User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 1/15/2004 8:00:04 AM EDT
[#1]
Let me get this out of the way first [>Q].
That is interesting. If you are ever ordered to destroy a forged lower, do the same thing and post pics comparing the two lowers. That would be a more uniform experiment. People might argue that an upper is just stronger than the magwell of a lower, etc. Well, I'm glad you at least made it educational. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/15/2004 8:06:43 AM EDT
[#2]
I wonder how the sales folks at Oly feel about this post?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/15/2004 8:08:04 AM EDT
[#3]
I'll give you a dollar 2.98 for [img]http://www.hunt101.com/img/089846.JPG[/img]
I'm glad all my shizzle is forged. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/15/2004 1:26:01 PM EDT
[#4]
I have a friend who had a cast lower blow apart recently (Olympic Arms maybe?). I'll try to get pics.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/15/2004 3:23:12 PM EDT
[#5]
Man!
Sorry you had to do that. Must have sucked. At least you had the presence of mind to take something good (knowledge) from the experience and share it with your bros. Thanks. SD |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/15/2004 4:00:42 PM EDT
[#6]
If you have to destroy stuff on a regular basis, make the your bosses get you the right equipment. At least a 2 pound hammer, maybe an 8 if you feel comfortable with it, and an anvil.
You can destroy a house or a car with an 8 pounder, and really screw a 1911 if you use the anvil also. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/15/2004 4:08:33 PM EDT
[#7]
If an Orly, big deal. Send it in and get a new one under their lifetime warranty. Ruger uses cast too.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/15/2004 4:27:58 PM EDT
[#8]
Boy, am I glad I didn't get a pre-ban with as cast receiver. I read the forged vs. cast threads and decided to err on the side of caution.
BTW, just curious why the court ordered it destroyed. Not looking to stir anything up. I'm genuinely curious. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/15/2004 5:57:20 PM EDT
[#9]
Quoted: BTW, just curious why the court ordered it destroyed. Not looking to stir anything up. I'm genuinely curious. [blue]One of our local knucklehead cranksters had an unregistered AR, and although having a [u]previous felony record[/u], he was convicted of more. The court ordered the weapon destroyed. We are in good ol' California so he couldn't have had the option to have it sold by a dealer. F'n crankster anyway. Screw him! [/blue] |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/15/2004 6:27:47 PM EDT
[#10]
looks like the cast versuses forged question has finally been answered..thans wardog..and thank you forged receiver!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/15/2004 8:20:43 PM EDT
[#11]
Quoted: Quoted: BTW, just curious why the court ordered it destroyed. Not looking to stir anything up. I'm genuinely curious. [blue]One of our local knucklehead cranksters had an unregistered AR, and although having a [u]previous felony record[/u], he was convicted of more. The court ordered the weapon destroyed. We are in [red]good ol' California[/red] so he couldn't have had the option to have it sold by a dealer. F'n crankster anyway. Screw him! [/blue] Pardon me, but what is good about Kalifornia?? [:D] |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/15/2004 9:11:40 PM EDT
[#12]
Quoted: Pardon me, but what is good about California?? [:D] Ummm, the weather, and we make lots of money!! Oh, awesome looking women also. Bad politicians, and bad gun laws. Tuff trade. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/15/2004 9:53:04 PM EDT
[#13]
Give me hammer and a sharpie marker and I could tear up any reciever. Give me a roll of 100mph tape, and I will fix it!! ;)
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/15/2004 10:24:14 PM EDT
[#14]
Quoted: Give me hammer and a sharpie marker and I could tear up any reciever. Give me a roll of 100mph tape, and I will fix it!! ;) [LOL] |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/15/2004 11:04:08 PM EDT
[#15]
WARDOG,
The upper doesn't look cast, but hard to tell with only the one pic. Was it more resistant than the lower to your attempted destruction? I dunno about state laws but bashing lowers with a hammer doesn't satisfy ATF. IIRC, destroying lowers requires, specifically, three torch cuts through the part. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2004 4:14:03 AM EDT
[#16]
Thanks for sharing the pics. Sucks to see a weapon destroyed for any reason, but I always wanted to see this done to a cast lower. The pics speak for themselves. Next time you get a forged unit to destroy, please bring a camera!
I work as a mechanic and many engine parts are cast aluminum, on a bad motor I have tested the strength of cast parts before trashing it. They may not be as strong as an AR lower but they cracked way too easily for me to consider buying a cast lower. It was my way of comparing cast strength without killing a lower. The poor results of hammering cast auto parts kept me from buying a mint preban DPMS lower for a great price last year. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2004 4:46:53 AM EDT
[#17]
The difference between cast Ruger parts (or automotive parts) is the the design was predicated on the part being cast. Any weakness in the material could be made up for by proper design. Look at the blocky shape of Ruger slides and you'll see what I mean.
In the case of the AR, the design was predicated on a forged part with certain strengths and characteristics. A cast lower could be used but it would not look like a forged lower, the weaknesses in the part would have to be taken into account by the design. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2004 5:12:38 AM EDT
[#18]
I take it that the weapon was in good working order before you destoyed it? I have an old EA lower which has worked fine for years. True, forgings are better....but thats not to say that all cast receivers are pure junk either. Case on point.....I also have a SW 629 with no backsrap or 1/2 of a cylinder and it was forged.
My old EA is still as tight as the day I bought it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2004 9:06:54 AM EDT
[#19]
Quoted: The upper doesn't look cast, but hard to tell with only the one pic. Was it more resistant than the lower to your attempted destruction? [blue]I showed the upper and commented on it's toughness compared to the cast lower because the upper was obviously forged. It was tough as hell so I banged on it on it's weakest point, just below the ejection port.[/blue] I dunno about state laws but bashing lowers with a hammer doesn't satisfy ATF. IIRC, destroying lowers requires, specifically, three torch cuts through the part. [blue]My destruction process is actually in two parts. Unlike most other agencies, I partially destroy them at the time of the order instead of holding onto the weapons until I have a hundred to destroy. I render the weapons unuseable until their final destruction with a chopsaw by our public works with 3 witnesses. This prevents theft of parts and of the guns themselves while they are waiting for final destruction. The remnants are eventually melted down and made into steel products. Guns, money, and narcotics are the 3 things that get evidence tech's in the most trouble. Firearms that are evidence are triple locked and only accessed by me and my evidence tech. We are audited routinely by an outside agency. How did I know this would come up with this post?? Hmmmmm.....[/blue] |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2004 9:16:11 AM EDT
[#20]
Quoted: The difference between cast Ruger parts (or automotive parts) is the [u]the design was predicated on the part being cast[/u]. Any weakness in the material could be made up for by proper design. Look at the blocky shape of Ruger slides and you'll see what I mean. In the case of the AR, the design was predicated on a forged part with certain strengths and characteristics. A cast lower could be used but it would not look like a forged lower, the weaknesses in the part would have to be taken into account by the design. [blue]Very well said. I have a couple of Polaris Quads. The rear axle housing is cast out of tiny balls of aluminum (resembles styrofoam). It looks like it would shatter. Obviously it was engineered to be cast. I have had my 700 Sportsman airborne and forced to do things the manufacturer never intended. Never a problem with the axle housing.[/blue] |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2004 10:52:30 AM EDT
[#21]
I know destroying guns suck I work at a foundary in IL every couple of months the state
police brings bundles and boxes full of guns for us to melt down. The funny thing is most of them are shotguns and hand guns very rarely the oh so dangerous assult weapons that ar used in crimes and must be destroyed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2004 12:08:13 PM EDT
[#22]
dremel?
[:D] |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2004 1:43:18 PM EDT
[#23]
Quoted: I have a friend who had a cast lower blow apart recently (Olympic Arms maybe?). I'll try to get pics. Here they are. Please excuse the poor quality. It's the best I could do in the poor lighting and short time I had to take the photos. [img]http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid99/p876a9358e1b0c9051839e87f0965c88f/f9ed3b15.jpg[/img] The front left side of the upper receiver is blown out. [img]http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid99/pa856ea1418d6d11ddf62fc8997a4e4f5/f9ed3b14.jpg[/img] The lower receiver is cracked down through the takedown pin holes and on down below the holes as well. [img]http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid99/pe1ee4025c92c23eaa567ad9f66990f4f/f9ed3b12.jpg[/img] Note that both sides are cracked down into the takedown pin holes. The rifle in question is a cast Olympic Arms "Plinker" model. Olympic Arms also refuses to warranty it due to my friend's use of Barnaul ammo in it. The dealer he bought the rifle from offered him the cheap ammo when he bought the rifle. Not knowing any better, he bought it. Olympic Arm's website states that it won't warrant damage caused by foreign-made ammo. I'm not so sure the ammo was the cause, as it appears that the upper receiver had a stress crack anodized over from the factory. It doesn't appear to have formed after the anodizing process. I guess he is SOL. [:(] |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2004 4:25:51 PM EDT
[#24]
That's why my cast Oly lower sits in my safe and some day will get a .22 upper attached to it......and stay exactly what it is, a Plinker!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/20/2004 3:33:04 AM EDT
[#25]
Hey, wardog7366:
Thanks for the cool pictures. Very informative. I was wondering if it would be legal for me to have the destroyed receivers (cast and forged) and perform failure analysis / microstructural characterization of the piece? We need SEM images on the fracture surfaces to determine the fracture morpholgy and possible inclusions. I would think that a few EDS analysis on a few spots of the fracture surface to see the alloy composition won't hurt either, just to see if microsegregation may have occured, causing non metallic or intermetallic inclusions to form, causing embrittlement (I doubt it, since the x-section is very thin). I don't like the extremely "gritty" look of the fracture surface, tho. Not even if it was cast; something wrong with solidification causing excessive grain growth / dendrites? I don't know, only speculating, right now. I will write a complete and formal metallurgical report and post it here. I must warn you guys, however, that the results will take a long time, as I am out of an engineering work right now (laid-off) and having problems finding works right now. I need the right tools to photograph the fracture surface, section the piece, polish them, examine them under stereo microscope, take the micrographs, etc. I need to get an access to a metallurgical lab to do that (which I do not have right now). |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/20/2004 3:59:54 AM EDT
[#26]
M4Madness:
Please refer to my previous post to WARDOG. Can I have the receiver? Hey, you know what, your friend ought to consult a person who has dealt heavily with failure analysis before and find out the probable origin of fracture initiation. That should be possible by examining the fracture morphology. The final crack propagation mechanism that led to the catastrophic failure would (and should)be different from the initial propagation mode. Please DO NOT rub the fracture surfaces together, that may destroy evidence. You should perform NDE testing on the thing to see if you can detect other possible preexisting flaws. Other metallurgical examinations can be done latter if required (if your friend wants to pursue this matter further). I think Olympic Arms' claim about the foreign ammo use is BULLCRAP! I totally agree with your hypothesis about the presence of preexisting flaw from manufacturing defects. If only you / your friend can prove that the initiation point of the fracture is not near the chamber, your friend may be able to get his money back. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/20/2004 4:04:00 AM EDT
[#27]
Quoted: If an Orly, big deal. Send it in and get a new one under their lifetime warranty. Ruger uses cast too. Yeah, unless you're in the middle of a SHTF kinda situation, then you're just $#!t outta luck. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/20/2004 4:36:30 AM EDT
[#28]
Quoted: I take it that the weapon was in good working order before you destroyed it? I have an old EA lower which has worked fine for years. True, forgings are better....but that's not to say that all cast receivers are pure junk either. Case on point.....I also have a SW 629 with no backsrap or 1/2 of a cylinder and it was forged. My old EA is still as tight as the day I bought it. dc4stroke, Were all the E.A. receivers cast? WARDOG7366. Why were some of the internals stripped from the lower, but others weren't? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/20/2004 4:57:35 AM EDT
[#29]
Quoted: Can I have the receiver? I'd say that I could probably get you the upper receiver no problem. I am unsure about the lower though, especially considering the fact that it would have to be sent to an FFL in your state and you'd have to pay a transfer fee. But I'll ask about the upper. It seems to show the most damage anyway. I just can't believe how brittle it appears. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/20/2004 6:47:42 AM EDT
[#30]
Quoted: Hey, wardog7366: I was wondering if it would be legal for me to have the destroyed receivers (cast and forged) and perform failure analysis / microstructural characterization of the piece? [b]Sorry NO. Aint worth my job. And the rest of your post means [/b]ỒỶỘỗỐề Ằ№Ω דיẤیىעק חйШч фДКђњάβδζǽŷΎΘЖ έΨŒŕŊ Ħøħ שئژעش ط€₪ẵỆ ىעקח йШчфД Кђњάβδ ζǽŷΎΘЖέ ΨŒŕŊ Ħøħќש ئژעشط€₪ẵ Ệ№Ω דיẤیىע קח йШч фДКђњάβ δζǽŷΎΘЖέΨ Œŕ ŊĦø ħќש ئژעشط [b]to me.[/b] |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/20/2004 7:07:10 AM EDT
[#31]
Quoted: WARDOG7366. Why were some of the internals stripped from the lower, but others weren't? I can see where this is going..... [sarcasim on][i]Good question[/i] [/sarcasim off] Here's your answer:ỒỶỐề Ằ№Ω דיẤیىעק חйШч έΨŒŕŊ Ħøħ שئژעش ط€₪ẵỆ ىעקח йфД Кђњάβδ ζǽŷΎΘЖέ ΨŒŕŊ Ħøħќש ئژעشط€₪ẵ Ệ№Ω דיẤیىע קח йШч фДКђњάβ δζǽŷΎΘЖέΨ Œŕ ŊĦø ħќש ئژעشط [rolleyes] |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/20/2004 1:52:20 PM EDT
[#32]
Quoted: Quoted: Can I have the receiver? I'd say that I could probably get you the upper receiver no problem. I am unsure about the lower though, especially considering the fact that it would have to be sent to an FFL in your state and you'd have to pay a transfer fee. But I'll ask about the upper. It seems to show the most damage anyway. I just can't believe how brittle it appears. M4Madness: Please check your e-mail. Thank you so much for considering my request. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/20/2004 3:11:42 PM EDT
[#33]
I've got a Colt SP2 made in Jan 91. Is it cast or forged?
rk |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2004 12:52:33 AM EDT
[#34]
Colt receivers are forged. You should see a ridge on the exterior of the lower around the perimeter of the area in which the trigger sits.
More info [url=http://ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=12&t=169249]here[/url] and [url=http://ar15.com/forums/announcement.html?b=3&f=66&id=192]here[/url]. I don't think that an FFL needs to get involved if there isn't a transfer of the firearm, meaning that the other person becomes the new owner. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2004 7:35:00 AM EDT
[#35]
Thank you for posting the pics. Interesting and disturbing. Watch-Six
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2004 8:40:01 AM EDT
[#36]
Quoted: Quoted: The difference between cast Ruger parts (or automotive parts) is the [u]the design was predicated on the part being cast[/u]. Any weakness in the material could be made up for by proper design. Look at the blocky shape of Ruger slides and you'll see what I mean. In the case of the AR, the design was predicated on a forged part with certain strengths and characteristics. A cast lower could be used but it would not look like a forged lower, the weaknesses in the part would have to be taken into account by the design. [blue]Very well said. I have a couple of Polaris Quads. The rear axle housing is cast out of tiny balls of aluminum (resembles styrofoam). It looks like it would shatter. Obviously it was engineered to be cast. I have had my 700 Sportsman airborne and forced to do things the manufacturer never intended. Never a problem with the axle housing.[/blue] It's cast alright, but not out of little balls of aluminum. It's solid aluminum you are looking at. The surface looks like styrofoam because they used the investment casting method werein a likeness of the part is formed in syrofoam then packed in sand an the hot aluminum burns the styrofoam away as it fills the mold formed by the styrfoam and sand. The surface finish looks just like styrofoam because the master was styrofoam. IIRC The process is called the "lost foam" process. Kent |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2004 5:15:42 PM EDT
[#37]
Thanks for the info.
rk |
|
|
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.
