Discussion on BCG finishes

[MichaelZWilliamson]

Trying to compare the following:

DLC, TiN, chrome, nickel boron, robar NP3, melonite.

And to determine which ones can be done on a milspec bolt and carrier.

From what I understand, melonite must be done before heat treating.

NiB is tougher and slicker than chrome at a reasonable price.

Is there a way to chart and compare?

[Pax]

Are you also considering IonBond or FailZero EXO coatings? I know FZ hasnt been taking orders for custom EXO coatings for a while, but Im pretty sure you can still get one of their BCGs. And they're supposed to start taking orders again soon.

[JChops]

I hate to derail a thread... but are you absolutely hell-bent on using one of those coatings?

I ask because I do not think any of them offer any quantifiable advantage to the end-user.

I have used Ion Bond, Teflon-Nickel, Nickel-Boron (Exo) and NP3 on many different gun parts (including AR BCGs). While they certainly look nice and (sometimes) wipe off easy, they don't offer me a quantifiable upgrade for the amount of money invested.

I still have to use acquire and use lube, clean BCG parts and generally maintain my rifle just like I did before. The BCG and affected parts still wear.

In fact, I found many of the above coatings to be inferior to the 'ol tried and true parkerizing. I've had several of the above coatings chip, peel or—in the case of a moderately abused M60 bolt—flake off. That never happens with park.

I like new technology and all, but I'm not sold on the new push to "super coatings" fad just yet. There are too many panaceas being peddled right now and I think we should let the dust settle before wasting more money on miracle cures.

Manganese phosphate has been kicking ass on AR BCGs since the 1960s.

[MichaelZWilliamson]

I hate to derail a thread... but are you absolutely hell-bent on using one of those coatings?

I ask because I do not think any of them offer any quantifiable advantage to the end-user.

I have used Ion Bond, Teflon-Nickel, Nickel-Boron (Exo) and NP3 on many different gun parts (including AR BCGs). While they certainly look nice and (sometimes) wipe off easy, they don't offer me a quantifiable upgrade for the amount of money invested.

I still have to use acquire and use lube, clean BCG parts and generally maintain my rifle just like I did before. The BCG and affected parts still wear.

In fact, I found many of the above coatings to be inferior to the 'ol tried and true parkerizing. I've had several of the above coatings chip, peel or—in the case of a moderately abused M60 bolt—flake off. That never happens with park.

I like new technology and all, but I'm not sold on the new push to "super coatings" fad just yet. There are too many panaceas being peddled right now and I think we should let the dust settle before wasting more money on miracle cures.

Manganese phosphate has been kicking ass on AR BCGs since the 1960s.

The first M16s I was issued were HC. They dated from the 1960s. They shat all over parkerizing, which the Army switched to for largely cosmetic reasons. I carried some that were 20+ years old with no signs of flaking. A most durable "fad."

Park doesn't flake off, but it does wear off very rapidly. It also causes hydrogen embrittlement, which is relevant to small, treated metal parts such as bolt lugs and extractors.

I have used HC successfully in my ARs for 20 years. I took my own HC BCG downrange and swapped out for the issue garbage.

So, yes, I'm sure.:)

I will gladly spend another $100 on a critical internal component before wasting money on real fads, such as 6 angles of rail gewgaw, flipping things or 19 point slings that do nothing to improve the mechanical function of the weapon.

I'm looking for Rc numbers, Cx and sources.

Thanks.:)

[MichaelZWilliamson]

Pax: Failzero's one contender, though it looks like Spike's offers the same finish cheaper, with less hype, and lists the metallurgy of their BCG, which causes me to put them a little higher on the list.

I'm sold on electroless nickel (NiB) as a little more durable than chrome for a little more money, and several reliable shops can do it. TiN I'm of mixed feelings about. It's never made a difference on the durability of twist drills for me, but that's a different application. Melonite is proven, but a bitch to apply.

[bleaman225]

I find it funny that Spikes has FailZero coat their BCGs but sells theirs for less.

[MichaelZWilliamson]

I find it funny that Spikes has FailZero coat their BCGs but sells theirs for less.

And from what I understand, it's just electroless nickel, which is not a particularly new nor proprietary finish.

[JChops]

The first M16s I was issued were HC. They dated from the 1960s. They shat all over parkerizing, which the Army switched to for largely cosmetic reasons. I carried some that were 20+ years old with no signs of flaking. A most durable "fad."

I have used HC successfully in my ARs for 20 years. I took my own HC BCG downrange and swapped out for the issue garbage.

I'm curious what you found "better" about the hard chrome BCGs over the manganese phosphated ones. When you say they "shat" on them, can you quantify why? What makes them "issue garbage" so bad that you had to replace them? (This is the first I'm hearing someone actually complaining about manganese phosphate BCGs strictly related to the finish itself.; I'm actually interested.)

Good luck in your search for info. Just be careful as there is a lot of snake oil out there with the new coatings.

[MichaelZWilliamson]

Yeah, FZ hypes a very basic process a lot.

I can always stick with the hard chrome I have. There have been no issues. But if something better is cost effective, I'll upgrade as I go. Coal Creek can do me electroless nickel on an existing BCG.

But does anyone make a group that's melonited?

[Altoids]

Trying to compare the following:

DLC, TiN, chrome, nickel boron, robar NP3, melonite.

And to determine which ones can be done on a milspec bolt and carrier.

From what I understand, melonite must be done before heat treating.

NiB is tougher and slicker than chrome at a reasonable price.

Is there a way to chart and compare?

I'm interested in different coating technologies and I've been wanting to do some research on each, but I just haven't gotten started. It's a lot of information to go through and it's hard to find independent objective reviews.

I think a good place to start would be a spreadsheet similar to "The Chart". List all the characteristics of each process. Things like whether it's electroplating or electroless, whether heat treating is required and what temp, hardness, lubricity (is that the word?), thickness of coating, durability, etc. I don't know if some of those, like lubricity, are quantifiable.

I would tend to favor an electroless process because it should produce a more even thickness than electroplating. In electroplating, because of the interaction between the anode and cathode, you get different thicknesses on areas like edges or where there is no direct path between the anode and cathode. Though, the difference may be so minuscule that it doesn't matter. We're talking microns here.

So far, from my limited research, I like Nickel Boron best. But I haven't looked into DLC, TiN, or melonite.

[MichaelZWilliamson]

I'm assuming barrel linings are electroless.

[Brahmzy]

FZ touts their NiB because they are only one of 3 shops in the world that can do "level 5" NiB coating - all others are the inferior level 3 or lower. There's lots of info all over the place on this. What they do isn't readily available for customer owned parts anywhere at the moment. Do some research.
I've got Spikes NiB BCGs in every 556 AR I own. Less friction, easier to clean - that was worth the cost *to me*. The things slide in my uppers like there's a coating of butter in there - pretty crazy. The upper wears less as a result - that's a fact I've verified on various new builds. I still use some lube, but it's nice knowing if I didn't, the rifle would still function.
But as always, with many, this may be an unjustified luxury for some folks who will resort to calling them "fads."
Just remember, in a hot, dirty, metal on metal movement situation, like the upper rec, less friction is a good thing for many reasons.

[MichaelZWilliamson]

Brahmzy: thanks. An extra $30 seems well spent for a higher rated finish, depending on the criteria.

What's the metallurgy of their carriers and bolts, if anyone knows?

Though really, I've never had a problem with any military or commercial carrier, and if a bolt eventually breaks, I'll have a spare on hand.

[MichaelZWilliamson]

I'm always amazed at people who'll hang a grand of rails and gadgets on the outside but don't want to "Waste money" on internals without which the weapon is a very pretty ornament.

[MichaelZWilliamson]

[0008]There are three types of alkaline electroless nickel boron coatings. The Type-1 is taught in U.S. Pat. No. 3,674,447 to Bellis filed Jul. 4, 1972, which is incorporated by reference. Metal elements such as thallium and lead are used to stabilize the electroless plating. These metal elements form a poly alloy with the nickel boron coating. A typical Type-1 electroless coating has about 1-3% thallium, 2-4% boron and 97-92% nickel by weight.

[0009]The Type-2 is taught in U.S. Pat. No. 6,066,406 to McComas which is incorporated by reference. A typical Type-2 electroless coating has 1-6% boron, 99-94% nickel,

[0010]The Type-3 is taught in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/903,687 filed Aug. 2, 2004 entitled Electroless Coating with Nanometer Particles to Ed McComas. A typical Type-3 electroless coating has Nickel Boron plus nanometer DLC particles. 1-6% boron, 99-94% nickel plus co-deposition of solid DSLC particles.

http://www.faqs.org/patents/app/20090151525

[BufordTJustice]

And from what I understand, it's just electroless nickel, which is not a particularly new nor proprietary finish.

I have about 1200 rds through my spike's Exo BCG. It is, indeed, coated by FailZero. I verified this by calling Fail Zero and they stated that they coat Spike's NiB BCG with their EXO coating. I spoke with Felipe Jose at FZ, FTR (in case this turns into a shitstorm and bs starts flying).

I'm VERY happy with mine. I am running an 8.3oz custom buffer (carbine stock) and Tubbs CS flatwire spring with mine. It's the smoothest shooting setup to date on my BCM 14.5" middy. The cleanup is easy and the added lubricity inside the upper cannot be a bad thing. I'll buy another...and it was worth every penny to upgrade it. I like that, after shooting 1100 rds without cleaning (only lube added), the BCG doesn't slow down despite copious amounts of fouling building up.

I'm not gonna get into a this-vs-that debate in the 'coating wars'. Taking a quality Mil Spec BCG and having it coated with a treatment that greatly reduces friction seems like a win-win for me.

The coating is so slick, all lube (I use Slip 2k EWL) drips right off after about a week of storage. I mean bone dry. With lube, the BCG glides inside the upper like greased marbles on a buttered glass floor.

[MichaelZWilliamson]

Is the buffer for competition or something else?

I'm also trying to find a way to plate breech face and extension, like the original I had. Ridiculously easy to clean, and immune to most corrosion.

[Altoids]

I'm assuming barrel linings are electroless.

Chrome plating is electro-plating. Though I do wonder how this is accomplished. Is the anode placed inside the barrel? I think it would have to be, but I'd like to see how that is done.

[BufordTJustice]

Is the buffer for competition or something else?

I'm also trying to find a way to plate breech face and extension, like the original I had. Ridiculously easy to clean, and immune to most corrosion.

The buffer is for my duty carbine. It was custom fabricated by Slash at Heavy Buffers dot net.

I'm sure you could find somebody to coat a quality Barrel extension. It seems that an Ionbond barrel extension would play nice with a FZ BCG. Even HC would be an improvement. However, I don't really see the BE as a huge contributor to smoothness. My BCM has a normal mil spec BE and it works great for me (and for me most).

[MichaelZWilliamson]

The only reason to plate the extension is ease of cleaning, but they were VERY easy to clean. Spray with solvent, wipe with a bronze brush. Done.

And I HAVE seen badly abused weapons stored wet rust shut with park to park finishes.

[kartoffel]

Are you also considering IonBond or FailZero EXO coatings?

IonBond is DLC. FailZero is Nickel Boron. So yes, the OP is considering those coatings.

[Kchen986]

Re: Chrome & Fail Zero:

I've always noticed my Fail Zero coated LWRC Bolt Carrier's to feel much much, slicker after firing than a comparable YM Chrome Carrier I used in my DI carbine.

No scientific data from me, here.

But I have seen old Parked Bolt Carriers rust and pit. Not sure if a 15 year old chrome BC with tens of thousands of rounds would have had the same result.

[[SAS]Reaver]

I was at Tripp Research hard chroming a bcg for my dad's ar and the bolt head and a few other pieces for my hk-91 clone build. I was lucky enough to witness the hard chroming process twice. its pretty simple but yet complicated. alot of prepping needs to be done when hanging the parts in the chroming baskets. its pretty much a science and know i know why they are the best in the biz. Virgil Tripps son was my roommate and we have remained friends for the last 11 years. i guess it was worth it.
before
http://img705.imageshack.us/img705/9923/picture002ww.jpg
http://img600.imageshack.us/img600/9563/photo3ln.jpg
http://img27.imageshack.us/img27/5695/picture008py.jpg

[jetspeed8]

Now this is a very informative technical discussion. And that is why I come here first when researching certain topics.

[MichaelZWilliamson]

Okay, heat treated hard chrome is 65-69 Rc.

NiB is slightly softer, but some sources say more durable, and it's got about 30% better lubricity.

Since Spike's uses milspec metals and treatment for their BCG underneath, and they're cheaper than FZ while being done by FZ, barely more expensive than a non-provenance chrome assy, I'm giving them good marks. I'll definitely get one to test.

I have an inquiry in with CCA on Isonite/Melonite possibilities.

Nothing on Robar or some of the ceramic penetrations yet.

[[SAS]Reaver]

oh yeah and just to stir the hornets nest i paid 100 for all the above parts to be hard chromed instead of 300.:thank_you2:

[MichaelZWilliamson]

http://www.ar15.com/lite/topic.html?b=3&f=123&t=241681


Bolt/carrier groups. Top is the early AR-15 and M16 bolt group, no forward assist cuts. Later transitional M16 bolt group is not pictured (mix of chrome and parked parts). Second down is the early XM16E1 bolt group, has added forward assist cuts. Next is the late XM16E1 and M16 and early M16A1 bolt group, now parked (transitional bolt groups are a mix of chrome and parked parts). Third from bottom is the later C marked M16/A1 bolt group. Second from bottom is the M16A2 bolt group. Bottom is the M16A4 bolt group, it is parked a lighter color:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/0603/Ekie12091941/variation%20guide/carriersright.jpg

Stoner intended and designed hard chrome. Parkerizing was a cosmetic change by the Army, for "tactical" reasons, since chrome is shiny.

Chrome operating mass, combined with this chromed extension, led to almost flawless functioning regardless of sand, muck, carbon.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/0603/Ekie12091941/variation%20guide/MPC09chromeextension.jpg

As I was able to do several years of side by side comparison of the two types, I consider it very worth it.

[BCmJUnKie]

I'm always amazed at people who'll hang a grand of rails and gadgets on the outside but don't want to "Waste money" on internals without which the weapon is a very pretty ornament.

Lol. DAMMIT that one should have been mine! I agree:laugh::laugh:

[m249saw]

All I can find from FailZero is a Semi auto Bolt Carrier:confused:

[MichaelZWilliamson]

http://www.failzero.com/productaquisition.html?page=shop.browse&category_id=4

Product Acquisition -> M16/4 Parts

[SA80Dan]

I'm always amazed at people who'll hang a grand of rails and gadgets on the outside but don't want to "Waste money" on internals without which the weapon is a very pretty ornament.

I don't think that is particularly the case for a lot of people here when it comes to BCG's - as most people who frequent this forum are running top tier BCGs. Most on this forum do not believe in skimping on important components. However, the question a lot of people will be asking when it comes to the coated BCGs is this - is it really worth the extra $120 or so for a fail zero BCG when you never hear of any problems with high mileage BCM/DD/Noveske etc 'normal' BCGs?

I personally believe there well may be some benefit to the coated ones, but how many tens (or hundreds) of thousands of rounds would you need to get through one to reap those benefits?

As an earlier poster said, I think the jury is still out for a lot of people....but it isn't a question of skimping.

[MichaelZWilliamson]

I don't think that is particularly the case for a lot of people here when it comes to BCG's - as most people who frequent this forum are running top tier BCGs. Most on this forum do not believe in skimping on important components. However, the question a lot of people will be asking when it comes to the coated BCGs is this - is it really worth the extra $120 or so for a fail zero BCG when you never hear of any problems with high mileage BCM/DD/Noveske etc 'normal' BCGs?

I personally believe there well may be some benefit to the coated ones, but how many tens (or hundreds) of thousands of rounds would you need to get through one to reap those benefits?

As an earlier poster said, I think the jury is still out for a lot of people....but it isn't a question of skimping.

I shot chrome and park side by side for 5 years. I won't say the park are crap by comparison, but they are definitely second tier, if for no other reason than maintenance. The extra $50 or so for chrome is recouped in the first five cleanings, in time and materials saved. Unless someone believes chrome is INFERIOR in function.

If the chrome avoids one jam at the wrong time, and statistically it will, it's worth it.

At the extreme end, I saw a sealed container of M16s that were put away wet and dirty. They were opened up 12 weeks later, because someone decided it might be a good idea to double check before an IG visit.

Parked assys, rusted shut into the lugs, unsalvageable, trash.

Chrome assys as above, required replacement of rusty hammers and some very serious cleaning and oiling, but were functional.

It doesn't matter how good the materials and workmanship are when oxygen comes calling.

I'm tempted to do a salt water immersion test. I have a spare BCG I could donate.

[Freelance]

I have and run a variety of BCG's (DD,Stag,Olympic, Noveske,Spikes,AA.) I am not a LE/SF/Mil operator, but I do shoot and build a fair amount of AR platform. I am personally sold on the FailZero/EXO coating though. I have purchased 3 of these units to date (2 in 5.56 and 1 in 6.8 SPC.) They are the smoothest BCG's I have ever used, several friends that have shot the platforms have commented on them comparing them to their own rifles. I was paying about $160 for my DD BCG's and $60 bones for the FailZero coating on such a critical part is a no brainer for me personally. Clean up is also a breeze comparably. I highly recommend, do a search for FailZero torture tests on google for some demonstrations and make your own call :)

[PatrolRifleGroup]

I believe that the newer coatings absolutely have an application in LE. I currently teach patrol rifle for my department, and have prior military and SWAT experience. Believe it or not, most cops are not gun guys. They typically know very little about guns, and tend to put even less effort in maintaining them.

For a guy that does properly maintain and lubricate a rifle, I doubt that there would be any dicernable difference between an EXO coated BCG, and a parked BCG. The guy might comment on the ease of cleaning, but the two will run the same because they are both well lubed and clean.

However, most cops don't properly maintain or lube their rifles. They tend to be shot a few times a year, lightly cleaned if at all, then put away. Whatever lube might or might not have been applied, tends to evaporate over time, as the rifle moves from their home, to cruiser trunk, to locker. What you are left with is dirty rifle with very little lube.

In these particular circumstances, the EXO coating does give you an edge. The inherent lubricity of the coating ensures that even though it is dirty and dry, the rifle will still run, or at least have a better chance of running.

As an instructor, I still try to instill that a duty weapon needs to be cleaned and lubed, no matter what kind of BCG a guy has. But time and time again, we'll see dry & dirty traditional BCG's choke, while the coated ones keep singing along. Most all of us as instructor's have gone to either the Fail Zero or Spike's BCG's, and most of our students have transitioned as well.

I would expect the nay-sayers to be gun guys, who maintain their guns, and thus see no benefit to the coatings. For anyone in LE, the coatings provide a extra bit of reliability, when your life is on the line.

[MichaelZWilliamson]

For a guy that does properly maintain and lubricate a rifle, I doubt that there would be any dicernable difference between an EXO coated BCG, and a parked BCG. The guy might comment on the ease of cleaning, but the two will run the same because they are both well lubed and clean.

My experience was that the hard chrome ran significantly better in all circumstances. There's not much difference for the first few dozen rounds, but after that, it's noticeable.

Bunches of people (who are wrong:)) will disagree with me, but lube IS NOT the solution to second-rate function. Installing better components is the solution. As many people learn the hard way in the Sandbox, oil + Arabian dust = mud. Oil is a FIELD REPAIR for a rough running AR. If you can't run it without oil, it is mechanically inadequate.

[PatrolRifleGroup]

My experience was that the hard chrome ran significantly better in all circumstances. There's not much difference for the first few dozen rounds, but after that, it's noticeable.

Bunches of people (who are wrong:)) will disagree with me, but lube IS NOT the solution to second-rate function. Installing better components is the solution. As many people learn the hard way in the Sandbox, oil + Arabian dust = mud. Oil is a FIELD REPAIR for a rough running AR. If you can't run it without oil, it is mechanically inadequate.

I realy cant speak about the hard chrome, since I've never owned one. I do see them periodically in class, and they are nice. My first experiences were with Robar/NP3, and then transitioned to the EXO/NiBoron. I am in agreement that an enhanced BCG, in whatever your flavor (Chrome/NP3/NiBoron) is always better choice.

I should be able to provide better feedback on the chrome BCG's after this year. It seems like a bunch of guys have purchased the S&W MP-15 TS model. S&W's website shows that they come standard with a chrome BCG, but I have yet to actually inspect one.

[MichaelZWilliamson]

Did you notice any difference between Robar and Ni3B?

[.45fmjoe]

Stoner intended and designed hard chrome. Parkerizing was a cosmetic change by the Army, for "tactical" reasons, since chrome is shiny.

Chrome operating mass, combined with this chromed extension, led to almost flawless functioning regardless of sand, muck, carbon.



Umm... actually you're wrong.

You see, chrome plated BCGs were already being phased out by 1964 and chrome plated chambers were introduced in 1968. So, you're just a *tad* bit incorrect.

[.45fmjoe]

My experience was that the hard chrome ran significantly better in all circumstances. There's not much difference for the first few dozen rounds, but after that, it's noticeable.

Bunches of people (who are wrong:)) will disagree with me, but lube IS NOT the solution to second-rate function. Installing better components is the solution. As many people learn the hard way in the Sandbox, oil + Arabian dust = mud. Oil is a FIELD REPAIR for a rough running AR. If you can't run it without oil, it is mechanically inadequate.

Where do you come up with this shit?

It's a frigging mechanical device, it needs oil. Oil is a necessity for all machines, and it is not a band-aid.

Oh, and even the Army says you're wrong about heavy lubrication in sand:

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/07/army_carbine_lubrication_070716/



Heavy lubrication shown to improve M16, M4 effectiveness




By Matthew Cox - Staff writer
Posted : Monday Jul 16, 2007 17:34:05 EDT

Army weapons officials might have found a way to improve the M16 family’s performance in the desert.
“Dust chamber” tests at Aberdeen Proving Ground, Md., last year show that M16 rifles and M4 carbines perform dramatically better when the weapon’s bolt assembly is heavily lubricated.
During each phase of the two-part “system assessment” at Army Test and Evaluation Command, testers fired 60,000 rounds through 10 weapon samples of each model.
Treated with light lubrication, new M16A4s and M4s, performed poorly in the extreme dust and sand conditions of the test, according to a January report from ATEC.
But when testers applied a heavy coat of lubrication to the weapons, the test results showed a “significant improvement.”
Out of the 60,000 rounds fired in each phase, the M4 stoppage-rate dropped from 9,836 with light lubrication to 678 with heavy lubrication.
The M16A4 stoppage-rate dropped from 2,124 with light lubrication to 507 with heavy lubrication, results show.
For years, Army weapons officials have preached to soldiers to virtues of applying a light coat of lubrication during weapons maintenance.
But the test results reinforce a recent change in weapons maintenance guidance Army units are practicing in Iraq and Afghanistan, said Col. Carl Lipsit, project manager for Soldier Weapons.
At the request of Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., the Army will conduct a similar dust-chamber test in August, pitting the M4 against the Heckler and Koch 416, the H&K XM8 and FNH USA’s Special Operations Forces Combat Assault Rifle.
All of the participating weapons will be treated with a heavy coat of lubrication during the test, Lipsit said.

[MichaelZWilliamson]

Umm... actually you're wrong.

You see, chrome plated BCGs were already being phased out by 1964 and chrome plated chambers were introduced in 1968. So, you're just a *tad* bit incorrect.

Weapon was first in use in 1959. 1959 is before 1964.

Back to my question. What experiences do you have, or technical information do you have, on the difference between Chrome, Ni3B, Robar or Melonite?

[MichaelZWilliamson]

Have you carried and used a weapon in the Arabian desert? I have.

Run dry, with teflon lube, the gas system blows the receiver reasonably clean with each shot. Run wet, it gunks up fast.

Oil is necessary, but I'm not aware of any other gun with a fan club that preaches pouring engine oil in. Mayhap that theory is wrong?

And if there's a way to not need to pour in a crate of oil, perhaps that is more useful?

Is this the same Army that doesn't actually teach cleaning and maintenance, barely teaches sighting in, issued my wife a "cleaning kit" consisting of only a tooth brush, and prohibits cleaning with solvents because HAZMAT procedures are too hard to follow? Why, yes, it is.

It's also the same Army that insists that ACU is actually camouflage.

[MichaelZWilliamson]

And as far as being "phased out," chrome BCGs were in use in my experience as late as 1990.

What you read online, or in some report, doesn't necessarily parse with the real world.

[.45fmjoe]

And as far as being "phased out," chrome BCGs were in use in my experience as late as 1990.

What you read online, or in some report, doesn't necessarily parse with the real world.

Holy shit. No shit they were still in inventory, Colt phased out chrome BCGs by 1964. What's missing from Ekie's picture is a transitional parkerized carrier with chrome key and bolt. Until the change over was complete, any mixture of chrome and parkerized parts could have been had. But by the time chrome chambers were introduced by Colt's in 1968, none came from the factory with chrome BCGs.

I have shown you an article with hard scientific data to prove you're wrong about lubrication. Also, you think some rifles don't need lubrication to run. You're wrong.

You know what, though. You have fun believing whatever you want. You think you know everything, I have explained why you are wrong and you still think otherwise. Have fun arguing with yourself, I'm done.

[kartoffel]

Try training the oil out of your car and driving in through the Arabian Desert. Feel free to chrome plate the internals or use teflon dry lube if you feel it will help.

Be sure to post pictures afterwards ;)

[MichaelZWilliamson]

Do either of you have any experience, or data, on advanced coatings for BCGs?

Please stay on topic or go to arfcom.

PS: I have 6 AKs here that have never been lubed.

[MichaelZWilliamson]

I have shown you an article with hard scientific data to prove you're wrong about lubrication. Also, you think some rifles don't need lubrication to run. You're wrong.


I'm going to assume from your tone that you have not actually carried and used an AR platform in the Arabian desert, have not had the opportunity to test chrome and park side by side on active duty, and spend a lot of time reading when you should be shooting.:)

[MarkG]

While I can understand plating the bolt, I can't understand plating the carrier. The carrier rides on four thin rails and the bolt pocket is already chrome lined. Spot application of plating to the rails would be difficult and cost prohibitive.

Contrary to a previous post in the thread, manganese phosphate is an excellent coating. It has excellent corrosion resistance and provides superior lubrication for metal to metal contact. It is a sacrificial finish and has excellent break-in properties and reduces wear on moving surfaces. It's highly absorptive coating retains oils, rust preventives and lubricants.

The nickel based coatings hold very little lubricant as their surface matrix is not course enough and lubricant easily flung off of coated parts.

[MichaelZWilliamson]

While I can understand plating the bolt, I can't understand plating the carrier. The carrier rides on four thin rails and the bolt pocket is already chrome lined. Spot application of plating to the rails would be difficult and cost prohibitive.

Contrary to a previous post in the thread, manganese phosphate is an excellent coating. It has excellent corrosion resistance and provides superior lubrication for metal to metal contact. It is a sacrificial finish and has excellent break-in properties and reduces wear on moving surfaces. It's highly absorptive coating retains oils, rust preventives and lubricants.

The nickel based coatings hold very little lubricant as their surface matrix is not course enough and lubricant easily flung off of coated parts.

Are the lugs and raceway chromed on most guns? Some of my issue weapons were, and it worked well, but I don't recall any recent ones being that way. I may be wrong. Please do let me know on this.

Parkerizing isn't a bad coating, and holds lube well, but it is a coarser surface, and that same texture also holds crud, once the oil dissipates from friction.

The nickel and chrome don't hold lube as well, true, but they have a higher natural lubricity. This reduces (not eliminates, despite straw man arguments upthread) the need for lube, and reduces adhesion by what I will again technically call "Crud.":)

Since I have several similar guns, once the temperature warms up I'll go do a side by side test of park and chrome and post results.

[boomhower]

My $.02

I am new to these things but I went with a FailZero BCG. I am in LE and it was worth the extra cash for just a little more piece of mind it will go bang when I need it to.

Couple of things:
All current FZ kits have FA carriers. I ordered a semi kit from brownells expecting a semi carrier and hammer. It came with a FA carrier. I contacted FZ for clarification and they verified all current kits going out are FA carriers due to customer demand.

Spike isn't really any cheaper. FZ charges $250 and Spikes charges $225. But Spikes doesn't include a hammer. Then you need to spend $22 for a FZ hammer or $60 for Spikes battle trigger kit.

[MichaelZWilliamson]

FZ costs more than $250 now, and I have the right hammer already. I'm not opposed to a treated hammer, but I don't see a real advantage except for the inside of the pivot being treated.

[boomhower]

FZ costs more than $250 now, and I have the right hammer already. I'm not opposed to a treated hammer, but I don't see a real advantage except for the inside of the pivot being treated.

It's still $250. I got mine from Brownells last week. FZ has them listed directly from them for $250.

As far as the hammer being needed to be treated as well, I don't have a clue. $25 isn't a huge deal one way or the other. More than anything else I hate the Spikes logo.

[MichaelZWilliamson]

$265 FZ vs $225 Spikes. FZ doesn't list the metallurgy though, but I can call and ask. Spikes is spec steel. I'd want at least milspec steel, and there isn't much tougher than the Carpenter 158.

I should have those heat treat specs in a day or so, and will be able to tell if Melonite treatment will affect the temper.

[boomhower]

$265 FZ vs $225 Spikes. FZ doesn't list the metallurgy though, but I can call and ask. Spikes is spec steel. I'd want at least milspec steel, and there isn't much tougher than the Carpenter 158.

I should have those heat treat specs in a day or so, and will be able to tell if Melonite treatment will affect the temper.

I'm not trying to get into a pissing match but, link (http://www.brownells.com/.aspx/pid=27448/Product/AR_15_BOLT_CARRIER_GROUP)

I've yet to hear of a problem with a FZ bolt or carrier. It's been said they are CMT BCG's but I don't know if they've said that for fact.

[MichaelZWilliamson]

Ah. Cheaper than the FZ site, and I get a discount at Brownell's. Thanks for the lead.

[madcratebuilder]

This is from the current ARMY TM 9-1005-319-23&P

NOTE
There are bolts and bolt carriers on fielded rifles, some with chrome-plated exterior surface finishes
and some with phosphate coating Both finishes are acceptable under certain operational requirements
and or restrictions Phosphate-coated bolt carriers are required for divisional combat units Chrome
plated bolt carriers are acceptable for divisional noncombat units and training center units. Chromeplated
and phosphate-coated bolt assemblies, bolt carrier assemblies, and repair parts for these
assemblies may be intermixed In any combination, with the following exception:
Phosphate-coated bolt carriers are required for all deployable and deploying units Chrome-plated bolt
carriers are acceptable for nondeployable and training center units.

[MichaelZWilliamson]

Phosphate-coated bolt carriers are required for all deployable and deploying units Chrome-plated bolt
carriers are acceptable for nondeployable and training center units.


As I noted in another thread, this has nothing to do with function, and is strictly a cosmetic issue because "chrome is shiny." They're afraid it will show up when it's illuminated by muzzle flash or some crap.

Notice they don't consider the bolt a problem if chromed, just the carrier.

This is why when you design a weapon, you give the infantrymen sticks and send them out to whack snakes while the engineers do the work. Every time the Army has stuck its dick in the M16, they've ****ed it up worse.

This matches the pattern of problems with the M14, Garand and previous weapons.

Just because it's milspec does not make it smart. In fact, usually the opposite.

I believe Kuleck noted in one of his books that the Army keeps insisting the M16 will be replaced "within a couple of years" and refusing to accept Colt, FN and other proposals for upgrades as "Wasted money."

Sorry, but with respect, after 25 years in service, "The manual says so" means dick to me. The manual was usually written by ****stick.

[fivefivesix]

My $.02

I am new to these things but I went with a FailZero BCG. I am in LE and it was worth the extra cash for just a little more piece of mind it will go bang when I need it to.

Couple of things:
All current FZ kits have FA carriers. I ordered a semi kit from brownells expecting a semi carrier and hammer. It came with a FA carrier. I contacted FZ for clarification and they verified all current kits going out are FA carriers due to customer demand.

Spike isn't really any cheaper. FZ charges $250 and Spikes charges $225. But Spikes doesn't include a hammer. Then you need to spend $22 for a FZ hammer or $60 for Spikes battle trigger kit.

spikes does come with the coated hammer for 225.00
i bought one from aim and in the tube with the bcg was the coated hammer

[No Bananas]

Just read on this site that many FZ employees have quit or been let go. Is FailZero in trouble?

[jbsmwd]

link?

[No Bananas]

https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=78366&highlight=failzero

[MichaelZWilliamson]

I've got Next Generation Arms' X7 here for test and evaluation. The ceramic coating is amazing. So's the accuracy.

[scrambler 2]

Ah. Cheaper than the FZ site, can and I get a discount at Brownell's. Thanks for the lead.

I've been using Nib for a while now. I have experimenited with all the coatings you named earlier in your posts. long story short, Nib is in the middle of extremes. super hard melonite is too hard....soft matrix coatings such as nickle teflon and ceramics are too soft and wear quickly. all will work, but have their pros and cons, Nib is self lubricious and hard enough to last without flaking or peeling. tactically it is superior because you can run it wet or dry. I have shot more rounds in Nib coated guns than you would beleive, it is the best.
there is a company, WMD guns, that will Nib your original parts that fail zero would not. so you now have a choice. they are on the web.
scrambler 2.

[boomhower]

I've been using Nib for a while now. I have experimenited with all the coatings you named earlier in your posts. long story short, Nib is in the middle of extremes. super hard melonite is too hard....soft matrix coatings such as nickle teflon and ceramics are too soft and wear quickly. all will work, but have their pros and cons, Nib is self lubricious and hard enough to last without flaking or peeling. tactically it is superior because you can run it wet or dry. I have shot more rounds in Nib coated guns than you would beleive, it is the best.
there is a company, WMD guns, that will Nib your original parts that fail zero would not. so you now have a choice. they are on the web.
scrambler 2.

You just made my day. I've been wanting to coat my DD BCG to go with my FZ BCG. This also opens up triggers a bit since you can get the hammers coated. I've always been under the impression FZ was the only was ones that could do it. I'll be giving a report on WMD shortly.

[MichaelZWilliamson]

It's worth a test. I'm also looking at barrel extension and breech face in chrome.

[markm]

This thread is ARFcom A LA MADRE. :bad:

[BluegrassGunGuy]

This thread is ARFcom A LA MADRE. :bad:

Do you go to sleep at night dreaming about pissing in people cheerios the next morning?

[vicious_cb]

So what do these fancy coatings do that a well lubed parked carrier does not?

[MichaelZWilliamson]

So what do these fancy coatings do that a well lubed parked carrier does not?

Work better.

[DOA]

So what do these fancy coatings do that a well lubed parked carrier does not?

Think PT Barnum. ;)

[MichaelZWilliamson]

Yes, the Army has NEVER settled for second best. Everything they have is flawless. When they changed the Garand, and the M16, it's because Infantrymen know better than John C. or Eugene.

In fact, the peak of weapons development was the Remington Rolling Block. Repeaters are for fools who can't shoot.

"PT Barnum" more aptly applies to the morons with $1000 worth of crap hanging off rails, who don't know how to shoot, and figure, "The Army must be smarter than me, so 1960s materials are good enough for the functional mechanism of my rifle."

I'm going out on a limb here and guessing some of you don't have training in metallurgy or chemistry....amirite?;)

[MichaelZWilliamson]

Oh, yes--and issue M4s are built by the lowest bidder.;)

[vicious_cb]

Yes, the Army has NEVER settled for second best. Everything they have is flawless. When they changed the Garand, and the M16, it's because Infantrymen know better than John C. or Eugene.

In fact, the peak of weapons development was the Remington Rolling Block. Repeaters are for fools who can't shoot.

"PT Barnum" more aptly applies to the morons with $1000 worth of crap hanging off rails, who don't know how to shoot, and figure, "The Army must be smarter than me, so 1960s materials are good enough for the functional mechanism of my rifle."

I'm going out on a limb here and guessing some of you don't have training in metallurgy or chemistry....amirite?;)

MichaelZWilliamson, I don't know if you know this, but you're coming off as an arrogant know it all a-la an arfcom "expert". Whether this is intentional or not I do not know.

[MichaelZWilliamson]

I don't know if you know it, but so are some others.

I'll go ahead and put a chart together of materials and their properties. Unless everyone here already knows everything?

[MichaelZWilliamson]

And quite seriously--would my professional reviews of various platforms be welcomed here? Or would I be wasting my time and "coming off as arrogant" by doing so?

[Dave_M]

Nevermind.

[MarkG]

Work better.

Problem is, you couldn't prove they work better with both hands and a flashlight in a dark room.

[rsilvers]

I've been using Nib for a while now. I have experimenited with all the coatings you named earlier in your posts. long story short, Nib is in the middle of extremes. super hard melonite is too hard....soft matrix coatings such as nickle teflon and ceramics are too soft and wear quickly. all will work, but have their pros and cons, Nib is self lubricious and hard enough to last without flaking or peeling. tactically it is superior because you can run it wet or dry. I have shot more rounds in Nib coated guns than you would beleive, it is the best.
there is a company, WMD guns, that will Nib your original parts that fail zero would not. so you now have a choice. they are on the web.
scrambler 2.

I am also a big fan of NiB and we use it on our cam pins. But, we specifically manufactured the pins to allow for the thickness of the NiB. I think you run a serious risk of applying it to existing parts running outside of the drawing for part dimensions. This also applies to parts coating with anything. There are people who have chrome-lined barrels without electropolishing and it results to an out of spec bore. If you buy parts with coating or have them coated, approach it with extreme prejudice and have the critical dimensions gauged to a military drawing before believing it all worked out as a win win.

[scrambler 2]

MW, if it not for forward thinking people like you none of the innovations we enjoy today would happen. everything from toilets to weapons. ( I can use the stream or ground or my neighbors back yard to defecate in, why do I need to buy a toilet? ) I too wonder at someone who will hang a grand of crap off the gun but do not want to spend money making their weapon more reliable. Nib works, people have tested it, OEMs have adopted it, there is no more question to it. i.e. the TALO Glock, do you really think that Glock would have allowed that to happen without their blessing??? the first finish they have ever allowed other than their own. it is up to you whether to use it or not, no is forcing it on anyone, but don't diss something you have never tried. everyone is entitled to their opinion,
but your opinion is only valid if you have tested or experienced the subject matter. if not, then it is hot air.
scrambler 2.

[scrambler 2]

I am also a big fan of NiB and we use it on our cam pins. But, we specifically manufactured the pins to allow for the thickness of the NiB. I think you run a serious risk of applying it to existing parts running outside of the drawing for part dimensions. This also applies to parts coating with anything. There are people who have chrome-lined barrels without electropolishing and it results to an out of spec bore. If you buy parts with coating or have them coated, approach it with extreme prejudice and have the critical dimensions gauged to a military drawing before believing it all worked out as a win win.

The guys at WMD are pioneers at coating weapons with Nib.
they are well aware of dimensions and tolerances when coating Nib.
1/2 mil of Nib will rarely throw anything but the tightest tolerance out of spec.
scrambler 2.

[jbsmwd]

The guys at WMD are pioneers at coating weapons with Nib.
they are well aware of dimensions and tolerances when coating Nib.
1/2 mil of Nib will rarely throw anything but the tightest tolerance out of spec.
scrambler 2.

Then why is the cam pin and bolt area so tight that are brand new with NiB? The sample of 2 that I have were tight.

[scrambler 2]

Did WMD coat them?
scrambler 2

[SOP1]

The M4 you see as my picture was done by WMD Guns. The upper, lower, barrel, hammer and BCG is all coated in their Nib-X (nickel boron). I have shot it a few thousand of rounds with no signs of any wear. Plus no lube has ever been used on this rifle and never will.

[jbsmwd]

Did WMD coat them?
scrambler 2

FailZero did bought as a kit

[No Bananas]

The M4 you see as my picture was done by WMD Guns. The upper, lower, barrel, hammer and BCG is all coated in their Nib-X (nickel boron). I have shot it a few thousand of rounds with no signs of any wear. Plus no lube has ever been used on this rifle and never will.

SOP1,
Can you post some pics?:smile:

[scrambler 2]

FailZero did bought as a kit

I see, so what does that have to do with WMD? a different company.
or are you saying that 1/2 mil of coating is too much on cam pins.
or perhaps the company who manufactured the cam pin turned it a little to the high side of the drawing. or maybe FZ coated high on their spec. there is a lot of variables. which one do you pick?
scrambler 2.

[Ryan S.]

I see, so what does that have to do with WMD? a different company.
or are you saying that 1/2 mil of coating is too much on cam pins.
or perhaps the company who manufactured the cam pin turned it a little to the high side of the drawing. or maybe FZ coated high on their spec. there is a lot of variables. which one do you pick?
scrambler 2.

WMD is the employees who broke off from FZ to focus on serving individuals also. That is where all the commends about "is FZ going under"... "they are laying off employees"..."employees are quitting"... etc are comming from.

[No Bananas]

Have there been widespread issues w/ HC, NiB, NP3 coatings with intolerances that have effected function or accuracy?

[rsilvers]

Have there been widespread issues w/ HC, NiB, NP3 coatings with intolerances that have effected function or accuracy?

The cam pin diameter has to be within +- 0.00025. You can strip the dry film lube off one, measure it with a micrometer, then decide how much NiB to add in order to hit the spec dead-center. It can be done, but it is a project. When we do it, we tell the vendor what the final dimensions need to be, and it they are outside that, then we reject the parts. If a guy just sends his BCG to be coated and does not provide a drawing for the final dimensions, then even if it were to come back outside mil specs, you would have no basis to reject the work as you never provided a drawing.

To answer your question - I had a coated BCG which was out of spec - and frankly, I would expect them all to be out of spec unless they were machined smaller specifically to be coated. Is this enough to cause failure? Maybe, maybe not. But I would rather have a phosphated BCG which was in spec than a fancy coated one which was over-sized to the point of being outside of the allowed-for tolerance - even by a little. So I am not getting anything coated without a guarantee it will be done within mil specs for final dimensions.

[jbsmwd]

I see, so what does that have to do with WMD? a different company.
or are you saying that 1/2 mil of coating is too much on cam pins.
or perhaps the company who manufactured the cam pin turned it a little to the high side of the drawing. or maybe FZ coated high on their spec. there is a lot of variables. which one do you pick?
scrambler 2.

Man if I pissed in your cheerio's, I am sorry, that was not my intent. I am here to LEARN.

I do have a couple questions.

1a. Is the NiB that WMD is offering that EXACTLY the same as FailZero was/is offering? (NiB Class 5 if i recall correctly, if not please
let me know)

1b. If no, is it better or worse? (please state why it's better or worse)

2. Does the process change the tempering/strength/Rc hardness of the steel in anyway?

3. Do you work for/with WMD?

and lastly

4. Why did you pick a name that very similar to the FailZero rep that was/is on this forum? because of this I assumed you worked for FailZero sorry i normally block out avatars

[No Bananas]

The cam pin diameter has to be within +- 0.00025. You can strip the dry film lube off one, measure it with a micrometer, then decide how much NiB to add in order to hit the spec dead-center. It can be done, but it is a project. When we do it, we tell the vendor what the final dimensions need to be, and it they are outside that, then we reject the parts. If a guy just sends his BCG to be coated and does not provide a drawing for the final dimensions, then even if it were to come back outside mil specs, you would have no basis to reject the work as you never provided a drawing.

To answer your question - I had a coated BCG which was out of spec - and frankly, I would expect them all to be out of spec unless they were machined smaller specifically to be coated. Is this enough to cause failure? Maybe, maybe not. But I would rather have a phosphated BCG which was in spec than a fancy coated one which was over-sized to the point of being outside of the allowed-for tolerance - even by a little. So I am not getting anything coated without a guarantee it will be done within mil specs for final dimensions.

I hear what you are saying, and it makes sense. However, how tight are the dimensions for an AR BCG? Will it still function if it's .00025 off? I just haven't heard of widespread issues of any coating on a BCG being too thick and throwing off function or accuracy. I can't imagine the coating to be so thick that it threw off the headspacing and causing a danger. All that being said, I'd want to make sure that I went through a quality outfit that stands by their work.

[rsilvers]

I don't know what you mean about 0.00025 off.

You mean 0.0005 larger than nominal or 0.00025 larger than nominal?

[No Bananas]

My point is although that specificationis crucial to the part of your suppressor design and manufacturer, I'm not sure that the tolerances are that tight on the BCG. No, I'm not saying we should just willie nillie address tolerancesof any movingpart. But I just have neverheard of "my gun blew up, accuracy sucked or wouldn't function after I got X coating."

[rsilvers]

My point is although that specificationis crucial to the part of your suppressor design and manufacturer, I'm not sure that the tolerances are that tight on the BCG.

I was quoting the actual requirements. The cam pin diameter has to be within +- 0.00025 or else it is out of spec. This is about 1/10 the thickness of a hair. This is not all that hard to do with grinding, but hard to do when you add a two layer coating as you have to control tolerance stack.

If you send a cam pin to a gunsmith to be coated, there is a very good chance they will return you an out of spec part.

[scrambler 2]

rsilvers, you forget that most cam pins that come in for refinish already have a coating of phos or other material that is usually
thicker than the Nib that it is replaced with. so no, they are not generally out of spec. yes I used to work for Fail Zero, we did a technical analysis of every part that was coated. the cam pins were and are coated at .00035. which is not enough of a stack up to throw them out of spec since there is a plus and minus variable to keep. the proof? thousands of FZ kits out there that work with cam pins that were not altered to accept coating. and if you work for one the major companies that FZ has and is doing R&D work for then that means I inspected and cleared those cam pins and carriers and bolts that you had coated. We started a refurb business early on, and
up until the time I left there were no returns for malfunctioning parts whatsoever. and I have not said anything degrading about Fail Zero in any of my posts, and will not. I'm back to working as a Gunsmith full time and as for the work I did for Nib and FZ, I hear that FZ cannot make it fast enough.
scrambler 2

[rsilvers]

This works because there is normally a 0.0003 thick dry-film lubricant on the cam pin. The other parts are not normally coated.

[scrambler 2]

Agreed, some coatings are much thicker and will bring the part out of spec. parts such as the carrier .00035 - .0005 of Nib does not affect it at all.
scrambler 2.

[thisaway]

I run a BCM IonBond BCG in my 14.5 midlength BCM carbine. I don't have a clue what "DSC" even means. My question is this: even though the IonBond coating may not make much of a difference for me (slothful, fat-assed civilian shooter), the coating doesn't really cause any disadvantage either, does it?

[rsilvers]

As long as the thickness is the same as the finish that was removed it should be ok. Is it PVD over nickel?

[mag318]

Last year I sent my BCG to Robar for their NP3 electroless nickle finish. The first big difference as opposed to it's previous parkerized finish was the ease of cleaning the carbon build up on the bolt. NP3 is teflon impregnated so it requires much less lubrication. So far I put 1K rounds thru my carbine and there are no signs of wear. I really like this finish and IMO it is superior to parkerizing and well worth the money.

[scrambler 2]

NP3 is a very good finish. Nib has all the same qualities and is able to run without lube and is harder.
scrambler2.

[No Bananas]

Quick questions for scrambler and crew:

-Does WMD gaurantee their work? No flaking or chipping of the coating?

-If I send in a BCG w/ properly staked gas key. Will it be too damaged to coat? Do I need to include a new gas key and screws?

-Is there a real advantage to having the upper and BCG coated?

[scrambler 2]

Quick questions for scrambler and crew:

-Does WMD gaurantee their work? No flaking or chipping of the coating?

-If I send in a BCG w/ properly staked gas key. Will it be too damaged to coat? Do I need to include a new gas key and screws?

-Is there a real advantage to having the upper and BCG coated?

Yes, if the coating wears or has bond issues we will re-coat the part.
we can coat with the gas key staked in place, no need to remove it.
the advantage is Nib against Nib, if you are shooting full auto, or using it in extreme conditions, or shooting a lot of rds down range, it makes it easier to clean and of course, lube free use if desired.
scrambler2.

[geistacwm]

Not sure what long term benefits the coating will have on BGCs, but when put to trigger group such as LWRC and Spikes, It makes for smooth action.

[constructor]

FZ touts their NiB because they are only one of 3 shops in the world that can do "level 5" NiB coating - all others are the inferior level 3 or lower. There's lots of info all over the place on this. What they do isn't readily available for customer owned parts anywhere at the moment. Do some research.
I've got Spikes NiB BCGs in every 556 AR I own. Less friction, easier to clean - that was worth the cost *to me*. The things slide in my uppers like there's a coating of butter in there - pretty crazy. The upper wears less as a result - that's a fact I've verified on various new builds. I still use some lube, but it's nice knowing if I didn't, the rifle would still function.
But as always, with many, this may be an unjustified luxury for some folks who will resort to calling them "fads."
Just remember, in a hot, dirty, metal on metal movement situation, like the upper rec, less friction is a good thing for many reasons.

Strange, I open a FZ box and the carrier on the inside has the exact same stamped number and coating looks exactly the same as the carriers we buy straight from the manufacturer.