Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ... 91011
Results 101 to 110 of 110

Thread: FN double chrome lined barrel question

  1. #101
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    729
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by mtdawg169 View Post
    OK, champ. Off the top of my head, this example comes to mind. A factory PSA upper with the barrel drilled with a rifle gas port in either the Carbine or midlength position. Can't remember which, as details fade with time. End result was a severely over gassed gun that did not run. This presents a couple of potential issues. Either a) PSA didn't know what port size to spec for the barrel or b) their QC sucks / is non existent. This specific example was well documented here on M4C an while back. The thread is somewhere in the AR discussion or technical sections if you want to go look for it. Though I'm sure you won't bother because it would contradict what you think you know about PSA as they compare to other manufacturers.
    LOL, you could stick a folder 10 feet tall of issues in front of him and he will still say nuh uhhhhh.

    At this point, probably good to leave him be, as he has gone on and on even when industry professionals say they are incorrect (some did nicer than others). Pretty set in stone when someone says they can't unlearn what they have already learned. Basically a case of can't fix stupid and best to move on.
    From TOS ... "buy the shit out of that thing, all the mil spec is just nonsense."

  2. #102
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    GA
    Posts
    3,704
    Feedback Score
    43 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by discreet View Post
    LOL, you could stick a folder 10 feet tall of issues in front of him and he will still say nuh uhhhhh.

    At this point, probably good to leave him be, as he has gone on and on even when industry professionals say they are incorrect (some did nicer than others). Pretty set in stone when someone says they can't unlearn what they have already learned. Basically a case of can't fix stupid and best to move on.
    Good point. Moving on.

  3. #103
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ohio, USA
    Posts
    523
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by mtdawg169 View Post
    OK, champ. Off the top of my head, this example comes to mind. A factory PSA upper with the barrel drilled with a rifle gas port in either the Carbine or midlength position. Can't remember which, as details fade with time. End result was a severely over gassed gun that did not run. This presents a couple of potential issues. Either a) PSA didn't know what port size to spec for the barrel or b) their QC sucks / is non existent. This specific example was well documented here on M4C an while back. The thread is somewhere in the AR discussion or technical sections if you want to go look for it. Though I'm sure you won't bother because it would contradict what you think you know about PSA as they compare to other manufacturers.
    I think I remember that but was the barrel in question even one of the FN manufactured CHF barrels?

  4. #104
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    GA
    Posts
    3,704
    Feedback Score
    43 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Yojimbo View Post
    I think I remember that but was the barrel in question even one of the FN manufactured CHF barrels?
    I tried to find the thread, unsuccessfully. But the point remains that either the specs provided to the barrel manufacturer by PSA or the QC performed by PSA was inadequate or nonexistent. The question of "quality" is somewhat nebulous when discussing barrels sourced from one manufacturer or the other. As some of the SMEs have pointed out, the differences are really found in the drawings / specs provided to FN by the manufacturer and the QC processes employed to pass / fail the final product. In that particular case, PSA failed at some point. For me, that's a data point that affects who I choose to purchase from. Primarily because I want as much assurance as possible that I'm getting a good product.

    The greater topic here has been "what makes one brand better than the other", assuming barrels are from a common source. The answer seems to be, "depends on who ordered it". We generally tend to look at the specs in a vacuum thanks to the "chart" which helped put the TDP requirements into layman's terms that we could use for a basis for comparison. The piece of the puzzle that is missing in that equation are the proprietary requirements spec'd by each manufacturer and what QC methods they employ to guarantee consistent quality within their product line. Some are better at it than others and hold their products to a higher standard. Those efforts are generally manifested in costs, both to the manufacturer and the customer. (refer to Grants post above). My example of the PSA upper with the wrong port size was merely an example to show that these specific requirements and QC processes are what differentiate good from great when all other "specs" seem the same.

    One other thing to consider is that some manufacturers wish to mask the source of their products, proprietary specs & processes due to competitive factors. For example, BCM doesn't advertise the "machine gun steel / double chrome lined" aspect of their barrels. Further, no one discloses their QC processes. Why? Product differentiation and because as soon as they did, the competition would attempt to duplicate it in an effort to get a leg up. Which is exactly what happened when Noveske and then BCM began producing chf barrels in the first place.

  5. #105
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    123
    Feedback Score
    0
    Coming from a sales background one big thing I see missing is counseling and service. Assuming I was a barrel manufacturer and a upstart company with solid numbers came to me as asked for my product produced to their specifications and I agreed to sell to them with my stamp and reputation was on them. You bet your ass the conversation wouldn't go to the like of how many? Done! The idea and specs would passed to the production manager, engineer, down to the R&D division to ensure my product would be designed to function as intended to both bolster and help corner the market share with my companies logo printed proudly. That's how it's done in a business standpoint. A proven company with a strong reputation and relationships wouldn't throw caution to the wind for 2,000 barrels with crazy nonfunctional dimensions from co Joe Blow. And due to FN's success I strongly doubt they would conduct business this way either. My opinion to the OP although I don't have every make mentioned in my safe, I think you'd be secure in buying from the previously mentioned companies double chromed or not.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    Free men do not ask permission to bear arms.

  6. #106
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    NW WA
    Posts
    346
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Dino11 View Post
    Better over gassed than under gassed. At least you can compensate for over gassed, more ways than one. And you know you have a gun that will cycle.
    I Disagree, unless you are talking seriously under gassed to the point a rifle wouldn't cycle 5.56. At that point it would be a problem for anyone and unacceptable. Being over gassed is extremely hard on parts no matter how you try and over compensate for it.

  7. #107
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    616
    Feedback Score
    0
    This argument is getting old...

    Just buy whatever barrel you want. Bottom line, they're not all spec'd the same and only you can determine which barrel will work best for you.

    Sent with a Gen 2 Nexus 7

  8. #108
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    270
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by mtdawg169 View Post
    I tried to find the thread, unsuccessfully. But the point remains that either the specs provided to the barrel manufacturer by PSA or the QC performed by PSA was inadequate or nonexistent. The question of "quality" is somewhat nebulous when discussing barrels sourced from one manufacturer or the other. As some of the SMEs have pointed out, the differences are really found in the drawings / specs provided to FN by the manufacturer and the QC processes employed to pass / fail the final product. In that particular case, PSA failed at some point. For me, that's a data point that affects who I choose to purchase from. Primarily because I want as much assurance as possible that I'm getting a good product.

    The greater topic here has been "what makes one brand better than the other", assuming barrels are from a common source. The answer seems to be, "depends on who ordered it". We generally tend to look at the specs in a vacuum thanks to the "chart" which helped put the TDP requirements into layman's terms that we could use for a basis for comparison. The piece of the puzzle that is missing in that equation are the proprietary requirements spec'd by each manufacturer and what QC methods they employ to guarantee consistent quality within their product line. Some are better at it than others and hold their products to a higher standard. Those efforts are generally manifested in costs, both to the manufacturer and the customer. (refer to Grants post above). My example of the PSA upper with the wrong port size was merely an example to show that these specific requirements and QC processes are what differentiate good from great when all other "specs" seem the same.

    One other thing to consider is that some manufacturers wish to mask the source of their products, proprietary specs & processes due to competitive factors. For example, BCM doesn't advertise the "machine gun steel / double chrome lined" aspect of their barrels. Further, no one discloses their QC processes. Why? Product differentiation and because as soon as they did, the competition would attempt to duplicate it in an effort to get a leg up. Which is exactly what happened when Noveske and then BCM began producing chf barrels in the first place.
    https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread...an-issue/page2

    I found it mtdawg, I remember reading it, this is the major sin that makes all PSA barrels crap huh? The gas port on my 12" CHF carbine gas P.S.A barrel is .068 if I recall correctly and it ran fine stock with a heavier buffer and spring.. I will run it suppressed so... I put an SLR adjustable gasblock on it. As I stated before I like the fact that P.S.A gas ports run on the large side because it allows me more control on tuning it. The gas port size is not an accident.

    In the thread , on of the mods here hit the nail on the head and filled you all in
    Yes, but this isn't a defect (as they seem to do this alot) it's how they make the ports.
    I wonder if he is also stupid huh discreet?

  9. #109
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    270
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by discreet View Post
    LOL, you could stick a folder 10 feet tall of issues in front of him and he will still say nuh uhhhhh.

    At this point, probably good to leave him be, as he has gone on and on even when industry professionals say they are incorrect (some did nicer than others). Pretty set in stone when someone says they can't unlearn what they have already learned. Basically a case of can't fix stupid and best to move on.
    I wont go down to your level and start the personal attacks , this is about barrels not your mother so relax. The industry Pro's never said I was wrong and I never disagreed with anything they posted, i only stated that the differences did not add up to what they were vaguely inferring. If you notice they really never committed one way or the other. They simply stated in so many words that they dont trust P.S.A even though they have no idea what secret sauce they use. They are vendors and there is nothing wrong with that but when you have two industry Pro's that dont/wont and cant sell a competing product, don't expect them to say good things about it, they did remain as neutral and indirect as possible in their criticism, give m credit for that, but read between the lines.

    I dont think you will hear either of the ones who commented in this thread say that F.N CHF barrels sold by P.S.A or Spikes are defective junk, they will imply it to be sure to stroke the ego's of people like you, but there are too many people on this forum who know better and they have credibility to maintain.

    So to sum it all up I will restate my opinion. All F.N CHF barrels are good barrels in as consistent as a man made object can be. Not all F.N barrels are made to the same specs. A person would well served by purchasing any F.N CHF barrel regardless of the vendor selling it and since we civilians dont fire auto mag dumps alot, double chrome lining isnt a necessity.

    These are my extremist views.
    Last edited by quaesitor logica; 02-11-14 at 01:10.

  10. #110
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    AZ-Waging jihad against crappy AR's.
    Posts
    24,902
    Feedback Score
    104 (100%)
    Since this one has gone down the toilet and people are resorting to insults and arguments, it's done.



    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

Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ... 91011

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
  •