User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 3/9/2024 4:33:51 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Wangstang]
It's getting to the point that chrome lined and parkerized bolt carriers, along with parkerized bolts are getting toward the rare side in the commercial market, with deals on them being even more rare. Did .gov/.mil start allowing some use of nitrided BCG in the last few years or are they still required to be chrome lined and parkerized.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/9/2024 5:07:31 PM EDT
[#1]
Military is still parkerized. There’s a spec for chrome but those aren’t deployable and they don’t order them.
|
|
|
|
OH, USA
|
Posted: 3/9/2024 5:30:26 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Millennial]
[#2]
After working for a major mil contractor for 17+ years as a test, design, field service, test, and then again design engineer … I’ve learned “milspec” just means “good enough”.
I wouldn’t put much weight in mil spec versus commercial. Tons of commercial things and processes are better than mil spec but for one reason or another military settles on one thing. Milspec is all about certification standardization so they can farm out parts to various manufactures if they need to scale up quick and know the parts will still work regardless of the OEM. As a civilian it’s a good way to judge a product because if it’s good enough to meet military requirements and conditions it’ll probably be good enough for your LARPing. But don’t make the false equivalency that milspec is the end all be all of quality. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/9/2024 6:17:59 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Wangstang]
[#3]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Millennial: I wouldn’t put much credence in mil spec versus commercial quality. Tons of commercial things and processes are better than mil spec but for one reason or another military settles on one thing. Milspec is all about standardization so they can farm out parts to various manufactures if they need to scale up quick and know the parts will still work. As a civilian it’s a good way to judge a product because if it’s good enough for military conditions it’ll probably be good enough for yours. But don’t make the false equivalency that milspec is the end all be all of quality. After working for a major mil contractor for 17+ years as a test, design, field service, test, and then again design engineer … I’ve learned milspec just means “good enough”. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Millennial: I wouldn’t put much credence in mil spec versus commercial quality. Tons of commercial things and processes are better than mil spec but for one reason or another military settles on one thing. Milspec is all about standardization so they can farm out parts to various manufactures if they need to scale up quick and know the parts will still work. As a civilian it’s a good way to judge a product because if it’s good enough for military conditions it’ll probably be good enough for yours. But don’t make the false equivalency that milspec is the end all be all of quality. After working for a major mil contractor for 17+ years as a test, design, field service, test, and then again design engineer … I’ve learned milspec just means “good enough”. I don't disagree with your overall size up of "Milspec" but let's not kid ourselves here, the commercial market went to nitride because it was "good enough" and cheaper to produce than chrome lined for the Bolt Carrier. There have been more than enough barrel test done that show the value in chrome lining. From an engineering stand point I'd ask you to look in the expansion chamber of the nitride bolt carriers and compare it to that of a chrome lined carrier. Every* nitrided carrier has tooling marks left behind, usually perpendicular to the path of the bolt tail's forward and rearward movement, while the chrome lined is smooth. Which design would give you longer gas ring life and a better seal of the gas rings? My anecdotal observation over servicing around 100 rifles purchased from a few different manufacturers at different times during the last 20 years (so they aren't all one source or one batch), which consistently see 1k-2000 rounds a year through them, with some hitting 3-4,000 a year depending on the assignment...nitrided carriers eat gas rings every year and a half to two years. Chrome lined are needing replacement every 4-5 years. Nitride, even on a fresh set of rings, are less tolerant of ammo that's on the lower end of a powder charge as they are more likely to short stroke. Any how...I believe my primary question has been answered, in that nitride hasn't been adopted by the US military. Originally Posted By Ryan_Scott: Military is still parkerized. There’s a spec for chrome but those aren’t deployable and they don’t order them. Thanks On Edit * Every - meant in a general term but there are the rare exceptions to the rule out there. I used the phrase every in relationship to the general marketed "milspec" BCG currently available, not to reference high end/advertised as enhanced/improved BCG...See Molon's posts below. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/9/2024 6:25:27 PM EDT
[#4]
There’s no reason that a nitrided carrier couldn’t be built with a properly machined interior. But I do believe you’re right about most of them being built with less care.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/9/2024 6:27:00 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Wangstang: I don't disagree with your overall size up of "Milspec" but let's not kid ourselves here, the commercial market went to nitride because it was "good enough" and cheaper to produce than chrome lined for the Bolt Carrier. There have been more than enough barrel test done that show the value in chrome lining. From an engineering stand point I'd ask you to look in the expansion chamber of the nitride bolt carriers and compare it to that of a chrome lined carrier. Every nitrided carrier has tooling marks left behind, usually perpendicular to the path of the bolt tail's forward and rearward movement, while the chrome lined is smooth. Which design would give you longer gas ring life and a better seal of the gas rings? My anecdotal observation over servicing around 100 rifles purchased from a few different manufacturers at different times during the last 20 years (so they aren't all one source or one batch), which consistently see 1k-2000 rounds a year through them, with some hitting 3-4,000 a year depending on the assignment...nitrided carriers eat gas rings every year and a half to two years. Chrome lined are needing replacement every 4-5 years. Nitride, even on a fresh set of rings, are less tolerant of ammo that's on the lower end of a powder charge as they are more likely to short stroke. Any how...I believe my primary question has been answered, in that nitride hasn't been adopted by the US military. Thanks I just made a similar point about barrels the other day. Low end manufacturers aren’t piling on nitride because it’s better, they’re doing it because it’s cheaper. That same cost saving approach carries throughout their manufacturing. Chrome is more expensive. Naturally a company willing to spend more on finish treatment is more likely to spend more on other processes. Not all nitride products are bad and not all chrome lined products are good, but theres a very trackable quality trend between the two. |
|
|
|
OH, USA
|
Posted: 3/9/2024 8:56:08 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By -OdieGreen-: I just made a similar point about barrels the other day. Low end manufacturers aren’t piling on nitride because it’s better, they’re doing it because it’s cheaper. That same cost saving approach carries throughout their manufacturing. Chrome is more expensive. Naturally a company willing to spend more on finish treatment is more likely to spend more on other processes. Not all nitride products are bad and not all chrome lined products are good, but theres a very trackable quality trend between the two. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By -OdieGreen-: Originally Posted By Wangstang: I don't disagree with your overall size up of "Milspec" but let's not kid ourselves here, the commercial market went to nitride because it was "good enough" and cheaper to produce than chrome lined for the Bolt Carrier. There have been more than enough barrel test done that show the value in chrome lining. From an engineering stand point I'd ask you to look in the expansion chamber of the nitride bolt carriers and compare it to that of a chrome lined carrier. Every nitrided carrier has tooling marks left behind, usually perpendicular to the path of the bolt tail's forward and rearward movement, while the chrome lined is smooth. Which design would give you longer gas ring life and a better seal of the gas rings? My anecdotal observation over servicing around 100 rifles purchased from a few different manufacturers at different times during the last 20 years (so they aren't all one source or one batch), which consistently see 1k-2000 rounds a year through them, with some hitting 3-4,000 a year depending on the assignment...nitrided carriers eat gas rings every year and a half to two years. Chrome lined are needing replacement every 4-5 years. Nitride, even on a fresh set of rings, are less tolerant of ammo that's on the lower end of a powder charge as they are more likely to short stroke. Any how...I believe my primary question has been answered, in that nitride hasn't been adopted by the US military. Thanks I just made a similar point about barrels the other day. Low end manufacturers aren’t piling on nitride because it’s better, they’re doing it because it’s cheaper. That same cost saving approach carries throughout their manufacturing. Chrome is more expensive. Naturally a company willing to spend more on finish treatment is more likely to spend more on other processes. Not all nitride products are bad and not all chrome lined products are good, but theres a very trackable quality trend between the two. That’s why most precision shooters are using stainless or nitrided stainless/chromoly… not many precision manufactures out there besides criterion do chrome. Then again, the chrome barrel will wear longer and be tolerant of rapid or automatic fire (something precision shooters don’t really worry about. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/9/2024 9:02:47 PM EDT
[#7]
The first sub minute ten shot group I fired was through a hammered and chrome lined barrel.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/9/2024 10:36:10 PM EDT
[Last Edit: -OdieGreen-]
[#8]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Millennial: as far as barrels are concerned, a nitrided bore is easier to control for quality than a chrome lined bore. Nitriding doesn’t change the surface dimensions and chrome lining adds enough surface that you have to rely on a very controlled/quality application to keep the bore uniform. That’s why most precision shooters are using stainless or nitrided stainless/chromoly… not many precision manufactures out there besides criterion do chrome. Then again, the chrome barrel will wear longer and be tolerant of rapid or automatic fire (something precision shooters don’t really worry about. Yeah, but how many precision manufacturers are doing nitride AR barrels on the other side of the coin? Criterion again is the only one I know of off hand. There very well could be others but I haven’t looked for a bit. The truth is the vast majority of nitride barrel makers aren’t starting with a quality barrel to begin with. Therein lies the problem. It’s not that nitride is bad, it’s that at this point in the game, most companies using it are not good. |
|
|
|
AZ, USA
|
Posted: 3/9/2024 10:38:37 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Millennial: After working for a major mil contractor for 17+ years as a test, design, field service, test, and then again design engineer … I’ve learned “milspec” just means “good enough”. I wouldn’t put much weight in mil spec versus commercial. Tons of commercial things and processes are better than mil spec but for one reason or another military settles on one thing. Milspec is all about certification standardization so they can farm out parts to various manufactures if they need to scale up quick and know the parts will still work regardless of the OEM. As a civilian it’s a good way to judge a product because if it’s good enough to meet military requirements and conditions it’ll probably be good enough for your LARPing. But don’t make the false equivalency that milspec is the end all be all of quality. You reduce the core strength of the bolt material by about 30% when you hold it for 5hrs at 1000F, or more. That's crazy. Nitrided bolts are metallurgically inferior to bolts that were being produced per the TDP in 1971. It's a good thing that the factors-of-safety are high enough that it rarely results in a shooter having a really bad day. Most aftermarket products are hot garbage. S7 tool steel bolts are also insanely idiotic. |
|
|
AZ, USA
|
Posted: 3/9/2024 10:44:16 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Wangstang: I don't disagree with your overall size up of "Milspec" but let's not kid ourselves here, the commercial market went to nitride because it was "good enough" and cheaper to produce than chrome lined for the Bolt Carrier. There have been more than enough barrel test done that show the value in chrome lining. From an engineering stand point I'd ask you to look in the expansion chamber of the nitride bolt carriers and compare it to that of a chrome lined carrier. Every nitrided carrier has tooling marks left behind, usually perpendicular to the path of the bolt tail's forward and rearward movement, while the chrome lined is smooth. Which design would give you longer gas ring life and a better seal of the gas rings? My anecdotal observation over servicing around 100 rifles purchased from a few different manufacturers at different times during the last 20 years (so they aren't all one source or one batch), which consistently see 1k-2000 rounds a year through them, with some hitting 3-4,000 a year depending on the assignment...nitrided carriers eat gas rings every year and a half to two years. Chrome lined are needing replacement every 4-5 years. Nitride, even on a fresh set of rings, are less tolerant of ammo that's on the lower end of a powder charge as they are more likely to short stroke. Any how...I believe my primary question has been answered, in that nitride hasn't been adopted by the US military. Thanks Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Wangstang: Originally Posted By Millennial: I wouldn’t put much credence in mil spec versus commercial quality. Tons of commercial things and processes are better than mil spec but for one reason or another military settles on one thing. Milspec is all about standardization so they can farm out parts to various manufactures if they need to scale up quick and know the parts will still work. As a civilian it’s a good way to judge a product because if it’s good enough for military conditions it’ll probably be good enough for yours. But don’t make the false equivalency that milspec is the end all be all of quality. After working for a major mil contractor for 17+ years as a test, design, field service, test, and then again design engineer … I’ve learned milspec just means “good enough”. I don't disagree with your overall size up of "Milspec" but let's not kid ourselves here, the commercial market went to nitride because it was "good enough" and cheaper to produce than chrome lined for the Bolt Carrier. There have been more than enough barrel test done that show the value in chrome lining. From an engineering stand point I'd ask you to look in the expansion chamber of the nitride bolt carriers and compare it to that of a chrome lined carrier. Every nitrided carrier has tooling marks left behind, usually perpendicular to the path of the bolt tail's forward and rearward movement, while the chrome lined is smooth. Which design would give you longer gas ring life and a better seal of the gas rings? My anecdotal observation over servicing around 100 rifles purchased from a few different manufacturers at different times during the last 20 years (so they aren't all one source or one batch), which consistently see 1k-2000 rounds a year through them, with some hitting 3-4,000 a year depending on the assignment...nitrided carriers eat gas rings every year and a half to two years. Chrome lined are needing replacement every 4-5 years. Nitride, even on a fresh set of rings, are less tolerant of ammo that's on the lower end of a powder charge as they are more likely to short stroke. Any how...I believe my primary question has been answered, in that nitride hasn't been adopted by the US military. Originally Posted By Ryan_Scott: Military is still parkerized. There’s a spec for chrome but those aren’t deployable and they don’t order them. Thanks I don't know exactly how the bolt carriers are plated. Sometimes the polarity of the components are reversed - the anode becomes the cathode, and vice versa, so that the part to be plated is electropolished, resulting in a very smooth, burr-free surface to be plated. Hard chrome has a very low friction coefficient, and extremely good anti-galling characteristics. There's really nothing that matches it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/9/2024 10:46:00 PM EDT
[Last Edit: -OdieGreen-]
[#11]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By brownbomber: You reduce the core strength of the bolt material by about 30% when you hold it for 5hrs at 1000F, or more. That's crazy. Nitrided bolts are metallurgically inferior to bolts that were being produced per the TDP in 1971. It's a good thing that the factors-of-safety are high enough that it rarely results in a shooter having a really bad day. Most aftermarket products are hot garbage. S7 tool steel bolts are also insanely idiotic. What are your thoughts on 9310 nitride bolts? I’ve wondered about the process since 9310 is supposed to be so sensitive to treat. Seems like it’s the new standard for cheap as possible bolts. |
|
|
|
AZ, USA
|
Posted: 3/9/2024 11:01:32 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By -OdieGreen-: What are your thoughts on 9310 nitride bolts? I’ve wondered about the process since 9310 is supposed to be so sensitive to treat. Seems like it’s the new standard for cheap as possible bolts. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By -OdieGreen-: Originally Posted By brownbomber: You reduce the core strength of the bolt material by about 30% when you hold it for 5hrs at 1000F, or more. That's crazy. Nitrided bolts are metallurgically inferior to bolts that were being produced per the TDP in 1971. It's a good thing that the factors-of-safety are high enough that it rarely results in a shooter having a really bad day. Most aftermarket products are hot garbage. S7 tool steel bolts are also insanely idiotic. What are your thoughts on 9310 nitride bolts? I’ve wondered about the process since 9310 is supposed to be so sensitive to treat. Seems like it’s the new standard for cheap as possible bolts. My thought is that they are hot garbage. The strength of the base material is reduced by about 30% over a 300F temper, so it's really curious how manufacturers claim that they're 9310 bolts are X% stronger than Carpenter 158, when they are actually about 30% weaker. I mean, they would be X% stronger had they tempered it at 300F, but they tempered it for 5 hours (or more) at 1000F (or more). Tempering something at 300F and then dipping it in molten salt at 1000F for 5 hours would be like pooping, wiping, then having a massive diarrhea explosion, and then pulling your pants up and going about your day. It's retarded. Direction of R and D of Advanced Gear Steels (ADP005061) (see the tempering diagram at top-right) I've worked for 2 small firearms manufacturers, and you would be astonished at how ignorant they all are about basic metallurgy. This is just basic first-week stuff for an introductory college-level material science course. Note that there are materials that exhibit "secondary hardening" - they actually achieve a peak strength at a very high tempering temperature (2 of them are shown on the same diagram that I linked above). They are unusual and exotic, whereas 9310 is not. It's a 1950s-era alloy, and a standard AISI grade that is not proprietary. It's a great material for gears that are immersed in oil, and do not exceed a temperature of 200F or so. Nitriding is probably a fair bit cheaper than the rather exotic heat treatment that the Mil-Spec bolt is subjected to. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/9/2024 11:04:53 PM EDT
[#13]
Neither is 1/8 twist rifling, Wylde Chamber, Non-A2 barrel profile, nor 5R rifling.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/9/2024 11:08:52 PM EDT
[Last Edit: -OdieGreen-]
[#14]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By brownbomber: My thought is that they are hot garbage. The strength of the base material is reduced by about 30% over a 300F temper, so it's really curious how manufacturers claim that they're 9310 bolts are X% stronger than Carpenter 158, when they are actually about 30% weaker. I mean, they would be X% stronger had they tempered it at 300F, but they tempered it for 5 hours (or more) at 1000F (or more). Tempering something at 300F and then dipping it in molten salt at 1000F for 5 hours would be like pooping, wiping, then having a massive diarrhea explosion, and then pulling your pants up and going about your day. It's retarded. Direction of R and D of Advanced Gear Steels (ADP005061) (see the tempering diagram at top-right) I've worked for 2 small firearms manufacturers, and you would be astonished at how ignorant they all are about basic metallurgy. This is just basic first-week stuff for an introductory college-level material science course. Note that there are materials that exhibit "secondary hardening" - they actually achieve a peak strength at a very high tempering temperature (2 of them are shown on the same diagram that I linked above). They are unusual and exotic, whereas 9310 is not. It's a 1950s-era alloy, and a standard AISI grade that is not proprietary. It's a great material for gears that are immersed in oil, and do not exceed a temperature of 200F or so. Nitriding is probably a fair bit cheaper than the rather exotic heat treatment that the Mil-Spec bolt is subjected to. Spot on for what my concern was. Thanks! I’ve been avoiding nitride 9310 bolts and will continue to do so. |
|
|
|
AZ, USA
|
Posted: 3/9/2024 11:29:59 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By -OdieGreen-: Spot on for what my concern was. Thanks! I’ve been avoiding nitride 9310 bolts and will continue to do so. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By -OdieGreen-: Originally Posted By brownbomber: My thought is that they are hot garbage. The strength of the base material is reduced by about 30% over a 300F temper, so it's really curious how manufacturers claim that they're 9310 bolts are X% stronger than Carpenter 158, when they are actually about 30% weaker. I mean, they would be X% stronger had they tempered it at 300F, but they tempered it for 5 hours (or more) at 1000F (or more). Tempering something at 300F and then dipping it in molten salt at 1000F for 5 hours would be like pooping, wiping, then having a massive diarrhea explosion, and then pulling your pants up and going about your day. It's retarded. Direction of R and D of Advanced Gear Steels (ADP005061) (see the tempering diagram at top-right) I've worked for 2 small firearms manufacturers, and you would be astonished at how ignorant they all are about basic metallurgy. This is just basic first-week stuff for an introductory college-level material science course. Note that there are materials that exhibit "secondary hardening" - they actually achieve a peak strength at a very high tempering temperature (2 of them are shown on the same diagram that I linked above). They are unusual and exotic, whereas 9310 is not. It's a 1950s-era alloy, and a standard AISI grade that is not proprietary. It's a great material for gears that are immersed in oil, and do not exceed a temperature of 200F or so. Nitriding is probably a fair bit cheaper than the rather exotic heat treatment that the Mil-Spec bolt is subjected to. Spot on for what my concern was. Thanks! I’ve been avoiding nitride 9310 bolts and will continue to do so. You're welcome. I don't think that 9310 is even remotely difficult to heat treat. AR15 bolts are a lot smaller than helicopter gears - there shouldn't be any problems consistently hardening and tempering a part that small that is made of a high-hardenability material like 9310. Issues arise when people deviate from tried-and-true processes for a profit incentive. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2024 10:57:58 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Molon]
[#16]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Wangstang: From an engineering stand point I'd ask you to look in the expansion chamber of the nitride bolt carriers and compare it to that of a chrome lined carrier. Every nitrided carrier has tooling marks left behind, usually perpendicular to the path of the bolt tail's forward and rearward movement, while the chrome lined is smooth. False. The boresope views below show an unfired Colt bolt carrier on the left and an unfired nitrided JP Enterprises bolt carrier on the right.  ... |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2024 11:17:27 AM EDT
[#17]
JP is super premium gear…I think we can all infer that he is talking about mid range carriers like a generic PSA or similar.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2024 11:38:19 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Wangstang]
[#18]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Molon: False. The boresope views below show an unfired Colt bolt carrier on the left and an unfired nitrided JP Enterprises bolt carrier on the right. https://i.ibb.co/hMXk5tS/colt-bolt-carrier-borescope-003b.jpg ... JP might be the one in 100 company that requires a final hone, and even with that you can see tooling faintly in that carrier running consistent with the manufacturing process. That colt does look textured, I wonder if the light reflects off the chrome In a way that better highlights the texture than the black/deep blue nitride in the JP. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2024 11:38:40 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By FedDC: JP is super premium gear…I think we can all infer that he is talking about mid range carriers like a generic PSA or similar. I suggest you find a local community college offering night courses and enroll in an Introduction to Logic class. Within the first hour you will learn what most fourth graders already know; that all that is necessary to prove a statement containing a claim of "every" is false, is one single instance showing so. ... |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2024 11:45:23 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Molon: I suggest you find a local community college offering night courses and enroll in an Introduction to Logic class. Within the first hour you will learn what most fourth graders already know; that all that is necessary to prove a statement containing a claim of "every" is false, is one single instance showing so. ... I've edited the post with some point of clarification * Every - meant in a general term but there are the rare exceptions to the rule out there. I used the phrase every in relationship to the general marketed "milspec" BCG currently available, not to reference high end/advertised as enhanced/improved BCG |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2024 12:20:59 PM EDT
[Last Edit: j3_]
[#21]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Wangstang: I've edited the post with some point of clarification * Every - meant in a general term but there are the rare exceptions to the rule out there. I used the phrase every in relationship to the general marketed "milspec" BCG currently available, not to reference high end/advertised as enhanced/improved BCG I think all of us that made it to the fourth grade already understood the meaning of the original post. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2024 1:56:24 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Molon: I suggest you find a local community college offering night courses and enroll in an Introduction to Logic class. Within the first hour you will learn what most fourth graders already know; that all that is necessary to prove a statement containing a claim of "every" is false, is one single instance showing so. ... Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Molon: Originally Posted By FedDC: JP is super premium gear…I think we can all infer that he is talking about mid range carriers like a generic PSA or similar. I suggest you find a local community college offering night courses and enroll in an Introduction to Logic class. Within the first hour you will learn what most fourth graders already know; that all that is necessary to prove a statement containing a claim of "every" is false, is one single instance showing so. ... You don’t have to be rude. Try understanding the context into which the poster in question was speaking- not JP level. Everyone in the room…except you…seems to perfectly understand that. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2024 2:17:12 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By FedDC: You don’t have to be rude. Try understanding the context into which the poster in question was speaking- not JP level. Everyone in the room…except you…seems to perfectly understand that. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By FedDC: Originally Posted By Molon: Originally Posted By FedDC: JP is super premium gear…I think we can all infer that he is talking about mid range carriers like a generic PSA or similar. I suggest you find a local community college offering night courses and enroll in an Introduction to Logic class. Within the first hour you will learn what most fourth graders already know; that all that is necessary to prove a statement containing a claim of "every" is false, is one single instance showing so. ... You don’t have to be rude. Try understanding the context into which the poster in question was speaking- not JP level. Everyone in the room…except you…seems to perfectly understand that. Ah Molon - that guy is great. Think of him more as someone from Big Bang Theory. Complete savant genious. Suffers fools poorly. . Threshold to be so categorized is not high. And occasionally - BAM! Don't take it too personal. We're lucky to have him. Getting zinged from time to time is the price of admission. Sometimes you even end up better for it. That said - the call out from you was not undeserved either. Me, I'm just having a coke lighting off some rounds at the range (actually one of those Dr Pepper Vanilla Cream Soda Zeros - which are just AMAZING) |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2024 2:20:23 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Molon]
[#24]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By FedDC: Try understanding the context into which the poster in question was speaking- not JP level. Everyone in the room…except you…seems to perfectly understand that. If you have a nitrided bolt carrier that has significant tool marks in the gas ring run, it has nothing to do with nitriding and everything to do with the fact that you have a cheap-ass bolt carrier; something that you can't seem to understand. My nitrided bolt carriers don't have significant tool marks in the gas ring run, but I don't buy cheap-ass bolt carriers. Don't buy cheap-ass bolt carriers and you won't have significant tool marks in the gas ring run. ... |
|
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 3/10/2024 2:32:37 PM EDT
[#25]
A expert in barrels and bolts has for many years studied and analyzed nitride bolts and the lugs will compact and shrink
The nitride process is good for some things but not bolts |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2024 2:33:46 PM EDT
[Last Edit: -OdieGreen-]
[#26]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Molon: If you have a nitrided bolt carrier that has significant tool marks in the gas ring run, it has nothing to do with nitriding and everything to do with the fact that you have a cheap-ass bolt carrier; something that you can't seem to understand. My nitrided bolt carriers don't have significant tool marks in the gas ring run, but I don't buy cheap-ass bolt carriers. Don't buy cheap-ass bolt carriers and you won't have significant tool marks in the gas ring run. ... Everyone knew what he meant including you. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2024 3:00:15 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By gasgas: A expert in barrels and bolts has for many years studied and analyzed nitride bolts and the lugs will compact and shrink The nitride process is good for some things but not bolts Which is why JP Enterprises doesn't using nitriding on their bolts. ... |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2024 3:28:27 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Molon: False. The boresope views below show an unfired Colt bolt carrier on the left and an unfired nitrided JP Enterprises bolt carrier on the right. https://i.ibb.co/hMXk5tS/colt-bolt-carrier-borescope-003b.jpg ... The exception that proves the rule. JP stuff is always well finished and gorgeous. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2024 4:05:32 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Molon: If you have a nitrided bolt carrier that has significant tool marks in the gas ring run, it has nothing to do with nitriding and everything to do with the fact that you have a cheap-ass bolt carrier; something that you can't seem to understand. My nitrided bolt carriers don't have significant tool marks in the gas ring run, but I don't buy cheap-ass bolt carriers. Don't buy cheap-ass bolt carriers and you won't have significant tool marks in the gas ring run. ... Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Molon: Originally Posted By FedDC: Try understanding the context into which the poster in question was speaking- not JP level. Everyone in the room…except you…seems to perfectly understand that. If you have a nitrided bolt carrier that has significant tool marks in the gas ring run, it has nothing to do with nitriding and everything to do with the fact that you have a cheap-ass bolt carrier; something that you can't seem to understand. My nitrided bolt carriers don't have significant tool marks in the gas ring run, but I don't buy cheap-ass bolt carriers. Don't buy cheap-ass bolt carriers and you won't have significant tool marks in the gas ring run. ... @Molon Molon, this is ARFCOM 75% here buy cheap shit and than promote it as better than the companies that actually make very high quality parts. They will even go so far to say anything over their budget brand is wasting money and not necessary. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2024 4:18:42 PM EDT
[#30]
Applied chrome adds dimension whereas nitride does not. Another variable to consider.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2024 4:34:51 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TGWLDR: Applied chrome adds dimension whereas nitride does not. Another variable to consider. That’s not an issue at all, you can account for that. The larger issue is that the plating process leaves a less consistent dimension due to thickness variations. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2024 4:55:21 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Ryan_Scott: That’s not an issue at all, you can account for that. The larger issue is that the plating process leaves a less consistent dimension due to thickness variations. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Ryan_Scott: Originally Posted By TGWLDR: Applied chrome adds dimension whereas nitride does not. Another variable to consider. That’s not an issue at all, you can account for that. The larger issue is that the plating process leaves a less consistent dimension due to thickness variations. And possibly covers a percentage of minor tooling marks. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2024 5:16:54 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TGWLDR: And possibly covers a percentage of minor tooling marks. Another advantage of hammer forging. There’s also different processes that etch away more or less barrel steel. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2024 5:23:08 PM EDT
[#34]
Here’s a question I’ve wondered, when the nitrate wears out how much does barrel enlarge and how fast does the barrel eroding increase? We know there is no argument that chrome is harder and lasts longer, but does a nitrated barrel wear faster after its has worn out of the barrel?
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2024 5:34:51 PM EDT
[Last Edit: TGWLDR]
[#35]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By mstennes: Here’s a question I’ve wondered, when the nitrate wears out how much does barrel enlarge and how fast does the barrel eroding increase? We know there is no argument that chrome is harder and lasts longer, but does a nitrated barrel wear faster after its has worn out of the barrel? Nitride processing is typically .0003 -.0015" in depth and is 60-70+ HRC. Hard chrome comes in at 68-72HRC and plating thickness is ~.0004" |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2024 10:15:54 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Molon: If you have a nitrided bolt carrier that has significant tool marks in the gas ring run, it has nothing to do with nitriding and everything to do with the fact that you have a cheap-ass bolt carrier; something that you can't seem to understand. My nitrided bolt carriers don't have significant tool marks in the gas ring run, but I don't buy cheap-ass bolt carriers. Don't buy cheap-ass bolt carriers and you won't have significant tool marks in the gas ring run. ... Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Molon: Originally Posted By FedDC: Try understanding the context into which the poster in question was speaking- not JP level. Everyone in the room…except you…seems to perfectly understand that. If you have a nitrided bolt carrier that has significant tool marks in the gas ring run, it has nothing to do with nitriding and everything to do with the fact that you have a cheap-ass bolt carrier; something that you can't seem to understand. My nitrided bolt carriers don't have significant tool marks in the gas ring run, but I don't buy cheap-ass bolt carriers. Don't buy cheap-ass bolt carriers and you won't have significant tool marks in the gas ring run. ... No, it’s not the same. Nitride has a key feature- Hardness. It functionally locks in whatever surface finish exists in the freshly machined surface. This eliminates its ability to break in or smooth out any imperfections. Dave Tooley talks about this on the hide in the context of nitrided precision rifle barrels in that the shooter needs to slightly break in the barrel prior to nitride or the barrel will strip copper off the bullets badly. Specifically, he notes that chambering produces small burrs on the trailing edge of the rifling leade and they need to be polished away before nitride or they will never go away. Carriers are the same…imperfections become permanent and eat rings. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2024 10:29:33 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By mstennes: @Molon Molon, this is ARFCOM 75% here buy cheap shit and than promote it as better than the companies that actually make very high quality parts. They will even go so far to say anything over their budget brand is wasting money and not necessary. Ain't that the truth! |
|
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 3/11/2024 11:07:49 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By FedDC: No, it's not the same. Nitride has a key feature- Hardness. It functionally locks in whatever surface finish exists in the freshly machined surface. This eliminates its ability to break in or smooth out any imperfections. Dave Tooley talks about this on the hide in the context of nitrided precision rifle barrels in that the shooter needs to slightly break in the barrel prior to nitride or the barrel will strip copper off the bullets badly. Specifically, he notes that chambering produces small burrs on the trailing edge of the rifling leade and they need to be polished away before nitride or they will never go away. Carriers are the same imperfections become permanent and eat rings. |
|
|
MI, USA
|
Posted: 3/12/2024 12:08:27 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Tiribulus]
[#39]
I'm not technically qualified to weigh in on that side of this discussion and therefore hesitated before saying anything.
However, I cannot help but make 2 observations. One is that it is possible to produce good nitrided or nitrocarburized bolts (including with 9310) and carriers. Or so I've read from sources that seem to have at least as much credibility as anybody else. Two would be the reality that unless someone can demonstrate otherwise, there doesn't seem to be an outcry over failed ones online, (not in the last few years anyway) where unsatisfied users of anything cannot wait to tell the world about their negative experience. This must mean that a fairly large percentage of them are being manufactured optimally, or even if not, they still work. I've seen some reports of failed C-158 bolts, even from higher end names, as well as reports of many thousands of rounds on nitrided 9310 bolts with no problems. And vice versa. In fact, I don't think I've seen any more reports of failed 9310 bolts than C-158 bolts. Not so that it would be noticeable. Don't misunderstand. I'm not challenging anybody. I'm just reflecting on the above out loud. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2024 6:18:53 AM EDT
[#40]
For M16 FOWs? Probably not, but the M27 uses them.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2024 3:56:47 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Tiribulus: I'm not technically qualified to weigh in on that side of this discussion and therefore hesitated before saying anything. However, I cannot help but make 2 observations. One is that it is possible to produce good nitrided or nitrocarburized bolts (including with 9310) and carriers. Or so I've read from sources that seem to have at least as much credibility as anybody else. Two would be the reality that unless someone can demonstrate otherwise, there doesn't seem to be an outcry over failed ones online, (not in the last few years anyway) where unsatisfied users of anything cannot wait to tell the world about their negative experience. This must mean that a fairly large percentage of them are being manufactured optimally, or even if not, they still work. I've seen some reports of failed C-158 bolts, even from higher end names, as well as reports of many thousands of rounds on nitrided 9310 bolts with no problems. And vice versa. In fact, I don't think I've seen any more reports of failed 9310 bolts than C-158 bolts. Not so that it would be noticeable. Don't misunderstand. I'm not challenging anybody. I'm just reflecting on the above out loud. Most new shooters funnel into Reddit instead of gun forums. HERE is a Google link with an endless sea of broken 9310 bolt stories and pictures from Reddit. It seems the majority are Aero, PSA, Toolcraft, and Anderson. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/19/2024 6:41:58 PM EDT
[#42]
Originally Posted By FedDC: No, it’s not the same. The words “the same” don’t appear anywhere in my post. Originally Posted By FedDC: . . . . chambering produces small burrs on the trailing edge of the rifling leade. . . No shit Sherlock. I’ve only been posting about that on this website for more than 15 years. Originally Posted By FedDC: Nitride has a key feature- Hardness. It functionally locks in whatever surface finish exists in the freshly machined surface. This eliminates its ability to break in or smooth out any imperfections. Yet another demonstration of just how little first-hand experience you have on the subject matter and that you just regurgitate talking points that you’ve seen on the Internet. Here’s what the rifling in the leade of a properly manufactured nitrided AR-15 barrel looks like after it has started breaking in. No significant permanent tool marks on the rifling of the leade and there's no badly stripping of copper off the bullets.  Originally Posted By FedDC: Carriers are the same…imperfections become permanent and eat rings. I already proved on the first page of this thread that if you don’t buy cheap-ass nitrided bolt carriers, that doesn’t happen, but since you’re trying to pretend that you didn’t see that proof, here it is again. No permanent significant tool marks and it doesn’t “eat gas rings.” …. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/19/2024 7:37:32 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By R0N: For M16 FOWs? Probably not, but the M27 uses them. What’s the finish on the bolt? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/20/2024 12:32:07 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Molon: The words “the same” don’t appear anywhere in my post. No shit Sherlock. I’ve only been posting about that on this website for more than 15 years. Yet another demonstration of just how little first-hand experience you have on the subject matter and that you just regurgitate talking points that you’ve seen on the Internet. Here’s what the rifling in the leade of a properly manufactured nitrided AR-15 barrel looks like after it has started breaking in. No significant permanent tool marks on the rifling of the leade and there's no badly stripping of copper off the bullets. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/28568/nitride_leade_01b-3163873.jpg I already proved on the first page of this thread that if you don’t buy cheap-ass nitrided bolt carriers, that doesn’t happen, but since you’re trying to pretend that you didn’t see that proof, here it is again. No permanent significant tool marks and it doesn’t “eat gas rings.” https://i.ibb.co/hMXk5tS/colt-bolt-carrier-borescope-003b.jpg …. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Molon: Originally Posted By FedDC: No, it’s not the same. The words “the same” don’t appear anywhere in my post. Originally Posted By FedDC: . . . . chambering produces small burrs on the trailing edge of the rifling leade. . . No shit Sherlock. I’ve only been posting about that on this website for more than 15 years. Originally Posted By FedDC: Nitride has a key feature- Hardness. It functionally locks in whatever surface finish exists in the freshly machined surface. This eliminates its ability to break in or smooth out any imperfections. Yet another demonstration of just how little first-hand experience you have on the subject matter and that you just regurgitate talking points that you’ve seen on the Internet. Here’s what the rifling in the leade of a properly manufactured nitrided AR-15 barrel looks like after it has started breaking in. No significant permanent tool marks on the rifling of the leade and there's no badly stripping of copper off the bullets. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/28568/nitride_leade_01b-3163873.jpg Originally Posted By FedDC: Carriers are the same…imperfections become permanent and eat rings. I already proved on the first page of this thread that if you don’t buy cheap-ass nitrided bolt carriers, that doesn’t happen, but since you’re trying to pretend that you didn’t see that proof, here it is again. No permanent significant tool marks and it doesn’t “eat gas rings.” https://i.ibb.co/hMXk5tS/colt-bolt-carrier-borescope-003b.jpg …. Are you autistically trying to be rude or do you lack the social skills to read the room and see that multiple people dropped clear hints to tone it down...we aren't enemies or fighting with one another. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2024 12:02:33 AM EDT
[#45]
Figured I'd share a relevant deal:
 Attached FileBuy two and throw in a grip screw to bring the total to $250.40, then use code FREESHIP for orders over $250 and it's a solid deal on quality milspec components. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2024 9:13:49 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Molon: The words “the same” don’t appear anywhere in my post. No shit Sherlock. I’ve only been posting about that on this website for more than 15 years. Yet another demonstration of just how little first-hand experience you have on the subject matter and that you just regurgitate talking points that you’ve seen on the Internet. Here’s what the rifling in the leade of a properly manufactured nitrided AR-15 barrel looks like after it has started breaking in. No significant permanent tool marks on the rifling of the leade and there's no badly stripping of copper off the bullets. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/28568/nitride_leade_01b-3163873.jpg I already proved on the first page of this thread that if you don’t buy cheap-ass nitrided bolt carriers, that doesn’t happen, but since you’re trying to pretend that you didn’t see that proof, here it is again. No permanent significant tool marks and it doesn’t “eat gas rings.” https://i.ibb.co/hMXk5tS/colt-bolt-carrier-borescope-003b.jpg …. Good lord man. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2024 10:14:24 PM EDT
[#47]
Awaiting staff. DJ or which ever one answers can unlock it.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2024 10:14:42 PM EDT
[#48]
Pending staff review
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2024 2:45:02 PM EDT
[#49]
Unlocked
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2024 6:51:16 PM EDT
[#50]
Good stuff @Molon.
|
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
