Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 38

Thread: Barrel Treatments (nitride/CL)

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    454
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by MegademiC View Post
    I honestly cant remember, but I know at least one guy said chrome was better but nitriding was cheaper when you factor in cost to stay epa compliant. I'll try to find the thread...

    Head effects = heat effects. It was a mistake, which happens since I dont always proof read forum posts.
    Ah, no worries, it happens to the best of us.

    to clerify how I understood, nitriding was better for the main part of the barrel, but chrome was better for protecting against throat erosion - which is more important for high volume barrels.

    Let me try to find the thread-which I should have done in the first place- instead of posting what is starting to look like hearsay, I'm sure. I dont know the specs for all the materials so I cant reallygive solid info at this time.

    Edit : Haha, its a thread you were active in. : https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread...=83495&page=20

    I only read it in the early stages and missed the last 12 pages or so. Just got caught up. I screwed up twice in one day... time to start reading more...

    OP the very long thread above is well worth the read.
    I remember the thread. Unfortunatly I can't remember there being a whole lot of empirical data being thrown around in it one way or the other.

    In my learning from sources other then those related to firearms (firearms related nitriding sources are pretty biased because they are trying to sell something) what ultimatly makes the difference in the effectivness of nitriding is the alloy used.

    If it is a high quality alloy, then the material will be harder (and deeper in depth then chrome is thick) then chrome and will prevent throat erosion just as much or even better. If the base metal is a cheaper ordinary steel, then nitriding may not be able to perform as good as chrome. Although nitriding, regardless of base metal, still has a natural, inherent lubricity as a factor of the process that chrome simply cannot match.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    90
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by GrumpyM4 View Post
    Nope.

    That's the biggest complaint about the MR556 actually aside from the stupid weight.

    I did some major barrel work on my MR556 and it machined very nicely. It is a harder metal then typical OS, but it is through hardened, not surface hardened like nitride does.

    I had the barrel QPQ nitrided as the final step in the build though so now it does have that protection and superior properties.

    I'll be damned. You'd think they'd have QPQed it. I'm not interested in the MR556A1 because of the weight and how HK modified it so it can't work with full auto parts. It's too bad the real 416 14.5" uppers are so rare and expensive.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    454
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Nmate View Post
    I'll be damned. You'd think they'd have QPQed it. I'm not interested in the MR556A1 because of the weight and how HK modified it so it can't work with full auto parts. It's too bad the real 416 14.5" uppers are so rare and expensive.
    Like many, I was under the impression that the MR series was nitrided as well, so when I found out about the thickness and weight of the barrel, I was very discouraged. This was a project nearly 10 years in concept for me.

    So in my case, lack of nitriding was a good thing because that meant I could customize the barrel.

    I chucked it up in a lathe and took the pre-gas block barrel down to .7 inches. I wanted it lighter, but not true lightweight profile because I run a suppressor a fair amount and wanted less barrel flex. The .7 inch midweight profile is working very well for me.


    And one of the first things I did once the barrel was removed from the upper was to remove the barrel extension tab that prevents the use of an FA BCG.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    8
    Feedback Score
    0

    Boron Carbide

    They have a Boron Carbide treatment available now. It uses a diffusion process similar to nitride so there are no tolerance differences. Boron carbide is the same stuff used to make hard armor plates.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    454
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)
    Armor plates can crack due to their brittleness.

    I'd hate to have that happen to a high impact gun part such as the bolt carrier or barrel extension.

    As in I wouldn't want the coating to crack under repeated impacts and lose any anti-corrosive properties, nor would I trust such a lining on the inside of a barrel.

    It would be great on the outside of a barrel to protect it though.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    8
    Feedback Score
    0

    Boron carbide

    It isn't a plating. It becomes part of the steel. There is no cracking to worry about.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    8
    Feedback Score
    0

    Boron carbide

    It only infuses the chamber and bore. Nothing else.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    90
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by GrumpyM4 View Post
    Armor plates can crack due to their brittleness.

    I'd hate to have that happen to a high impact gun part such as the bolt carrier or barrel extension.

    As in I wouldn't want the coating to crack under repeated impacts and lose any anti-corrosive properties, nor would I trust such a lining on the inside of a barrel.

    It would be great on the outside of a barrel to protect it though.
    I haven't looked into this in depth, but I'd guess he's talking about nickel boron coatings. You generally see them on bolts and bolt carriers. I've never seen one applied to the bore, I believe that Fail Zero tried it out and it didn't work out so well. I think it would work fine on the outside of the barrel, but I don't know if it would be enough of an improvement over something like QPQ to justify itself. As far as bolts and bolt carriers go, it's a fairly proven technology. I've been thinking about sending a couple carriers and bolts off to have it done.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    454
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by banzai70 View Post
    It isn't a plating. It becomes part of the steel. There is no cracking to worry about.
    Link?

    Everything I can find says that at the most it's a coating. Can't find anything that says that it's a carbiding process.

    Boron carbide is used for lots of things besides SAPI plates, up to and including sand blast nozzles.

    But all of those things are made from boron carbide, not steel that is processed with "boron carbiding".

    On that note, a search for the term "boron carbiding" didn't turn up anything either.

    There's a few hits for tungsten carbiding, which is also a coating.


    ETA: I finally found "Boronizing" as a process that produces an extremely hard outer layer of steel. It is mainly touted as an anti-corrosive/errosion treatment though and it's been around long enough for manufacturers to understand its limitations.

    I bet there's a reason it's not in use in high impact processes.
    Last edited by GrumpyM4; 04-25-12 at 07:20.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    454
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Nmate View Post
    I haven't looked into this in depth, but I'd guess he's talking about nickel boron coatings. You generally see them on bolts and bolt carriers. I've never seen one applied to the bore, I believe that Fail Zero tried it out and it didn't work out so well. I think it would work fine on the outside of the barrel, but I don't know if it would be enough of an improvement over something like QPQ to justify itself. As far as bolts and bolt carriers go, it's a fairly proven technology. I've been thinking about sending a couple carriers and bolts off to have it done.
    I'm aware of this. I've had a fail zero BCG in one of my guns for about a year now.

    Something tells me this isn't what he's talking about though.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •