Are these gas key screws properly staked?

[Iraqgunz]

So here's the bottom line. There are A LOT of AR companies and parts suppliers who know absolutely Jack and Shit about the AR platform. There are even more (CEO's, workers, etc...) who have never carried one in combat or used one for duty. They simply look at it as a vessel to make money and do not care about the overall performance.

Let's be a real for a minute. Mediocre companies (DPMS, Olympic Arms, Bushmaster, et al...) have all thrived for years. So when other companies start up they know they can get away with cutting corners. Lots of people like to use Colt and some others as punching bags, yet they cannot even meet THAT MOST BASIC STANDARD. People also need to realize that many companies do not make BCG's. They can't due to cost and to remain competitive. I know of one company that supplies BCG's to a few big names, and their stakings are laughable and in fact they don't even install extractor spring buffers and they think it's OK.

That shows a fundamental lack of understanding why it's needed and of the weapon itself. Across the board we see the same issues time and again with the Cost Cutters Armory- no H buffer, no receiver extension stakings, crappy carrier key stakings, lack of HP/MPI testing, etc.. etc..

Not everyone likes the basic Colt M4/6920 model, I get it. But, it is still a measurable standard to use as a baseline to build a carbine.

In short, once people decide to take the AR serious again, and remember what the original design and intent was for maybe we will see less of these substandard companies, although I doubt it.

[Straight Shooter]

Even if it's only a dime, it adds up.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

Actually, in the case of the 1911, I would think it is pretty substantial, not the cost of the parts themselves so much but the necessary labor to properly hand fit them by competent people. ARs don't have that issue.

Ok, so its a dime, dollar or twenty. Pass it on to the consumer, and advertise it as such. As in the 1911 example, it wasnt a problem for 70-80 years to fit those parts, why now? Also- still looking for a rough actual $$ figure, if possible. like, how much is a MIM 1911 hammer over steel? A MIM S&W hammer over steel? Is there a rough, or set figure or percentage that MIM is cheaper..like MIM is about 10% cheaper then a equal steel part, or 20% or whatever?

[Kdubya]

If they've already agreed to send you a replacement, why not go ahead and see if you can get them out? Clearly they are using a different method than we traditionally see. So, judging the quality of the job by comparing to the appearance of traditional staking is unlikely to be all that telling. In theory, the method they've selected could very well be effective. At the same time, I'm sure there is a way to mess it up. AFAIK there's at least one company (Young Mfg if IIRC) out there who doesn't do ANY staking. Yet, they too use a different approach. And, by most accounts, their method works. Both on paper and in practice.

In the age of the Internet, the whole "does this staking look right" craze has gone wayyyy too far. It's not to say that improper staking never happens. Saw a thread recently where someone's BCM was bleeding gas like crazy at the key. But seeing a couple of pictures every now and then does not make everyone an expert. Case in point, we've got seven pages of mostly negative assertions over of a method that very few probably have any experience with. Count me as one of those people.

So, give it a spin and see if they'll come out...

[GrumpyM4]

Staking on the carrier key exists for a reason.

Some engineer didn't just get kicked in the balls by the good idea fairy one day and add this process to the manufacturing and maintenance standards on a whim.

[26 Inf]

Ok, so its a dime, dollar or twenty. Pass it on to the consumer, and advertise it as such. As in the 1911 example, it wasnt a problem for 70-80 years to fit those parts, why now?

Straight talk. Seventy or eighty years ago it was cost effective to hand fit. They had folks that were skilled enough AND WILLING to be trained in the piece work process. Designs represented that mindset. In a world of MIM, investment casting, injection molded plastics, and CNC milling machines, would John Browning has designed his pistol the way he did? Modern machining can go to tolerances that were undreamed of in mass production 70 or 80 years ago, much less 100.

It is my view that even into the late 70's and early 80's the production lines at Remington, Smith and Wesson, Colt and Ruger, were staffed by workers who considered themselves craftsmen and had a great deal of loyalty to the company. They entered the workforce at those companies intent on a career with the company. That is changed.

Also- still looking for a rough actual $$ figure, if possible. like, how much is a MIM 1911 hammer over steel? A MIM S&W hammer over steel? Is there a rough, or set figure or percentage that MIM is cheaper..like MIM is about 10% cheaper then a equal steel part, or 20% or whatever?

IDK the answer to that, it depends are part complexity and numbers produced. This info sheet does a pretty good job of explaining differences.

https://www.dynacast.com/blog-mim-vs-machining

Medium to high volumes of 10,000 to 2,000,000 parts annually are typically needed in order to be able to amortize costs associated with tooling and start-up engineering. The best economic advantages are achieved at the highest quantities, due to the benefits of larger material purchases, multi-cavity tooling, and dedicated production units.

http://mimaweb.org/Genl_guidelines.htm

[Straight Shooter]

IDK the answer to that, it depends are part complexity and numbers produced. This info sheet does a pretty good job of explaining differences.

https://www.dynacast.com/blog-mim-vs-machining

Medium to high volumes of 10,000 to 2,000,000 parts annually are typically needed in order to be able to amortize costs associated with tooling and start-up engineering. The best economic advantages are achieved at the highest quantities, due to the benefits of larger material purchases, multi-cavity tooling, and dedicated production units.

http://mimaweb.org/Genl_guidelines.htm

I truly appreciate that info 26 Inf....thank you sir. I agree 100% with the first part, too.

[pinzgauer]

The staking is garbage. Additionally, those fasteners are of inferior quality, most certainly not grade 8 USA fasteners.

Hmm, there is not really any such thing as a grade 8 socket head. The correct spec is an ASTM one.

No butthurt here, I assure you. I do have a question for any & all: WHY...WHAT BENEFIT is this over the tried, true & proven way its been done for decades? What about it is SO GOOD they re-invented the wheel, so to speak? Cannot see an advantage of it, even IF it is done "correctly". Any ideas?

No but hurt implied. Ruger clearly screwed up, but there are legit reasons to change the staking approach. I'm told it's more consistent (when done right) and allows more contact with the screw head. Also deforms the gas key less.

Nothing to do with Ruger, but I'd recommend reading this thread about the new machine staking some mfgs are going to. And in particular, post #26 where someone with 1st hand experience removing gas keys from BCG's using the machine staking indicates it actually requires a much greater force to remove the screws as the staking contacts more metal.

As mentioned before, I'd probably prefer traditional staking as advocated (rightfully) by IG, etc. But also believe too much of a good thing can be a problem, and many are overstaking their BCG's. Out of spec regarding vertical displacement. Can distort the gas key. Can break MIM keys, etc. (And that's another big emotional fight)

I predict a market for artesian, hand staked, seasoned BCG's.

Will be curious to see what the staking looks like on the replacement BCG from Ruger. From the pics, it appears their machine was not setup correctly or the gas key itself was possibly out of spec. (too narrow at one end?)

[26 Inf]

I truly appreciate that info 26 Inf....thank you sir. I agree 100% with the first part, too.

Thank you for the response. I learn a lot on here, often from others who have a question or observation that encourages me to read a little more.

[JC5188]

Ok, so its a dime, dollar or twenty. Pass it on to the consumer, and advertise it as such. As in the 1911 example, it wasnt a problem for 70-80 years to fit those parts, why now? Also- still looking for a rough actual $$ figure, if possible. like, how much is a MIM 1911 hammer over steel? A MIM S&W hammer over steel? Is there a rough, or set figure or percentage that MIM is cheaper..like MIM is about 10% cheaper then a equal steel part, or 20% or whatever?

I don't know a percentage, but anytime you can get a part in its final shape using a REPEATABLE process that is 98% the equal of the barstock? You are going to go from bespoke (Wilson, les, mars, etc) special guns to mass produced, serviceable, guns for the masses. Oh and money...you'll make more money. On guns that cost less to produce.

As long as the process is controlled and the Mim specs are up to the task...you're good.






"I've just got like, this 5.56 okay? And it's 55 grain ball. And everybody I've ever seen shot with it, it dicks them up."

---Clint Smith
Thunder Ranch

[Straight Shooter]

Thank you for the response. I learn a lot on here, often from others who have a question or observation that encourages me to read a little more.

As do I, sir!

I don't know a percentage, but anytime you can get a part in its final shape using a REPEATABLE process that is 98% the equal of the barstock? You are going to go from bespoke (Wilson, les, mars, etc) special guns to mass produced, serviceable, guns for the masses. Oh and money...you'll make more money. On guns that cost less to produce.

As long as the process is controlled and the Mim specs are up to the task...you're good.

Roger that & agreed.





"I've just got like, this 5.56 okay? And it's 55 grain ball. And everybody I've ever seen shot with it, it dicks them up."

---Clint Smith
Thunder Ranch