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.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
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.
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.
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
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
This is why you don't buy questionable bolts.
IMG_1494.jpg
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
For the reasonable price you can get a BCM bcg for, I don't see many reasons to buy anything else.
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
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
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"
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"
Bookmarks