View Full Version : Compensators affecting bolt/barrel life?
I was having a conversation with my local gunsmith who had worked as an Army armorer, and he made the claim that a compensator can affect your barrel or bolt life over time because it creates a vertical force on your barrel as the bolt is unlocking and cycling, and that creates uneven stresses on the bolt from the top lugs to the bottom lugs.
I vaguely remember that there was a report where heavily pulling on a vertical foregrip affects bolt life for the same reason, that it causes a bending force on the barrel that ends up putting more pressure on some bolt lugs than others.
Am I misremembering this? Is there any veracity to these claims?
Waiting for Lysander to weigh in.
Inkslinger
06-11-22, 20:51
I’m probably way off base, but that sounds far fetched. Vertical force as in comps designed to reduce muzzle rise? What about comps that vent to the sides? What about ones like Noveskes pig that direct the gas forward? Heck, the A2 even vents on the top.
I'm not an expert here, but let me say that sounds really farfetched. The barrel extension is much beefier than the muzzle, and it's further supported by the receiver. I don't see much flex happening there. Furthermore, all barrels whip when fired, comp or no comp. I guess if it were the case, you'd see increased wear on the upper and lower lugs maybe? Also, doesn't the BCG essentially float in the upper and wouldn't that mean that it would move to align with the extension?
Yeah, it's called wear, discharging the gun creates wear as well. . Did he used to be a range officer?
He may be correct but at what point does it become significant?
Yeah, it's called wear, discharging the gun creates wear as well. . Did he used to be a range officer?
He may be correct but at what point does it become significant?
Army mostly doesn’t use Range Officers in the same context as LE. An Armorer would see broken guns but might not have the contextual education to know much about this subject.
In high-speed, some comps create notable downward barrel flex, but I have no idea if that adds up to anything.
Inkslinger
06-14-22, 09:41
If this is true, I would think there would be noticeable wear on specific bolt lungs and their corresponding points inside the barrel extension.
I’m probably way off base, but that sounds far fetched. Vertical force as in comps designed to reduce muzzle rise? What about comps that vent to the sides? What about ones like Noveskes pig that direct the gas forward? Heck, the A2 even vents on the top.
This was a big thing with orkan who used to post here. He was a big proponent of brakes that only vented sideways and didn't push the barrel downward. The A2 cage's compensation seems negligible to me. I definitely wouldn't use any device that comp'd the barrel down on any type of rifle... bolt or gas.
For any chance of this I’d think the gun would need to held firmly in a rest or something. Otherwise I think the person holding it is going to absorb and soften some of that down force.
Overall it seems pretty out there. Certainly no premature wear.
Sounds like total bunk. How would you even be able to prove such a thing? Trying to account for every variable would be extremely hard.
Sounds like total bunk. How would you even be able to prove such a thing? Trying to account for every variable would be extremely hard.
If you had an aggressive comp, you could probably see uneven galling on the barrel extension over many rounds... Assuming the theory has any truth to it.
If you had an aggressive comp, you could probably see uneven galling on the barrel extension over many rounds... Assuming the theory has any truth to it.
Something as simple as not holding the rifle in the exact same way every time could affect how the comp works. On top of that, variations in ammo, bolt heat/extension treatment, materials could affect how those parts wear together irrespective of what the comp does. A cause and effect relationship would be difficult...was it the comp? the bolt? the extension, the shooter? none of that...something else?
Something as simple as not holding the rifle in the exact same way every time could affect how the comp works. On top of that, variations in ammo, bolt heat/extension treatment, materials could affect how those parts wear together irrespective of what the comp does. A cause and effect relationship would be difficult...was it the comp? the bolt? the extension, the shooter? none of that...something else?
Partly agree. I'd say with a FF handguard though.. holding the rifle wouldn't matter as much. But with American mediocrity in design and production in every component in the equation, it would be hard to say with certainty that the comp was guilty.
I was having a conversation with my local gunsmith who had worked as an Army armorer, and he made the claim that a compensator can affect your barrel or bolt life over time because it creates a vertical force on your barrel as the bolt is unlocking and cycling, and that creates uneven stresses on the bolt from the top lugs to the bottom lugs.
Unless he's talking about some extreme porting for competition, some off brand-fashion comps, or 30k-40k rounds, this is one of the most ridiculous things I've heard.
If you're concerned with the bolt life replace it every 10-15k rounds. Quality bolt costs $60-70 which is about 120 rounds of ammo give or take.
This was a big thing with orkan who used to post here. He was a big proponent of brakes that only vented sideways and didn't push the barrel downward. The A2 cage's compensation seems negligible to me. I definitely wouldn't use any device that comp'd the barrel down on any type of rifle... bolt or gas.
What was his argument about compensators that don’t push the barrel downwards? Is it also something about bolt wear, or is there something more to it?
I’m considering a Warcomp but this argument is giving me second thoughts.
I’m considering a Warcomp but this argument is giving me second thoughts.
Refer to my “Who Here Really Breaks Bolts” thread. I think you’ll be fine.
What was his argument about compensators that don’t push the barrel downwards? Is it also something about bolt wear, or is there something more to it?
I’m considering a Warcomp but this argument is giving me second thoughts.
Much ado about nothing. Don't give it another thought.
What was his argument about compensators that don’t push the barrel downwards? Is it also something about bolt wear, or is there something more to it?
I’m considering a Warcomp but this argument is giving me second thoughts.
He was a bolt gunner. I think it was more of an approach that you don't want a comp that makes your barrel flex like a diving board. Side vent brakes don't add to barrel whip. With .223, there's not as much muzzle blast, but when you start getting into 308 and up, a comp can really start moving a barrel.
https://youtu.be/0yzKLyARNeU
Even an A2 birdcage will cause noticeable barrel whip compared to bare muzzle.
https://youtu.be/0yzKLyARNeU
Even an A2 birdcage will cause noticeable barrel whip compared to bare muzzle.
If you twist one on a P90 it will actually push the muzzle down as you rip a burst.
The Battlecomp would push down pretty good in rapid fire on a short barrel. That's the first muzzle device on an AR that I could really feel.
Not going to weigh in on whether it has a detrimental effect, but I imagine it would have to be at full auto pace to make any impact.
I didn't get to see the video posted, but if the A2 has a real "comp" effect, I'd have to say that the issue is not a big deal just based on the millions of A2 flash hiders in use for decades.
A shorter barrel will have more of a comp effect since the gasses at muzzle are higher pressure. On a 16" barrel, who knows. Now I wish someone did the same thing but with a Warcomp, just out of curiosity.
There is obviously going to be a natural amount of elasticity with the steel and if kept within limits would have no effect, I just don't know if the Warcomp falls into that category.
A shorter barrel will have more of a comp effect since the gasses at muzzle are higher pressure. On a 16" barrel, who knows. Now I wish someone did the same thing but with a Warcomp, just out of curiosity.
There is obviously going to be a natural amount of elasticity with the steel and if kept within limits would have no effect, I just don't know if the Warcomp falls into that category.But a shorter barrel produces less leverage on the fulcrum which even it out somewhat. I bet Lysander could probably tell us on how the offset would be based on the decreasing gas pressure as leverage increases with barrel length.
Sent from my SM-G998U using Tapatalk
Inkslinger
06-16-22, 17:03
A shorter barrel will have more of a comp effect since the gasses at muzzle are higher pressure. On a 16" barrel, who knows. Now I wish someone did the same thing but with a Warcomp, just out of curiosity.
There is obviously going to be a natural amount of elasticity with the steel and if kept within limits would have no effect, I just don't know if the Warcomp falls into that category.
But wouldn’t it take less pressure to bend a longer barrel? Leverage and all that…
Even if a barrel is in a "whip" wouldn't the upper (and thus the BCG) remain in line with the barrel extension and make the effect negligible to the bolt lock up?
It really mostly depends which direction the vertical grip is facing, but we all knew that already.
PB
Even if a barrel is in a "whip" wouldn't the upper (and thus the BCG) remain in line with the barrel extension and make the effect negligible to the bolt lock up?
This is my thought. The receiver would need to bend in order for any uneven load to be placed on the bolt.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It really mostly depends which direction the vertical grip is facing, but we all knew that already.
PBNo one has even stopped to consider what effect the grip screw has on all this. Probably the key to unraveling the whole thing.
Sent from my SM-G998U using Tapatalk
None of this shit happens when using iron sights
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.