Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 66

Thread: Colt BCG worth it over AIM?

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    276
    Feedback Score
    4 (100%)
    There is no way I'd save a few bucks on a quality build, by going with a cheap bcg. Go Colt, BCM and enjoy knowing you have top notch equipment in the most important of places.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    44
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Kain View Post
    OP you are obviously using other quality parts, Colt barrel, Mur upper, Centurion rail. All of which are parts that most here will tell you are good to go. Considering you are not skimping in these areas why would you skimp on the BCG? That is the first question here that I think would bare answering. If you are looking to cut corners, or spend less there are other areas I would consider cutting cost. That or save your pennies for a little longer.

    Explaining what the mission of this rifle is going to be may be something that would help guide those who have been there and done that guide you to the parts that would best serve at the best price.
    I just joined a private security firm and we're being sent to fight ISIS.



    Just Kidding. This is just a fun build for me and joining an arsenal of other high quality weapons in the safe. I do shoot quite often so I'm sure it'll see a couple thousand rounds of XM193 and Mk262 clones through it through it's life.

    I ask about the BCG because there are measurable differences between say a Colt SOCOM 14.5 barrel and a similar barrel from FN, BCM, or even Noveske. In quantified tests, the Colt barrel seems to outshoot all other commercially available chrome lined 14.5 barrels. I like the MUR because of my previous experience with them. I like the Centurion rail because I've used one before although right now it's a toss up between a Centurion and DD Lite rail, both with FSP cutouts.

    What I don't completely get about BCGs is that there doesn't seem to be quantified tests or real proven reasons why you shouldn't go with a widely used BCG such as from AIM for $100 versus the $200 Colt BCG. I'm 90% sure I'll go with the Colt BCG but a lot of people seem to say even $110 BCG from Microbest are extremely good to go. So this area confuses me. Where's the evidence? Why should I get something 100% more expensive if there is no disadvantage or problem going with other BCGs that seem to be of the same quality?

    If they are not of the same quality, exactly how are they worse? Not trying to start a kerfuffle, just asking questions.
    Last edited by FlyPenFly; 03-10-15 at 19:26.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    1,052
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by FlyPenFly View Post
    IWhat I don't completely get about BCGs is that there doesn't seem to be quantified tests or real proven reasons why you shouldn't go with a widely used BCG such as from AIM for $100 versus the $200 Colt BCG. I'm 90% sure I'll go with the Colt BCG but a lot of people seem to say even $110 BCG from Microbest are extremely good to go. So this area confuses me. Where's the evidence? Why should I get something 100% more expensive if there is no disadvantage or problem going with other BCGs that seem to be of the same quality?

    .

    Well most of the people saying that doesn't shoot that much. A lot of guys on this forum shoot a lot. That is where you find flaws , when you actually use it.
    Last edited by 223to45; 03-10-15 at 21:48. Reason: Spelling
    The price of liberty is, always has been, and always will be blood: The person who is not willing to die for his liberty has already lost it to the first scoundrel who is willing to risk dying to violate that person's liberty! Are you free?
    --- Andrew Ford

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    1,052
    Feedback Score
    0
    Plus 9130 vs C158.

    Someone on here already posted some issue with a 9130 bolt.

    They say 9130 is better, and that might be true. But 9130 is very sensitive to proper heat treating and if not done just right won't be very good.
    The price of liberty is, always has been, and always will be blood: The person who is not willing to die for his liberty has already lost it to the first scoundrel who is willing to risk dying to violate that person's liberty! Are you free?
    --- Andrew Ford

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    AZ-Waging jihad against crappy AR's.
    Posts
    24,902
    Feedback Score
    104 (100%)
    This is why you don't buy questionable bolts.

    IMG_1494.jpg

    Quote Originally Posted by FlyPenFly View Post
    I just joined a private security firm and we're being sent to fight ISIS.



    Just Kidding. This is just a fun build for me and joining an arsenal of other high quality weapons in the safe. I do shoot quite often so I'm sure it'll see a couple thousand rounds of XM193 and Mk262 clones through it through it's life.

    I ask about the BCG because there are measurable differences between say a Colt SOCOM 14.5 barrel and a similar barrel from FN, BCM, or even Noveske. In quantified tests, the Colt barrel seems to outshoot all other commercially available chrome lined 14.5 barrels. I like the MUR because of my previous experience with them. I like the Centurion rail because I've used one before although right now it's a toss up between a Centurion and DD Lite rail, both with FSP cutouts.

    What I don't completely get about BCGs is that there doesn't seem to be quantified tests or real proven reasons why you shouldn't go with a widely used BCG such as from AIM for $100 versus the $200 Colt BCG. I'm 90% sure I'll go with the Colt BCG but a lot of people seem to say even $110 BCG from Microbest are extremely good to go. So this area confuses me. Where's the evidence? Why should I get something 100% more expensive if there is no disadvantage or problem going with other BCGs that seem to be of the same quality?

    If they are not of the same quality, exactly how are they worse? Not trying to start a kerfuffle, just asking questions.



    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

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    157
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    For the reasonable price you can get a BCM bcg for, I don't see many reasons to buy anything else.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Pensacola, FL
    Posts
    1,362
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by 223to45 View Post
    Plus 9130 vs C158.

    Someone on here already posted some issue with a 9130 bolt.

    They say 9130 is better, and that might be true. But 9130 is very sensitive to proper heat treating and if not done just right won't be very good.
    There is little difference between these bolts. Each has its advantages and disadvantages. Just because the C158 is "mil-spec", it does not mean that it is the best. 9310 bolts work just as well. This said, if you are going to run a carbine hard and often, in a harsh environment, and even suppressed, you may want to consider a C158 bolt. For just a range and HD carbine, the 9310 bolt is more than sufficient.

    Here is a post from M4Carbine.net from 2013.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Alexander View Post

    Bolts are becoming a pet subject!

    It is always interesting to consider the bolt within the context of its application. To do so will draw not only on stress analysis, but also on fatigue theory and metalurgy. This will quickly move the solution beyond the simple question of which steel is best, for the best steel if applied out of context will not perform adequately.

    So for simple illustration let us assume that the steels are applied well, before discussing the differences.

    Carpenter 158 is without doubt an excellent material for the production of M16 bolts. The material is clean with negliable elements in the make up that are detrimental to the fatigue life. It can operate happily within the confines of the enviromental requirements imposed by the application and has a very low deformation of the parts as they run through heat treatment. The down side to the material is that it was designed to heat treat in large sections so the thin bolt material will respond somewhat voilently. Again not an immediate problem if the heat treatment is absolutely perfect but within the confines of a production enviroment it will throw problems.

    By comparison AISI 9310 will on first inspection also make an adequate bolt material. It has several alloy elements that promote a better structure and in the correct heat treatment will provide a slightly higher toughness than Carpenter 158 which is benificial to the fatigue life. Corrosion resistance is slightly higher but as with C158 it should not be applied without some form of surface protection. Thin section response to quenching is somewaht less than C158 which makes it better suited to the manufacture of bolts. However by comparison to Carpenter 158, AISI 9310 has several elements present in its composition that are detrimental to fatigue while not being evident in the physical properties.

    It has become evident from the industry that a number of manufacturers have jumped upon the AISI 9310 wagon in order to claim better performance. While in theory an AISI 9310 bolt may perform better I would not typically select this material specification. There are a wide number of superior alloys available without resorting to the nickel based maraging alloys which are expensive, difficult to machine and extremely temperamental in behaviour. The steel industry has advanced since the specification of Carpenter 158 but the basic premises for the selection remain even if the menu has now expanded.

    Bill Alexander
    "A Bad Day At The Range Is Better Than A Great Day Working"

    USMC Force Recon 1978-1984
    US Air Force Res. 1995-2004 (Air Transportation)
    M16/AR15 shooter since 1978, gun collector and AR builder since 2004
    Oath Keeper member
    III% United Patriots member

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    1,052
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Renegade04 View Post
    Just because the C158 is "mil-spec", it does not mean that it is the best. 9310 bolts work just as well.

    Never said it was . Never even mentioned mil-spec.
    The price of liberty is, always has been, and always will be blood: The person who is not willing to die for his liberty has already lost it to the first scoundrel who is willing to risk dying to violate that person's liberty! Are you free?
    --- Andrew Ford

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    6,323
    Feedback Score
    8 (100%)
    You did good on that Sionics BCG. The price on those with NP3 is the cost of NP3. Their price is remarkable. I bought a few of their carriers and I have been impressed.
    "Air Force / Policeman / Fireman / Man of God / Friend of mine / R.I.P. Steve Lamy"

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    1,094
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    Op, you've mentioned more than once about "testing" where colt is SOO much better than BCM and FN. Can you please provide the data your drawing these conclusions from?

    Iv seen a "few" Colts shoot groups and never noticed anything so outstanding that makes me want to dump either my FN or BCM barrels.
    "Just throw Krylon on it"

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... 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
  •