AR Sponsor
[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Un-breakable bolt... (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 7/15/2015 5:57:41 AM EDT
|
I have yet to see a broken 9310 bolt that was QPQ treated, which was not broken by an over-pressure (KB) situation.
These bolts, from various manufacturers, have been out for a while now. Well over a year. Yet I have NOT SEEN A SINGLE ONE BROKEN. I have seen them with well over 25K rounds on them, but never a broken one. Has anyone broken or seen one broken? Pics? |
|
I thought JoeBob's had a bad batch of 9310 bolts. I'm not sure how they were finished/treated though. ETA: If you really want an unbreakable bolt look at the LMT-E bolt or a KAC E3 bolt and extension. LMT uses Aeromet and I don't think a commercially sold one has been broken yet. |
|
Quoted:
I thought JoeBob's had a bad batch of 9310 bolts. I'm not sure how they were finished/treated though. ETA: If you really want an unbreakable bolt look at the LMT-E bolt or a KAC E3 bolt and extension. LMT uses Aeromet and I don't think a commercially sold one has been broken yet. Anything can have an issue (bad heat-treat,etc.) but I am meaning a 9310 bolt that is QPQ'ed that did not have a flawed metallurgy due to a processing error,etc. I have yet to see one that's been broken. |
|
Quoted:
Very true, but I've not seen or read about a broken 9310 QPQ'ed bolt that wasn't a defect. Quoted:
Quoted:
anything can be broken.. Very true, but I've not seen or read about a broken 9310 QPQ'ed bolt that wasn't a defect. Most shooters won't break a standard bolt unless there is a defect/over charge from a reload; most guys can't afford to shoot enough to wear out bolts anymore. So I'm not getting the point of the question. Do you have a published test on the Mean Time Between Failures comparing a TDP spec bolt vs a typical commercial spec vs a 9310 QPQ bolt? Unless you do, asking for anecdotal evidence is pointless. |
|
Quoted:
Most shooters won't break a standard bolt unless there is a defect/over charge from a reload; most guys can't afford to shoot enough to wear out bolts anymore. So I'm not getting the point of the question. Do you have a published test on the Mean Time Between Failures comparing a TDP spec bolt vs a typical commercial spec vs a 9310 QPQ bolt? Unless you do, asking for anecdotal evidence is pointless. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
anything can be broken.. Very true, but I've not seen or read about a broken 9310 QPQ'ed bolt that wasn't a defect. Most shooters won't break a standard bolt unless there is a defect/over charge from a reload; most guys can't afford to shoot enough to wear out bolts anymore. So I'm not getting the point of the question. Do you have a published test on the Mean Time Between Failures comparing a TDP spec bolt vs a typical commercial spec vs a 9310 QPQ bolt? Unless you do, asking for anecdotal evidence is pointless. Colt/LMT bolts run for about 7K rounds and then pop, per NSW guys I know who run 'em hard, suppressed, in a 10.3" gun. I do not know how long a 9310 bolt lasts in that application, although I know of 1 that has been run hard in a 12.5" gun for about 3K rounds. That's still very shy of a regular bolt. I know of others with mixed use in the 25-50K round count range that are doing fine. Never heard of one breaking, though. |
|
Can you send us the reference to the ones with 50k rounds?
Defects have to be taken into account when comparing 9310 to C158 because of the difficulty of heat treating. It's much easier to screw up 9310 so bad batches are going to be more common, depending on the manufacturer of course. I do prefer a properly heat treated 9310 bolt over C158 as it should have a slight advantage in impact toughness, however I just don't trust many of the manufacturers that make them. I doubt QPQ treatment has any effect on the bolt breaking as it's just a surface treatment and does not affect the core hardness, or toughness. For a bolt, I do prefer it over NiB and other coatings because of the risk of hydrogen embrittlement. |
|
Quoted:
Here's a broken Young's 9310 bolt, phosphated, not nitrided. https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/u0_677WHd5A6osGwzQ2E_UouhA6CymShRVf4V7VsOsw7E0nxAnlF-iKfeh9-TFHHMcSar7c6UqQ9eDk=w1203-h681-rw Picture isn't working. Also, QPQ is a treatment as such that does alter the bolt enough that I don't feel the results are compatible to a phosphated bolt. |
|
Quoted:
Can you send us the reference to the ones with 50k rounds? Defects have to be taken into account when comparing 9310 to C158 because of the difficulty of heat treating. It's much easier to screw up 9310 so bad batches are going to be more common, depending on the manufacturer of course. I do prefer a properly heat treated 9310 bolt over C158 as it should have a slight advantage in impact toughness, however I just don't trust many of the manufactures that make them. I doubt QPQ treatment has any effect on the bolt breaking as it's just a surface treatment and does not affect the core hardness, or toughness. For a bolt, I do prefer it over NiB and other coatings because of the risk of hydrogen embrittlement. Bolts begin cracking at the rear fillets of the lugs many times due to stress cracks that propagate. QPQ reduces the likelihood of these from developing because the friction coefficient of QPQ'ed steel on steel is lower than steel on steel, meaning less axial force is transmitted to the lugs during unlocking. Further, QPQ reduces the propensity for surface wear, as well as stress cracking, in and of itself. Personal conversation with DMACK, but he has openly posted things like this: 
|
|
It's a good thing to raise the mean rounds between failures. Precisely what the alloy changes and modified machining is meant to do. And it's not impossible that it could raise said failure rate pretty high. It's doesn't mean that just because we haven't had any anecdotal reports here on one forum that it hasn't already happened.
When parts are designed anew, to justify the costs some makers got thru durability testing, employees at a specialty range shoot ammo thru it, and they document at what round the failure occurred. The data is analyzed, then bean counters get it, management reads over the reports and assesses it's marketability vs failure rate to make sure it stands up to the claims. They very well may already know just about when the first ones are likely to crack or lose a lug - not "they never fail." More like "they won't fail real soon and it will impress everybody to buy one from us." The maker is under no obligation to tell us when they are expected to fail, or even that they tested them to find out. All we are going to read is ad hype and fanboy support based on tribal Brand identification. The former couch their language in statements that allude to a superior ability without actually getting into details, the latter make flat out statements that lack documentation or real life experience. Ok there's no report we've heard of - yet. Time will tell. |
|
Quoted:
It's a good thing to raise the mean rounds between failures. Precisely what the alloy changes and modified machining is meant to do. And it's not impossible that it could raise said failure rate pretty high. It's doesn't mean that just because we haven't had any anecdotal reports here on one forum that it hasn't already happened. When parts are designed anew, to justify the costs some makers got thru durability testing, employees at a specialty range shoot ammo thru it, and they document at what round the failure occurred. The data is analyzed, then bean counters get it, management reads over the reports and assesses it's marketability vs failure rate to make sure it stands up to the claims. They very well may already know just about when the first ones are likely to crack or lose a lug - not "they never fail." More like "they won't fail real soon and it will impress everybody to buy one from us." The maker is under no obligation to tell us when they are expected to fail, or even that they tested them to find out. All we are going to read is ad hype and fanboy support based on tribal Brand identification. The former couch their language in statements that allude to a superior ability without actually getting into details, the latter make flat out statements that lack documentation or real life experience. Ok there's no report we've heard of - yet. Time will tell. It will take a MOUNTAIN of data to arrive at a point where we can say when a QPQ'ed bolt lug is likely to break. However, DMACK has yet to break a bolt, and several of his have lasted well over 25% longer than the Colt and LMT bolts as the current thread running about what breaks getting 100K rounds shot through it by the range in Nevada (20K is when theirs die) seems to indicate. Right now, we do not have a mountain of data. Anecdotal reports are as good as it gets right now...so I'm looking. |
|
Quoted:
Colt/LMT bolts run for about 7K rounds and then pop, per NSW guys I know who run 'em hard, suppressed, in a 10.3" gun.. 
There are damn few NSW guys here. You're on a hobbyist board talking to mostly civilian shooter who are not doing lots of full-auto from SBRs with all the ammo they can fire for free. That comparing apples to Mac Trucks. Here in the real world Colt and LMT bolts easily go 20K+ rounds w/o a problem. Not to mention if your running the gun hard enough to break a bolt at 7K rounds, your barrel is also likely shot (or soon to be). |
|
Quoted:
I take it you also go by WS6? http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?170524-9310-QPQ-A-better-Bolt Do you sell QPQ 9310 bolts by any chance?  Yes, and no, as separate answers to your separate questions. |
|
Quoted:
There are damn few NSW guys here. You're on a hobbyist board talking to mostly civilian shooter who are not doing lots of full-auto from SBRs with all the ammo they can fire for free. That comparing apples to Mac Trucks. Here in the real world Colt and LMT bolts easily go 20K+ rounds w/o a problem. Not to mention if your running the gun hard enough to break a bolt at 7K rounds, your barrel is also likely shot (or soon to be). Quoted:
Quoted:
Colt/LMT bolts run for about 7K rounds and then pop, per NSW guys I know who run 'em hard, suppressed, in a 10.3" gun..
There are damn few NSW guys here. You're on a hobbyist board talking to mostly civilian shooter who are not doing lots of full-auto from SBRs with all the ammo they can fire for free. That comparing apples to Mac Trucks. Here in the real world Colt and LMT bolts easily go 20K+ rounds w/o a problem. Not to mention if your running the gun hard enough to break a bolt at 7K rounds, your barrel is also likely shot (or soon to be). Their barrels go for about 7500. Yes, that is what the Nevada thread indicated. About 20K. Give/take. |
|
Quoted:
Any proof that Rangerproofs claims are legit? They have a product to sell so you must take everything with a grain of salt. Pretty sure Rob Arms claims they have a gun with 600,000 rounds on the same bolt and barrel still holding groups. Well, RP is selling something, true, but it's not his aside from the laser markings on it. That doesn't change that it's still putting dollars in his wallet though. I'd like to think he would not lie about something like that, but I'd also like to be rich and all that too, lol. Anyway, that was why I started this thread....to see if anyone HAS broken a 9310 qpq bolt that wasn't from a faulty lot. |
|
Quoted:
Most shooters won't break a standard bolt unless there is a defect/over charge from a reload; most guys can't afford to shoot enough to wear out bolts anymore. So I'm not getting the point of the question. Do you have a published test on the Mean Time Between Failures comparing a TDP spec bolt vs a typical commercial spec vs a 9310 QPQ bolt? Unless you do, asking for anecdotal evidence is pointless. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
anything can be broken.. Very true, but I've not seen or read about a broken 9310 QPQ'ed bolt that wasn't a defect. Most shooters won't break a standard bolt unless there is a defect/over charge from a reload; most guys can't afford to shoot enough to wear out bolts anymore. So I'm not getting the point of the question. Do you have a published test on the Mean Time Between Failures comparing a TDP spec bolt vs a typical commercial spec vs a 9310 QPQ bolt? Unless you do, asking for anecdotal evidence is pointless. What dont you get about the question ? he said he has never seen one broken , has anyone broken one or saw one broken,simple question. Its a basic question in search of data or real life experience. |
|
Quoted:
What dont you get about the question ? he said he has never seen one broken , has anyone broken one or saw one broken,simple question. Its a basic question in search of data or real life experience. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
anything can be broken.. Very true, but I've not seen or read about a broken 9310 QPQ'ed bolt that wasn't a defect. Most shooters won't break a standard bolt unless there is a defect/over charge from a reload; most guys can't afford to shoot enough to wear out bolts anymore. So I'm not getting the point of the question. Do you have a published test on the Mean Time Between Failures comparing a TDP spec bolt vs a typical commercial spec vs a 9310 QPQ bolt? Unless you do, asking for anecdotal evidence is pointless. What dont you get about the question ? he said he has never seen one broken , has anyone broken one or saw one broken,simple question. Its a basic question in search of data or real life experience. The issue is you need a large sample size and someone with the money to run them hard enough to break. Something like the lucky gunner test where 10,000 rounds were fired over a week. |
|
Quoted:
Can you send us the reference to the ones with 50k rounds? Defects have to be taken into account when comparing 9310 to C158 because of the difficulty of heat treating. It's much easier to screw up 9310 so bad batches are going to be more common, depending on the manufacturer of course. I do prefer a properly heat treated 9310 bolt over C158 as it should have a slight advantage in impact toughness, however I just don't trust many of the manufacturers that make them. I doubt QPQ treatment has any effect on the bolt breaking as it's just a surface treatment and does not affect the core hardness, or toughness. For a bolt, I do prefer it over NiB and other coatings because of the risk of hydrogen embrittlement. QPQ temps (1050 Deg F) are high enough to draw back some core hardness on Carburized 9310. 
This might be a good thing. |
|
Looks good! I like all the soft corners. Is the cam-pin hole honed? |
|
Filthy 14 has gone over 62,000 rounds last I checked. As a carbine class loaner it wasn't being babied. Barrels can go a lot more than 7,500 rounds. IIRC it's on it's third bolt.
It's not impossible to design and manufacture an unbreakable bolt, but as said, it's going to take some expensive testing to prove it. And the higher costs are going to have to be justified. At the present time Uncle Sam doesn't prioritize it enough to bother. We get what we get on a low bid contract and the taxpayer doesn't even lose sleep over it. There's no currently workable method of counting rounds, therefore the TM procedure is to inspect and catch them breaking. You have to clean it daily and inspect all the other parts anyway. And nobody makes the unbreakable cam pin, unbreakable extractor and spring or the eternal firing pin. You are still left with the next weakest item failing. Ammo, magazines, and operator error are the main three culprits of malfunctions, bolts are pretty far down the list. |
|
Ask Badazzar15 about broken Nitrided bolts, he's seem plenty of them. In fact, he claims nitride is an inferior treatment due to it messing with the heat treatment of the bolt, making it softer on the inside with an ultra hard surface, like a chocolate coated icecream bar is how he described it.
It is far from an ideal treatment for bolts, many other coatings offer superior lubricity without messing with the heat treat. The closest thing to an unbreakable bolt would be LMT's enhanced bolt made with AerMet steel. |
|
Quoted:
Ask Badazzar15 about broken Nitrided bolts, he's seem plenty of them. In fact, he claims nitride is an inferior treatment due to it messing with the heat treatment of the bolt, making it softer on the inside with an ultra hard surface, like a chocolate coated icecream bar is how he described it. It is far from an ideal treatment for bolts, many other coatings offer superior lubricity without messing with the heat treat. The closest thing to an unbreakable bolt would be LMT's enhanced bolt made with AerMet steel. Interesting, I will ask him! Thanks! |
|
Quoted: Ask Badazzar15 about broken Nitrided bolts, he's seem plenty of them. In fact, he claims nitride is an inferior treatment due to it messing with the heat treatment of the bolt, making it softer on the inside with an ultra hard surface, like a chocolate coated icecream bar is how he described it. It is far from an ideal treatment for bolts, many other coatings offer superior lubricity without messing with the heat treat. The closest thing to an unbreakable bolt would be LMT's enhanced bolt made with AerMet steel. Really though, new quality "normal" bolts are in the $40-$50 range, if it takes $2000 or more in ammo to break one, the new bolt cost is inconsequential! |
| I don't have a dog in this hunt but I do remember some other bolts in the past that Ill list for your discussion. Relia-Bolt, Superbolt |
|
Quoted: I don't have a dog in this hunt but I do remember some other bolts in the past that Ill list for your discussion. Relia-Bolt, Superbolt Quoted: I don't have a dog in this hunt but I do remember some other bolts in the past that Ill list for your discussion. Relia-Bolt, Superbolt I won't use a Relia-Bolt. I use Superbolts in my 6.8's. I thought more highly of them before Harris put this in: 3 year conditional warranty The complete firearm upper half and cartridge fired must be sent in for inspection. Receivers that are unsquare will cause the bolt to carry the load unevenly on the lugs which will cause early failure. Square the face of the receiver or use Mega brand receivers. Overgassed systems will also cause early failure. Adjust the gas to eject the cases at 3-4 O'clock. Bolt face and firing pin hole erosion due to gases leaking around the primer or primer piercing voids the warranty. Do not use Remington 6 1/2, CCI 400, Fed 205 primers |
|
Quoted:
I thought JoeBob's had a bad batch of 9310 bolts. I'm not sure how they were finished/treated though. ETA: If you really want an unbreakable bolt look at the LMT-E bolt or a KAC E3 bolt and extension. LMT uses Aeromet and I don't think a commercially sold one has been broken yet. I thought the JoeBob's bad bolts were 8620 steel |
|
Quoted: I thought the JoeBob's bad bolts were 8620 steel Quoted: Quoted: I thought JoeBob's had a bad batch of 9310 bolts. I'm not sure how they were finished/treated though. ETA: If you really want an unbreakable bolt look at the LMT-E bolt or a KAC E3 bolt and extension. LMT uses Aeromet and I don't think a commercially sold one has been broken yet. I thought the JoeBob's bad bolts were 8620 steel   If you look close you can see the M from 223 REM right next to the ejector:  |
|
Interestingly, not a single person has produced a picture of a broken 9310 QPQ'ed bolt. Does it mean they aren't out there? Nope. But it is impressive nonetheless!
I did do some research on the statement made about badazzar and his opinion on the bolts. He has thus declined to comment to me on what the issue is except "It's melonite, not the 9310", so I will have to run with what someone else posted about surface vs. core hardness. A mil-spec bolt is a soft-cored, hard-shelled animal. That's how it is DESIGNED. The softer core can flex while the outer shell provides durability. This is part of the design of the M4/M16 bolt. 
|
|
Quoted:
Interestingly, not a single person has produced a picture of a broken 9310 QPQ'ed bolt. Does it mean they aren't out there? Nope. But it is impressive nonetheless! I did do some research on the statement made about badazzar and his opinion on the bolts. He has thus declined to comment to me on what the issue is except "It's melonite, not the 9310", so I will have to run with what someone else posted about surface vs. core hardness. A mil-spec bolt is a soft-cored, hard-shelled animal. That's how it is DESIGNED. The softer core can flex while the outer shell provides durability. This is part of the design of the M4/M16 bolt. http://i62.tinypic.com/23wvhxe.jpg The issue is that if you google "broke M4 bolt" you also get very little evidence of C158 bolts breaking as well. Like I said before in this thread, finding people who will put enough rounds through a bolt to break it is rare. Your best best is consulting with people who run carbine courses and maybe use the bolt in their own carbine, because for 99% of shooters 500 rounds a year is a lot. The majority of broken bolt pictures online are either KB's or subpar parts from subpar brands. There is just very little proof of any bolt breaking period. |
|
Quoted:
The issue is that if you google "broke M4 bolt" you also get very little evidence of C158 bolts breaking as well. Like I said before in this thread, finding people who will put enough rounds through a bolt to break it is rare. Your best best is consulting with people who run carbine courses and maybe use the bolt in their own carbine, because for 99% of shooters 500 rounds a year is a lot. The majority of broken bolt pictures online are either KB's or subpar parts from subpar brands. There is just very little proof of any bolt breaking period. Quoted:
Quoted:
Interestingly, not a single person has produced a picture of a broken 9310 QPQ'ed bolt. Does it mean they aren't out there? Nope. But it is impressive nonetheless! I did do some research on the statement made about badazzar and his opinion on the bolts. He has thus declined to comment to me on what the issue is except "It's melonite, not the 9310", so I will have to run with what someone else posted about surface vs. core hardness. A mil-spec bolt is a soft-cored, hard-shelled animal. That's how it is DESIGNED. The softer core can flex while the outer shell provides durability. This is part of the design of the M4/M16 bolt. http://i62.tinypic.com/23wvhxe.jpg The issue is that if you google "broke M4 bolt" you also get very little evidence of C158 bolts breaking as well. Like I said before in this thread, finding people who will put enough rounds through a bolt to break it is rare. Your best best is consulting with people who run carbine courses and maybe use the bolt in their own carbine, because for 99% of shooters 500 rounds a year is a lot. The majority of broken bolt pictures online are either KB's or subpar parts from subpar brands. There is just very little proof of any bolt breaking period. I don't disagree. I'm just looking for any datapoint I can find in addition to others I know of. This is not an end all search for data, but just one finger of that hand. |
|
Quoted:
The issue is that if you google "broke M4 bolt" you also get very little evidence of C158 bolts breaking as well. Like I said before in this thread, finding people who will put enough rounds through a bolt to break it is rare. Your best best is consulting with people who run carbine courses and maybe use the bolt in their own carbine, because for 99% of shooters 500 rounds a year is a lot. The majority of broken bolt pictures online are either KB's or subpar parts from subpar brands. There is just very little proof of any bolt breaking period. Quoted:
Quoted:
Interestingly, not a single person has produced a picture of a broken 9310 QPQ'ed bolt. Does it mean they aren't out there? Nope. But it is impressive nonetheless! I did do some research on the statement made about badazzar and his opinion on the bolts. He has thus declined to comment to me on what the issue is except "It's melonite, not the 9310", so I will have to run with what someone else posted about surface vs. core hardness. A mil-spec bolt is a soft-cored, hard-shelled animal. That's how it is DESIGNED. The softer core can flex while the outer shell provides durability. This is part of the design of the M4/M16 bolt. http://i62.tinypic.com/23wvhxe.jpg The issue is that if you google "broke M4 bolt" you also get very little evidence of C158 bolts breaking as well. Like I said before in this thread, finding people who will put enough rounds through a bolt to break it is rare. Your best best is consulting with people who run carbine courses and maybe use the bolt in their own carbine, because for 99% of shooters 500 rounds a year is a lot. The majority of broken bolt pictures online are either KB's or subpar parts from subpar brands. There is just very little proof of any bolt breaking period. This. 90% of folks want the best to go out a few times a year and informally plink a few boxes of ammo at a time. Whether a bolt lasts 20k or 100k rounds is inconsequential to most. |
|
Quoted: There are damn few NSW guys here. You're on a hobbyist board talking to mostly civilian shooter who are not doing lots of full-auto from SBRs with all the ammo they can fire for free. That comparing apples to Mac Trucks. Here in the real world Colt and LMT bolts easily go 20K+ rounds w/o a problem. Not to mention if your running the gun hard enough to break a bolt at 7K rounds, your barrel is also likely shot (or soon to be). Quoted: Quoted: Colt/LMT bolts run for about 7K rounds and then pop, per NSW guys I know who run 'em hard, suppressed, in a 10.3" gun.. There are damn few NSW guys here. You're on a hobbyist board talking to mostly civilian shooter who are not doing lots of full-auto from SBRs with all the ammo they can fire for free. That comparing apples to Mac Trucks. Here in the real world Colt and LMT bolts easily go 20K+ rounds w/o a problem. Not to mention if your running the gun hard enough to break a bolt at 7K rounds, your barrel is also likely shot (or soon to be). I'm with him. ^^^ |
|
Quoted:
I'm with him. ^^^ Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Colt/LMT bolts run for about 7K rounds and then pop, per NSW guys I know who run 'em hard, suppressed, in a 10.3" gun..
There are damn few NSW guys here. You're on a hobbyist board talking to mostly civilian shooter who are not doing lots of full-auto from SBRs with all the ammo they can fire for free. That comparing apples to Mac Trucks. Here in the real world Colt and LMT bolts easily go 20K+ rounds w/o a problem. Not to mention if your running the gun hard enough to break a bolt at 7K rounds, your barrel is also likely shot (or soon to be). I'm with him. ^^^ Maybe my question would garner more answers on a more "serious" website vs. a hobbyist site, but still, there are a TON of members here, and quantity over volume of fire might have led to a picture, I figured. |
|
Quoted: Maybe my question would garner more answers on a more "serious" website vs. a hobbyist site, but still, there are a TON of members here, and quantity over volume of fire might have led to a picture, I figured. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Colt/LMT bolts run for about 7K rounds and then pop, per NSW guys I know who run 'em hard, suppressed, in a 10.3" gun.. There are damn few NSW guys here. You're on a hobbyist board talking to mostly civilian shooter who are not doing lots of full-auto from SBRs with all the ammo they can fire for free. That comparing apples to Mac Trucks. Here in the real world Colt and LMT bolts easily go 20K+ rounds w/o a problem. Not to mention if your running the gun hard enough to break a bolt at 7K rounds, your barrel is also likely shot (or soon to be). I'm with him. ^^^ Maybe my question would garner more answers on a more "serious" website vs. a hobbyist site, but still, there are a TON of members here, and quantity over volume of fire might have led to a picture, I figured. Feel free to go to a more "serious" website.....the Internet is a big place. You've gotten a lot of feedback.....and as in the rest of life we keep what is of value and discard the rest. When the vast majority who own AR's can get 20k+ round counts out of a good BCG, your question would seem to be more appropriate for those who shoot a LOT more rounds then the majority of owners do. I guess since you apparently didn't get the needed info from TOS, and came here with the same question, and seem to be unsatisfied with the info/feedback so far here as well, it would appear this "hobbiest" label is a broad one. Perhaps Lightfighter should be your next stop if your frustration here persists? |
|
Quoted: Maybe my question would garner more answers on a more "serious" website vs. a hobbyist site, but still, there are a TON of members here, and quantity over volume of fire might have led to a picture, I figured. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Colt/LMT bolts run for about 7K rounds and then pop, per NSW guys I know who run 'em hard, suppressed, in a 10.3" gun.. There are damn few NSW guys here. You're on a hobbyist board talking to mostly civilian shooter who are not doing lots of full-auto from SBRs with all the ammo they can fire for free. That comparing apples to Mac Trucks. Here in the real world Colt and LMT bolts easily go 20K+ rounds w/o a problem. Not to mention if your running the gun hard enough to break a bolt at 7K rounds, your barrel is also likely shot (or soon to be). I'm with him. ^^^ Maybe my question would garner more answers on a more "serious" website vs. a hobbyist site, but still, there are a TON of members here, and quantity over volume of fire might have led to a picture, I figured.  |
|
Quoted:
Interestingly, not a single person has produced a picture of a broken 9310 QPQ'ed bolt. Does it mean they aren't out there? Nope. But it is impressive nonetheless! I did do some research on the statement made about badazzar and his opinion on the bolts. He has thus declined to comment to me on what the issue is except "It's melonite, not the 9310", so I will have to run with what someone else posted about surface vs. core hardness. A mil-spec bolt is a soft-cored, hard-shelled animal. That's how it is DESIGNED. The softer core can flex while the outer shell provides durability. This is part of the design of the M4/M16 bolt. http://i62.tinypic.com/23wvhxe.jpg The easy way to answer the whole hardness question would be to take a melonited example of a 9310 and a Carpenter 158 bolt and bi-sect them and check hardness at various spots and compare them to a control bolt of each that has not been melonited. Cheaper than shooting 200,000 rounds of ammo. |
|
Quoted:
Lol! Serious users don't give a shit what the bolt is made from. They shoot their guns, and if something breaks, they replace it. You think your NSW buddies sit around discussing the minutiae of bolt metallurgy? Fuck no, that's what hobbyists do
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Colt/LMT bolts run for about 7K rounds and then pop, per NSW guys I know who run 'em hard, suppressed, in a 10.3" gun..
There are damn few NSW guys here. You're on a hobbyist board talking to mostly civilian shooter who are not doing lots of full-auto from SBRs with all the ammo they can fire for free. That comparing apples to Mac Trucks. Here in the real world Colt and LMT bolts easily go 20K+ rounds w/o a problem. Not to mention if your running the gun hard enough to break a bolt at 7K rounds, your barrel is also likely shot (or soon to be). I'm with him. ^^^ Maybe my question would garner more answers on a more "serious" website vs. a hobbyist site, but still, there are a TON of members here, and quantity over volume of fire might have led to a picture, I figured.
In the interest of accurately representing the scenario, those "serious shooters" also generally have a supply chain getting them parts when they break something. Now whether it pays to buy a $170 bolt that may last longer or buy more $60 bolts is a worthy point of consideration. |
[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Un-breakable bolt... (Page 1 of 2)
AR Sponsor