Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 30

Thread: FH Torque

  1. #11
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    438
    Feedback Score
    0
    Hey Ironman,
    Did you get it figured out?
    Quick question & Heads UP on your "torque wrench" IS Yours the style which has the square driver that pops back and forth through the wrench head? Or does yours have the lever that on the back of the head that switches back and forth for right hand and left hand threads??

    IF yours doesn't have the lever or knob style, then it is quite possible you have the driver in Wrong side = said torque wrench is then NOT going to torque anything, it will just act like a regular wrench,... unless you just happen to be working a left hand thread. LOL

    Peace Jeff


    PS. Even IF BufordTJustice is correct about the threads/shoulder (FWIW: this advice does Sounds good to me too).... 30 foot pounds should kick over easy enough.... 2 cents

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Allen, Texas
    Posts
    657
    Feedback Score
    0
    The factory torque setting for the A2 FH is 25 - 30 ft-lbs, with the variance there so you can align the center vent of the compensator.
    Colt's Manufacturing Company Armorer Instructor

    Aimpoint USA ProStaff

    www.hardwiredtacticalshooting.com

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    6,611
    Feedback Score
    11 (100%)
    20-30# is the standard. I prefer 20 on dry-torque, and after Rocksett, I will push it until it lines up (usually a HAIR over 20#, if the Rocksett got a little tacky while I was final-aligning shims,etc.). I simply set the wrench to 25 for the final torque, and torque until alignment. I don't care if it "snaps", because I already know its GOING TO BE at least 20#. I just don't want to go over 25.

    When you over-torque a muzzle device, it causes the muzzle to "bell" out. This can of course cause accuracy issues, and in general, is just bad to bend the barrel at any point, even the end.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    2,114
    Feedback Score
    0
    There's good reason to not induce a torque load that could distort the bore and cause other problems.
    I would tend not to torque much over 20 ft/lbs for that and other reasons. Unfortunately, without knowing much about a selected barrel or muzzle device if that limit could be 24, 29, or 19 ft/lbs.
    If a universal print in manufacturing standard is openly released and accepted by all, or hopefully most. Some base issues can be resolved besides a torque value in range that clearly does not work for all. Some say that it is, but is it really in use?

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    6,611
    Feedback Score
    11 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by tom12.7 View Post
    There's good reason to not induce a torque load that could distort the bore and cause other problems.
    I would tend not to torque much over 20 ft/lbs for that and other reasons. Unfortunately, without knowing much about a selected barrel or muzzle device if that limit could be 24, 29, or 19 ft/lbs.
    If a universal print in manufacturing standard is openly released and accepted by all, or hopefully most. Some base issues can be resolved besides a torque value in range that clearly does not work for all. Some say that it is, but is it really in use?
    Surefire and AAC have both conducted quite a bit of testing. There is a trade-off between bore distortion, and keeping your suppressor on the rifle. If I were not shooting suppressed, I'd torque to 15#. If I were mounting a suppressor, or using an aggressive brake, 20-30. AAC and SF both publish 20-30#.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    2,114
    Feedback Score
    0
    Yeah, I can pretty much agree.
    The higher torque really isn't needed for most, even with a can. Without knowing when issues arise with the higher torque, what gamble are you willing to place?
    Many, with lower magnification probably wouldn't notice, but that doesn't mean the issue doesn't exist.
    I would tend to prefer a precision ground shim with Rocksett in the 20 lbs range over the 30 range

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    6,611
    Feedback Score
    11 (100%)
    The issue begins at around 25#, technically, and noticeably past around 35 to 40ish.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    1,359
    Feedback Score
    51 (100%)
    I recently removed a "pinned and welded" 14.5" barrel and found it to not be welded or pinned. The hole on the muzzle device was threaded and it had a small set screw that reached into the barrel (where it was drilled for a pin) and then soldered the hole above the set screw to make it permanent. If you have a SBR lower or 16" barrel you could use this design without the solder and use rockset with the correct shim and go with a much lower torque value on the MD correct? Then you have a pin that will definitely keep the MD from backing off and a low torque value to keep from hurting accuracy.

    Am I missing something?

    Ps I have not done this, just thinking and putting it out there to see what would be wrong with it. The rifle I found it on has had 4K plus rounds through it suppressed and never moved or had problems.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    6,611
    Feedback Score
    11 (100%)
    I use proper torque due to harmonics issues. Real or perceived. My .02

  10. #20
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    2,114
    Feedback Score
    0
    That depends on the parts that could be compared. Sure many can do that, that decision may not be as inclusive as many think.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 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
  •