Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 4567 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 68

Thread: Are PSA branded AR parts good enough?

  1. #51
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    1,503
    Feedback Score
    8 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Gen4Glock22 View Post
    Also FWIW... The gentleman I spoke with today (forget his name) looked at the picture I sent over (the same one I posted) and told me that the gas keys did look properly staked.

    At this point I just want a return/refund...
    I don't blame you. Those are pretty weak.
    Originally Posted by Iraqgunz
    This is 2012. The world is going to end this December and people are still trying to debate the merits of piece of shit, cost cutting crap AR's. Really?

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Where the 2nd Amendment still lives.
    Posts
    2,729
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)
    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.

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    966
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Gen4Glock22 View Post
    Also FWIW... The gentleman I spoke with today (forget his name) looked at the picture I sent over (the same one I posted) and told me that the gas keys did look properly staked.
    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.

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    1,048
    Feedback Score
    12 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by HackerF15E View Post
    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.
    Metal from the gas key is indeed touching each screw in two places.

    To me not enough metal is displaced. Does it look like your BCG?

    Would you be just as happy if you had my BCG in your upper instead of yours?

  5. #55
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    7,711
    Feedback Score
    10 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by HackerF15E View Post
    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.

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    1,048
    Feedback Score
    12 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by tb-av View Post
    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.
    I share this sentiment.

  7. #57
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    966
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    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".

  8. #58
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    59
    Feedback Score
    0
    My "premium" BCG was not staked properly. I sent it back and they sent me another one- also not staked properly.
    I have one PSA HP/MPI-tested "premium" BCG, and the staking looks perfect on it.

    It looks identical to every BCM bolt carrier I've seen.

  9. #59
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    1,048
    Feedback Score
    12 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by HackerF15E View Post
    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".
    Not interested in doing that. I am just going to return it and buy a BCM.

    Like i said before; I'm not trying to bash on PSA, in fact I actually really want to like them...

  10. #60
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    966
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Gen4Glock22 View Post
    Would you be just as happy if you had my BCG in your upper instead of yours?
    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.

Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 4567 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
  •