View Full Version : Feeding issue, has this ever happened to you?
HansTheHobbit
03-27-16, 06:39
I recently noticed that my new AR feeds much more reliably than any I've ever owned. I can actually ride the bolt forward and it will still feed. I have no idea how this is possible. It has perfectly normal M4 feed ramps. It's a Wilson Combat barrel.
I thought maybe the feed ramps being polished had something to do with it, although they don't really look all that polished to me. There aren't any discernible tool marks, but they're not a mirror finish like some. To test that theory, I polished the feed ramps on one of my other ARs, which was a painstaking process. I think it did help some, but I'm still not getting anywhere near the level of smoothness that I do with the Wilson.
I also wanted to mention that I've already removed all other variables. I've tried all combinations of lower, buffer weight, rifle vs carbine spring, ammo, magazines, BCG, etc. None of these things changes the performance of either rifle. The Wilson, for whatever reason, simply feeds much more reliably, and a hell of a lot more smoothly. If anyone has experienced something similar, please let me know.
EVERY one of my ARs feeds/operates that smoothly. That's how they're supposed to work.
When things operate as they should, it's really not thread-worthy.
HansTheHobbit
03-27-16, 07:23
EVERY one of my ARs feeds/operates that smoothly. That's how they're supposed to work.
When things operate as they should, it's really not thread-worthy.
Before this, I've never owned an AR that would feed reliably if you rode the bolt forward, and I've had a few. They weren't off brands either.
Before this, I've never owned an AR that would feed reliably if you rode the bolt forward, and I've had a few. They weren't off brands either.
Were they brand new &/or relatively unfired?
I'm not sure under what context you would ever want to "ride the bolt home" but that is certainly, based on my experience and the experience of many others, a recipe for inducing a malfunction.
The AR is designed to use the force of the buffer spring under pressure then released after pulling the CH all the way back and letting it go, or hitting the bolt release, to strip a round out of the magazine and then chamber it securely.
Interrupting that cycle of operation is not a good idea.
556BlackRifle
03-27-16, 09:58
I'm not sure under what context you would ever want to "ride the bolt home" but that is certainly, based on my experience and the experience of many others, a recipe for inducing a malfunction.
The AR is designed to use the force of the buffer spring under pressure then released after pulling the CH all the way back and letting it go, or hitting the bolt release, to strip a round out of the magazine and then chamber it securely.
Interrupting that cycle of operation is not a good idea.
+1 To that! Just asking for trouble riding forward.
OP, does the problem rifle only have this problem when riding forward or does it also happen when properly cycled?
I think you guys are misinterpreting the OP. I don't think he's advocating riding the charging handle (at least I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt that's he's not); he's just commenting on how smooth his bolt chambers a round.
Yes, it's a nonissue when closing the bolt correctly, it's also a nonissue that the OPs operates smoothly.
HansTheHobbit
03-27-16, 14:31
I don't think you guys are getting what I'm saying. I can insert a fully loaded magazine, even a surefire 60 it seems, and slowly ride the bolt forward WITHOUT inducing a malfunction, whereas this would almost certainly induce a failure to feed with any other AR I've ever encountered. In other words, I can't make this thing jam even if I try. Considering that most ARs have a little trouble feeding from fully loaded magazines from the bolt catch, I would call this a pretty big improvement.
And, no, I don't ride the bolt forward as a habit. I was testing out a new magazine. I like to slowly chamber a round and watch just to make sure everything is kosher. Normally I have to nudge the bolt with the forward assist during that process, but to my surprise that wasn't needed with this rifle.
If I understand you correctly the only static variable - or components which do not change - are the upper receiver and the barrel/extension in the 'smooth' rifle?
To my surprise that wasn't needed with this rifle.
Congrats on your super-smooth and slick feeding AR.
Mysteryman
03-27-16, 16:42
I don't think you guys are getting what I'm saying. I can insert a fully loaded magazine, even a surefire 60 it seems, and slowly ride the bolt forward WITHOUT inducing a malfunction, whereas this would almost certainly induce a failure to feed with any other AR I've ever encountered. In other words, I can't make this thing jam even if I try. Considering that most ARs have a little trouble feeding from fully loaded magazines from the bolt catch, I would call this a pretty big improvement.
And, no, I don't ride the bolt forward as a habit. I was testing out a new magazine. I like to slowly chamber a round and watch just to make sure everything is kosher. Normally I have to nudge the bolt with the forward assist during that process, but to my surprise that wasn't needed with this rifle.
Why would you ever ride the bolt? That isn't how the rifle works when fired, so testing it(or a magazine) in that fashion is false economy. Insert the magazine in question, work the charge handle, shoot the sh*t out of the magazine to ensure it works. Obviously buying quality mags will go a long way to alleviating any concerns about their reliability.
MM
Just to repeat, as has been revealed in the OP's latest comments, he is simply marveling at how wonderfully his AR feeds ammo and how smoothly it does, to the point that he even can ride the bolt home and it will still feed reliably.
It's an Easter miracle!
:)
HansTheHobbit
03-27-16, 18:09
If I understand you correctly the only static variable - or components which do not change - are the upper receiver and the barrel/extension in the 'smooth' rifle?
I'm using different uppers, but the BCG, CH, and lower are the same, with the same results. I've also tried using a lower with an A2 stock with the same results across the board. Magazine and ammo are also the same.
Why would you ever ride the bolt? That isn't how the rifle works when fired, so testing it(or a magazine) in that fashion is false economy. Insert the magazine in question, work the charge handle, shoot the sh*t out of the magazine to ensure it works. Obviously buying quality mags will go a long way to alleviating any concerns about their reliability.
MM
Not all magazines work the same with all rifles. Things are better than they used to be in this regard, but you can still run into less than optimal combos. When I try a new brand of magazine (the new lancers in this case), I always closely inspect how the mag is feeding, like where the bolt hits the rear of the case, if the feed lips are making contact with the carrier, and where the bullet nose first makes contact with the feed ramp.
Just to repeat, as has been revealed in the OP's latest comments, he is simply marveling at how wonderfully his AR feeds ammo and how smoothly it does, to the point that he even can ride the bolt home and it will still feed reliably.
It's an Easter miracle!
:)
Yes! I'm not saying I ride the bolt when actually firing the rifle. But, there are lots of advantages to smooth feeding. First of all, reliability. The smoother it fees, the less likely it is to jam. That's just common sense. As already stated, there's also much less pronounced scoring of the bullet nose. We're talking light scratches as opposed to, well, everyone knows what a bullet nose looks like after it's been chambered in an AR. I have to imagine this can't hurt accuracy.
HansTheHobbit
03-28-16, 18:32
For anyone who's interested, I think I've figured it out. There are some key areas to polish if the barrel doesn't already come that way. The feed ramp itself is of very little importance. The areas that really need the most attention are the back corners of the lugs above the feed ramp itself. And certainly don't polish the feed ramps in the receiver, as the bullet doesn't come anywhere near them, or at least it shouldn't. If the bullet is making contact with the aluminium portion of the ramp, then the magazine isn't sitting in the right position. To do a good job, it is necessary to remove the barrel from the upper. And definitely don't use files or sandpaper, as some forums suggest. A felt polishing cone with some lightly abrasive jeweller’s rouge is completely adequate for the whole job. I don't see any reason not to follow that with Flitz, but I'm also dubious as to whether it's necessary. Smoothing the sharp corners on the lugs seems to be all that is really needed.
The areas that really need the most attention are the back corners of the lugs above the feed ramp itself.
A felt polishing cone with some lightly abrasive jeweller’s rouge is completely adequate for the whole job.
Thanks for the update.
Do you have a picture?
Do ARs have feeding problems that would require this kind of polishing and so forth? I dont' recall reading anything about this anywhere else.
For anyone who's interested, I think I've figured it out. There are some key areas to polish if the barrel doesn't already come that way. The feed ramp itself is of very little importance. The areas that really need the most attention are the back corners of the lugs above the feed ramp itself. And certainly don't polish the feed ramps in the receiver, as the bullet doesn't come anywhere near them, or at least it shouldn't. If the bullet is making contact with the aluminium portion of the ramp, then the magazine isn't sitting in the right position. To do a good job, it is necessary to remove the barrel from the upper. And definitely don't use files or sandpaper, as some forums suggest. A felt polishing cone with some lightly abrasive jeweller’s rouge is completely adequate for the whole job. I don't see any reason not to follow that with Flitz, but I'm also dubious as to whether it's necessary. Smoothing the sharp corners on the lugs seems to be all that is really needed.
It would have been more astute of me to ask if what were observing occurred before or after the bolt was within the extension. Your observation makes sense to me.
HansTheHobbit
03-28-16, 21:18
Do ARs have feeding problems that would require this kind of polishing and so forth? I dont' recall reading anything about this anywhere else.
No, not at all, at least not inherently. Certainly don't let this thread scare you away from buying one. In fact, the more I learn about the platform the more I love it. And improvements are being made all the time that are yielding more accuracy and reliability across the board. Little tweaks to the design of certain components, better lubricants, better coatings, cheaper precision barrels that just about anyone can afford...and the list goes on I'm sure. All guns can be improved upon; mostly it's just a matter of attention to detail, which is usually a function of how much money you're willing to spend. That doesn't mean there's anything wrong with the platform, though.
HansTheHobbit
03-28-16, 21:39
It would have been more astute of me to ask if what were observing occurred before or after the bolt was within the extension. Your observation makes sense to me.
The snag happens when the nose of the bullet goes through the constriction between the lugs in the barrel extension. There are two sharp corners in there, if they weren't polished out by the manufacturer, that snag the bullet, producing the typical scoring marks we're all used to. I'm sure the attention to detail during the machining process has a lot to do with how good or bad it is out of the box. Until those sharp bits get worn down, either through polishing or round count, it takes a lot of inertia to push the round past them. If it's really bad, then they'll even nick up the neck of the case. I never really attributed that to anything bad until I got this Wilson barrel and realized what a good precision barrel extension should be. No snag, no scoring, and no problem feeding the first round out of a fully loaded 60 round mag, which is pretty remarkable in my experience with those mags. To be honest, I'm not sure if Wilson actually polished them, or if the machine work is just superior to most barrels. Either way, it makes a world of difference.
I've inspected some of my ARs to see how they compare in this regard, and in general the more expensive the barrel the less scoring on the nose, with the exception of an Armalite national match, which I would have expected better from. The worst offender was a DTI barrel, and the middle ground was Faxon, which is the barrel I'm currently using to experiment with. I would place it in the realm of Colt, Spikes, FN, etc. in terms of the amount of scoring, so it seems to be a pretty good barrel, especially for the price. I chose it because it's inexpensive and seems to represent the middle ground; in other words if I can make it perform like a top quality barrel extension, then this mod would presumably be successful for almost any decent AR, or at least that was my reasoning. I'll tackle the DTI eventually, but it's going to take a lot more work for sure to get it where it needs to be, and I'm not sure how that much polishing will affect it. As for the Faxon, it needs a little more work in the hard to reach areas, but when it's done I think it will feed every bit as smoothly as the Wilson. I was actually talking to a guy on another forum, and he reports the same kind of performance from Black Hole Weaponry barrels, which leads me to believe that precision barrel makers seem to take a little extra care with the barrel extension. Like I said before, I'm sure the absence of scoring helps with accuracy. There's nothing worse than shelling out a buck a round for match ammo, then having it get the hell scratched out of it while chambering, which would explain why companies like Wilson and BHW are the ones taking the time to do it. In my opinion, though, it improves feeding reliability, so I think it's something that would be worthwhile for any AR, not just precision rifles.
Mysteryman
03-30-16, 16:39
I'm using different uppers, but the BCG, CH, and lower are the same, with the same results. I've also tried using a lower with an A2 stock with the same results across the board. Magazine and ammo are also the same.
Not all magazines work the same with all rifles. Things are better than they used to be in this regard, but you can still run into less than optimal combos. When I try a new brand of magazine (the new lancers in this case), I always closely inspect how the mag is feeding, like where the bolt hits the rear of the case, if the feed lips are making contact with the carrier, and where the bullet nose first makes contact with the feed ramp.
Why are you trying different mags? If a brand works then stick with it, like Pmags for instance. Regardless, any major reputable brand will or rather should work without issue provided your gun is a quality make and in spec. If it doesn't work under NORMAL FIRING conditions then bin it and move on. Attempting to diagnose or vet magazines by manually running the action at low velocity is a false sense of achievement. I know of no one professionally or otherwise who suggests, recommends or even mentions doing this. If you're concerned the mags you bought are not in spec then you bought junk.
Yes! I'm not saying I ride the bolt when actually firing the rifle. But, there are lots of advantages to smooth feeding. First of all, reliability. The smoother it fees, the less likely it is to jam. That's just common sense. As already stated, there's also much less pronounced scoring of the bullet nose. We're talking light scratches as opposed to, well, everyone knows what a bullet nose looks like after it's been chambered in an AR. I have to imagine this can't hurt accuracy.
In the orange.
MM
HansTheHobbit
03-30-16, 17:10
Why are you trying different mags?
Why does a bear crap in the woods? I bought some of the new AWMs to test out because I liked the old Lancer mags so much I thought I would see what the new ones were all about. Long story short, they're pretty nifty.:cool:
HansTheHobbit
03-30-16, 17:16
[QUOTE=bfoosh006;2294828]Interesting observation.... no I am curious about mine !
Thanks for sharing ![QUOTE]
I should have updated this yesterday. Last night, I did go ahead and polish the areas of the Faxon barrel around the lugs in question, and it did work. While it's not quite as smooth as the Wilson, I got 90% of the way to where I wanted it to be. I guess I'll have to let Wilson keep the other 10%, lol. With that said, I think the Faxon barrel will get even smoother as it breaks in, so after a few thousand rounds it will probably be as good as the getting gets in this case.
Anyways, if you do decide to do it, I can now give you more detailed information on exactly which areas to polish.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.