User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 9:00:46 PM EDT
[#1]
Sounds like a standard government profile.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 9:01:42 PM EDT
[#2]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 10:03:16 PM EDT
[#3]
Yes, there are a LOT of barrel makers out there (many are industry partners here too) that stupidly call some of their barrels SOCOM when they are nothing of the sort.
As far as my rather limited knowledge goes, the M4A1 barrel is a SOCOM barrel, and other with slightly more mass under the handguard than towards the muzzle have been referred to as SOCOM also, however nowadays everybody seems to like to call the government profile barrels SOCOM...and this is completely stupid. Don't settle for what they want to call a SOCOM, get the specs and get the barrel that you want based on its design, not what they call it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 10:27:04 PM EDT
[#4]
PSA does the same thing.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 10:50:58 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
PSA does the same thing. So does Faxon. There's nothing "socom" about their barrels. It's a stupid marketing tactic. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 10:55:12 PM EDT
[#6]
Thanks for the insight everyone. Yes, upon further review mine is definitely a government profile barrel. I kind of wish it was a thin barrel all around but I can live with this.
Thanks again. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2016 12:41:21 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Thanks for the insight everyone. Yes, upon further review mine is definitely a government profile barrel. I kind of wish it was a thin barrel all around but I can live with this. Thanks again. In other words, you ordered a SOCOM/heavy profile barrel, rec'd a (thinner/lighter) Govt. profile barrel and really want a lightweight/pencil barrel. Unless you really wanted the heavy barrel profile for some reason, I'd be OK with the Govt. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2016 2:51:54 AM EDT
[#8]
get Colt... the only real Socom barrel
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2016 7:14:17 AM EDT
[#9]
confusion setting in here.
Socom, M4 etc refer to carbine barrels Government profile = rifle barrel never seen a Gov't profile carbine barrel which one you got? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2016 8:21:41 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: confusion setting in here.Socom, M4 etc refer to carbine barrels Government profile = rifle barrel never seen a Gov't profile carbine barrel which one you got? M4 profile refers to standard government profile, rifle or carbine, thinner under handguards, 750 gas block, then thicker after gas block. M4, m4a1 profile is probably more accurate but I still don't think it's correct calling a m4 profile a socom profile.
The two profiles:  |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2016 9:16:04 AM EDT
[#11]
Just like the term "mil-spec", some manufacturers are using SOCOM as a marketing tool on unsuspecting buyers.
If you want a SOCOM barrel, get a Colt or BCM. ETA: nothing wrong with a regular M4 profile, but you paid for a SOCOM barrel, and it's bullshit a vendor is lying to its customers. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2016 9:38:20 AM EDT
[#12]
Sadly, it's just a marketing ploy. It's like the Mega Arms 18" SPR barrel that even includes the warning 'not profiled for Ops Inc. collar and brake' and all the other SPR barrels out there. The barrels shoot great, but the names are misleading. I hope that's your experience as well.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2016 11:24:11 AM EDT
[#13]
side view
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2016 1:14:18 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
get Colt... the only real Socom barrel BCM also sells a proper SOCOM barrel. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2016 5:08:51 PM EDT
[#15]
Mine looks like the M4 barrel in the picture shown five posts above, but w/o the M203 cuts.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2016 5:14:25 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Mine looks like the M4 barrel in the picture shown five posts above, but w/o the M203 cuts. The lower one or the upper one? If it's the lower one, that's govt. If it looks like the upper one w/o the 203 cuts UNDERNEATH the handgaurd, then it's an HBAR M4 profile. If it's either and it doesn't have the M4 step, then it's just a regular ole carbine barrel. Either HBAR or Govt. Can you post a pic? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2016 10:09:46 PM EDT
[#17]
It looks like the lower one, the M4 barrel that's thin under the hand guards and then thick shortly before the gas block and to the muzzle threads (but w/o the M4 cuts).
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2016 11:54:41 PM EDT
[#18]
http://www.cbcindustries.com/collections/barrels/products/ar-15-barrel-16-5-56x45-1-7-twist-midlength
I saw 3 barrels that were called "Socom" profile according to them. They all looked to be midlength. Different twists. 1/7, 1/8, and 1/9. If you're asking what profile that is, it's just a carbine barrel. You would call it govt profile UNDERNEATH the handgaurds. It's basically the same thing as a govt profile 20"er, but shortened to 16" with a midlength gas system. Honestly, I like that profile. It just doesn't fall into any military profile that they use. But the thicker end is kind of.... not really necessary? If you're gonna go skinny, might as well do it all the way down and save some weight. I don't have a profile just like that, other than my 20" A2. And that gun balances really well. Anyways.... Not much else to say about it other than didn't you see what you were getting when you ordered it? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2016 1:03:06 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
BCM also sells a proper SOCOM barrel. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
get Colt... the only real Socom barrel BCM also sells a proper SOCOM barrel. I wouldn't say proper, only because they're not the originator of the design, but it has a SOCOM profile. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2016 1:10:49 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So does Faxon. There's nothing "socom" about their barrels. It's a stupid marketing tactic. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
PSA does the same thing. So does Faxon. There's nothing "socom" about their barrels. It's a stupid marketing tactic. That's because both are economy companies worry about moving more product over quality or theory of use. But then people are also STUPID, as they will want a SOCOM barrel, but go to the one that advertises a lower weight. Cough. There's a reason IV8881's vid of melting down a DI AR didn't take as long as it should have. The Faxon barrel failed. If you want a SOCOM type for reals, guess Colt is like the only option. Hear someone is selling the stripped (or maybe assembled?) Colt SOCOM barrels. Sucks that most of them, or all of them, are 16" with a carbine length gas system. For that reason, I'd prefer a medium to medium/heavy no-gov-cuts barrel. These, from a truly quality maker, will give you better results. Maybe look at Wilson Combat barrels? After various make barrels, I can't recommend Rainier ones; but Wilson Combat have been great. Not Wilson barrels, but Wilson Combat. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2016 1:26:17 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That's because both are economy companies worry about moving more product over quality or theory of use. But then people are also STUPID, as they will want a SOCOM barrel, but go to the one that advertises a lower weight. Cough. There's a reason IV8881's vid of melting down a DI AR didn't take as long as it should have. The Faxon barrel failed. If you want a SOCOM type for reals, guess Colt is like the only option. Hear someone is selling the stripped (or maybe assembled?) Colt SOCOM barrels. Sucks that most of them, or all of them, are 16" with a carbine length gas system. For that reason, I'd prefer a medium to medium/heavy no-gov-cuts barrel. These, from a truly quality maker, will give you better results. Maybe look at Wilson Combat barrels? After various make barrels, I can't recommend Rainier ones; but Wilson Combat have been great. Not Wilson barrels, but Wilson Combat. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
PSA does the same thing. So does Faxon. There's nothing "socom" about their barrels. It's a stupid marketing tactic. That's because both are economy companies worry about moving more product over quality or theory of use. But then people are also STUPID, as they will want a SOCOM barrel, but go to the one that advertises a lower weight. Cough. There's a reason IV8881's vid of melting down a DI AR didn't take as long as it should have. The Faxon barrel failed. If you want a SOCOM type for reals, guess Colt is like the only option. Hear someone is selling the stripped (or maybe assembled?) Colt SOCOM barrels. Sucks that most of them, or all of them, are 16" with a carbine length gas system. For that reason, I'd prefer a medium to medium/heavy no-gov-cuts barrel. These, from a truly quality maker, will give you better results. Maybe look at Wilson Combat barrels? After various make barrels, I can't recommend Rainier ones; but Wilson Combat have been great. Not Wilson barrels, but Wilson Combat. People are stupid. Wanting a SOCOM/M4 barrel profile that has been compromised with sharp cuts, notches, and other stress risers to accommodate a M203, when they will never mount a M203 on it is plain stupid. The A2 profile is just as dumb, and IV888's test proves that, where it burst where it's thinnest behind the gas block. It's hard to say if the Faxon is any worse than a Colt barrel though, because when Colt tested their M4s under sustained FA fire, their gas tube burst at the 5XX mark whereas the IV888's Faxon barrel burst at the 8XX mark. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2016 1:32:18 AM EDT
[#22]
I like the C8 SFW profile a lot. Can't wait to see how it groups at 100 yards with a decent optic.
 |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2016 1:39:54 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
People are stupid. Wanting a SOCOM/M4 barrel profile that has been compromised with sharp cuts, notches, and other stress risers to accommodate a M203, when they will never mount a M203 on it is plain stupid. The A2 profile is just as dumb, and IV888's test proves that, where it burst where it's thinnest behind the gas block. It's hard to say if the Faxon is any worse than a Colt barrel though, because when Colt tested their M4s under sustained FA fire, their gas tube burst at the 5XX mark whereas the IV888's Faxon barrel burst at the 8XX mark. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
PSA does the same thing. So does Faxon. There's nothing "socom" about their barrels. It's a stupid marketing tactic. That's because both are economy companies worry about moving more product over quality or theory of use. But then people are also STUPID, as they will want a SOCOM barrel, but go to the one that advertises a lower weight. Cough. There's a reason IV8881's vid of melting down a DI AR didn't take as long as it should have. The Faxon barrel failed. If you want a SOCOM type for reals, guess Colt is like the only option. Hear someone is selling the stripped (or maybe assembled?) Colt SOCOM barrels. Sucks that most of them, or all of them, are 16" with a carbine length gas system. For that reason, I'd prefer a medium to medium/heavy no-gov-cuts barrel. These, from a truly quality maker, will give you better results. Maybe look at Wilson Combat barrels? After various make barrels, I can't recommend Rainier ones; but Wilson Combat have been great. Not Wilson barrels, but Wilson Combat. People are stupid. Wanting a SOCOM/M4 barrel profile that has been compromised with sharp cuts, notches, and other stress risers to accommodate a M203, when they will never mount a M203 on it is plain stupid. The A2 profile is just as dumb, and IV888's test proves that, where it burst where it's thinnest behind the gas block. It's hard to say if the Faxon is any worse than a Colt barrel though, because when Colt tested their M4s under sustained FA fire, their gas tube burst at the 5XX mark whereas the IV888's Faxon barrel burst at the 8XX mark. Well, it probably wasn't a Faxon gas tube that held up this time. Would also say, which version was Colt testing? Also, 5.56 NATO isn't freaking Wolf/Tula. The Faxon barrel was thin under the handguard, where it would be hidden, yet thick where you could see it. That makes me think they are going for looks + low weight over function. Probably true, as those two things move the most product. Did it fail behind the gas block? was thinking it was closer to the chamber? Oh well, either way. I don't get clone building in general. Not my thing, but others like it. Same thing though. Ask the clone builders. Also what I don't get... building for looks.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2016 2:23:33 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I like the C8 SFW profile a lot. Can't wait to see how it groups at 100 yards with a decent optic. https://s12.postimg.org/w3272heml/IMG_2681.jpg Is that designed for a certain suppressor? Those steps at the front look odd. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2016 2:31:58 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Is that designed for a certain suppressor? Those steps at the front look odd. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I like the C8 SFW profile a lot. Can't wait to see how it groups at 100 yards with a decent optic. https://s12.postimg.org/w3272heml/IMG_2681.jpg Is that designed for a certain suppressor? Those steps at the front look odd. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2016 7:52:29 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Well, it probably wasn't a Faxon gas tube that held up this time. Would also say, which version was Colt testing? Also, 5.56 NATO isn't freaking Wolf/Tula. The Faxon barrel was thin under the handguard, where it would be hidden, yet thick where you could see it. That makes me think they are going for looks + low weight over function. Probably true, as those two things move the most product. Did it fail behind the gas block? was thinking it was closer to the chamber? Oh well, either way. I don't get clone building in general. Not my thing, but others like it. Same thing though. Ask the clone builders. Also what I don't get... building for looks.... Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: PSA does the same thing. So does Faxon. There's nothing "socom" about their barrels. It's a stupid marketing tactic. That's because both are economy companies worry about moving more product over quality or theory of use. But then people are also STUPID, as they will want a SOCOM barrel, but go to the one that advertises a lower weight. Cough. There's a reason IV8881's vid of melting down a DI AR didn't take as long as it should have. The Faxon barrel failed. If you want a SOCOM type for reals, guess Colt is like the only option. Hear someone is selling the stripped (or maybe assembled?) Colt SOCOM barrels. Sucks that most of them, or all of them, are 16" with a carbine length gas system. For that reason, I'd prefer a medium to medium/heavy no-gov-cuts barrel. These, from a truly quality maker, will give you better results. Maybe look at Wilson Combat barrels? After various make barrels, I can't recommend Rainier ones; but Wilson Combat have been great. Not Wilson barrels, but Wilson Combat. People are stupid. Wanting a SOCOM/M4 barrel profile that has been compromised with sharp cuts, notches, and other stress risers to accommodate a M203, when they will never mount a M203 on it is plain stupid. The A2 profile is just as dumb, and IV888's test proves that, where it burst where it's thinnest behind the gas block. It's hard to say if the Faxon is any worse than a Colt barrel though, because when Colt tested their M4s under sustained FA fire, their gas tube burst at the 5XX mark whereas the IV888's Faxon barrel burst at the 8XX mark. Well, it probably wasn't a Faxon gas tube that held up this time. Would also say, which version was Colt testing? Also, 5.56 NATO isn't freaking Wolf/Tula. The Faxon barrel was thin under the handguard, where it would be hidden, yet thick where you could see it. That makes me think they are going for looks + low weight over function. Probably true, as those two things move the most product. Did it fail behind the gas block? was thinking it was closer to the chamber? Oh well, either way. I don't get clone building in general. Not my thing, but others like it. Same thing though. Ask the clone builders. Also what I don't get... building for looks.... The only ones today aren't are true SOCOM profile like Colt, HBARS, Match Target, etc. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2016 10:10:36 AM EDT
[#27]
Picked my Colt SOCOM barrel off the EE for a great price. Added a pinned and welded extended A2 FH from the AR15 store. Not a fan of skinny barrels or government profiles.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2016 11:38:03 AM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
People are stupid. Wanting a SOCOM/M4 barrel profile that has been compromised with sharp cuts, notches, and other stress risers to accommodate a M203, when they will never mount a M203 on it is plain stupid. The A2 profile is just as dumb, and IV888's test proves that, where it burst where it's thinnest behind the gas block. It's hard to say if the Faxon is any worse than a Colt barrel though, because when Colt tested their M4s under sustained FA fire, their gas tube burst at the 5XX mark whereas the IV888's Faxon barrel burst at the 8XX mark. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
PSA does the same thing. So does Faxon. There's nothing "socom" about their barrels. It's a stupid marketing tactic. That's because both are economy companies worry about moving more product over quality or theory of use. But then people are also STUPID, as they will want a SOCOM barrel, but go to the one that advertises a lower weight. Cough. There's a reason IV8881's vid of melting down a DI AR didn't take as long as it should have. The Faxon barrel failed. If you want a SOCOM type for reals, guess Colt is like the only option. Hear someone is selling the stripped (or maybe assembled?) Colt SOCOM barrels. Sucks that most of them, or all of them, are 16" with a carbine length gas system. For that reason, I'd prefer a medium to medium/heavy no-gov-cuts barrel. These, from a truly quality maker, will give you better results. Maybe look at Wilson Combat barrels? After various make barrels, I can't recommend Rainier ones; but Wilson Combat have been great. Not Wilson barrels, but Wilson Combat. People are stupid. Wanting a SOCOM/M4 barrel profile that has been compromised with sharp cuts, notches, and other stress risers to accommodate a M203, when they will never mount a M203 on it is plain stupid. The A2 profile is just as dumb, and IV888's test proves that, where it burst where it's thinnest behind the gas block. It's hard to say if the Faxon is any worse than a Colt barrel though, because when Colt tested their M4s under sustained FA fire, their gas tube burst at the 5XX mark whereas the IV888's Faxon barrel burst at the 8XX mark. Except in Molons testing the Colt SOCOM had probably one of the most accurate barrels I've ever seen. Also IV888 talks a lot during his tests. Plenty of down time between mags unlike Colt testing that was no frills mag after mag. Also the gas tube didn't burst till around 800 rounds. The M4 barrel drooped and blew out around 500 rounds, and the M4A1 gas tube went around 875 rounds making the gun a bolt action. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2016 11:51:36 AM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:I don't get clone building in general. Not my thing, but others like it. Same thing though. Ask the clone builders. Also what I don't get... building for looks....
Kind of like building a semi auto gun to do what a full auto gun can do for a limited amount of time in a controlled environment. IIRC IV88 even mentioned you would never be able to carry that kind of ammo or last in a firefight long enough for it to be an issue in the real world. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2016 12:36:22 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
People are stupid. Wanting a SOCOM/M4 barrel profile that has been compromised with sharp cuts, notches, and other stress risers to accommodate a M203, when they will never mount a M203 on it is plain stupid. The A2 profile is just as dumb, and IV888's test proves that, where it burst where it's thinnest behind the gas block. It's hard to say if the Faxon is any worse than a Colt barrel though, because when Colt tested their M4s under sustained FA fire, their gas tube burst at the 5XX mark whereas the IV888's Faxon barrel burst at the 8XX mark. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
PSA does the same thing. So does Faxon. There's nothing "socom" about their barrels. It's a stupid marketing tactic. That's because both are economy companies worry about moving more product over quality or theory of use. But then people are also STUPID, as they will want a SOCOM barrel, but go to the one that advertises a lower weight. Cough. There's a reason IV8881's vid of melting down a DI AR didn't take as long as it should have. The Faxon barrel failed. If you want a SOCOM type for reals, guess Colt is like the only option. Hear someone is selling the stripped (or maybe assembled?) Colt SOCOM barrels. Sucks that most of them, or all of them, are 16" with a carbine length gas system. For that reason, I'd prefer a medium to medium/heavy no-gov-cuts barrel. These, from a truly quality maker, will give you better results. Maybe look at Wilson Combat barrels? After various make barrels, I can't recommend Rainier ones; but Wilson Combat have been great. Not Wilson barrels, but Wilson Combat. People are stupid. Wanting a SOCOM/M4 barrel profile that has been compromised with sharp cuts, notches, and other stress risers to accommodate a M203, when they will never mount a M203 on it is plain stupid. The A2 profile is just as dumb, and IV888's test proves that, where it burst where it's thinnest behind the gas block. It's hard to say if the Faxon is any worse than a Colt barrel though, because when Colt tested their M4s under sustained FA fire, their gas tube burst at the 5XX mark whereas the IV888's Faxon barrel burst at the 8XX mark. When the Army tested the M4 govt profile against the M4A1 SOCOM profile the M4 barrel melted after 5XX rounds; the gas tube on the M4A1 melted at 9XX rounds and the weapon continued to fire the rest of the current magazine via manual feed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2016 2:05:31 PM EDT
[#31]
Wow, so now govt' profile barrels are dumb and will melt when you go to the range. OK then.
I guess all the A1's, A2's, M4's CQBR's or add any military AR variant with a govt profile under the handguards were all an accident waiting to happen. 
I have no doubt that an hbar or socom would take longer to melt. But seriously. Nobody carries 5k rounds on them. I bet there has never been anybody in combat that shot that many rounds in any one engagement with a individual rifle. Now gaitlin guns mounted on vehicles, different story probably. Wait a minute, you're saying they melted at 500 some odd rounds? Wow, I gotta see this test. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2016 3:09:40 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
BCM also sells a proper SOCOM barrel. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
get Colt... the only real Socom barrel BCM also sells a proper SOCOM barrel. I always thought the BFH series in this profile would be interesting. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2016 4:07:48 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Wow, so now govt' profile barrels are dumb and will melt when you go to the range. OK then. I guess all the A1's, A2's, M4's CQBR's or add any military AR variant with a govt profile under the handguards were all an accident waiting to happen.
I have no doubt that an hbar or socom would take longer to melt. But seriously. Nobody carries 5k rounds on them. I bet there has never been anybody in combat that shot that many rounds in any one engagement with a individual rifle. Now gaitlin guns mounted on vehicles, different story probably. Wait a minute, you're saying they melted at 500 some odd rounds? Wow, I gotta see this test. Well it was 5xx rounds in full auto mag dumps, plus the gun had double heat shield handguard which are proved to reduce time before cookoff and retain heat on the barrel. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2016 4:24:01 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Well it was 5xx rounds in full auto mag dumps, plus the gun had double heat shield handguard which are proved to reduce time before cookoff and retain heat on the barrel. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Wow, so now govt' profile barrels are dumb and will melt when you go to the range. OK then. I guess all the A1's, A2's, M4's CQBR's or add any military AR variant with a govt profile under the handguards were all an accident waiting to happen.
I have no doubt that an hbar or socom would take longer to melt. But seriously. Nobody carries 5k rounds on them. I bet there has never been anybody in combat that shot that many rounds in any one engagement with a individual rifle. Now gaitlin guns mounted on vehicles, different story probably. Wait a minute, you're saying they melted at 500 some odd rounds? Wow, I gotta see this test. Well it was 5xx rounds in full auto mag dumps, plus the gun had double heat shield handguard which are proved to reduce time before cookoff and retain heat on the barrel. As opposed to rails I'm guessing? As of right now I'm glad my M4gery is an hbar. LOL. I still think a govt profile balances better. I highly doubt it, but I wonder if anybody has ever done this while in a firefight. I know most people don't carry that much ammo. But I've read a few books about Vietnam and how some of of that fighting was protecting firebases from oncoming hordes of South Vietnamese Army. Wonder if any M16's or A1's ever failed from over use. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2016 4:49:04 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
As opposed to rails I'm guessing? As of right now I'm glad my M4gery is an hbar. LOL. I still think a govt profile balances better. I highly doubt it, but I wonder if anybody has ever done this while in a firefight. I know most people don't carry that much ammo. But I've read a few books about Vietnam and how some of of that fighting was protecting firebases from oncoming hordes of South Vietnamese Army. Wonder if any M16's or A1's ever failed from over use. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Wow, so now govt' profile barrels are dumb and will melt when you go to the range. OK then. I guess all the A1's, A2's, M4's CQBR's or add any military AR variant with a govt profile under the handguards were all an accident waiting to happen.
I have no doubt that an hbar or socom would take longer to melt. But seriously. Nobody carries 5k rounds on them. I bet there has never been anybody in combat that shot that many rounds in any one engagement with a individual rifle. Now gaitlin guns mounted on vehicles, different story probably. Wait a minute, you're saying they melted at 500 some odd rounds? Wow, I gotta see this test. Well it was 5xx rounds in full auto mag dumps, plus the gun had double heat shield handguard which are proved to reduce time before cookoff and retain heat on the barrel. As opposed to rails I'm guessing? As of right now I'm glad my M4gery is an hbar. LOL. I still think a govt profile balances better. I highly doubt it, but I wonder if anybody has ever done this while in a firefight. I know most people don't carry that much ammo. But I've read a few books about Vietnam and how some of of that fighting was protecting firebases from oncoming hordes of South Vietnamese Army. Wonder if any M16's or A1's ever failed from over use. It was done after Wanat, when soldiers said their barrels turned white hot and melted. It showed that one, barrels don't turn white hot. And two that the M4 can go through 5xx rounds before barrel failure. For the handguard yes. I believe even the KAC RIS increase cookoff rates from 170 rounds(M4A1 with polymer double insulated) to 240-270270(M4A1 with KAC RIS). Something like that, don't remember the exact numbers. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2016 5:58:40 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
As opposed to rails I'm guessing? As of right now I'm glad my M4gery is an hbar. LOL. I still think a govt profile balances better. I highly doubt it, but I wonder if anybody has ever done this while in a firefight. I know most people don't carry that much ammo. But I've read a few books about Vietnam and how some of of that fighting was protecting firebases from oncoming hordes of South Vietnamese Army. Wonder if any M16's or A1's ever failed from over use. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Wow, so now govt' profile barrels are dumb and will melt when you go to the range. OK then. I guess all the A1's, A2's, M4's CQBR's or add any military AR variant with a govt profile under the handguards were all an accident waiting to happen.
I have no doubt that an hbar or socom would take longer to melt. But seriously. Nobody carries 5k rounds on them. I bet there has never been anybody in combat that shot that many rounds in any one engagement with a individual rifle. Now gaitlin guns mounted on vehicles, different story probably. Wait a minute, you're saying they melted at 500 some odd rounds? Wow, I gotta see this test. Well it was 5xx rounds in full auto mag dumps, plus the gun had double heat shield handguard which are proved to reduce time before cookoff and retain heat on the barrel. As opposed to rails I'm guessing? As of right now I'm glad my M4gery is an hbar. LOL. I still think a govt profile balances better. I highly doubt it, but I wonder if anybody has ever done this while in a firefight. I know most people don't carry that much ammo. But I've read a few books about Vietnam and how some of of that fighting was protecting firebases from oncoming hordes of South Vietnamese Army. Wonder if any M16's or A1's ever failed from over use. Once the guys were told they had to clean them, were given stuff to clean them with and instructions on how to clean them and were given ammunition loaded with the correct powder I haven't heard a ton of stories of them having problems. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2016 9:41:55 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
BCM also sells a proper SOCOM barrel. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
get Colt... the only real Socom barrel BCM also sells a proper SOCOM barrel. I like my BCM SOCOM barrel a lot.. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2016 9:46:30 PM EDT
[#38]
I bought a 16 inch socom from sota. HATED IT. Felt like a fucking pig. Used it as an excuse to do a 14.5 instead. I dont think I'll buy another one.
|
|
|
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.
