The photo above is a screen shot from a Taiwanese news report about the sales of the T91 upper receiver being imported by Wolf Ammo.

If you are not familiar with the T91, it is the standard issued rifle for the Republic of China, aka Taiwan. Wolf is importing the upper receivers but making the barrels here in the US. The Wolf A1 Upper does not come with the carry handle rear sight nor does it have the picatinny rail below the gas block.

Burst Review has two videos explaining the Wolf A1 in detail. Click here to check them out.

The screen shot above is of me shooting the Wolf A1 at the Big 3 East Media Event last October. Here is the article I wrote about it when I was there.

The video of me used in the Taiwanese news report was shot by fellow TFB writer Tim Yan.

Here is the other side of that same shot sequence.

 

From what little I was able to translate, the news report is proud that the T91 is recognized and sold in the US. Albeit as an upper receiver only. 1,000 units have been sold to the US at $599 each so the report says.

Here is another news report about the Wolf A1 Upper. They even used the photos I took but they credited TFB in the upper right hand corner.





Advertisement

  • 8166PC1

    It does say something when a military like Taiwan that has experience with a standard M16/M4 decides to go to an op rod design.

    • Anonymoose

      Does it? The Brits had experience with M16s before they adopted the L85, and you see how that turned out for them (until HK fixed it). The Kiwis are back to the DI M4 platform after using the AUG for many years.

      • 8166PC1

        And Polish SF use to use the M4 and went to the HK416. And the French who had experience with the M4 went to the HK416. You can find many more examples of people going from M4’s to op rod rifles.

        • Anonymoose

          That’s fair, I guess, but the T91’s gas piston setup has been around since the 1970s.

          • No one

            Funnily enough, the T91 actually predates the HK416 and many other SSP AR designs, but no one pays attention to it because it’s not some H&K Wundergun or something.

            Implying they went to it after seeing it from experience from other nations like that one guy seems to be saying above is pretty funny in that context considering they were one of the very first to do it.

        • No one

          You can also find many examples of old militaries who still use old model M16s or other retro AR variants or other militaries who have adopted DI ARs from other designs.

          Your point?

          • 8166PC1

            I’m sorry I’m not sure what you’re saying.

          • No one

            That the fact some armies use gas piston ARs over DI, mainly when there’s probably more armies that still either use DI or are still adopting them doesn’t mean Gas Piston = Better. (Their original intended replacement for the T65 series, which is still in limited service was actually the DI T86, which had to be cut after around 5,000 units at the time for budgetary change reasons.)

            Also, Taiwan was literally one of the, if not the first nation (I’d have to double check exactly WHO was) that even adopted a gas pistol AR, the T91 design predates the HK416 which gets alot more attention. So its not like they just decided to switch to a Gas Piston design out of trend or seeing experiences from other nations, they were pioneers in the field. (Yes yes, Stoner designed a long stroke piston AR way back in 1969, but they made what, 3 of them total? That’s not the point.)

          • DW

            T86 is also a piston gun.

          • No one

            Yeah, you’re right sorry, I was probably thinking of the eariler T65 variants that didn’t prior to Taiwanese experimentation with Gas Piston uppers.

            To be fair, I literally just woke up after I made that post yesterday.

          • DW

            The most notable asian AR derivative(that is not an AR clone) that is DI would be the daewoo K1A1. Not only is it a DI gun, it is still in service, and is a 10.4″ gun before subcarbines are cool. They however preferred K2, basically piston operated, longer barrel derivative of the K1.

          • roguetechie

            He’s saying you’re full of feces jebrosephat

        • john huscio

          I’m not sure when the French ever adopted the M4…..

          • 8166PC1

            I have a picture in one of my books about the M16 showing the French using a M4.

      • No one

        Don’t get the British also adopted the DI C7 for several of their police and military units including their SF, and the L129A1 which is a .308 LMT AR used as a DMR that’s also DI.

        Come to think of it, quite a few militaries have adopted the C7/C8.

        • JT303

          Most of the UK police forces seem to like the G36c and Glock 17, but there’s a lot of politics, apparently. If one force chooses a firearm another may avoid it as a result. There are even some who have chosen the L115A3 as a precision rifle despite needing the permission of a very senior officer to engage a target past 200m. When it comes to firearms, it’s the choice of the specific force and not a national decision. I’ve not heard of our police forces using the C7, but some of the Transport Police use silenced 5.56 LMT ARs, which I think are DI. Our SF use the C8 and seem quite happy with it.

          • No one

            Ok, I made an error, according to the sources I have on which British LEOs and Military use what, it’s actually the Royal Military Police that use the C7/C8 series, not civilian ones, so that’s my bad. (your claim about Civilian police forces using LMT DI ARs appears to be true however, they couldn’t have picked a better brand), other then that, the Pathfinder Platoon, the Parachute Regiment (rather generic name for an airborne force, but I digress.) and of course the SAS and SBS (which are just combined under the name “UK SF” in this book) all use the C7 or C8 rifle.

        • Anonymoose

          There are probably as many countries using Colt Canada rifles as there are countries using FN M16s.

      • MeaCulpa

        Well not as a mass issue rifle. And after the L85 (that isn’t nearly as horrible as it’s reputation suggest post H&K fixes that costed more the original rifles) most rifles must have felt like a marked improvement including DI.

    • The Type 91 is a direct evolution from the Type 65 rifle. So, Taiwan has been playing with external-piston rifles since at least 1976. (The designations are based upon the Mínguó calendar, with Year 1 representing the establishment of the Republic of China in 1912.)

      • roguetechie

        Daniel, you rock dude!

        You’re better than having a copy of both of Bartocci’s black rifle books sitting next to your keyboard.

        BTW, to those who post making claims about the AR series and what it is and isn’t who don’t have a well dog eared copy of bartocci’s black rifle books and Daniel’s 5.56 timeline open in another tab….

        Stop, just stop…

        You’re embarrassing yourself and wasting others’ time

  • whydoesthisguywriteforyou

    When did this picture of the day thing become a chance for Nick to show off? Stop s#!tposting

  • valorius

    $599 for an upper? madness.

    • Anonymoose

      It better have a damn good barrel in it. A SIG516 upper is twice that.

      • No one

        Considering the Mil Spec barrel of a T91 rifle is already 16″ so chances are they didn’t have to change it to adhere to the NFA laws on SBRs, the barrels on Taiwanese ARs are surpsingly pretty damn good from every report I’ve heard, not like magical fairy dust good, but they’re rather accurate and have a good barrel life.

        • VieteranGunsmith

          It looks like they have a long muzzle device on it, much longer than the standard GI flash suppressor.

          • No one

            They do, the ROCA found that the new style flash hider was actually a significant improvement, mainly during night fire exercises. (a good majority of their previous generation rifles have what are more or less your bog standard “bird cage” flash hiders that was….well, not so shockingly inspired by the US made M16s they used to use.)

        • myndbender

          Iirc, Wolf buys the upper as a parts kit w/o barrel, & assembles it stateside with an American made Nitride barrel.

          • No one

            From the sources I’ve heard, the Barrels actually are originally made in Taiwan to the specs of the T91 rifling, however, the barrels arrive unrifled with the rifling of the bore done in the US. (And possibly any post shipping treatment processes, not 100% sure on the latter though.)

          • No one

            *of the T91 Milspec Rifle.

    • No one

      I’d go for it, I actually like the idea of a minimalist upper without a forward assist (I can count the amount of times I’ve actually used a forward assist on my 2 AR-15s and have fingers left over) and a brass deflector, the BD has some use but it’s still extra weight, a forward assist on the other hand just feels kind of useless to me as I’m never in any situations it’s actually useful in and adds a bit of space and weight I’d rather not have.

      Now if only they’d add the DI gas system from the T86 and I’d buy it the second I saw one in stores, though I’d probably still want a T91 upper still.

    • neckbone

      Wait until you see how reliable and robust they are.

    • The T91 ROCs, though.

    • VieteranGunsmith

      Yes indeed, that better be one helluva upper assembly. I’ve got two complete weapons that cost less than that, and I get MOA from both. They should be able to sell for $299 for an upper and still be profitable.

      • john huscio

        Do you know what the going rate of piston AR uppers is?

        • VieteranGunsmith

          Sure, but this thing isn’t in the same league with domestic production piston AR uppers. Why can’t we get more detailed views of it?

          • Caffeinated

            You are correct. Very few of the domestic ones have been in long term military service and have been combat proven. The T91 along with its predecessors have both to their credit.

          • VieteranGunsmith

            And just how much combat has the Taiwan Army seen since moving offshore to Taiwan? As far as I know they have been deployed to fight against an armed enemy force ZERO times. Our military is not fielded a piston upper for a reason, and only special forces units have even used them in a combat situation. If piston technology was so much better than DI, the United States – the largest armed force using AR/Stoner design weapons would have replaced the DI rifles long ago.
            There is a reason for this, and I think you might know the answer already.

          • int19h

            I’m not saying that piston is better than DI. I’m saying that this piston has something to go for it compared to US-made piston uppers. Even if it never saw action in combat, it certainly saw a lot of rounds fired through it in training, and the design was improved several times by now.

          • VieteranGunsmith

            Fair enough, but this is like many subjects in the world of firearms technology – each design in the market has it’s benefits and it’s fans and critics alike. There are merits as well as pitfalls to every firearm design. In the end analysis, what matters is if it works when you need it to.

          • No one

            This was never even about DI vs Gas Pistion for the most part, this was about the quality of the upper itself, which has seen combat as the T65 series, T86, and mainly the T91 have in fact been exported to places that have to deal with terror groups and the like.

          • VieteranGunsmith

            This is all still a matter of personal preference, and the technology is not new. Not one person here has ever indicated who is using this in combat, and that isn’t a good measure of quality as there are plenty of very primitive weapons still being used in combat by someone around the globe. I am not judging this upper (it isn’t even the entire rifle we are discussing here), based on some small country using it on the battlefield at some point in time. It’s opposition on the field is the AK which is also a piston system and by many experts the AK is the most prolific weapon in the world, but that does not make it a superior or even a high quality firearm. It is all in how you do the analysis and what criteria you set up for the system to meet or exceed. I am saying this – piston system weapons are a step backwards in the evolution of battlefield armament and are no better or no worse than DI – each system has it’s plusses and minuses.
            When it comes down to it, all of this banter amounts to people expressing their own opinions, and everyone has a right to believe as they wish. What I do find mildly curious is the extent to which people will go to make claims that their favorite design is superior to all others, and to base that on which weapons have been used on the battlefield, through history is really no way to judge that weapon’s merits. If I am going to spend my money on a piston system rifle I will purchase the one that holds it’s value over time and is the most durable, and other than the kinds of statements many have expressed in the affirmative or reflecting positively on this upper we have no tangible measurements of this upper assembly except the remarks made here about several un-named countries using them. Taiwan certainly has no real record of accomplishment with modern warfare since they have not been involved in any conflict since being driven from mainland China in the late 1940’s.
            That is all I was saying, nothing more, nothing less,and I have been working on military firearms since 1972 when I was a soldier in the US Army, so I do have some basis for my opinions.

          • EC

            The reason is… cost?

            Pretty much with all the programs to replace the DI rifles we have, the reason why we kept our current small arms was mostly cost. In short, the other weapons are indeed better than ours (as shown through testing), but not better enough by a large margin for us to justify the monumental cost of rearming our military.

            You’d be kidding yourself if you think we have all the best toys in our military. Lowest bidder and all that.

          • No one

            Explain to me how a literal military issue gas piston upper isn’t “in the same league” as domestic uppers?

            Like I’ve said, you do realize Taiwan was arguably one of the, if not the first nation to actually mass adopt a gas piston AR-15 design right? And have done many experiments with the concept before most others well known for it did.

          • VieteranGunsmith

            Ok, but they haven’t been in a shooting war since Mao took over mainland China, and back then they would have been fortunate to have a semiauto rifle to begin with.
            There are several domestic production gas piston AR rifles made here in the US, and that is what I am calling domestic production – not the same as produced for civilian use or the commercial market. I am not talking about mil-spec because that term is over used and often abused when describing firearms. The fact is any bullet launcher is better than none, but there are some piston guns that stand out as superior to the others, and I am saying this one does not fall into that category.
            I’ve been a military armorer since 1972, worked as a gunsmith from 1975 through today, and this argument about which is better DI or piston actuation has been going on since direct impingement was invented. The facts are DI systems are lighter, have less parts to fail and are easier to free float the barrel so they tend to be capable of greater long range accuracy. That is why the M16 family of military weapons has been in service since the 1960’s. They also require less maintenance to stay serviceable in the field.
            I would trust the quality of US manufactured AR design firearms over any other nation on the planet, regardless of whether it is a DI or piston gun. I am sure Taiwan manufactured guns are good, but I have seen enough weapons manufactured elsewhere to know that the quality control that the US market demands is higher than anywhere else on earth, but has been equaled in Europe depending on how much you want to pay for it.
            There is no substantial difference in durability, between DI and piston systems. The main difference is that piston guns have less firing residue in the receiver area, but they vent it near the piston area and they are cooler running as far as the BCG is concerned. Does a hot BCG make for a less reliable weapon? Not in my experience. For the heat to be a factor in part failure the temperatures would have to approach the temperature that the parts were heat treated at, and you’d have material breakdown type failures of the upper receiver if that was happening. In my several decades of working on the AR platform I have yet to see overheating as a cause of major failure, which in my view negates the main advantage of the piston upper.

          • VieteranGunsmith

            Experiments are not the same as real battlefield use.

          • myndbender

            You’re correct in that 95% of domestically produced piston uppers aren’t close to being soldier proof enough to trust it w/your life. & the 5% that are mil-spec would easily double the a1’s $599 MSRP! The T91 upper is the direction the M16A4 & M4A1 should have went in…

          • VieteranGunsmith

            I still contend that the piston upper is a fix in search of a problem that does not exist. You still need to maintain a piston system to be reliable just like any other man made mechanical device. They are less accurate than DI guns because of the piston system itself. This is why your DI AR will outperform an AK on the range, and you don’t see any competition shooters winning matches with AK based rifles. The bottom line is if you are a fan of piston systems that’s fine by me, but they really are not better than DI systems, and they are heavier and somewhat less accurate without a lot of tweaking. Not everyone has the skills to build a piston gun that will be as accurate as a good DI gun that costs less and weighs less – which is one of the factors that keep the US military from going to piston guns. We did that whole thing in the 1930’s through the 1950’s and found the AR was from most perspectives superior for use in the field by our troops.
            If SIG or HK was making a piston gun for this kind of money that would be news, but how do we know this WolfA1 is good enough to issue to our troops who have been in combat a lot more than Taiwan has, and they need their weapons to be able to function everywhere on the planet, regardless of the climate and geographic environments.

          • john huscio

            what domestically produced piston uppers have been adopted by multiple foreign militaries/LE agencies?

          • VieteranGunsmith

            You are the one asking the question, and I am sure that you have heard of the domestic firearms manufacturers that build piston ARs.

      • valorius

        There are a few websites that sell complete AR kits with 80% lowers for less than $400 total.

    • john huscio

      An honest to God general issue milspec piston upper that’s battle proven and in service around the world. I’m surprised it isn’t selling for twice that.

      • valorius

        An entire (mostly) milspec Ruger AR556 can be had for $450.

        • Taylor Hardin

          There is nothing milspec about that rifle.

          • valorius

            That is a completely nonsensical statement. There are many things milspec about that rifle.

          • Caffeinated

            And there are more things that are not.

          • valorius

            I can think of 4 items that are not milspec: The front sight post, the delta ring the barrel (which i’d argue is better than milspec) and the finish.

          • Wow!

            When people say milspec it is a throwback to the days when Colt dominated the AR market and produced a politically correct “commercial” version. When someone says milspec, that means it is theoretically compatible with a M16 or M4. Yes, Ruger would not fit in the military contract, but what needs to be milspec is, and that is what matters.

          • Taylor Hardin

            Have you taken one apart? The barrel nut is some strange screw on thing and the front A2 sight is machined and not cast (which makes it very heavy) and is pinned on the top and not the bottom of the barrel. If they cut corners with things like that, where else did they go cheap with?

          • Wow!

            A machined sight provides negligible additional weight. If anything, the precision of the barrel contour has a bigger factor in how heavy the weapon feels. Pinning at the top or bottom makes no difference in the security of the part, the interface of the hole sizes and the pin does. The barrel nut is arbitrary. The DI tube holds it in place like any other AR. You call this cutting corners but nothing about the design is inferior.

        • int19h

          It’s not piston.

          • valorius

            That’s the best part about it. 😉

          • int19h

            Let’s just say that this is a subjective preference. The point is that DI uppers and piston uppers are really two different market segments that are priced very differently. This is competing against other piston uppers, and if you look at their prices, this one is actually quite reasonable.

        • john huscio

          but thats not a piston upper is it?

    • No one

      You should’ve seen what I paid for my POF-308 upper back when I still owned a POF-415.

      Hell, if I took off the upper on my nearly new LMT SLK8 and sold it as just that upper, it would probably go for at least $1000 dollars if not more, and that’s a traditional DI upper and not even a gas piston upper which are far more trendy these days.

      In the context of what a brand COULD charge, I don’t see $600 as all that bad honestly. Mainly considering I actually have wanted a really minimalist upper for a while that cuts off as many smaller or (in my opinion) non needed features as possible considering there’s far more options out there for those who don’t run minimalist. (I’ve never used anything other then a scope/optics and sometimes a vertical foregrip on an AR, I’ve wanted a decent quality upper without a brass defector and mainly a forward assist forever now.)

      • valorius

        I like some “overpriced” products myself, i hear you.

    • ReadyOrNot

      They could’ve sold it for $1 and you’d still find someone complaining about it costing too much 8)

  • Jose

    Given the success of the Type 91 upper, it should be of great interest that Wolf Ammo negotiate a deal with the Taiwanese Military to allow the importation of the Type 65 as a parts kit; upper receiver included, minus the barrel. That way, they can offer the complete package, with the U.S. made barrel and lower receiver; and you have something extraordinary: a very unique AR variant made with a gas piston unit, made first; and used first; by Taiwan.

    • Amplified Heat

      I think they may be already; those Grendel Wolf uppers are Taiwanese as well, just in a different (much better 😉 ) chambering. The slick-side piston setup here is a rather nice alternative as far as a more diverse market, though. A DI version would get lost in the competition I’d think (at least enough to possibly not be worth the importation hassle)

      I notice a distinct lack of fools crying “Cheap Taiwanese junk! ‘Murica-made!” in the comments for some reason.

  • Duro Sig

    why do they not include the pic rail? no proper way to mount a light pisses me off.

    • Big Kat

      Its not just a pic rail, its a bayonet mount with a pic rail behind it. They may have has some trouble trying to import it with a bayonet lug.

    • No one

      Why would you want to ruin a minimalist upper design? It’s fine the way it is.

    • john huscio

      Relax, I’m sure as these filter in, someone (midwest industries maybe) will start making rail systems for them.

    • ReadyOrNot

      I agree it could use a more up to date hand guard.. I’m about certain there is already a small company out there working on one though seeing as how popular these uppers will get.

  • VieteranGunsmith

    I see this debate over DI versus piston systems and each type has it’s advantages and detractions. Piston systems add weight to the gun with more moving parts, (also known as points of failure), and can be less accurate than DI designs. It is much easier to free float a piston system gun, but they run cooler than the gas guns and some say cleaner but really it is a matter of where the firing residue escapes and not really cleaner.
    Then there is the reciprocating mass problem in the piston gun versus the much lower mass in direct impingement.
    Neither has a longer system life over the other one, just different points of wear. The biggest difference is a matter of preference and not truly one of dependability regarding the cycling of the action or durability of the weapon as a whole.
    There may be a slight difference in felt recoil between the two design types but in a 5.56 NATO caliber firearm this is really meaningless. There just isn’t much recoil no matter how you cycle the action, so the whole argument is just silly.
    You pick the rifle you like best and learn how to shoot it well with iron sights over long ranges (beyond 300 yards or more) and it doesn’t matter how it functions. It all comes down to personal preference.

  • VieteranGunsmith

    Looking at the entire rifle in the video, it appears the buttstock has a very short toe end. I am not sure what the purpose of that is. It also appears that this is a franken gun – the lower is definitely not matched to the upper, and how do we know that these uppers will truly mate with domestic lowers made in the US? For the money I can get an entire AR instead of this thing, and the thing looks like a rip off of the old Colt SP1 type upper receiver that has been fitted with a piston system barrel assembly and a MOE like handguard. The front sight base looks like an afterthought grafted onto the piston assembly. It is very difficult to see the details in the way these parts are put together and the fit and finish are as a result a mystery.
    This may be all the rage in Taiwan, but I think I’ll stick with my domestic production guns.

    • john huscio

      There was a guy who did a review early last month who tried it on several lowers (PSA, BCM, DPMS, ect) and it worked fine on all of them.

    • int19h

      It is a local Taiwanese development of M16 with a piston instead of DI. But it has been in use by their army since 2003 in present shape, and the gas system has been in use (in previous iterations) since 1976.

      So this is not some new fanged invention. It’s a military design that has been around for 40 years now. Can any US-made piston AR conversion boast that?

      If you don’t care for pistons, then yes, it’s not particularly interesting. But that’s one of those “tastes differ” things.

      • VieteranGunsmith

        I agree with you this is not new – these systems have been around since the Garand, FN49, and many other piston/pushrod systems.

        • No one

          It’s something “not new” in the context Taiwan was a pioneer in making an SSP system for an AR-15 platform, not the first ever, the first to actually design a Gas Piston AR (which was Long Stroke and not Short Stroke) was actually Stoner himself with the 1969 Colt 703 design, however they made about 3 of these total if that and it never entered anything past R&D stages.

          They may not have been the absolute first to try and mate a gas piston, short or long to an AR-15, but they were still one of the first and one of the most overlooked, and arguably the first to do it in mass service adoption.

  • john huscio

    First batch apparently sold fast. The barrels are made in Taiwan and rifled here.

    • ReadyOrNot

      Yes, the Atlantic batch sold out within hours and the AIM batch lasted a couple days or so. Not bad considering the market is flooded with ARs!

  • Stephen Paraski

    A check at Brownells shows Adams base Piston uppers starting at $529, with a regular carbine type hand guard. $599 may come down a little. I like pistons and rollers.

    • No one

      Considering how fast the first batch sold out, wouldn’t count on it anytime soon.

  • The Deplorable Boogur T. Wang

    Ya’ll get down around Tainan just gimme a holler.
    Buh Wen Dai ,

  • No one

    That was basically testing done in the worst types of conditions you’d find in a very hot desert by the way, where most of our wars are currently or recently happened.

  • ReadyOrNot

    Just picked mine up from AIM a week ago and ran close to 300 rounds of XM193 and M855 through it… ZERO malfunctions! 1.5 MOA or so with XM193 and I”m sure it could shoot tighter if I had better ammo and was a better shot, hah. This is a great option for those looking for a piston upper or just something different for their AR. Awesome to support our Taiwanese allies and hope to see more products come over in the future!

    • No one

      Hopefully the next batch comes soon, I’m not sure if I’ll put it on my LMT rifle since I kind of need that for competitive shooting and changing back and forth would be a pain, might just buy a new good quality, minimalist lower assembly and slap it on that when I manage to get my hands on one.

      • ReadyOrNot

        Sweet, I mounted mine on a Colt 6920 lower I bought prior to the election. The front pin was tight, had to use a rubber mallet to get it to go, but it’s loosened up since then. I read somewhere it could be the hand guard wasn’t mounted properly from the assembly plant in the US, but not sure if that’s my issue either. So just something to keep in mind as you look for a lower..

  • Kinda expensive imho

  • VieteranGunsmith

    This is in reply to the following from lostintranslation:

    Would you accept such a document as follows?

    GROUND PRECAUTIONARY MESSAGE
    ACALA XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
    (Redacted portions of this document represented by XXXXXXXXXX)

    SUBJECT: GROUND PRECAUTIONARY MESSAGE (GPM), 97-03 5.56MM M4A1 CARBINE

    1. DISTRIBUTION: {MENU} THIS IS A GROUND PRECAUTIONARY MESSAGE THAT HAS NOT BEEN TRANSMITTED TO SUBORDINATE UNITS.
    XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

    2. PROBLEM DISCUSSION:

    A. SUMMARY OF PROBLEM: SEVERAL INCIDENTS OF COOK-OFFS, IN AND OUT OF BATTERY, AS WELL AS BURST BARRELS, HAVE OCCURRED WITH THE 5.56MM M4A1 CARBINE.

    XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
    RESULT FROM FIRING NUMEROUS ROUNDS WITHIN A SHORT AMOUNT OF TIME WITHOUT ADEQUATE COOLING.

    (1) COOK-OFFS OCCUR WHEN A LIVE ROUND IS LEFT IN THE CHAMBER OR IN CONTACT WITH THE CHAMBER OF A HOT WEAPON AND HEATS TO THE POINT THAT THE PROPELLANT IS IGNITED.

    (A) SUSTAINED FIRING OF THE M16 SERIES RIFLES OR M4 SERIES CARBINES WILL RAPIDLY RAISE THE TEMPERATURE OF THE BARREL TO A CRITICAL POINT. (the temperature required for this to occur is conveniently omitted)

    (B) FIRING 140 ROUNDS, RAPIDLY AND CONTINUOUSLY, WILL RAISE THE TEMPERATURE OF THE BARREL TO THE COOK-OFF POINT. AT THIS TEMPERATURE, ANY LIVE ROUND REMAINING IN THE CHAMBER FOR ANY REASON MAY COOK-OFF (DETONATE) IN AS SHORT A PERIOD AS 10 SECONDS.
    (this means a round left in the chamber for ten seconds after 140 rounds were fired CONTINOUSLY with 30 round magazines how do you do that?)

    XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

    I can’t find that document in this comment section – it is probably not meant for publication.

    First, any fully auto weapon can overheat and cook-off if it is
    a. air cooled
    b, abusively and continuously fired – *difficult to do with a magazine fed weapon
    This has nothing what so ever to do with upper assembly heating during firing. The advantage a piston rifle has is that hot gases are not directed into the upper receiver during firing. That does not mean a piston system can’t be abused and be made to cook off. During my enlistment, the weapon most prone to cook offs was not the M16 – it was the belt fed air cooled M60 machine gun. This was because people tried to treat it like a death ray and just kept feeding belt after belt of ammo to the gun without barrel changes.
    I don’t know where you got this document, but it looks like it is not for publication in a general sense, and a burst barrel and cook off isn’t because the receiver parts including the bolt carrier got too hot. In a cook off it is the powder charge in the cartridge that ignites, not the primer. The primer will usually blow out of the primer pocket in a cook off round. If the bolt got so hot that you had a cook off the upper would develop problems and I have never seen a structural failure of any upper receiver, bolt, bolt carrier or any other part except for the barrel. In cases where the barrel bursts it is usually a bore obstruction such as a projectile not exiting the bore, and even then multiple projectiles stack in the barrel prior to bursting the barrel/chamber wall. That is not a heat problem – it is a overpressure problem.
    The only full auto weapons that do not have the potential to cook off are water cooled machine guns. It is most often seen in belt fed weapons because of the number of rounds in a belt and the rapidity with which the belt can be changed when the gunner runs out. By dropping the magazine you allow cooler air to flow through the weapon from the mag well and ejection port through the bore. This drops the temperature enough that by the time you load a fresh magazine and begin firing again the chance of a cook off is pretty well eliminated.
    That being said, there are ways to make it happen, but that is not how soldiers are taught to fire an automatic weapon, and with burst fire auto mode you would have to work very hard to overheat the M4/AR15 to the point where this is possible.
    The heat I referred to in my previous postings is the heat transferred to the bolt carrier group and that heating is a result of the DI process where the gas is routed through the gas port in the barrel, through the gas tube, and into the bolt carrier key. This results the firing residue in the gas being deposited on all the surfaces of the components in the upper receiver assembly. That results in a bolt carrier group heating to the point that it is unwise to attempt handling it directly after firing, to the point of it reaching several hundred degrees, but well below temperatures that would cause structural breakdown of the parts and part failure.
    Soldiers are trained to avoid operating their weapon in such a way that a cook off could occur, and I can assure you this is a very uncommon problem. This is also why riflemen are taught to aim and fire directly at targets and not to use their weapon to suppress fire – that is what machine guns are for, and even they need to change barrels periodically during sustained use in the field to minimize cook offs.
    I’ve worked on military full automatic weapons from nearly every nation on earth, and they all have the potential to cook off live rounds left in a hot chamber – that is why you clear a weapon after firing, but of course in combat there are needs to disobey the rules, and during that kind of scenario you are still to keep the weapon pointed downrange. In 45 years I have yet to see a cook off. They are not supposed to happen if you handle the weapon correctly, and most are the result of abusing the firearm by not following operational rules to allow the weapon to cook off. To me, cook offs are very rare and that isn’t to say they don’t happen, but with someone with my experience not having ever seen one occur, that would indicate to me that they are a fairly rare occurrence.

  • L. Roger Rich

    LOL. You can get an entire AR 15 for $599.

    • kalashnikev

      Yeah… a piece of s one.

  • Franivelius

    What are gun laws for regular citizens in Taiwan like?

  • Ron Walsh

    Now I must have one. Should be a bit different than the standard AR upper.

  • CavScout

    They aren’t popular in Taiwan I wouldn’t think… as I doubt anyone has them…

    That video needs subs!!! Hentai translators, get to work!