|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PSA,
Without disclosing your source can you tell us what metals are used in the manufacturing of your classic Gen 2 LPK? Is it to Mil-Spec standards as suggested below for metals/hardening/coatings used or only to size so to fit in a mil-spec receiver?
From PSA's site,
"These kits are assembled right here at our new facility in Columbia. All parts are from mil-spec manufacturers and are made in the USA"
We are all inclined to judge ourselves by our ideals; others, by their acts.
Well, clearly PSA has used several different suppliers for their BCGs over the last couple years.
That being said, my understanding of the mil-spec is that the staking simply has to be touching the side of the bolt, two stakes 180-out, and the torque spec for how much must be applied to remove the bolts.
It looks to me in the photo that you posted that there was metal-to-metal contact at all four stake points.
Most of the well staked pieces tend to have a bit of the metal actually roll over the top edge of the cap screws on both sides.
metal to metal is one thing and could be friction only. But when you drive enough metal to fold over the top you pretty well know you have jammed some metal into the sides of those screws like gears meshing.
I agree it looks done but not done enough to remove doubt. IOW, did it just bend metal or did it really bond two pieces together at 4 points.
If you're really that convinced it isn't good enough based on how it looks, put a torque wrench on it and see how much it takes to break free -- that is the only true objective measure to see if it meets the spec or not.
Again, so far as I know there is no part of the spec that identifies how much metal-to-metal contact at the staking points there has to be, just that there has to be contact. Nothing about vertical development of the stake mark, etc.
So, since it is making contact in the two bolts in question, the only way you'll know if they're up to spec is to bust out the torque wrench. That way we can stop relying on subjective measures like "I don't like how it looks" and "I don't feel it is enough".
I have one PSA HP/MPI-tested "premium" BCG, and the staking looks perfect on it.My "premium" BCG was not staked properly. I sent it back and they sent me another one- also not staked properly.
It looks identical to every BCM bolt carrier I've seen.
Yes, because I think folks put waaaaaaaay too much importance into the whole "gas key staking" issue, and the belief that the quality of gas key staking is directly indicative of the quality of the rest of the BCG.
Obviously there have been bad stakes with some manufacturers where there were marks on the key but metal did not touch the screw -- and that's obviously not right, and people were smart to avoid those manufacturers if they wanted a professional grade rifle. In this case, though, that does not apply.
Bookmarks