View Full Version : Ruger SR-556 Carrier Tilt
Here are a few pics of my SR-556 after a few thousand rounds over the last eight months. It have sent it back to Ruger for inspection and repair but I have doubts that if this is happening in 556, how is the 6.8 SPC going to do???
Robb Jensen
12-11-10, 14:01
I've seen tilt get so bad that it'll have intermittent problems. Sometimes you'll get through a whole mag without stoppages but sometimes you can't get past a couple of rounds. The carrier wasn't designed by Eugene Stoner to move in the fashion that it does in a piston gun. When you get your carrier back I'd suggest replacing the receiver extension with a new one (if Ruger doesn't) and getting an anti-tilt buffer from FRS, get the H2 weight.
I've seen a few HK upper receivers that were shot hard and suppressed which cracked the upper receivers.
That's so strange that the Ruger SR-556 does this. I have ARs from Daniel Defense, Bravo Company, Colt, LMT and even Bushmaster and I have never seen this problem.
Cameron
NewbieDave
12-11-10, 17:45
DI guns don't have this issue... it's strictly piston driven system that produce the problem. It's the way the impulse hits the BCG that cause the issue... a DI system doesn't exhabit it. The anti-tilt is probably the best way to resolve the issue.
http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t244/seth_100/DSCN1846.jpg
As far as I understand it... it's different for every gun. Some has a lot and some has very little. Some will wear a lot at the beginning then stop and functions just fine. Me, I'll stick to the DI gun since that's what the system was designed for in the first place.
~dpc
DI guns don't have this issue... it's strictly piston driven system that produce the problem. It's the way the impulse hits the BCG that cause the issue... a DI system doesn't exhabit it. The anti-tilt is probably the best way to resolve the issue.
Wouldn't the easiest way to resolve the issue simply be to not get a piston in the first place?
Me, I'll stick to the DI gun since that's what the system was designed for in the first place.
~dpc
Exactly my point. The OP should have Ruger refund his cash or repair and sell it.
Cameron
Wouldn't the easiest way to resolve the issue simply be to not get a piston in the first place?
Cameron
Because they are awesome. They stop jams.:sarcastic:
Yup this was quite the bummer for me. I'll wait to see what Ruger does. But like I said, if it is happening in 556, what is the 6.8 going to do? I do have plans to add a different buffer after I get it back and see if that helps. I would think that Ruger has tried this already though so I'm not expecting it to help much. I'm also curious to see if anyone else has had this happen. Not that much info out there about rates of this happening. No recall's that I have heard of but that doesn't mean it's not going to happen.
What is FRS Robb??
Seth Harness' business is FRS, he makes the anti tilt buffer, Ruger refunded my money.
Here is who youre looking for https://www.m4carbine.net/member.php?u=2419
Bolt carrier tilt is what happens when you use a desgin not made for that operating system.
It's all about the axis of force from the piston. Take a look at every piston design that was designed from scratch as a piston gun. The return spring and pistion are inline, i.e. the same axis, not parallel, but the exact same axis. The FAL has the return spring attatched to the rear point of the bolt carrier opposite of where the piston strikes it. The M1's spring actually goes in the oprod opposite of the piston. The AK's spring is housed in the bolt carrier opposite of the piston. Even a DI gun techincally has a piston. The bolt carrier acts as a stationary piston, and the bolt carrier around it acts as a gas cylinder. Where's the spring on the AR-15? It's directly behind the "piston" on the opposite end of the bolt carrier. On the Daewoo K1A1 (the only other DI gun I have expereince with), they used two springs ala M3 Grease gun, but still they are in line with the "Piston" or bolt. AR-180 used twin springs again inline with the gas psiton.
Any design that uses a spring in a postion that it will not be directly acting on the force opening the bolt, is simply bad engineering. No one in their right mind would design a piston gun from scratch to have a spring acting on the bolt carrier in a different axis than the force of the piston. Yet somehow these designs are considered "improvements".
Here are a few pics of my SR-556 after a few thousand rounds over the last eight months. It have sent it back to Ruger for inspection and repair but I have doubts that if this is happening in 556, how is the 6.8 SPC going to do???
Any signs of wear inside your upper receiver?
Ten four on what Rob says it seems every rifle will wear different.You cant go wrong with getting a buffer from fire arm ready solutions, Seth is a great guy to talk to,get one for the 5.56 and one for the 6.8 if you have two rifles, and dont look back.
Jason
How long will it take the world to figure out that a piston AR is a ****ing retarded idea? :confused:
RAM Engineer
12-12-10, 10:31
As are 90% of the guns designed by Ruger...
How long will it take the world to figure out that a piston AR is a ****ing retarded idea? :confused:
the world may never know.
http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/jezebel/2009/04/mr-owl-425.jpg
How long will it take the world to figure out that a piston AR is a ****ing retarded idea? :confused:
Took me 1000 rounds and joining M4.
Magic_Salad0892
12-12-10, 10:54
How long will it take the world to figure out that a piston AR is a ****ing retarded idea? :confused:
I'm with you on this one now. I'm honestly sorry for not listening to you before.
However, the Daewoo K2 is a pretty good design, IMO.
And if the SCAR could have been a drop in upper receiver with a replaceable stock kit.... oooooooh.
However, the Daewoo K2 is a pretty good design, IMO.
That's because it has a long stroke piston which rides in a gas tube to keep the carrier traveling straight. So does the XCR.
All three rifles, the ar15, daewoo k2, and xcr have a bolt carrier that has four contact points the carrier travels on. There are no rails. As such, if a piston is to be used, like on the xcr and daewoo k2, it must be connected directly to the carrier, with the op rod guided by a gas tube, in order to prevent carrier tilt.
short stroke designs are a no-go unless the carrier rides on a pair of rails.
NewbieDave
12-12-10, 12:12
In my understanding... that's why PWS went with a long-stroke system (ie AK-piston) in their revamp design.
One thing to keep in mind, reading on blogs of people that's actually keeping track of their wear on piston uppers... most rubbing stops after a set amount. While the set amount varies, I have yet to read of any rubbing past the tube and into the lower receiver's tube threads. So at worst, you're looking at a buffer tube with some wear marks on it and not causing function issues. It may look ugly, but that's about it.
That being say... it's not something that one should expect on a $1200 rifle. I'm sure Ruger knew about the issue... it probably comes down to a numbers game, would it cost more to add the anti-tile buffer for every rifle they sell or just replace the tube for people that return it for repairs? My guess is, not everyone shoots their rifle enough to cause the wear... thus it's cheaper to deal with the repairs.
Side note: Not every Ruger design is junk, I have a Security-6 that my daddy gave me... after 20 years, it's still a rock solid 6 shooter ;)
Cant we all just get along.
It seems every time a new person comes along and wants to ask questions and become part of the family, it turns into a mine is better than yours and that rifle is crap and yada,yada,yada.We are all part of a group who want to use the Ar platform,it takes a real man behind a computer to talk trash about other peoples property!!:mad:
Jason
RAM Engineer
12-12-10, 12:37
Side note: Not every Ruger design is junk, I have a Security-6 that my daddy gave me... after 20 years, it's still a rock solid 6 shooter ;)
Their revolvers and their .22s are the 10% exception to my rule. I'm still trying to figure out which population my LCP belongs in.
Cant we all just get along.
It seems every time a new person comes along and wants to ask questions and become part of the family, it turns into a mine is better than yours and that rifle is crap and yada,yada,yada.We are all part of a group who want to use the Ar platform,it takes a real man behind a computer to talk trash about other peoples property!!
We're not trying to trash on paul24. It's in our best interest, collectively, to prevent another mistake from happening to all forum members. That is, to prevent members from spending money on something not worth while.
Granted, my first post in this thread didn't contribute shit. :D
Eurodriver
12-12-10, 14:07
How long will it take the world to figure out that a piston AR is a ****ing retarded idea? :confused:
My UPS driver is obsessed with Piston ARs. He always delivers my boxes marked "BCM" and asks me "Why no piston?!?!"
Hes so in love with them I really dont have the heart to tell him that they suck, Ill never own one, and they're worthless...
My UPS driver is obsessed with Piston ARs. He always delivers my boxes marked "BCM" and asks me "Why no piston?!?!"
Hes so in love with them I really dont have the heart to tell him that they suck, Ill never own one, and they're worthless...
======================================
That's funny. My UPS driver at work is ate up with DPMS. He told me he has a DPMS .223 and he's never had a problem. A year ago he told me he wanted a DPMS .308.
Nice and polite as I could be, I told him DPMS "wasn't very well thought of", sent him threads, etc. About 6-months ago, he bought one anyway but I'm starting to see why he is OK with DPMS. He has only shot his .308 one time for 30-rounds and he has not shot his .223 a single time in a year.
At that rate, his .308 should give him years and years of trouble-free service. And silly me, buying those top-tier guns...Oh well...
Guess UPS drivers see more DPMS's and Ruger's delivered, so they figure they must be better.
.
Funny I have a DPMS AP4 Carbine that has over 3000 rounds through it and no problems I must have the only one that made it to that round count.:sarcastic:
Jason
Here are a few pics of my SR-556 after a few thousand rounds over the last eight months. It have sent it back to Ruger for inspection and repair but I have doubts that if this is happening in 556, how is the 6.8 SPC going to do???
That's some pretty extensive wear, Paul.
I can't think of any reason a different caliber would make the wear better or worse.
That wear has nothing to do with the recoil of the cartridge.
It has everything to do with the piston and carrier bearing system.
How long will it take the world to figure out that a piston AR is a ****ing retarded idea? :confused:
As are 90% of the guns designed by Ruger...
Really? 90%?
Must be why they're such a failure as a firearms manufacturer.....
:rolleyes:
RAM Engineer
12-12-10, 15:35
Really? 90%?
Must be why they're such a failure as a firearms manufacturer.....
:rolleyes:
That's because most people shop on price alone and as mentioned above, never shoot the guns enough to have issues.
My wife's father, brother and brother-in-law, think Ruger hung the moon. When I suggested a Glock instead of a Ruger pistol, my brother-in-law said "That's WAY more than I want to spend." That is the mindset of the average Ruger owner. And there are WAY more of them than there are of us.
My father-in-law actually bragged to me that his PRIMARY personal protection gun (a S&W Model Chief's Special, bought in 1950-something) had only had 4 rounds fired through it SINCE HE BOUGHT IT OVER 50 YEARS AGO. I told him he wasn't getting his money's worth out of it that way. Not to mention the fact that he only carries 4 rounds in it, so the chamber under the hammer is empty. :rolleyes:
Any signs of wear inside your upper receiver?
Nope, not a bit.
Clint, I find it hard to believe this is an isolated incident. My thought also was that with high recoil and this may excellerate the problem of Carrier tilt.
Personally I love the Ruger piston system. I have been firing AR's since I went into the Army in 1985. I'm still in and I firmly believe if the piston system can be worked out it will eventually take over the DI weapons in the services. Remember people that this system has been around since the 1960's. It has had plenty of time to "figure out the problems." For years the AR platform was condemmed as "crap" by almost everyone. It was still being called crap in the 80's when the M16A2 came out. It will get worked out.
As to Ruger getting bashed I'm surprised by the venom on this site. They have been around forever and I'll stick by them.
I will get a Buffer from FRS and "drive on" with my SR-556. It's a good platform and very accurate.
That's because most people shop on price alone and as mentioned above, never shoot the guns enough to have issues.
My wife's father, brother and brother-in-law, think Ruger hung the moon. When I suggested a Glock instead of a Ruger pistol, my brother-in-law said "That's WAY more than I want to spend." That is the mindset of the average Ruger owner. And there are WAY more of them than there are of us.
My father-in-law actually bragged to me that his PRIMARY personal protection gun (a S&W Model Chief's Special, bought in 1950-something) had only had 4 rounds fired through it SINCE HE BOUGHT IT OVER 50 YEARS AGO. I told him he wasn't getting his money's worth out of it that way. Not to mention the fact that he only carries 4 rounds in it, so the chamber under the hammer is empty. :rolleyes:
They've made millions of well designed and reliable firearms, that were priced fairly, and met the needs of those who bought them.
Have they catered to the 2% of gun experts? No. Have they made some clunkers? Sure. Which major hasn't? Maybe they've even made more than their fair share. But saying that "90% of their designs are retarded" is a bit of a stretch.
....I will get a Buffer from FRS and "drive on" with my SR-556. It's a good platform and very accurate.....
====================
I think I see what Rob_S means when he says some people ask questions but when the answers start coming in, they put their fingers in their ears and start chanting, "LA-LA-LA-LA-LA...". :rolleyes:
.
I think I see what Rob_S means when he says some people ask questions but when the answers start coming in, they put their fingers in their ears and start chanting, "LA-LA-LA-LA-LA...".
For some people, selling a firearm, especially at a loss, is a hard thing to do.
So you just deal with it or assign it for a different duty, whatever it may be, and make a better purchasing decision next time.
====================
I think I see what Rob_S means when he says some people ask questions but when the answers start coming in, they put their fingers in their ears and start chanting, "LA-LA-LA-LA-LA...". :rolleyes:
.
LMAO! If I listened to everyone that posts I would have a stick and throw all my weapons away. Everyone has their preferences. I didn't come here for answers. I simply posted a couple pics of carrier tilt. I liked the idea of the new buffer tube and will incorporate it into my AR. I'm thinking you feel you have the perfect "system" and everyone else's is crap.
I don't get caught up in "this vs that".
NewbieDave
12-13-10, 01:18
To the OP...
As I started in my post, I probably won't worry about it too much. Keep tracking your round count and keep tabs on the wear pattern. Most of the people that have blogged about this and kept track of it has stated that the wear stops... none have reported as far as I know that it would keep going down to the threads of the lowers, which would be more of an issue.
If in the long run, you think it may be an issue... you can get both the anti-tilt from FRS and the PWS Enhanced Buffer Tube (EBT). It's my understand that the EBT was designed to allow for the carrier to be fully supported so that it doesn't have to 'jump' into the buffer tube. Looks promising for piston system... time will tell if it works out.
Also check out this thread, just found it. He moded his standard tube and carrier to address tilting. Seem like a good home-smithing job that seem to address the the tilt issue.
https://www.m4carbine.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=4076&d=1264288549
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=39687
Just my 2 cent.
~dpc
To the OP:
don't accept anything less than to be 100% satisfied from Ruger. That is unacceptable. My 10.5" LWRC upper has NO signs of carrier tilt at ~1000 rounds. And pay no mind to d-bags like the 'MarkM' guy that craps on any thread piston related. Enjoy your gun when the get it right (Or, sell it when they send it back & move on).
BufordTJustice
12-13-10, 02:11
To the OP...
As I started in my post, I probably won't worry about it too much. Keep tracking your round count and keep tabs on the wear pattern. Most of the people that have blogged about this and kept track of it has stated that the wear stops... none have reported as far as I know that it would keep going down to the threads of the lowers, which would be more of an issue.
If in the long run, you think it may be an issue... you can get both the anti-tilt from FRS and the PWS Enhanced Buffer Tube (EBT). It's my understand that the EBT was designed to allow for the carrier to be fully supported so that it doesn't have to 'jump' into the buffer tube. Looks promising for piston system... time will tell if it works out.
Also check out this thread, just found it. He moded his standard tube and carrier to address tilting. Seem like a good home-smithing job that seem to address the the tilt issue.
https://www.m4carbine.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=4076&d=1264288549
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=39687
Just my 2 cent.
~dpc
The pic you posted won't work very well. Reducing the length of the RET by shortening it and then screwing it further into the lower will reduce the overall rearward stroke of the BCG and buffer assembly. This could detrimentally affect the bolt locking open on empty, and other aspects of the rifle's function. Who knows.
OP, Any modification that substantially increases wear as compared with the original design better have a damn good reason for doing so. The main articulated reason for developing these piston systems is to increase reliability in the AR15 platform. After reading articles like Pat Roger's Filthy 14, and hearing from many hundreds of forum members here, reliability of the DI AR15 platform, when properly manufactured, is simply not a problem. I paid less for my Spike's lower and BCM upper than I would have for a complete DPMS or Bushmaster at the last gun show. As I've stated before, if DPMS/Bushmaster/Olympic Arms/Model 1 Sales/Stag AR's ran like LMT/BCM/KAC/Noveske/Larue/Spike's Tactical/Daniel Defense.......this entire forum would not exist.
Are there people who shoot relatively high round counts with the above listed brands and have few issues....yes. But they are clearly the exception to the rule. Piston AR15's deviate from the basic design principles of the Direct Impingement AR15 in such a fashion as to have a myriad of unintended, detrimental consequences. Increased heat at the gas block and carrier tilt being two of the main issues.
The fact remains that Ruger has created a gun that has increased wear in a previously non-bearing-surface area. I still have not heard one good excuse for doing so.
The properly made DI AR is not broken. If some are blinded by their own financial investment into piston AR's so be it. :rolleyes:
This could detrimentally affect the bolt locking open on empty, and other aspects of the rifle's function. Who knows.
awww that's ****ing nice. Let's buy a piston AR, **** up the buffer tube because of a side effect, mess up the BCG stroke length and now we got more problems.:sarcastic:
Maybe the dude should cut 1/8 inch off the the rear of the carrier!
Oh shit then the gas key might strike the buffer tube, now we gotta cut up the gas key!:sarcastic:
this is ridiculous.
That's because most people shop on price alone and as mentioned above, never shoot the guns enough to have issues.
My wife's father, brother and brother-in-law, think Ruger hung the moon. When I suggested a Glock instead of a Ruger pistol, my brother-in-law said "That's WAY more than I want to spend." That is the mindset of the average Ruger owner. And there are WAY more of them than there are of us.
My father-in-law actually bragged to me that his PRIMARY personal protection gun (a S&W Model Chief's Special, bought in 1950-something) had only had 4 rounds fired through it SINCE HE BOUGHT IT OVER 50 YEARS AGO. I told him he wasn't getting his money's worth out of it that way. Not to mention the fact that he only carries 4 rounds in it, so the chamber under the hammer is empty. :rolleyes:
I still have a p89 my grandfather bought when it first came out.......he gave it to me before he died. He never shot it much but I can't even guess how many thousands of rounds I have put through it the past 15 years. The only thing ever replaced have been the mag springs and followers for the original mags. it would make a horrible cc gun but it has been rock solid through the years. The only other ruger I have now is a redhawk. I wanted a 45 colt that would stand up to stout loads.
justin_247
12-13-10, 18:37
LMAO! If I listened to everyone that posts I would have a stick and throw all my weapons away. Everyone has their preferences. I didn't come here for answers. I simply posted a couple pics of carrier tilt. I liked the idea of the new buffer tube and will incorporate it into my AR. I'm thinking you feel you have the perfect "system" and everyone else's is crap.
I don't get caught up in "this vs that".
Dude, you have that much wear after 8 MONTHS of usage - that's pathetic and it's obviously a poor design. There is no "buffer tube fix" aside from swapping out the tube for a new one every year. At best, you can get the anti-tilt H2 buffer. So, basically, you have to buy an aftermarket component to fix an inherent problem in Ruger's system that they refuse to fix.
The FACT is that it's a bad design. Period.
So, basically, you have to buy an aftermarket component to fix an inherent problem in MOST, IF NOT ALL SHORT STROKE PISTON AR'S
fixed.
Well...most piston ARs don't have that much rec. extension wear and another option for a permanent fix is the POF receiver extension. http://www.pof-usa.com/parts/arparts.htm
7075 alloy, mil spec and $39.95. Not a bad option, it does what the jerry rigged photo does, only a lot better w/o any of the downsides.
Here was my SR556 after the initial test firing by Ruger. Also note the lack of a staked castle nut/receiver endplate, which I think of as a requirement, having had another piston AR cause an unstaked nut to come loose.
http://www.545ar.com/SR556tilt.jpg
Acquiring this SR556 was a huge mistake on my part, I took a bath to say the least...
Here was my SR556 after the initial test firing by Ruger. Also note the lack of a staked castle nut/receiver endplate, which I think of as a requirement, having had another piston AR cause an unstaked nut to come loose.
http://www.545ar.com/SR556tilt.jpg
Acquiring this SR556 was a huge mistake on my part, I took a bath to say the least...
===========================
Whoa!!! Now there's a man!
87, don't feel bad, I scrounged and saved to get the ultimate super-duty mother of all piston guns last year...a SIG 556 Classic SWAT...and as you said, "...a huge mistake on my part...".
Oh well, live and learn (it's just that some people don't (can't, refuse to) learn). :rolleyes:
.
What was wrong with the Sig?
BufordTJustice
12-14-10, 02:05
There are some piston AR15 models that do not exhibit abnormal wear from carrier til, PWS making a long stroke system that includes their extended buffer tube being a prime example of a successful basic piston design. Notice how even the PWS costs more than the Ruger design.
I'm all for piston systems. I think the Robinson Arms XCR is a great concept, as is KAC's PDW. I own a Romanian AKM clone that I love and will never sell it. I've shot a Steyer AUG and MSAR clone...both running superbly. I thoroughly enjoyed shooting both the FAL and the M1A recently with a buddy.
I'm not against piston systems, I'm against poorly designed/implemented piston systems. I think it's just as bad to try and cheaply adapt a piston system to a DI AR15 as it would be to adapt a 'Direct Impingement' setup on a piston setup (think DI-AK). Why not just build to MIL specs, at a minimum, and use good lube? I run crappy tula and wolf through my BCM 14.5" middy ALL DAY LONG without cleaning (just liberal use of Slip 2K EWL). Why fix what isn't broken? The DI AR isn't broken...the cheaply made DI AR is the problem. IN fact, the cheaply-made-anything is the problem.
I also refuse to participate in a Ruger hating party. I just bought an LCR (38 special +P) for my wife and love the damn thing....so does she. Ruger isn't the only one making shitty piston carbines. CMMG, Bushmaster, Stag, etc are making bottom-of-the-barrel rifles using piston systems and charging about as much as Ruger. If Ruger just included a PWS enhanced RET, the issues discussed in this thread would be largely moot.
thopkins22
12-14-10, 02:36
Well...most piston ARs don't have that much rec. extension wear...
I would argue that most piston ARs don't get shot very much.
I would argue that most piston ARs don't get shot very much.
Neither do DI ARs. Most ARs in general are safe queens.
There are some piston AR15 models that do not exhibit abnormal wear from carrier til, PWS making a long stroke system that includes their extended buffer tube being a prime example of a successful basic piston design.
Here's a picture of the "enhanced" buffer tube I used in conjunction with a PWS piston upper. Note that carrier tilt damage was still present.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v221/tokarev/PWS%20DC-12/DSCN1159.jpg
Here's the buffer tube in my SR556C after 4,000 rounds.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v221/tokarev/Ruger%20SR-556C/103_0101.jpg
Any guesses as to what upper caused this wear mark?
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v221/tokarev/media1-9.jpg
Any guesses as to what upper caused this wear mark?
Full auto lower...
I'll guess a Colt DI upper ... Well used.
Full auto lower...
I'll guess a Colt DI upper ... Well used.
Yup. We've got a number of these guns and most all of them show some wear inside the buffer tube. Some show more than others but they do show it.
BufordTJustice
12-14-10, 20:59
Tok,
I don't want this to sound like a challenge, but it's gonna come across that way. I've seen over ten Ruger piston carbines hanging on dealer/gunshop walls that exhibit more wear than that after test firing from the factory. Being an LEO, I've got many buddies who've seen the same wear in countless brand new or super low round count Rugers. The photos you've submitted, if true, are the exception to the rule. I'm glad you've had such a good experience with minimal RET wear. Most have not been nearly as fortunate.
As for the PWS, I stand corrected. The wear is obviously still readily apparent...just at a reduced rate.
Also, how many rounds through the Ruger you photographed? Not questioning the results...just honestly curious.
For the record, I've personally seen lowers used with DI uppers with over 18,000 rounds with zero wear in that area. Exhibiting zero wear in that area of the RET is not a cause for bragging rights.
Your RET exhibits the least amount of wear I've seen in any piston setup. Now go out and buy a lottery ticket. :)
Tok,
I don't want this to sound like a challenge, but it's gonna come across that way. I've seen over ten Ruger piston carbines hanging on dealer/gunshop walls that exhibit more wear than that after test firing from the factory. Being an LEO, I've got many buddies who've seen the same wear in countless brand new or super low round count Rugers. The photos you've submitted, if true, are the exception to the rule. I'm glad you've had such a good experience with minimal RET wear. Most have not been nearly as fortunate.
As for the PWS, I stand corrected. The wear is obviously still readily apparent...just at a reduced rate.
Also, how many rounds through the Ruger you photographed? Not questioning the results...just honestly curious.
For the record, I've personally seen lowers used with DI uppers with over 18,000 rounds with zero wear in that area. Exhibiting zero wear in that area of the RET is not a cause for bragging rights.
Your RET exhibits the least amount of wear I've seen in any piston setup. Now go out and buy a lottery ticket. :)
The PWS buffer tube didn't have too many rounds through it before I pulled it off and sent it back to Addax for some store credit. The tilt wear pictured took place within a couple of magazines.
Here's another Ruger that showed more signs of tilt. I sold this one and replaced it with an SR556C but it had 4,000 +/- through it when this picture was taken. The wear here is really nothing other than finish wear and couldn't be felt with a fingernail.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v221/tokarev/Ruger%20SR%20556/DSCN0831.jpg
The one pictured in my above reply is also right at 4,000 rounds and has been through a couple of carbine classes has been a solid carbine. Accurate and reliable with everything but Silver Bear and some WOLF. I do note that it seems to run Hornady steel cased ammo without issues but doesn't seem to like the 100% Russian stuff for some reason. Anyway, this gun has a Ruger F/A bolt carrier in it that's got a much more radiused carrier and I wonder if that's not the "cure" to the tilt wear.
And now, here are some pictures of the first SR556 I bought. This one really showed some super nasty ugly carrier tilt and it went back to the factory for inspection. Ruger replaced it with a NIB specimen without hassle. These pics were taken right before the gun went back and I had about 2,500 rounds through it at that point. Unlike the wear in my other buffer tubes, this could easily be felt with a fingernail and was getting pretty nasty.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v221/tokarev/Ruger%20SR%20556/100_0265.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v221/tokarev/Ruger%20SR%20556/100_0266.jpg
I do believe that the guns currently shipping from Ruger have a bolt carrier more akin to the F/A carrier that's in my SR556C that's not showing any wear. I do believe Ruger bought carriers from three or four different vendors but they are now using just one. I hope this one vendor will help cure, or at least curtail, the tilt phenomenon.
justin_247
12-14-10, 21:45
Anyway, this gun has a Ruger F/A bolt carrier in it that's got a much more radiused carrier and I wonder if that's not the "cure" to the tilt wear.
Do you have a picture of the carrier? Adams Arms developed a carrier with "skis" on it that they claim eliminates carrier tilt.
I do believe that the guns currently shipping from Ruger have a bolt carrier more akin to the F/A carrier that's in my SR556C that's not showing any wear.
Maybe there's something about the C-model that's different other than the carrier?
Also, Ruger needs to free-float their rail. Right now it's just a giant heat sink.
Do you have a picture of the carrier? Adams Arms developed a carrier with "skis" on it that they claim eliminates carrier tilt.
Maybe there's something about the C-model that's different other than the carrier?
Also, Ruger needs to free-float their rail. Right now it's just a giant heat sink.
I thought I had some pictures of the bolt carrier in my photobucket account but I don't see any. I'll try to take some tomorrow and post them here.
AFAIK, there's no difference in the SR556 and the SR556C other than the fluted barrel and integral flash hider. It could be that the lack of carrier tilt in my one particular sample is more a case of tolerances over any specific part or design change. With that said, I have used the SR556C upper on a couple different Colt F/A lowers with no tilt marks to the buffer tube.
BufordTJustice
12-14-10, 23:02
Tok,
Thank you for the great pix and interesting info. I would love to see a picture of your carrier.
I wonder if there is anything else that has been revised for the SR556C?
Can any of the DI guys take hi-res pictures of their buffer tubes after about 5k rounds? I want to see what normal wear of a buffer tube looks like.
BufordTJustice
12-15-10, 02:17
Can any of the DI guys take hi-res pictures of their buffer tubes after about 5k rounds? I want to see what normal wear of a buffer tube looks like.
Without being smug, there is no 'normal wear' at that spot on a DI weapon, regardless of round count.
The issue of wear inside the buffer tube/ RET has only popped up since the advent of piston AR's.
My agency issues most patrol deputies vietnam era M16A1's with the FA function disabled. Only God knows how many thousands of rounds those guns have seen. Most of them are in fair-to-poor condition. I've detail stripped a few of them...no wear to speak of on the interior surface of the RET. Keep in mind that these guns are at least 25 years old.
Without being smug, there is no 'normal wear' at that spot on a DI weapon, regardless of round count.
The issue of wear inside the buffer tube/ RET has only popped up since the advent of piston AR's.
My agency issues most patrol deputies vietnam era M16A1's with the FA function disabled. Only God knows how many thousands of rounds those guns have seen. Most of them are in fair-to-poor condition. I've detail stripped a few of them...no wear to speak of on the interior surface of the RET. Keep in mind that these guns are at least 25 years old.
I was told the TDP of the M4 buffer tube requires a dry lube coating, so, in essence I was asking to see how much of the original finish in a DI Ar-15 wears off, revealing the dry-lube. Really just trying to see a picture here, not trying to pitch in on the (beaten to death) DI vs. Piston debate.
BufordTJustice
12-15-10, 02:30
I was told the TDP of the M4 buffer tube requires a dry lube coating, so, in essence I was asking to see how much of the original finish in a DI Ar-15 wears off, revealing the dry-lube. Really just trying to see a picture here, not trying to pitch in on the (beaten to death) DI vs. Piston debate.
Gotcha. Well, the M16A1's that I've seen in person may or may not have the dry lube coating in the RET's. But they showed essentially no wear at all. Literally, they didn't look much different at all from my recently purchased Spike's Tactical lower. I don't have any pix handy though. I'm sure somebody has to have a pic. Maybe on TOS?
Gotcha. Well, the M16A1's that I've seen in person may or may not have the dry lube coating in the RET's.
All Colt/FN/GM/HR AR-15 variants have dry lube coating in the receiver extension.
I was told the TDP of the M4 buffer tube requires a dry lube coating, so, in essence I was asking to see how much of the original finish in a DI Ar-15 wears off, revealing the dry-lube.
They dry lube is put on top of the anodizing, not below it.
S/A carrier on left/bottom.
Note the rounded tail end on the full-auto carrier. I do believe this is the standard style for the latest semi carriers, too.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v221/tokarev/Ruger%20SR%20556/P1000930.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v221/tokarev/Ruger%20SR%20556/P1000929.jpg
BufordTJustice
12-18-10, 01:10
Tok,
Thanks for the pix. THAT would represent a meaningful design improvement on Ruger's part. But, to publicize it would require an acknowledgment of a deficiency with the first carrier. I hope they continue to make detail refinements/improvements like this.
I wonder if it would also be beneficial to coat the inside of the RET w/ hardchrome or a FailZero coating to further reduce wear/friction, as well as extend the front lower lip further forward (like PWS/POF have done)?
There are some piston AR15 models that do not exhibit abnormal wear from carrier til,
There is my AR15-like piston carbine with some 2-3K rounds on it. Strange "scar" inside buffer tube was there day 1 and it can not be felt by hand or by tool (surface is smooth). It did not change by all the time. Looks like discolouration from coating process.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v286/montrala/MR223/barrelextension.jpg
Notice slightly extended lower part of tube. Not as pronounced as in POF or PWS tubes but it's there. Buffer retaining pin is not symmetrical, but retaining part is moved forward to allow this.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v286/montrala/MR223/carrier.jpg
Carrier has some sort of skis and is enlarged in bottom to prevent tilt.
Sorry for cell phone pics!
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.