|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Maybe fore you. I don't settle for lower grade stufflol. It's all opinion based. The same thing as people on arfcom squacking about how their 100$ mystery barrel is top shit because they got it from PSA and yadi yadi yada. Someones turds are someones gold and likewise
![]()
Last edited by discreet; 02-09-14 at 02:20.
From TOS ... "buy the shit out of that thing, all the mil spec is just nonsense."
Call me crazy, but yes, I do. It's simple marketing. Noveske, BCM and Centurion are at the higher end of the cost spectrum. As a result, it would make sense for someone to want to differentiate their businesses. In this industry, you can do that by of a couple of methods, 1) innovate or 2)cost vs spec. Since none of the low price leaders are innovators, they have to attract business to their products by matching the specs of the upper echelon, at least closely enough to appear similar. Now, there's no way they are all selling the exact same product with such a wide variance in cost. What you don't know are the contractual obligations in place that might tie up all of the straightest / truest barrels for a handful of buyers, with the "seconds" going to the low cost leaders. If the buyer requires more QC before shipping, that will drive cost up as well. These are just a few examples of production variables that could affect the cost and quality of the finished product. Sure, the PSA and Spikes barrels are perfectly serviceable, but you shouldn't assume that just because they originate from the same source, that they are all exactly the same.
This was posted in another forum from a barrel distributor. These are not my words.
"""When I order parts from FN, I provide the drawings and specifications.
They price the work according to the specifications.
I might specify that the barrels must pass a 0.00015" maximum groove diameter deviation requirement on an air-gauge bench while another vendor might not even specify a maximum deviation on groove size.
So, FN makes a bunch of barrels, air-gauges them, sets the good ones aside for me and sells the others to the vendor with lower standards.
Don't think it happens that way?"""
Sorry to pee on some wheaties. Just offering my own experience, working within a company the outsources, and also provides outsourced manufactured parts. No, they are not barrels, or gun parts.
The cost savings for those who buy outsourced parts, say barrels, is to work within the "economy of production" with their supplier. Once you start to send drawings, and other specs, for an item that you are not buying a humpty jillion of, then things get more expensive. For small purchase quantities, which may even span several production runs, its usually less expensive to buy off the line, and do the final prep to your own specs in house, or to work with smaller shops to bring raw parts up to your own needs.
I can see a company like PSA or even Noveske, or any of 'em, buying standard barrels right off the standard line - which FN has made very cost efficient for themselves. I can see those same companies re-working barrels that are less finsihed - that is to say, hammer forged but unturned, with or without extensions, and doing the final turning in house or with a local shop's services. What they have to spend doing that is partially offset by the ability to buy fewer items, yet maintain a more varied inventory.
And that is where problems arise... because once you go to another party, more problems pop up. I can see port size mix ups and such happening - just from my own experience (yes one thing I deal with is orrifice sizes to minutely control hydraulic fluid pressures).
To the best of my knoweledge - as a half ass'd engineer - all hammer forged barrels are turned after the hammering process - with the exception of some heavy target barrels which have the hammer pattern intact, and which are preferred by the bench rest guys and such (or at least the few I know). I've got one of those in .22lr on a 10/22 and its good as 10/22's go. I've also got one on a Kimber .22 that shoots literally one hole groups at 50 yards with Remington sub-sonics, which is all I've ever shot in it.
The poster who said there is just a delay in pattern opening is correct, and .... not so correct. You just can't tell. Its a crap shoot, even for the bench rest guys. The tendancy is - button rifling tends to be less accurate than hammer forging - especially in thinner barrels, due to the stresses button rifling creates. The top shooters still prefer a cut rifled barrel, where the rifling step and bore diameter - or its taper - can be controlled.
But its still a crap shoot. You can get a hammered, stress relieved blank, drill it, ream it, carefullly broach cut the rifling, and put the final constriction in the bore (or really open up the lands by .0002 or so), and have it shoot like crap. Happens. Its less likely, but it happens. You can get an off the shelf, "Joe's Tires & Brake's While-U-Wait and Barrel Shop" chromed M4 barrel out of the barrel bin/whiskey keg, that shoots cloverleaf patterns at 100 yards. Happens. But less likely.
Then there's those shades of grey in the middle of the extremes.
In my own experience, the whole design concept of the AR tends to be conducive to better than decent performance on the target, even without a bunch of tweaks. Unless I was building a paper shooting match gun, I can't say the barrel manufacturing type - hammer forged vs button rifled - would make or break a deal, as the differences are likely to cause more than a trifles iota of a difference in a fighting rifle. Way to many other items to worry about than hammer vs button.
Last edited by cjb; 02-09-14 at 09:34.
well said, guaesitor logica. and whos to say the psa "specs" for their FN barrel aren't better than the "specs" of BCM? is it the price that dictates which company provides the best "specs"?
Nice, comparing a $100 dollar barrel to a Noveske F.N barrel in order to try an give your bias some credibility. You did not address my comments or the lack of difference in performance between F.N made barrels. I do agree with you that this is all opinion based because real world performance says otherwise.
or maybe I just got lucky with my accurate PSA CHF barrels.![]()
Last edited by quaesitor logica; 02-09-14 at 10:40.
I never said they were exactly the same. I never said "Higher End" didn't not have more stringent specs. I never said what they demand didn't cost more. What I did say is that in terms of accuracy regarding F.N barrels, it doesn't manifest in better performance because the even the shoddiest barrels coming out of F.N are good barrels.
A few people here like to insinuate that PSA and Spikes F.N barrels are inferior and should be avoided despite the fact that they are proven performers. I dont know on what specs these guys are skimping on but their barrels shoot straight and are as reliable as any you listed.
Last edited by quaesitor logica; 02-09-14 at 10:55.
Bookmarks