View Full Version : High round-count users: At what point do you retire a rifle/carbine to back-up duty?
Scotter260
09-06-11, 23:33
This is likely one of those questions about a non-issue that so many here, including myself, look at with disdain but I'm interested to find out if heavy users:
1. Keep a rifle/carbine indefinitely replacing parts as needed including major parts
2. Buy new and move their current set-up to secondary/back-up duty after so many rounds or perhaps after a set number of years, etc.
3. Buy new and just sell off the current arm, minus reusable accessories, at a loss accepting that loss as rent paid in order to start over fresh
4. Buy new while holding on to all past arms for spare parts, loaners, etc.
Let's say that heavy-user means someone who trains, competes, or otherwise expends multiple thousands of rounds per year.
What do you define as just broke in, "sorta" used but adequate for primary duty, and worn out and not suitable for primary duty?
I'm not talking about buying just to get something new but realizing that buying a new replacement is easier and more financially sound than buying new parts and spending the time to replace them.
Really...you should always inspect all parts during a cleaning session on the rifle...there really is no round count for parts to fail...its just like a car...the better you maintain it...the longer it lasts
Interesting question. I look forward to seeing the responses.
It seems to me it would be cheaper to continually rebuild the rifle in a regular schedule. The military does that, although with mixed results it seems. With someone who knows what they're doing servicing a rifle regularly, inspecting and replacing worn parts, I don't see why a rifle couldn't last for many decades.
I don't have a link.... but someone who knew their rifles saw a slab-side lower still in service, I believe it was with the Air Force. If I recall correctly, it was being used in Iraq/Afghanistan. Of course, it had been rebuilt and updated a number of times.
My friend in the Air Force Academy trains on an M16A1. I imagine it had seen quite a bit of rebuilding.
Interesting question. I look at it 2 ways.
Replacing a barrel is relatively easy and cheaper than replacing a whole carbine..
New barrel technology may make it a bit easier to decide when to change. Kind of a keeping up with the Jones's so to speak.
I have not shot out any barrels yet so I will keep a close eye on the responses from the heavy shooters.
And how do you know this? AFAIK- you have no military experience and you are all of 19 years old. I have a hard time believing that you have any extensive experience with the AR.
Interesting question. I look forward to seeing the responses.
It seems to me it would be cheaper to continually rebuild the rifle in a regular schedule. The military does that, although with mixed results it seems. With someone who knows what they're doing servicing a rifle regularly, inspecting and replacing worn parts, I don't see why a rifle couldn't last for many decades.
I don't have a link.... but someone who knew their rifles saw a slab-side lower still in service, I believe it was with the Air Force. If I recall correctly, it was being used in Iraq/Afghanistan. Of course, it had been rebuilt and updated a number of times.
My friend in the Air Force Academy trains on an M16A1. I imagine it had seen quite a bit of rebuilding.
To the OP,
Not sure how to address this question to be honest. Common sense would dictate that replacing parts as needed would be cheaper than buying a complete firearm. My BCM SBR had 5K rounds through it before I did anything to it. It didn't need anything done to it, simply I decided to change the configuration.
Generally speaking the only parts that would more than likely need replacing would be the bolt, barrel, gas rings, and the buffer spring. Obviously at some point other springs would need to be replaced as well. Gaging of certain parts is but one facet of this process. Since most people do not have access to the gages and others do not have the technical know how you have to either wait until something fails or you have to set a number and go with it.
As we have seen good barrels can last a number of rounds. Assuming that a good AR barrel lasts 14K rounds (arbitrary number) then you could buy several barrels before you get to the point of matching the price of a quality weapon. The configuration would also be a determining factor. Selling an AR that has a 230.00 rail system and other accessories only to turn around and buy a new one doesn't seem to make much sense.
Airborne12b
09-07-11, 16:05
Couldn't the TM be used as a baseline for service life on components...obviously provided you used quality components?
To the OP,
Not sure how to address this question to be honest. Common sense would dictate that replacing parts as needed would be cheaper than buying a complete firearm. My BCM SBR had 5K rounds through it before I did anything to it. It didn't need anything done to it, simply I decided to change the configuration.
Generally speaking the only parts that would more than likely need replacing would be the bolt, barrel, gas rings, and the buffer spring. Obviously at some point other springs would need to be replaced as well. Gaging of certain parts is but one facet of this process. Since most people do not have access to the gages and others do not have the technical know how you have to either wait until something fails or you have to set a number and go with it.
As we have seen good barrels can last a number of rounds. Assuming that a good AR barrel lasts 14K rounds (arbitrary number) then you could buy several barrels before you get to the point of matching the price of a quality weapon. The configuration would also be a determining factor. Selling an AR that has a 230.00 rail system and other accessories only to turn around and buy a new one doesn't seem to make much sense.
Have you read the TM before? Everything is based off of conducting gaging and measuring (headspace, bore erosion, firing pin protrusion, buffer spring length, etc..) and function testing of the weapon.
There are no established round counts or anything of that nature. It also provides steps to identifying certain issues.
However, I have yet to find anything in the TM that identifies bolt bounce or how to identify it. As an example.
Couldn't the TM be used as a baseline for service life on components...obviously provided you used quality components?
steelonsteel
09-07-11, 20:03
I would think an good quality carbine would be worth keeping around - so replace any and all parts when broken/worn out, including replacing a BCG and barrel when the time calls for it.
Scotter260
09-07-11, 23:43
I appreciate the responses thus far and IG, I did qualify in one of the options that reusable (non-wear) accessories, in my mind meaning rails and such, would be kept and base items, again in my mind meaning a complete upper or BCG would be relegated or sold off.
I also understand that maintaining for most isn't difficult, can also be enjoyable for most, and educational for everyone. I just wonder if logging round counts and replacing some parts at X number of rounds while replacing others at Y number of rounds might not be considered a waste when one could start over with fresh everything at a given round count. I'm not advocating or arguing for it, just wondering if it's a practice that's out there.
I figure that folks aren't going to want to run a primary to parts or performance failure although most of us who pay for our stuff aren't using it in a life or death environment.
Here's something that should help establish some baselines:
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=61505
Dont wanna get my head bitten off here but I have seen rifles that have shot over 30,000 rounds within my department. Some of these weapon are a number of years old, I think over 10 to 15 years old and handled by dudes that don't own them. Our armors change out barrels BCG, springs and what not. The upper and lowers are inspected and put back into service. I think its cheaper to change out parts then to buy new rifles.
Airborne12b
09-08-11, 07:54
Have you read the TM before? Everything is based off of conducting gaging and measuring (headspace, bore erosion, firing pin protrusion, buffer spring length, etc..) and function testing of the weapon.
There are no established round counts or anything of that nature. It also provides steps to identifying certain issues.
However, I have yet to find anything in the TM that identifies bolt bounce or how to identify it. As an example.
I honestly haven't read that TM, but I spent a small about of time in motorpool and found vehicular TM's pretty good, though I have an engineering background and have experience with engines and powertrain construction and rebuild procedure. I figured it might be a good starting point based on other TM's I have used.
An issue with that is that even if there were established TM round-counts nobody knows how many rounds have been through military weapons, it's not really tracked, at least not with us. You just kind of shoot it until something breaks then turn it in, it's not a proactive system.
Airborne12b
09-08-11, 09:41
An issue with that is that even if there were established TM round-counts nobody knows how many rounds have been through military weapons, it's not really tracked, at least not with us. You just kind of shoot it until something breaks then turn it in, it's not a proactive system.
We never had any idea with any of ours, you might have had an idea about how many you have fired, but you have no idea how many were fired previous to you being issued the weapon...unless it was a brand new gun when you got it.
So I think it is safe to say that without the necessary gages and knowledge on how to correctly use them you wouldn't know until something broke or your groups started opening up telling you that either you had ME/TE or your crown was damaged.
That's a good point. It would be all but impossible to use rounds counts as a basis. Especially in a military environment.
An issue with that is that even if there were established TM round-counts nobody knows how many rounds have been through military weapons, it's not really tracked, at least not with us. You just kind of shoot it until something breaks then turn it in, it's not a proactive system.
norinco982lover
09-08-11, 14:26
Dont wanna get my head bitten off here but I have seen rifles that have shot over 30,000 rounds within my department. Some of these weapon are a number of years old, I think over 10 to 15 years old and handled by dudes that don't own them. Our armors change out barrels BCG, springs and what not. The upper and lowers are inspected and put back into service. I think its cheaper to change out parts then to buy new rifles.
My department has some olympics that are supposedly 15+ years old and our armorer claims they have a round count in the 20 or 30k range.
I KNOW the barrels have not been replaced. (now we have mainly Colts ..and the Olympic was malfunctioning yesterday).
To the OP it obviously would be cheaper to repair as needed.
~Norinco
This is likely one of those questions about a non-issue that so many here, including myself, look at with disdain but I'm interested to find out if heavy users:
1. Keep a rifle/carbine indefinitely replacing parts as needed including major parts
2. Buy new and move their current set-up to secondary/back-up duty after so many rounds or perhaps after a set number of years, etc.
3. Buy new and just sell off the current arm, minus reusable accessories, at a loss accepting that loss as rent paid in order to start over fresh
4. Buy new while holding on to all past arms for spare parts, loaners, etc.
Let's say that heavy-user means someone who trains, competes, or otherwise expends multiple thousands of rounds per year.
What do you define as just broke in, "sorta" used but adequate for primary duty, and worn out and not suitable for primary duty?
I'm not talking about buying just to get something new but realizing that buying a new replacement is easier and more financially sound than buying new parts and spending the time to replace them.
Firmly option 1 for me. However, some parts may end up on different rifles at some point, so there's some of #4 in there as well. Once you can competently completely put complete rifles together, it becomes more about the individual parts rather than looking at them as "complete rifles", IMHO.
My definition of broke in? Don't really give it much thought to be honest - its a rolling process, I shoot all my guns on a regular basis, I've never once done the "It's now broke in so I'm going to set it aside for a rainy day" thing.
...its just like a car...
Going off of some of the replies that have been offered since your post, its seeming like a car might not be the best comparison.
No matter how well maintained, all cars that are actually being driven will reach a point where is no longer makes sense to keep making the repairs needed to keep it function.
In contrast, my takeaway from the responses so far is that rifles/carbines generally don't reach such a point because the parts one would expect to need replacing in a heavily used rifle won't exceed the cost of a new rifle.
MeanStreaker
09-08-11, 17:21
This discussion is a great reason why it's so important to keep accurate, detailed logs for each of our firearms.
I've got 7,630 rounds through a cheap-o wilson arms barrel from m&a parts. groups have opened up from 1.5 to 3.25 (measured today) at 100 yards. it's now a plinker.
This discussion is a great reason why it's so important to keep accurate, detailed logs for each of our firearms.
Damnit! I need to go out and buy all new guns now! :jester:
your answer is number one on your list. These gun with proper care will last indefintely. You might need to replace things like a bolt or firing pin from time to time, and some will chime in with round count rules of thumb- extractor and spring at x round count or whatever. My across the course rifle that is shot a couple times a month but meticulously maintained is on all its original components except barrel. it is over 20 years old. Some of the rebuilt guns going in harms way right now will have vietnam era a1 lowers rebuilt with the auto word ground off and burst stamped on top of the old lettering if this tells you anything.
Not really since we already know that round counts aren't the determining factor. It also can't be done unless the firearm is absolutely new and you have strict control of the weapons.
For a PD or military it would be virtually impossible.
This discussion is a great reason why it's so important to keep accurate, detailed logs for each of our firearms.
And how do you know this? AFAIK- you have no military experience and you are all of 19 years old. I have a hard time believing that you have any extensive experience with the AR.
Anyone else would have read that and understood what I meant... you just have it in for me and look for any way you can possibly contort anything I say into being incorrect.
The military doesn't rebuild on a schedule, as far as I know. They run to failure. What I was trying to get at, which anyone else likely understood, is that the military continually rebuilds rifles for many years. I provided my sources on that information.
Let me ask you this... How do you know Colt uses 158 Carpenter steel in the bolt? Have you personally performed the tests on the steel to determine that it is in fact that alloy?
My guess would be no... you have not personally done that. So, by your logic, there is not any possible way you could know what type of steel is used in a Colt bolt.
You have sources for that information. You have not personally proved the information to be true... but that doesn't mean the information is wrong.
I can't figure out what your problem is... Just because I don't think Colt is the cat's meow, you have developed a personal grudge. Why don't you just drop it- we disagree, move on. This thread was going fine until you caused a disturbance.
GermanSynergy
09-09-11, 11:07
Dude.....
There are many members here with decades of verifiable experience on the AR platform, to include employing it in combat, maintaining it in a combat theater and training others how to employ it in said theater.
Check the attitude, read more, post less.
Just some friendly advice.
Anyone else would have read that and understood what I meant... you just have it in for me and look for any way you can possibly contort anything I say into being incorrect.
The military doesn't rebuild on a schedule, as far as I know. They run to failure. What I was trying to get at, which anyone else likely understood, is that the military continually rebuilds rifles for many years. I provided my sources on that information.
Let me ask you this... How do you know Colt uses 158 Carpenter steel in the bolt? Have you personally performed the tests on the steel to determine that it is in fact that alloy?
My guess would be no... you have not personally done that. So, by your logic, there is not any possible way you could know what type of steel is used in a Colt bolt.
You have sources for that information. You have not personally proved the information to be true... but that doesn't mean the information is wrong.
I can't figure out what your problem is... Just because I don't think Colt is the cat's meow, you have developed a personal grudge. Why don't you just drop it- we disagree, move on. This thread was going fine until you caused a disturbance.
Anyone else would have read that and understood what I meant... you just have it in for me and look for any way you can possibly contort anything I say into being incorrect.
The military doesn't rebuild on a schedule, as far as I know. They run to failure. What I was trying to get at, which anyone else likely understood, is that the military continually rebuilds rifles for many years. I provided my sources on that information.
Let me ask you this... How do you know Colt uses 158 Carpenter steel in the bolt? Have you personally performed the tests on the steel to determine that it is in fact that alloy?
My guess would be no... you have not personally done that. So, by your logic, there is not any possible way you could know what type of steel is used in a Colt bolt.
You have sources for that information. You have not personally proved the information to be true... but that doesn't mean the information is wrong.
I can't figure out what your problem is... Just because I don't think Colt is the cat's meow, you have developed a personal grudge. Why don't you just drop it- we disagree, move on. This thread was going fine until you caused a disturbance.
I don't personally know IG or you but, I would speculate it's that you're a teenager who showed up & started spouting knowledge you can't possibly have had time to amass? I remember being 19 or 20 & thinking I was a ****ing genius amongst fools. Now I can tell you that I didn't know 2% of what I know now, regardless of topic.
You may take the read more & talk less approach, or you may continue to argue with professionals, your call?
Just some constructive advice,
Have a nice day.
Edited to add: All of us can regurgitate shit we read on the internet, it doesn't replace real knowledge or experience. There is a lot to learn here if you stop typing long enough to take it in.
Ghost 954RR
09-09-11, 13:32
There are no established round counts or anything of that nature.
Then why are they devloping a round counter to determine when to replace parts?
SOPMOD PROGRAM
OVERVIEW
For the
National Defense Industrial
Association
Small Arms Symposium
17 April 2006
"Sub-Program Status: GREEN
Enables unit armorers to determine number of rounds fired
Minimizes catastrophic parts failures and malfunctions in combat
More cost-effective…reliability, & maintenance"
Bolt Failure Problem
"Most Bolts Subjected to Harsh Firing Schedules Will Show Initial
Cracking Around 3,000 to 6,000 Rounds"
"Cracked Lugs Are Normally Impossible to
Detect Ahead of Time Without a Microscope
May Cause Weapon to Jam When Lug Breaks Loose"
On Milder Schedules, Nearly All Bolts Will Show Initial Cracking at
6,000 to 10,000 Rounds
Once the Crack Is Initiated, the Bolt May Fail at Any Time, or May
Last for Thousands of Rounds, Depending on Crack Propagation"
The Barrel Burn Problem
"Most M4A1 Carbine Barrels Subjected to Harsh Firing Schedules
Will Be Burned Out Between 4,000 and 6,000 Rounds
On Milder Firing Schedules, They May Last 10,000 Rounds
Barrel Gauges Are Only 60% Accurate and Are Expensive to Buy
and Calibrate. After Barrel Inspection:
The Armorer May Think the Gun Is OK, but There Is a 40%
Chance That the Barrel Is Burned Out and the Shooter Cannot
Reliably Hit His Enemies
The Armorer May Have Turned the Gun in for Depot Overhaul,
but There Is a 40% Chance That the Barrel Is Still
Good…millions of Dollars Wasted in Unneeded Repairs"
The Barrel Burn Problem –Throats
"The Throat Is the Rifled Area in Front of the Chamber Erodes Forward of the Chamber in a Cone-shaped Pattern or a
Football-shaped Pattern Taper Barrel Gauges Do Not
Adequately Measure Throat Erosion
Throat Erosion is the Primary, Progressive Cause of Poor Accuracy"
The Barrel Burn Problem – Gas Port Erosion
Unburned Powder Particles Mixed in Hot Gasses Erode Port
Decreases Gas Friction, but Without Increase of External Port Size
Cannot Be Detected With Gauges
Increases Rate of Fire, Increases Bolt, Spring, and Part Fatigue
Possible Cause of Failure to Eject and Poor Accuracy
Goals
"Modify the Current Maintenance System From a Time Schedule to
a Usage Schedule
Minimize Catastrophic Failures and Weapon Jamming, and
Resultant Injuries or Deaths in Combat
Enable Weapons Maintenance Personnel (Armorers) to Easily
Determine the Number of Rounds Fired Through a Weapon
Provide Data Collection Device (DCD)
Distinguish Blanks From Ball Ammo
Between Dry and Live Fire
Cadence of Fire
Barrel Temperature"
The issues are connected. There is no established round count because there is no way to know how many rounds have been fired. Developing a round-counter would also go hand-in-hand with developing round count standards, which would still ultimately only be like the mileage on your car.
which would still ultimately only be like the mileage on your car.
True, but anything that allows for a more proactive parts replacement schedule (your car has one of those too) instead of a, 'run it til it breaks' is 100% a step forward IMO.
Contrary to guessing and making stuff up there are a few places in the United States military where the gunsmiths and shooters have more than three brain cells.
Some pistols, rifles, and carbines are issued right out of the manufacturer's vapor-barrier bags straight off the truck from the National Inventory Control Point -- the first place Uncle Sam puts his hands on the machine from the time it is shipped from the manufacturer.
Guns fired with fairly meticulous records can go extraordinary round counts as their components and sub-assemblies get rotated and changed out for preventative reasons (fix it before it fails). Others have a flat service life where they're turned in and the shooter gets a brand-new weapon BEFORE it fails (at the government-specified and warranted round-count -- to be re-built by Mother Army and re-issued or scrapped).
A round counter is a band-aid for those shooters who don't know nor care how their weapon is shooting, and for armorers (parts-changers) who don't know a borescope or Magnuflux/non-destructive test machine from their ass or a hole in the ground.
Pardon my potty mouth.
sinister,
Thanks for providing another perspective on the matter.
Contrary to guessing and making stuff up there are a few places in the United States military where the gunsmiths and shooters have more than three brain cells.
Some pistols, rifles, and carbines are issued right out of the manufacturer's vapor-barrier bags straight off the truck from the National Inventory Control Point -- the first place Uncle Sam puts his hands on the machine from the time it is shipped from the manufacturer.
Guns fired with fairly meticulous records can go extraordinary round counts as their components and sub-assemblies get rotated and changed out for preventative reasons (fix it before it fails). Others have a flat service life where they're turned in and the shooter gets a brand-new weapon BEFORE it fails (at the government-specified and warranted round-count -- to be re-built by Mother Army and re-issued or scrapped).
A round counter is a band-aid for those shooters who don't know nor care how their weapon is shooting, and for armorers (parts-changers) who don't know a borescope or Magnuflux/non-destructive test machine from their ass or a hole in the ground.
Pardon my potty mouth.
lamarbrog,
Anyone else would have read that and understood what I meant... you just have it in for me and look for any way you can possibly contort anything I say into being incorrect.
You stated that the military rebuilds their weapons with mixed results or something to that effect. What do you mean mixed results? Again, this is just information that you heard from someone and you have no experience in the matter.
The military doesn't rebuild on a schedule, as far as I know. They run to failure. What I was trying to get at, which anyone else likely understood, is that the military continually rebuilds rifles for many years. I provided my sources on that information.
True to a point. But, if a service member were to go to the unit armor and report a deficiency then it would be fixed. Weapons are supposed to be gaged and inspected at least once a year. It can be done more often depending on firing schedules.
Let me ask you this... How do you know Colt uses 158 Carpenter steel in the bolt? Have you personally performed the tests on the steel to determine that it is in fact that alloy?
I don't have to know. The specifications are there and the information is documented. Unlike some people I am not going to run into the forest looking for a magical unicorn.
My guess would be no... you have not personally done that. So, by your logic, there is not any possible way you could know what type of steel is used in a Colt bolt.
You have sources for that information. You have not personally proved the information to be true... but that doesn't mean the information is wrong.
I can't figure out what your problem is... Just because I don't think Colt is the cat's meow, you have developed a personal grudge. Why don't you just drop it- we disagree, move on. This thread was going fine until you caused a disturbance.
The problem is- as I have told you before you show up here recommending stuff and sharing your vast experience which you cannot possibly have. I hope that's clear enough for you.
Guns fired with fairly meticulous records can go extraordinary round counts as their components and sub-assemblies get rotated and changed out for preventative reasons (fix it before it fails). Others have a flat service life where they're turned in and the shooter gets a brand-new weapon BEFORE it fails (at the government-specified and warranted round-count -- to be re-built by Mother Army and re-issued or scrapped).
I guess a more meticulously worded question would be for the majority of shooters who don't have access to their own arms depot, and are not purchasing weapon systems with specified round count warranties, at what point should simply replacing individual components identified through wear/schedule to be replaced be considered inadequate: i.e. after what length of time of replacing parts that look worn should a carbine be evaluated for a complete rebuild, or relegated to backup use only?
Similar to the excellent PM guide made by Hilton Yam for the 1911, which implies that six digit round counts are into the point of diminishing returns when using the same frame/slide combination, I'm not sure we have such an analog for AR15 (although the wide variety of configurations and brands would not doubt complicate such a venture)
Provide Data Collection Device (DCD)
Distinguish Blanks From Ball Ammo
Between Dry and Live Fire
Cadence of Fire
Barrel Temperature
I cannot even fathom such a device or the maintenance requirements of the device itself.
No unit I was ever in did round counts- it would be impossible to tell if the gun since last TI (technical inspection) had 10 rounds or 10000.
what the army does do after each unit deployment cycle (at least this was my experience) is box up the rifles from deployment and send them to depot for TI. All parts that meet standard are rebuilt again and those that are not get replaced. those rifles get put in the system to get issued to another unit.
It is not unusual during training for a few rifles to be drawn out of the arms room to get taken to the range or field for use with live ammo or blanks and swapped betwen multiple users (generating large round counts)while others just sit collecting dust.
steelonsteel
09-10-11, 09:35
It is not unusual during training for a few rifles to be drawn out of the arms room to get taken to the range or field for use with live ammo or blanks and swapped betwen multiple users (generating large round counts)while others just sit collecting dust.
I would think that would also save the wear and tear on the majority of the guns as well.
There could be an offset of getting the "lemon" that hs been the "training rifle" though?
I've heard tales of guys getting such a "lemon" when trying to do rifle quals, and after some argument, getting a new rifle and shooting a better score. now, that could be a story, or could be legit, or could just be an excuse for someone getting a reshoot. ANy experience with anything like that, out of curiosity?
and while I''m thinking about it, Are barrels REALLY burning out that quick? man that seems SHORT.
When I was in the Army every soldier was issued an individual weapon and they kept it for their duration in the unit until they were promoted or reassigned.
You were also required to conduct routine cleaning and PMCS. You filled out a 2404 and kept it in the buttstock (M16A2) days.
When I was in the USCG there weren't enough weapons for all personnel. So that means people often shared weapons. They were also very limited as to what they could do. It was the Gunners' Mates job to ensure that weapon were being maintained and if defective he scheduled the repairs with the servicing armory.
I was conducting some range evolution with the M92 and we had someone who failed to qualify. He/she claimed that the weapon wasn't acting correctly and it was slowing them down. Well low and behold after it was checked out thoroughly it was discovered that the hammer spring was worn and causing the issue. We issued a spare pistol and that person did qualify. So sometimes there is some truth to the stories, but not often.
I would think that would also save the wear and tear on the majority of the guns as well.
There could be an offset of getting the "lemon" that hs been the "training rifle" though?
I've heard tales of guys getting such a "lemon" when trying to do rifle quals, and after some argument, getting a new rifle and shooting a better score. now, that could be a story, or could be legit, or could just be an excuse for someone getting a reshoot. ANy experience with anything like that, out of curiosity?
and while I''m thinking about it, Are barrels REALLY burning out that quick? man that seems SHORT.
steelonsteel
09-10-11, 10:32
When I was in the Army every soldier was issued an individual weapon and they kept it for their duration in the unit until they were promoted or reassigned.
You were also required to conduct routine cleaning and PMCS. You filled out a 2404 and kept it in the buttstock (M16A2) days.
When I was in the USCG there weren't enough weapons for all personnel. So that means people often shared weapons. They were also very limited as to what they could do. It was the Gunners' Mates job to ensure that weapon were being maintained and if defective he scheduled the repairs with the servicing armory.
I was conducting some range evolution with the M92 and we had someone who failed to qualify. He/she claimed that the weapon wasn't acting correctly and it was slowing them down. Well low and behold after it was checked out thoroughly it was discovered that the hammer spring was worn and causing the issue. We issued a spare pistol and that person did qualify. So sometimes there is some truth to the stories, but not often.
thanks for the insight! appreciated!
The conventional "Leg" US Army is a mass-issue organization. You get what you're issued from a massive stock pile. What you get is what you get.
There are gauging protocols in the -24 and -34 maintenance technical manuals. These are, again, a general guide (a bore gauge will go this far; external finish looks like this; if cracked, replace, etc.). Brigades and divisions returning from overseas get visited by small arms maintenance teams for re-cock and re-set (as noted above).
Start date can be tracked on new weapons as far as when they got issued (i.e., you can probably check with the 82d Airborne Division's Property Book Officer and he can tell you that M4 Carbine W1234567 was received from the NICP on XX March, 2000, and issued to 1st Battalion, 325 Parachute Infantry Regiment on YY April, 2000. That's about it -- maintenance records are then down at the unit level and the individual Paratrooper (now on its 8th, 9th, or 10th owner, at least).
An M16 on Sand Hill at Fort Benning's Infantry Training Brigade will get a new owner every 16 weeks or more often, if cross-issued from the Weapons Pool to a troop in the Basic Training Brigade, Armor Training Brigade, or one of the Officer Training Courses. These guns get amazing punishment.
When Benning changed from the M16A2 to the M16A4 the Army Marksmanship Unit got some 350-400 of the tired girls while trainees got new A4s. No surprise, once you do a PROPER technical inspection (instead of just the general -24 and -34 guidelines) and replace worn out components with new the rifles shoot TIGHT again.
M16/AR lowers receive very little stress or wear. You may need to refinish the lower but that's cosmetic. Shit-can the trigger group and springs and replace with new. Lowers don't get cut up unless the trigger holes are hogged out (they get very little wear). The only lower I ever saw destroyed was when my battle buddy missed a window and the grappling hook and rope smashed in his magazine well on the way down.
This is based on military competition and forward-deployed Special Forces battalion experience (where your weapons are being serviced by the Air Force or Marines):
Generically and precautionary (for optimum accuracy at 600 yards) change out the barrel and gas rings every 3,500 rounds, and bolts every third barrel (12,000-15,000 rounds cumulative). This can only be determined by shooting to determine whether your accuracy is failing or not. A bore scope beats a throat gauge hands-down -- you are putting eyes-on your throat cracking and chrome-peeling instead of just guessing on wear using a generic gauge.
If you never shoot past 100-200 yards you can go 10,000 rounds on a barrel. Rapid fire (heat, i.e., "Mag-dumps") will kill a barrel's throat.
New trigger and hammer springs every 9,000 rounds. Depending on cam pin wear change out the upper every fourth barrel (12,000-15,000 rounds) if it's cracking, otherwise keep going.
Check your flash suppressor/compensator slots for gas/flame-cutting and cracks every 5,000 rounds.
It's a machine -- change out parts either before they fail or as you see they're going to.
Repeat as necessary until you retire or pass the weapon to a child or grandchild.
These re-builds are issued out at the Small Arms Firing Schools at the National Matches, CMP Creedmoor Matches, and the All-Army. They are capable of shooting a 100-point rapid-fire "Clean" score at 200 yards.
http://i212.photobucket.com/albums/cc272/cozmacozmy/CMP007.jpg
http://www.danpassaro.com/img/s8/v10/p267946634-3.jpg
http://www.fototime.com/2A89F2F8F5FE539/standard.jpg
^^You earn you money as a subject matter expert perhaps like none other, I learn stuff from just about every one of your post!! That is one helluva a great post brother:)
eta...just for clarity, I don't think the SME's really earn money..just a figure of speech.
MustangGreg66
09-10-11, 13:50
Back to what the OP asked, for individual actual results and plans.
I am a 3-gun competitor with no law enforcement or military experience. With how often I practice with my rifles and shoot it in competition I'm getting several thousand rounds per year shot through my guns. In fact I'm starting to shoot more in my dedicated .22 to save my primary competition rifle.
Anyway, I built my competition rifle with the intention of replacing parts (barrel,bolt, BCG parts) as they fail to perform to my need. So that would fall under #1.
I was weighing my options for a barrel and decided to go with a DPMS barrel for several reasons: It was cheaper than the other options, accurate enough for my game, and DPMS is a 3-gun sponsor. I figured by the time I shoot out the barrel and it's no longer capable of holding 2MOA (probably the max I would accept for my game) then I'll just either buy a new one or caugh up the bucks for a better barrel at that point. When it reaches that point I'll probably set aside that upper as a training upper and build or buy a new one. (#4)
Even being the only person shooting my guns, I quickly lost count of how many rounds are through them. Between the mixed boxes of left over ammo for testing, my reloads, and long days at the range I just havn't kept record of it all. I'd estimate I'm somewhere around 5k rounds for this year split between two rifles.
What this boils down to is my plan to shoot the lower parts until they break and shoot the barrel until it stops producing the accuracy I desire. Even then, once accuracy fails, I plan to clean the rifle well and give it one more chance. Another competitor friend of mine had the experience of shooting 10k+ rounds through his JP upper before getting poor performance out of it. He called JP and they told him to take the muzzle break off and clean the crown. He sent it in to them to have it done (not a mechanical kinda guy). Anyway, it came back shooting as good as new! The caked on carbon in the comp had started to effect accuracy.
I do have the luxury of inspecting my rifle after every range outing and cleaning it (though I don't as often as I should). So I'll be watching for parts failures and hopfully catch them before they appear.
This has been my and my friends personal experience and plans with these firearms. YYMV and your plan may vary depending on your intended use for your arms. I hope you find this useful.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.