AR Sponsor
Posted: 11/2/2014 1:13:55 AM EDT
|
I have been an avid supporter of the 6.8.
But really, with the advent of the lighter .308 that equals the weight of the 5.56, 6.5G, 300 Black, 6.8SPC etc... Why, unless ya just want to mess with smaller calibers, why build anything but a .308 now? I mean for deer, hogs, any game animal. Unless its for a youth or a woman, someone who needs less recoil, why anything but a .308 I guess I'm just sharing my epiphany. |
|
Non interchangeable parts, if you are changing platforms anyway there are many other options out there.
To be clear, I agree. With the cost of a 308 rifle these days I have no use for a 6.5 or 6.8 or anything if the sort, I'll just go 308. 300 blackout is a possibility if I ever buy a suppressor though. |
|
Valid thinking in terms of terminal performance.
Certainly the newer style variants like the GII & Nexgen components are hedging the variance of size & mass between the AR-10 & AR -15, there is still advantages of the latter. While a 1000HP drag car is great at the track & fun to drive on the street, it's not necessarily the best choice for going on family trips... While 308win rounds aren't that bad of a price, they still aren't as cheap as 556. When reloading the smaller 223 case variants, as well as SPC, uses less powder so cost is reduced, as well as powder conserved, & the piece of paper doesn't know the difference. For sub sonic use, I am not sure any 308win loads have been developed. |
| I'm a 308 guy. I guess the only reason would be recoil. I have not shot 6.5 or 6.8 but I understand they probably don't have the recoil that 308 does. Although with a brake I don't think my 308 is that bad at all, but less recoil is probably always a plus even if you can "handle" it. |
|
The main reasons IMHO going for the smaller/lighter rounds like the 6.5mm Grendel & 6.8mm SPC and so on is :
Lower cost, weather for buying or reloading the ammo... Lower overall felt recoil, able to get a accurate second shot if needed... Excellent performance considering case/round size, weight, etc...this especially true with higher BC capable rounds... New wildcat rounds based off of the Grendel & SPC cases (and others as well) offer even more versatility in the AR-15 platform... Much less work to get a AR-10/AR-308 running smoothly and parts compatibility/standardization are not a Issue with the AR-15 platform... Of course I really like the .223/5.56mm wildcats for the great low cost to reload vs. the excellent power ratio and minimal recoil... |
|
Primarily cost. I can build a 6.8 upper for arround $550 and slap it on my ar15 lower. I completely understand ballistic superiority of the 308, but... the 308 does not offer 'significant' performance exceeding 6.8. By this I mean, I cannot think of any game animals I would hunt that would require a 308 over a 6.8. Yes its more powerful, but yet, in my opinion not powerul enough for truely big game. If I were to draw a moose or elk tag for example, I would take a more substantial round than a 308. Its a matter of choice because I completly understand a 308 is capable o killing both. For my needs, the 6.8 closes the gap close enough to 308 with much less cost and weight, even with newer designs. Thats not to say ill never own an ar10 style gun... it simply will likely not be 308.
I also primarily hunt areas of dense cover and sub 100yard shots. For these areas I take my 458 socom and do far more than a 308 will... and I can comfortably shoot through the brush. The 6.8 and 458 socom uppers, together cost less than a complete ar10 of comparable quality. I get more flexibility, less weight, and less cost. All the parts interchange and are available. Ar10.... not so much. Find a 5 round ar10 mag on short notice.... good luck. |
|
Even with the introduction of the GII, I don't see it offering me anything if we're talking about .308 Winchester.
It all has to do with performance and use in a gas gun. Factory ammo 6.5 Grendel gives me anywhere from 85% (at the muzzle), to 99% of .308 energy on target, with half the recoil, less wind drift, cheaper ammo, and ammo that is meant to actually work in a gas gun. .308 has none of that going for it. Most of the ammunition that is up to date with modern pills hits an AR10 gas system with too much port pressure, and it is usually $7-$12 more per box of 20. Recoil: loser Ammunition cost: loser Compatibility with gas guns: loser AR15 parts compatibility: loser I literally had a hard time distinguishing between impact noise on steel between my buddy's 26" .308 bolt gun pushing 168gr SMK's, right next to my little 16" 6.5 Grendel pushing 123gr Scenar's and 123gr SST's at 200yds on 18" plates. The whole time in my head I'm thinking, "I'm so glad I got out of that cartridge." No matter what kind of diet you put the GII on, it will never match an AR15 equally configured when talking about weight and balance. They will feel the same perceptively, but a scale will show a few oz. favor to the AR15, and I can get a little more barrel length for overall length when comparing the AR15 to the GII, but it is marginal. Now that said, I am interested in the GII in other calibers, especially big bores. Imagine a super light brush buster/bear slayer, with a tuned gas and recoil system that functions well in the cold, but feels like you are carrying an AR15. That is where the GII is going to make some money. .308 is a non-starter for me personally. Been there, done that, the cartridge has been nothing but a disappointment for me from that first time I watched it through a spotting scope in SOTIC MTT, to my last trip to the range 7 days ago ( a time span covering 18 years of shooting and spotting .308/7.62LR). The rare exceptions have been spotting for some guys with really accurate bolt rifles and the 175gr SMK out to 700yds, but my 16" Grendel has more supersonic reach still, so again, .308 is basically dead to me, and nothing can really change that. I was raised on the .270 Winchester in childhood, so my idea of a center fire rifle is biased. If I'm going to get .308 performance, there is no practical reason to have .308 action size and recoil, so I refuse to pay those prices when more efficient, cheaper, and AR15 compatible options lie right at my feet. I will have a GII, but no way is it going to be chambered in .308 Winchester. |
|
Having started an AR10 a while back, the specifics of the parts are what changed my mind. I probably should have stuck with it as all I needed was a barrel and a BCG.
Now having a 6.5 Grendel, I am more than pleased with it as a whole. Great caliber IMHO. Don't know if I would go the 10 route again as the Grendel does everything I want. My philosophy on "why caliber 'X'?", is simple. Get what you want as nothing else will fit with a person desires. I am just glad there is such a selection in the "AR" platform as a whole. |
|
Another way to look at it is my situation with my 22" .260 Remington AR10. It's an amazing 1000-1500yd gun.
It stays home most of the year because of my 6.5 Grendel's. Reasons: * Weight (GII fixes that) * No factory ammo support for a gas gun (GII does not fix that.) * It adds 200yds of supersonic performance when compared to my 16" Grendel, and my Grendel is already staying supersonic past 1200-1300yds, depending on the temp. I do a lot of long range shooting, but most of it is intermediate to long range, with 1000yds being more the exception, and 300-800yds taking up more of the target distances. I also shoot to 1200 and 1500yds, but those occasions are the exception. I don't shoot my .260 Remington unless I hand load for it, period. If my .260 Remington, (which trashes the .30-06 for retained energy, trajectory, and wind deflection) stays home a lot already, you can see why .308 has no appeal to me at all. I live in rifleman's paradise, where we have amazing ranges to shoot long distance, plus tons of BLM land where you simply can't bring enough gun in many cases. Most shooters don't have access to the type of terrain where these distances really count, so .308 is fine for 300-600yds, and 600yds is pushing it if there is erratic wind. Even still, the Grendel will make it easier to get hits at those ranges, you can spot your hit without a break, and follow-up is faster. Add to the fact that you have AR15 parts commonality, and AR10's lose their appeal really quick, unless you are into different calibers. |
|
Some guys already mentioned it but, for me, it's also the recoil. I don't see the .308 killing 'em any deader than 6.5 Grendel or 6.8 SPC or the others, but eventually recoil takes the fun out of shooting and it becomes more a chore, particularly if you lighten up a .308 platform.
LR, I've been watching the GII with interest, and am wondering what will happen when one lightens up the components for a heavier-recoiling cartridge. Do you have any concerns at all about long-term durability of the GII? BTW, this is me, Grendelizer, under my new handle. 
|
|
Quoted:
Even with the introduction of the GII, I don't see it offering me anything if we're talking about .308 Winchester. It all has to do with performance and use in a gas gun. Factory ammo 6.5 Grendel gives me anywhere from 85% (at the muzzle), to 99% of .308 energy on target, with half the recoil, less wind drift, cheaper ammo, and ammo that is meant to actually work in a gas gun. .308 has none of that going for it. Most of the ammunition that is up to date with modern pills hits an AR10 gas system with too much port pressure, and it is usually $7-$12 more per box of 20. Recoil: loser Ammunition cost: loser Compatibility with gas guns: loser AR15 parts compatibility: loser I literally had a hard time distinguishing between impact noise on steel between my buddy's 26" .308 bolt gun pushing 168gr SMK's, right next to my little 16" 6.5 Grendel pushing 123gr Scenar's and 123gr SST's at 200yds on 18" plates. The whole time in my head I'm thinking, "I'm so glad I got out of that cartridge." No matter what kind of diet you put the GII on, it will never match an AR15 equally configured when talking about weight and balance. They will feel the same perceptively, but a scale will show a few oz. favor to the AR15, and I can get a little more barrel length for overall length when comparing the AR15 to the GII, but it is marginal. Now that said, I am interested in the GII in other calibers, especially big bores. Imagine a super light brush buster/bear slayer, with a tuned gas and recoil system that functions well in the cold, but feels like you are carrying an AR15. That is where the GII is going to make some money. .308 is a non-starter for me personally. Been there, done that, the cartridge has been nothing but a disappointment for me from that first time I watched it through a spotting scope in SOTIC MTT, to my last trip to the range 7 days ago ( a time span covering 18 years of shooting and spotting .308/7.62LR). The rare exceptions have been spotting for some guys with really accurate bolt rifles and the 175gr SMK out to 700yds, but my 16" Grendel has more supersonic reach still, so again, .308 is basically dead to me, and nothing can really change that. I was raised on the .270 Winchester in childhood, so my idea of a center fire rifle is biased. If I'm going to get .308 performance, there is no practical reason to have .308 action size and recoil, so I refuse to pay those prices when more efficient, cheaper, and AR15 compatible options lie right at my feet. I will have a GII, but no way is it going to be chambered in .308 Winchester. A GII or NextGen in a 6.5 Creedmore, makes way more sense in todays market the the 6.5G |
|
Quoted:
A GII or NextGen in a 6.5 Creedmore, makes way more sense in todays market the the 6.5G Quoted:
A GII or NextGen in a 6.5 Creedmore, makes way more sense in todays market the the 6.5G How is that? I think you skipped the part where factory ammo doesn't run well at all in gas guns, if we're talking 6.5 Creedmoor or .260 Remington. You are also limited in what gas system lengths you can get away with, unless you go short 120gr or less pills with faster powders, but even then you are hitting the gas port hard. Consider the following statement, then ask if it is from a sound mind: Can't give the old DPMS LR 308 away? This is the answer!
The next generation of 308 sized platforms. Finally an option for those too heavy to carry DPMS LR rifles sitting in the back of the safe. For years many have said they wish there was an AR12. A rifle bigger than an AR15 but without the weight of the AR10. In 2009 I designed a "12" more or less. A 7lb 16" barrel 308 rifle is possible. Standard 308 Pmags can be used in DPMS style LR 308 lowers. These Nexgen uppers can be built to fire any 308 based cartridges. The new DPMS GII is a very close copy of these uppers. We will sell kits which include an upper receiver, carrier, bolt and barrel. In addition to that you will need an AR10 charge handle, your choice of any AR15 handguard/rail, gas block, gas tube, AR10 firing pin, AR15 cam pin and cotter, flash hider or comp. So where did DPMS copy the Nexgen? Was it the shorter bolt carrier? No, Nexgen doesn't use that. It uses an 1990's AR10 length carrier, since it still uses a 1990's AR10 length upper receiver, with a smaller diameter. Was it the radial bolt and barrel extension lugs and teeth? Nope, Professional Ordance introduced that back with the Carbon 15. 
The GII has a unique barrel extension and steel feed ramp insert. The GII has a tower on the bolt carrier, for the key to insert into. LWRC has the same design for their DI AR15 they introduced this year at 2014 SHOT. Who did it first? 
The next question is, why does the GII need a different barrel nut, whereas the Nexgen will work with existing AR15 handguards and nuts? Answer: Because the GII uses a larger barrel extension and bolt diameter. Next question: Why did DPMS make the GII's barrel extension and bolt a larger diameter? Factors of Safety for .473" based case head cartridges, and their associated pressures. Next question: If the GII is that way, why is the Nexgen not? Please tell me that it isn't using that 800 series bolt and extension with an AR15 tennon, especially with 6.5x47 Lapua. You don't own one of these by any chance? |
|
Quoted:
How is that? I think you skipped the part where factory ammo doesn't run well at all in gas guns, if we're talking 6.5 Creedmoor or .260 Remington. You are also limited in what gas system lengths you can get away with, unless you go short 120gr or less pills with faster powders, but even then you are hitting the gas port hard. Consider the following statement, then ask if it is from a sound mind: So where did DPMS copy the Nexgen? Was it the shorter bolt carrier? No, Nexgen doesn't use that. It uses an 1990's AR10 length carrier, since it still uses a 1990's AR10 length upper receiver, with a smaller diameter. Was it the radial bolt and barrel extension lugs and teeth? Nope, Professional Ordance introduced that back with the Carbon 15. http://i36.tinypic.com/t8u36b.jpg The GII has a unique barrel extension and steel feed ramp insert. The GII has a tower on the bolt carrier, for the key to insert into. LWRC has the same design for their DI AR15 they introduced this year at 2014 SHOT. Who did it first? http://www.recoilweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/LWRC-new-bolt-carrier-group.jpg http://dpms-gii.com/assets/img/content/[email protected] The next question is, why does the GII need a different barrel nut, whereas the Nexgen will work with existing AR15 handguards and nuts? Answer: Because the GII uses a larger barrel extension and bolt diameter. Next question: Why did DPMS make the GII's barrel extension and bolt a larger diameter? Factors of Safety for .473" based case head cartridges, and their associated pressures. Next question: If the GII is that way, why is the Nexgen not? Please tell me that it isn't using that 800 series bolt and extension with an AR15 tennon, especially with 6.5x47 Lapua. You don't own one of these by any chance? Quoted:
Quoted:
A GII or NextGen in a 6.5 Creedmore, makes way more sense in todays market the the 6.5G How is that? I think you skipped the part where factory ammo doesn't run well at all in gas guns, if we're talking 6.5 Creedmoor or .260 Remington. You are also limited in what gas system lengths you can get away with, unless you go short 120gr or less pills with faster powders, but even then you are hitting the gas port hard. Consider the following statement, then ask if it is from a sound mind: Can't give the old DPMS LR 308 away? This is the answer!
The next generation of 308 sized platforms. Finally an option for those too heavy to carry DPMS LR rifles sitting in the back of the safe. For years many have said they wish there was an AR12. A rifle bigger than an AR15 but without the weight of the AR10. In 2009 I designed a "12" more or less. A 7lb 16" barrel 308 rifle is possible. Standard 308 Pmags can be used in DPMS style LR 308 lowers. These Nexgen uppers can be built to fire any 308 based cartridges. The new DPMS GII is a very close copy of these uppers. We will sell kits which include an upper receiver, carrier, bolt and barrel. In addition to that you will need an AR10 charge handle, your choice of any AR15 handguard/rail, gas block, gas tube, AR10 firing pin, AR15 cam pin and cotter, flash hider or comp. So where did DPMS copy the Nexgen? Was it the shorter bolt carrier? No, Nexgen doesn't use that. It uses an 1990's AR10 length carrier, since it still uses a 1990's AR10 length upper receiver, with a smaller diameter. Was it the radial bolt and barrel extension lugs and teeth? Nope, Professional Ordance introduced that back with the Carbon 15. http://i36.tinypic.com/t8u36b.jpg The GII has a unique barrel extension and steel feed ramp insert. The GII has a tower on the bolt carrier, for the key to insert into. LWRC has the same design for their DI AR15 they introduced this year at 2014 SHOT. Who did it first? http://www.recoilweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/LWRC-new-bolt-carrier-group.jpg http://dpms-gii.com/assets/img/content/[email protected] The next question is, why does the GII need a different barrel nut, whereas the Nexgen will work with existing AR15 handguards and nuts? Answer: Because the GII uses a larger barrel extension and bolt diameter. Next question: Why did DPMS make the GII's barrel extension and bolt a larger diameter? Factors of Safety for .473" based case head cartridges, and their associated pressures. Next question: If the GII is that way, why is the Nexgen not? Please tell me that it isn't using that 800 series bolt and extension with an AR15 tennon, especially with 6.5x47 Lapua. You don't own one of these by any chance? The guy that can best answer your questions does not come to this forum. You should go to the other one to ask him. Your quoting what I posted off the AR Performance website. Want to question his design, ask him. Because your stating Harrison at AR Performance does not have a sound mind, not me. And no I dont own one. Not yet anyway. Edit: Billet receivers, 9310 alloy bolts, carriers and barrels extensions. Melonite treated 4150 11595E barrel steel. High performance 5R rifling with a low land to groove ratio. Also the NextGen is coming out in .308 and .260 Rem not a 6.5x47 Lapua, it is the 270 AR that is based off the 6.5x47 Lapua I've only been in the AR black gun disease for a few years now, but I have seen things change fast. This whole rivalry between calibers thing is like racism, its taught, by the incumbents. |
|
He posts here all the time as Yankindachain, after having been banned twice within a very short period of time for major COC violations. Somebody that understood materials science and mechanical engineering as it pertains to firearms would never be stupid enough to try to fit .308-based cases into the constraints of the AR15 barrel tenon.
In a world full of blind men, the one-eyed man leads the way. In this case, he thinks the cliff is farther away than it is, but he's right on the edge, with rocks already crumbling under foot. Now the site is talking about FOS of 1.3, which is crazy. * Why did you stop selling stainless barrels?
416R stainless has a yield strength of apx 80,000psi. The hoop stress in a .980" diameter barrel with a 6.8 chamber is apx 80,000psi. That's a problem and the Grendel/264LBC in a stainless barrel is worse. 4150 CMV has a yield strength of 104,000psi. A 1.3 safety factor sounds much better than a 1:1 ratio. The wssm cartridges in an AR15 are dangerous. Even though some think they are made with AR10 barrel extensions and barrel nuts they are not. They are .050" larger in diameter than a AR15 but the WSSM cartridges are .555 in diameter. That would be apx the same as a 30 RAR in an AR15 barrel. I have seen a photo of a broken wssm barrel extension, the only broken barrel extension I have seen. The BRX and BR cartridges in 4150 barrels have a better strength ratio than a Grendel in a stainless barrel. Here's the translation: "Because I'm pushing well past the yield strengths of common barrel steel used by most high end barrel makers, if any kind of reasonable FOS is to be achieved." That's simply insane in the gun industry, which is why the GII has a larger diameter tenon and barrel extension. No way would a mechanical engineer even think about showing up to corporate with a design that relies on one type of special CMV barrel steel, while knowingly blowing the FOS on 416R. He'd be looking for a new job very soon thereafter, for failing the basics of design when looking at FOS. H's position is that if he controls the barrel steel, even at 1.3 FOS, it's ok because he knows what is going into the gun in terms of materials selection, and he's a decent machinist who can control his nominal minimums on diameters. Production operations see a variation in dims, that have to be within certain specs set by the manufacturer based on FOS first, then compatibility with other parts. With FOS and barrel tenon, you want the deviation to be on the + side, definitely not on the - side, because that eats into the FOS. How much does it eat into that .3 remainder on a 1.3 FOS? Probably not much. How many people will be hand loading for these? All of the customers who are getting into a wildcat. What pressures will they be using? You realize .308 Winchester is rated for 62,000psi by SAAMI? That's just the MAP. The Maximum Probable Lot Mean is 63,600psi, and the Maximum Probable Sample Mean is 66,000psi. These numbers are talking about factory ammunition as well. Was that MAP, MPLM, and MPSM taken into consideration when designing this barrel extension, or was it simply making a stronger bolt to fit in the AR15 upper receiver? Yankindachain can answer. He'll curse my name for it, but these questions need to be answered, because I'm seeing a lot of red flags from a safety point. I've already had one of his nitrided barrel extensions chip like glass when I tried to polish it with a rubber Cratex bit. That shouldn't happen, and indicates that someone sent out heat treated and tempered 8620 barrel extensions (attached to the barrel BTW), for nitriding after the fact. I called one of the QPQ places he referenced, and they said if it is done that way, you can get through-hardening on acute angle geometry of the part. Guess what? The feed ramps are an acute angle. The nitrogen will diffuse as deep as it can when bathed in the heated solution of the bath. Next question: If the feed ramps are through hardening, how far are they through hardening? Is this something limited to the feed ramps, or has it happened to areas on the bolt? What are the ways to test for correct nitriding of critical parts, and where are now with Factors Of Safety? Have we cut more into that .3 remainder off of the never would pass the drawing board 1.3 FOS? Don't worry, let the customers figure it out with their hand loads. When they call and complain, I'll post their personal info on the next forum to be banned from, then pull out one of my 12 other screen names. I've only been in the AR black gun disease for a few yeasr now, but I have seen things change fast.
This whole rivalry between calibers thing is like racism, its taught, by the incumbents. We're not talking about calibers anymore, we're talking about due diligence as a manufacturer, and customer service. I should have figured there was something too good to be true about a fluted, nitrided barrel for $170. I already know what happens to customers who have legitimate complaints. You didn't know I used to buy barrels from him. What kind of vendor publishes customer info online after they complain about a part? The same kind of vendor who pushes .308-based cases at 1.3 FOS from inside AR15 barrel tenon diameters. It's off the reservation. And I'm the bad guy in his mind. This is the kind of thing you shouldn't have to deal with when talking about firearms. |
|
Quoted:
He posts here all the time as Yankindachain, after having been banned twice within a very short period of time for major COC violations. Somebody that understood materials science and mechanical engineering as it pertains to firearms would never be stupid enough to try to fit .308-based cases into the constraints of the AR15 barrel tenon. In a world full of blind men, the one-eyed man leads the way. In this case, he thinks the cliff is farther away than it is, but he's right on the edge, with rocks already crumbling under foot. Now the site is talking about FOS of 1.3, which is crazy. Here's the translation: "Because I'm pushing well past the yield strengths of common barrel steel used by most high end barrel makers, if any kind of reasonable FOS is to be achieved." That's simply insane in the gun industry, which is why the GII has a larger diameter tenon and barrel extension. No way would a mechanical engineer even think about showing up to corporate with a design that relies on one type of special CMV barrel steel, while knowingly blowing the FOS on 416R. He'd be looking for a new job very soon thereafter, for failing the basics of design when looking at FOS. H's position is that if he controls the barrel steel, even at 1.3 FOS, it's ok because he knows what is going into the gun in terms of materials selection, and he's a decent machinist who can control his nominal minimums on diameters. Production operations see a variation in dims, that have to be within certain specs set by the manufacturer based on FOS first, then compatibility with other parts. With FOS and barrel tenon, you want the deviation to be on the + side, definitely not on the - side, because that eats into the FOS. How much does it eat into that .3 remainder on a 1.3 FOS? Probably not much. How many people will be hand loading for these? All of the customers who are getting into a wildcat. What pressures will they be using? You realize .308 Winchester is rated for 62,000psi by SAAMI? That's just the MAP. The Maximum Probable Lot Mean is 63,600psi, and the Maximum Probable Sample Mean is 66,000psi. These numbers are talking about factory ammunition as well. Was that MAP, MPLM, and MPSM taken into consideration when designing this barrel extension, or was it simply making a stronger bolt to fit in the AR15 upper receiver? Yankindachain can answer. He'll curse my name for it, but these questions need to be answered, because I'm seeing a lot of red flags from a safety point. I've already had one of his nitrided barrel extensions chip like glass when I tried to polish it with a rubber Cratex bit. That shouldn't happen, and indicates that someone sent out heat treated and tempered 8620 barrel extensions (attached to the barrel BTW), for nitriding after the fact. I called one of the QPQ places he referenced, and they said if it is done that way, you can get through-hardening on acute angle geometry of the part. Guess what? The feed ramps are an acute angle. The nitrogen will diffuse as deep as it can when bathed in the heated solution of the bath. Next question: If the feed ramps are through hardening, how far are they through hardening? Is this something limited to the feed ramps, or has it happened to areas on the bolt? What are the ways to test for correct nitriding of critical parts, and where are now with Factors Of Safety? Have we cut more into that .3 remainder off of the never would pass the drawing board 1.3 FOS? Don't worry, let the customers figure it out with their hand loads. When they call and complain, I'll post their personal info on the next forum to be banned from, then pull out one of my 12 other screen names. Quoted:
He posts here all the time as Yankindachain, after having been banned twice within a very short period of time for major COC violations. Somebody that understood materials science and mechanical engineering as it pertains to firearms would never be stupid enough to try to fit .308-based cases into the constraints of the AR15 barrel tenon. In a world full of blind men, the one-eyed man leads the way. In this case, he thinks the cliff is farther away than it is, but he's right on the edge, with rocks already crumbling under foot. Now the site is talking about FOS of 1.3, which is crazy. * Why did you stop selling stainless barrels?
416R stainless has a yield strength of apx 80,000psi. The hoop stress in a .980" diameter barrel with a 6.8 chamber is apx 80,000psi. That's a problem and the Grendel/264LBC in a stainless barrel is worse. 4150 CMV has a yield strength of 104,000psi. A 1.3 safety factor sounds much better than a 1:1 ratio. The wssm cartridges in an AR15 are dangerous. Even though some think they are made with AR10 barrel extensions and barrel nuts they are not. They are .050" larger in diameter than a AR15 but the WSSM cartridges are .555 in diameter. That would be apx the same as a 30 RAR in an AR15 barrel. I have seen a photo of a broken wssm barrel extension, the only broken barrel extension I have seen. The BRX and BR cartridges in 4150 barrels have a better strength ratio than a Grendel in a stainless barrel. Here's the translation: "Because I'm pushing well past the yield strengths of common barrel steel used by most high end barrel makers, if any kind of reasonable FOS is to be achieved." That's simply insane in the gun industry, which is why the GII has a larger diameter tenon and barrel extension. No way would a mechanical engineer even think about showing up to corporate with a design that relies on one type of special CMV barrel steel, while knowingly blowing the FOS on 416R. He'd be looking for a new job very soon thereafter, for failing the basics of design when looking at FOS. H's position is that if he controls the barrel steel, even at 1.3 FOS, it's ok because he knows what is going into the gun in terms of materials selection, and he's a decent machinist who can control his nominal minimums on diameters. Production operations see a variation in dims, that have to be within certain specs set by the manufacturer based on FOS first, then compatibility with other parts. With FOS and barrel tenon, you want the deviation to be on the + side, definitely not on the - side, because that eats into the FOS. How much does it eat into that .3 remainder on a 1.3 FOS? Probably not much. How many people will be hand loading for these? All of the customers who are getting into a wildcat. What pressures will they be using? You realize .308 Winchester is rated for 62,000psi by SAAMI? That's just the MAP. The Maximum Probable Lot Mean is 63,600psi, and the Maximum Probable Sample Mean is 66,000psi. These numbers are talking about factory ammunition as well. Was that MAP, MPLM, and MPSM taken into consideration when designing this barrel extension, or was it simply making a stronger bolt to fit in the AR15 upper receiver? Yankindachain can answer. He'll curse my name for it, but these questions need to be answered, because I'm seeing a lot of red flags from a safety point. I've already had one of his nitrided barrel extensions chip like glass when I tried to polish it with a rubber Cratex bit. That shouldn't happen, and indicates that someone sent out heat treated and tempered 8620 barrel extensions (attached to the barrel BTW), for nitriding after the fact. I called one of the QPQ places he referenced, and they said if it is done that way, you can get through-hardening on acute angle geometry of the part. Guess what? The feed ramps are an acute angle. The nitrogen will diffuse as deep as it can when bathed in the heated solution of the bath. Next question: If the feed ramps are through hardening, how far are they through hardening? Is this something limited to the feed ramps, or has it happened to areas on the bolt? What are the ways to test for correct nitriding of critical parts, and where are now with Factors Of Safety? Have we cut more into that .3 remainder off of the never would pass the drawing board 1.3 FOS? Don't worry, let the customers figure it out with their hand loads. When they call and complain, I'll post their personal info on the next forum to be banned from, then pull out one of my 12 other screen names. Sounds like you have a personal vendetta with him, which your entitled to. He also builds the best barrels for the 6.8 bar none, they are prized by many satisfied customers. I have also seen him make things right with every single person that had any issues, which are few in my 2+ years. Another consideration, do you think he is constantly learning? Think he might get screwed by his suppliers ever? Im just stating a couple facts as I see them, as did you. I have no connection with him and dont even own an ARP barrel yet, although my next one will be. Sounds like your bad experience was before my time in the AR world, at that price for a barrel I know it was. Perhaps you were part of the learning curve, sorry to hear that sir. |
|
Yes, I've been around a lot longer than 2 years. All the dealings I had with him were fine back then, to be totally honest. There were some minor hiccups with the way the website charged you shipping for every item you put in the cart, but it wasn't anything I really was concerned about.
I was actually on good terms with him until this past year, when he went full retard out of the blue and started making personal threats. I now am suspecting that it coincided with the abortion of an idea that was proposed here, to stuff the 30 RAR into AR15 uppers with 800 series extensions-which leaves no FOS really. It's over the edge. I have problems with a barrel manufacturer "learning along the way" when the information is easily learned in an ME program, or even a basic gunsmithing course. They cover FOS and barrel tenon thickness in every reputable gunsmithing program in the Nation. It's a common thing to address, and they also go into materials science to the degree that a smith should know it, like yield strengths, correct tempering points for common steels, surface hardness, and treatments. I can tell you what, it certainly has been a learning curve for me. My list of barrel sources has gotten smaller. H's persona in the 6.8 world has been driven by the position that he did a lot to support the cartridge, and many customers are appreciative of that. Heck, the .223 Wylde barrels I have from him are accurate, and I know he has changed vendors for his nitriding since I got that one with the extension that chipped. The muzzle threads on it are horrendous though, and the index pin needed to be radiused because it would damage the upper if you inserted it that way. He isn't the only barrel maker that put out stuff like that. I've seen recent examples of it from Shilen. Like I said, in a blind world, the one-eyed man leads the way. |
|
Quoted:
Yes, I've been around a lot longer than 2 years. All the dealings I had with him were fine back then, to be totally honest. There were some minor hiccups with the way the website charged you shipping for every item you put in the cart, but it wasn't anything I really was concerned about. I was actually on good terms with him until this past year, when he went full retard out of the blue and started making personal threats. I now am suspecting that it coincided with the abortion of an idea that was proposed here, to stuff the 30 RAR into AR15 uppers with 800 series extensions-which leaves no FOS really. It's over the edge. I have problems with a barrel manufacturer "learning along the way" when the information is easily learned in an ME program, or even a basic gunsmithing course. They cover FOS and barrel tenon thickness in every reputable gunsmithing program in the Nation. It's a common thing to address, and they also go into materials science to the degree that a smith should know it, like yield strengths, correct tempering points for common steels, surface hardness, and treatments. I can tell you what, it certainly has been a learning curve for me. My list of barrel sources has gotten smaller. H's persona in the 6.8 world has been driven by the position that he did a lot to support the cartridge, and many customers are appreciative of that. Heck, the .223 Wylde barrels I have from him are accurate, and I know he has changed vendors for his nitriding since I got that one with the extension that chipped. The muzzle threads on it are horrendous though, and the index pin needed to be radiused because it would damage the upper if you inserted it that way. He isn't the only barrel maker that put out stuff like that. I've seen recent examples of it from Shilen. Like I said, in a blind world, the one-eyed man leads the way. For you sir, your troubles must be a product of karma. Be well |
AR Sponsor