anyone willing to test a Bolt Carrier

[vicious_cb]

Would have been perfect for my 5.45 AR shooting corrosive ammo. Too bad I killed the barrel on it already.

[_Stormin_]

Sure, if the guy is looking for beta testers and asking them to put a few thousand rounds downrange using his BC, why not?

Always fun to watch new people around here... Sometimes the end result is apparent 19 posts in.

I'd be lying if I didn't say that the coating is more interesting to me than the BC, but that's because I have never had a carrier fail. I do have a few thousand rounds of 5.45 corrosive ammo left over and a fresh bolt and barrel. Could be interesting to see how the coated carrier holds up.

[elephant]

Right now I have around 60,000 rounds of M855 and another 20,000 rounds available to me. I am not willing to pay $1000 to anyone, but would be willing to donate 2-3,000 rounds to the few people that I chose to do some test trials. I'm not looking for just anyone. I'm investing a lot of money in this and time trying to bring something to the market.

This is kind of important to me that I get good or bad feed back, this bolt is to be used in conjunction with another component that is patent pending. I patented a "Riser Lifting Tool" a few years ago and it took several thousand dollars and almost 14 months to be awarded the patent. This might take longer because of what it is.

The "component" is a cushion unit that replaces the buffer and spring and is a self contained unit that is adjustable. The idea behind this invention was to be able to reduce felt recoil as well as reduce the forward momentum of the bolt as it slams against the barrel extension. This component is based on a larger design that our company came up with for use in hydraulic cylinders to keep the piston from slamming against the gland and blind end. The new buffer component would work similar to the conventional buffer/spring but would use spring/hydraulic force to minimize the felt recoil as well as limit the bolt's forward speed.

I don't really want to go into a lot of detail but I can give you an idea of what it is:
Attachment 50438




Basically the BCG would operate normally except this devise would slow the rate of speed at the last possible second reducing the felt recoil, similar to a shock absorber, the BCG would then chamber a new round normally but would slow its rate of speed at the last possible second minimizing the sound the bolt makes when it slams up against the barrel extension. This works by forcing hydraulic fluid through a adjustable port that slows the rate of speed. The adjustable port would be indexed to allow the shooter to adjust between 556 and 300blk. I think this would be a great addition to a suppressed weapon. And I feel strongly that this could reduce the felt recoil up to 30%

The reason for the HY-100 is because it is strong and I can remove a little more material than I could using carpenter steel- that why I said it was lighter. I could possibly get by removing as much as 10-15% more material thus having less mass. Less mass would mean the BCG would travel faster and this buffer component works better when the bolt is traveling faster.

But this test is to make sure the weapon cycles consistently and efficiently and I figured a couple thousand rounds would give enough data.

[GH41]

really?

I don't think that is unfair at all. Why should someone burn 2K rounds plus wear and tear to test a carrier for a guy who owns two planes? 2K rounds is nothing and the OP cannot control the test if Bubba in Georgia has the part. Elephant seems like a nice enough guy but I am not sure this idea isn't along the lines of reinventing sealing wax. It may be a good idea but how much demand is there for it. What the OP needs to do is pay someone who does this kind of testing for a living and is respected throughout the industry. If it shows promise with documented results that's when you start calling people like KAC. People that don't care what it cost within reason if it gives them an advantage over their competitors.

[ArtoftheGun]

I don't think that is unfair at all. Why should someone burn 2K rounds plus wear and tear to test a carrier for a guy who owns two planes? 2K rounds is nothing and the OP cannot control the test if Bubba in Georgia has the part. Elephant seems like a nice enough guy but I am not sure this idea isn't along the lines of reinventing sealing wax. It may be a good idea but how much demand is there for it. What the OP needs to do is pay someone who does this kind of testing for a living and is respected throughout the industry. If it shows promise with documented results that's when you start calling people like KAC. People that don't care what it cost within reason if it gives them an advantage over their competitors.

Thanks, precisely my point. As far as I'm concerned, the OP's product is a classic case of a solution in search of a problem.

[LockenLoad]

I don't think that is unfair at all. Why should someone burn 2K rounds plus wear and tear to test a carrier for a guy who owns two planes? 2K rounds is nothing and the OP cannot control the test if Bubba in Georgia has the part. Elephant seems like a nice enough guy but I am not sure this idea isn't along the lines of reinventing sealing wax. It may be a good idea but how much demand is there for it. What the OP needs to do is pay someone who does this kind of testing for a living and is respected throughout the industry. If it shows promise with documented results that's when you start calling people like KAC. People that don't care what it cost within reason if it gives them an advantage over their competitors.

he has been here a not even 2 weeks, what are his credentials had it come from someone else a bit more valid, as far as how many airplanes OP owns not aware of his personal life. The rest I agree with.

[ArtoftheGun]

I would be willing to donate 2-3,000 rounds to the few people that I chose to do some test trials. I'm not looking for just anyone. I'm investing a lot of money in this and time trying to bring something to the market.

Now that makes sense. I'm sure you'll have plenty of qualified RD consultants with that offer. Good luck on your venture. Sorry if I offended you and others. Seems an honest question to me. I'm still not convinced there is a need for a BC, but then again...who knows? Maybe!

[Ned Christiansen]

I concur that 5.45X39 can be a good way to "overtest" AR-ish things that are part of the gas stream / BCG due to its skankiness (the surplus stuff anyway).

[GrumpyM4]

In the OP you say HY100 and link to HY80.

I have worked extensively with both when employed at PSNS (DoD) on both subs and surface vessels.

Ohio class are not HY100 hulls, or any other structural component.

Corrosion resistance out of HY yield steels is greatly overstated. They are not CRES or stainless. HY steels are chosen for their toughness, ability to flex under pressure and they rust pretty easily all things considered. Also, for those who are curious, they are NOT armor rated steels by any stretch of the imagination (I know this wasn't stated, i'm just making this clear). I've had the opportunity to shoot several pieces of HY80 with a wide variety of ammunition and the results were less then impressive. 5.7mm out of a P90 burned through 3/8" plate %50 of the time at 25 yards. Most 5.56mm did not penetrate (M193 or M855) at any distance, but caused severe cratering and some deformation on the back plate. Multiple hits same location would eventually burn through. Anything .30 cal and above went through it like shit through a goose (furthest test distance was 200 meters).

Because of this, these materials exhibit more "springback" during forming and use then Ordinary Steels (OS). They also experience a fair amount of expansion/contraction during heating and cooling and require special treatment prior to welding on heavy sections (pre-heat for any and all hull components) or the base material will suffer micro-cracking. On sub-safe surfaces, this is a bad thing. Naval controls for working on these materials are pretty stringent, especially on the newer class subs for various reasons, most of which I cannot elaborate on. Having worked with multiple grades of HY, I'd rather work with 80 than 100 any day of the week. 60, not so much.

My biggest concern for HY carriers is the fact that HY comes pre-heat treated and tempered..... which is pretty soft all things considered (see the above regarding it's lack of armor plate qualities), which could be cause for concern regarding its impact resistance in applications such as being a bolt carrier. Were it to be heat treated and tempered (hardened to a more appropriate hardness for an application such as this), it would lose it's properties that make it HY80 or 100.

The fact that it has the yield strength it does comes not just from the alloy, but also from how it's processed (treat and temper). Having drilled on copious amounts of HY steel and having ATTEMPTED to drill a standard bolt carrier with the same type of drill bits out of sheer curiosity some years ago, I can definitively say that HY is much, much, much softer, yet has more inherent springback. Basically it's like a soft spring. Which may lead to more bolt bounce as well as deformation through constant impact.

I would be willing to test a carrier (I would attempt Parkerizing it as well), and you would get a very unbiased opinion that's backed up by prior experience with the material.




Regarding the above idea to slow the BCG prior to impact on the barrel extension, unless the buffer system is "attached" or locked to the BCG, it won't make a difference. It will only change how the buffer interacts with its force on the BCG, not the interaction between the BCG and extension.

Remember how a short stroke piston driven system works. The op-rod only pushes the BCG rearward for approx. 3/8" and the resultant energy transferred to the BCG is enough to carry it through the remainder of the rearward stroke of the cycle. When the buffer pushes the BCG forward, in theory it only needs to travel far enough to impart enough energy on the BCG to overcome stripping the next round, chambering, and locking the bolt into position. If you slow the buffer just before the BCG impacts, the buffer will slow, but the BCG already has that energy and will continue with the same force while the buffer slows.

Changing the amount of force imparted on the BCG by the buffer *may* have unexpected consequences in feeding or overcoming fouling.

[opngrnd]

Now that makes sense. I'm sure you'll have plenty of qualified RD consultants with that offer. Good luck on your venture. Sorry if I offended you and others. Seems an honest question to me. I'm still not convinced there is a need for a BC, but then again...who knows? Maybe!

I don't think there's any need at all for a new BC. What we will only learn by trying different things, so my interest is piqued.