner of some bar nursing a beer and doodling on the back of a bar napkin, rifles with pistons were nothing new. The G3 existed, as well as the FAL among others. Now we all widely acknowledge, E. Stoner as a genius. Thus, it's not for me to second guess the man. If he chose to go with a direct impingement system, he probably had a reason far beyond my feeble mind for choosing it. Thus, if I want a piston gun, I'll buy one in which the weapon system was originally designed with a piston driven action.

Again, JMHO.

I've handled LWRC rifles and they seem nice. I've read good and bad but, as you may have guessed, I've never bought one. :wink:

I think Mr. Stoner designed a rifle system, in that the bullet, powder, gas port size, gas port location, rifling twist, carrier mass, buffer mass, spring rates, barrel length, etc, all worked harmoniously. Ordnance messed up the powder part of the equation, as is well known, and early rifles issued with minimal instruction were not cleaned correctly.

Then, Colt chopped up the design to create shorter versions of the original M16, leading to all sorts of design modifications to deal with modified pressure curves and other changes that initially "broke" the balanced Stoner DI design.

Piston ARs are a direct response to the shortcomings of the M4 and other short barreled M16 variants. IMHO if Eugene Stoner had known the M16 was going to be converted into a bazillion different SBR configurations, many of which are shot with suppressors mounted, he might not have chosen DI for the operating system. This is why the emerging consensus is that pistons are really only needed if you shoot very short barreled AR configurations or shoot suppressed. A plain-jane 20" A4 does not need a piston.

 

[THellURider]

I'm gonna throw my thoughts on Pistons and the AR platform in general in...

In essence, my feelings are this:

On the night that E. Stoner sat in a corner of some bar nursing a beer and doodling on the back of a bar napkin, rifles with pistons were nothing new. The G3 existed, as well as the FAL among others. Now we all widely acknowledge, E. Stoner as a genius. Thus, it's not for me to second guess the man. If he chose to go with a direct impingement system, he probably had a reason far beyond my feeble mind for choosing it. Thus, if I want a piston gun, I'll buy one in which the weapon system was originally designed with a piston driven action.

Again, JMHO.

I've handled LWRC rifles and they seem nice. I've read good and bad but, as you may have guessed, I've never bought one. :wink:

I think Mr. Stoner designed a rifle system, in that the bullet, powder, gas port size, gas port location, rifling twist, carrier mass, buffer mass, spring rates, barrel length, etc, all worked harmoniously. Ordnance messed up the powder part of the equation, as is well known, and early rifles issued with minimal instruction were not cleaned correctly.

Then, Colt chopped up the design to create shorter versions of the original M16, leading to all sorts of design modifications to deal with modified pressure curves and other changes that initially "broke" the balanced Stoner DI design.

Piston ARs are a direct response to the shortcomings of the M4 and other short barreled M16 variants. IMHO if Eugene Stoner had known the M16 was going to be converted into a bazillion different SBR configurations, many of which are shot with suppressors mounted, he might not have chosen DI for the operating system. This is why the emerging consensus is that pistons are really only needed if you shoot very short barreled AR configurations or shoot suppressed. A plain-jane 20" A4 does not need a piston.

I wouldn't begin to put word in the mouth of Mr. Stoner or conjecture about what he would have done. Would John Moses Browning have don't things different if he'd had plastic? C'mon...

Piston AR's are a direct response to marketing people seeing a need to fill after HK designed theirs and then didn't release it to us simple folk. I haven't met a military guy yet, and I've met a lot of HSLD types, that goes around going "Damn, I wish this was a piston gun. Stupid Eugene, Stupid!"

You can have your feelings, I will have mine. That's why I stated "JMHO" maybe I should have added "YMMV" as well?

 

[caporider]

I'm gonna throw my thoughts on Pistons and the AR platform in general in...

In essence, my feelings are this:

On the night that E. Stoner sat in a corner of some bar nursing a beer and doodling on the back of a bar napkin, rifles with pistons were nothing new. The G3 existed, as well as the FAL among others. Now we all widely acknowledge, E. Stoner as a genius. Thus, it's not for me to second guess the man. If he chose to go with a direct impingement system, he probably had a reason far beyond my feeble mind for choosing it. Thus, if I want a piston gun, I'll buy one in which the weapon system was originally designed with a piston driven action.

Again, JMHO.

I've handled LWRC rifles and they seem nice. I've read good and bad but, as you may have guessed, I've never bought one. :wink:

I think Mr. Stoner designed a rifle system, in that the bullet, powder, gas port size, gas port location, rifling twist, carrier mass, buffer mass, spring rates, barrel length, etc, all worked harmoniously. Ordnance messed up the powder part of the equation, as is well known, and early rifles issued with minimal instruction were not cleaned correctly.

Then, Colt chopped up the design to create shorter versions of the original M16, leading to all sorts of design modifications to deal with modified pressure curves and other changes that initially "broke" the balanced Stoner DI design.

Piston ARs are a direct response to the shortcomings of the M4 and other short barreled M16 variants. IMHO if Eugene Stoner had known the M16 was going to be converted into a bazillion different SBR configurations, many of which are shot with suppressors mounted, he might not have chosen DI for the operating system. This is why the emerging consensus is that pistons are really only needed if you shoot very short barreled AR configurations or shoot suppressed. A plain-jane 20" A4 does not need a piston.

I wouldn't begin to put word in the mouth of Mr. Stoner or conjecture about what he would have done. Would John Moses Browning have don't things different if he'd had plastic? C'mon...

Piston AR's are a direct response to marketing people seeing a need to fill after HK designed theirs and then didn't release it to us simple folk. I haven't met a military guy yet, and I've met a lot of HSLD types, that goes around going "Damn, I wish this was a piston gun. Stupid Eugene, Stupid!"

You can have your feelings, I will have mine. That's why I stated "JMHO" maybe I should have added "YMMV" as well?

I completely agree with you in terms of MY need for a piston AR. I don't have a single one, and I shoot SBRs suppressed all the time. Then again, my firing schedule does not begin to replicate what the HSLD guys are doing in workups to deployment.

I'm just saying that Mr. Stoner designed a very specific, very balanced rifle with fine tolerances, and DI was a choice he made alongside hundreds of other choices based on a known end state. Had that end state been different... who knows? Mr. Stoner did go on to design the AR18, which uses a short stroke piston.

 

[paulosantos]

This is the way I look at it. If you were going into harms way and you were given a chance to choose between a DI AR and a Piston AR, what would you rather take with you? For a while I wasn't sure, but now I definitely know which one I would rather have.

 

[rcrandall]

I go into harm's way all the time, just did a high risk no knock search warrant a few hours ago. I use an LWRC 6.8 SPC rifle. As for never meeting a military guy who says, "I wish this was a piston", I have met two SF operators who would like a piston gun, and when I was a Marine 0311 if I had known what a piston was I would have said, "I want a piston." I'm not saying the DI system is not good, we issue Colt Commando's and M4's, they work. If there wasn't a need or a want for a move away from the DI system in at least some military circles then why the FN SCAR rifles and the HK 416? If someone here want's to buy a gas piston gun, it's their money, and if they get an LWRC and, I'm hearing, an LMT they they have a better than even chance of liking the system. I do agreed about the 20" barrel AR, though. No need for a piston there.

 

[THellURider]

I go into harm's way all the time, just did a high risk no knock search warrant a few hours ago. I use an LWRC 6.8 SPC rifle. As for never meeting a military guy who says, "I wish this was a piston", I have met two SF operators who would like a piston gun, and when I was a Marine 0311 if I had known what a piston was I would have said, "I want a piston." I'm not saying the DI system is not good, we issue Colt Commando's and M4's, they work. If there wasn't a need or a want for a move away from the DI system in at least some military circles then why the FN SCAR rifles and the HK 416? If someone here want's to buy a gas piston gun, it's their money, and if they get an LWRC and, I'm hearing, an LMT they they have a better than even chance of liking the system. I do agreed about the 20" barrel AR, though. No need for a piston there.

Hey, YMMV right?

I would like a piston gun, just not one on my AR platform that was designed for DI. That's just how I feel about it.

 

[Mark21]

I'll chime in with my own .02, and that's all this is worth at best!

First, I never want to be one of those people whom technology passes them by. The guys who hang on to yesterday's tech, saying "it was good enough for me". Kind of like the guys that show up at carbine courses with M1 rifles. Nothing wrong with it, but why deal with the length, the weight, the irons -- when there is a better way?

So that said, the piston-driven platforms appeal to me. The writing is on the wall that these are the next generation, given all the new rifles being manufactured and tested by miliitaries (SCAR, Mossada, HP, etc).

But my biggest problem so far is the lack of standardization. You have an LMT piston rifle and want to swap out barrels? Outta luck unless you get it from LMT for now. Then add in the retro-fit kits out there, other manufacturers, etc -- you prob have a dozen different systems. Throw a potential weapons ban in the mix, and suddenly spare parts for your "unique" rifle may get so rare you will be left with a safe queen. I think when and if a standard is set upon, these will slowly take over the field.

Again, my .02. Maybe even .01. YMMV :lol:

 

[rcrandall]

I understand about the AR piston thing, originally designed as DI. I would take a SCAR but FN can't seem to get them out and I hear, if they become available in time, they will be around $2600 to $3000. That's alot of money for another damn 5.56 rifle that is largely plastic and that I MAYBE can buy a 6.8 conversion kit for later.