User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 9:25:05 AM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Why?  Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
FYI, Molon used to lap uppers before he started using billet uppers. Most lapping tools are relieved so the area inside the upper won't be cut even if a little lapping compound gets inside. You should always be careful to avoid any compound getting inside the upper. If any does get inside I would recommend cleaning it out before proceeding any farther. I respect Molon's approach, but I also know he's cautious and methodical; lapping enough to get a perfectly smooth upper face would take very little time, and I'm certain Molon monitored his progress very carefully. I'm not dissing receiver lapping. I'm saying that a lot of people do way too much, and maybe not too well because of all this talk about how it "improves accuracy," without even considering that maybe this receiver might need just a touch, and this one even less to make them perfectly square. I know about three different lapping tools, and all of them have relief grooves (of different widths) between the centering pilot and the flange that is supposed to lap the upper. But I also know how some people can go overboard with anything. There are a lot of ways to goof this up, and since Wheeler's tool came out apparently designed to be used on a power drill, there is a statistical certainty that someone has goobered several uppers messing with that tool. We are talking about a precision tool that needs to be used with a gentle hand being used by underinformed, enthusiastic builders without the knowledge of what to watch out for. I can agree with this. I will be lapping by hand using 600 grit, with receiver facing up. Why? The drill is then out of the picture, 600 is plenty of grit, and with tool on top, gravity/weight of the tool can do the cutting. Does that answer the why ? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 9:34:03 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Like I said its up to you on who to believe I choose to believe the guy whose been involved in a high level of competition for 20 years Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The whole point of this forum is to learn from other people with more knowledge and experience It's up to you to choose who to believe Video from someone who knows something In three years of accuracy testing I saw no evidence that this is a sound practice. Just like barrel break-in voodoo the data just does not exist. Does it hurt? Probably not. Like I said its up to you on who to believe I choose to believe the guy whose been involved in a high level of competition for 20 years You can....I choose to believe science and testing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 9:36:10 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The drill is then out of the picture, 600 is plenty of grit, and with tool on top, gravity/weight of the tool can do the cutting. Does that answer the why ? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
FYI, Molon used to lap uppers before he started using billet uppers. Most lapping tools are relieved so the area inside the upper won't be cut even if a little lapping compound gets inside. You should always be careful to avoid any compound getting inside the upper. If any does get inside I would recommend cleaning it out before proceeding any farther. I respect Molon's approach, but I also know he's cautious and methodical; lapping enough to get a perfectly smooth upper face would take very little time, and I'm certain Molon monitored his progress very carefully. I'm not dissing receiver lapping. I'm saying that a lot of people do way too much, and maybe not too well because of all this talk about how it "improves accuracy," without even considering that maybe this receiver might need just a touch, and this one even less to make them perfectly square. I know about three different lapping tools, and all of them have relief grooves (of different widths) between the centering pilot and the flange that is supposed to lap the upper. But I also know how some people can go overboard with anything. There are a lot of ways to goof this up, and since Wheeler's tool came out apparently designed to be used on a power drill, there is a statistical certainty that someone has goobered several uppers messing with that tool. We are talking about a precision tool that needs to be used with a gentle hand being used by underinformed, enthusiastic builders without the knowledge of what to watch out for. I can agree with this. I will be lapping by hand using 600 grit, with receiver facing up. Why? The drill is then out of the picture, 600 is plenty of grit, and with tool on top, gravity/weight of the tool can do the cutting. Does that answer the why ? The way you plan on doing it will just add error. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 11:20:39 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
In three years of accuracy testing I saw no evidence that this is a sound practice. Just like barrel break-in voodoo the data just does not exist. Does it hurt? Probably not. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The whole point of this forum is to learn from other people with more knowledge and experience It's up to you to choose who to believe Video from someone who knows something In three years of accuracy testing I saw no evidence that this is a sound practice. Just like barrel break-in voodoo the data just does not exist. Does it hurt? Probably not. Please cite your testing that stabilizing the upper/extension joint has no benefit. What exact methods of stabilization have you tested? Please cite your testing that proves barrel breakin is voodoo. Thanks. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 11:35:13 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Please cite your testing that stabilizing the upper/extension joint has no benefit. What exact methods of stabilization have you tested? Please cite your testing that proves barrel breakin is voodoo. Thanks. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The whole point of this forum is to learn from other people with more knowledge and experience It's up to you to choose who to believe Video from someone who knows something In three years of accuracy testing I saw no evidence that this is a sound practice. Just like barrel break-in voodoo the data just does not exist. Does it hurt? Probably not. Please cite your testing that stabilizing the upper/extension joint has no benefit. What exact methods of stabilization have you tested? Please cite your testing that proves barrel breakin is voodoo. Thanks. They can't cite shit. All they're doing is talking, yap yap yap, cause ohnoo someone won't list to us..our feellss. This thread went from ideas about compounds and some good input, to a bunch of narrow minded posters who think, the world should revolve around their point of view. Even had one guy bring the catholic church into it, hell all were missing is Trump, Hillary, and global warming. This thread probably needs to be moved to general discussion, its gotten rather amusing, in truth I haven't helped much by replying back to the stupidity. Love the elk hunting pics you post by the way. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 11:38:39 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You can....I choose to believe science and testing. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The whole point of this forum is to learn from other people with more knowledge and experience It's up to you to choose who to believe Video from someone who knows something In three years of accuracy testing I saw no evidence that this is a sound practice. Just like barrel break-in voodoo the data just does not exist. Does it hurt? Probably not. Like I said its up to you on who to believe I choose to believe the guy whose been involved in a high level of competition for 20 years You can....I choose to believe science and testing. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 11:58:24 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Please cite your testing that stabilizing the upper/extension joint has no benefit. What exact methods of stabilization have you tested? Please cite your testing that proves barrel breakin is voodoo. Thanks. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The whole point of this forum is to learn from other people with more knowledge and experience It's up to you to choose who to believe Video from someone who knows something In three years of accuracy testing I saw no evidence that this is a sound practice. Just like barrel break-in voodoo the data just does not exist. Does it hurt? Probably not. Please cite your testing that stabilizing the upper/extension joint has no benefit. What exact methods of stabilization have you tested? Please cite your testing that proves barrel breakin is voodoo. Thanks. Please cite your testing that blessing barrels by ministers and priests has no benefit. What exact denominations of faith have you tested? Please cite your testing that proves excising demons from your barrels is voodoo. Thanks. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 12:07:48 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The way you plan on doing it will just add error. I assume you are misunderstanding what he is saying. He is talking about using a method similar to what this guy used. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HAL5DqNJd9s Upper vertical, top surface leveled or indicated, lapping tool dropped in and spun by hand rather than DeWalt. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 12:08:11 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Please cite your testing that stabilizing the upper/extension joint has no benefit. What exact methods of stabilization have you tested? Please cite your testing that proves barrel breakin is voodoo. Thanks. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The whole point of this forum is to learn from other people with more knowledge and experience It's up to you to choose who to believe Video from someone who knows something In three years of accuracy testing I saw no evidence that this is a sound practice. Just like barrel break-in voodoo the data just does not exist. Does it hurt? Probably not. Please cite your testing that stabilizing the upper/extension joint has no benefit. What exact methods of stabilization have you tested? Please cite your testing that proves barrel breakin is voodoo. Thanks. I was VP of Quality at ArmaLite. We built and tested thousands of rifles for sub MOA accuracy. This includes goverment testing. We built them to print. Let's see your data. All you have is smoke and mirrors.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 12:12:48 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The whole point of this forum is to learn from other people with more knowledge and experience It's up to you to choose who to believe Video from someone who knows something In three years of accuracy testing I saw no evidence that this is a sound practice. Just like barrel break-in voodoo the data just does not exist. Does it hurt? Probably not. Like I said its up to you on who to believe I choose to believe the guy whose been involved in a high level of competition for 20 years You can....I choose to believe science and testing. Really? How many firearms test ranges have you managed? Acraglass, JB weld, epoxy etc. No statistically significant difference compared to a rifle built to print. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 12:13:11 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I was VP of Quality at ArmaLite. We built and tested thousands of rifles for sub MOA accuracy. This includes goverment testing. We built them to print. Let's see your data. All you have is smoke and mirrors. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The whole point of this forum is to learn from other people with more knowledge and experience It's up to you to choose who to believe Video from someone who knows something In three years of accuracy testing I saw no evidence that this is a sound practice. Just like barrel break-in voodoo the data just does not exist. Does it hurt? Probably not. Please cite your testing that stabilizing the upper/extension joint has no benefit. What exact methods of stabilization have you tested? Please cite your testing that proves barrel breakin is voodoo. Thanks. I was VP of Quality at ArmaLite. We built and tested thousands of rifles for sub MOA accuracy. This includes goverment testing. We built them to print. Let's see your data. All you have is smoke and mirrors. LOL. So you never tested upper/extension stabilization nor did you test barrel breakin. Thanks. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 12:18:39 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I assume you are misunderstanding what he is saying. He is talking about using a method similar to what this guy used. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HAL5DqNJd9s Upper vertical, top surface leveled or indicated, lapping tool dropped in and spun by hand rather than DeWalt. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The way you plan on doing it will just add error. I assume you are misunderstanding what he is saying. He is talking about using a method similar to what this guy used. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HAL5DqNJd9s Upper vertical, top surface leveled or indicated, lapping tool dropped in and spun by hand rather than DeWalt. Yikes! That's worse than I thought...ugh! Like I mentioned above...it probably will not hurt anything. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 12:23:55 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
LOL. So you never tested upper/extension stabilization nor did you test barrel breakin. Thanks. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The whole point of this forum is to learn from other people with more knowledge and experience It's up to you to choose who to believe Video from someone who knows something In three years of accuracy testing I saw no evidence that this is a sound practice. Just like barrel break-in voodoo the data just does not exist. Does it hurt? Probably not. Please cite your testing that stabilizing the upper/extension joint has no benefit. What exact methods of stabilization have you tested? Please cite your testing that proves barrel breakin is voodoo. Thanks. I was VP of Quality at ArmaLite. We built and tested thousands of rifles for sub MOA accuracy. This includes goverment testing. We built them to print. Let's see your data. All you have is smoke and mirrors. LOL. So you never tested upper/extension stabilization nor did you test barrel breakin. Thanks.
We tested a lot of stuff years before I came on board plus testing done under my watch. We also had access to outside resources and data from Rock Island Arsenal. None of this stuff is new. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 12:26:24 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
LOL. So you never tested upper/extension stabilization nor did you test barrel breakin. Thanks. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The whole point of this forum is to learn from other people with more knowledge and experience It's up to you to choose who to believe Video from someone who knows something In three years of accuracy testing I saw no evidence that this is a sound practice. Just like barrel break-in voodoo the data just does not exist. Does it hurt? Probably not. Please cite your testing that stabilizing the upper/extension joint has no benefit. What exact methods of stabilization have you tested? Please cite your testing that proves barrel breakin is voodoo. Thanks. I was VP of Quality at ArmaLite. We built and tested thousands of rifles for sub MOA accuracy. This includes goverment testing. We built them to print. Let's see your data. All you have is smoke and mirrors. LOL. So you never tested upper/extension stabilization nor did you test barrel breakin. Thanks. Where is your data? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 12:27:14 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
We tested a lot of stuff years before I came on board plus testing done under my watch. We also had access to outside resources and data from Rock Island Arsenal. None of this stuff is new. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
In three years of accuracy testing I saw no evidence that this is a sound practice. Just like barrel break-in voodoo the data just does not exist. Does it hurt? Probably not. Please cite your testing that stabilizing the upper/extension joint has no benefit. What exact methods of stabilization have you tested? Please cite your testing that proves barrel breakin is voodoo. Thanks. I was VP of Quality at ArmaLite. We built and tested thousands of rifles for sub MOA accuracy. This includes goverment testing. We built them to print. Let's see your data. All you have is smoke and mirrors. LOL. So you never tested upper/extension stabilization nor did you test barrel breakin. Thanks.
We tested a lot of stuff years before I came on board plus testing done under my watch. We also had access to outside resources and data from Rock Island Arsenal. None of this stuff is new. Cool. Now please post the actual data not you opinion of the testing. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 12:27:21 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I was VP of Quality at ArmaLite. We built and tested thousands of rifles for sub MOA accuracy. This includes goverment testing. We built them to print. Let's see your data. All you have is smoke and mirrors. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 12:30:09 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
In three years of accuracy testing I saw no evidence that this is a sound practice. Just like barrel break-in voodoo the data just does not exist. Does it hurt? Probably not. Please cite your testing that stabilizing the upper/extension joint has no benefit. What exact methods of stabilization have you tested? Please cite your testing that proves barrel breakin is voodoo. Thanks. I was VP of Quality at ArmaLite. We built and tested thousands of rifles for sub MOA accuracy. This includes goverment testing. We built them to print. Let's see your data. All you have is smoke and mirrors. LOL. So you never tested upper/extension stabilization nor did you test barrel breakin. Thanks. Where is your data? http:// http://i3.ytimg.com/vi/vjkFcEBGB4U/mqdefault.jpg I didn't make unsubstantiated claims. You did. Please post the actual data from these tests in which you claim to be involved. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 12:37:35 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I assume you are misunderstanding what he is saying. He is talking about using a method similar to what this guy used. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HAL5DqNJd9s Upper vertical, top surface leveled or indicated, lapping tool dropped in and spun by hand rather than DeWalt. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The way you plan on doing it will just add error. I assume you are misunderstanding what he is saying. He is talking about using a method similar to what this guy used. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HAL5DqNJd9s Upper vertical, top surface leveled or indicated, lapping tool dropped in and spun by hand rather than DeWalt. Exactly. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 12:39:35 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I was VP of Quality at ArmaLite. We built and tested thousands of rifles for sub MOA accuracy. This includes goverment testing. We built them to print. Let's see your data. All you have is smoke and mirrors. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The whole point of this forum is to learn from other people with more knowledge and experience It's up to you to choose who to believe Video from someone who knows something In three years of accuracy testing I saw no evidence that this is a sound practice. Just like barrel break-in voodoo the data just does not exist. Does it hurt? Probably not. Please cite your testing that stabilizing the upper/extension joint has no benefit. What exact methods of stabilization have you tested? Please cite your testing that proves barrel breakin is voodoo. Thanks. I was VP of Quality at ArmaLite. We built and tested thousands of rifles for sub MOA accuracy. This includes goverment testing. We built them to print. Let's see your data. All you have is smoke and mirrors. Thank you for at least giving us some info, besides that won't work. Helps a lil when peolple post some credibility. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 12:40:56 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Please cite your testing that blessing barrels by ministers and priests has no benefit. What exact denominations of faith have you tested? Please cite your testing that proves excising demons from your barrels is voodoo. Thanks. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The whole point of this forum is to learn from other people with more knowledge and experience It's up to you to choose who to believe Video from someone who knows something In three years of accuracy testing I saw no evidence that this is a sound practice. Just like barrel break-in voodoo the data just does not exist. Does it hurt? Probably not. Please cite your testing that stabilizing the upper/extension joint has no benefit. What exact methods of stabilization have you tested? Please cite your testing that proves barrel breakin is voodoo. Thanks. Please cite your testing that blessing barrels by ministers and priests has no benefit. What exact denominations of faith have you tested? Please cite your testing that proves excising demons from your barrels is voodoo. Thanks. BS wilson, nuff said. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 12:46:30 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Please cite your testing that blessing barrels by ministers and priests has no benefit. What exact denominations of faith have you tested? Please cite your testing that proves excising demons from your barrels is voodoo. Thanks. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The whole point of this forum is to learn from other people with more knowledge and experience It's up to you to choose who to believe Video from someone who knows something In three years of accuracy testing I saw no evidence that this is a sound practice. Just like barrel break-in voodoo the data just does not exist. Does it hurt? Probably not. Please cite your testing that stabilizing the upper/extension joint has no benefit. What exact methods of stabilization have you tested? Please cite your testing that proves barrel breakin is voodoo. Thanks. Please cite your testing that blessing barrels by ministers and priests has no benefit. What exact denominations of faith have you tested? Please cite your testing that proves excising demons from your barrels is voodoo. Thanks. Why post this silly stuff in a tech forum? I never made any of those statements.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 1:39:44 PM EDT
[#22]
Because it has as much merit as anything else suggested or discussed here thus far.
And I like to poke people on the eye who hold superstitious beliefs, which is precisely what this thread is about. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 1:49:47 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Because it has as much merit as anything else suggested or discussed here thus far. And I like to poke people on the eye who hold superstitious beliefs, which is precisely what this thread is about. I would love to see how your precision AR's perform. Perhaps you could post an entry in the MOA thread or at least tell us how your AR performs in a 10 shot accuracy test. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 1:58:59 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I would love to see how your precision AR's perform. Perhaps you could post an entry in the MOA thread or at least tell us how your AR performs in a 10 shot accuracy test. http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_16_17/51___ARFCOM_1_MOA_ALL_DAY_LONG__Challenge_.html Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Because it has as much merit as anything else suggested or discussed here thus far. And I like to poke people on the eye who hold superstitious beliefs, which is precisely what this thread is about. I would love to see how your precision AR's perform. Perhaps you could post an entry in the MOA thread or at least tell us how your AR performs in a 10 shot accuracy test. http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_16_17/51___ARFCOM_1_MOA_ALL_DAY_LONG__Challenge_.html So you admit to being a troll, trying to fuck with people. Thanks I suggest everyone ignore the admitted troll. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 5:12:33 PM EDT
[#25]
well, the first troll test is to compare post count, join date, and EE feedback...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 5:26:52 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I have to ask, what factory Armalite rifles are 10 shot sub MOA accurate? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I was VP of Quality at ArmaLite. We built and tested thousands of rifles for sub MOA accuracy. This includes goverment testing. We built them to print. Let's see your data. All you have is smoke and mirrors. The Super SASS was, AR-10T...we tested for .mil and export. Facing and bedding did not make a statistically significant difference. However, if I was going to glue a barrel into a receiver, I would use JB weld. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 5:31:24 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Thank you for at least giving us some info, besides that won't work. Helps a lil when peolple post some credibility. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The whole point of this forum is to learn from other people with more knowledge and experience It's up to you to choose who to believe Video from someone who knows something In three years of accuracy testing I saw no evidence that this is a sound practice. Just like barrel break-in voodoo the data just does not exist. Does it hurt? Probably not. Please cite your testing that stabilizing the upper/extension joint has no benefit. What exact methods of stabilization have you tested? Please cite your testing that proves barrel breakin is voodoo. Thanks. I was VP of Quality at ArmaLite. We built and tested thousands of rifles for sub MOA accuracy. This includes goverment testing. We built them to print. Let's see your data. All you have is smoke and mirrors. Thank you for at least giving us some info, besides that won't work. Helps a lil when peolple post some credibility. The other issue revolves around the test method itself...don't get me started on that...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 6:42:41 PM EDT
[#28]
I just pulled a looser fitting barrel that was sort of printing 2 groups. I used red RTV (really), I'll report if it helped.
Why red RTV? Somebody had to.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 7:00:34 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The Super SASS was, AR-10T...we tested for .mil and export. Facing and bedding did not make a statistically significant difference. However, if I was going to glue a barrel into a receiver, I would use JB weld. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I was VP of Quality at ArmaLite. We built and tested thousands of rifles for sub MOA accuracy. This includes goverment testing. We built them to print. Let's see your data. All you have is smoke and mirrors. The Super SASS was, AR-10T...we tested for .mil and export. Facing and bedding did not make a statistically significant difference. However, if I was going to glue a barrel into a receiver, I would use JB weld. I've used JB on some cheap bolt gun stuff that didn't justify spending money on acra glass. It worked great as a bedding epoxy. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 7:03:36 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I've used JB on some cheap bolt gun stuff that didn't justify spending money on acra glass. It worked great as a bedding epoxy. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I was VP of Quality at ArmaLite. We built and tested thousands of rifles for sub MOA accuracy. This includes goverment testing. We built them to print. Let's see your data. All you have is smoke and mirrors. The Super SASS was, AR-10T...we tested for .mil and export. Facing and bedding did not make a statistically significant difference. However, if I was going to glue a barrel into a receiver, I would use JB weld. I've used JB on some cheap bolt gun stuff that didn't justify spending money on acra glass. It worked great as a bedding epoxy. Shrinks a lot. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 7:07:36 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Shrinks a lot. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I was VP of Quality at ArmaLite. We built and tested thousands of rifles for sub MOA accuracy. This includes goverment testing. We built them to print. Let's see your data. All you have is smoke and mirrors. The Super SASS was, AR-10T...we tested for .mil and export. Facing and bedding did not make a statistically significant difference. However, if I was going to glue a barrel into a receiver, I would use JB weld. I've used JB on some cheap bolt gun stuff that didn't justify spending money on acra glass. It worked great as a bedding epoxy. Shrinks a lot. Yep, but when your cheap buddy wants the dirt cheap bedding job in his plastic stock , he gets the JB and 2 drops of black paint mixed for color. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 7:13:54 PM EDT
[#32]
He got his money's worth, fair enough.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 7:24:48 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
He got his money's worth, fair enough. You, Mr. Red RTV, are a pioneer in the field sir. Look forward to your observations. Hope it helps. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 7:30:34 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You, Mr. Red RTV, are a pioneer in the field sir. Look forward to your observations. Hope it helps. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
He got his money's worth, fair enough. You, Mr. Red RTV, are a pioneer in the field sir. Look forward to your observations. Hope it helps. I'm sure everyone has considered it, and I just happened to have a tube of it right here, so here goes something. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 7:52:50 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm sure everyone has considered it, and I just happened to have a tube of it right here, so here goes something. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
He got his money's worth, fair enough. You, Mr. Red RTV, are a pioneer in the field sir. Look forward to your observations. Hope it helps. I'm sure everyone has considered it, and I just happened to have a tube of it right here, so here goes something. SAU..shock absorbing upper. No felt recoil.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 9:14:46 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Shrinks a lot. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I was VP of Quality at ArmaLite. We built and tested thousands of rifles for sub MOA accuracy. This includes goverment testing. We built them to print. Let's see your data. All you have is smoke and mirrors. The Super SASS was, AR-10T...we tested for .mil and export. Facing and bedding did not make a statistically significant difference. However, if I was going to glue a barrel into a receiver, I would use JB weld. I've used JB on some cheap bolt gun stuff that didn't justify spending money on acra glass. It worked great as a bedding epoxy. Shrinks a lot. Anyone try Bondo? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 9:23:00 PM EDT
[#37]
I wouldn't rule anything out if people are using stuff like RTV.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 9:27:42 PM EDT
[#38]
Bondo shrinks too, and depending on temperature, thickness and other factors, maybe more than JB.
Bedding a bolt gun with Bondo isn't too out in left field, but Bondo is kind of heavy. AcraGlas is fairly light and shrinks "less than 1/10th of 1%" according to Brownells. Bondo is made to fill voids in steel, where its weight isn't an issue. Using any of these items to "bed" an AR barrel to an upper is overkill; once the barrel nut is tightened, the barrel won't move (barring using the rifle as a club or something). And as I said above, if the barrel is so loose that you can actually get any measurable quantity of things like these in between the barrel extension and the upper, you need to return that barrel. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 9:31:52 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
LOL. So you never tested upper/extension stabilization nor did you test barrel breakin. Thanks. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The whole point of this forum is to learn from other people with more knowledge and experience It's up to you to choose who to believe Video from someone who knows something In three years of accuracy testing I saw no evidence that this is a sound practice. Just like barrel break-in voodoo the data just does not exist. Does it hurt? Probably not. Please cite your testing that stabilizing the upper/extension joint has no benefit. What exact methods of stabilization have you tested? Please cite your testing that proves barrel breakin is voodoo. Thanks. I was VP of Quality at ArmaLite. We built and tested thousands of rifles for sub MOA accuracy. This includes goverment testing. We built them to print. Let's see your data. All you have is smoke and mirrors. LOL. So you never tested upper/extension stabilization nor did you test barrel breakin. Thanks. Actually, there are some well thought of smiths and barrel makers on the hide that have opined that break in is pretty much a non event with a decent barrel. There may or may not be some break in of the throat depending on how well the reamer cut and if it left marks but that this is avoidable if the smith is on his game. Some barrel makers actually said that break in process can do more harm than good in terms of barrel life and that just watching the performance of the barrel in terms of velocity and group size is a much better indicator than a cleaning process at X number of rounds. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 9:33:28 PM EDT
[#40]
FWIW, I think barrel break in is voodoo.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 9:36:51 PM EDT
[#41]
On a side note, what bedding compound could withstand the heat of being used on the extension?
I would guess that you would melt just about ever bedding compound I have seen used on bolt guns? LocTite is not a bedding compound. I don't see that being effective unless you are talking about using it on the threads for the barrel nut to be locked in place which may have utility. Marine Tex melts...seen it. Steel Bed? maybe... LRI has some stuff that they advised is used to repair commercial boilers...that would likely work but I have no idea what it is. I'm not saying it wouldn't help one way or another...but instead of bedding compound, couldn't you just use an adhesive and unitize the two parts completely? That seems like the most secure way if you were truly looking for a 100% solution? I have no idea what glue would work with the heat though. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 9:38:16 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
FWIW, I think barrel break in is voodoo. That was ArmaLite's position when I worked there. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 9:39:20 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
FWIW, I think barrel break in is voodoo. All precision rifle stuff is voodoo to me. I just shoot it and clean it and shake my head when I don't hear the ding after the shot...then blame it on my ear pro and call it a day. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 9:41:38 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
On a side note, what bedding compound could withstand the heat of being used on the extension? I would guess that you would melt just about ever bedding compound I have seen used on bolt guns? LocTite is not a bedding compound. I don't see that being effective unless you are talking about using it on the threads for the barrel nut to be locked in place which may have utility. Marine Tex melts...seen it. Steel Bed? maybe... LRI has some stuff that they advised is used to repair commercial boilers...that would likely work but I have no idea what it is. I'm not saying it wouldn't help one way or another...but instead of bedding compound, couldn't you just use an adhesive and unitize the two parts completely? That seems like the most secure way if you were truly looking for a 100% solution? I have no idea what glue would work with the heat though. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 9:42:10 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
On a side note, what bedding compound could withstand the heat of being used on the extension? I would guess that you would melt just about ever bedding compound I have seen used on bolt guns? LocTite is not a bedding compound. I don't see that being effective unless you are talking about using it on the threads for the barrel nut to be locked in place which may have utility. Marine Tex melts...seen it. Steel Bed? maybe... LRI has some stuff that they advised is used to repair commercial boilers...that would likely work but I have no idea what it is. I'm not saying it wouldn't help one way or another...but instead of bedding compound, couldn't you just use an adhesive and unitize the two parts completely? That seems like the most secure way if you were truly looking for a 100% solution? I have no idea what glue would work with the heat though. LOCTITE EA 9340? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 9:53:31 PM EDT
[#46]
I use Loctite 603.
I'm not too terribly concerned about it melting on the rifles I'm doing it to. They're not machine guns. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 10:37:50 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The Super SASS was, AR-10T...we tested for .mil and export. Facing and bedding did not make a statistically significant difference. However, if I was going to glue a barrel into a receiver, I would use JB weld. Quote HistoryQuoted:
The Super SASS was, AR-10T...we tested for .mil and export. Facing and bedding did not make a statistically significant difference. However, if I was going to glue a barrel into a receiver, I would use JB weld. The world is literally "filled" with much better epoxies than JB weld, not that I am recommending gluing the extension into the upper. Side note, did Armalite win the SASS contract? 
Quoted:
The other issue revolves around the test method itself...don't get me started on that... Well if it involves production grade barrels chambered in 7.62 shooting mil spec ammo then I would not be at all surprised the differences would be hard to discern. You do realize some shoot high grade barrels and can assemble very high quality ammo, right? Quoted:
FWIW, I think barrel break in is voodoo. I guess we all have our opinions.
I would agree that spending much time breaking in a production grade .308 Win barrel shooting M118LR is a waste. On the other hand if you want to run 140gr 6.5mm VLDs at 3300fps through an expensive handlapped barrel then an afternoon of shoot 5 and clean for the first 25 rounds is going to pay dividends. Barrel breakin is a pretty broad subject to simply say "voodoo" or at least that is my opinion.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 10:40:09 PM EDT
[#48]
I wouldn't say it's an opinion, in my case.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 10:46:36 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Actually, there are some well thought of smiths and barrel makers on the hide that have opined that break in is pretty much a non event with a decent barrel. There may or may not be some break in of the throat depending on how well the reamer cut and if it left marks but that this is avoidable if the smith is on his game. Some barrel makers actually said that break in process can do more harm than good in terms of barrel life and that just watching the performance of the barrel in terms of velocity and group size is a much better indicator than a cleaning process at X number of rounds. Kewl.
I have a slightly different opinion. Doing a proper breakin will do absolutely zero "harm" to a good barrel. Doing a crappy cleaning job will damage any barrel no matter whether it happens during a breakin or if the barrel has 2000 rnds through it. Barrels change as we shoot high velocity bullet through them. Understanding how to start the throat and in the AR port right and keep them right are what gives long barrel life.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2016 10:49:45 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The world is literally "filled" with much better epoxies than JB weld, not that I am recommending gluing the extension into the upper. Side note, did Armalite win the SASS contract?
Well if it involves production grade barrels chambered in 7.62 shooting mil spec ammo then I would not be at all surprised the differences would be hard to discern. You do realize some shoot high grade barrels and can assemble very high quality ammo, right? I guess we all have our opinions.
I would agree that spending much time breaking in a production grade .308 Win barrel shooting M118LR is a waste. On the other hand if you want to run 140gr 6.5mm VLDs at 3300fps through an expensive handlapped barrel then an afternoon of shoot 5 and clean for the first 25 rounds is going to pay dividends. Barrel breakin is a pretty broad subject to simply say "voodoo" or at least that is my opinion.
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The Super SASS was, AR-10T...we tested for .mil and export. Facing and bedding did not make a statistically significant difference. However, if I was going to glue a barrel into a receiver, I would use JB weld. The world is literally "filled" with much better epoxies than JB weld, not that I am recommending gluing the extension into the upper. Side note, did Armalite win the SASS contract?
Quoted:
The other issue revolves around the test method itself...don't get me started on that... Well if it involves production grade barrels chambered in 7.62 shooting mil spec ammo then I would not be at all surprised the differences would be hard to discern. You do realize some shoot high grade barrels and can assemble very high quality ammo, right? Quoted:
FWIW, I think barrel break in is voodoo. I guess we all have our opinions.
I would agree that spending much time breaking in a production grade .308 Win barrel shooting M118LR is a waste. On the other hand if you want to run 140gr 6.5mm VLDs at 3300fps through an expensive handlapped barrel then an afternoon of shoot 5 and clean for the first 25 rounds is going to pay dividends. Barrel breakin is a pretty broad subject to simply say "voodoo" or at least that is my opinion.
Yes...we won a few SASS contracts from other countries. If you read the report from the US GOV, we had the most accurate rifle, but not the facilities to meet the terms of the contract. |
|
|
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.
