Page 10 of 11 FirstFirst ... 891011 LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 110

Thread: FN double chrome lined barrel question

  1. #91
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    270
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by tom12.7 View Post
    There is no clear way to answer what you are asking. There's much more to barrels than accuracy and reliability. Besides, how is that accuracy and/or reliability measured? At what round count? What other variables?
    Example:
    A business decides to see if it's viable to go forward with a project or idea. R&D tests ideas that may come to light. The original engineering designs the part based on what the product is geared to. Parts are manufactured and tested to QC programs. Before the finished part leaves, it's verified by QA.
    There's a lot that can go on with an item as complex as barrels. There are things that are often overlooked by the end consumer that have direct effects on the product. There can be a significant investment in the costs of checking these items.
    In the end, if it wasn't worth the cost to do this QA/QC, why would they bother?
    I kind've summed it up and purposely left out some stuff to keep this short. Some things are far more complex than most folks realize.
    That is a good point. I cant say that the Spikes or P.S.A will hold up as long as a DD, Noveske or a Centurion. BCM aslo still needs to prove itself in that regard. I measure accuracy in mechanical MOA group capability as it pertains to the equipment in question. I agree with you that accuracy in this regard is subjective to many influences beginning with Ammo, but that goes for any barrel manufactured at any time not just these barrels in question. You bring up valid points. P.S.A and Spikes have been selling CHF barrels for about 4 years in good standing, but so far, so good.
    Last edited by quaesitor logica; 02-10-14 at 20:02.

  2. #92
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Stickman View Post
    Posts like this really show there is a group of people here who have no idea what they are talking about. If you think they are all the same, that is great, the people who are familiar with the prints and design of the barrels know the difference, the companies who buy the rejected barrels or barrels that didn't pass the spec'd QC for other companies know the difference. The companies that spec their barrels and/ or have patents know the difference.

    The posters here who keep saying there is no difference.... are simply wrong, and once again this thread goes to show people simply don't know what they don't know.
    Really? People don't know what they don't know?

    Do any of the companies that are being discussed here actually publish the specs for the barrels? The tolerances that they allow and so forth?

    I have not seen any such detailed information published. So, if the information isn't publicly available, how can anyone realistically differentiate between any of the numerous companies selling barrels sourced from FN?

    It can't be done. Not enough data. Hell, what is being sold today may not even be what is going to be sold tomorrow.

    So, yes, I agree - this thread shows that people simply do not know what they don't know.

  3. #93
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    270
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by mtdawg169 View Post
    Do your own damn research. There have been numerous cases cited here on M4C and elsewhere over the last few years. For the record, I'm talking specifically about reliability and QC issues with PSA barrels.
    Post the reviews where P.S.A CHF barrels are given negative reviews. All I can find are innuendos and indirect unsubstantiated inferences like yours. You dont even own any of the barrels in question, yet your opinion trumps mine any many other owner experiences.

  4. #94
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    GA
    Posts
    3,704
    Feedback Score
    43 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by quaesitor logica View Post
    Post the reviews where P.S.A CHF barrels are given negative reviews. All I can find are innuendos and indirect unsubstantiated inferences like yours. You dont even own any of the barrels in question, yet your opinion trumps mine any many other owner experiences.
    Like I said, I don't have the time to do your research for you.

  5. #95
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    270
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by mtdawg169 View Post
    Like I said, I don't have the time to do your research for you.
    No problem mtdawg , I did my research two years ago and followed it up with real world testing before i put skin in the game and bought a barrel form P.S.A. You couldn't find the evidence if you tried, all you will find is more stuff like what you posted. Real evidence isn't there to find.

    O.P double chrome or not. Buy any of these barrels and you will not be disappointed.
    Last edited by quaesitor logica; 02-10-14 at 20:16.

  6. #96
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,157
    Feedback Score
    38 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by quaesitor logica View Post
    Post the reviews where P.S.A CHF barrels are given negative reviews. All I can find are innuendos and indirect unsubstantiated inferences like yours. You dont even own any of the barrels in question, yet your opinion trumps mine any many other owner experiences.
    Post long-term reviews from reputable sources with large sample sizes. I'll wait.

    Fact is, there isn't enough data to prove either case. All we know is what those with industry knowledge claim, the companies and their established reputation for QC/QA in other product areas, and the very limited data showing poor specs (like oversized gas ports) from the likes of PSA and Spike's.

    Why, taking all of this into account, anyone would ever buy PSA or Spike's-branded FN barrels to save $20 on a $1000+ gun versus other, more reputable brands is beyond me.
    Last edited by DreadPirateMoyer; 02-10-14 at 20:14.

  7. #97
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    2,114
    Feedback Score
    0
    Why start this pissing match? No company is going to give out their info on specs, tolerances, material selection, QC, QA, etc.. Each can have their own for any of these or others.
    For the case in question, FN does tend to produce quality barrels.
    That definitely does not mean that ALL of their barrels are 100%, nobody does that. That's why some of the quality programs used by their sources are quality checked.

  8. #98
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    270
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by DreadPirateMoyer View Post
    Post long-term reviews from reputable sources with large sample sizes. I'll wait.

    Fact is, there isn't enough data to prove either case. All we know is what those with industry knowledge claim, the companies and their established reputation for QC/QA in other product areas, and the very limited data showing poor specs (like oversized gas ports) from the likes of PSA and Spike's.

    Why, taking all of this into account, anyone would ever buy PSA or Spike's-branded FN barrels to save $20 on a $1000+ gun versus other, more reputable brands is beyond me.
    Oversized compared to what? The port size on my barrel is .078 and it works fine. I highly doubt that F.N has much trouble keeping uniformity in a gas port hole that is the simplest operation to do in a barrel, I feel pretty safe saying that F.N can make uniform gas ports.

    The answer to why is, because they shoot straight and are durable. I initially tried it because P.S.A was having a sale for $230 a 16" medium contour CHF barrel and they were double thickness chrome I couldn't stay away. I'm a gambler I suppose. Now I know what I know and I cant un-know it
    Last edited by quaesitor logica; 02-10-14 at 20:36.

  9. #99
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    61
    Feedback Score
    0
    My mid length, middle weight FN barrel shoots spot on for what it is designed to do. Double chrome lined makes no difference to me, it does the job I want it to do.
    Sniper barrel it is not, but it is a 1 MOA barrel. And it did not break the bank. You will be happy with one no matter who you purchase it from. I will not indorse any brand because of the fanboy's.
    But if it comes from FN, you will be happy. You might have to do some tuning to the rifle to achieve certain goals. But in the end you will be happy with any of their barrels that are CHF.
    They do not produce junk. Their reputation is on the line, no matter where it comes from. Personally I would rather have to big a gas port than to small. Easier to tune for the over size than to small.
    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.

  10. #100
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    GA
    Posts
    3,704
    Feedback Score
    43 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by quaesitor logica View Post
    You couldn't find the evidence if you tried, all you will find is more stuff like what you posted. Real evidence isn't there to find.
    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.

Page 10 of 11 FirstFirst ... 891011 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
  •