View Full Version : BCG Manufacturers
Whenever I do research on BCG's there are (2) manufacturing names that come up most of the time; FN and Toolcraft. Are these the ONLY manufacturers of BCG's, or, are there some that just don't want to be recognized? One of my PSA Premium BCG's carrier has an "F" stamped on it. I was told this was for FN.
I do know that some AR companies (Ruger is one) make their own in house BCG's, but, most get their BCG from somewhere else. Any input on this is greatly appreciated.
cougar_guy04
09-17-16, 11:58
Microbest is another big player in the BCG game. There's also AO Precision in FL.
slowlowmiata
09-17-16, 12:32
I was told there was only like 6 manufacturers of forged recievers. I'd assume bolts and many of the other small bits are the same way
this signature exceeds the 15 character capacity count
wildcard600
09-17-16, 12:42
Whenever I do research on BCG's there are (2) manufacturing names that come up most of the time; FN and Toolcraft. Are these the ONLY manufacturers of BCG's, or, are there some that just don't want to be recognized? One of my PSA Premium BCG's carrier has an "F" stamped on it. I was told this was for FN.
I do know that some AR companies (Ruger is one) make their own in house BCG's, but, most get their BCG from somewhere else. Any input on this is greatly appreciated.
I guess I would question why it matters ? You should only be caring about who is actually selling the BCG. I wouldn't personally care if it was revealed tomorrow that the same company was making BCM, ATI and Bushmaster's BCG's. The requested specs and QC of the end company are what matters.
BufordTJustice
09-17-16, 13:46
BCG sources will manufacture to a spec and a price point. Just like aluminum forges and barrel makers. So, a cheap PSA barrel made by FNH is not going to be the same as a more expensive FNH barrel made for the likes of Rainier Arms.
A company may instruct the manufacturer to skip any number of non-critical finishing our QC related steps in order to meet a price point. Skip enough, and the manufacturer may prohibit a company from even disclosing that they are the source of the barrels.
BCG sources will manufacture to a spec and a price point. Just like aluminum forges and barrel makers. So, a cheap PSA barrel made by FNH is not going to be the same as a more expensive FNH barrel made for the likes of Rainier Arms.
A company may instruct the manufacturer to skip any number of non-critical finishing our QC related steps in order to meet a price point. Skip enough, and the manufacturer may prohibit a company from even disclosing that they are the source of the barrels.
^^^what Buford T. Said
I think this is what the general public does not understand about almost EVERY product they buy.
I'm a manufacturing manager. My employer is the largest in the world for what we do. We don't sell our products direct (unless you know somebody), and we do sell re-branded product. We will also purchase tooling based on a customer design/spec and run it off our machinery as their product. Because it is. There is no reason to worry about "not being recognized", because it's the customer's product. They have essentially designed and spec'd a product, and rented machinery and labor from us to produce it.
Same for gun parts, most watches (even brands you wouldn't expect), etc.
Just because something is manufactured by a certain company, is not a reason to assume it is equal to other stuff made by them. It's only a guarantee its to a certain (usually unknown to the end purchaser) spec.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Nope there are many.
-lmt
-young mfg
-dpms
-cmt
-lwrc
-microbest
-toolcraft
-some company thats called lewis machine but isnt lmt
-lparts inc or something
-and more i'm forgetting
I guess I would question why it matters ? You should only be caring about who is actually selling the BCG. I wouldn't personally care if it was revealed tomorrow that the same company was making BCM, ATI and Bushmaster's BCG's. The requested specs and QC of the end company are what matters.
Because, I am curious. :)
Because, I am curious. :)
Same here. I'm following simply because I like knowing things.
Johnson184
09-17-16, 22:01
Pretty sure KAC makes their own.
Not everyone that's been listed actually makes their own bolts. Carriers is another story.
justin_247
09-18-16, 16:08
I was told there was only like 6 manufacturers of forged recievers. I'd assume bolts and many of the other small bits are the same way
I wish this myth would go away. It's a leftover from the years of "an AR is an AR... they're all made with parts from just a few manufacturers, so choose whichever is cheapest!" Rubbish.
slowlowmiata
09-18-16, 16:09
I wish this myth would go away. It's a leftover from the years of "an AR is an AR... they're all made with parts from just a few manufacturers, so choose whichever is cheapest!" Rubbish.
Do you have a list of manufacturers? Not counting the billet and extremely small guys
this signature exceeds the 15 character capacity count
thespyhunter
09-18-16, 19:41
Nope there are many.
-lmt
-young mfg
-dpms
-cmt
-lwrc
-microbest
-toolcraft
-some company thats called lewis machine but isnt lmt
-lparts inc or something
-and more i'm forgetting
Advance Ordnance is another
A very good friend of mine, whom is a gunsmith, built an AR-15 and used a VDI BCG in it, just like this one;
http://www.voodooinnovations.com/vdi-lifecoat-low-mass-bolt-carrier-group
Is there a BCG built better than this one?
A very good friend of mine, whom is a gunsmith, built an AR-15 and used a VDI BCG in it, just like this one;
http://www.voodooinnovations.com/vdi-lifecoat-low-mass-bolt-carrier-group
Is there a BCG built better than this one?Define "better" and in relation to what.
Some folks report cycling issues with low mass BCGs.
@AR-556
not whom, but who.
Also, I would use a Colt M16 BCG or something similar. As the previous poster suggested, defining "better" can get interesting.
take care.
A very good friend of mine, whom is a gunsmith, built an AR-15 and used a VDI BCG in it, just like this one;
http://www.voodooinnovations.com/vdi-lifecoat-low-mass-bolt-carrier-group
Is there a BCG built better than this one?
Depends on what you are wanting to do. That is a low mass BCG and would not be a good choice for a say a duty gun.
C4
Define "better" and in relation to what.
Feel like a broken record. "Better" is a meaningless word without the measuring stick that is a requirement.
I can ask what's better between a 12.5" SBR and a 24" HBAR and the answer is different depending on whether I want to do room clearing or pick of prairie dogs at distance.....
I was told there was only like 6 manufacturers of forged recievers. I'd assume bolts and many of the other small bits are the same way
I think there are only about 6 companies who produce raw forgings of receivers. However, there are probably about 10 times as many who purchase those forgings and machine them, and they are manufacturers.
That type of restriction on the supply chain does not exist with bolts, bolt carrier groups, and other small AR parts.
Joe Mamma
I think there are only about 6 companies who produce raw forgings of receivers. However, there are probably about 10 times as many who purchase those forgings and machine them, and they are manufacturers.
That type of restriction on the supply chain does not exist with bolts, bolt carrier groups, and other small AR parts.
Joe Mamma
Yeah I think forging aluminum like that is pretty capital intensive. Presents a big barrier to market entry....
BCG sources will manufacture to a spec and a price point. Just like aluminum forges and barrel makers. So, a cheap PSA barrel made by FNH is not going to be the same as a more expensive FNH barrel made for the likes of Rainier Arms.
A company may instruct the manufacturer to skip any number of non-critical finishing our QC related steps in order to meet a price point. Skip enough, and the manufacturer may prohibit a company from even disclosing that they are the source of the barrels.
This is correct.
People just don't get it though. I have a buddy that built a rifle from PSA parts including their barrel that is made by FN. He thinks that his barrel is on par with my LaRue Tactical Stealth barrel. Whether or not the PSA premium FN barrel is nice is not the point. They are I'm sure an excellent choice, however it's brutally obvious that the finish and QC is is on a much higher level on the Larue. Then shoot them side by side and it really becomes obvious which is the clear winner.
Feel like a broken record. "Better" is a meaningless word without the measuring stick that is a requirement.
I can ask what's better between a 12.5" SBR and a 24" HBAR and the answer is different depending on whether I want to do room clearing or pick of prairie dogs at distance.....Yep. Which is why asked the fellow asking the question to define his terms and contexts...
wildcard600
09-19-16, 17:00
Just get the lightest carrier possible as lighter=moar bettererer.
Jim Sullivan advocates as much reciprocating mass as possible, but what does he know about the AR system really ? :rolleyes:
This is correct.
People just don't get it though. I have a buddy that built a rifle from PSA parts including their barrel that is made by FN. He thinks that his barrel is on par with my LaRue Tactical Stealth barrel. Whether or not the PSA premium FN barrel is nice is not the point. They are I'm sure an excellent choice, however it's brutally obvious that the finish and QC is is on a much higher level on the Larue. Then shoot them side by side and it really becomes obvious which is the clear winner.
You are crazy if you think FN somehow FN has a shitty switch on the machines that make barrels. I agree on the QC and detailing statement though. The premium barrel may get hand lapped and the bargain barrel not at all. In the end you get what you pay for. Unfortunately most of what you are paying for is brand marketing. Do you really think that FN has a shop foreman telling the crew.. OK guys. Change the button and put your machines on the crap setting. We are running PSA barrels today. I doubt it.
Define "better" and in relation to what.
Some folks report cycling issues with low mass BCGs.
Better, meaning, the gas key incorporated into the carrier. In other words, no separate gas key and gas key bolts for the key to loosen up and/or leak.
Yep. Which is why asked the fellow asking the question to define his terms and contexts...
just so I'm clear I was agreeing with you 100%. just was adding my thoughts.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
just so I'm clear I was agreeing with you 100%. just was adding my thoughts.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using TapatalkCopy that. ;)
Better, meaning, the gas key incorporated into the carrier. In other words, no separate gas key and gas key bolts for the key to loosen up and/or leak.Can you quantify the benefit? Say, against increased cost versus likelihood (or not) of failure averted? How about trade offs -- or unintended consequences -- to changing a proven design?
One thing I think is better is a seller that provides the specs for the BCG they're pushing, which I couldn't find in the link provided.
Not sure about carriers but Rock Island (as in the U.S. gubment Rock Island) makes/made bolts for the M16, among other small parts. Not sure they were ever put into factory new Colt/Hydramatic/FN weapons but perhaps used for arsenal rebuilds (?).
Can you quantify the benefit? Say, against increased cost versus likelihood (or not) of failure averted? How about trade offs -- or unintended consequences -- to changing a proven design
always have to keep that in mind. assuming that you know better than the people who came before you is a dangerous game.
the two piece design could have been due to manufacturing limitations, for cost reasons, or to be able to replace just the key and not the entire carrier if there's a problem.
and that ultimately is the problem with a lot of ideas that intend to improve the design is the people with the ideas have no idea why the original design decisions were made. small changes to the system in that light can have far reaching consequences.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
Until you get a primer lodged in the carrier key, or something other object and it doesn't come out. Or Pvt. Snuffy drops the carrier and dings the carrier key lip.
Better, meaning, the gas key incorporated into the carrier. In other words, no separate gas key and gas key bolts for the key to loosen up and/or leak.
Until you get a primer lodged in the carrier key, or something other object and it doesn't come out. Or Pvt. Snuffy drops the carrier and dings the carrier key lip.
Yeah, you've got a point there.
We all know a Pvt Snuffy that can break an anvil. An AR BCG is just a walk in the park. It's been said, you get what you pay for.
You are crazy if you think FN somehow FN has a shitty switch on the machines that make barrels. I agree on the QC and detailing statement though. The premium barrel may get hand lapped and the bargain barrel not at all. In the end you get what you pay for. Unfortunately most of what you are paying for is brand marketing. Do you really think that FN has a shop foreman telling the crew.. OK guys. Change the button and put your machines on the crap setting. We are running PSA barrels today. I doubt it.
100% correct. Seen it from ingots to final product. People don't even begin to comprehend the drastically added costs if it was done that way, not even close enough to cover the price difference from brand X to brand Y. If you look/dig hard enough you will even find statements from 'Tier 1' assemblers stating, "we use box stock bolts from CMT" etc. Machining is an expensive time consuming process to say the least, companies wouldn't last long at all if they operated in the example given above.
You are crazy if you think FN somehow FN has a shitty switch on the machines that make barrels. I agree on the QC and detailing statement though. The premium barrel may get hand lapped and the bargain barrel not at all. In the end you get what you pay for. Unfortunately most of what you are paying for is brand marketing. Do you really think that FN has a shop foreman telling the crew.. OK guys. Change the button and put your machines on the crap setting. We are running PSA barrels today. I doubt it.
Then why would anyone ever buy anything but the cheap FN barrels from PSA? I would venture to say that there are additional steps that are taken and may even be an entirely different process when producing their barrels for the top tier companies. Better quality checks, better finishing. The PSA barrels probably get the bare bones treatment and are shipped off. While the others are finished to a higher quality level. Lots of manufacturers produce products for different companies to sell at different levels of quality. Just because FN is producing barrels for PSA to sell cheap doesn't mean those are the same barrels coming off the same line as the higher quality examples. I could sit here and list hundreds of companies that produce products at different quality levels for a different tier of end user. Otherwise people would be stupid to buy anything but the $150 FN barrel from PSA.
Then why would anyone ever buy anything but the cheap FN barrels from PSA? I would venture to say that there are additional steps that are taken and may even be an entirely different process when producing their barrels for the top tier companies. Better quality checks, better finishing. The PSA barrels probably get the bare bones treatment and are shipped off. While the others are finished to a higher quality level. Lots of manufacturers produce products for different companies to sell at different levels of quality. Just because FN is producing barrels for PSA to sell cheap doesn't mean those are the same barrels coming off the same line as the higher quality examples. I could sit here and list hundreds of companies that produce products at different quality levels for a different tier of end user. Otherwise people would be stupid to buy anything but the $150 FN barrel from PSA.
Did you even read my post before quoting it?
100% correct. Seen it from ingots to final product. People don't even begin to comprehend the drastically added costs if it was done that way, not even close enough to cover the price difference from brand X to brand Y. If you look/dig hard enough you will even find statements from 'Tier 1' assemblers stating, "we use box stock bolts from CMT" etc. Machining is an expensive time consuming process to say the least, companies wouldn't last long at all if they operated in the example given above.
CMT has been making bolts (maybe the carriers too?) for the military for decades. The now defunct/newly revived Stag was the commercial side of CMT, and if you read the specs you could see where things like batch MPI/HPT was done on the Stag side. CMT is pretty solid though. Not too awfully long after Sandy Hook, like when stuff actually started to become available again, I bought four complete CMT BCG's from BCM for $130 each. They met "The Specs". I only have one left.
Did you even read my post before quoting it?
Absolutely I did. Not at all trying to spit back and forth. Just making a statement that there is a very strong possibility that there are 2, or even more, different assembly lines that FN uses to make 2 different levels of quality barrels. Not necessarily like you said in that the foreman stops the line and starts making the shitty barrels for PSA, but many manufacturers have completely different lines that have completely different equipment that makes completely different products.
milsurpman
09-21-16, 06:02
Actually Fn does have 2 manufacturing methods for their barrels, its well known. Cut rifle barrels for mil contracts m16types and the Hammer forged. I would not ever put any fn barrel as bad. I have both and they shoot.
This is correct.
People just don't get it though. I have a buddy that built a rifle from PSA parts including their barrel that is made by FN. He thinks that his barrel is on par with my LaRue Tactical Stealth barrel. Whether or not the PSA premium FN barrel is nice is not the point. They are I'm sure an excellent choice, however it's brutally obvious that the finish and QC is is on a much higher level on the Larue. Then shoot them side by side and it really becomes obvious which is the clear winner.
I understand the argument, but you are comparing a 4150 CMV barrel to a custom stainless profile. This isn't even comparing apples to oranges, this like comparing a golden retriever to humpback whale.
Now, could could consider comparing a PSA Premium FN barrel to a Rainier Arms or Spikes FN contract barrel. Based upon my experience, the differences are trivial, and one might prefer one to the other based upon finish ect. I like the heavy parkerized finish on my PSA premium FN barrels, and the target crown, which is absent on a Spikes FN barrel I just handled at my local gun shop. Some people may like Spikes shiny smoother finish. To each their own. Is one better? Some will just assume the barrel that costs $50 is better. Go figure.
Then again, Daniel Defense once supplied barrels for Rainier Arms. These were great buys, though the factory DD chambers were slightly more refined, most noticeably in regard to the machining between the feed ramps. It took about 1000 rounds before my brass was no longer gouged during extraction from the chamber, though I never experienced this with DD factor barrels. I could see why someone might choose to may a $50 premium for a factory DD barrel over the Rainier example.
I would find it safe to assume that establishments like Rainier and PSA receive overrun barrels contracted to other higher tier manufacturers, at a discounted price. This may explain the perpetually fluctuating supply and and small changes in characteristics of identically described barrels (such as PSA's "Premium" FN barrels).
I also read that Noveski CMV barrels come from FN… and are manufactured to Noveski specs. Are you going to compare a Noveski barrel to a PSA Premium? I guess you could, it would be like comparing a Camaro to a Corvette, same manufacturer. They both kick ass. One costs twice as much as the other. It is your wallet.
...I also read that Noveski CMV barrels come from FN… and are manufactured to Noveski specs. Are you going to compare a Noveski barrel to a PSA Premium? I guess you could, it would be like comparing a Camaro to a Corvette, same manufacturer. They both kick ass. One costs twice as much as the other. It is your wallet.Except one kicks considerably more ass than the other, and if your intended use requires that capability profile, it's money well spent.
KeithTexas
09-25-16, 11:38
Except one kicks considerably more ass than the other, and if your intended use requires that capability profile, it's money well spent.
Help me understand where it is important to "kick considerably more ass" in a non-.mil environment.
Help me understand where it is important to "kick considerably more ass" in a non-.mil environment.Elite competitors, professional trainers, folks who prefer to cry once...
Elite competitors, professional trainers, folks who prefer to cry once...
yawn..........
yawn..........Brilliance.
SeriousStudent
09-26-16, 20:28
Dial back the bickering now.
KeithTexas
09-26-16, 20:45
Elite competitors, professional trainers, folks who prefer to cry once...
Absolutely valid and fair. I appreciate the distinction.
I would like and eventually likely will buy Noveske, KAC, LWRC, et. al.
Currently, I'm at 9 rifles and 3 red dot sights.
I'm working on build #10 and am in the market for a quality 1x6 optic like Nightforce, ACOG, Kahles, Steiner, or Vortex Razor.
When I reach a 'comfortable number' of guns and optics (12 rifles maybe? - I dunno), then I will probably consider spending $2K+ on one rifle.
I could have afforded Tier 1, I have just preferred to acquire/collect more second tier guns over the last few years like Colt, PSA CHF, DD, FN, BCM.
Plus significant ammo stock-age which has pulled from the budget as well.
All the best to everybody and their individual priorities.
Brilliance.
No, indifference.
There are conflicting views in regard to what makes a weapon system "kick more ass."
Some folks think a weapon system kicks ass if the price tag is high, the configuration/parts are the flavor of the week, and a sponsored shooter or instructor rocks it in a controlled environment.
Some folks think a weapon kicks ass if It can reliably engage the enemy, while bringing the shooter home in one piece, from a dynamic, uncontrolled and unforgiving environment.
Funny how so many folks who fit the second category gravitate to "second tier" firearm manufacturers such as Colt of FN?
To each their own.
Cheers.
NWcityguy2
09-27-16, 03:28
It was your fault for asking a question that can be answered by generalities and sterotypes, saw it coming from a mile away.
Whenever I do research on BCG's there are (2) manufacturing names that come up most of the time; FN and Toolcraft. Are these the ONLY manufacturers of BCG's, or, are there some that just don't want to be recognized? One of my PSA Premium BCG's carrier has an "F" stamped on it. I was told this was for FN.
I do know that some AR companies (Ruger is one) make their own in house BCG's, but, most get their BCG from somewhere else. Any input on this is greatly appreciated.
Azimuth produces BCG's from the ground, up. This includes boring, machining, torquing the gas-key screws, and staking them. I have owned multiple BCG's from them, and they have some of the cleanest machine work around.
No, indifference.
There are conflicting views in regard to what makes a weapon system "kick more ass."
Some folks think a weapon system kicks ass if the price tag is high, the configuration/parts are the flavor of the week, and a sponsored shooter or instructor rocks it in a controlled environment.
Some folks think a weapon kicks ass if It can reliably engage the enemy, while bringing the shooter home in one piece, from a dynamic, uncontrolled and unforgiving environment.
Funny how so many folks who fit the second category gravitate to "second tier" firearm manufacturers such as Colt of FN?
To each their own.
Cheers.Of course there are conflicting views regarding what makes a weapon system "kick more ass" -- that's always the result of subjective and conflicting priorities.
But the categorical distinctions you draw are arbitrary, perception rather than quantification based, and -- most importantly -- not mutually exclusive.
As an aside, this is the first I've encountered Colt referred to as "second tier" (not in my book), as well as first I've heard them given equal footing with FN vis-a-vis the AR platform (doesn't seem supported by assessments and reviews).
But the point was that in your Chevrolet analogy you seemed to be saying that since both the Camaro and the Corvette are made by the same company and kick ass, the only meaningful difference between them is cost; my point was that if the Camaro fulfills the user's need, then sure, but it won't perform to the level of the Corvette, and if the user's need either requires or can make use of the 'Vette's superior capabilities, then no, price isn't the only difference between purchasing one over the other.
It was your fault for asking a question that can be answered by generalities and sterotypes, saw it coming from a mile away.
No kidding! I believe that most folks spend more time on Internet forums talking about guns, than tangibly building and shooting them. My aptitide for Internet discussions is inferior these types, as is my ability to play Call of Duty. I thought my analogy of comparing a Camaro to Corvette was cute. Maybe I should have compared a Ford Raptor to a Mustang Cobra.. Yes, that would have been epic.... Cheers!
SeriousStudent
09-27-16, 19:07
When people are told to stop bickering, it means stop bickering. That is as clear as I can make it.
Multiple warnings in the thread means people and thread go bye-bye.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.