Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 69

Thread: nickel boron or black nitride BCG

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    33
    Feedback Score
    0

    nickel boron or black nitride BCG

    I apologize in advance if this question has been asked already.

    I've recently begun my first build and have been searching for only the highest caliber of components (pun intended). I had all but settled on a nickel boron bolt and carrier but just stumbled upon one having undergone a black nitride treatment. So far they seem similar in that they are both pitched as somewhat self-lubricating. Even so; I fully intend on responsibly lubricating my rifle. Anyways, I'm curious if anyone can provide more information on these different coatings and which may prove more durable and better functioning.

    Thank you for reading

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    AZ-Waging jihad against crappy AR's.
    Posts
    24,902
    Feedback Score
    104 (100%)
    I was discussing this with a friend of recently and we were thinking that the supercoatings almost seem to stop the lubricant from adhering to the carrier. I have noticed this with my black Ion bonded BCM carrier.



    Owner/Instructor at Semper Paratus Arms

    Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/SemperParatusArms/

    Semper Paratus Arms AR15 Armorer Course http://www.semperparatusarms.com/cou...-registration/

    M4C Misc. Training and Course Announcements- http://www.m4carbine.net/forumdisplay.php?f=141

    Master Armorer/R&D at SIONICS Weapon Systems- http://sionicsweaponsystems.com

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    980
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Iraqgunz View Post
    I was discussing this with a friend of recently and we were thinking that the supercoatings almost seem to stop the lubricant from adhering to the carrier. I have noticed this with my black Ion bonded BCM carrier.
    That would make sense. Phosphating is extremely porous.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    AZ-Waging jihad against crappy AR's.
    Posts
    24,902
    Feedback Score
    104 (100%)
    That's what we concluded as well. If anything I would really just want the tail section of the bolt to be treated where the carbon is dumped into the carrier.

    Quote Originally Posted by foxtrotx1 View Post
    That would make sense. Phosphating is extremely porous.



    Owner/Instructor at Semper Paratus Arms

    Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/SemperParatusArms/

    Semper Paratus Arms AR15 Armorer Course http://www.semperparatusarms.com/cou...-registration/

    M4C Misc. Training and Course Announcements- http://www.m4carbine.net/forumdisplay.php?f=141

    Master Armorer/R&D at SIONICS Weapon Systems- http://sionicsweaponsystems.com

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Vegas
    Posts
    6,717
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)

    Re: nickel boron or black nitride BCG

    Quote Originally Posted by foxtrotx1 View Post
    That would make sense. Phosphating is extremely porous.
    So the better it collects carbon, the better it holds on to lubricant. But something that doesn't hold carbon due to smoothness and has a nitride or NiB layer doesn't need as much lubricant. Hm.
    "I never learned from a man who agreed with me." Robert A. Heinlein

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    between the Rockies and the Sierras
    Posts
    153
    Feedback Score
    0
    Less porous = less friction. Less friction = less wear. That is why you do not use sandpaper for "Slip and Slide" mats.

    Less porous will hold the lube less, but then again less will be required for ANTI -FICTION lubrication. Lube does other things too, like being a medium to remove carbon and other contaminants and acts as an anti-corrosive.

    So yes, less lube holds to the BCG, but less should be required, all things considered.
    USMC, 21 years and 21 days. But who was counting?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    980
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    The assumption that holding less lube means something requires less lube hinges on the idea that: (insert favorite lubricant here) has a lower coefficient of friction than (coating x).

    The carrier may be slicker for NiB vs. Phosphate, sure. But what you may want to ask is this: Is NIB slicker than my carrier drenched favorite lube?

    I'm sure some material engineers can aid us here.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    3,055
    Feedback Score
    21 (100%)
    Black Nitride/QPQ, Ionbond and NiB are totally different.
    Black River Tactical
    BRT OPTIMUM HFCL Barrels - Hammer Forged Chrome Lined 11.5", 12.5", 14.5"
    BRT OPTIMUM Barrels - 16" MPR, 14.5" MPC, 12.5" MRC, 11.5" CQB, 9" PDW
    BRT EZTUNE Preset Gas Tubes - CAR and MID
    BRT Covert Comps 7.62, 5.56, 6X, 9mm
    BRT MarkBlue Gas Tubes - BRT EXT, EXC and PDW Lengths
    BRT MicroPin Gas Blocks - .750" & .625"
    BRT MicroTUNE Adjustable Gas Blocks
    BRT CustomTUNE Gas Ports

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Northeast MS.
    Posts
    460
    Feedback Score
    0
    I don't get it. Lubricating BCG's with everything from 30 weight motor oil to Slip 2000 has worked on phosphate coating for years. Are people spending $50-100 more on treated BCG's just to use less lubrication? (I guarantee over the life of a BCG you won't spend that much on lube).
    Or are they just too lazy to lube in the first place?
    Last edited by eperk; 03-27-13 at 12:59.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    22
    Feedback Score
    0
    I believe it is the idea of an extended amount of use between lubrication.

    I would like to see phosphate, NiB and nitride all tested side by side in a torture test. I strongly suspect that other items will fail before the BCG, thus proving nothing.

Page 1 of 7 123 ... 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
  •