I built a 300 BLK Form 1 with a 10.5" barrel and love it. Purchased my first suppressor and it's a relatively tidy package that makes me LOL every time I go to the range. It's short, light and with subs, is ridiculously easy to shoot.
I also have a POF Revolution DI which Iove but with the 16.5" barrel and the suppressor attached, it's a lot of gun and a far different beast from the 300 BLK. I'm not a long-range shooter (yet) and I'd probably just get something like a Ruger Precision if I wanted to explore that end of things but I know, as is, the POF would be fine at say 600-800 yards. So I'm contemplating going SBR on the POF and going with their 12.5" upper. I'd keep the 16.5" DI upper just because. The rifle's been fantastic and very accurate.
I'm using an OSS flow through suppressor which doesn't add much in terms of making the gun run dirtier overall since there's no discernible increase in back pressure.
I'm now contemplating piston vs. DI and my only reason going piston would be long-term function without maintenance. Otherwise DI is a bit more accurate from my understanding and a few ounces lighter. I understand the argument revolving around proprietary parts with a piston gun and the benefits of it running cleaner when suppressed (negated by the OSS suppressor). And it's a POF so half of the major components are already proprietary. They're no Sig either. Both versions of the rifle have been around for a while.
Given the current state of the industry, the 12.5" complete uppers may never be in stock or at least not in stock within a reasonable time frame. I could purchase the pistol version of either which would leave me the choice of either doing a form 1 on the existing rifle lower and selling the new complete pistol lower or the other way around. Either way, I'll want one SBR lower. I do this with the 300 Blackout and my 5.56 16" upper on one lower. Just like it that way and keeps things simple and consistent from a trigger and function standpoint.
Anything I'm overlooking? Any reason to stick with DI vs. a piston upper given my operating parameters? The only benefit I see with choosing the DI upper would be redundant components.
I also have a POF Revolution DI which Iove but with the 16.5" barrel and the suppressor attached, it's a lot of gun and a far different beast from the 300 BLK. I'm not a long-range shooter (yet) and I'd probably just get something like a Ruger Precision if I wanted to explore that end of things but I know, as is, the POF would be fine at say 600-800 yards. So I'm contemplating going SBR on the POF and going with their 12.5" upper. I'd keep the 16.5" DI upper just because. The rifle's been fantastic and very accurate.
I'm using an OSS flow through suppressor which doesn't add much in terms of making the gun run dirtier overall since there's no discernible increase in back pressure.
I'm now contemplating piston vs. DI and my only reason going piston would be long-term function without maintenance. Otherwise DI is a bit more accurate from my understanding and a few ounces lighter. I understand the argument revolving around proprietary parts with a piston gun and the benefits of it running cleaner when suppressed (negated by the OSS suppressor). And it's a POF so half of the major components are already proprietary. They're no Sig either. Both versions of the rifle have been around for a while.
Given the current state of the industry, the 12.5" complete uppers may never be in stock or at least not in stock within a reasonable time frame. I could purchase the pistol version of either which would leave me the choice of either doing a form 1 on the existing rifle lower and selling the new complete pistol lower or the other way around. Either way, I'll want one SBR lower. I do this with the 300 Blackout and my 5.56 16" upper on one lower. Just like it that way and keeps things simple and consistent from a trigger and function standpoint.
Anything I'm overlooking? Any reason to stick with DI vs. a piston upper given my operating parameters? The only benefit I see with choosing the DI upper would be redundant components.
